Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Restructure - A Step forward in competitive a step backwards in casuals


ChrisWhitey.9076

Recommended Posts

I like the idea of balanced game play and think this is a great move forward for the veterans of WvW. I am concerned that if there is a 500 guild/alliance cap it will make things harder for casuals. If there is limits as to who can play it will cause guilds to cut baggage and inactives. Even if guilds have good players they might get cut if they only show up 10% of the time. GW2 is a game where I think people come and go and I think that is a plus for it but that is just my opinion. I think if players want to play with tag and some guilds play close tag these players have moved to other servers with more open tags for a casual experience. I think it should be good for players to be in a WvW guild overall but some casuals just want to play when ever and join who ever. I prefer the competitive style we are moving to but I think we will need something to make it easy for new players have fun in WvW. I would love to see guilds have ranks so that the best guilds are ranked from bronze to diamond. I think one solution would be guilds that need players that they could get fills in LFG from anywhere if the player is solo (and are not in a WvW guild) but then balance becomes an issue.

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is a very fair point but that is where I hope that the match making that comes with it balances that out. If you want to fight only weaker teams to max k/d then you either get matched up against strong teams. Same could be said for guilds that PPT when it is dead to flip a map and leave they get other guilds to fight. I am thinking that it will not work at launch so I hope that it works out. If match making means guilds can still pick to fight bag farms and PPT at dead hours then it seems like a dead system at launch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, ChrisWhitey.9076 said:

I like the idea of balanced game play and think this is a great move forward for the veterans of WvW. I am concerned that if there is a 500 guild/alliance cap it will make things harder for casuals.

Why? The 500 cap is not new. The Alliance sub-function of the WR, which is effectively on hold, had 500 to keep guilds and Alliances in step for the sorting logic. The goal was to allow for massive group of players to stick together but not to dominate the population of a new server. When looking at just WvW players I am not sure how many 500 player WvW guilds there are anymore if any. Casuals will fit into servers and they will also account for out of balance matches as they do today but if all works out should factor into the sorting logic to balance them around. They will ironically also account for more fluctuations in queue since causal by nature means they may or may not show up in their normal timezone or outside of it. 

35 minutes ago, ChrisWhitey.9076 said:

If there is limits as to who can play it will cause guilds to cut baggage and inactives. Even if guilds have good players they might get cut if they only show up 10% of the time.

This again assumes a full WvW guild.

35 minutes ago, ChrisWhitey.9076 said:

GW2 is a game where I think people come and go and I think that is a plus for it but that is just my opinion. I think if players want to play with tag and some guilds play close tag these players have moved to other servers with more open tags for a casual experience. I think it should be good for players to be in a WvW guild overall but some casuals just want to play when ever and join who ever.

Not sure where you are going here.

35 minutes ago, ChrisWhitey.9076 said:

I prefer the competitive style we are moving to but I think we will need something to make it easy for new players have fun in WvW. I would love to see guilds have ranks so that the best guilds are ranked from bronze to diamond. I think one solution would be guilds that need players that they could get fills in LFG from anywhere if the player is solo (and are not in a WvW guild) but then balance becomes an issue.

Where does ranking guilds come into issues with causals? How do you rank guilds when there is both PPT and PPK which are important to game play? How do you rank a 3 player guild versus a 500 one? If a 3 player guild took the same objective that the 500 player one had just done who was more effective in terms of a rank?

When you say LFG from anywhere are you talking about cross servers? If so will have to go with a no there since that is the point of the WR is to discourage stacking since that is what got us into this mess in the beginning. As far as a system to spread new players around Anet is more than likely already planning for this and we might see more info on it in the blog in January. Non-guilded players will already be sorted the same as guilds to spread them about based on their average play hours and time zone. Trying to match both player counts and amount of play to make things even across the new servers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the feedback @TheGrimm.5624 I think my concern is that if servers stacking was an issue guild stacking is inevitable. I think you might have some thoughts that the restructure might remove stacking all together so if that is the case we might not have an issue. Anyways my thoughts are below so if there is anything you think is worth critic I would love to hear it to make sure the game has a positive direction forward.

10 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

Why? The 500 cap is not new. The Alliance sub-function of the WR, which is effectively on hold, had 500 to keep guilds and Alliances in step for the sorting logic. The goal was to allow for massive group of players to stick together but not to dominate the population of a new server. When looking at just WvW players I am not sure how many 500 player WvW guilds there are anymore if any. Casuals will fit into servers and they will also account for out of balance matches as they do today but if all works out should factor into the sorting logic to balance them around. They will ironically also account for more fluctuations in queue since causal by nature means they may or may not show up in their normal timezone or outside of it. 


My concern is long term. If people are going through the effort to stack servers they will stack guilds. Some servers are already creating WvW guilds for restructure already to have many commanders and many hours of coverage. Once the 500 player limit is hit and people compete to who is in the guild then usually it is the casual players that get cut. This will not be an issue at the launch of beta but will be the overall outcome long term. This of course is speculation and I think it is great if competitive guild are happy to keep casuals and still be happy.

 

15 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

This again assumes a full WvW guild.

This is again coming from hearing that WvW servers and making server guilds so I am sure it is a thing.

 

17 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

Not sure where you are going here.

This was just if casuals have to fight for a guild spot then it will be an issue as GW2 imo is not a try hard MMO like many others it competes against. (doesn't mean that there are people that do not go hard in this game cause there are).
 

 

25 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

Where does ranking guilds come into issues with causals? How do you rank guilds when there is both PPT and PPK which are important to game play? How do you rank a 3 player guild versus a 500 one? If a 3 player guild took the same objective that the 500 player one had just done who was more effective in terms of a rank?

This is more of a dream in the future and yeah it seems like a mess but if balance is suppose to match guilds then there must be a ranking system for balance and I just think a rank system would be a nice touch. My thoughts that guilds with different sizes have different rank pools so 50 people guilds are not ranked against 500 but this is not important.

 

28 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

When you say LFG from anywhere are you talking about cross servers? If so will have to go with a no there since that is the point of the WR is to discourage stacking since that is what got us into this mess in the beginning. As far as a system to spread new players around Anet is more than likely already planning for this and we might see more info on it in the blog in January. Non-guilded players will already be sorted the same as guilds to spread them about based on their average play hours and time zone. Trying to match both player counts and amount of play to make things even across the new servers.

I agree that it non guild players should not be able to stack groups as it would be a mess. Was just an idea to help people find new guilds as a few players with out a home might not make a difference. I guess in game chat the forums and social networking will have to do but it was a thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

But... has the fact that you can only be 50 man in a squad stopped guilds that have more than 50 members from playing? 

What about member #219, does he not get to play when it's time to raid?

Technically large guilds already have first come first serve sign ups for every raid to help manage and do take attendance. Though yeah if the whole server guild stacking is not a concern I think this was funny and I am the dumb.

Edited by ChrisWhitey.9076
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think this will be a significant problem. On any game with a competitive set up, players will try to "win". Now, how we define win varies a lot from player to player. K/D ratio, kills, current battle, points, etc. 

You are right, since 500 is a hard ceiling, ultra competitive guilds are going to "cut the fat". In fact, that happened already in some cases. But it's not going to be widespread, just like today hardcore GvG is not the prevalent style.

WvW will have space for everyone, chill guilds and pugmanders will be spread and won't have to face hardcore guilds (*if the matchmaking algorithm works).

Gaming the system to "win" is nothing new, today players transfer to stack a server, play on alts if they don't like the matchup, skip weeks to tank in points. We will have ultra stacked guilds and your normal "I don't care about winning guilds", just like today. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like this is one of those bridges we will deal with it when we cross it. If it is true that we regularly need more than groups of 500+ desiring to play WvW, then WvW will have already been in a good spot and WR was a great success and these changes will come fairly naturally.

The more pressing issue I think is the 5 guild limit as it is time for players to start consolidating.

And that being said, I think WvW has certainly become less casual friendly over the years due to barriers to entry increasing and some serious thought has to be given. In the past WvW was supposed to be a "bridge" to the endgame of PvP. Of course PvP is whatever, so WvW is an actual endgame destination but you really have to convince people of that.

Let's be honest. The game doesn't really explain itself well at times. After all, most of our info is gotten from the player driven wiki, and everyone knows how great the modern gamer is at reading.

Edited by ArchonWing.9480
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read a good post in forum.. or maybe discord... that basically said:

'''The deadweight culture is particularly horrid in this game to the point people expect to be rewarded for having a pulse.

If you have standards, you are toxic or a gatekeeper.

Oh no, a pve boss requires some degree of coordination! Angry frog noises, its even worse in wvw :classic_rolleyes:'''

And i think its how literally this thread will end, so basically u can all pack it up, nothing more to banter here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Triptaminas.4789 said:

Oh no, a pve boss requires some degree of coordination! Angry frog noises, its even worse in wvw :classic_rolleyes:''

Boon balls are the random roaming world/raid bosses of wvw that require a raid to defeat!

Everyone cheers when they are finally taken down!

But the loot is even worse!

🤭🍦

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Triptaminas.4789 said:

I read a good post in forum.. or maybe discord... that basically said:

'''The deadweight culture is particularly horrid in this game to the point people expect to be rewarded for having a pulse.

If you have standards, you are toxic or a gatekeeper.

Oh no, a pve boss requires some degree of coordination! Angry frog noises, its even worse in wvw :classic_rolleyes:'''

And i think its how literally this thread will end, so basically u can all pack it up, nothing more to banter here.

Sounds familiar. Yea that was me lol.

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/134282-why-isnt-willbender-nerfed-in-wvw-/?do=findComment&comment=1965508

It's very unfortunate, but  gatekeeping sometimes is needed for a better experience because there are too many people that just want stuff for free. I'm not talking about not running builds or following tags but simply just taking responsibility for one's own actions.  The forums is a great place to read about people that land in bad situations because they did something dumb, and then most of it is just them blaming everyone but themselves.

The way I see it, it's not gatekeeping because of perceived skill, but mentality. Players are going to want to play with players with similar mentalities, whether it be full sweat, or full casual. And being casual isn't a bad thing because it's just a video game. What is bad is being casual yet having hardcore expectations.

Unfortunately, for any new system to work, there needs to be a degree of accountability  to get the desired results.  And I'm not just saying this about random pugs. I've also seen numerous fly by night alliances fall apart because they have the planning of a goldfish.

 

And accountability certainly is not just on part of the players too, mind you. Developers also should "get good" too.

 

Edited by ArchonWing.9480
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ArchonWing.9480 said:

Sounds familiar. Yea that was me lol.

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/134282-why-isnt-willbender-nerfed-in-wvw-/?do=findComment&comment=1965508

It's very unfortunate, but  gatekeeping sometimes is needed for a better experience because there are too many people that just want stuff for free. I'm not talking about not running builds or following tags but simply just taking responsibility for one's own actions.  The forums is a great place to read about people that land in bad situations because they did something dumb, and then most of it is just them blaming everyone but themselves.

The way I see it, it's not gatekeeping because of perceived skill, but mentality. Players are going to want to play with players with similar mentalities, whether it be full sweat, or full casual. And being casual isn't a bad thing because it's just a video game. What is bad is being casual yet having hardcore expectations.

Unfortunately, for any new system to work, there needs to be a degree of accountability  to get the desired results.  And I'm not just saying this about random pugs. I've also seen numerous fly by night alliances fall apart because they have the planning of a goldfish.

 

And accountability certainly is not just on part of the players too, mind you. Developers also should "get good" too.

 

Birds of feather flocks together, its just nature, u cant change it, u cant force this out,  it always was and will be the case. 

All worries expressed about this thing.... like u can draw parallels now to countless other both human and animal examples, where system self corrected itself, initial bandwagon guilds that farmed pugs would be replaced and farmed by prior puglet guilds or something like that, and game would go on. 

aslong as anet manages to sustain and attract userbase to wvw (which is in its best interest imo, as its literally endgame, endgame that can keep people playing and interested indefinitely) the system no matter what nonsese they would do with user base shuffling and bandwaggon initiation will eventually self correct and stabilize like nothing ever happened

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I play with a casual guild who raids 2-4 times a week organized.  Most of our roster raids with us, but a handful are too busy in real life to make many raids, they still have a guild spot.  Our rule as a guild is if you are offline for a month, you get an ingame mail and the boot from the guild.  You keep your discord perms unless you actually leave our server to play with others.  Our roster hovers between 100 to 50, and we always have 2 or 3 people returning from a hiatus with no problems.  Alliance wise, we are unaffiliated due to the drama it causes and peoples unwillingness to self regulate their member counts responsibly. With monthly restructures, it shouldn't be a big deal, and likely with the drama past alliances will have caused over time, some of these super alliances will fragment due to too many egos.

 In the past beta's those who were guildless or didn't select their wvw guild were able to see which servers their guilds were distributed to, then join that server individually as long as they didn't join wvw and have a server automatically assigned to them.  If this system is still like this at its official release, then i dont really see an issue unless a server becomes full.   If its full, then too bad.  Find a group to play with that are willing to accept your real life obligations (or lack of wvw commitment) vs trying to stick to a tag who doesn't want your type of player following them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, SweetPotato.7456 said:

Your suggestion is making it hard for new players to join. 
I have alt noob account, the noob on the account is level 70 a mere footman, I just found a very good guild to run with, and they have allow me into their guild. if guild is going to be rank , my noob toon will be axe immediately. 

Stop with this nonsense. 

What on earth are you even talking about? What “rank”? Guilds don’t have ranks measured in levels, not now and not with WR.

If a “very good guild” leader actually told you that then you are a mascot that would be dumped at any time regardless of WR or not.

Because a “very good guild” that competetive doesn’t entertain noobs.

There are a metric ton of casual guilds for every competetive guild and it’s far more likely we will see the complete opposite with WR - guilds screaming to recruit anyone just to fill their ranks because even a noob is a body you can throw at the enemy.

It’s not like all guilds are packed today, where will all the veterans pushing out the noobs come from? SPvP or something? Or do we have that many unguided pro roamers?

Edited by Dawdler.8521
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

What on earth are you even talking about? What “rank”? Guilds don’t have ranks measured in levels, not now and not with WR.

If a “very good guild” leader actually told you that then you are a mascot that would be dumped at any time regardless of WR or not.

Because a “very good guild” that competetive doesn’t entertain noobs.

There are a metric ton of casual guilds for every competetive guild and it’s far more likely we will see the complete opposite with WR - guilds screaming to recruit anyone just to fill their ranks because even a noob is a body you can throw at the enemy.

It’s not like all guilds are packed today, where will all the veterans pushing out the noobs come from? SPvP or something? Or do we have that many unguided pro roamers?

Read original post

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ragnarvor.2351 said:

Balance? Me and my buddy just got one shot in under five seconds by a mesmer.  I want people to understand that this is terrible class design. Even if you are bias toward this game that is actually complete garbage class design.  

That's not a one shot if it took 5 seconds, for 5 seconds you had plenty of time to use two dodges and mouse click a defensive skill.

Now if you had said one shot combo out of stealth in 1 second, that's a different story...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ragnarvor.2351 said:

Balance? Me and my buddy just got one shot in under five seconds by a mesmer.  I want people to understand that this is terrible class design. Even if you are bias toward this game that is actually complete garbage class design.  

What were your stats and gear? Class and attributes? Elite/Core? What level?

Now the real question, what does this have to do with the World Restructuring project that the thread is about?

Side note, this might be a better thread post under the Mesmer Class subforum in professions if you want to suggest changes to the class and skills. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, ChrisWhitey.9076 said:

Thanks for the feedback @TheGrimm.5624 I think my concern is that if servers stacking was an issue guild stacking is inevitable. I think you might have some thoughts that the restructure might remove stacking all together so if that is the case we might not have an issue. Anyways my thoughts are below so if there is anything you think is worth critic I would love to hear it to make sure the game has a positive direction forward.

The WR will use causals as cement in a wall. I see myself in that group. I see my server as a local pub that I enjoy to visit nightly and fight and joke and laugh with. I am server side player personally. I do think that the more organized will group and handle issues on coverage.  That's also why I could see their logic to limit the Alliance side to 500 and try and make sure a given Alliance does not dominate a server in population. I have also seen servers where if the server is made up of massive guilds they sink to the bottom since if their drivers are not online then the guild doesn't play since they don't have direction. So will Guilds stack, yes. Should they be allowed to overstack and imblance a sort, no.

20 hours ago, ChrisWhitey.9076 said:

My concern is long term. If people are going through the effort to stack servers they will stack guilds. Some servers are already creating WvW guilds for restructure already to have many commanders and many hours of coverage. Once the 500 player limit is hit and people compete to who is in the guild then usually it is the casual players that get cut.

Agree. So us causals will either need to group up or accept the mixing bowl. I don't like it either but by Anet not dealing with the issue before this or causals not voicing the issue earlier, we are at that point. 

20 hours ago, ChrisWhitey.9076 said:

This will not be an issue at the launch of beta but will be the overall outcome long term. This of course is speculation and I think it is great if competitive guild are happy to keep casuals and still be happy.

I think we have already seen this issue during betas actually. Groups that have already formed up during betas have thrown the testing off in spots which is why they went to 4 week sorts to try and better code for it while they cancelled the Alliance sub-feature. So, not so sure here.

20 hours ago, ChrisWhitey.9076 said:

This was just if casuals have to fight for a guild spot then it will be an issue as GW2 imo is not a try hard MMO like many others it competes against. (doesn't mean that there are people that do not go hard in this game cause there are).

Causals is in how you define them though. Again I define myself as one. A causal is not going to be thinking at competing for a guild spot. They are going to be going out to look for a fight. Everyone likes to win, but right now there is nothing to win. Mind you I see that as a bad thing but that is what we have been playing under the terms of for a long time. One of reasons I agree with the WR is to give us more reasons to win again. Now once we are there, the causal issue might be more of an issue, I agree.

20 hours ago, ChrisWhitey.9076 said:

This is more of a dream in the future and yeah it seems like a mess but if balance is suppose to match guilds then there must be a ranking system for balance and I just think a rank system would be a nice touch. My thoughts that guilds with different sizes have different rank pools so 50 people guilds are not ranked against 500 but this is not important.

Your rank idea makes more sense when talking matching for sorts versus LFG. Anet has already hinted they are working on underlying attributes to do this since they have also ID'd that though this guild is 500 and so is this one (or 50 v 50) they are not the same. A secondary aspect of the sorting, and with causals, is to move players about so that guilds can find like minded players, be those that are hardcore, organized, like minds, causal or any other attribute to group up. Guilds that want to find others will both have options to see more players shuffled about (us pub style players are in trouble here) so that guilds have more options to gather but hopefully also to keep numbers in balance to hopefully create good matchups. 

20 hours ago, ChrisWhitey.9076 said:

I agree that it non guild players should not be able to stack groups as it would be a mess. Was just an idea to help people find new guilds as a few players with out a home might not make a difference. I guess in game chat the forums and social networking will have to do but it was a thought.

I think we will see more guild recruiting with the WR and potentially more on the forums once this rolls out. I am interested in seeing more info on how they plan to handle players dropping in mid-sort. I could see a number of approaches to this. Transfers are also another I would like to see more info on since I do see them as a potential disruptions if the goal is more balanced servers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expect guilds will stack a few alliances, my only concern is if there's even enough of those guilds to have at least 12 alliances that are fairly even in size.

I could see an alliance stacking 3-6 "fight" guilds of 20-50 active members, enough to fit on 4 maps for prime time, but not an overly amount to have massive queues every night, and then use the remaining 200 filler slots for players of their choosing, maybe reserves for prime time, or off hours. The bigger these alliances are for them, the better, as they will then get less random casuals to fill their world, especially for prime time, more so now that time zones will count, which means there may be other worlds where more casuals are present in prime time(if there isn't enough big alliances for 12 servers), meaning easier farms for those guilds.

The next concern is whether or not these guilds in those alliances are even going to care to "win", as it is right now we have servers that have these massive guilds slumming it in T4. WR does nothing for them motivation wise to win a match. We have yet to hear what Anet's firm plans to do about this in the future, simply organizing the population to be more even, is not enough to get players to care about winning as a world 10 years into this mode. There's only two things these guilds care about these days, more map space for them, and plentiful easy opponents to farm.

Maybe the next beta will have some revelations about the future.

  • Like 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...