The Crisis of World Restructuring and why it will destroy WvW: Everything outside of one guild will be shifting sand

[Zok.4956]

6 minutes ago, ascii.1369 said:

Seems to me that’s an an argument for not against WR

It was not intended as an argument for or against WR. It was just an example in which I experienced "social drama" and "tyrannical leaders" myself. To show that such people really exist.

[Mabi black.1824]

3 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Ie what every smaller linked world that gets their name ripped from them experience every month. It’s not their world.

Yet people still defend for reasons unknown.

The reasons are well known. No names and servers are deleted. When you check your current match you will always see the name of my server + the name of your server. That's 2 servers that are playing together. That tower will be perceived by both servers as their own tower. So they're going to defend it when it's under attack.

P.S. Denying the evidence of what I write to you is not helpful. I can understand your illusion that it's perfect and Everything will be the same as before. But my reflections lead me to point out a series of critical issues, because I predict that there will be a lot of them. Nothing but useless defense because I can't close a wall. I tell you that we will soon see what a useless defense really is. I just hope I'm wrong.

Edited May 28 by Mabi black.1824

[Dawdler.8521]

44 minutes ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

That's 2 servers that are playing together. That tower will be perceived by both servers as their own tower. So they're going to defend it when it's under attack.

So how exactly does that differ from two big community guilds fighting together under the same team name/same color?

[Mabi black.1824]

48 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

So how exactly does that differ from two big community guilds fighting together under the same team name/same color?

My fragment will not appear in the name that the game design offers. What should be my borderland will bear a name unknown to me. and every 4 weeks it will be a 'new' unknown name. My fragment won't have any historical track, because the score is server-related, one up or down is server-related, and even the leaderboard is server-related. My fragment will be denied any form of comparison and competition, I win or lose with respect to what? These are things that we cannot and must not deny. Now you can tell me that we are changing, that interacting with the environment and the maps that this mode offers, defend attack will soon be useless , because we will have to focus only on the guild. Guild vs Guild. Then you can say that in any case half of the players are already playing this way. They don't look at the score and they don't look at the environment around them. They change servers every time and that's fine.but keep in mind that for the other half It exists (today in a few months maybe not) What puzzles me are all those players we've seen complaining about repairing a wall or a shrinking circle. Keep your mouth shut about this change. Because it's the best way to tough bye bye to your defense. wait for it to be captured and resume later. When you have the right numbers, you organize your GVG and so on. This is the dead end we are getting ourselves into. And after 4 weeks you won't have your home to go back to. Another round of the carousel , the towers are still ''nobody'' of a team with a strange name with different people this time. and gvg with new guilds. 

Edited May 28 by Mabi black.1824

[urd.8306]

I enjoy being part of the shifting sands, because what destroyed WvW is the ever transfering GvG crowd and elitists that tried to stack servers so they could roll over any opposition and the very fitting meta we got for this. This whole bunker boon kitten and not being able to defend a keep vs a blob made this game mode the mess it is.
This game mode always was a PUG mode. You saw a pin, joined on whatever class you liked to play and did stuff on the map to upgrade your side of the borderland and after started sieging (means preparing positions, building siege and fighting off other servers meanwhile) keeps so in the end you could have a nice fight in that keep with two other servers.
Now you throw 5 catas, bruteforce into that keep and move on to the next, because defensive siege won't hit and won't hurt you.
The gamemode is fast food now. It's just not worth keeping a tower, because you can retake it in less than 3 minutes.

And now you cry because the gamemode could die because your guild has a small is too small and you fear your zerg has no one that flips camps for you, calls out enemie zergs, while your running with hidden tag?
Oh no, I'm sorry.
 

[Zok.4956]

13 minutes ago, urd.8306 said:

because what destroyed WvW is the ever transfering GvG crowd and elitists that tried to stack servers so they could roll over any opposition and the very fitting meta we got for this.

Why do you think that those players/guilds won't do/try this in the future? 

[Dawdler.8521]

14 minutes ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

My fragment will not appear in the name that the game design offers. What should be my borderland will bear a name unknown to me. and every 4 weeks it will be a 'new' unknown name. My fragment won't have any historical track, because the score is server-related, one up or down is server-related, and even the leaderboard is server-related. My fragment will be denied any form of comparison and competition, I win or lose with respect to what? These are things that we cannot and must not deny. 

You are still basically describing links, lol. 

I know there is two linked worlds but I only see the main world when fighting you, not the link. So you are denied if you are on it.

You also mention score being server related. No it’s not. Placement become random when links shuffle. Once again, you are denied. There is no history, due to links. There is no leaderboard, due to links.

Have you lost my respect if you fight under another name than your own link, because I haven’t a kitten clue which of the two worlds you are really on? I uh… will let you decide that. But from your description here if you where me, it seems that you would already say yes.

[urd.8306]

4 minutes ago, Zok.4956 said:

Why do you think that those players/guilds won't do/try this in the future? 

They can try what they want, but the effect won't be the same.
I have some of those "transfers" on my main server and it made the game worse. They are even complaining that they can't get a full raid, because people prefer not running with a tag and doing their own stuff.
Good luck trying this with the new system.

[disForm.2837]

4 minutes ago, Zok.4956 said:

Why do you think that those players/guilds won't do/try this in the future? 

They absolutely will stack, some Alliances I've heard of are just terrifying but still hard capped at 500. It's nothing like we currently have, where you can bandwagon to a low population link to play with an already stacked server. 

Also, no more old players flocking to alts placed in convenient matches. Alliances slots, given the scarcity, are more valuable so getting alts in your chosen match is not easy.

[urd.8306]

6 minutes ago, disForm.2837 said:

They absolutely will stack, some Alliances I've heard of are just terrifying but still hard capped at 500. It's nothing like we currently have, where you can bandwagon to a low population link to play with an already stacked server. 

Also, no more old players flocking to alts placed in convenient matches. Alliances slots, given the scarcity, are more valuable so getting alts in your chosen match is not easy.

You mean they are already setup to fail big?
Like Blackgate, when they were stacked into oblivion.

[Custodio.6134]

20 minutes ago, urd.8306 said:

This whole bunker boon kitten and not being able to defend a keep vs a blob made this game mode the mess it is.

That is a Game-Balance issue, not a world-structure one, so WR doesn't change anything (and it's also not supposed to, since that's a totally different dev team and system responsible for that).

21 minutes ago, urd.8306 said:

This game mode always was a PUG mode. You saw a pin, joined on whatever class you liked to play and did stuff on the map to upgrade your side of the borderland and after started sieging (means preparing positions, building siege and fighting off other servers meanwhile) keeps so in the end you could have a nice fight in that keep with two other servers.

Again, a general Game-System issue that is unaffected by WR 

25 minutes ago, urd.8306 said:

because what destroyed WvW is the ever transfering GvG crowd and elitists that tried to stack servers so they could roll over any opposition and the very fitting meta we got for this.

And WR is limiting this, creating an overall better population balancing due to limits in guild size (and potentially limiting transfers in general, because we don't even know if ANet will allow mid-season transfers. So far we only know that ANet is considering it, but we have no confirmation if it actually will be a thing or not).

Currently a world consists of a lot more players (presumably between 1000-1500 players if not more, considering inactive players are not accounted for, yet are still assigned to servers). With WR you're limited to stacking 500 players max, hard capping how much you can overstock a single team (it will probably still be possible in some way, but it cannot be abused even remotely as much as with servers, considering transfers before relink, but after new links were already decided is simple to abuse)

[disForm.2837]

30 minutes ago, urd.8306 said:

You mean they are already setup to fail big?
Like Blackgate, when they were stacked into oblivion.

Haha, no idea, I don't presume to know the future. Historically speaking, managing too many egos has always been a challenge, to say the least.

I know of one theoretical top Alliance that imploded even before started, so you may be into something. 

[Mabi black.1824]

3 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

You also mention score being server related. No it’s not. Placement become random when links shuffle. Once again, you are denied.

if you press the B to check the game you are playing, you will see the name of your server followed by the + symbol and the name of the server you are playing with. The 2 servers appear with first and last names. All the time. After 1 month when you are assigned another match you will still have your name, and the historical trace of your team continues to manifest itself even in this forum in the community section. Hence the comparison/competition for all servers (main or not) Otherwise, we will have no trace of your fragment or alliance. never. carried by chance like a feather in the wind. Or to stay on Tom Hanks it will be like choosing a chocolate from the box of chocolates, you never know what flavor can you find.

Edited May 28 by Mabi black.1824

[Zok.4956]

3 hours ago, disForm.2837 said:

They absolutely will stack, some Alliances I've heard of are just terrifying but still hard capped at 500. It's nothing like we currently have, where you can bandwagon to a low population link to play with an already stacked server. 

It certainly also depends on whether there will still be server transfers or not. And what conditions there can be for server transfers.

Anet has made very different statements about this. At first it was said that there were no more server transfers at all, then Anet took that back and said that there could still be server transfers under some conditions. But as far as I know, there is no final and firm statement on this yet.

It's also not clear what happens to inactive alt accounts. Anet once said that accounts that have been inactive in WvW for a long time can still select a guild or server later. How do these count towards the server limit?

Much is still unclear about this. Only one thing is clear: There will always be guilds/players who will try to outsmart the system in order to keep stacking.

[Cyninja.2954]

Loving the doomer attitude here by some. Mostly by players who would rather have the mode continue on its failed trajectory even if their server is the last to remain.

I've said this in the past: WR is happening and the only one able to prevent it are the developers. Seems they managed to pull it off, or at least they believe they can. The step makes sense from a longevity standpoint and innate ability to balance the mode around fluctuating players numbers.

All those wasted hours on forum threads about how WR should not happen which could have been used instead to try to think of ways to improve the system.

Doesn't help with the un-fun balance we have right now, but maybe that will change once the new system is in place and new habits and approaches to the mode have formed.

[XenesisII.1540]

4 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

WR is happening and the only one able to prevent it are the developers.

4 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Doesn't help with the un-fun balance we have right now, but maybe that will change once the new system is in place and new habits and approaches to the mode have formed.

Sorry to say but balance is not going to change due to new habits and approaches, that's all dictated by the developers too, and we all know the direction they've taken. WR does nothing in regards to that other than provide more plebs to farm.

[Cyninja.2954]

5 minutes ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Sorry to say but balance is not going to change due to new habits and approaches, that's all dictated by the developers too, and we all know the direction they've taken. WR does nothing in regards to that other than provide more plebs to farm.

You are probably right, one dare hope though.

[thamesgirl.1960]

13 hours ago, Ronin.4501 said:

I think a lot of you are either confused about how this is going to work OR have only played in smaller guilds that have no interaction with anyone outside their guild.

I'm currently in 3 different WvW guilds.  We formed a larger alliance guild consisting of those 3 guilds + several others, mostly from one server but a few from other servers as well.  When WR goes live, we will all choose the alliance guild as our WvW guild but will continue repping and chatting and interacting with our smaller WvW guilds. We will continue to use both our alliance Discord as well as our guild discords.

No one is saying you can't continue to play with your friends. All you need to do is create an alliance guild and invite them. No one is forcing them to rep that alliance guild. Your using it to get on the same server/shard. What you want to do with your alliance guild or individual guilds after that is up to you.

This is what my guild and many others on our server are doing. One anchor guild, and then everyone continues to rep their individual guild and run on their usual schedule. The anchor guild is a way for us to try and keep our server community together. 

[ArchonWing.9480]

11 hours ago, Zok.4956 said:

But in general it seems to be the case that in larger guilds the ego of the guild leaders grows with the size of the guild. And at some point the typical human interpersonal drama arises because some people don't like each other.

That's why I said in the next sentence

14 hours ago, ArchonWing.9480 said:

I suppose if one joins some fly by night guilds that just wants extra bodies sure, but that's a rather shallow level of socialization.

Yes, I am aware of the "corporate" style mega guilds that don't look to you as a person, but rather as someone to fill their ranks. In these cases you will always lose in any drama because they never cared about you. Which is why I think anyone with self respect wouldn't rely on those guilds besides mutual exploitation. You can be with them if you have common goals, just don't rely on them.

Now you may say what about small time guilds that grow and become corrupt? Yea I see that, but this is not something that happens overnight. Indeed there's always a sense of denial or some attachments to people in the guild but this is just the case it's always been -- you gotta look out for yourself.

11 hours ago, Zok.4956 said:

Players who don't want this kind of drama were previously able to choose a server without asking anyone for permission and without being forced to join a (large) guild.

But servers are no less immune to this. Server drama is quite frequent; bandwagons often rise , try to take over a server,  use numbers to bully pug tags, and take its native residents to tiers they don't belong, and causes massive disruptions when the bandwagon breaks.

And here's the thing. You have no control if a bandwagon lands on your server. You can't force them out and they will queue you out of your maps and ruin the server's atmosphere. This is extremely common and has destroyed many communities.

So guess what? Even if you do not participate in the drama, you can't really hide from it in the server system either.

There are certain advantages to being able to gatekeep community destroyers like that.

Like there's  one of the mega guilds in NA-- I'm not going to name them and I don't even hate them, but I consider them the Walmart of WvW.  They come into a community and it seems ok at first that they're providing a service to the community but what they really want to do is exploit it while draining the community of its members and resources before leaving. I mean it's nice that they're growing their own community, but it comes at the expense of the local community. In other words, NIMBY.

Like really, every time this guild moves to a new server, they kill it.

 

11 hours ago, Zok.4956 said:

Players who don't want to constantly play without a (somewhat) fixed community in the future will have to somehow become a member of a (larger) guild and then have to ask someone for permission and then endure the social "guild drama".

Which amounts to giving your current guild leader permissions, who will invite everyone in the guild to the alliance. This isn't exactly very dramatic. Like really, most alliance guilds won't be run at all. It will just be either a former server that got together or a couple of guilds getting together and using the alliance guild as an anchor. It would be too much effort and nobody sane is going to spend that much effort to act as CEO because there is nothing to really gain. Not in this day and age.

Like, you have to stop imagining commanders and guild leader(s) (usually guilds aren't monarchies) as some kind of gods. Commanders aren't kitten if nobody follows them. The only problems with usurpation in this game is if there are things to be stolen, and there is no reason to invest heavily into an alliance guild.

And yes, I do believe at the end of the day, most conflicts are material in nature. People can wax philosophical about fights and pride and kitten, but at the end of the day it comes down to greed and self interest.

Now, to be fair, I do expect about 1/3 to 1/2 of alliances to fail, because they didn't read my posts and did instead try to incorporate an LLC or something. And there will be snake oil salesmen, and scammers. But I'm just going to say this-- I've interacted with these types to know that these pyramid schemes are not subtle at all. They're not that smart and well, anyone can see it coming from a mile away.

Of course I also know that most people that play this game aren't very smart and still have to think twice about what button to press when 10 enemies charge at them.  So yes, there will be problems. But just be smart.**

** Also, yes, you may be part of an alliance that turns out to be full of idiots and it may break apart. Heck, who knows, maybe mine will too. But you should have that contigency plan and grab your friends so you can instant transmission out of this mess and all that will happen is you will need to regroup for next month.

Like really. It's very hard for me to take posts like OP seriously, when I know what their priorities are. That they'd spend more time ranting on a forum rather than acutally being in game and watching people that care about "disappear" when you have an entire month to persuade them otherwise.. Apparently the forum post comes first, so yea, I guess the pretty low priority.

I mean as much crap as I write, I always put my friends above shitposting.

Edited May 28 by ArchonWing.9480

[One more for the road.8950]

People have been playing with links for years but somehow still haven't clocked that they keep meeting the same teammates every few links.

Same thing with WR.

[ArchonWing.9480]

10 hours ago, urd.8306 said:

They can try what they want, but the effect won't be the same.
I have some of those "transfers" on my main server and it made the game worse. They are even complaining that they can't get a full raid, because people prefer not running with a tag and doing their own stuff.
Good luck trying this with the new system.

Yea, if you form a large enough alliance, and gatekeep those types of guilds, the chance is higher you can keep away from them, as well as preventing them from trying to poach as much.

Nothing is 100% guranteed, but at least it allows for some agency.

I predict those types of "transfer" guilds will probably be one of the first victims of alliance failure because they don't usually show much signs of long term planning and usually seek out other guilds/pugs as meatshields. They also probably won't recruit a diverse group of players and that will also cause its own issues. They've usually gotten away by using pug defenders and scouts to do their janitorial work. I expect a lot of sitting in spawn for an hour asking "where are the fights", but nobody will answer like before.

Of course this will be more effective when the actual alliances get implemented.

Edited May 28 by ArchonWing.9480

[T G.7496]

A lot of the catastrophising you're doing, OP, is in your own head.

There are already several, well articulated responses in this thread, and I haven't even read the whole thing.

I was tempted to come at you harder, because your level of hysteria about this isn't helpful. But then I figured you were, understandably, just afraid of the monumental change that is about to happen to your favourite game mode.

I get that, we all do.

But take some time to actually read, and digest, the calm, considered responses some people have taken the time to provide here.

It's the end of servers.

It's a new era for WvW.

But there's a view of all this which should acknowledge that Anet are placing greater agency, into the hands of players, over who we choose to play with, and when. We just have to be prepared to make some effort, individually and collectively.

Good luck.

[Chaba.5410]

52 minutes ago, T G.7496 said:

But there's a view of all this which should acknowledge that Anet are placing greater agency, into the hands of players, over who we choose to play with, and when. We just have to be prepared to make some effort, individually and collectively.

Ah, the cynical side of me believes that it's not that the nay-sayers are afraid, it's that they benefit in some way from the current system - can just pick and choose a server to transfer to without having to do anything else.  Hopefully they realize that with WR, no one still needs to put more effort into that greater player agency.  You still don't have to do anything else.  The whole guild/alliance thing is for players that do engage in making more effort collectively.

Edited May 29 by Chaba.5410

[Forgotten Legend.9281]

Well... I just think that Anet needs to decide if it wants us blobbing up and k-training (like EotM cooperation across servers and teams to allow all three sides to rotate their backcapping to avoid fights and maintain the perma karma train)... or to encourage fights

All the recent changes (say over the last few years) seem to be encouraging the old EotM k-trains and discouraging fights. By removing defense and possibly community with WR, even though the goal is the promote better population balance across servers.

With the planned scoring adjustments next month... I still think rewards for winning skirmishes and matches need to be implemented before the players care about winning the match. When there's no incentive to go up a tier to face known opponents in an expected boring match, it's real easy to tank. There's no choice of : take better rewards or have a fun match. The choice right now is: have a fun match or a boring match.

[Ronin.4501]

On 5/28/2024 at 2:36 AM, ArchonWing.9480 said:

This is true. My alliance guild is the least important guild in my list. It's just to set up the matchmaking.

That being said I have been asked to level up our alliance guild. Apparently I did something heinous in a past life. 😭