Guild Alliances is actually the Edge of the Mists system on WvW Maps ....

[Gotejjeken.1267]

3 hours ago, Reborn.2934 said:

v

i hope you haven't any involvment with the game development for this game or any game...

 

only this ....

 

p.s. first time in my gaming life i see someone accusing a gamer for posting gaming videos on a LIVESTREAM site that became famous from ... GAMERS as justin.tv*.!

 

and ofc you are not understand what i am saying because you are out of context with... GAMING. you are here for reasons you only know and i know but i don't want to name them because it will be my 2nd forum ban.

 

btw the first video you removed because you wanted to categorized my video from EotM as meme too, was A TV COMMERCIAL from a Greek director that won a OSCAR ... recently., 4 years ago!

 

lol try harder next time... to not look clown at least!

*(and gamers will kill it soon, but this is another story and not for this site)

 

Long winded way counter my response to:

"p.s.  open the link with my blog on the question above and tell me if you see any of these sites aka social media on my blog . no you will not because i haven't and for this reason i removed what you wrote. gn"

Twitch is social media. 

Was just pointing out if you want people to take you seriously, don't paste memes in your posts.  And yes, first 5 seconds of your EoTM video screams meme.  

Edited August 22, 2022 by Gotejjeken.1267

[nektar palas.5987]

On 8/17/2022 at 1:12 AM, lotus.5672 said:

If you are really part of a community why cant you make a guild with them? 🤔

communities are like soccer team fans, basketball team fans etc 

guilds are like soccer team leadership and its players, basketball team leadership and its players  etc.

as you understand communities are universal entities while guilds are egocentric entities around the leadership of the guild and its members.

 

So, WvW is about Servers that are Universal entities and GvG beta week is about guilds entities and as i see its implementation is downgrade from WvW!

 

Edited October 18, 2022 by nektar palas.5987

[T G.7496]

On 8/18/2022 at 3:36 AM, Knighthonor.4061 said:

because that means everybody has to throw away their own guilds that they currently are in and run with

Nope.

It just requires people, for whom a legacy of server identity is important, to organise the creation of an Alliance between guilds that maintains those bonds.

For some people, that might mean joining a new guild that is a part of such an initiative (or has been specifically created for the purpose).

However, once you have selected the guild you want to 'go with', for each Alliance period, you can rep whichever guild you like.

Many people are already doing this for the World Restructuring betas.

For example, the long established WSR community guild has been lovingly repurposed as a vehicle for many of the smaller guilds and roamers on WSR to ensure they get to experience the current beta together. It has worked very well. Each guild can still rep themselves, since the WSR guild is purely a vehicle for them all to travel to the beta together.

This is a prototype for an Alliance structure whose very purpose would be to maintain a legacy of server identity.

Any server can start such an initiative. This may very well be the test of whether any server really does have a strong enough community identity, and any appetite to preserve that.

[Vulkan.1375]

Guys, don't talk / answer to Dawdler. We're dealing with a dingoclown. 🤡
He is constantly on the forum, on all the posts. He just pisses people off. He's the biggest troll of the forum.

[Dawdler.8521]

2 hours ago, Vulkan.1375 said:

Guys, don't talk / answer to Dawdler. We're dealing with a dingoclown. 🤡
He is constantly on the forum, on all the posts. He just pisses people off. He's the biggest troll of the forum.

I last posted in this thread the 16th of august and the last time someone responded to me was the 18th of august. 

But hey if I'm a boogeyman to alt accounts or people that substitute their inability to argue a response with a confused emote and think "yeah that showed him!", I still consider that an achievement.

It's like thieves actually bothering to ragewhisper at you.

[Dayra.7405]

On 8/18/2022 at 4:59 AM, Leon Silver.2386 said:

OP described the issue and their point perfectly and articulately at every step, you have not.

I only saw a polemic video starter, an opinion and an EotM video in the OP-post. (But I did not read his replies, OP-post was enough)

 

Opposed to that I saw a lot of arguments from @Dawdler.8521 🙂

 

Anyway, I think, the only commonality of Alliances and EotM is: Both have some hardcore haters in the WvW-Community. 🙂

[Nymthalas.4019]

In fact i Saw @Dawdler.8521say something some people doesn't seem to get, the idea Anet has with alliances is to not have relink each week, and selected alliance will swap you on next relink.

Guilds/alliances allow 500 player to play together, if it is not enough space for all your friends... but something I've seeing because of playing  in a country server is that the problem usually is different from what is presented in the forums. People want to force other people from the same server to play with them, maybe the people that doesnt go into that 500  people server community guild is because they prefer to play with some other people, just MAYBE.

[kash.9213]

2 hours ago, Nymthalas.4019 said:

In fact i Saw @Dawdler.8521say something some people doesn't seem to get, the idea Anet has with alliances is to not have relink each week, and selected alliance will swap you on next relink.

Guilds/alliances allow 500 player to play together, if it is not enough space for all your friends... but something I've seeing because of playing  in a country server is that the problem usually is different from what is presented in the forums. People want to force other people from the same server to play with them, maybe the people that doesnt go into that 500  people server community guild is because they prefer to play with some other people, just MAYBE.

I think I get your point, but people can play somewhere else right now. And, no one can force you to play anywhere you don't want, guilds will only have that kind of influence and tools once Alliances and the restructure hit. 

[Junkpile.7439]

15 hours ago, T G.7496 said:

Nope.

It just requires people, for whom a legacy of server identity is important, to organise the creation of an Alliance between guilds that maintains those bonds.

For some people, that might mean joining a new guild that is a part of such an initiative (or has been specifically created for the purpose).

However, once you have selected the guild you want to 'go with', for each Alliance period, you can rep whichever guild you like.

Many people are already doing this for the World Restructuring betas.

For example, the long established WSR community guild has been lovingly repurposed as a vehicle for many of the smaller guilds and roamers on WSR to ensure they get to experience the current beta together. It has worked very well. Each guild can still rep themselves, since the WSR guild is purely a vehicle for them all to travel to the beta together.

This is a prototype for an Alliance structure whose very purpose would be to maintain a legacy of server identity.

Any server can start such an initiative. This may very well be the test of whether any server really does have a strong enough community identity, and any appetite to preserve that.

So WSR guild is like 2003 citroen xsara picasso. Sounds about right.

[DeceiverX.8361]

On 8/16/2022 at 5:38 PM, Magnuzone.8395 said:

The problem reasoning with those who still believe in Alliances in 2022 is that they have their blinders on. They are so set in their beliefs that nothing can convince them.

 

After all they have waited for this now outdated idea to save the game mode and when it goes live all the players that previously quit will come back and we will all zerg singing Kumbaya My Lord.

 

Nope....

The fact it had traction to begin with is frustrating.

Because it never was a good idea.

If people wanted a good platform to GvG they should have petitioned for Guild Hall arenas to use WvW balancing instead of PvE balancing.

The smart idea from the start was weekly relinking with allied server tags (as to allow players to know who's actually persistent in their group) using player data and AI.

Data sets like population load/playtime schedule hours on both the macro and micro levels to handle coverage disparities, where players congregate for kills or deaths, player migration metrics, and a whole bunch of other programmatic approaches for Machine Learning could have allowed for the establishment of really stable server environments that focused heavily on building competitive spheres that crucially, could not be stacked by transfers.

Instead we got something - often posited by VERY biased members of the community - that anyone that truly understands WvW from a systems perspective knew would be doomed to fail because it tries to solve symptoms and not causal problems, and makes problems like stacking which have plagued the format for years even worse.

[felix.2386]

you can fight for your server, you can fight for your alliance.

it's the same

[Astralporing.1957]

22 hours ago, Nymthalas.4019 said:

In fact i Saw @Dawdler.8521say something some people doesn't seem to get, the idea Anet has with alliances is to not have relink each week, and selected alliance will swap you on next relink.

Guilds/alliances allow 500 player to play together, if it is not enough space for all your friends... but something I've seeing because of playing  in a country server is that the problem usually is different from what is presented in the forums. People want to force other people from the same server to play with them, maybe the people that doesnt go into that 500  people server community guild is because they prefer to play with some other people, just MAYBE.

Or maybe they do not want to split their community into several smaller sub-communities that will no longer have any relations with each other. That alliance that plays alongside your own in this matchup? In the next matchup you might end up playing against them. In fact, most of players you are now playing alongside will end up in different "servers" on the next matchup. This is especially destructive for servers that are not built around few big guilds but more around a community of a bit more independent players.

You will be changing a bigger community for a more tight-knit, but also much smaller one. With most players on your side each matchup not being part of that community.

Edited October 20, 2022 by Astralporing.1957

[Dawdler.8521]

1 hour ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

That alliance that plays alongside your own in this matchup? In the next matchup you might end up playing against them.

Are you doubling down on the OPs false claim or are you mistaking matchups (which happen weekly) with reschuffles (which happens every 2 months) 😐

[JPUlisses.8756]

so boring, having multiple private tag guilds hit and running only killing 1 player out of 50 and instantly running and hiding for the next 5 minutes.

[jul.7602]

This will kill WvW.

[Astralporing.1957]

13 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Are you doubling down on the OPs false claim or are you mistaking matchups (which happen weekly) with reschuffles (which happens every 2 months) 😐

Currently we have reshuffles. Nobody really knows how the alliances will work, but the initial mentions did suggest team makeup was a weekly affair (because it tries to equally match player population along all 3 enemies, and those do change every week). Even if it's 2 months however, that's still not long enough to create a community. It's just a transient alliance that will completely break apart next reshuffle.

Notice, that, while big WvW-dedicated guilds will always form the core of server community, on at least some servers majority of that community is formed from small guilds and unaffiliated players. And those with the alliance changes will lose any sense of belonging. Big guilds will probably manage, although their identity will become much more narrow than today (well, for some it already happened, so those will probably see no change). Other players however may end up being hit hard by this. I doubt that would be to the mode's advantage.

[Dawdler.8521]

37 minutes ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Currently we have reshuffles. Nobody really knows how the alliances will work, but the initial mentions did suggest team makeup was a weekly affair (because it tries to equally match player population along all 3 enemies, and those do change every week). Even if it's 2 months however, that's still not long enough to create a community. It's just a transient alliance that will completely break apart next reshuffle.

They NEVER EVER suggested that.

It was 7+1 weeks. Same 2 months, but you could freely select WvW guild the first 7 weeks, then it would be locked the last week and finally reshuffled (when the new guild selection took effect for assignment)

[Astralporing.1957]

3 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

They NEVER EVER suggested that.

It was 7+1 weeks. Same 2 months, but you could freely select WvW guild the first 7 weeks, then it would be locked the last week and finally reshuffled (when the new guild selection took effect for assignment)

Okay, let's say you're indeed right about it (i'd still like to see a quote, though, because i seem to have missed that). What about the second part of my post then? How can a "community" that gets shattered every 2 months and will likely be never reformed again in the same shape be called a community? How can it hold any identity beyond the individual alliances? Because i just do not see that at all.

Edited October 21, 2022 by Astralporing.1957

[Stand The Wall.6987]

going from a solo player focus to group focus is going to be an interesting case study.

[subversiontwo.7501]

10 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Okay, let's say you're indeed right about it (i'd still like to see a quote, though, because i seem to have missed that). What about the second part of my post then? How can a "community" that gets shattered every 2 months and will likely be never reformed again in the same shape be called a community? How can it hold any identity beyond the individual alliances? Because i just do not see that at all.

It does not intend to hold identity. Your alliance is your largest-piece identity.

Now: Server+Server=World

Then: Alliance+Guild+Solo = World

Other alliances, guilds and solos fills the same role a link-server takes today.

Your alliance takes the role of your server today, at 20-25% its size.

Everything else is just mental gymnastics. They could take every server today, split it into 4-5 pieces and instead of linking 1+1 (2k-2.5k sized-) servers they could link 4+4 (500-sized) servers. That would be the server system balanced by smaller pieces. The alliance system will just add more granularity beyond that, letting people who want to be smaller pieces, be smaller pieces. Giving people the choice to be smaller if they want to is hardly a bad thing. That incluces solos, it's a choice.

Spoiler

The same goes for the resets, it is not there for social reasons, it is there to rebalance things, just like relinks now. The same. They are breaking servers up because balancing pieces that large is unwieldy. Allowing different pieces, giving players more control etc., are QoL additions to build a better, more flexible and player-friendly system.

It suffices to be said again, the only people I see having an issue with this (past an initial misunderstanding) are those that are antisocial, selfish and demanding. The kind of people who want access to the content produced by specific players, without having to listen to- or abide by those players wishes, the "I want to play my build in your squad" kind of people. They can be kicked from squads for their behaviour but not from maps or servers. They essentially fear giving those specific players more tools to avoid them for being belligerent and counterproductive: Because that is exactly what they are now, counterproductive, making it harder for those who want to create- and share content and as such making them less likely to do it.

 

Edited October 21, 2022 by subversiontwo.7501

[kash.9213]

39 minutes ago, subversiontwo.7501 said:

I does not intend to hold identity. Your alliance is your largest-piece identity.

Now: Server+Server=World

Then: Alliance+Guild+Solo = World

Other alliances, guilds and solos fills the same role a link-server takes today.

Your alliance takes the role of your server today, at 20-25% its size.

Everything else is just mental gymnastics. They could take every server today, split it into 4-5 pieces and instead of linking 1+1 (2k-2.5k sized-) servers they could link 4+4 (500-sized) servers. That would be the server system balanced by smaller pieces. The alliance system will just add more granularity beyond that, letting people who want to be smaller pieces, be smaller pieces. Giving people the choice to be smaller if they want to is hardly a bad thing. That incluces solos, it's a choice.

  Reveal hidden contents

The same goes for the resets, it is not there for social reasons, it is there to rebalance things, just like relinks now. The same. They are breaking servers up because balancing pieces that large is unwieldy. Allowing different pieces, giving players more control etc., are QoL additions to build a better, more flexible and player-friendly system.

It suffices to be said again, the only people I see having an issue with this (past an initial misunderstanding) are those that are antisocial, selfish and demanding. The kind of people who want access to the content produced by specific players, without having to listen to- or abide by those players wishes, the "I want to play my build in your squad" kind of people. They can be kicked from squads for their behaviour but not from maps or servers. They essentially fear giving those specific players more tools to avoid them for being belligerent and counterproductive: Because that is exactly what they are now, counterproductive, making it harder for those who want to create- and share content and as such making them less likely to do it.

 

Alliances aren't going to be what servers are now though. There are no administrators or governing body on servers right now who can preside over your placement on the server. Plus, if a guild implodes the server isn't in danger of dissolving and scattering people. There's adjacent problems right now but that's a weird comparison to me. 

Edited October 21, 2022 by kash.9213

[subversiontwo.7501]

26 minutes ago, kash.9213 said:

Alliances aren't going to be what servers are now though. There are no administrators or governing body on servers right now who can preside over your placement on the server. Plus, if a guild implodes the server isn't in danger of dissolving and scattering people. There's adjacent problems right now but that's a weird comparison to me. 

Well, I'd agree with you to an extent. I wouldn't be so sure of that last bit though. Here in EU, from the smallest link (Vabbi, WSR etc.) to some of the largest and most stable servers, there are very few left who have not gone through a complete collapse and rebuild. I guess it depends a bit on how you define words like dissolve, scatter, collapse and rebuild though.

However, I've kept these things in mind further back than Piken's collapse in 2019. Singular guilds are increasingly more important for each server. I've used it as an example many times in the past. How the transfers and typical stack-servers fare I'd say is commonly known. Less known perhaps is how volatile the populations are even on those few servers that have not gone through a collapse yet. I would not call them safe and stable though, at least not if you measure stability by the server's ability to share and match content. Go look at any relink thread and you can see the discourse surrounding Gandara for example. It can be debated how near collapse and scatter they have been, however, they have certainly been unhealthily dependent on singular guilds at times.

So, sure, alliances and servers are not exactly the same thing. The comparison was mostly there to help the player qouted get oriented in the system: Not to equate them for all intents and purposes. However, I would not be sure about that last bit in your post and overestimate the stability and permanence of servers: at least not as long as you subscribe to the idea that eg., a WSR or Vabbi without their nomadic communities are effectively scattered and dissolved. They are to me.

Edited October 21, 2022 by subversiontwo.7501

[Dawdler.8521]

2 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Okay, let's say you're indeed right about it (i'd still like to see a quote, though, because i seem to have missed that). What about the second part of my post then? How can a "community" that gets shattered every 2 months and will likely be never reformed again in the same shape be called a community? How can it hold any identity beyond the individual alliances? Because i just do not see that at all.

Seasons break WvW into cycles where several matches will play out. The current design for seasons is 8 weeks, but we are open to feedback. Matches are still a week long, so there would be eight matches a season in the above scenario. During the season, we will still be using 1-up, 1-down.

It's not the original post wit the dev, but is that close enough? 

Regarding the second part of you post... That's links. Normal WvW already does this on a bi-monthly basis. We know that the "average" world was around 2500 people back then, but we have no idea what the size scale is from largest to smallest, only that the largest was like 5x larger than the smallest. Is a "medium" low population link 1500 people? 1000? How far is it from an alliance?

On top of that in the EU we even got national links, having entire german/french communities joining international worlds. Is their community shattered by having multiple worlds? Why arent all germans on the same world!? How could they possible handle being on separate worlds?!?!

TL;DR It's just smaller links. People seem to forget they exist when talking about the horrors of alliances.

[kash.9213]

30 minutes ago, subversiontwo.7501 said:

Well, I'd agree with you to an extent. I wouldn't be so sure of that last bit though. Here in EU, from the smallest link (Vabbi, WSR etc.) to some of the largest and most stable servers, there are very few left who have not gone through a complete collapse and rebuild. I guess it depends a bit on how you define words like dissolve, scatter, collapse and rebuild though.

However, I've kept these things in mind further back than Piken's collapse in 2019. Singular guilds are increasingly more important for each server. I've used it as an example many times in the past. How the transfers and typical stack-servers fare I'd say is commonly known. Less known perhaps is how volatile the populations are even on those few servers that have not gone through a collapse yet. I would not call them safe and stable though, at least not if you measure stability by the server's ability to share and match content. Go look at any relink thread and you can see the discourse surrounding Gandara for example. It can be debated how near collapse and scatter they have been, however, they have certainly been unhealthily dependent on singular guilds at times.

So, sure, alliances and servers are not exactly the same thing. The comparison was mostly there to help the player qouted get oriented in the system: Not to equate them for all intents and purposes. However, I would not be sure about that last bit in your post and overestimate the stability and permanence of servers: at least not as long as you subscribe to the idea that eg., a WSR or Vabbi without their nomadic communities are effectively scattered and dissolved. They are to me.

I think the you're trying to convince me of what I already agreed with about server conditions at the end of my comment. Whatever drama guilds have going on right now doesn't matter to me, regardless of what tier they're trying to crash or avoid, and if my guild right now ever fizzles out I can just drop tag and continue to run around with the usual crowd when I log on.

If there's drama with Alliances, guild and alliances leaders could have some say in where I'm logging in at in a match or two unless I or my guild are super careful with stats to try to let the math keep me around, or I need to bend the knee to someone. 

 

[Astralporing.1957]

49 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Seasons break WvW into cycles where several matches will play out. The current design for seasons is 8 weeks, but we are open to feedback. Matches are still a week long, so there would be eight matches a season in the above scenario. During the season, we will still be using 1-up, 1-down.

It's not the original post wit the dev, but is that close enough? 

Thanks.

49 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Regarding the second part of you post... That's links.

(...)
TL;DR It's just smaller links. People seem to forget they exist when talking about the horrors of alliances.

Agreed in part. Yes, it will be somehow like links, but much worse.

Notice, how already people are commenting on identity issues for those smaller, link servers. The new situation is not going to help that. Instead of identity for primary server, and weaker identity for links, you will have even smaller identities for individual alliances. That's for big alliances though. There will also be small guilds and individual players in that mix - and those will have no identity whatsoever.  Additionally, as someone poined out, today nobody can dictate what server you can play on. In future, your identity will be in hands of big guild leaders. They will decide who has the right to be in their alliance, and who has not. Which, again, means that small guilds without connections and unafiliated players will be left out in the cold. Which may negatively impact their interest in the mode. And while it is indeed the big guilds that form the core of the WvW community, the numbers come mostly from those small guild/unafiliated players.

The change will go from a system more open to both more hardcore and semi-casual players to one designed only for big highly dedicated guilds.