What happened to all the servers?

[oatsnjuices.1698]

Well, im attached to mag and there is a 100 que for ebg. I'd love to see alliances, but i cant sit in a 2 hour que for content when the boarder lands have no real content. Guess that is it for me until a relink, or a change. Im trying real hard to be a casual, but its becoming too much work.

Edited March 20 by oatsnjuices.1698

[XenesisII.1540]

Good thing there's eotm weekly to do lmao...... .. . 😌

[red.9862]

Welp we held smc, the wvw map crashed, then green and blue came creeping in as soon as it was possible, FIX IT.

[TheGrimm.5624]

6 hours ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Good thing there's eotm weekly to do lmao...... .. . 😌

lol, was there? I was switching toons and hit all maps queued so jumped to EotM. Was a lot of fights and fun. So tried to share map info to those that hadn't been there till Guildmates game jumped and asked for aid elsewhere. I admit, I still like the map and was fun to share with others that hadn't spent time there. Being only Tuesday at the time. might be there more after seeing the bonus run all the maps to queue.

[XenesisII.1540]

8 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

lol, was there? I was switching toons and hit all maps queued so jumped to EotM. Was a lot of fights and fun. So tried to share map info to those that hadn't been there till Guildmates game jumped and asked for aid elsewhere. I admit, I still like the map and was fun to share with others that hadn't spent time there. Being only Tuesday at the time. might be there more after seeing the bonus run all the maps to queue.

Yeah vault weekly has capture 5 eotm objectives.

[TheGrimm.5624]

1 minute ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Yeah vault weekly has capture 5 eotm objectives.

Wow. I admit I don't read any of them when they are released unless it seems I am going to not complete them by just playing. This makes more sense in some of the team chats now. Thanks! That said the EotM fights were fun tonight and was able to share some EotM info to peeps, didn't get to drop a zerg info a pit via a bridge ambush but was still fun if a slow run. Still think, add mounts, but not gliders to the map.

[Avalanche.7359]

What is happening? Insane lags are happening, many guilds are disbanding, long time wvw players are stopping playing, we are losing people like crazy. This meta is complete nonsense, 10-15s skillags when 2 zergs meet, and we can't use absolutely nothing if third zerg even comes close. Now the rush event starts and we can't get people to the maps bcs 40q on every map. Wake up Anet you are destroying wvw on a scale so massive I've never seen in 10 years...

[Yoruba.7048]

23 hours ago, Sylosi.6503 said:

maybe combined with how they determine the thresholds if they for example base it off the most populated server (WSR in this case).

This is exactly my theory
WSR got so stacked that the threshold changed making every server having lower population in comparison 

Sure people can get bored of the game/meta and play less or take a break, but this happening in all the servers at once in one week and to the extend of making the population drop from Full straight to High is a lot of coincidence.

At least in my server that is high right now i see the exact same activity that we had 2 weeks ago when we were full

[Mabi black.1824]

38 minutes ago, Yoruba.7048 said:

This is exactly my theory
WSR got so stacked that the threshold changed making every server having lower population in comparison 

So it's so stacked that the servers that come right after are 2 sizes smaller. very good. That's why I keep asking who really won a game, the team with 350 victory points and 50000 hours/game or the team with 300 victory points and 25000 hours/game? A competitive game mode deserves a response.

[Dawdler.8521]

1 hour ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

That's why I keep asking who really won a game, the team with 350 victory points and 50000 hours/game or the team with 300 victory points and 25000 hours/game?

The team with 350 VPs. That’s how winning works.

[Mabi black.1824]

20 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

The team with 350 VPs. That’s how winning works.

Outdated point system, please upgrade

[Morden Kain.3489]

Ahh yes, the "winner takes all" mentality... Just like US politics 😄 .

[ArchonWing.9480]

Nobody really knows.

All these designations are arbitrary and it's not like we have any official population stats. So medium or high means exactly what Anet wants to mean. Basically, you can move to it or not. Maybe the overall activity is higher and so people can start moving to servers that aren't as relatively huge as they were in the past, etc.

Edited March 20 by ArchonWing.9480

[TheGrimm.5624]

5 hours ago, Yoruba.7048 said:

This is exactly my theory
WSR got so stacked that the threshold changed making every server having lower population in comparison 

I think you go a bit light here in the use of the word theory. Would have to dig it out of archive but Anet does assign the highest populated server as the cap and then reevaluate all the others based on that. So if they did open a server and leave it open too long and it overstacked it would drop the server status on others to balance out compared to it. Saw the same thing in NA a year or two ago.

[Chaba.5410]

4 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

Would have to dig it out of archive but Anet does assign the highest populated server as the cap and then reevaluate all the others based on that.

I don't recall anything like that.  It implies that Full means highest populated server.  Why would we ever have more than one Full server if the cap keeps getting re-evaluated based on a single server?

Edited March 20 by Chaba.5410

[TheGrimm.5624]

41 minutes ago, Chaba.5410 said:

I don't recall anything like that.  It implies that Full means highest populated server.  Why would we ever have more than one Full server if the cap keeps getting re-evaluated based on a single server?

Will need to find, it was in conversation prior to server linking before they came about. I want to say the idea was something along the lines the server gets marked full and closed in hopes that players will self balance and transfer. Then as that server's pop lowers the bar is lowered until it falls in line with other servers where they get marked full and rinse and repeat to try and balance population. Will do a search and try and find the link after gaming tonight.

[Dawdler.8521]

9 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

I don't recall anything like that.  It implies that Full means highest populated server.  Why would we ever have more than one Full server if the cap keeps getting re-evaluated based on a single server?

If a server has similar population size as the “full” reference, wouldn’t that have full status too?

Pretty certain the threshold for full vs not full wouldn’t be a single player.

[Chaba.5410]

7 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

If a server has similar population size as the “full” reference, wouldn’t that have full status too?

Pretty certain the threshold for full vs not full wouldn’t be a single player.

As we know from the old dev post, servers beyond the "Full" threshold are marked as Full and there was a comparison of the highest populated server at the time of that post to the next highest populated server.  It wasn't similar.

So how is the "Full" threshold determined then?  It follows then that surely the highest populated server is not the cap.  The cap is something below the highest populated server and we don't know by how much - could be quite a bit (or has in the past) given the original comparison chart.  It's arbitrary and servers can even be set individually to "Full" regardless of the threshold, as was done with host servers at the very beginning of server links.

Edited March 21 by Chaba.5410

[hugeboss.5432]

On 3/19/2024 at 8:03 PM, misterman.1530 said:

Huh. I had no idea. I guess I never really gave it much thought. Makes sense, though.

 

Well... (that brought back some memories) originally everyone used to be located on those different servers at launch (yes, both PvE + WvW). Every server had it's own "Lions Arch" map instance (etc) with only their own citizens (+ "guests"). [This is what the "guest" option was for in the server selection window].

Later, it was further developed & everyone was migrated into the "mega cloud-like server" instead, so now you can meet anyone located in the same world region as yourself in any PvE map randomly. These days, those old server names are still used for WvW team assignment (in the different regions) and count + limit populations for that purpose only (afaik).

 

 

[TheIceman.1039]

On 3/20/2024 at 2:13 AM, oatsnjuices.1698 said:

Well, im attached to mag and there is a 100 que for ebg. I'd love to see alliances, but i cant sit in a 2 hour que for content when the boarder lands have no real content. Guess that is it for me until a relink, or a change. Im trying real hard to be a casual, but its becoming too much work.

Just finished red border defence run, had alot content.  

 

 

[reddie.5861]

On 3/19/2024 at 8:25 AM, Chyx.3956 said:

Almost every single server is open right now. What happened?

cus WvW isnt fun anymore?
every1 has every single boon in the game for 1 minute running around like idiots.
mass corrupting keeps getting one nerf after another.
i have lost fun few months ago.

for me wvw is equal to doing a raid in gw2.

u just have all boons and u spank the "enemy"(raid)  and see who wins nothing else is involved anymore. maybe GvG is somewhat different but really not into something that was already dead for multiple years.

[Mabi black.1824]

17 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

So how is the "Full" threshold determined then?  It follows then that surely the highest populated server is not the cap.  The cap is something below the highest populated server and we don't know by how much - could be quite a bit (or has in the past) given the original comparison chart.  It's arbitrary and servers can even be set individually to "Full" regardless of the threshold, as was done with host servers at the very beginning of server links.

Let's just forget about WR for a moment.

This description of yours is pretty much the fundamental part on which you build this team-based PvP game mode. As a gamer and as a WVW enthusiast, I would expect all this to be first of all more transparent, and secondly to be constantly polished, improved, updated. It's pretty much the most important part. We're pretty much in a position where we don't know who is the team that really won a weekly game. Because quantity overshadows quality. My recommendations to developers are

1 : Maintain/strengthen the concept of servers/teams

2 : Transparent and improve the management of server/team thresholds

3 : Build goals for servers/teams, move out of the perpetual format and consider a seasoned format.

4 : Too old point system needs to be updated, and you have to add coefficients that help and unequivocally show quality over quantity

[Mabi black.1824]

Very often it is more important to define what you want to do. The how, where and when will only follow the possibilities and potential that this development has available. It's more important to define the route your ship wants to take. When it will reach the port of your choice is irrelevant.✌️

[Chaba.5410]

On 3/20/2024 at 3:23 PM, TheGrimm.5624 said:

Will need to find, it was in conversation prior to server linking before they came about. I want to say the idea was something along the lines the server gets marked full and closed in hopes that players will self balance and transfer. Then as that server's pop lowers the bar is lowered until it falls in line with other servers where they get marked full and rinse and repeat to try and balance population. Will do a search and try and find the link after gaming tonight.

All I've been able to find so far is Anet dev posting about using highest populated server as benchmark for server links, not for population thresholds.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Transfers-Links-and-Population-Data

Your description sounds like from a different post Tyler Bearce made about server linking vs. merging which also didn't have anything to do about how thresholds are determined.

Edited March 27 by Chaba.5410