The World Restructuring is Fun and should be Permanent

[A Hamster.2580]

As someone who plays with an organized guild and uses discord for voice comm, I am having lots of fun with this beta. I feel there are way more epic fights than before.

I see some arguments against the beta in the forum here but they seem to be mostly from anti-social individuals that refuse to join guilds or discord but yet want to play with familiar faces. How do you even balance around that? After all, this is "Guild Wars 2" aka "War of the Guilds" aka "2 or more guilds duking it out". I think world restructuring is the best solution we have so far.

Another argument I see is "how unbalance the match up seems to be in this beta". Well duh. This is week 1. It should be mathematically impossible to have good balance on the very first week with no prior data to work with. It should take a few "WvW resets" to balance out the teams under this new system.

I suspect many Maguuma bandwagoners folks from NA or whatever the equivalent is from EU are unhappy and complaining here. Too bad so sad because that is precisely what World Restructuring aims to solve. No more omega stacking one server.

 

Please Anet let this go through.

[bigmouse.2163]

I am/for world restructuring. But when are they actually going to DO it? How many more betas?

Also, IMO balance has been fine and even enjoyable (for me personally) this beta. I'm on the Titan's Staircase matchup if that matters to anyone.

[Tora.2910]

   👎    👎    👎    👎    👎    👎    👎    👎   👎    👎    👎    👎    👎    👎    👎    👎   👎    👎    👎    👎    👎    👎    👎    👎  I think I made my point

[Gotejjeken.1267]

5 hours ago, A Hamster.2580 said:

Another argument I see is "how unbalance the match up seems to be in this beta". Well duh. This is week 1. It should be mathematically impossible to have good balance on the very first week with no prior data to work with. It should take a few "WvW resets" to balance out the teams under this new system.

You know this is beta 5 or so, right?

[One more for the road.8950]

5 hours ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

You know this is beta 5 or so, right?

You know it's not the same people on the teams as earlier betas, as it's dynamic, and the other betas has nothing to do with this "reset", right?

[Cyninja.2954]

5 hours ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

You know this is beta 5 or so, right?

What he is saying is that: while the population balance might be better than with the traditional server linking system, it will never be perfect on the first week. The (reasonable) assumption here being that when starting from a more balance outset, the 1up1down system would balance temporary worlds similar to how 1up1down does now.

The amount of betas will not change this fact, they might (and should) improve balance on the first week of each server recreation.

Edited January 17 by Cyninja.2954

[Pluton.7364]

12 hours ago, A Hamster.2580 said:

As someone who plays with an organized guild and uses discord for voice comm, I am having lots of fun with this beta. I feel there are way more epic fights than before.

I see some arguments against the beta in the forum here but they seem to be mostly from anti-social individuals that refuse to join guilds or discord but yet want to play with familiar faces. How do you even balance around that? After all, this is "Guild Wars 2" aka "War of the Guilds" aka "2 or more guilds duking it out". I think world restructuring is the best solution we have so far.

Another argument I see is "how unbalance the match up seems to be in this beta". Well duh. This is week 1. It should be mathematically impossible to have good balance on the very first week with no prior data to work with. It should take a few "WvW resets" to balance out the teams under this new system.

I suspect many Maguuma bandwagoners folks from NA or whatever the equivalent is from EU are unhappy and complaining here. Too bad so sad because that is precisely what World Restructuring aims to solve. No more omega stacking one server.

 

Please Anet let this go through.

Guild wars has nothing to do with gvg etc. Its named after series of huge historic wars

if anything wvw we have now is more close to it than your small scale fight with your guild

[Dawdler.8521]

12 hours ago, A Hamster.2580 said:

I see some arguments against the beta in the forum here but they seem to be mostly from anti-social individuals that refuse to join guilds or discord but yet want to play with familiar faces.

One also have to consider where people are coming from.

Many worlds are stacked and that’s why they win. So the population distribution toward them are pretty skewed, there is just way more players winning in high tiers than there are loosing in low tiers. Some worlds dominate the tier beneath them even if they happen to loose sometimes.

Now many suddenly find themselves on an “average” world that no longer has that known dominance factor. That will no doubt cause some pretty heavy bias. Because people like winning.

Edited January 17 by Dawdler.8521

[Mabi black.1824]

13 hours ago, A Hamster.2580 said:

As someone who plays with an organized guild and uses discord for voice comm, I am having lots of fun with this beta. I feel there are way more epic fights than before.

really? Is that enough? And what would be the motive the purpose to be transported and involved in this epic battles?

From the pages of this forum, you can click guildwars.com, then click Community, then click Ranking. You will see the list of all our servers and their placement. That's the purpose we've always had. With so many problems that we know well and so many wishes that one day it would finally improve for everyone. On the other hand, here the impression is that ''too complicated to solve, easier to eliminate''. If you haven't noticed in the official leaderboards of Guidwars2 we have no record of the guilds, because it would be just ridiculous to just think about it. So if you want to share with me what the purpose of World vs. World will be with the mechanic of WR with its ability to involve all players (from the single one to the group of 10 or the group of 100 players), you are welcome.

Edited January 17 by Mabi black.1824

[One more for the road.8950]

16 minutes ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

really? Is that enough? And what would be the motive the purpose to be transported and involved in this epic battles?

From the pages of this forum, you can click guildwars.com, then click Community, then click Ranking. You will see the list of all our servers and their placement. That's the purpose we've always had. With so many problems that we know well and so many wishes that one day it would finally improve for everyone. On the other hand, here the impression is that ''too complicated to solve, easier to eliminate''. If you haven't noticed in the official leaderboards of Guidwars2 we have no record of the guilds, because it would be just ridiculous to just think about it. So if you want to share with me what the purpose of World vs. World will be with the mechanic of WR with its ability to involve all players (from the single one to the group of 10 or the group of 100 players), you are welcome.

Wouldn't the purpose with WvW be to have a fun pastime? If they enjoy epic fights and battles and the involvement in that, why would they care about leaderboards? It's situation, an event, that is enjoyed by people participating there and then, not been done for some kind of statistics?

[One more for the road.8950]

1 hour ago, Pluton.7364 said:

Guild wars has nothing to do with gvg etc. Its named after series of huge historic wars

if anything wvw we have now is more close to it than your small scale fight with your guild

It's Guild Wars 2
In Guild Wars there is GvG but no WvW
In Guild Wars 2 you have a sandbox to do both in

[Mabi black.1824]

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

Wouldn't the purpose with WvW be to have a fun pastime? If they enjoy epic fights and battles and the involvement in that, why would they care about leaderboards? It's situation, an event, that is enjoyed by people participating there and then, not been done for some kind of statistics?

In a large-scale PvP game mode you need to have access to a large-scale confrontation. At least that's what I think. Can I play and participate in the non-confrontation mode in useless mode? Of course, even if I was convinced that it was our problem to solve (not very credible competition due to the balance of the servers). Can I still be transported and involved to propose my content and put my time ? I'm afraid not. Unless, you're doing it on purpose. If the goal here is to take a step back (in terms of PvP/competition - let's make it all random and pointless) because the development believes it intercepts more players in this way, well then if that's what we're talking about, I'm the one who's quite wrong.

And yes, a game has to be fun, like Tetris. Then it becomes a great game when when it has the ability to carry and engage multiple players.

Edited January 17 by Mabi black.1824

[One more for the road.8950]

9 minutes ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

In a large-scale PvP game mode you need to have access to a large-scale confrontation. At least that's what I think. Can I play and participate in the non-confrontation mode in useless mode? Of course, even if I was convinced that it was our problem to solve (not very credible competition due to the balance of the servers). Can I still be transported and involved to propose my content and put my time ? Of course not. Unless, you're doing it on purpose. If the goal here is to take a step back (in terms of PvP/competition - let's make it all random and pointless) because the development believes it intercepts more players in this way, well then if that's what we're talking about, I'm the one who's quite wrong.

And yes, a game has to be fun, like Tetris. Then it becomes a great game when it also becomes addictive.

I am really sorry, but I have no idea what you are trying to say in relation to what I said in the post about enjoying the interactions and gameplay in a dynamic situation.

[Mabi black.1824]

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

I am really sorry, but I have no idea what you are trying to say in relation to what I said in the post about enjoying the interactions and gameplay in a dynamic situation.

You have to excuse me but I'm a landslide with English and I'm a landslide with the translator. What I want to tell you, is that we could have a harder time getting to those engaging iterations with large numbers. Because week after week, if you haven't built a purpose (carrot-stick) the player struggles in his participation.

At least that's how I felt during the beta. While knowing it's a beta, purposely looking carefully at the collaborative aspect and engagement among players. especially about myself. And I struggle to get involved/transported even if you're having fun.

Especially in this last beta, because the bug affected me too (WVW guild selected but ended up on the wrong fragment, ticket opened the next day, but anet definitely too messed up to solve for everyone) it doesn't matter, I had the opportunity to look around carefully even more.

Edited January 17 by Mabi black.1824

[DeWolfe.2174]

15 hours ago, A Hamster.2580 said:

As someone who plays with an organized guild and uses discord for voice comm, I am having lots of fun with this beta. I feel there are way more epic fights than before.

I see some arguments against the beta in the forum here but they seem to be mostly from anti-social individuals that refuse to join guilds or discord but yet want to play with familiar faces.

Aka... "we're rolling over people and it's fun"

Social cliques are anti-social. Removing Worlds and making it Guild based will ultimately be anti-social as there's no fabric to bring people together.

[Custodio.6134]

52 minutes ago, DeWolfe.2174 said:

Aka... "we're rolling over people and it's fun"

no, it´s actually quite the opposite. 

At least a large portion of "progressive" WvW-guilds and their players actually HATE one-pushing the enemy. It´s not fun, it´s not challenging, and it doesn´t show any kind of skill. 
I am also part of 2 WvW-focused guilds. And while i do like my easy stack of bags, if there is no threat of the enemy, it´s just boring. Winning an outnumbered fight (talking about 1:2 or 1:3 in factors of being outnumbered) is by far the second most satsifying thing that can happen in WvW. Right after winning an evenly numbered fight against other players of similar skill. I don´t even mind LOSING against enemies/an enemy guild, if the fight was close and we made a mistake that cost us the win. It´s a lesson to be learned to not make the same mistake again, which ultimately leads to improvement (one of the main goals of progressive WvW-players). 
 

[Gotejjeken.1267]

8 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

What he is saying is that: while the population balance might be better than with the traditional server linking system, it will never be perfect on the first week. The (reasonable) assumption here being that when starting from a more balance outset, the 1up1down system would balance temporary worlds similar to how 1up1down does now.

The amount of betas will not change this fact, they might (and should) improve balance on the first week of each server recreation.

Doesn't make a lot of sense to me--someone is putting guild together and they have metrics.  The balance should be as close to perfect as possible the first week, and then may fall off as guilds change and/or people start repping different guilds in WvW, or people simply stop playing as the novelty wears off.  

From what I understand these 'temporary worlds' are supposed to eventually last 4 weeks or so (might have been longer, can't remember the exact blog); I'd hope the balance is good on week one--would be kind of bad marketing to be like 'well, the system isn't perfect...by week 3 we should have some balanced matches!'.  

[Cyninja.2954]

9 hours ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

Doesn't make a lot of sense to me--someone is putting guild together and they have metrics.  The balance should be as close to perfect as possible the first week, and then may fall off as guilds change and/or people start repping different guilds in WvW, or people simply stop playing as the novelty wears off.  

No. You are just ignoring any and all factors which affect activity of players.

Some examples just off the top of my head (and inconsistencies you mentioned):

- players representing other guilds has 0 effect on the worlds they are in post creation

- different play behavior can lead to more or less activity of groups of players

- on EU: language barriers

- amount of commanders willing to tag up

etc.

Think of anything which affects engagement which is unrelated to average activity, all of that still persists.

Having a better or worse experience during the beta alone has an impact.

That's before even assuming the matchmaking algorithm needs improvement.

Better distribution does not mean perfect distribution and to assume or hold the new system to such a standard is dishonest.

9 hours ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

From what I understand these 'temporary worlds' are supposed to eventually last 4 weeks or so (might have been longer, can't remember the exact blog); I'd hope the balance is good on week one--would be kind of bad marketing to be like 'well, the system isn't perfect...by week 3 we should have some balanced matches!'.  

Or the balance is okay in week one and keeps improving for the following weeks versus what we have now: balance is non existant in week one and remains poor due to player transfers and server stacking for the remainder of the 8 weeks.

Ignoring the personal doom and gloom of some individuals here, seems the beta is doing well. 

Edited January 18 by Cyninja.2954

[meerfunkuhtron.9725]

17 hours ago, Custodio.6134 said:

no, it´s actually quite the opposite. 

At least a large portion of "progressive" WvW-guilds and their players actually HATE one-pushing the enemy. It´s not fun, it´s not challenging, and it doesn´t show any kind of skill. 
I am also part of 2 WvW-focused guilds. And while i do like my easy stack of bags, if there is no threat of the enemy, it´s just boring. Winning an outnumbered fight (talking about 1:2 or 1:3 in factors of being outnumbered) is by far the second most satsifying thing that can happen in WvW. Right after winning an evenly numbered fight against other players of similar skill. I don´t even mind LOSING against enemies/an enemy guild, if the fight was close and we made a mistake that cost us the win. It´s a lesson to be learned to not make the same mistake again, which ultimately leads to improvement (one of the main goals of progressive WvW-players). 
 

That may be for you and your guilds. But that hasn't been my experience with a ton of them over the years. More often than not, I play with/against guilds that are more interested in easy wins. The amount of times I've scared off a large zerg by simply being there, or when they run as soon as an EWP shows up, is too numerous.

The problem with what Anet is doing in this restructuring is removing options for people who want to play differently. Players are forced to consolidate themselves into one guild, just so they can get some semblance of organization to be effective. That may not spell out anything negative for you, but it does to people who are in different circumstances than you are.

@A Hamster.2580 People aren't anti-social just because they don't want to join specific guilds or use discord. Where'd you get this idea?
In terms of not wanting to join guilds: Some people simply don't have a spot left for an additional guild. I'm part of 4 guilds that are all WvW-focused, and each one is scattered to the four winds because we couldn't make one giant guild for ourselves for multiple reasons. I have a spot for one, while a good number of people in my server don't. On the other hand, I've played with a lot of guild-less folks who freely interact with other players around them. Having a guild isn't a requirement for social interaction.
In terms of not joining discord: If you're playing in a zerg or organized group, I get the need for discord. But some people don't enjoy playing in zergs or organized groups. Roamers are a thing in WvW. Communication through the in-game chat is more than sufficient for the types of messages I'd like to share with my team while I'm roaming, and joining discord is unnecessary for that purpose.
Notice that none of the reasons provided above is correlated to anti-social behavior. People are just different and are in different circumstances. This kind of diversity has not been an issue within the server system, yet it is in this system we're testing. In fact, a lot of the people who are not having fun with this beta are people who put value in communities, which are going to get blown apart by the current iteration of WR.

Edit: What part of this is confusing. Please actually engage instead of just leaving your confused faces 'cause I want to get an idea of what people are actually thinking.

Edited January 18 by meerfunkuhtron.9725

[XenesisII.1540]

12 hours ago, Custodio.6134 said:

no, it´s actually quite the opposite. 

At least a large portion of "progressive" WvW-guilds and their players actually HATE one-pushing the enemy. It´s not fun, it´s not challenging, and it doesn´t show any kind of skill. 
I am also part of 2 WvW-focused guilds. And while i do like my easy stack of bags, if there is no threat of the enemy, it´s just boring. Winning an outnumbered fight (talking about 1:2 or 1:3 in factors of being outnumbered) is by far the second most satsifying thing that can happen in WvW. Right after winning an evenly numbered fight against other players of similar skill. I don´t even mind LOSING against enemies/an enemy guild, if the fight was close and we made a mistake that cost us the win. It´s a lesson to be learned to not make the same mistake again, which ultimately leads to improvement (one of the main goals of progressive WvW-players). 
 

Yeah right, 9/10 times doesn't seem that way to me.

Guild A loses one fight to another Guild B that known to be good, Guild A runs off to another map, 90% of the time.

Guild C stacked with 50 tight boon ballers, ain't looking for competition, abusing target caps and boon spam to steam roll groups, Guild D with less numbers sees this guild and automatically just leaves, wooo competitive.

Hate one pushing enemies.... yet love one pushing pugs all the time, sitting in keeps farming pugs knowing an equal competitive guild cannot get on the map to counter them, wooo competitive. 

Frankly if you guilds love competition and facing similar enemies you'd be sitting in eotm arena all week fighting each other, running your gvg league, but you don't. I wonder how many of you are going to park in the guild arena when they revamp that zone for wvw stats, I bet the answer will be little to none because there isn't easy rewards to be had.

[Gotejjeken.1267]

2 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

No. You are just ignoring any and all factors which affect activity of players.

Some examples just off the top of my head (and inconsistencies you mentioned):

- players representing other guilds has 0 effect on the worlds they are in post creation

- different play behavior can lead to more or less activity of groups of players

- on EU: language barriers

- amount of commanders willing to tag up

We have no idea if players repping other guilds after affects things--as we still have bugs where players are split off from the guild they chose to begin with.  

For the rest, think you agree with me as different play behavior, language barriers, and lack of commanders would all cause activity to drop after the first week.  

There is no better metric than the first week; least of all here when in addition to novelty you have events going on to bring players in and really test the matchmaking. 

2 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Ignoring the personal doom and gloom of some individuals here, seems the beta is doing well. 

This is literal speculation lol.  You see it as doing well, and others see it as the Q times have dropped massively after the world rush ended, so we really have no clue.  Probably won't either as they messed up with rush events in week one...should have waited to week 2 or 3 for that....

[Cyninja.2954]

1 hour ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

We have no idea if players repping other guilds after affects things--as we still have bugs where players are split off from the guild they chose to begin with.  

For the rest, think you agree with me as different play behavior, language barriers, and lack of commanders would all cause activity to drop after the first week.  

There is no better metric than the first week; least of all here when in addition to novelty you have events going on to bring players in and really test the matchmaking.

Okay, and the first week now is miles ahead of first weeks in the old system in regards to player distribution.

As to agreeing, actually no. I'd much rather argue that the initial impact of some of the issues might more lead to short term reactions like rage logging, when viewing the negative, and more excessive play rates when fun, factoring for the positive factors. Which would lead to a far more scuffed match-up in week one. The 1up1down system then sorts servers a bit more to be matched with other more similar servers (as seen in the regular match-ups).

The assumption that week 1 is the most balanced is a very bad take (and again, not even reflected in anything we have seen so far, not even regular linkings). You are trying to make something stick which does not.

Quote

This is literal speculation lol.  You see it as doing well, and others see it as the Q times have dropped massively after the world rush ended, so we really have no clue.  Probably won't either as they messed up with rush events in week one...should have waited to week 2 or 3 for that....

We have limited access to metrics still, and those are better than during regular WvW. The fact that many posters decide that their subjective opinion = truth, does not change this.

We also have 2 more weeks ahead free of the rush event, one of which will be an 1up1down week.

Yes, it is speculation on my part, just as you are speculating on the opposite while not even wanting to wait out the entirety of the beta.

EDIT: and while at it: happy players are playing, unhappy players come to the forums. The reaction in the forums too does not support the assumption that the new system is broadly disliked. The thread about being mismatched was dozens of pages long, yet the players complaining don't even fill 2-4 hands worth (and we know there is no serious down trend in players with different metrics like k/d and total deaths for example). If the "outrage" and "unsatisfaction" were so large, this place would be in flames. Alas, there is barely any smoke. Not any type of metric, but something to keep in mind when considering ones personal experience bias.

Edited January 18 by Cyninja.2954

[Ashen.2907]

19 hours ago, Pluton.7364 said:

Guild wars has nothing to do with gvg etc. Its named after series of huge historic wars

if anything wvw we have now is more close to it than your small scale fight with your guild

The first game was named after the intended primary game mode of guild vs guild. The backstory of the historic wars among guilds was written later.

[Ashen.2907]

19 hours ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

really? Is that enough? And what would be the motive the purpose to be transported and involved in this epic battles?

From the pages of this forum, you can click guildwars.com, then click Community, then click Ranking. You will see the list of all our servers and their placement. That's the purpose we've always had. With so many problems that we know well and so many wishes that one day it would finally improve for everyone. On the other hand, here the impression is that ''too complicated to solve, easier to eliminate''. If you haven't noticed in the official leaderboards of Guidwars2 we have no record of the guilds, because it would be just ridiculous to just think about it. So if you want to share with me what the purpose of World vs. World will be with the mechanic of WR with its ability to involve all players (from the single one to the group of 10 or the group of 100 players), you are welcome.

This.

[Kree.5628]

On 1/17/2024 at 2:05 AM, A Hamster.2580 said:

with no prior data to work with

wait, what?! 11 years of WvW are not enought data to see who's the best alliance/guild/players?