Zyreva.1078 Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 (edited) 17 hours ago, Karagee.6830 said: Servers that accidentally, emphasis on accidentally, get no link, don't play for 2 months because they can't take it. And yet one server (well 2 with BB) is forced to do this almost all the time. Does that seem fair to you? Well, the alternative would be to unlink servers that handle said situation even worse, as you say yourself. Not very fair either, right? The thing is, the main reason why your situation is perceived as unfair is because it has lasted for so long, right? But have you ever considered that the reason why anets "treatment" doesn't change is because the server itself also doesn't change much (much less than other servers anyway)? From their point of view, keeping gandara unlinked and full works just fine. Maybe they even think the majority of your players enjoy being one of the lower populated worlds, because players doesn't seem to leave , at least not to any significant extent. Quote The bottom line is there are many ways to fix this, but there is no logical reason to keep the server close and without a link for 10-12 months straight every time. If you don't want to eliminate a tier, then open Gandara and cap us at the same level BB is right now. But then what happens with the third unlinked server, that often can't even compete with gandara's current population? Quote They created this system to balance things out Yes, and despite the flaws it's clearly working, if you compare matchup balance pre and post linking periods. Quote and avoid screwing the same people over and over and yet that's exactly what is happening. Did they really say anything along those lines or is it just your very own conclusion? Quote Now I'm curious to hear what you think should be done in this situation. Nothing and leave Gandara permanently outnumbered without a link and locked? Is that it? I don't think there is a good solution within the current system. Someone will always get screwed over. 17 hours ago, Karagee.6830 said: I was going to look for scores for morning and day during the weekends and throughout the day on weekdays were you see lopsided scores over and over (overall score so ppt from objectives + kills + other things like donkeys, everything). Because I can't use the current match as it would be even more lopsided, I'm struggling to locate data for past matches that is not aggregate. But every single matchup looks more or less like this. When you compare overal score disparities within different matches, then you will see that gandara's matches aren't generally more onesided than other's. Not even right now. Quote And yes, them saying Gandara has the highest participation among 27 (26 excluding BB) servers on EU, which is the topic of this thread, would be an outright lie, as others have explained to you here and elsewhere. But nobody said that, so everything is fine, right? You seem to be stuck with the idea that being unlinked (and full) is the result of gandara being the allegedly most populated server at a given time. And i have already explained to you, why that might be a wrong conclusion. 15 hours ago, Karagee.6830 said: [...]with the way they claim they select links for Gandara[...] How do they claim to select links for gandara? Quote This andcdotal evidence is the exact opposite of what you would expect if things were working as Anet said they should The linking system is supposed to create more balanced matches - which it does. They also said that the system doesn't allow them to create balance across all worlds, so they are trying to balance "tiers" instead (meaning it is fully intended that some worlds end up with a higher population than other's). So what exactly isn't working as they said it should work? 2 hours ago, GoguSpatzialu.7948 said: People quit the game, etc. so we slowly lose people over time, but with the server constantly full, there is no way to recruit people to replace them. The fact that we're underpopulated a majority of the time shows that the full status is undeserved. Unless gandara is getting outnumbered by unlinked servers other than BB - which usually isn't the case, as the third unlinked server has historically been even weaker than gandara - there is no evidence that gandara doesn't deserve "full" status according to anets metrics, whatever those are. Edited June 22, 2022 by UmbraNoctis.1907 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 Some relevant past Anet comments regarding high population servers being benchmarks and the goal of world linking for trying to retain competitiveness for in-tier matches rather than high match volatility across all tiers: "If a world is locked, it is because it has a larger population than our “Full” threshold." "Yes, high population servers are usually the benchmark for when we link worlds. For example, if Blackgate has 10 players and it’s the highest populated server, then we try to link worlds so their populations are also around 10. We can’t be totally precise so sometimes worlds might end up with 12 or 9 but we try to get as close as possible."https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Transfers-Links-and-Population-Data/page/1#post6664495 "Our goal with World Linking is good matches. ... ideally every world in tier 4 should be competitive with the other worlds in tier 4 and likewise every world in tier 1 should be competitive with the other worlds in tier 1. It would be nice if worlds in tier 4 were competitive with tier 1, but it’s not realistic since the distribution of players across worlds is not consistent"https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/World-Linking-8-26-2016/page/4#post6308545 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karagee.6830 Posted June 22, 2022 Author Share Posted June 22, 2022 (edited) 5 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said: Some relevant past Anet comments regarding high population servers being benchmarks and the goal of world linking for trying to retain competitiveness for in-tier matches rather than high match volatility across all tiers: "If a world is locked, it is because it has a larger population than our “Full” threshold." "Yes, high population servers are usually the benchmark for when we link worlds. For example, if Blackgate has 10 players and it’s the highest populated server, then we try to link worlds so their populations are also around 10. We can’t be totally precise so sometimes worlds might end up with 12 or 9 but we try to get as close as possible."https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Transfers-Links-and-Population-Data/page/1#post6664495 "Our goal with World Linking is good matches. ... ideally every world in tier 4 should be competitive with the other worlds in tier 4 and likewise every world in tier 1 should be competitive with the other worlds in tier 1. It would be nice if worlds in tier 4 were competitive with tier 1, but it’s not realistic since the distribution of players across worlds is not consistent"https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/World-Linking-8-26-2016/page/4#post6308545 So you seem to agree with Luranni or whoever it was on the other thread that the sudden increase in full servers on EU may be due to Gandara lowering its numbers on purpose. If that's the case we have a tool to hold Anet to ransom, as manipulating our active numbers can kitten the whole system... Edited June 22, 2022 by Karagee.6830 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted June 22, 2022 Share Posted June 22, 2022 24 minutes ago, Karagee.6830 said: So you seem to agree with Luranni or whoever it was on the other thread that the sudden increase in full servers on EU may be due to Gandara lowering its numbers on purpose. If that's the case we have a tool to hold Anet to ransom, as manipulating our active numbers can kitten the whole system... I don't know what you mean by holding Anet at ransom. Nowhere have I seen it promised that Anet would not change the threshold and we don't know their reasons. A few weeks ago a bunch of servers opened up and a general opinion seemed to be that it was in preparation for the Steam launch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karagee.6830 Posted June 23, 2022 Author Share Posted June 23, 2022 (edited) 10 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said: I don't know what you mean by holding Anet at ransom. Nowhere have I seen it promised that Anet would not change the threshold and we don't know their reasons. A few weeks ago a bunch of servers opened up and a general opinion seemed to be that it was in preparation for the Steam launch. I mean that if Gandara population is the benchmark against which the server sizes are set, then we can make about 15-18 servers full and locked by striking even harder. In the past 3 weeks 14-15 servers (out of 26) became suddenly Full or had their population increased by at least 1 tier. Now this may be just a coincidence, but it is at least suspicious and would explain how Gandara has been full for 2 years (except for one week a year ago when Anet clearly did something manually as all servers suddenly became open). Remember, being always Full is part of the problem and if this how things work, then we cannot ever become open unless Anet does something manually to override the general system. Edited June 23, 2022 by Karagee.6830 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karagee.6830 Posted June 23, 2022 Author Share Posted June 23, 2022 (edited) 17 hours ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said: Well, the alternative would be to unlink servers that handle said situation even worse, as you say yourself. Not very fair either, right? What are you talking about? It's like giving welfare benefits to rich people instead of unemployed poor people because the rich spend so much money that they have less left at the end of the month as a percentage of their income. Because Gandara has a us v everyone and us v Anet attitude to being unlinked and full, it doesn't mean that we should be in this situation for years. Spread the pain if you can't fix the problem. If they rotated every server each server would have to suffer 2 months with no link every 2 years and 2 months, instead your bright idea is that the same people to suffer all the time in perpetuity. 17 hours ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said: But then what happens with the third unlinked server, that often can't even compete with gandara's current population? If they weren't taking a vacation when they have no link they would be competitive. We nearly lost to Desolation twice last relink, it really came down to the last skirmishes and Desolation went from 40k K+D to 83k in a week after they got a link. 17 hours ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said: From their point of view, keeping gandara unlinked and full works just fine. Maybe they even think the majority of your players enjoy being one of the lower populated worlds, because players doesn't seem to leave , at least not to any significant extent. So you are saying that the only way for Gandara to get out of this situation would be to destroy itself? Ok... 17 hours ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said: I don't think there is a good solution within the current system. Someone will always get screwed over. But every single matchup looks more or less like this. When you compare overal score disparities within different matches, then you will see that gandara's matches aren't generally more onesided than other's. Not even right now. Yes and we are asking not to be triple screwed: if you want to leave us unlinked for 1 year then don't leave us locked for 2 years or vice-versa. Regarding scoring you fail to understand a simple thing. In our current match BB greatly outnumbers everyone at night and AG greatly outnumbers everyone in the morning. With such disparity they can force whoever they want into third place: the PPT usually looks like this during these times: 1st 250-300; 2nd 50; 3rd 30. Last month we had one night when the PPT score was 440-2-0. I cba quoting every single snippet. Just because Gandara is more resilient to being unlinked, due to having a closer, long-term community than others, it does not mean we have a higher long term population than servers that occasionally get unlinked and quit playing when they do because they have no community. As I said with Desolation depressed numbers they almost beat us twice and it came down to the last skirmishes on a Friday. So this ideas of yours are bizarre to say the least. As I said above you are advocating that we destroy our community because we are punished for having one. If they want to keep us unlinked forever they should turn us and another server into BBv2.0 and BBv3.0 and balance things that way. You have to realise that we have not been able to get people on the server (which you say is very likely not to be the most populated) for 2 years except for 1 week when everyone was open. Edited June 23, 2022 by Karagee.6830 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakez.7561 Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 Like people even could not get the point, when someone from my IRL friends want to pick up GW2 for WvW, I cannot even play with them on my home server that sits in the last place EU roster... like simple human thing is denied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zyreva.1078 Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 @Karagee.6830 I never said anything about fairness, or that gandara's situation doesn't suck. I understand where the complaints are coming from, even tho i still think that there is quite a bit of exaggerating and over dramatising happening. But mainly i'm just trying to explain that there might be a logical reason behind the situation that goes beyond "anet hates gandara". But whatever, keep crying on the forum, suuurely that's going to help ... Also your comparison with welfare is inappropriate and not applicable whatsoever. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forum Moderator.3419 Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 Hello Everyone, I'm locking this thread as it has descended into bickering. Regards. 1 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts