WVW alliance is dead before out of beta due to ultra stacking alliance guild.

[DAN.7314]

13 hours ago, gloflop.3510 said:

One option which anet has is to reduce the number of players per alliance. I would encourage them to keep this option on the table. It should be rather easy to implement.

I've had the same thoughts ever since alliances were announced. 500 per alliance is way too many. Even half that would probably be too much to prevent stacking.

 

There are people who put 40 hours into WvW a week (some play way more). You stack 500 of them together on one alliance you would have an average of roughly 120 players from alliance on 24/7 (40 hours x 500 players in alliance = 20k cumulative weekly hours divided by 168 hours in a week = 119 players). That would be four 30 man squads on every map around the clock. Even if you cut it down to a playtime of 20 hours a week (enough time for many to get diamond chests done) that would be an average of 60 players on 24/7.

 

I think they need to introduce a new type of guild with the expansion that is only for WvW and has a reduced player cap. Make it the new alliance size as well. Can only join alliances if you are in the new WvW-only guild (otherwise you get placed where ever). Or just scrap WvW and make instanced maps with 20v20v20 and/or 50v50v50 or even just 1v1 (GvG) maps with WvW rules and set up, but that's not going to happen.

 

[DAN.7314]

13 hours ago, gloflop.3510 said:

One option which anet has is to reduce the number of players per alliance. I would encourage them to keep this option on the table. It should be rather easy to implement.

I've had the same thoughts ever since alliances were announced. 500 per alliance is way too many. Even half that would probably be too much to prevent stacking.

 

There are people who put 40 hours into WvW a week (some play way more). You stack 500 of them together on one alliance you would have an average of roughly 120 players from alliance on 24/7 (40 hours x 500 players in alliance = 20k cumulative weekly hours divided by 168 hours in a week = 119 players). That would be four 30 man squads on every map around the clock. Even if you cut it down to a playtime of 20 hours a week (enough time for many to get diamond chests done) that would be an average of 60 players on 24/7.

 

I think they need to introduce a new type of guild with the expansion that is only for WvW and has a reduced player cap. Make it the new alliance size as well. Can only join alliances if you are in the new WvW-only guild (otherwise you get placed where ever). Or just scrap WvW and make instanced maps with 20v20v20 and/or 50v50v50 or even just 1v1 (GvG) maps with WvW rules and set up, but that's not going to happen.

 

[DAN.7314]

13 hours ago, gloflop.3510 said:

One option which anet has is to reduce the number of players per alliance. I would encourage them to keep this option on the table. It should be rather easy to implement.

I've had the same thoughts ever since alliances were announced. 500 per alliance is way too many. Even half that would probably be too much to prevent stacking.

 

There are people who put 40 hours into WvW a week (some play way more). You stack 500 of them together on one alliance you would have an average of roughly 120 players from alliance on 24/7 (40 hours x 500 players in alliance = 20k cumulative weekly hours divided by 168 hours in a week = 119 players). That would be four 30 man squads on every map around the clock. Even if you cut it down to a playtime of 20 hours a week (enough time for many to get diamond chests done) that would be an average of 60 players on 24/7.

 

I think they need to introduce a new type of guild with the expansion that is only for WvW and has a reduced player cap. Make it the new alliance size as well. Can only join alliances if you are in the new WvW-only guild (otherwise you get placed where ever). Or just scrap WvW and make instanced maps with 20v20v20 and/or 50v50v50 or even just 1v1 (GvG) maps with WvW rules and set up, but that's not going to happen.

 

[Dawdler.8521]

35 minutes ago, DAN.7314 said:

I've had the same thoughts ever since alliances were announced. 500 per alliance is way too many. Even half that would probably be too much to prevent stacking.

 

There are people who put 40 hours into WvW a week (some play way more). You stack 500 of them together on one alliance you would have an average of roughly 120 players from alliance on 24/7 (40 hours x 500 players in alliance = 20k cumulative weekly hours divided by 168 hours in a week = 119 players). That would be four 30 man squads on every map around the clock. Even if you cut it down to a playtime of 20 hours a week (enough time for many to get diamond chests done) that would be an average of 60 players on 24/7.

 

I think they need to introduce a new type of guild with the expansion that is only for WvW and has a reduced player cap. Make it the new alliance size as well. Can only join alliances if you are in the new WvW-only guild (otherwise you get placed where ever). Or just scrap WvW and make instanced maps with 20v20v20 and/or 50v50v50 or even just 1v1 (GvG) maps with WvW rules and set up, but that's not going to happen.

 

Restricting alliances to less than 500 is easy.

The question is what you are going to say to the 500 man guilds today when they have to pick and choose which of the 250+ members to kick because the alliance cap and guild cap goes hand in hand.

But also, your numbers are not really realistic because we have the capability of doing this today (actually more than what the restructure can offer since we arent restricted to a mere 500, as long as the world is open you can stack it), yet guilds dont really do it. Usually because of self balancing and people not liking each other. Guilds get restructured themselves all the time.

[Cuks.8241]

We have the capability today to stack beyond 500 players on one server. We have guilds that have 500 or close to 500 players. I don't see why and how suddenly players will stack more than today. 

Besides fighting guilds want to fight each other, not sit on the SM wall whole day long. For me this beta was refreshing because with the current system you usually fight the same guilds or groups for longer periods. We are on a large server floating in the upper 2 tiers so we usually see the same people for longer periods, several re links. Now in betas we are meeting groups we haven't seen in a long time.

[JTGuevara.9018]

On 1/15/2022 at 3:19 AM, foxof.8752 said:

The main reason alliance is created to balanced the wvw numbers, but people already found a simple way to stack the wvw player in one huge guild, it will be more deadly than current server based WVW.

 

Yup. It's as I thought, it's what many people thought. Big guilds have figured out how to game the system. It's like NOBODY even bothers to stop and think. That will ruin the alliance hype train and we can't have that!

[Stand The Wall.6987]

with autonomy comes responsibility.

[MedievalThings.5417]

All I see in every tier, for years now, is comp'd groups fighting pugs.  When they have to face an equal size comp they change maps or transfer.  Occasionally, you will see a small 10-20 man guild, try to do quick pushes for some kills on the stack, get a few, die and then repeat.  But that doesn't happen a lot.

 

Alliances do nothing to change this mentality.

[Zephyrus.9680]

Not seeing how just 500 active players can "stack" an alliance when servers could fit at least 3-5 times that? Everyone is going on anecdote but in my experience the coverage issue was greatly improved in both betas and I don't think they were even trying to balance time zones yet. 

 

If anything they could increase the team sizes but keep guild cap the same. If they make the alliance cap smaller than a single guild's cap that will be never ending drama on who gets in and who doesn't. Bad idea. 

[joneirikb.7506]

On 1/16/2022 at 6:42 AM, DAN.7314 said:

I've had the same thoughts ever since alliances were announced. 500 per alliance is way too many. Even half that would probably be too much to prevent stacking.

 

There are people who put 40 hours into WvW a week (some play way more). You stack 500 of them together on one alliance you would have an average of roughly 120 players from alliance on 24/7 (40 hours x 500 players in alliance = 20k cumulative weekly hours divided by 168 hours in a week = 119 players). That would be four 30 man squads on every map around the clock. Even if you cut it down to a playtime of 20 hours a week (enough time for many to get diamond chests done) that would be an average of 60 players on 24/7.

 

I think they need to introduce a new type of guild with the expansion that is only for WvW and has a reduced player cap. Make it the new alliance size as well. Can only join alliances if you are in the new WvW-only guild (otherwise you get placed where ever). Or just scrap WvW and make instanced maps with 20v20v20 and/or 50v50v50 or even just 1v1 (GvG) maps with WvW rules and set up, but that's not going to happen.

 

Just to clarify, the World Restructure system also takes "Player Hours" into account, not just number of players.

So in theory:
Team A could be 2500 players playing 2 hours daily/average.
Team B could be 500 players playing 10 hours daily/average.
Team C could be 10000 players playing 0,5 hour daily/average

(Clearly not the right numbers)

Edit: Perhaps we should make a habit of saying something like 2500 players/hours, instead of just saying 2500 players, to try to make this more clear?

Edited January 17, 2022 by joneirikb.7506

[kamikharzeeh.8016]

the biggest EU beta-guilds i know have only 260 and 210 people in, far off 500. and only half of each is really playing - and of that quite some are alt accounts, i guess.

[The Boz.2038]

Alliance has a max size. 

Team has a max size.

Team is made up of Alliances.

If Alliance > Team Size in matchup? Guess what, they have no friends, and are placed against similarly sized teams.

End result? If you stack up your uber-sized guild of WvW fanatics all into one alliance, have fun with your queue times. 

[Mabi black.1824]

absolutely non-existent queues throughout the weekend at virtually any time, I purposely connected at different times to check it.

are in eu t2 is so also in your area? I am right to give a response to the balance achieved. and I am referring to the population not to guilds.

[DAN.7314]

On 1/16/2022 at 2:20 PM, joneirikb.7506 said:

Just to clarify, the World Restructure system also takes "Player Hours" into account, not just number of players.

So in theory:
Team A could be 2500 players playing 2 hours daily/average.
Team B could be 500 players playing 10 hours daily/average.
Team C could be 10000 players playing 0,5 hour daily/average

(Clearly not the right numbers)

Edit: Perhaps we should make a habit of saying something like 2500 players/hours, instead of just saying 2500 players, to try to make this more clear?

Just highlighting this post as it adds to my previous post.

 

In combination with the fact (as others mentioned in this thread) that stacking already happens with less than 500 people with the basis that the alliance system is balancing total player hours, just further makes me believe alliances are going to accomplish absolutely nothing.

 

Every player hour is NOT equal. Veteran and/or skilled players contribute multiple times more value then other players even though they might contribute the same amount player hours.

 

Good players already stack and bandwagon match-ups with far fewer than 500 people. There will be one overwhelming stacked alliance just like in current WvW (at least in NA - where I play). Alliances are just giving people a much easier way to bandwagon IMO.

 

Cut the alliance size down to 50 or 100. Full squad size (which you virtually never see organized guilds run) is 50. Balance player hours around that alliance cap. I think it would lead to easier to balance match ups.

 

 

PS: Sorry for the triple post earlier. Forum is a little whacky.

[The Boz.2038]

So your plan is "an alliance can fill a map, but when they're having lunch, the map is entirely abandoned"?

[TheGrimm.5624]

On 1/15/2022 at 2:31 PM, Chaba.5410 said:

Considering timezone for matchmaking really needs to get tried.

/sigh

 

100% agree, its needs to be in the algorithm. I just don't want people to think it is part of the equation while they say it was not. I actually wish that the different regions could share servers to help balance the 24 hr clock or even a system that could take score from the various server groups and mix them to balance the coverage. But as it is, the groups that account for their own coverage time will become the new top tier 'shards'/servers simply via organization. I am not saying that is bad, as a roamer/havoc I am just seeing that as a 'thing' that will occur with the system. 

[jul.7602]

I said a long time ago this was dead on arrival. As I predicted, we have overstacked alliances, 50/50 comped squads rolling over everything, pugmanders completely removed from the game.

[TheGrimm.5624]

Just now, jul.7602 said:

I said a long time ago this was dead on arrival. As I predicted, we have overstacked alliances, 50/50 comped squads rolling over everything, pugmanders completely removed from the game.

 

Can you share your matchup stats? The one I am in is within reason but players can not see others matchups and not sure if sites like gw2stats.com is getting good numbers.  

[jul.7602]

2 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

 

Can you share your matchup stats? The one I am in is within reason but players can not see others matchups and not sure if sites like gw2stats.com is getting good numbers.  

Thornwatch, Giants rise, Pheonix dawn

Score:129, 176, 163

KDR: 0.84, 0.93 1.5

[The Boz.2038]

Well, since I am on Phoenix Dawn, I... can't say I've shared your experience in this particular matchup the past few days.

 

[Littlekenny.4196]

6 hours ago, jul.7602 said:

I said a long time ago this was dead on arrival. As I predicted, we have overstacked alliances, 50/50 comped squads rolling over everything, pugmanders completely removed from the game.

There are no alliances. Alliances haven't been implemented yet. What you see is guilds that would have formed an alliance all joining a single guild instead, then going against random guilds because their opponents didn't do the same.

[Strider Pj.2193]

7 hours ago, jul.7602 said:

Thornwatch, Giants rise, Pheonix dawn

Score:129, 176, 163

KDR: 0.84, 0.93 1.5

That just looks like a standard relink matchup…. Not the death of a mode lol.

Edited January 18, 2022 by Strider Pj.2193

[Monarc.9726]

It's clear that WvW worlds are less balanced with the Alliances system, which defeats the entire purpose. Big guilds seem to have more ability now to shut down everyone else and dominate. Yes, there was some of that before, but it's worse now. This might be fun for the big guilds, but give it a few weeks or months after launch and everyone else will quit, making it a large guild vs large guild game mode. Half of the population will be gone and so no easy bag farming for the big guilds, so they'll lose interest as well.

[DAN.7314]

18 hours ago, The Boz.2038 said:

So your plan is "an alliance can fill a map, but when they're having lunch, the map is entirely abandoned"?

Not sure how you got that from my post.

 

The empty map problem is always going to be an issue with a 24/7 WvW concept. There aren't enough players during non prime time hours to have even fights on every server. Players when given the chance will bandwagon. That's unlikely to change. I'd personally prefer to see instanced battleground type content or reset the WvW maps (like EotM does) every X hours to prevent the off-peak hour domination. Or give skirmishes a weighted score based on the total player activity (more during prime time).

 

.......................................

 

 

With the current system, the largest transfer/alliance/bandwagon I have ever seen in NA was around 300 players. They won every match-up, often without losing a skirmish and at times spawn camped all 4 maps in t1, and knocked the dominant server out of t1 after they reigned for many years. In this previous system, the alliances were often limited by servers becoming full and it was not an invite only system. Anyone could join. There was a gem fee though.

 

The new alliance system is going to allow veteran players to stack even easier with higher numbers (500), in an invite only method (no uninvited noobs), and with no transfer fee.

[Dawdler.8521]

1 hour ago, DAN.7314 said:

With the current system, the largest transfer/alliance/bandwagon I have ever seen in NA was around 300 players. They won every match-up, often without losing a skirmish and at times spawn camped all 4 maps in t1, and knocked the dominant server out of t1 after they reigned for many years. In this previous system, the alliances were often limited by servers becoming full and it was not an invite only system. Anyone could join. There was a gem fee though.

 

The new alliance system is going to allow veteran players to stack even easier with higher numbers (500), in an invite only method (no uninvited noobs), and with no transfer fee.

Ok, so its easier.

That means its just as easy for the enemy too. 

Or what exactly are you implying here, that there will just be 1 single 500 man alliance across entire WvW?