Leechess.7859 Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 (edited) The game mode needs attention. Things are going stale. Making them live now its better than a beta at this point. Don't over hype it for so long just roll it out. People are getting tired of waiting. Edited March 2 by Leechess.7859 3 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawdler.8521 Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 I have a suspicion this thread will do exactly nothing to speed it up. 3 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenesis.6389 Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 Just need to snap their fingers and have it all done instantly I guess... 🥴 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roederich.2716 Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 Last november they said next beta at the start of the year, now we have march… i have given up on this, they obviously stopped to work on it again and want to sell noodle chairs instead. 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrivukasLT.3507 Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 On 3/2/2023 at 2:38 PM, Dawdler.8521 said: I have a suspicion this thread will do exactly nothing to speed it up. *PROCEEDS TO WAIT FASTER* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mabi black.1824 Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 (edited) When I see these posts, it comes naturally to me to wonder if this game mode is built around and within a server/team concept. The player is naturally transported by his server in the most free form possible. Single player, small guild or mega guild. Yes or no? So all these servers are competing with each other, each one has his own public enemy number 1, he will spare nothing to win and capture all the enemy lands to prove that his kingdom rules over all the boundless lands of the mists. Yes or no? (Which is why you would need at least 10 different maps with different environments, or the boundless lands of mists seem too small.) So players should put their content in the mode , each in its own way different to try to do something good in the name of their server . Yes or no? Your server, like all the others, are inexorable and inviolable, there is no drama that can stop a server, you do not exercise victory or defeat that can stop the advance or action of your server. Yes or no? Well then we want alliances right away, and then what do we do with this game mode? Feel free to explain it to me because honestly I still do not understand. Does this server-based game logic manifest serious problems to ensure a decent level of competition between all the various teams, in order to make fun accessible to all the peoples of WWW? Yes, of course. Has any passive or active initiative to improve and/or solve a series of knots that put the mechanics we have always had in difficulty ever been considered? I would say no, or at least I didn't notice it when you did. If, one day, you decide to try to solve / improve this aspect of WVW let me know, because I will definitely be interested in making you hear my ideas, suggestions, opinions and considerations. Peace and love to all servers and long live WVW. P.S. of course it is addressed to all of you but in particular to all the friends of Anet project.✌️ Because my passion for WWW is like our servers, relentless and unstoppable, until I have obtained my constructive, open and sincere, polite and transparent confrontation with the development guys. here on this forum. And what the kitten are they up to with alliances. Edited March 12 by Mabi black.1824 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristingr.5034 Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 On 3/2/2023 at 12:53 PM, Xenesis.6389 said: Just need to snap their fingers and have it all done instantly I guess... 🥴 *Thanos Snap* Did I do it right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenesis.6389 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 5 hours ago, Bristingr.5034 said: *Thanos Snap* Did I do it right? Did you have the power glove on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willow.8209 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 Anet should either release alliances or not. Dithering about it for years and years is counterproductive. Just decide if it's happening or not already. Actually get it done if it's happening. Quit teasing if not. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bern.9613 Posted March 16 Share Posted March 16 Alliances has been on going since 2018 and pretty much immediately put on the back burner. I suspect it got caught up in Dune-gate. There was also a lot of people fired/released/let go in Feb 2019 and maybe the guy/gal who was the architect of the alliances, got swept out to sea on that wave. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
two sheets to wind.2496 Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 WvW is broken no chance of winning cause one bunch has more players than the other .Should put a cap on how many on one side can be on the map so as to be fair fight. Anet needs to stop 150 players from one side & only allow less on the other side. It is not balanced. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chichimec.9364 Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 (edited) On 3/15/2023 at 1:58 AM, willow.8209 said: Anet should either release alliances or not. Dithering about it for years and years is counterproductive. Just decide if it's happening or not already. Actually get it done if it's happening. Quit teasing if not. On the one hand, like many other WvW players, I'm frustrated with Anet's badly bungled handling of the Alliance development process. Like so many others, I am impatient for the Alliance system to finally get here. On the other hand, I don't want to see Anet release some buggy, unplayable mess caused by rushing the Alliance development now. My flickering hopes are that Anet is seriously working on the Alliance system. That they will communicate that to us in clear, unequivocal terms. And that in the near future, they will concretely show us something to demonstrate that serious work. Iirc, the devs said that the next stage of betas would be testing the mechanics of the Alliance system. My memory is not the best so if I'm wrong about that, please correct me. If they did say that though, or something close to that, I hope we will get the next beta in the near future. One positive thing I do have to say is that the recent changes to the WvW reward system really have seemed to breathe new life into WvW. Since the changes started, I have been seeing a lot more folks and a lot more fighting, both attacking and defending, on the various WvW maps. A new beta which shows us that real progress being made on the Alliance system would really help solidify the positive impact of those recent changes. So let's hope we see such a beta soon. Edited March 17 by Chichimec.9364 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johje Holan.4607 Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 10 hours ago, two sheets to wind.2496 said: WvW is broken no chance of winning cause one bunch has more players than the other .Should put a cap on how many on one side can be on the map so as to be fair fight. Anet needs to stop 150 players from one side & only allow less on the other side. It is not balanced. It already is set up like you want. The cap is the same for each team. (We don’t know exact numbers but eg. Red cap is 60, blue cap is 60, green cap is 60. At no point is green allowed to have 75 and red only 45). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mabi black.1824 Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 11 minutes ago, Johje Holan.4607 said: It already is set up like you want. The cap is the same for each team. (We don’t know exact numbers but eg. Red cap is 60, blue cap is 60, green cap is 60. At no point is green allowed to have 75 and red only 45). The problem is not the hat of 60 players on a single map. The problem is when a server is able to fill only one map, while your opponent queues them all 4. The problem is seeing games that end at the weekend with a flow of 50,000 K+D in T5 while you see 130,000 K+D in T1. The problem is that Anet makes matches based on the numbers it sees at the end of the 2-month period, and 3 days later players upset those same numbers. The problem is to get Serie A players and Serie B players in the end, and the rules are not the same for everyone. Unless you also join "the merry company of the transfer", looking for content, without understanding what content we are talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dayra.7405 Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Mabi black.1824 said: The problem is that Anet makes matches based on the numbers it sees at the end of the 2-month period, and 3 days later players upset those same numbers. Yeah transfers should only be allowed at the end of a linking period, not at its start. Or even better: All WvW-Rewards are disabled for the rest of the linking period in which you have transfered, then people that have the urgend need to transfer can transfer, but all people want to transfer at the end of a linking period. 🙂 Edited March 17 by Dayra.7405 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashantara.8731 Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 On 3/2/2023 at 1:47 AM, Leechess.7859 said: The game mode needs attention. I don't think Alliances are the kind of attention that will be a game changer for the mode. What it really needs is a breath of fresh air in the form of a new map with new mechanics (e.g., a Cantha-themed one with Siege Turtles) and bonus events with interesting directives instead of the same old boring "No Downed State" and "Bonus XP" weeks. 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johje Holan.4607 Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 On 3/17/2023 at 9:01 AM, Mabi black.1824 said: The problem is not the hat of 60 players on a single map. The problem is when a server is able to fill only one map, while your opponent queues them all 4. The problem is seeing games that end at the weekend with a flow of 50,000 K+D in T5 while you see 130,000 K+D in T1. The problem is that Anet makes matches based on the numbers it sees at the end of the 2-month period, and 3 days later players upset those same numbers. The problem is to get Serie A players and Serie B players in the end, and the rules are not the same for everyone. Unless you also join "the merry company of the transfer", looking for content, without understanding what content we are talking about. Oh I agree with everything you say here. I was just pointing out to the poster that the caps are equal for each side. They didn't seem to know that. So they were under the mistaken impression that it was even more unfair than it actually is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now