Alliances are nowhere near complete. Poorly managed project with serious concerns.

[Nugatory.8920]

10 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Including scare quotes for "community" and everything that came after my first sentence shows I wasn't implying that.  Or at least I had hoped readers would understand.  /shrug

That's the problem. The second sentence you wrote invalidates the initial claim you made in the first sentence. 

 

21 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

It was asked for "by the community" though.  I put that in quotes because the community isn't generally in agreement all the time nor in the best position to design games.

The first sentence claims the community asked for the change, which implies there was a consensus behind the request. But the following sentence shows you understand it wasn't the community, because as you go on to write the "community isn't generally in agreement". 

 

You can't make both sides of the argument at the same time. 

 

If we're talking about the community asking for something, we are talking about a consensus. Otherwise we are not talking about the community but rather individuals within the community.

 

It's an important distinction when discussing whether the community asked for a change. Was it the community, or was it individuals within a community?

 

I don't want to harp on the point for too long though as I agree for the most part with what your comment goes on to say. Regardless of who asked for the change, or if nobody asked for the change, this is the path the devs have found themselves on and they're in a tough spot. The devs have found themselves in a catch 22.

 

It just seems like a lot of time and effort to put into a project I'm not sure the broader WvW community even cares about.

Edited December 6, 2022 by Somnambulist.5036
I can't grammar.

[Thea Cherry.6327]

Tbh would it be a bad idea to just scrap the whole thing and when they at it, scrap the linking systems since it brought absolutely nothing but bad blood, destroyed servers and balancing even more?

Get back to the OG system, implement restrictions to server hopping by making it stack the more you change servers or add the barrier like New World has, where you only can change factions in a 6 month rythmn.

 

After that you can concentrate on Events like the WvW Tournaments back then, new siege options, revamp of maps, tower structures, Siege skins (yes that would be a good way to finally get rid of all the trash currencys which flood our chars xD) or maybe diffenrent styles depending what color your server is. I think the last major update for the Alpine borderlands has been the rework where they got rid of the sea in the middle and the orb.

 

And tbh who cares if 3 low pop servers are fighting in a lower tier anyway?

[Svarty.8019]

14 hours ago, Somnambulist.5036 said:

Nah, all you need is a couple of posts from individuals to establish a consensus from the community!

You know what's ironic? 
When that vocal minority of forumgoers wanted servers deleting way back in the day...

 

... and the Ahat response was,

Quote

"Deleting worlds and redistributing players is something that has been considered and discussed. In the way described it is not an option that we feel works to solve the complex issue of world population balance. There are many factors involved many that are not immediately obvious without the data we have access to."

 

But they built a 5+ year mehehehegaproject on that premise anyway.

[LetoII.3782]

2 hours ago, Thea Cherry.6327 said:

scrap the linking systems since it brought absolutely nothing but bad blood, destroyed servers and balancing even more?

 

You mean, would the game be better if there were twice as many simultaneous matches and two thirds of them were ghost towns?

[Mabi black.1824]

17 hours ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

Competition died a while ago and doesn't look like it'll be brought back in any form. Some people want to blow up servers, some don't, but why are we doing it in the first place if nothing else will change? Anet has said nothing, and we can only speculate we might get tournaments, but is that a good enough reason for the tsunami in the first place?

I have the exact same question in my head. So let us ask for development, let us let it be known to development clearly without misunderstandings. The only justification for deleting factions, communities, servers and consequently the way to play for all those players that identifies in their server and who want to go online to do something good for their server are not alliances, as we have given way to know them.

Perhaps it is more appropriate to say that they are not enough. We need a broader design, we need to contextualize these alliances in the game mode we know, worlds vs worlds. You need, indeed it is essential to give a motivation and involve your players, to have a goal, and make sure that winning actually has meaning.

And if they win they will be rewarded, in a unique way not with something you find on the BLTP, if you want you know that you have to put passion and tears and blood in this mode.

Let's take advantage of all this hard development work to finally have very similar teams, and we suggest to Anet what he needs to add. 

I suggested a seasonal competition. Don't like it? Make your proposals and suggest a way to leverage alliances with a long-term team competition perspective. Just complaining gets us nowhere, and it doesn't help us take even one step further. We remain nailed to exactly the same spot.

[Mabi black.1824]

9 hours ago, roederich.2716 said:

You asked anet to shuffle the people for balancing and then you complain to be shuffled all the time.

Honestly I have read many posts by many players asking for similar teams, balanced in terms of the flow of number of players, I have often read of people asking to control and define how to manage the transfer system, to allow friends to play together and avoid large groups using it as a tool for manipulating matches,   at the expense of a healthy and credible competition.

These are things that I have read very often, on the contrary I have never seen players ask as a solution to delete communities and servers, to be constantly mixed at random.

If you put a little good will you will find 1000 different and also valid ways , which allow you to improve and control the flows of all servers and allow everyone fun and engaging games. Of course you have to put the will to do it.

[Thea Cherry.6327]

38 minutes ago, LetoII.3782 said:

You mean, would the game be better if there were twice as many simultaneous matches and two thirds of them were ghost towns?

Yes i do.

Imo. even the "medium" populated servers still have a lot of players so i doubt they will become ghost towns (as you called it), but even if, the option to close a tier could still be: an option. My home server is propably one of the servers which would be closed then, iam fine with that, since the linking system completly destroyed our home server anyway. 

I never understood the urge of ANet to not do what other game devs did and close servers which are ghost towns. 🤷‍♂️

[Mabi black.1824]

My grandfather (wise person) always said that the best solution is: little expense so much yield. 😎

[Neo.4056]

I don't feel any motivation to fight for the alliance with these random guilds that I don't know.
I just miss Strombluff Isle dudes even if they break sometimes. :(

[roederich.2716]

1 hour ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

Honestly I have read many posts by many players asking for similar teams, balanced in terms of the flow of number of players, I have often read of people asking to control and define how to manage the transfer system, to allow friends to play together and avoid large groups using it as a tool for manipulating matches,   at the expense of a healthy and credible competition.

These are things that I have read very often, on the contrary I have never seen players ask as a solution to delete communities and servers, to be constantly mixed at random.

If you put a little good will you will find 1000 different and also valid ways , which allow you to improve and control the flows of all servers and allow everyone fun and engaging games. Of course you have to put the will to do it.

Ay stop this false warmup speech about friendships „deletion of communities“ and such…

no friendship or community gets deleted with alliances.

this claim comes from people who just want to avoid changes for the sake to prevent a change. I expect these tight friends to be able to communicate with each others to end in the same alliance as alliances will bring enough functions to ensure all these „friends“ can join the same alliance. Lol

but lets ask different: where are all these „friends“ at all?

the daily dosis of complaints is about unequal numbers.

if this game would be so full of rich friendships and large communities who are about to get soooooo disheartening ripped appart by the eeeeeevil dragons that arenanet are there shouldnt be any unequality at all atm.

and now i end all discussion about this old shoe sole of „firendships and communities get ripped away“ as it is pure nonsense.

if you guys have nothing to say than to dig out the same untrue alarm over and over again the game cant have that much problems like you always want to make it look like.

communicate with your friends and you will stay together. That this is hard for the voiceless pug cloud server which deso is i can imagine. Maybe its time for kinds of commanders and sort of voiceless community spokespersons like you should change their behavior and start to get on voicecom once and for all.

i would never want to play on a silent community where one guy on his warrior sprints 900 range infront everybody and thinks that is an entertaining evening for everybody……….

huge friendship without voicecom… looooooooool

 

[Mabi black.1824]

1 hour ago, roederich.2716 said:

Ay stop this false warmup speech about friendships „deletion of communities“ and such…

no friendship or community gets deleted with alliances.

this claim comes from people who just want to avoid changes for the sake to prevent a change.

The server container itself is community, a large number of players with a large number of iterations that are formed that change, friendships that are formed etc etc. Servers can be compared with each other, guilds and alliances can not be compared with each other. And as I have already written it is not about being afraid of a change, precisely because of this modality that has practically never seen changes, it is clear that whatever you want to change you can only find me agree.

But if I see that with the change could an unexpected problem I come here and write it to you. Alliances are all very well and I can't wait for them to arrive, I believe, as far as I know, that this project is missing a part, an important part.

Development is working on this project right now and if we don't ask now to add anything that can help to stimulate and motivate players we may not get a second chance.

Edited December 6, 2022 by Mabi black.1824

[Mabi black.1824]

52 minutes ago, roederich.2716 said:

communicate with your friends and you will stay together. That this is hard for the voiceless pug cloud server which deso is i can imagine. Maybe its time for kinds of commanders and sort of voiceless community spokespersons like you should change their behavior and start to get on voicecom once and for all.

All the pieces I miss in this alliance development, are definitely not a problem for a small group of friends to continue to be a small group of friends and spend time having fun together. As for my person I can only tell you to consider that not everyone can use the voice as listening, for the most diverse reasons.

Consequently, each one tries to have fun with the means that are granted to him.

As far as I am concerned, I am really the last example to follow, the last wheel of the wagon. You will only find my tag when there are no others. And if I see another initiative on the map you will see my tag disappear in a few moments. If you played with me and you didn't have fun I'm sorry I don't have much more to offer you and I'm just happy to leave you the place.

[Chaba.5410]

7 hours ago, Somnambulist.5036 said:

That's the problem. The second sentence you wrote invalidates the initial claim you made in the first sentence. 

 

The first sentence claims the community asked for the change, which implies there was a consensus behind the request. But the following sentence shows you understand it wasn't the community, because as you go on to write the "community isn't generally in agreement".

It's not a problem.  It's called "Qualifying a Statement", a rather standard and common writing technique.  The second sentence qualifies the first, doesn't invalidate it.  No writer has an interest in invalidating their first sentence.  If I did, I wouldn't have written the second sentence to explain why I put words in scare quotes nor expanded upon my reasoning with the rest of that post.  Be fair and assume good faith.

[Chaba.5410]

3 hours ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

My grandfather (wise person) always said that the best solution is: little expense so much yield. 😎

In English there's the phrase "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."

The cure for the flaws of the game mode is certainly expensive.

[AlCapwnd.7834]

5 minutes ago, Chaba.5410 said:

It's not a problem.  It's called "Qualifying a Statement", a rather standard and common writing technique.  The second sentence qualifies the first, doesn't invalidate it.  No writer has an interest in invalidating their first sentence.  If I did, I wouldn't have written the second sentence to explain why I put words in scare quotes nor expanded upon my reasoning with the rest of that post.  Be fair and assume good faith.

iS THiS A gAMER FOruM ORE A EnglISH LeesON?(o/?<.!2@

[Chaba.5410]

9 minutes ago, AlCapwnd.7834 said:

iS THiS A gAMER FOruM ORE A EnglISH LeesON?(o/?<.!2@

aPpaReNtly!  Stay in school, kids!  You too can obtain a reading level above 8th grade.

Edited December 6, 2022 by Chaba.5410

[Kozumi.5816]

1 year later and alliances have made 0 progress. The writings on the wall, people need to just start reading it.

[b k.1648]

If there was actually 0 progress they wouldn't even be running beta events

[enkidu.5937]

On 12/5/2022 at 6:33 AM, Sviel.7493 said:

This is beta number 6 or 7 depending on how you count.  For every other beta, they gave ample warning ahead of time.  Thus, I'm inclined to believe that this was some sort of error rather than the new standard we should expect from them.

At the beginning, the Devs announced the betas to make people excited and join. Now that people understood that its a big pile of poo, Anet will not announce it since people would logout for that week.

[Dawdler.8521]

6 minutes ago, enkidu.5937 said:

Anet will not announce it since people would logout for that week.

Doesnt that imply that people wouldnt even notice a beta is going on if Anet never said anything?

[Kozumi.5816]

2 hours ago, Ben K.6238 said:

If there was actually 0 progress they wouldn't even be running beta events

Betas with 0 problems addressed and zero new features isn't progress.

[Kozumi.5816]

On 12/3/2022 at 10:07 PM, Xenesis.6389 said:

They just continue to drop crumbs on the ground with these bonus weeks and hope you eat it up and buy something from the store while you're still here...

Yes it's same for the end game PvE player base. Enough so you keep up hope so you stick around but the main focus is open world casual maps.

[SweetPotato.7456]

if Anet release a half baked alliance system, the title of this thread would be a different one. I rather they take their time and give us something awesome then something that's not ready.

[Nugatory.8920]

On 12/5/2022 at 6:38 PM, Chaba.5410 said:

It was asked for "by the community" though.  I put that in quotes because the community isn't generally in agreement all the time nor in the best position to design games.

OK, let's simplify what you wrote to better illustrate my point:

 

"'The 'community' asked for the changes. But the community doesn't agree and smells bad so shouldn't be listened to anyway.'"

 

6 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

The second sentence qualifies the first

 

If the qualification made is that the initial sentence isn't true, then it renders the initial claim moot, wouldn't you agree? If the community doesn't agree how is the "community" asking for the change? What is your definition of this "community" you are referring to? If you are referring to individuals within the community making requests for change that does not constitute a request from the community as a whole as I and others have already pointed out to you.

 

All of which leads to the conclusion that it cannot be said that the community asked for these changes. 

 

There's a reason I don't often come on forums; I really do not wish to be a pedant. As I already said, I agree with most of what you wrote in that comment. Fortunately, the beta is halfway through so it won't be long before we can return to fighting in WvW rather than on the WvW forums.

[LordHT.8297]

I stopped believing this team would do anything good for wvw when they removed the extra pips from outnumber maps