World Linking 7/28/2023

[RaveOnYou.2819]

those regional servers should be closed. why people think bringing same nationalities together good idea? people can easily join national guilds and select server. now those servers consists of mostly people with same nationalities, speak non eng. language all day from team chat. its just annoying  to see non eng. language on team chat, join a public tag on dc with french speaking people etc. and in this matchup anet totally mixed all those servers and match with general eu servers.

[Riba.3271]

5 hours ago, RaveOnYou.2819 said:

those regional servers should be closed. why people think bringing same nationalities together good idea? people can easily join national guilds and select server. now those servers consists of mostly people with same nationalities, speak non eng. language all day from team chat. its just annoying  to see non eng. language on team chat, join a public tag on dc with french speaking people etc. and in this matchup anet totally mixed all those servers and match with general eu servers.

They're not regional, they're language based. There are French canadians, French Africans, French, etc... It becomes pretty big barrier if you have to learn a new language to attend 75%+ of the content provided in WvW.

What they need to do is go back to monoservers. No mix of language servers, no transfers to play with Full servers by transferring to link and most importantly reviving home for the people. It just hard to find or build a truly homeserver when commanders, people, guilds, player quality, player quantity and queues have drastic changes every 2 months.

Edited August 5, 2023 by Riba.3271

[DarlingUnderdog.7235]

I never understood the point of forcing two servers with different languages together. I don't think any English speaker is going to learn French/German overnight for WvW, and vice versa.

[Dawdler.8521]

29 minutes ago, DarlingUnderdog.7235 said:

I don't think any English speaker is going to learn French/German overnight for WvW, and vice versa.

Yeah aint nobody got time to learn writing "2 nc" because it is so much more more complicated than <random 8 word sentence of nonsense that doesnt even contain the number of enemies>.

What Anet should have done YEARS ago was to remove the language note on the worlds. Delete it. Simple as that. Problem solved, no more national worlds people can complain being linked to. Whether people talk in other languages in team/map... well that's just normal, isnt it? English is rarely everyones native language, it's just the need for common communications that leads us to use it. People would learn eventually. Maybe not overnight. It'll take like a weekend. 

Edited August 6, 2023 by Dawdler.8521

[RisingDawn.5796]

On 8/6/2023 at 12:52 PM, DarlingUnderdog.7235 said:

I never understood the point of forcing two servers with different languages together. I don't think any English speaker is going to learn French/German overnight for WvW, and vice versa.

It's probably not a good idea, but there are National servers, which lead in English too, most of the time it's easy to understand each other or to compromise. Anyone linked with Baruch has a disadvantage though, as I only met very few who speak English, although there were Spanish guilds on international servers in the past.

Linking servers was supposed to be temporary system, now you have people having alts and transferring to stack on other servers, trying to find a different experience, but it's not so much different.

Some servers lost all their quality and experience over the years, due to players stacking on our link, which meant getting stuck in T1 almost every other relink, when the server as a host was also popular with many WvW guilds and active commanders back then.

I have retired my main account, on the same server i was on almost 11 years ago today, but you have people playing alts that don't need the numbers or even veterans, when they are just making up the numbers there.

The current system, gives some really bad pairings. So of course, wvw won't be as populated or like it was 10 years ago, but it could be better.

Edited September 1, 2023 by CrimsonOneThree.5682

[Sirvaleen.1379]

On 8/6/2023 at 1:52 PM, DarlingUnderdog.7235 said:

I never understood the point of forcing two servers with different languages together. I don't think any English speaker is going to learn French/German overnight for WvW, and vice versa.

I'm playing on a half-dead french server and most often than not map/team chat is a mix of french and english depending of the current link. You really don't need to be fluent in english to be able to communicate. It's not that hard and most french/german are well aware of that. If they opt not to use english when linked, well.. they can't complain if not many players answer their calls.

This time we're linked with Baruch though and it's really unpleasant. I was expecting them to at least partly communicate in english but it's not the case. I'll probably transfer before the end of the week because enduring that for 2 months is not my idea of fun.

In theory, the "easy" solution would be to merge some servers which should put an end to the dubious linking system. It won't happen though so.. at least we do have the option to transfer..

Edited August 8, 2023 by Sirvaleen.1379

[Absurd.2947]

Anet sees WvW as ppt/karma train/GoB farm, so who gives a kitten if someone scout reports or asks for daily keep in FR/DE/ES. Just learn like 4 words 5head. 

[Zok.4956]

On 8/5/2023 at 5:37 PM, RaveOnYou.2819 said:

those regional servers should be closed. why people think bringing same nationalities together good idea?

There are no nationality servers. There were servers for some languages. Learn the difference.

 

On 8/5/2023 at 5:37 PM, RaveOnYou.2819 said:

its just annoying  to see non eng. language on team chat

Get over it. It won't go away.

 

[dead.7638]

Mag is purposely sinking their own ships, have fun with that.

[DarlingUnderdog.7235]

On 8/8/2023 at 12:11 PM, CrimsonOneThree.5682 said:

It's probably not a good idea, but there are National servers, which lead in English too, most of the time it's easy to understand each other or to compromise. Anyone linked with Baruch has a disadvantage though, as I only met very few who speak English, although there were Spanish guilds on international servers in the past.

On 8/8/2023 at 1:01 PM, Sirvaleen.1379 said:

I'm playing on a half-dead french server and most often than not map/team chat is a mix of french and english depending of the current link. You really don't need to be fluent in english to be able to communicate. It's not that hard and most french/german are well aware of that. If they opt not to use english when linked, well.. they can't complain if not many players answer their calls.

You both make valid points! I should have rephrased my initial statement with something along the lines of, "Mixed language combinations leave room for stubborn players unwilling to compromise." Or something like that.

Obviously most players are willing to find a way to communicate (whether through acronyms or something else) but it is difficult when you have some who outright refuse to even try with their pairing. Which is very much an unfair disadvantage. As you both confirmed with the example being Burach. 

[Hellbound.5610]

On 7/31/2023 at 1:54 PM, Mabi black.1824 said:

I agree, but that is only in the hands of Anet. while it is only the ''stupid'' players who want to manipulate the current system.Anet has every chance to limit this. The day Anet takes a more active, and less permissive attitude, maybe we will have more balanced / similar games and then you will finally better distribute the fun / participation you have your players.

But, the real risk is that WWW works better. So many other players flock to WWW and this is a problem for Anet. Latency, lag, endless queues etc etc. So, Anet is careful to say it freely, but not actually improving conditions in WWW is something they probably want on purpose. or they will have many other problems to solve. With one click, they have access to any data/information within GW2.

WWW works, the flows are constant, people play it anyway (because the game is nice) the wheel turns, so let it keep spinning by itself. This is + or - the development approach, just for my personal opinion.

This is the best opinion I have ever read! Totally spot in.

[Riba.3271]

2 hours ago, Hellbound.5610 said:

On 7/31/2023 at 2:54 PM, Mabi black.1824 said:

I agree, but that is only in the hands of Anet. while it is only the ''stupid'' players who want to manipulate the current system.Anet has every chance to limit this. The day Anet takes a more active, and less permissive attitude, maybe we will have more balanced / similar games and then you will finally better distribute the fun / participation you have your players.

But, the real risk is that WWW works better. So many other players flock to WWW and this is a problem for Anet. Latency, lag, endless queues etc etc. So, Anet is careful to say it freely, but not actually improving conditions in WWW is something they probably want on purpose. or they will have many other problems to solve. With one click, they have access to any data/information within GW2.

WWW works, the flows are constant, people play it anyway (because the game is nice) the wheel turns, so let it keep spinning by itself. This is + or - the development approach, just for my personal opinion.

Expand  

This is the best opinion I have ever read! Totally spot in.

Nah, it was completely wrongly based opinion. The balance is in a way that Stonemist castle and objectives in general are super easy to defend, so this promotes stacking to server that can both take and actually defend objectives most of the day.

Unbalanced servers and hard separation of casuals/tryhards was born from the fact that being much stronger was only way to get fun when you want fun. If balance was fair and same server that can barely take ogrewatch, can also barely lose wildcreek, overly stacking would be extremely boring, and servers would stay relatively balanced.

Anet should also not decide which player goes where, because this will lead to monotonous experience as every server will be the same. It is much better to provide diverse options for players to go to, and have tiers do the fair matchmaking. Also regular matchmaking has the issue that organised groups will always have to be pre-made as it will rarely reach anyone outside that bubble in the little time they are together. Stable servers have incentive to teach and reach out to new players, because those will stick around forever. Regularly rearranged servers by developers will just keep the amount of new players relatively same everywhere, so any effort you do won't actually be beneficial to the quality of gameplay you experience.

All they need is fair balance, way to limit populations and incentive to reach out to new players. Having developers do the matchmaking regularly is a terrible idea as it will shut the door down between old and new players completely.

[Mabi black.1824]

On 8/25/2023 at 1:47 AM, Riba.3271 said:

Unbalanced servers and hard separation of casuals/tryhards was born from the fact that being much stronger was only way to get fun when you want fun

That is exactly where you and I disagree. You don't need to stack good players and have big numbers all day to have fun. You don't have to win to have fun. I've had a lot of fun nights while losing the weekly game. Perhaps the funniest.

In this game mode players choose how to play it, then choose a group of friends to play with together, and that's it, here should end the freedom and manipulation of the player. Then it's up to Anet to build the games and it's up to you to play those games, not manipulate them. You ended up in an unlucky match, learn to get by and invent a way to have fun. Transfers are out of place in the WVW, and even more misplaced are the alliances of 500 players.

At least that's my thought. while it would serve a purpose, a reason to involve players. Once you've made sure that various groups of players can't manipulate the mechanics, build your own servers, and give them a competitive season to participate in. 6 months 1 year and then start again. from the new game environments , different from each other, each with its own characteristics and add here and the events. Competitive events that affect your team's points. etc etc

But that's taking care of WWW, that's improving the gaming experience in this mode, with the risk of bringing too many players in here, so a lot of problems for Anet to solve. ( queues, latency, delays etc etc ) so here we are, stuck for a long time.

Edited August 28, 2023 by Mabi black.1824

[Riba.3271]

22 hours ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

On 8/25/2023 at 2:47 AM, Riba.3271 said:

Unbalanced servers and hard separation of casuals/tryhards was born from the fact that being much stronger was only way to get fun when you want fun

That is exactly where you and I disagree. You don't need to stack good players and have big numbers all day to have fun. You don't have to win to have fun. I've had a lot of fun nights while losing the weekly game. Perhaps the funniest.

In this game mode players choose how to play it, then choose a group of friends to play with together, and that's it, here should end the freedom and manipulation of the player. Then it's up to Anet to build the games and it's up to you to play those games, not manipulate them. You ended up in an unlucky match, learn to get by and invent a way to have fun. Transfers are out of place in the WVW, and even more misplaced are the alliances of 500 players.

At least that's my thought. while it would serve a purpose, a reason to involve players. Once you've made sure that various groups of players can't manipulate the mechanics, build your own servers, and give them a competitive season to participate in. 6 months 1 year and then start again. from the new game environments , different from each other, each with its own characteristics and add here and the events. Competitive events that affect your team's points. etc etc

But that's taking care of WWW, that's improving the gaming experience in this mode, with the risk of bringing too many players in here, so a lot of problems for Anet to solve. ( queues, latency, delays etc etc ) so here we are, stuck for a long time.

Indeed, you don't need such a thing. You don't need to have exactly equal or more numbers to have fun. That is why stable tiers is perfect system for people to decide what they want to do to have fun. If they want to GvG, they will go lower tier, if they want to avoid queues all together, they will go lowest tier. If everything is your thing, tier 1 is there.

You're just blaming players too much. The current state of world stacking is 90% developers fault. Only after they added linkings and massive cloud buffs, people started stacking and actually competitive voice tags slowly quit the game. Match manipulation isn't a real thing, people just do the thing which leads to most fun. So you should aim for infrastructure where balanced servers are most fun, and servers can't overstack to Full + Full point.

Anyways, bad balance isn't match manipulating. They made clouding op and they made defensive siege useless against large groups. So, all you have left is clouding servers and very little commanders that want to be clouded, so thats why the game feels bad. It is just not serious or emotion inducing enough anymore. And randomized matchmaking would make WvW completely lighthearted. And lighthearted things are very to drop.

Edited August 29, 2023 by Riba.3271

[Chaba.5410]

On 8/28/2023 at 3:48 AM, Mabi black.1824 said:

being much stronger was only way to get fun

5 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

You don't need to have exactly equal or more numbers to have fun.

Now you're just contradicting yourself.

Edit: (Sorry, Mabi, meant to quote Riba in the first quote.  Forum software didn't understand how to quote the quote from your post.)

Edited August 29, 2023 by Chaba.5410

[Mabi black.1824]

7 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

You're just blaming players too much. The current state of world stacking is 90% developers fault

I don't want to blame anyone, or at least that's not my intention. I've just been observing for many years what happens around me in this mode. Only with the hope that something good, useful will come out, since I am passionate about WWW like many of you here on the forum.

So back in our discussion, the players are not to blame, it's just that they are WWW players, competing players, and you will see that they will invent anything to manipulate the matches and pairings that Anet proposes every 2 months, so as to overcome their opponents. Many are willing to come to terms with their worst enemies in order to control the game. The manipulation of the games is done by us players, not Anet.

The responsibility of Anet, is not to realize (or not want to realize) that this is a beautiful game mode '' competitive '' and leave all that freedom of control to the players, makes the same competition not credible.

Hardly credible competition = real problem of the game mode.

Server without identity = another real problem of game mode

Inside the server container lies the secret to transport and involve players, of any kind of player you want to talk (roaming, small scale, large scale, closed guild etc etc) all of us until we recognized ourselves in our server, until we had our kingdom to defend we had a reason to propose our content. When you lose that perspective, everything changes. When you make your first jump to another server, everything changes.

Because at that point winning or losing really doesn't count for anything anymore. And this is the problem to be solved. My suggestion is beyond alliances and wr. Because, as I have already written, WR and alliances gives the possibility to ANET to rebuild all the servers from scratch, periodically, leaving the groups of friends and pieces of community still together. This is a huge thing that we get. But behind this new mechanic you have to revolutionize the competitive part, The new servers will need more time, so as to allow them to participate in a competitive season, the scoring system must be updated or better revolutionized, daily and weekly events must affect the score of the server, in addition to kills and capture or defense of structures. You have to add the possibility to double the server points if for example you win 2 consecutive weeks, and so on. you have to make sure that the ranking is not trivial and The recovery of your opponent is always possible.

If we add to all this new maps (not one but a dozen, we change every month) they can also resemble each other, it would be enough to change the setting, change some differences in height and bottlenecks and it's done. Then we get a new WWW that lives up to what GW2 is, something you can truly call the ''cornerstone'' of this game.

I realize I'm asking a lot, but that's what our mode needs. And for the record, as usual I immediately bought Soto, even if I only play WWW. Because if I can I always support, what I have always made for the group of Arena Net. Because even if we always get little anet, you must know that we also always contribute to your bisnes.✌️

Edited August 29, 2023 by Mabi black.1824

[Riba.3271]

5 hours ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

 

The responsibility of Anet, is not to realize (or not want to realize) that this is a beautiful game mode '' competitive '' and leave all that freedom of control to the players, makes the same competition not credible.

Hardly credible competition = real problem of the game mode.

Server without identity = another real problem of game mode

If you cannot choose your team, your team doesn't stay the same nor is there any kind of ranked matchmaking, it isn't a competitive environment. Actual competitive environment is where you can either commit to a team (so stable servers regardless of tier you're in), you can matchmake most of your team or the numbers are actively balanced to be fair. Linking system does none of these. You won't have fair numbers any time you're online, your alliance will just be fraction of the people nor will you have power to change the team around you longterm.

So what you want is active matchmaking  system that matchmakes people equally on WvW maps. So Arena matchmaking. You or your guild gets thrown in on one side, and next one gets thrown to another. But that is not what linkings are. It isn't active matchmaking. It is just terrible system taking worst of servers and arena gamemode.

And you do understand that linking system is as easily played as current system? You just make a big guild of main accounts, and guild of alts. Then you alternate between them every 2 months with one having high WvW playing hours and another low amount. And boom, you will have massive numbers advantage always. Another is just reducing playing hours couple weeks before linking, which lot of groups already do naturally. If you want developers to take truly reins of WvW, you need to have active matchmaking, or forget about large guilds completely.

Edited August 29, 2023 by Riba.3271

[Riba.3271]

5 hours ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

 

Because at that point winning or losing really doesn't count for anything anymore. And this is the problem to be solved.

Winning points does not matter because:

1. Playing for points means putting ton more hours in, hours which could be committed to fighting. The hours you put in playing when there are no enemies, will translate to having equal amount of players less during times when there are enemies. This is an obvious flaw of matchmaking people for 2 months based on activity where you should only play during good hours as playing at slightly worse hours will make good hours outnumbered.
2. The balance is garbage. Objectives are not fair for sieging or fights at all. Defenders can't hold against large groups because gates are paper, golems can be buffed by boons and shield gens block all siege. And defenders win almost all fights due to stats and several respawns. Obviously if taking an upgraded objective is garbage experience where you lose most of time, people stop caring about score since playing for score isn't fun. If there are no attackers or even dolly snipers, there is just nothing to defend against.
3. The teams are not consistant. The higher percentage the randoms around you are, the less you will care about the end result. Currently it is average of like probably 55% of people are on your server, rest on linkings (0.65*0.65 + 0.35*0.35 = 0.545). Alliances would be even worse than current linking system. Why put extra hours in or care about score, when you're working with randoms? The rest 45% will just mess up any great timezone or tier you manage to put down. Also why would you support a new commander, if he is on a link, or you transfer around regularly? He isn't going to be in your team in 2 months so there is no reason to wait for them to improve or to get to know them early.
4. Timezones are not consistant. As a commander, you know that when a new linking comes there is a chance that tagging dynamics change drastically.  Everytime there is change in queues and sometimes even popular commander stealing almot all your players by tagging up hour before. People can adapt to slow change of going from 40 people following to 10 people over months, but not when it happens instantly. Since the system is at fault and not yourself for timezone becoming unplayable, most people will just give up on the game. Maybe transfer once or twice, but thats it. The game pulls new players or commanders in when it is great, and losing greatness instantly is very bad for longetivity.

So what we need are regular servers, not just for fairer matchmaking than currently but also for stable environment. Slow change and ability to adapt to changes around you. But not only that, we need better balance, closer to one we had in the past. Where attacking was still difficult but commanderless disorganised clouding wasn't nearly as advantageous, and keeps/castles took much longer to upgrade. Currently we have too many unlosable tier 3 objectives meaning there are too few timezones where having smaller groups slowing down or helping upgrading matters. If your activity does not matter most of the days, the scene will just die.

Edited August 29, 2023 by Riba.3271

[Mabi black.1824]

10 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

If you cannot choose your team, your team doesn't stay the same nor is there any kind of ranked matchmaking, it isn't a competitive environment.

I believe that this game mode is based on a team/server concept. We've always had them, and you've always been able to choose which one is yours. and I don't understand the problem of having matched 2 servers. It's just like you have an ally for 2 months. Each of the two gets their own weekly points. Both will remain the same after the 2-month period. Both can freely express their identity or style of play etc etc.

I really struggle to see a problem in this or a reason why it might question the competition. While, I think that the competition is not credible, because at this precise moment I can read in EU some teams reach 100,000 K + D while others reach 40,000 K + D. Anet is in difficulty to better match the servers, rightly because the pieces are too big, but above all the players decide to manipulate the mechanics to win easy.

A large number of players want to have control over the numbers to manipulate the game. Probably Anet has an extraordinarily inclusive policy that leaves all kinds of freedom and choice to the player, but in this case he should modify his passive attitude to take a more active attitude. Put in place everything you need to bring that K+D number from T1 to T5 inside say 15 or 20% maximum difference on a weekly basis. Then you won't tell me anymore that WWW is not competitive.

[Mabi black.1824]

10 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

Where attacking was still difficult but commanderless disorganised clouding wasn't nearly as advantageous, and keeps/castles took much longer to upgrade. Currently we have too many unlosable tier 3 objectives

You should consider that this game is a few years old. Maybe it was easier before, because so many players still have to grow or learn how to play in the mode. Today we have experienced players who know how to play pretty much anywhere. They will read your thrusts and know how to attack you even if they don't have a commander. forged by many hours of gameplay. This is normal. It is not a fault of the balance if before you managed to get results and now you find it more difficult to get them.

[Deniara Devious.3948]

Since winning and losing in WvWvW doesn't matter and they should NOT matter, because the populations are so imbalanced. How about we get rid of the winner goes up/loser goes down a tier system?

Instead the tiers could determined by total active WvWvW ticks per server (and its links) and fairly large random number. Let me explain:
total active WvWvW hours tells how active a server is. If a player is inside WvWvW (AFK or doing something) at the end of the tick, he/she is counted active. This is extremely easy to program on the server side. Just sum all those together. The server which has more total ticks is the most active. And the match making should match most active servers against other similar servers and vice versa.

Where do we need the large random number? The random number simply provides random variation to the above system. With the randomness added we could avoid a deadlock in e.g. top tier having so active servers they always stay the same (anyways in current system 2 will stay the same or in worst case all 3 if #2 and #3 have equal points, since we don't have a tie-break system). Yet, if the random number should not be too large to make the system entirely random.

Advantages of proposed system:
+ provides more equal matchmaking, at least to population (especially after relinking the current system can provide weeks of lopsided matches e.g. imagine you are placed in tier 1 without a link, and then lose 5 weeks in a row because of hopelessly.. I have seen that happen many times)
+ able to adjust to large player migrations / alt population activations within 1 week
+ less chances of match manipulation e.g. trying to avoid certain opponent (if the random number is not known in advance, it could still match make you somewhere you didn't expect)

Disadvantage of proposed system:
- more difficult for players to know what is the next match up. You can predict it, but not as well as with current system

Ayna

PS. Just like Riba explained the alliances won't solve anything and in fact it might lead to as lopsided matches with certain alliances having very large population advantage. Many hard core players have alts. 

Edited August 30, 2023 by Deniara Devious.3948

[Mabi black.1824]

2 hours ago, Deniara Devious.3948 said:

Instead the tiers could determined by total active WvWvW ticks per server (and its links) and fairly large random number. Let me explain:
total active WvWvW hours tells how active a server is. Should it count AFK players. I think it should. If a player is inside WvWvW at the end of the tick, he/she is counted active. This is extremely easy to program on the server side. Just sum all those together. The server which has more total ticks is the most active. And the match making should match most active servers against other similar servers and vice versa.

It seems to me a good suggestion, and the algorithm that defines the server should be updated for real, in addition to the number of players / hours of play should consider many other parameters. Number of tags, K/D coefficient, guild number of a certain size, how much it has won or how much it has lost in the last 5 weeks, etc etc. But this would be more work to be programmed for development.

[RisingDawn.5796]

I remember, when servers were free to transfer for the first few months back in 2012 and also when guilds used to pay 1800 gems to join a Very High, active server or those who got help to transfer to servers, by Server leaders back in those days.

So there's been alot for Anet, to have to ponder and realize that they needed a better way to balance populations, within the game mode alone, including during the years we had WvW tournaments.

It just hasn't happened fast enough, to keep the game modes population more healthy.

Now you have the addition of alts and server links, it's added another layer of difficulty to balance, but I'm sure most people would rather play with the same community of players, if they can help it.

It's just that for me, many people I knew either quit or just play on other servers now, including me, cause I was burning out.

[Mabi black.1824]

12 hours ago, CrimsonOneThree.5682 said:

It's just that for me, many people I knew either quit or just play on other servers now, including me, cause I was burning out.

I find it hard to understand this behavior. It's as if everyone throws themselves into the well then I throw myself into the well. If you have the intellect to have understood the technical problems of this gameplay, why Your solution is to throw yourself into the well like everyone else?

WWW will continue to have the same ''technical issues'' even when you move to another server. In addition to the fact that you will have lost your identity and the reason for putting content inside WWW. You can pretend to hide inside your guild and friends, but it's nowhere near the same feeling of participation and belonging that the server/team container is meant to offer.

The server/team concept is the brick with which WWW was conceived and designed. Do you want to make it useless? Well you will make WWW useless, it is not a choice it is a fact. This is a large-scale PvP game. Players need rules. Equal rules for everyone. And as I have already written until I read differences of K + D from T1 to T5 within parameters that can be shared by everyone on a weekly basis. The mode will continue to have the same ''technical problems''.

You can keep transferring for another 1000 times, but it will only be worse and worse.

The possible solutions are not so impossible. You can also continue to pursue the choice of WR and alliances for another 5 years if necessary. But in the meantime grant small updates to this mode. Show the love you have for this mode. Small things, but constantly year after year. Just like you do for the PVE part. PvP needs the same love. if you want to see it always at the highest level.✌️

P.S if the community asks for more balance between the teams, rather than a more credible competition from T1 to T5 to be all more involved. It will do nothing to give the community a new weapon rather than changing the parameters of a rune or relic. Because what they are asking for is something else. a bit salty, but that's how I feel today.

PPS: I like to watch your Twitch every now and then. You're in a nice group of players, and knowing that I'm still in WWW only makes me more serene.

Edited September 1, 2023 by Mabi black.1824

[RisingDawn.5796]

...

 

Edited September 23, 2023 by CrimsonOneThree.5682
Ranting