WvV reconstruction (or alliance ) is the worst idea to come up since Gwen broke her flute.

[Dawdler.8521]

14 minutes ago, Neo.4056 said:

Exactly. They are actually changing WvW into EotM. This is totally nonsense. If WvW is just the same as EotM, why should I play WvW mode which is not a World vs World anymore, and why should I secure a tier level of this randomly constructed team for what?

Did your matchup reset all score in the last 4 hours and determined who the winner was? Do you play with all the players in WvW that’s on a specific colour? Do you have multiple instances of EB and only EB to play on?

If no, then it’s not EoTM. WR is nowhere near EoTM. 

If WR is EoTM then linking is EoTM too since WR shares 100% of the linking matchup and design.

Your logic is that regular WvW was EoTM all along.

[Neo.4056]

45 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Did your matchup reset all score in the last 4 hours and determined who the winner was? Do you play with all the players in WvW that’s on a specific colour? Do you have multiple instances of EB and only EB to play on?

If no, then it’s not EoTM. WR is nowhere near EoTM. 

If WR is EoTM then linking is EoTM too since WR shares 100% of the linking matchup and design.

Your logic is that regular WvW was EoTM all along.

If you cannot build a lasting history with other guilds or players, it's akin to a random EoTM. Even with re-linking, there are still long-term anchor called a server, enabling your guild to preserve and reminisce about its history with other guilds. This facilitates understanding their styles for the long term, comparing and exchanging information, playing together, or securing tier points in each guild's respective borderlands.

But with this random matching, like in EotM, there's no motivation to defend a borderland or work together with other guilds to secure points, because today's randomly allied guild may become an enemy in the next reconstruction round.

[Dawdler.8521]

45 minutes ago, Neo.4056 said:

If you cannot build a lasting history with other guilds or players, it's akin to a random EoTM. 

And by that very first sentence you declared it is in fact, not EoTM. Because that lasting history would be an "alliance" (ie community guild of different smaller guilds) or just a plain guild.

Have you even looked at what EoTM is?

Edited January 14 by Dawdler.8521

[Neo.4056]

1 hour ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

And by that very first sentence you declared it is in fact, not EoTM. Because that lasting history would be an "alliance" (ie community guild of different smaller guilds) or just a plain guild.

Have you even looked at what EoTM is?

I'm pointing out that EoTM and WR are alike in having a matching system with random players, and in both, the long-term history and experiences of guilds don't add up so that defending points and other cooperative operations become meaningless.

Yeah, they do have different reset periods – 4 hours for EoTM and 1 week for WR etc. So what's your point?

[Chaba.5410]

3 hours ago, DeWolfe.2174 said:

Because the solution given to the loss of Worlds was to simply form a Guild. That solution gives power to a guild leader to control others.

"Server police" doesn't stop a person from playing on a world. They have no actual power over anyone.
"Discord Dictators" is not a thing as Discord is not required to play WvW at all.

Anet needs to consider this removal of a paying customers agency should not be supported. They should not be "placed" by an employee or another customer.

Do you want to know the way your posts read here?  Like someone who willfully ignores the actual implementation and just makes stuff up.  No need to take you seriously.

Edited January 14 by Chaba.5410

[Chaba.5410]

47 minutes ago, Neo.4056 said:

I'm pointing out that EoTM and WR are alike in having a matching system with random players

EoTM is not random, but made up of players on your server plus players on servers with the same color as you.

WR is made up of players in your set WvW guild, who are usually also players on your server.

I think you may be onto something...

[Neo.4056]

29 minutes ago, Chaba.5410 said:

EoTM is not random, but made up of players on your server plus players on servers with the same color as you.

WR is made up of players in your set WvW guild, who are usually also players on your server.

I think you may be onto something...

Yeah, in your terms, both EotM and WR aren't random. What I'm getting at is that, unlike WvW where you get matched up with intended guilds or server players on the same team, WR throws your guild into the mix with randomly assigned groups, kind of like playing EotM with a bunch of strangers.

Let's not get caught up in the small stuff, and if my term is confusing, my bad. What I'm trying to say is that under WR, we're fighting for empty or pointless goals with random strangers, not like neighbor guilds who we knows in WvW. So, WR isn't really a guild(world or team) wars in the sense of WvW.

If ArenaNet's aim is to ditch the decent-scale random wars and steer players toward groups of random strangers, then they're succeeding. But if they wanted to fix WvW's population distribution issue through WR, they're totally going about it the wrong way.

Edited January 14 by Neo.4056
to prevent misreading

[Zok.4956]

4 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

If no, then it’s not EoTM. WR is nowhere near EoTM. 

If WR is EoTM then linking is EoTM too since WR shares 100% of the linking matchup and design.

Your logic is that regular WvW was EoTM all along.

Well, in terms of gameplay, I was already of the opinion before WR that the current EBG was more similar to the earlier EotM than WvW. 😉

[DeWolfe.2174]

23 minutes ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Do you want to know the way your posts read here?  Like someone who willfully ignores the actual implementation and just makes stuff up.  No need to take you seriously.

The actual implementation is exactly as I've described it.

Did anyone have a choice on these newly named worlds? No, none of us had a choice.
Did I choose to be on Skrittsburg? No, I had no choice in the matter at all.
Is there anyone I know on Skrittsburg? No, everyone I know in my time zone (the guilds) was thrown to the winds by the devs.

This is exactly the wrong path for the mode as the players need to have the ability and freedom to World Build.

[Chaba.5410]

Just now, DeWolfe.2174 said:

The actual implementation is exactly as I've described it.

Only, it's not.

[Chaba.5410]

4 minutes ago, Neo.4056 said:

Yeah, in your terms, both EotM and WR aren't random. What I'm getting at is that, unlike WvW where you get matched up with intended guilds or server players on the same team, WR throws your guild into the mix with randomly assigned groups, kind of like playing EotM with a bunch of strangers.

Let's not get caught up in the small stuff, and if my term is confusing, my bad. What I'm trying to say is that under WR, we're fighting for empty or pointless goals with random strangers, not like neighbor guilds who we knows in WvW. So, WR isn't really a guild wars in the sense of WvW.

If ArenaNet's aim is to ditch the decent-scale random wars and steer players toward groups of random strangers, then they're succeeding. But if they wanted to fix WvW's population distribution issue through WR, they're totally going about it the wrong way.

It's not my terms.  I only described how EOTM teams are formed: from servers with the same color as your server - you can see this description on the wiki even.  This implies that players on your team in EOTM are also on your own server.  You literally can't play against your own "neighbor guilds" you know in WvW unless you're going to the special arena that was later added for GvGs.

I get your point about EOTM even though it's a bad analogy.  It may feel random because your "neighbor guilds" are going to be in the actual WvW match in general and not in EOTM.  But let's also talk about my point with how WR isn't really random either.  The intent of the team formation is you can still play with your "neighbor guilds" if the players all join together using the guild system.  It may feel random because a guild is a smaller grouping than a server and some of your servermates are going to pick to be in a different guild from you rather than wanting to be all on the same team with you, but that doesn't make it random.

[Dawdler.8521]

2 hours ago, Neo.4056 said:

I'm pointing out that EoTM and WR are alike in having a matching system with random players, and in both, the long-term history and experiences of guilds don't add up so that defending points and other cooperative operations become meaningless.

Yeah, they do have different reset periods – 4 hours for EoTM and 1 week for WR etc. So what's your point?

Then explain how I can be playing right now, in WR, with the same people I've played the last decade with?

Sure not all of them. But the guild.

Also 1 month ago, half our world was random. In fact we didnt even have our world, it was a name we dont represent.

And a month before that, half the world was also random.

In fact we've had much of the world as random players every 2 months for half a decade.

[Cameirus.8407]

the more I think about this whole thing, the less I can work out why Anet thinks it is a good idea.

Servers naturally matched communities of a similar level.

So more casual communities played more casual communities and more hardcore wvw communities played each other.

everyone got the game they wanted more or less.

Now, you are mixing casuals with hardcore and neither gets what they want. Casuals get steamrolled and its miserable, and hardcore just run over people with no challenge or fight.

 

This is an awful system, just look in map/team chat, no one playing the game likes it.

[Dawdler.8521]

23 minutes ago, Cameirus.8407 said:

Servers naturally matched communities of a similar level.

So more casual communities played more casual communities and more hardcore wvw communities played each other.

Hahaha… wait are you being serious?

That not how WvW tiers has ever worked.

[Cameirus.8407]

2 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Hahaha… wait are you being serious?

That not how WvW tiers has ever worked.

ofcourse it did, more or less.

No one said it was prefect, but it was better than this miserable mess we have now.

[Dawdler.8521]

Just now, Cameirus.8407 said:

ofcourse it did, more or less.

No one said it was prefect, but it was better than this miserable mess we have now.

So you are saying that all these years when people has said population is everything it has all been a lie?

The worlds in T5 are actually just filthy casuals compared to the hardcore T1 worlds? 

Or wait are you saying T5 is the hardcore tier and T1 is the casuals?

Or is both T1 and T5 casuals that should actually be matched against each other and T2-T4 are the hardcore worlds?

I guess it was never about populations all along. Hm. Wonder why people complain.

[Chaba.5410]

By hardcore communities, all I think of is the casuals who bandwagon to winning servers because winning. This just became an #openBG thread, didn't it?

Edited January 14 by Chaba.5410

[DeWolfe.2174]

20 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Hahaha… wait are you being serious?

That not how WvW tiers has ever worked.

The tiers always provided different levels of game play.
From T1 being the largest scale fighting and score oriented.
To T2 being more medium scale and  PPK oriented.
Down to T4 which provided a small scale and wilderness feel.

This is like a 9 year old conversation and still holds true.

[One more for the road.8950]

6 hours ago, DeWolfe.2174 said:

The tiers always provided different levels of game play.
From T1 being the largest scale fighting and score oriented.
To T2 being more medium scale and  PPK oriented.
Down to T4 which provided a small scale and wilderness feel.

This is like a 9 year old conversation and still holds true.

How to say you're not playing on EU servers without saying you're not playing on EU servers.
I have no idea if the NA ones actually are like that though.

[DeWolfe.2174]

58 minutes ago, One more for the road.8950 said:

How to say you're not playing on EU servers without saying you're not playing on EU servers.
I have no idea if the NA ones actually are like that though.

We're NA players and that's how we've organized the tiers since pretty much year one. How you folks organize over on EU is your business.

On another topic, I'm watching wvwintel (again NA) and see this idiotic system placed two guilds together whom should never be together. Literally one of the tags is so toxic that they sends hate and threats to the other.

I cannot express enough how bad the Dev's thought process is on this. Removing our choices and freedom to move and play where we want is extremely detrimental.

[One more for the road.8950]

3 minutes ago, DeWolfe.2174 said:

We're NA players and that's how we've organized the tiers since pretty much year one. How you folks organize over on EU is your business.

On another topic, I'm watching wvwintel (again NA) and see this idiotic system placed two guilds together whom should never be together. Literally one of the tags is so toxic that they sends hate and threats to the other.

I cannot express enough how bad the Dev's thought process is on this. Removing our choices and freedom to move and play where we want is extremely detrimental.

Oh, you actually organize the tiers?

[Chaba.5410]

1 hour ago, One more for the road.8950 said:

How to say you're not playing on EU servers without saying you're not playing on EU servers.
I have no idea if the NA ones actually are like that though.

T4 NA isn't smallscale and wilderness. If you look at the API sites for servers, you'll find the real difference between tiers in NA is coverage. And coverage tends to be a function of links.

Edited January 15 by Chaba.5410

[One more for the road.8950]

Just now, Chaba.5410 said:

T4 NA isn't smallscale and wilderness. If you look at the API sites for servers, you'll find the real difference between tiers in NA is coverage.

I wasn't expecting it to be either, to be honest.

[One more for the road.8950]

I just want to know how one "organize the tiers".... O,o

[Chaba.5410]

Just now, One more for the road.8950 said:

I just want to know how one "organize the tiers".... O,o

Same as the playerbase balances matches by destacking and so we don't need WR. Doesn't happen.