Imbalance of match complains

[XenesisII.1540]

4 minutes ago, Leger.3724 said:

The beta matches had more people playing and then the other problem is that with the beta ending it seems like we're doing a complete showing to rebalance the servers as they were.

The next beta better test something meaningful and not just a "lets shake things up". Do or don't shake up servers. Do or don't double rewards.

Don't test it and then have all the servers thrown into a hat after its over so that over the next 4-6 weeks the old servers can rebalance to where they were at before the beta.You're just going to cause more people to leave and never come back. Beta test something significant. Changes to combat. Changes to scaling of zergs. Maybe change how different objectives can be upgraded and fortified and how much siege you can stuff in them. Test something meaningful.

While there was nothing wrong with the beta the weeks after have been a complete and unmitigated disaster. And we also learned nothing.

Next time the devs decided to completely kitten over matchmaking for 10 weeks... try to get something achieved. Slight rebalancing of server pops by describing them as "alliances" achieved nothing.

TBF the beta also had the wxp boost going on too and that would get the pve casuals in to play.

Next test is suppose to actually be alliances in it. These tests are purely for world restructuring and alliances and I guess queue fixes, not other wvw system changes which we don't even know are even on the table for changes or not.

[Riba.3271]

Beta was better balancewise. But in the past we also had system with decent population balance while keeping the worlds alive: One without link worlds.

It still had less populated worlds but they faced somewhat equally populated worlds. Full status actually stopped people from transferring. The system just had 3 holes:

1. Glicko matchmaking (so not current 1-up-1-down) that still provided unbalanced matchups across multiple tiers
2. Full worlds opened in the middle of the night
3. There were too many worlds for them to function

Now 1. and 2. are already fixed with changes to matchmaking and population status updates. All we need is to reduce total amount of worlds. There will still be less and more active worlds but that will reflect the entertainment they provide and everyone will have a matchup they can win.

On 7/3/2023 at 5:31 PM, Tinka M.3964 said:

The re-linking should be EVERY month and not just every 2 months

This won't stop people from tranferring. Example: There was just 200 organised people transferring to stack a world linking in EU 3 weeks before relink. It needs to be EVERY week if you want to keep linkings and matchups balanced. Granted linking system will always be a bad system controlling player movement unless they limit the transfers based on total population.

Edited July 12, 2023 by Riba.3271

[allshallperish.4620]

Reasons why in no particular order;

*  persistent game mode across multiple maps

*  server transfers, guild migrations, or new players joining specific servers. 

*  Sometimes reliant on player/commander activity and mindset, game too hard log off, too ez log off, avoid fights move maps.  Enemy boring to fight too much seige, players too casual, players too tri hard, hidden tags, guild raids no publics, commanders bad, toxic elitist, skill lag etc etc 

*  Timezone and Availability Differences: WvW operates 24/7, and different servers have players from various time zones.

*  People want to play with like minded people, casuals will play with casuals, people who want more organised or to play with better players will do so.

*  Relinking System: The relinking system was introduced to periodically rebalance server populations in WvW.  Unlucky you can transfer immediately the very second after relinking happens.  oof

*  Bandwagoning to Winning Servers: In WvW, some players may choose to join servers that are consistently winning or dominating their matchups
 

*  Alt account users, maybe this effects matchups who knows.

* beta events  - this disrupts just the same way as relinks
 

Why alliances will never work is simply because it will not solve any of the above issues listed, but hey i'd love to be proven wrong.   If the system could aim to match alliances with similar sizes and strengths (SBMM) to ensure fair and competitive matchups then GGZ.  

Edited July 12, 2023 by allshallperish.4620

[Mabi black.1824]

14 hours ago, Nherro.4528 said:

https://www.zupimages.net/viewer.php?id=23/28/oaj8.png

 

They have completely abandoned server-to-server fair matches. A picture speaks louder than words. And it is very regularly like that. Where is the difficulty in getting the big mcm servers to play with each other, the medium ones with each other and the small ones with each other? No here it prefers to spoil the game of several players for several weeks. So much so that we don't even want to go back.

Where are you playing? wsr? First time without a link? It's the same soup for all servers that don't get a connection. It has been asked many times in so many different ways to solve this problem in the EU. They should have addressed it and considered it as a priority. 50% of the problems in the EU are exactly there. in terms of equal opportunities for all.

[Mabi black.1824]

double post sorry

Edited July 12, 2023 by Mabi black.1824

[Thron Stal.9367]

On 6/27/2023 at 3:39 PM, Dayra.7405 said:

If I look at this weeks normal matches, they are way more imbalanced than the matches of the beta in the last two weeks.

Why do people complain about beta imbalance, but not about normal match imbalance?

I never made it that far into beta, I could not get on the server at all.   Zero feedback to a non-functioning system. 

[Widebody.5071]

Maybe it's not all Anets' fault that server imbalance is screwed up, I believe a certain group of players have a lot to do with it. Example: no matter what server I'm mine is attached to I always seem to run into the same group of roamers, chat smack talkers, afkers and defensive siege haters.

They'll chase me down and pop up no matter what direction I may go. Win or lose they're always around or they may be a fellow server-mate that follows me around yet never help build anything or respond to chat. Then after I spend a bit on siege they'll disappear only to have a huge zerg pop up bypassing everything else going straight for me spot.

It's all part of the game though, those guys sure do work hard for such small returns to the point it's comical. If you call them out in get ready for chat after chat of total nonsense. Just can't believe they are grown adults hell most teens don't act like that.

[Nherro.4528]

I'm just completely disgusted with wvw. Playing to get slaughtered, so difficult to finish the weekly in these conditions. But arenat doesn't care. No feedback from them. It suits them people buy gems for the change of server.
Again the same score this week. 1st: 11000
2nd: 4700
3rd: 3700