upcoming alliances can I ask you a couple of questions?

[Chaba.5410]

8 hours ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

yes exactly, I do not want to create problems or delays, keep all the work you have done and are doing; I would just like to understand if somehow we can have alliances and preserving the concept of team to better feed the competition.

Yea only Anet can answer that.  I do think there are some design decisions that are still "up in the air" such as world transfer restrictions, how individual players are evaluated beyond simple playhours, and the length of seasons.  The number of tiers might also change since world restructuring allows that to be dynamically responsive to how they're dividing up total population.

Edited June 23, 2022 by Chaba.5410

[Karagee.6830]

16 minutes ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Implementation would be new servers added that people and guilds could transfer to.  These new servers would have small populations that could be fitted in to help create teams that are more equal in population to each other, yes.

It requires people to actually want to fill up some new servers though.  Who would do that?  You don't need to reduce the number of tiers to do that since apparently when EU had four tiers the queues were too large.

I'll tell you who: the people that want to play with the host server and they can't because the host server is full and locked for 2 years. So yeah, rather than removing a tier, if EU participation is much higher than NA then keep 5 tiers and give us 2 or 3 new servers. It does not remove the bandwagoning transfers, but that's a problem for T1 only and it will make all other tiers, including T5, more enjoyable and balanced in time. Of course they could restrict bandwagoning transfers as well, if they really wanted to, and sort also the other major problem with the game mode.

Edited June 23, 2022 by Karagee.6830

[Svarty.8019]

6 hours ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

become exactly like all those cowards who transfer the day after the links.

It seems to me that those are the people Arenanet has been asking for advice from. 😞

[Chaba.5410]

7 hours ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

the question is not exactly if you like the reshuffle, the question is whether you like to still have a team as you had it before, when alliances go live, of course only for a 12-month season and then it will be canceled to build a new one. but at least we do not lose something that gives an added value in this mode.

Team concept: The team is not the guild that players build, nor is it the group of guilds that players always build and choose to play together. first of all the team is a container that the administrator built. 

and during the season it is only the team that is ranked and that can win, so all the players socialize, aggregate, suffer and rejoice all together in the common interest that is the team. the result of your guild or character comes only later for pure personal ambition or a small aggregate of players.

hence my second question. since for me it is clear and evident that the team is a precious and characteristic value not to say fundamental of this mode of play, is it also for you?

Will I like to be placed on the same Anet-constructed team as I had before?  I don't know.  I imagine that with world restructuring there will be some teams I enjoy playing with and others I won't.  There's players I like to play with and players I really couldn't care about on my current server-based team.  The sameness does get old after awhile.  I did enjoy the "fog of war" created when we had the beta tests because going into WvW meant having to learn how to deal with new guilds and team configurations never faced before.

[Karagee.6830]

1 hour ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Will I like to be placed on the same Anet-constructed team as I had before?  I don't know.  I imagine that with world restructuring there will be some teams I enjoy playing with and others I won't.  There's players I like to play with and players I really couldn't care about on my current server-based team.  The sameness does get old after awhile.  I did enjoy the "fog of war" created when we had the beta tests because going into WvW meant having to learn how to deal with new guilds and team configurations never faced before.

In the Beta me and my guild ended up playing against 90% of Gandara. We roamed together with another party of guys from DL that we have fought bitterly several times previously and we know them well. They are good fighters, they are almost as sneaky as we are with siege, have a similar propension to jumping enemies when they see them and have slightly higher numbers than us and crucially they always had dedicated support. I have to say it was very enjoyable as we had numbers to do more damage than normal and also we could see where our tags were as we share one or more guilds with other people on Gandara.

We knew before Beta that logically speaking it would make more sense for us to team up with guys like that than with the rest of Gandara and so we used our own guild for the Beta and not larger containers like most people did (btw this is where the 'stacking' is going to come from, alliances crowding specific time slots and alliances elite at something, be it ppt or fighting, recruiting or joining up with equally skilled and like-minded people). 

Ultimately I think Alliances will be generally good, 500 is a lot of people and nobody should have any trouble getting enough people they like to play with, especially if they are a commander or a guild leader and they have enough sway to bring the people they like with them.  If you are an open tag commander once your regulars are with you the moving parts don't matter as much as long as they are not toxic people.

Edited June 23, 2022 by Karagee.6830