Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Should Arenanet Rush WvW Alliance system or wait another X+ years to dish it out?


Should Arenanet Rush WvW Alliance system or wait another X+ years to dish it out?  

15 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Arenanet Rush WvW Alliance system or wait another X+ years to dish it out?

    • Yes
      9
    • No
      6


Recommended Posts

It's been years of broken promises, several set backs and such postponing this update over and over and over. Do they not realize the longer it takes to release the alliance system that guilds, friends, whole communities can fall apart the longer we have to wait? I know 3 huge WvW guilds that just gave up and quit to move onto similar games. I'm personally being told to just set the game aside and take a break...until they release it....why? i can come back in 3 months and it'll be the same content-less WvW crap with barren fights unless I move everyone in the guild to an entirely different timze-zone based server which we wont have activity during our times anyway.

WE WANT TO PLAY WITH OUR FRIENDS CROSS SERVER ALREADY...WITHOUT HAVING TO MOVE!

move your butts anet. and hire someone that actually understands thief, give DoubleTap his job back already

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with alliances is...it's exactly what we have now.  It is literally no different.  Same players, same behaviors, same stacking, same coverage issues, same people transferring to easier matchups.  Anet said early on that alliances would not fix coverage disparities.  So, there is no reason for them to push out a "new" feature that isn't done and changes nothing when it is.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MedievalThings.5417 said:

The problem with alliances is...it's exactly what we have now.  It is literally no different.  Same players, same behaviors, same stacking, same coverage issues, same people transferring to easier matchups.  Anet said early on that alliances would not fix coverage disparities.  So, there is no reason for them to push out a "new" feature that isn't done and changes nothing when it is.

Except it does change. It shuffles the guilds and players in a way that's more unpredictable and it makes the starting field more even. Just like autobalance should work in more competetive games. If you dont think it changes anything well then it doesnt matter, does it? That just shows they have every reason to push it out. At least then you get the chance to complain about how you where right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, MedievalThings.5417 said:

The problem with alliances is...it's exactly what we have now.  It is literally no different.  Same players, same behaviors, same stacking, same coverage issues, same people transferring to easier matchups.  Anet said early on that alliances would not fix coverage disparities.  So, there is no reason for them to push out a "new" feature that isn't done and changes nothing when it is.

17 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Except it does change. It shuffles the guilds and players in a way that's more unpredictable and it makes the starting field more even. Just like autobalance should work in more competetive games. If you dont think it changes anything well then it doesnt matter, does it? That just shows they have every reason to push it out. At least then you get the chance to complain about how you where right.

Let's not forget that the balancing itself is said to put every world around 90% of its cap on relink, putting the amount of players who could even begin to move from world A to B in the low hundreds instead of the low thousands, as is the case now. After WR, if one sizable guild/alliance decides to move, literally, no-one can follow them. If they are at the guild/alliance cap, they might not even able to move in the first place.

That doesn't mean that the new system is void of possible problems. However, them being same problems ranges from improbable to impossible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the topic at hand, I'm not sure if you can call 10 years to rush things out. The problem is quite clearly that they are not allocating sufficient resources into WvW to develop it. No additional amount of time will solve that problem. One more year or five more years of no tangible progress still means no tangible progress. Do note the tangible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MedievalThings.5417 said:

The problem with alliances is...it's exactly what we have now.  It is literally no different.  Same players, same behaviors, same stacking, same coverage issues, same people transferring to easier matchups.  Anet said early on that alliances would not fix coverage disparities.  So, there is no reason for them to push out a "new" feature that isn't done and changes nothing when it is.

The biggest difference is the smaller pieces of the puzzle will be spread out more so it evens out the activity time per world, in other words the casuals/pugs/no guilders who don't move often, it's the guilds and their groupies moving that tend to unbalance everything. WR will instead move the casuals/pugs/no guilders around those groups instead to balance the worlds.

WR will also kinda solve the other issue of when a bandwagon leaves a world, that world and it's remaining players aren't stuck on dropping to T4 for 6-12 months until they get another bandwagon, or decent link. Worlds completely resetting every two months will nullify any major unbalancing movements made.

Yes time zones will still be a problem, not adding that variable to the sorting is a mistake. They say it's possible it will be added later, that they just want to get the vanilla system out and working, but given their current development progress on this project alone, I doubt it'll ever be implemented.

Old system: Casuals/pugs/no guilders/homers all static players on worlds, Guilds and groupies bandwagons do the moving to unbalance populations(especially fight before a set relink).

New system: Guilds/alliances will be the starting pieces (static players) for a world, casuals/pugs/no guilders will be the ones moved around to balance the worlds around them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personal observation & opinion here.

I've gotten overly used to seeing discussions like this...

Where highly intellectual forum experts here love to discuss something in great detail that ultimately & absolutely does nothing in the end.  I might add it's the same bunch of experts...myself included.

Over many years I might add.  This is just cannon fodder discussion that's only purpose is to amuse anybody replying to it...myself included.

Hoping for a solution, but would recommend that you don't hold your breath waiting.

Look at my old posts if you're curious about where my opinion comes from.

Yours truly,
Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.
#MyEoDPurchaseStillComingSoon
#AlliancesWhen
#RoadMapWhen

Edited by Diku.2546
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...