Be gone desert bl!

[Twilightzone.7452]

Almost choose yes thinking it was EBG, RED BL is fun so keep it, thanks

[XenesisII.1540]

WvW isn't much different than stepping into a new game and not knowing what to do, especially in a genre you might be new to. But like everything else you need to take the time to learn the mode. The biggest thing that hampers new wvw players is they're already been conditioned in pve on how to play the game for 80 levels, which isn't entirely sandboxed, you do get hearts and map events to carry you along, or tutorials and hints interface on places to go and stuff to do, or have the little apple tag leading you around.

Stepping into wvw it's very minimal and everything you need to learn either by experiencing it or being told by other players, and it's not like there's tags constantly up to help with this on every map, so 2-3 of the maps look empty to players most of the time. It's too bad eotm wasn't structured to remain as a tutorial map would have been fairly easy to do with pop up tutorials. Or even place a mini training area in spawns, have some siege out that you practice on, anet really doesn't give a kitten about wvw, not like pve where they were creating strikes to be a stepping stone for raids, both of which probably still draws less players than wvw. 🤷‍♂️

[Arya Whitefire.8423]

I voted delete it.  But... that's because there were only 2 choices. 

I think the biggest problem with it, is that it negatively affects the red team, which is typically the weakest team in the matchup.   Optimally things would be changed so that it was only used occasionally, but when it's used all 3 teams use it.  If that's impossible, moving it to the green team would be better than leaving it red.

[Chaba.5410]

9 minutes ago, Arya Whitefire.8423 said:

I think the biggest problem with it, is that it negatively affects the red team, which is typically the weakest team in the matchup.   Optimally things would be changed so that it was only used occasionally, but when it's used all 3 teams use it.  If that's impossible, moving it to the green team would be better than leaving it red.

I have same opinion on the matter.  Move it to greenbl.  The original reasoning for why red didn't turn out to be the case.

[Riba.3271]

 2 reasons to remove desert map:

• Scoring: Having completely different map beats the purpose of scoring and balance. In no way is it fair that someone has desert map to defend, and other team has alpine
• Unpopularity: WvW is completely different with 4 popular maps compared to 3 popular maps. Whose map you're on makes a difference.

I get it, some people like Desert because there aren't many enemies there. But Id rather see devs prioritize competitive balance.  I am not saying there shouldn't be environment for those who prefer to meet less players as this is achievable without bad map distribution. It just doesn't make sense to remove all the competitiveness and make the gamemode worse for 80% of the players so you can have small improvement to 20% of players.

Edited January 24 by Riba.3271

[Thomas.2564]

Well well, this went pretty much as I expected. So despite the fact that desert bl is litterally full of bugs and exploids, it seems the majority of the wvw community doesn't care. Well then, this might explain why anet doesn't borher to fix bugs, and exploids in wvw. Cause aparently the community doesnt care. So please keep this in mind the next time u wanna complain about bugs and exploids in wvw 👍

[CafPow.1542]

1 hour ago, Thomas.2564 said:

Well well, this went pretty much as I expected. So despite the fact that desert bl is litterally full of bugs and exploids, it seems the majority of the wvw community doesn't care. Well then, this might explain why anet doesn't borher to fix bugs, and exploids in wvw. Cause aparently the community doesnt care. So please keep this in mind the next time u wanna complain about bugs and exploids in wvw 👍

I think the map is cool, therefore i like bugs.

your mental gymnastics are impressive.

how about i would like to have the bugs fixed but still like dbl? Impossible concept for you?

[TheGrimm.5624]

3 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

 2 reasons to remove desert map:

• Scoring: Having completely different map beats the purpose of scoring and balance. In no way is it fair that someone has desert map to defend, and other team has alpine

Do you want to try this again? So it takes 4 players to paper ABL keeps. 4 players can do the same to DBL, but for two of three keeps it takes twice as long since they need to work thru both walls. Now move up the numbers. It's even easier to just paper ABL. DBL is like SMC, you worry about inner and ignore outer unless inner is built up. DBL like SMC was created in the idea that there would be more fights between the two walls. ABL just encourages more karma trains, least effort highest rewards.

3 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

• Unpopularity: WvW is completely different with 4 popular maps compared to 3 popular maps. Whose map you're on makes a difference.

What 4 popular maps? Even when it was EBG and 3 ABL, that's just two maps. 

3 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

I get it, some people like Desert because there aren't many enemies there.

So based on this you aren't seeing three way fights in the DBL keeps. Mileage varies. 

3 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

But Id rather see devs prioritize competitive balance.

Want to expand on this? Is this in class skill balance or something else?

3 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

  I am not saying there shouldn't be environment for those who prefer to meet less players

So defenders have all the advantage as you claim, DBL has less players as you claim. So does this mean that you agree DBL keeps are actually keeps versus over sized towers that we have on ABL? So its the fact that DBL has better designed keeps that defenders can hold? 

3 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

as this is achievable without bad map distribution.

Agree, remove an ABL and replace with a EotM map.

3 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

It just doesn't make sense to remove all the competitiveness

Those who stack win? The WR is trying to balance numbers but we aren't there yet so what are you talking about? Outside of that, what are winning?

3 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

and make the gamemode worse for 80% of the players so you can have small improvement to 20% of players.

I agree removing DBL would make the game mode worse for 80% of the players. 

Again joking aside if I was asked what drove most of the players I know away, it would be ABL and its design and lack of map options.

[TheGrimm.5624]

1 hour ago, Thomas.2564 said:

Well well, this went pretty much as I expected. So despite the fact that desert bl is litterally full of bugs and exploids, it seems the majority of the wvw community doesn't care. Well then, this might explain why anet doesn't borher to fix bugs, and exploids in wvw. Cause aparently the community doesnt care. So please keep this in mind the next time u wanna complain about bugs and exploids in wvw 👍

lol, ABL is not? That is quite funny. I guess you weren't around when the forum asked that DBL be removed and after the game director was removed they did so just to see the forums flooded with new posters asking WTW just happened! Where did the new map go. Which made them step back and question and re-engage the map. And if you really think there are no exploits in ABL, you might want to look at the forum archives or G...... things I can't say without ToS issues about that. 

I try and not speak for others, but implying the community doesn't care about exploits...a map doesn't impact that issue. Players still want bugs and exploits fixed. Trying to use a map as an excuse that exploits shouldn't be addressed is kind of using it as your own dislike of a map as an excuse that issues and exploits in other maps are also ok. Is that really the point you want to imply? So you are good with teleport hacks since you dislike DBL? That is how you came across. 

[TheGrimm.5624]

12 hours ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Welllll, squads that want to cap stuff in peace/be sneaky/run away from other zergs tend to hit dbl... also big squads that would have a hard time fitting in other maps tend to hit dbl too... on reset night it's not uncommon to not have a tag on there so people queue for the map that probably has one or the big fight guild of the server.

😉

I agree some players really like attacking it and that's fair. But I have also seen this when DBL is home BL that it will queue after EBG. This is one of the reasons I should upgrade my alt account to visit the EU, well that and to have dance offs, fall offs with players with fellow forum peeps. 

I admit the funniest moment I had during this beta was I was chasing a run away thief. They had dropped a player that I got back up so I started the chase though I was expecting to be outran. A group moved in and out paced me as I was doing this. What dropped me was I had to stop to laugh out load as one of them was using an in game instrument to play the jaws theme as they closed and dropped the target. I was laughing so hard that I couldn't breath as I explained this to guildies not in game at the time about it. Again to those, Luranni, double hats off you, that create such amassing content that is fun for those that weren't there to see. +5 from me, keep at it since there are some amazing and fun things to see in game and the free marketing it adds to gain use all the more players the merrier. 

Downside, now I need to figure out what they were using to do this. Roamers and Havocs need more squirrels. not! 🙂 

[Chaba.5410]

ABL is full of bugs and exploits. Remove it.

[Riba.3271]

5 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

9 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

• Scoring: Having completely different map beats the purpose of scoring and balance. In no way is it fair that someone has desert map to defend, and other team has alpine

Do you want to try this again? So it takes 4 players to paper ABL keeps. 4 players can do the same to DBL, but for two of three keeps it takes twice as long since they need to work thru both walls. Now move up the numbers. It's even easier to just paper ABL. DBL is like SMC, you worry about inner and ignore outer unless inner is built up. DBL like SMC was created in the idea that there would be more fights between the two walls. ABL just encourages more karma trains, least effort highest rewards.

My argument didn't say which map is easier or harder to defend, just that the maps are too different, so it impacts outcome of scoring, thus outcome of matchup.

How you counter my argument is not pointing out differences, as this strengthens my claim, but by saying how differences don't impact scoring and same server will beat another regardless if they have desert map or not.

5 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

9 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

• Unpopularity: WvW is completely different with 4 popular maps compared to 3 popular maps. Whose map you're on makes a difference.

What 4 popular maps? Even when it was EBG and 3 ABL, that's just two maps. 

? There is difference if you go to blues alpine map or greens alpine map. Especially off primetime, if you go on green map, you will mostly fight greens, on blue map you will mostly fight blues. Or reduce their score. You should try commanding, or choosing between borderlands, sometime: There is a lot to factor in what will be most fun, productive and challenging. Map with much lower chance that enemies or allies want to play in, hardly is the choice.

5 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

9 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

But Id rather see devs prioritize competitive balance.

Want to expand on this? Is this in class skill balance or something else?

WvW has massive amount of groups that never go to desert map (you can witness this behaviour in stat websites such as https://gw2mists.com/matches/eu). This in addition to different map layout, leads it to being large competitive advantage or disadvantage, several time larger than asymmetrical EB,  to have desert map.

Imagine matchup where one server isn't allowed to play revs, 2nd server eles and 3rd server warriors. With such balance, you cannot say winners are true winners. Same applies to desert map. Owner of desert map losing or beating alpine map owner, is meaningless, since they played completely different game.

5 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

9 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

as this is achievable without bad map distribution.

Agree, remove an ABL and replace with a EotM map.

This wouldn't make game more competitive. All servers in same matchup need to have same homeborderland. If it is bad map, then let it be. It just shouldn't doesn't affect matchup outcome much.

Issue is not desert map itself, it is the fact that we have 2 alpine maps and 1 desert map in same matchup. For example more competitive system would be everyone having desert map this week, and alpine map next week. But since there are so few that enjoy Desert map, WvW would be pretty much ghost town those weeks. So thats why removing Desert map is better choice than Alpine map. But WvW would  still competitively make sense even if everyone had less popular maps.

It isn't about personal preference, if desert map was even remotely popular, I would be fine with replacing 2 alpine maps with desert map. As long as all 3 borderlands are the same.

Now if playerbase want to experience different borderlands, then rotate borderlands between weeks. Don't put them all in at the same time. It ruins scoring. You can even have half the matchup with desert map (3.5 days) and the 2nd half with alpine map (3.5 days). As long as it is fair.

5 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

9 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

and make the gamemode worse for 80% of the players so you can have small improvement to 20% of players.

I agree removing DBL would make the game mode worse for 80% of the players. 

Again joking aside if I was asked what drove most of the players I know away, it would be ABL and its design and lack of map options.

This is hard claim to prove since if you look at statistics and we compare ABL and DBL:

Time. WED 24/01/2024 12:30 (GMT) EU WvW. Source Gw2mists

    Map                |  Total amount of kills (T1+T2+T3+T4+T5)

Alpine  (blue)    |   77 125

Alpine (green) |  83 770

Desert (Red)   |   47 447

 

So Desert map has less than 60% of the kills of 1 alpine map. You claim most prefer this map, but very few actually play it. It is all words. And this was against map which popularity is split between 2 maps.

We can conclude according to numbers that at least two thirds of the people prefer alpine borderland over desert.

Now of course these numbers don't tell everything, since every home border has baseline that people have to play them. Baseline meaning that even worst map that everyone hates would have some kills since the scoring forces you to play it. You would have to substract this number from each borderland. Realistical estimation of the portion of playerbase that prefer alpine maps is around 70-80%, maybe even as high as 90% (we know it is at least 66.66%). Giving them extra map and returning competitive balance which benefits everyone is much better option than what we have right now.

Unfortunately, while desert map isn't terrible map, the numbers just are not your side. You can't argue that desert is popular because very few choose it over other maps. You can't argue people like it, because very few play it. You can't argue that it is better because very few play it. You can't argue it makes WvW better because very few play it. Having desert map is like allowing smoking in restaurants: One person smoking will bother and make the experience worse for all the remaining customers.

Edited January 24 by Riba.3271

[Aeolus.3615]

The red map was to much advanced for a game that is all about ktrain 11111, the map begged for more mechanics but anet gave the map a midle finger.

That is the real problem, ktrains over combat/gameplay depth.

Edited January 24 by Aeolus.3615

[Firefly.5982]

I really like Desert BL.

I also don't mind it being given to red...though this would be the one thing I wouldn't mind if they changed it because so many people seem to feel it's a disadvantage (personally have never experienced it as such but hey).

Don't get rid of Desert BL. But do give us another map besides 2x Alpine...

[Dinas Dragonbane.2978]

5 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

We can conclude according to numbers that at least two thirds of the people prefer alpine borderland over desert.

*Then goes on to ignore the numbers of this poll and continues to lecture peers*

Well what about the numbers of this poll huh? 

This is why anet doesn't even take us the wvw playerbase seriously, because why should they after reading this thread? Even the op was slightly mental with the statement of liking of desert equals liking bugs. 

What a roundabout way to achieve what exactly?

[Sleepwalker.1398]

No no OP...those cliffs in red bl have content ....like these.

 

[Zepoolpe.9217]

16 hours ago, Thomas.2564 said:

Well well, this went pretty much as I expected. So despite the fact that desert bl is litterally full of bugs and exploids, it seems the majority of the wvw community doesn't care. Well then, this might explain why anet doesn't borher to fix bugs, and exploids in wvw. Cause aparently the community doesnt care. So please keep this in mind the next time u wanna complain about bugs and exploids in wvw 👍

Alpine BL has as much bugs and exploits as Desert BL.

And over the years, seeing the amount of posts either asking Anet to finally fix all the bugs and exploits or reporting bugs and exploiters, it is more anet that does not care, not the community. 

[Riba.3271]

4 hours ago, Dinas Dragonbane.2978 said:

10 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

We can conclude according to numbers that at least two thirds of the people prefer alpine borderland over desert.

*Then goes on to ignore the numbers of this poll and continues to lecture peers*

Well what about the numbers of this poll huh? 

This thread has 84 voters. That is less than 10% of 1 servers playerbase. And were talking about 27 servers. So less than 0.3% of WvWs playerbase polled on it.

Why results of this poll don't matter:

1. Majority is often wrong: They do not understand importance of competitive balancing. Polling everyone is akin to asking generic population if using nuclear energy is safe, when they don't know how it works.
2. Forum users are different from generic playerbase. If you go in room of prisoners, asking them if laws should be more lenient, will give you completely different results than asking everyone.
3. Less than 0.3% of playerbase (<100 people) polled on this. That is hardly reliable result. How do we know someone just didn't vote no on 50 accounts?
4. People wanting to be "just". People vote No, even if they know desert map is too unpopular to be healthy for gamemode, just because they think it is morally correct choice. Wanting to be good will often lead to bad decisions or self sacrifice. Often these people are misinformed about how 3 alpine WvW is different from 2 alpine WvW (they think it is the same). Ask people if butcher should provide vegetarian options giving them only 5 seconds to answer, and most would vote yes because they think just the wording "vegetarian options" makes that choice morally correct, even though it logically does not.

Everyone who voted no is just misinformed and wrong. Competitive gamemode needs competitive environment. Not only regarding fights, but also regarding scoring and maplayout. Imagine if your server got double points from towers and keeps, would that be fair? Wouldn't that mean scoring and matchup outcome is completely meaningless? And how is you having desert map and enemies not fair? Not saying you aren't allowed to not care about matchup outcome, but rather that those who want to, should be allowed to do so in a setting that is fair to all competitors.

Edited January 24 by Riba.3271

[SweetPotato.7456]

7 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

This thread has 84 voters. That is less than 10% of 1 servers playerbase. And were talking about 27 servers. So less than 0.3% of WvWs playerbase polled on it.

Why results of this poll don't matter:

1. Majority is often wrong: They do not understand importance of competitive balancing. Polling everyone is akin to asking generic population if using nuclear energy is safe, when they don't know how it works.
2. Forum users are different from generic playerbase. If you go in room of prisoners, asking them if laws should be more lenient, will give you completely different results than asking everyone.
3. Less than 0.3% of playerbase (<100 people) polled on this. That is hardly reliable result. How do we know someone just didn't vote no on 50 accounts?
4. People wanting to be "just". People vote No, even if they know desert map is too unpopular to be healthy for gamemode, just because they think it is morally correct choice. Wanting to be good will often lead to bad decisions or self sacrifice. Often these people are misinformed about how 3 alpine WvW is different from 2 alpine WvW (they think it is the same). Ask people if butcher should provide vegetarian options giving them only 5 seconds to answer, and most would vote yes because they think just the wording "vegetarian options" makes that choice morally correct, even though it logically does not.

Everyone who voted no is just misinformed and wrong. Competitive gamemode needs competitive environment. Not only regarding fights, but also regarding scoring and maplayout. Imagine if your server got double points from towers and keeps, would that be fair? Wouldn't that mean scoring and matchup outcome is completely meaningless? And how is you having desert map and enemies not fair? Not saying you aren't allowed to not care about matchup outcome, but rather that those who want to, should be allowed to do so in a setting that is fair to all competitors.

https://ibb.co/5Kc0Cz2

Screenshots above is a solid truth, simply go to the original post to see the result for yourself,

As for you misinformation about player being misinformed, please show us where these players get their misinformation from, did you have a webpage or send someone to talk to all the players who voted before they choose No. 

 

 

[Dawdler.8521]

7 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

This thread has 84 voters. That is less than 10% of 1 servers playerbase. And were talking about 27 servers. So less than 0.3% of WvWs playerbase polled on it.

Why results of this poll don't matter:

1. Majority is often wrong: They do not understand importance of competitive balancing. Polling everyone is akin to asking generic population if using nuclear energy is safe, when they don't know how it works.
2. Forum users are different from generic playerbase. If you go in room of prisoners, asking them if laws should be more lenient, will give you completely different results than asking everyone.
3. Less than 0.3% of playerbase (<100 people) polled on this. That is hardly reliable result. How do we know someone just didn't vote no on 50 accounts?
4. People wanting to be "just". People vote No, even if they know desert map is too unpopular to be healthy for gamemode, just because they think it is morally correct choice. Wanting to be good will often lead to bad decisions or self sacrifice. Often these people are misinformed about how 3 alpine WvW is different from 2 alpine WvW (they think it is the same). Ask people if butcher should provide vegetarian options giving them only 5 seconds to answer, and most would vote yes because they think just the wording "vegetarian options" makes that choice morally correct, even though it logically does not.

Everyone who voted no is just misinformed and wrong. Competitive gamemode needs competitive environment. Not only regarding fights, but also regarding scoring and maplayout. Imagine if your server got double points from towers and keeps, would that be fair? Wouldn't that mean scoring and matchup outcome is completely meaningless? And how is you having desert map and enemies not fair? Not saying you aren't allowed to not care about matchup outcome, but rather that those who want to, should be allowed to do so in a setting that is fair to all competitors.

Yet it’s rather funny it’s a repeat of basically every other such poll.

Even after no downstate weeks when people rant and rave about delete downstate, they put up a poll to clearly show everyone on the forum is with them… only to have a majority vote to keep downstate. Every time, probably half a dozen vote threads I’ve seen like that.

[Chaba.5410]

55 minutes ago, SweetPotato.7456 said:

https://ibb.co/5Kc0Cz2

Screenshots above is a solid truth, simply go to the original post to see the result for yourself

 

 

The term is "self-selection bias".

[TheGrimm.5624]

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

My argument didn't say which map is easier or harder to defend, just that the maps are too different, so it impacts outcome of scoring, thus outcome of matchup.

We disagree here, map differences don't impact scores, it impacts tactics needed. I don't think similar tactics should yields similar results across maps since that implies a side just had more numbers using the same tactics across all maps. Therefore the side just wins in this scenario.

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

How you counter my argument is not pointing out differences, as this strengthens my claim, but by saying how differences don't impact scoring and same server will beat another regardless if they have desert map or not.

See above.

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

? There is difference if you go to blues alpine map or greens alpine map. Especially off primetime, if you go on green map, you will mostly fight greens, on blue map you will mostly fight blues. Or reduce their score. You should try commanding, or choosing between borderlands, sometime: There is a lot to factor in what will be most fun, productive and challenging. Map with much lower chance that enemies or allies want to play in, hardly is the choice.

lol. I think you maybe need to Havoc more since this is a normal thought process. How do you want the fight to end up and choose your actions from there. In Havoc play its not always about do you want to win, but who do you want to win so that it helps your side more after the conflict though it may not be your side that wins the objective/fight. This doesn't mean your side wins but may mean your side gains something to help them in the long run after the action is over.

As far as playing off prime time...... I will assume you mean off your own prime time. Comms that play off the other sides prime times have it even easier. Have had to call out server mates that attacked off the other sides prime time since they just k-trained off hours raising the difficulty for everyone else playing their normal times. A previous server mate sent an image showing what they had done as was asking for a well done. Had to reply as WTF. Are you planning on doing this for months one end? Reply was no, just this matchup. So I asked so why are you looking to just bump us up to a tier that our players can't cover? Play your normal hours else you just create a situation that isn't sustainable in the longer run.

You assume I don't jump maps. I do, I find that the ABLs are still way to boring and when I feel the need to fight on them the gaming experience is lessened and less enjoyable.

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

WvW has massive amount of groups that never go to desert map (you can witness this behaviour in stat websites such as https://gw2mists.com/matches/eu). This in addition to different map layout, leads it to being large competitive advantage or disadvantage, several time larger than asymmetrical EB,  to have desert map.

I don't use this site. So what does this site use as its numbers? How did they access Anet numbers? Is this a register users API site or something else? I said before thru various threads this maybe a EU vs NA issue since I typically see more queues in DBL than you do. I am not in favor of either region driving map options personally. I will say as I have before I am not in favor in multiple maps. HBL concept was out of date after the first two years. We need 4 different 3 sides maps and after all these years they should be rotating at this point so players aren't saying, oh no, we are this color map this week.

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

 

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

Imagine matchup where one server isn't allowed to play revs, 2nd server eles and 3rd server warriors. With such balance, you cannot say winners are true winners. Same applies to desert map. Owner of desert map losing or beating alpine map owner, is meaningless, since they played completely different game.

This is a red herring. So in the same sense ABL shouldn't be able to use any fast moving classes since with more Thieves ABL needs less players to block map access as occurred during the tournament days? I don't get your point here. 

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

This wouldn't make game more competitive. All servers in same matchup need to have same homeborderland. If it is bad map, then let it be. It just shouldn't doesn't affect matchup outcome much.

Home BL shouldn't be a thing. That is the point. All maps should be like EBG and all those EBGs should be different to be competitive as well as keep them fresh and allow for multiple ways to win versus, just go to the double cata wall of objective 'x' and bring all. Competitive is also about open sandboxes that allow those groups to have varying tactics to meet the goal at the objective of note. When you limit the sandbox its not about competitive or tactics, its about numbers. If everyone uses the same tactic since its the same setup every time  that is not competitive, its knowing the map and just bringing more.

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

Issue is not desert map itself, it is the fact that we have 2 alpine maps and 1 desert map in same matchup. For example more competitive system would be everyone having desert map this week, and alpine map next week. But since there are so few that enjoy Desert map, WvW would be pretty much ghost town those weeks. So thats why removing Desert map is better choice than Alpine map. But WvW would  still competitively make sense even if everyone had less popular maps.

Again this was already voted down and second as I said above we don't need HBLs anymore, we need 4 three sided maps so that we also remove the HBL versus EBG back and fourths. And no, even 4 EBGs are not the same thing. Would still be stale encounters. On top of this we should have had enough maps to have been rotating week by week through them at this point.

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

It isn't about personal preference, if desert map was even remotely popular, I would be fine with replacing 2 alpine maps with desert map. As long as all 3 borderlands are the same.

 

Mileage varies.

 

 

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

Now if playerbase want to experience different borderlands, then rotate borderlands between weeks. Don't put them all in at the same time. It ruins scoring. You can even have half the matchup with desert map (3.5 days) and the 2nd half with alpine map (3.5 days). As long as it is fair.

This is hard claim to prove since if you look at statistics and we compare ABL and DBL:

Time. WED 24/01/2024 12:30 (GMT) EU WvW. Source Gw2mists

    Map                |  Total amount of kills (T1+T2+T3+T4+T5)

Alpine  (blue)    |   77 125

Alpine (green) |  83 770

Desert (Red)   |   47 447

Source of the data that they use? 

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

So Desert map has less than 60% of the kills of 1 alpine map. You claim most prefer this map, but very few actually play it. It is all words. And this was against map which popularity is split between 2 maps.

We can conclude according to numbers that at least two thirds of the people prefer alpine borderland over desert.

Not what my queues have shown, so again queue times? Source of their source? Anet numbers since the CEO asked for it to be removed and then after it was the forum backlashed was intense enough that it was re-added after they released players may be playing versus posting and....oops more internal numbers are needed versus feedback. 

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

Now of course these numbers don't tell everything, since every home border has baseline that people have to play them.

Have to play them? This applies to both ABL & DBL in the same weight by the way.

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

Baseline meaning that even worst map that everyone hates would have some kills since the scoring forces you to play it.

So are you calling out players that prefer to defend? And that they might do this if its DBL or HBL? You do seem to favor attackers and claim attackers are always disadvantaged.

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

You would have to substract this number from each borderland. Realistical estimation of the portion of playerbase that prefer alpine maps is around 70-80%, maybe even as high as 90% (we know it is at least 66.66%). Giving them extra map and returning competitive balance which benefits everyone is much better option than what we have right now.

lol. The number of times I have seen defenders give up on ABL since an attacking force was already at a double penetration wall before a shout out was made is way higher than a callout on DBL. I don't know of any sites that would have these stats on success versus fail rates and maps and objectives so this is really one of those who said what arguments. 

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

Unfortunately, while desert map isn't terrible map, the numbers just are not your side. You can't argue that desert is popular because very few choose it over other maps.

Transfer to NA?

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

You can't argue people like it, because very few play it.

Transfer to NA?

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

You can't argue that it is better because very few play it. 

I have an alt account that I haven't used for years. I need to add expansions to it now that I have a connection that might allow me to visit EU to see what you are seeing. 

Edited January 25 by TheGrimm.5624

[TheGrimm.5624]

2 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

The term is "self-selection bias".

Chaba! It's 4 AM and as usual bad habits and can't sleep peeps work and live on less sleep than they should. I admit I don't know this one. So thanks and bugger off. Now once awake I will need to review this one. I guess the only valid counter is, "All I know, is I know nothing.".

And I am going more towards the Bill & Ted style versus the more know source. 

[CafPow.1542]

42 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

Again this was already voted down and second as I said above we don't need HBLs anymore, we need 4 three sided maps so that we also remove the HBL versus EBG back and fourths. And no, even 4 EBGs are not the same thing. Would still be stale encounters. On top of this we should have had enough maps to have been rotating week by week through them at this point

But only if you want it to be „competitive“.

should it be like that?

red can win easily if they outnumber blue / green at any given time, some servers can do that. Does your server have a night-shift ktrain?

so much aspects besides „how are the maps balanced“ that it’s a bit silly to think „beimg competitive“ means, just having balanced maps.

in the end, this game will never be balanced. So i might aswell have different flavours of maps to chose from so it doesn’t get boring. I’d like to have a 4th map instead of 2 ABLs so i can switch around.

having those 4 maps created like ebg (when it comes to „balance of placed towers“) then it might be a better idea than HBL i dunno. Tho ebg isn’t balanced either so…

 

the main difference is 

ebg is very clumped

dbl is very wide

abl is something in the middle.

this creates a different feeling when roaming around there, and since i want different experiences, it’s a good thing to have.

but i know your point is another, your point about HBL is the nearest spawn from Midkeep etc. in this aspect, ebg is better than hbl i agree.

Edited January 25 by CafPow.1542

[Riba.3271]

2 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

We disagree here, map differences don't impact scores, it impacts tactics needed. I don't think similar tactics should yields similar results across maps since that implies a side just had more numbers using the same tactics across all maps. Therefore the side just wins in this scenario.

Well I guess it only becomes apparent to you only you experience facing a server that never goes to desert map. Not a single group. If you actually played for score in past 7 years, you would have noticed this behaviour already.

Since you do not ever play for score, it is natural you do not care about it. But yes, people are often oblivious to anyone elses behaviour.

2 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

23 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

Now if playerbase want to experience different borderlands, then rotate borderlands between weeks. Don't put them all in at the same time. It ruins scoring. You can even have half the matchup with desert map (3.5 days) and the 2nd half with alpine map (3.5 days). As long as it is fair.

This is hard claim to prove since if you look at statistics and we compare ABL and DBL:

Time. WED 24/01/2024 12:30 (GMT) EU WvW. Source Gw2mists

    Map                |  Total amount of kills (T1+T2+T3+T4+T5)

Alpine  (blue)    |   77 125

Alpine (green) |  83 770

Desert (Red)   |   47 447

Expand  

Source of the data that they use? 

You can use Gw2stats, gw2intel or any similar website and they will all show same data for ongoing matchup. They all use GW2 AI and they're still maintained after almost decade of being up. It is hard to believe these websites would be still be used and maintained if they just showed random data.

 

Overall, rest of your comment is dismissing the proof and numbers, so idk, maybe talking to you is waste of time? I based my whole comment on actual numbers that no one has reason to doubt, and you still somehow managed to make your whole comment about bananas not being yellow.

2 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

Transfer to NA?

Desert map numbers are atrocious regardless of if you're in EU or NA. Which you would know if you actually used any source to back your claims up.

And  the issue with desert map is that there are different borderlands for different servers in same matchup. Transferring will hardly solve this problem and you should practice reading comprehension. I literally bolded it for you.

Overall, somehow you managed to comment on my whole comment, and even had source to prove that transferring to NA does nothing to improve the numbers. And you learnt absolutely nothing about me or popularity of desert map. It just proves you're not very smart because thought transferring to NA solves anything with absolutely no basis behind it. You don't learn and incapable of understanding even most basic sentences.

Did I ever say that NA doesn't have same number problem? No. It does. Did I say my main issue with desert map was the numbers? No. It was the advantage or disadvantage owning it provides. Desert map also exists in NA. I can tolerate people being misinformed but thinking NA servers are any kind of solution is pretty much dumbest thing one can do because you just got informed before it.

Edited January 25 by Riba.3271