Arenanet you must do something more to ensure proper server matchups

[Nuchre Bumbling.9807]

So after every relink the servers are randomly assigned to tiers. This time Blacktide had the misfortune to matched against FoW who we had just played against the previous week. To add insult to injury FoW are linked with a strong secondary server and every week the 2 other servers are in a race to see who can be relegated to a more manageable tier. We ended up playing FoW for 2 more weeks until pretty well every Commander did the minimum so we could get relegated. We had the same issue in T2 against Gandara and unfortunately one obsessive PPTer ensured we stayed in T2 so now we are playing WSR. So far WSR has 128,312 War Score while BT and Gunnars have 88,000 combined. There are one or two very good zergs in WSR but the main reason they are winning is that they flood maps and overwhelm the opposition by sheer numbers.

FoW, Gandara and WSR are incredibly strong at the moment and linking them with strong secondary servers makes the imbalance even worse. At the reset these 3 servers should be in T1 not randomised where they play far weaker servers and make life a misery for the opponents. For example, 5 minutes after reset the camps adjacent to spawn both had mithril and diamond players ganking the weaker players  trying to capture the camps. Diamond and Mithril players have all the tickets they could possibly need so exactly what is achieved by this apart from the pleasure of ruining it for others.

At the next reset please, please ensure fairer matchups at the start because it is ruining WvW for a lot of people.

 

 

[Burt.9528]

Oh no, another WSR cry post

[Phobos.9736]

2 hours ago, Nuchre Bumbling.9807 said:

So after every relink the servers are randomly assigned to tiers. This time Blacktide had the misfortune to matched against FoW who we had just played against the previous week. To add insult to injury FoW are linked with a strong secondary server and every week the 2 other servers are in a race to see who can be relegated to a more manageable tier. We ended up playing FoW for 2 more weeks until pretty well every Commander did the minimum so we could get relegated. We had the same issue in T2 against Gandara and unfortunately one obsessive PPTer ensured we stayed in T2 so now we are playing WSR. So far WSR has 128,312 War Score while BT and Gunnars have 88,000 combined. There are one or two very good zergs in WSR but the main reason they are winning is that they flood maps and overwhelm the opposition by sheer numbers.

FoW, Gandara and WSR are incredibly strong at the moment and linking them with strong secondary servers makes the imbalance even worse. At the reset these 3 servers should be in T1 not randomised where they play far weaker servers and make life a misery for the opponents. For example, 5 minutes after reset the camps adjacent to spawn both had mithril and diamond players ganking the weaker players  trying to capture the camps. Diamond and Mithril players have all the tickets they could possibly need so exactly what is achieved by this apart from the pleasure of ruining it for others.

At the next reset please, please ensure fairer matchups at the start because it is ruining WvW for a lot of people.

 

 

i agree pls no more link for WSR

[Hoon.1524]

stop talking about wsr, every 2nd uses hack troll zero chances against wsr, and the have a game keeper as friend and they have stupid warrior use gun

[Burt.9528]

I used to be think I was happy in Drakkar Lake living my life as a Soulbeast pretending I was an Arrow Cart. Then I moved to WSR and I found true meaning, 10/10 server would recommend

[Nuchre Bumbling.9807]

6 minutes ago, Hoon.1524 said:

stop talking about wsr, every 2nd uses hack troll zero chances against wsr, and the have a game keeper as friend and they have stupid warrior use gun

Can you translate that into English please. To clarify I don't think WSR as individuals are that much stronger than the average BT player, it's just there are way more of them and you get overwhelmed by sheer numbers. 

[Nuchre Bumbling.9807]

3 minutes ago, Burt.9528 said:

I used to be think I was happy in Drakkar Lake living my life as a Soulbeast pretending I was an Arrow Cart. Then I moved to WSR and I found true meaning, 10/10 server would recommend

Well any server that swamps the other two and wins by sheer numbers is going to be fun but some of us have lives and can only play 3 or 4 hours average per day, many less. As you are having so much fun you should accept the challenge and have 4 weeks with Gandara and FoW. 

Edited December 16, 2023 by Nuchre Bumbling.9807

[joneirikb.7506]

2 hours ago, Nuchre Bumbling.9807 said:

So after every relink the servers are randomly assigned to tiers. This time Blacktide had the misfortune to matched against FoW who we had just played against the previous week. To add insult to injury FoW are linked with a strong secondary server and every week the 2 other servers are in a race to see who can be relegated to a more manageable tier. We ended up playing FoW for 2 more weeks until pretty well every Commander did the minimum so we could get relegated. We had the same issue in T2 against Gandara and unfortunately one obsessive PPTer ensured we stayed in T2 so now we are playing WSR. So far WSR has 128,312 War Score while BT and Gunnars have 88,000 combined. There are one or two very good zergs in WSR but the main reason they are winning is that they flood maps and overwhelm the opposition by sheer numbers.

FoW, Gandara and WSR are incredibly strong at the moment and linking them with strong secondary servers makes the imbalance even worse. At the reset these 3 servers should be in T1 not randomised where they play far weaker servers and make life a misery for the opponents. For example, 5 minutes after reset the camps adjacent to spawn both had mithril and diamond players ganking the weaker players  trying to capture the camps. Diamond and Mithril players have all the tickets they could possibly need so exactly what is achieved by this apart from the pleasure of ruining it for others.

At the next reset please, please ensure fairer matchups at the start because it is ruining WvW for a lot of people.

 

 

The fix they're working on is World Restructure.

They're not going to put that on pause to add temp-stop-gap measures when it would be more efficient for them to finish WR instead, which should resolve these issues for good.

[Burt.9528]

Indeed, I heard WSR already made a 500+ player alliance with every single hacker, riffle warrior, core engi, and moa mesmer out there. It'll be WSR x2, glorious

[Hoon.1524]

WSR is a very evil server perma spawn kill with big norms and asura with disgusting skins, they block peoples and throw toilet paper at us.

[Junkpile.7439]

So did anet ban those wsr exploiters already or do they still hide under stonemist?

[Nanogrid.7283]

8 hours ago, Hoon.1524 said:

WSR is a very evil server perma spawn kill with big norms and asura with disgusting skins, they block peoples and throw toilet paper at us.

Oi!!! This is not ok.

Telling me easter bunny doesn't exist, is ok.

Telling me tooth fairy is fake, no problemo.

Telling me santa claus isn't real, hey .. could be worse.

Telling me jesus christ is greatest scam in the history of humankind, no surprise there.

But hold on now ... you telling me that asuras are disgusting when I have 8 asuras out of 8 characters total ?!?!

This is NOT ok, this is kaput material, I've been living a lie! No amount of minstrel is able to heal me now!

I bid you farewell, barbaric WvW forum!

I go bully ChatGPT until he tells me that all asuras are magnificent and worthy of the respect they deserve!

 

Edited December 17, 2023 by Nanogrid.7283

[Araleg.3152]

Simple solution:

- Limit the amount of players across all maps to +/-10 the average population on any given side.
- Allow people to join any sever as a "Mercenary" with a 50% xp buff to balance the queue.

Over populated servers end up stuck in queues and have to disperse or join as a Mercenary.
Might be worried about spy/sabotage, but the NSO system in Planetside 2 seems to have worked fine.

From my experience the new beta revamp just shifted the problem from population to guild vs pub stacking and won't solve this at all.

Edited December 17, 2023 by Araleg.3152

[Nuchre Bumbling.9807]

@Araleg.3152

Rather like that solution as the problems are not that WSR, FoW and Gandara are amazingly good but that when their zerg is 50-100% bigger than yours you tend to do badly when they have any knowledge at all. For example today we have a chill Sunday morning run which was 20-30 players and we were clouded by WSR who attacked with roughly the same numbers. They did not fare well at all until we attacked a T3 keep when we were overwhelmed after the EWP was pulled and we found ourselves up against a huge cloud. We initially killed quite a few but as were whittled down eventually failed. I have no issues at all with losing fair fights the imbalance is so bad that many on our server who don't need tickets just aren't playing making the imbalance even worse. 

Edited December 17, 2023 by Nuchre Bumbling.9807

[TheGrimm.5624]

6 hours ago, Araleg.3152 said:

Simple solution:

- Limit the amount of players across all maps to +/-10 the average population on any given side.
- Allow people to join any sever as a "Mercenary" with a 50% xp buff to balance the queue.

Over populated servers end up stuck in queues and have to disperse or join as a Mercenary.
Might be worried about spy/sabotage, but the NSO system in Planetside 2 seems to have worked fine.

From my experience the new beta revamp just shifted the problem from population to guild vs pub stacking and won't solve this at all.

I don't think this would work.

A valid tactic is if a server is zerging a single map is to go and hit them across other maps. This solution would remove this tactic which is to encourage them to disperse to address all the other spots if they want to zerg a single map. Also if a single side was doing poorly against two others this would make it a valid tactic for them to ask or worse case tell all of their players to logoff to leave their so called "elite" players even numbers forcing players to leave the game mode, or game, reducing population while we are all seeking more populations. As far as the mercenary idea, I am not familiar with it from PS2, but considering how many complaints we see about alt-account trolling I don't think allowing players from other servers fill the queues on servers would work out at all and more than likely leading to extreme trolling. 

The WR is meant to address over stacked servers. How well it does that....?

[Mimizu.7340]

19 hours ago, Junkpile.7439 said:

So did anet ban those wsr exploiters already or do they still hide under stonemist?

The last time our server was matched with WSR (2-3 weeks ago) they had a hacker under the map whilst they did their 24/7 "omglul" spawn camping zerg.

They were able to get closer to spawn than any of them due to being immune to the Legendary Defenders.

So they don't just camp under EBG anymore.

[Araleg.3152]

4 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

I don't think this would work.

A valid tactic is if a server is zerging a single map is to go and hit them across other maps. This solution would remove this tactic which is to encourage them to disperse to address all the other spots if they want to zerg a single map. Also if a single side was doing poorly against two others this would make it a valid tactic for them to ask or worse case tell all of their players to logoff to leave their so called "elite" players even numbers forcing players to leave the game mode, or game, reducing population while we are all seeking more populations. As far as the mercenary idea, I am not familiar with it from PS2, but considering how many complaints we see about alt-account trolling I don't think allowing players from other servers fill the queues on servers would work out at all and more than likely leading to extreme trolling. 

The WR is meant to address over stacked servers. How well it does that....?

Could probably:

- Remove queue from maps so you only queue for WvW, once you're in you can change map at any time (still an internal queue for maxed maps).
- Pin the numbers to a minimum of say 20 and average it out over an hour.
 

Planetside 2 also:

- Rewards a lower populated side with increased xp, given the k/d and map control differences.
- Locks alternative maps if player numbers get too low.
- Locks certain grids from being captured during low pop hours.
 

At the very least ANet could:
- Grant outnumbered buff based on player numbers across all maps, reduce the requirements and have different tiers of buff.

Edited December 17, 2023 by Araleg.3152

[Burial.1958]

For that they also should look how strong skillwise a Server is (K/D). Makes no sense that Very Strong Servers get also a Strong Link.  Ofc that will not balance it out because of that transfersystem.

Edited December 17, 2023 by Burial.1958

[RisingDawn.5796]

They just changed to a 4 week relink cycle for now, also the transfers don't help. (also alts)

[Ubik.8315]

Allowing server transfers AFTER relink is insane. Transfers should be open at the tail end of each "season" (relink). 

[TheGrimm.5624]

8 hours ago, Araleg.3152 said:

Could probably:

- Remove queue from maps so you only queue for WvW, once you're in you can change map at any time (still an internal queue for maxed maps).

Right now players can queue for maps that are maxed and then they can already select another map to play while they wait. This kind of sounds like it would add random to the first they choose after queuing for a full map, not sure that helps.

8 hours ago, Araleg.3152 said:

- Pin the numbers to a minimum of say 20 and average it out over an hour.

Not sure what you mean here. So each map needs 20 before...? Again not sure what you mean and from what angle.

8 hours ago, Araleg.3152 said:

Planetside 2 also:

- Rewards a lower populated side with increased xp, given the k/d and map control differences.
- Locks alternative maps if player numbers get too low.
- Locks certain grids from being captured during low pop hours.

This is our outnumbered buff. Outnumbered of the three servers gain a buff on a map, but are only rewarded if they succeed. Players used to gain from just trying, but that was removed as a thought was that players would pip hunt win or not and they wanted to reward just winners. 

8 hours ago, Araleg.3152 said:

At the very least ANet could:
- Grant outnumbered buff based on player numbers across all maps, reduce the requirements and have different tiers of buff.

I don't think there should be stat buffs for fighting outnumbered since it encourages players telling others to leave. I also don't think they should have removed incentive to players to fight and fail while trying to fight outnumbered. I think the later has resulted in players that would defend anyway being outnumbered. While removing players that might have balanced out the sides as was the original intention of outnumbered to draw people in to balance the sides since they sought the buff win or lose. Its complicated in both senses. 

[TheGrimm.5624]

7 hours ago, Ubik.8315 said:

Allowing server transfers AFTER relink is insane. Transfers should be open at the tail end of each "season" (relink). 

Agree, 1 week before relink only, but that's while we have linked servers, WR, whole different topic.

[Mabi black.1824]

1 hour ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

Right now players can queue for maps that are maxed and then they can already select another map to play while they wait. This kind of sounds like it would add random to the first they choose after queuing for a full map, not sure that helps.

Let's try to think this way. The players allowed on a map can be a maximum of 70 (I think). Let's say that when Anet detects a disparity in flow that is no longer tolerable (30-40% ? it's to be defined) it applies a reduction of players allowed on the maps of 10-15% (also to be defined) to everyone.

When the flow differences become acceptable again, the original limit of players allowed on a map also returns. What will happen? All the servers suffering from numbers, they won't even notice. All servers overloaded with players will spend hours and hours queuing. So what? So we're spurring player redistribution.

It would be to see Anet take a new active attitude, as opposed to the passive one he has now.

Do you want to take action or do you just want to watch the problems? That is the real question we should be asking. And when you choose to take action, there's no need to make the revolution. delete a mode to make a new one. We just need to do, try, verify, and correct. Small things, often just numbers or parameters. constantly because the player will try to abuse again and again (especially if the player is PVP) so the action, the doing must be constant.

Edited December 18, 2023 by Mabi black.1824

[Mabi black.1824]

Not to mention transfers. The system we are using (which I personally like as an idea) combines 2 servers. The transfer limit must be applied to all 2 servers. Example: First server: full: 2000 players The second server: Medium : 500 players. The second server will be granted transfers for only 5% of the sum of the 2 servers, so 125 players maximum. You have to impose a limit also to the second server, beyond which you are not allowed to transfer.

But again, do you want to take action or do you just to watch the problems?

Edited December 18, 2023 by Mabi black.1824

[TheGrimm.5624]

20 minutes ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

Let's try to think this way. The players allowed on a map can be a maximum of 70 (I think). Let's say that when Anet detects a disparity in flow that is no longer tolerable (30-40% ? it's to be defined) it applies a reduction of players allowed on the maps of 10-15% (also to be defined) to everyone.

When the flow differences become acceptable again, the original limit of players allowed on a map also returns. What will happen? All the servers suffering from numbers, they won't even notice. All servers overloaded with players will spend hours and hours queuing. So what? So we're spurring player redistribution.

It would be to see Anet take a new active attitude, as opposed to the passive one he has now.

Do you want to take action or do you just want to watch the problems? That is the real question we should be asking. And when you choose to take action, there's no need to make the revolution. delete a mode to make a new one. We just need to do, try, verify, and correct. constantly because the player will try to abuse again and again (especially if the player is PVP) so the action, the doing must be constant.

Its 4:41 AM, let me come back to this and try this again if you don't mind. Forum War 2 3 hours before a Monday AM clock is not a good choice.