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

[Chaba.5410]

21 minutes ago, DeWolfe.2174 said:

People who support "Guilds" want individualism and no community relationships or responsibilities.
People who support "Worlds" want to continue building the community and greater good of the mode.

How you get that out of reading about Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft?  Seems opposite of what the links say.

What seems to be the struggle here is you're under the belief that Worlds are Gemeinschaft, or you're lamenting the loss of a Gemeinschaft relationship that Worlds never actually had.  In one of the links I shared, the author touches on there being some overlap between the two types and gives examples of Twitter early adopters vs. what Twitter evolved into.

Worlds do not have the same players they did in the first year of this game nor did all players on a World play WvW.   Worlds evolved towards a more Gesellschaft type and there's no going back really.  That evolution into a singular WvW playerbase society and away from Gemeinschaft started as players started transferring around, accelerated under server links, and will accelerate even further with WR shuffling players around.

Edited January 17 by Chaba.5410

[Chaba.5410]

34 minutes ago, DeWolfe.2174 said:

People who support "Guilds" want individualism and no community relationships or responsibilities.
People who support "Worlds" want to continue building the community and greater good of the mode.

Or here's another way of looking at it:

How do you think "the greater good" gets accomplished on Worlds today?

[Arya Whitefire.8423]

5 minutes ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Or here's another way of looking at it:

How do you think "the greater good" gets accomplished on Worlds today?

There is no longer a greater good, except just a smidgeon left on a handful of servers.  *cough* Maguuma *cough*

Most organized players show up for their "selfish" guild raid, and leave when it's over.  Most solo players are here to "selfishly" pip farm.

[DeWolfe.2174]

33 minutes ago, Arya Whitefire.8423 said:

There is no longer a greater good, except just a smidgeon left on a handful of servers.  *cough* Maguuma *cough*

Most organized players show up for their "selfish" guild raid, and leave when it's over.  Most solo players are here to "selfishly" pip farm.

As someone who spent thousands upon thousands of hours in WvW tending to our World, I can tell you these types never have, nor ever will, understand the community we formed and still hold 11 years later. I was still on JQ 11 years later.

Now that our Worlds are gone, you better believe all I'll be doing is pip farming.

[XenesisII.1540]

Sounds like to me Maguuma was the only servers that actually got a community guild together.

Everyone has had 6 years to do this step, we've had at least 2 years and like 8 betas to figure this out.

"But we can't drop a guild slot for this! How dare they ask us to do that!"

Does that really sound like a person from a community committed to each other if they wouldn't even commit a guild slot for it to stay together.

🤷‍♂️

 

 

 

[Arya Whitefire.8423]

I did say "most".  There absolutely are some community minded players left on many servers.  But they are a minority.  I was one for years, even after it stopped mattering.  But like my server all but died over 7 times.  So I moved on to other motivations to play.

[Chaba.5410]

1 hour ago, DeWolfe.2174 said:

As someone who spent thousands upon thousands of hours in WvW tending to our World, I can tell you these types never have, nor ever will, understand the community we formed and still hold 11 years later. I was still on JQ 11 years later.

Now that our Worlds are gone, you better believe all I'll be doing is pip farming.

What "these types" do you mean and why does that matter to this discussion?  I don't think you want to open this can of worms given my own record on server community building and also playing on other servers.  Arguing principles shouldn't have to rely upon personal histories anyway.

What other servers have you played on?  How can you measure up JQ's "community" to others?

Edited January 18 by Chaba.5410

[Chaba.5410]

38 minutes ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Sounds like to me Maguuma was the only servers that actually got a community guild together.

Not exactly.  I don't think D3RP and Magswag are together.  Not entirely sure though.  Was something I heard second hand.

Edited January 18 by Chaba.5410

[Playmate.8521]

I dont want this - i want stay on my server. I pray this since the first wvw ally beta. I dont get it why anet needs to mess up this. Ofc some worlds have less player BUT everyone can move their server (if the choosen one isnt full). If you like your server you dont care if you loose or win - because you like the people.

A lot from our server in a WorldGuild right now but not all because many ppl have no Guild Slot left and yes they could leave the other guilds (if the choosen guild isnt full). Also i choosed the "right" guild for the beta and im now split from the people i like.

 ...we have one big bio troll on our server but he is like an angel compared to the team and mapchat right now. I dont say the other people are bad, but the "vibe" and "mentallity" is a huge difference to our home server and it does not fit for me (also other ppl). 

 

JUST STOP THIS. Add anything like in gw1 with the factions where you can hold a city when you spend kurzick/luxon points. But not this what we have right now. This isnt fun to play - i started already with pve again because i dont want to play this. 

Edited January 18 by Playmate.8521
sry for my bad english

[meerfunkuhtron.9725]

11 hours ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Sounds like to me Maguuma was the only servers that actually got a community guild together.

Everyone has had 6 years to do this step, we've had at least 2 years and like 8 betas to figure this out.

"But we can't drop a guild slot for this! How dare they ask us to do that!"

Does that really sound like a person from a community committed to each other if they wouldn't even commit a guild slot for it to stay together.

🤷‍♂️

I can't speak for everyone of course, but I come from a very community oriented server who hasn't gotten together a server guild, so I might be able to add something here.

For one, a lot of our guilds died when server linking became permanent. So when Alliances got announced, our community was already a bit weakened with the loss of a lot of active voices. As for the server guild, essentially some of our major guild leaders couldn't agree on a solution (i.e. one of the guilds offered themselves as leaders of sorts of this new server guild, while others disagreed because it no longer felt like a "server guild" if done that way). It led to even more disagreements, and so, here we are without a shared guild to speak of. Plus, there's the general confusion with what Anet's doing in the first place. Some people still think Alliances would be a thing, so they don't think making a server guild is all that necessary. Some of us obviously don't have that kind of hope.

But here's the thing. We, as a server, knew that not all of our guilds got along perfectly, but it worked out for us anyway because we didn't have to agree on everything in order to play on the same server. As long as we had similar objectives and we agreed on some key things, we were able to enjoy playing together. With this new system, we don't really have the freedom to do that. Come together as a guild or bust, as if being in a guild meant the same thing as being in a server that contained different guilds and sometimes even guildless people. That in-between that allowed for the growth of our community in the first place is what's being lost here, so it's understandable to me why people are apprehensive to move into this new guild-centered system.

I'm actually going to try and convince our leaders one more time to create a server guild. I think there's a way for us to be in the same guild while maintaining the freedom of each of our actual respective guilds. I've been inactive for years though so my efforts may not mean much, but I feel it's worth the shot. Just thought I'd give an insight as to why making a giant guild hasn't worked for some of us, and that it's not simply because people don't have enough guild slots.

[Mabi black.1824]

15 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

If worlds are made up of roughly 2500 players, it's impossible to expect that everyone's social network is going to overlap with each other to the extent that 2500 people can all pick a single guild and call it a day. A server name is not a community. It's an illusion of community

This is not true. at least for what my experience has been. I've seen players and guilds transfer and more coming. like I can't get to know all the players on our server or have a constant dialogue with everyone. but it doesn't matter. I still feel part of the community that my server represents. I'm still excited to participate in the defense or attack action proposed by my server precisely because I feel like a member of a community. 

If a call comes in to defend a tower, I will do everything I can to be there and offer my support to everyone else. Because that's perceived as your tower. If we win or if we lose (it doesn't matter) it's not me who loses and neither does my guild. It's the community, our server. 1 out of 1 down is the server and no one else. What represents us in the rankings is our server and no one else.

And when I write you this I'm not saying that my server is 'special'' it's all normal, essentially it's how this game mode was designed. Large-scale PvP team game mode. What I'm saying should be really trivial.

[Mabi black.1824]

16 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

If worlds are made up of roughly 2500 players, it's impossible to expect that everyone's social network is going to overlap with each other to the extent that 2500 people can all pick a single guild and call it a day.  A server name is not a community.  It's an illusion of community.

Now let's pretend that the only way to solve the problem of balanced teams is with WR mechanics. there would be a huge difference if you make  X conteiners of 1000 players  available to me, without a leader, with wr you fill them with single players and guilds of all kinds, and give me the opportunity to participate in a competitive season of at least 12 months (possibly with a slightly more interesting and unpredictable point system). 

So, I would read it as an interesting change. Then WVW would still be a team game mode. Then I could still be transported to participate and feel represented and represent a team, my team.

Edited January 18 by Mabi black.1824

[DeWolfe.2174]

1 hour ago, meerfunkuhtron.9725 said:

Come together as a guild or bust, as if being in a guild meant the same thing as being in a server that contained different guilds and sometimes even guildless people. That in-between that allowed for the growth of our community in the first place is what's being lost here, so it's understandable to me why people are apprehensive to move into this new guild-centered system.

You get it! 🎉👏

[XenesisII.1540]

5 hours ago, meerfunkuhtron.9725 said:

I can't speak for everyone of course, but I come from a very community oriented server who hasn't gotten together a server guild, so I might be able to add something here.

For one, a lot of our guilds died when server linking became permanent. So when Alliances got announced, our community was already a bit weakened with the loss of a lot of active voices. As for the server guild, essentially some of our major guild leaders couldn't agree on a solution (i.e. one of the guilds offered themselves as leaders of sorts of this new server guild, while others disagreed because it no longer felt like a "server guild" if done that way). It led to even more disagreements, and so, here we are without a shared guild to speak of. Plus, there's the general confusion with what Anet's doing in the first place. Some people still think Alliances would be a thing, so they don't think making a server guild is all that necessary. Some of us obviously don't have that kind of hope.

But here's the thing. We, as a server, knew that not all of our guilds got along perfectly, but it worked out for us anyway because we didn't have to agree on everything in order to play on the same server. As long as we had similar objectives and we agreed on some key things, we were able to enjoy playing together. With this new system, we don't really have the freedom to do that. Come together as a guild or bust, as if being in a guild meant the same thing as being in a server that contained different guilds and sometimes even guildless people. That in-between that allowed for the growth of our community in the first place is what's being lost here, so it's understandable to me why people are apprehensive to move into this new guild-centered system.

I'm actually going to try and convince our leaders one more time to create a server guild. I think there's a way for us to be in the same guild while maintaining the freedom of each of our actual respective guilds. I've been inactive for years though so my efforts may not mean much, but I feel it's worth the shot. Just thought I'd give an insight as to why making a giant guild hasn't worked for some of us, and that it's not simply because people don't have enough guild slots.

I honestly don't know why you all are over thinking the solution.

There is one and only purpose for a community guild, to get everyone on that server into the same world, it's only function is to get people together on that one day of world creation. This doesn't need to be some entity that functions the entire 4-8 weeks of matches, it doesn't need a king to rule, you won't need a guild leader picked to run it, it doesn't need any guild tactics or whatever perks to operate, it' doesn't even need a guild bank or hall.

You can create a guild yourself, advertise it in chat as the community guild to get people to stay together, if they "really" want to stay together as a community they will make the effort/sacrifice(a dedicated guild slot) to do so. There is no timeline for alliances, don't even think of it as a solution, it will probably be years later after WR has started given their usual pace of development.

Guilds will have their own agendas and they may want to join other guilds instead for their alliances. If you want the community and those around do to, then do it, start it, you don't need to wait on other people, you don't need someone else's permission, you don't need an established guild to start it and run it for you. If people are "afraid" of a king rule them, then appoint multiple guild leaders, set the appropriate permissions. The community guild shouldn't have any other function than to keep you all together for that one day every 4 weeks.

[Chaba.5410]

6 hours ago, meerfunkuhtron.9725 said:

I can't speak for everyone of course, but I come from a very community oriented server who hasn't gotten together a server guild, so I might be able to add something here.

For one, a lot of our guilds died when server linking became permanent. So when Alliances got announced, our community was already a bit weakened with the loss of a lot of active voices. As for the server guild, essentially some of our major guild leaders couldn't agree on a solution (i.e. one of the guilds offered themselves as leaders of sorts of this new server guild, while others disagreed because it no longer felt like a "server guild" if done that way). It led to even more disagreements, and so, here we are without a shared guild to speak of. Plus, there's the general confusion with what Anet's doing in the first place. Some people still think Alliances would be a thing, so they don't think making a server guild is all that necessary. Some of us obviously don't have that kind of hope.

But here's the thing. We, as a server, knew that not all of our guilds got along perfectly, but it worked out for us anyway because we didn't have to agree on everything in order to play on the same server. As long as we had similar objectives and we agreed on some key things, we were able to enjoy playing together. With this new system, we don't really have the freedom to do that. Come together as a guild or bust, as if being in a guild meant the same thing as being in a server that contained different guilds and sometimes even guildless people. That in-between that allowed for the growth of our community in the first place is what's being lost here, so it's understandable to me why people are apprehensive to move into this new guild-centered system.

I'm actually going to try and convince our leaders one more time to create a server guild. I think there's a way for us to be in the same guild while maintaining the freedom of each of our actual respective guilds. I've been inactive for years though so my efforts may not mean much, but I feel it's worth the shot. Just thought I'd give an insight as to why making a giant guild hasn't worked for some of us, and that it's not simply because people don't have enough guild slots.

Your story exemplifies a lot of server communities.  There are disagreements which end up amounting to separate factions within the community.  It works out that you don't have to agree on everything in order to play on the same server because it is literally the condition of play - the game doesn't let you fight your servermates (Gesellschaft).  How is this different from the teams constructed via WR?  You can't fight your WR teammates either and if they are on map they are fighting against your opponents too.

One of the alliance guilds I have an account in considers itself a server community alliance (Gemeinschaft).  It is composed of three main NA "anchor" guilds, one late night guild, two smaller "havoc/roamer" guilds, and a bunch of long time and even returning "pug" players who wanted to follow those guilds for the beta.  Really, it's composed of about one or two factions of the larger server and that's ok.  No one wanted to end up too large to queue themselves out of maps and it was made by mutual choice, not for the simple fact that people had transferred to the server.  Now we ended up being in a match against two or three other factions from our server that chose to go solo (their choice!) and landed on the other two teams.  It's been nothing but fun, getting whispers of "good fights" from each other.

I guess that when players here also talk negatively about "large guilds" under WR, they don't realize they could be talking about some faction from a server community that they are trying to argue FOR.

Edited January 18 by Chaba.5410

[Chaba.5410]

6 hours ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

I'm still excited to participate in the defense or attack action proposed by my server precisely because I feel like a member of a community. 

If a call comes in to defend a tower, I will do everything I can to be there and offer my support to everyone else. Because that's perceived as your tower. If we win or if we lose (it doesn't matter) it's not me who loses and neither does my guild. It's the community, our server. 1 out of 1 down is the server and no one else. What represents us in the rankings is our server and no one else.

See my response to meerfunkuhtron above.

Have you ever thought about why you feel like a member?  Think back to when you first started playing and didn't know anyone yet.  How did you pick which server to create your account on?  Think upon how server links changed the "ownership" of rankings.
 

Edited January 18 by Chaba.5410