World Restructuring is Great

[Waffler.1257]

World restructuring is probably the best change Anet has made to WvW in it’s entire history. I get to play with all the people I know and like permanently just by being in a guild with them. No longer do I have to pay $25 just to switch to a server to be able to play with my friends, or even worse be permanently prevented from playing with them because the server they are on is full. No longer do I have to endure randomly being paired with a garbage server and having 2 months of unplayable match-ups due to server re-links. 500 people is more than enough to queue multiple maps so as long as you join a guild with your WvW buddies you can play entirely with people you know every night.

 

I will say that almost all the negative feedback I’ve read on the forums is related to people either not knowing about world restructuring, or not understanding how it works. To help with this Anet should probably create some sort of in-game interface to better explain how players are teamed up in WvW, and maybe even create an easy way for WvW guilds to advertise themselves so that players can more easily find and join one. People complaining about not having enough time to choose a guild when we’ve known about this change for years, or thinking that they would automatically be assigned to a steamroll server without either creating or joining an organized WvW guild doesn’t mean the new system is bad.

 

Ignore the haters and keep up the good work Anet!

[Malak.7108]

4 hours ago, Waffler.1257 said:

World restructuring is probably the best change Anet has made to WvW in it’s entire history. I get to play with all the people I know and like permanently just by being in a guild with them. No longer do I have to pay $25 just to switch to a server to be able to play with my friends, or even worse be permanently prevented from playing with them because the server they are on is full. No longer do I have to endure randomly being paired with a garbage server and having 2 months of unplayable match-ups due to server re-links. 500 people is more than enough to queue multiple maps so as long as you join a guild with your WvW buddies you can play entirely with people you know every night.

 

  Not everyone wants to play in a guild, and many of us feel real loyalty to our server, its our homeland.

There are countless hard working players, often solo, who keep their homelands going - roaming, scouting, running yaks, repairing structures, building siege - often with no participation. These are the ones I'll miss - in game we see their names and have fun with them - but as WvW has moved on they will simply appear as filler to make up the numbers.

I'm lucky to have been on AR for many years, where we had both good solo and roamers, small guilds, plus a great friendly AR guild. Of course our AR guild still remains. However, with the servers replaced by Mega 'Corporations', where is loyalty ?  Our player base is now constantly changing - why should solo and small guilds still run yaks. Anyhow its all beyond me now - WvW is  becoming too much like real life 😞.  

 

4 hours ago, Waffler.1257 said:

Ignore the haters and keep up the good work Anet!

We shouldn't have any haters of Anet - GW2 is an incredible game, and WvW is just a small part of it. Remember we have Tyria and all the expansions. Tyria is huge and and truly wonderful experience.

For many of us these past few years in WvW have been a slow moving train-wreck culminating in these server shutdowns. However, none of us should feel bitter about it, as it takes large number of dedicated people to make it all work. Personally, I'm taking a break from GW2, and hope to return when things settle down. I'm already missing my fellow guildies and others from AR. Hopefully WvW will come out of this better than before.

[Atoclone.4810]

Fully agreed. Great fun playing with my guild. Great content. Some nice captures, some fantastic defensive play (sorry my build is from meta battle, that's our keep stay out) and some fun fights. 

Worth reminding folks of just how many people play wvw on both sides of the pond and just how small a percentage of that number are filling the forums with doom and gloom

[Anjo.3170]

55 minutes ago, Atoclone.4810 said:

 

Worth reminding folks of just how many people play wvw on both sides of the pond and just how small a percentage of that number are filling the forums with doom and gloom

Worth reminding that the people who are enjoying it are the ones on a dominant shard.  The ones who are getting steam rolled have every right to express their frustration, or as you put it, doom and gloom. 

[DivineDreaming.7206]

Can't make this up, game called guild wars 2 and people crying they have to have social skills and organize with a guild in wvw....didn't you people complain for 12 years that there was no GVG or guild focused content???

People just cry about every little thing when it comes to wvw..........G U I L D WARS NOT SOLO WARS. the reconstruction is great, I was tired of being tied to a server with people that ran awful tags, now we can actually create alliances and play with people we synergize with.....G U I L D WARS imagine

[XenesisII.1540]

WvWvW - three sides to every story.

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

13 hours ago, Waffler.1257 said:

World restructuring is probably the best change Anet has made to WvW in it’s entire history

Agreed.

Anyone complaining about this system is only complaining because they aren't understanding how a guild rating system works. It's no different than if a pvp ranked season ran its very first season and everyone started at 0 MMR.

Upon the first reset, the ratings will take effect after this first skirmish, and this system is going to be kick***.

The boons of this system are already apparent:

1. Easily play with whatever group you want.
2. You can actually form guilds for wvw again, no "server is full" garbage or insistent reasons for players to constantly swap servers.
3. This one change makes the game's title actually relevant for the first time since release. This new system actually will be "The Guild Wars".

This is exactly what the game needed and people need to chill out.

[Zok.4956]

1 hour ago, Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

Easily play with whatever group you want.

Not for everyone at the same time. I can either play WvW with my guild mates from my main guild (set this guild as my WvW guild) or I can play with players from my WvW-Community/Alliance guild (set this guild as my WvW guild). Because WvW community/alliance guild is close to 500 players and accepts only WvW regulars because of this limit (and my main guild has not a lot of WvW regulars). Not complaining, just an example.

1 hour ago, Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

You can actually form guilds for wvw again, no "server is full" garbage or insistent reasons for players to constantly swap servers.

Agreed. Most server hoppers / bandwagoners don't have to hop anymore. Well, I personally never had the need to hop between servers.

1 hour ago, Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

This one change makes the game's title actually relevant for the first time since release. This new system actually will be "The Guild Wars".

The mode is called WvW. Maybe it should be renamed to GvG?

1 hour ago, Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

Anyone complaining about this system is only complaining because they aren't understanding how a guild rating system works.

Or, maybe:  You don't understand that there are other players who don't share your point of view for good reasons.

BTW: Did Anet ever say that a "guild rating system" has now been introduced in WvW with WR, or is that an invention of yours?

 

Edited June 17 by Zok.4956

[Burial.1958]

6 hours ago, DivineDreaming.7206 said:

Can't make this up, game called guild wars 2 and people crying they have to have social skills and organize with a guild in wvw....didn't you people complain for 12 years that there was no GVG or guild focused content???

People just cry about every little thing when it comes to wvw..........G U I L D WARS NOT SOLO WARS. the reconstruction is great, I was tired of being tied to a server with people that ran awful tags, now we can actually create alliances and play with people we synergize with.....G U I L D WARS imagine

The Name is about the Lore and not actually about a Guild vs Guild Gameplay.

 

1 hour ago, Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

Agreed.

Anyone complaining about this system is only complaining because they aren't understanding how a guild rating system works. It's no different than if a pvp ranked season ran its very first season and everyone started at 0 MMR.

Upon the first reset, the ratings will take effect after this first skirmish, and this system is going to be kick***.

The boons of this system are already apparent:

1. Easily play with whatever group you want.
2. You can actually form guilds for wvw again, no "server is full" garbage or insistent reasons for players to constantly swap servers.
3. This one change makes the game's title actually relevant for the first time since release. This new system actually will be "The Guild Wars".

This is exactly what the game needed and people need to chill out.

Still there are flaws. EU 6 has a big population imbalance. The system also do not recognize which Guilds are Roamers and which are Zergers. So that leads and ends up with teams which are overstacked with Zerg Guilds and others which do have like trillions of roamers. Also my Team is much likely a graveyard during daytime. There is simply no soul on the maps beside some PUG's which do the dailies.

 

 

 

Edited June 17 by Burial.1958

[senftube.6081]

9 minutes ago, Burial.1958 said:

The Name is about the Lore and not actually about a Guild vs Guild Gameplay.

 

Still there are flaws. EU 6 has a big population imbalance. The system also do not recognize which Guilds are Roamers and which are Zergers. So that leads and ends up with teams which are overstacked with Zerg Guilds and others which do have like trillions of roamers. Also my Team is much likely a graveyard during daytime. There is simply no soul on the maps beside some PUG's which do the dailies.

 

 

 

>That is indeed a big problem and why the real alliance system should still come. WR will never solve that because some Alliances (Guilds) are only a pool and the system will never see what type of guilds are in that pool.

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

1 hour ago, Zok.4956 said:

BTW: Did Anet ever say that a "guild rating system" has now been introduced in WvW with WR, or is that an invention of yours?

Here you go bud->Alliances - Guild Wars 2 Wiki (GW2W) - World Restructuring - Guild Wars 2 Wiki (GW2W)

Allow me to list some things to pay attention to:

1. Alliances are the second phase of World Restructuring, where World vs World uses Player guilds for matchmaking instead of servers.
2.  all allied Guilds would be considered as a single unit for the purposes of matchmaking
3. The system then creates new worlds (or WvW teams) by matching people in the same Region (NA or EU) with similar predicted participation, whilst keeping players with the same nominated Guild together.

The participation rates come from the players individually. However, due to the nature of how this is all working, when you select a guild to be your wvw guild, the guild as an entity picks up your participation rate and adds it into the pool of all the other player's participation rates, for the purpose of how to match you and where. This is literally a guild rating system. That's the whole purpose of it my guy.

If you chose NOT to select a guild as your wvw guild, it will take your own individual participation rate and place you as a yolo somewhere wherever it thinks you belong. But if you do nominate a guild as your wvw guild, it considers ALL the people's participation rates who are in your guild, as one entity, and places you ALL together wherever it feels you should be.

It is definitely designed for a guild rating system. It's just that the rating is participation rating, not necessarily "how good you are" rating.

Edited June 17 by Trevor Boyer.6524

[TheGrimm.5624]

16 hours ago, Waffler.1257 said:

World restructuring is probably the best change Anet has made to WvW in it’s entire history. I get to play with all the people I know and like permanently just by being in a guild with them. No longer do I have to pay $25 just to switch to a server to be able to play with my friends, or even worse be permanently prevented from playing with them because the server they are on is full. No longer do I have to endure randomly being paired with a garbage server and having 2 months of unplayable match-ups due to server re-links. 500 people is more than enough to queue multiple maps so as long as you join a guild with your WvW buddies you can play entirely with people you know every night.

I will say that almost all the negative feedback I’ve read on the forums is related to people either not knowing about world restructuring, or not understanding how it works. To help with this Anet should probably create some sort of in-game interface to better explain how players are teamed up in WvW, and maybe even create an easy way for WvW guilds to advertise themselves so that players can more easily find and join one. People complaining about not having enough time to choose a guild when we’ve known about this change for years, or thinking that they would automatically be assigned to a steamroll server without either creating or joining an organized WvW guild doesn’t mean the new system is bad.

Ignore the haters and keep up the good work Anet!

 

Glad you are enjoying it. You might want to stick to the parts you like and be less subjective of other posters unless you really want to join Forum Wars 2. Good hunting.

[Zok.4956]

1 hour ago, Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

The participation rates come from the players individually. However, due to the nature of how this is all working, when you select a guild to be your wvw guild, the guild as an entity picks up your participation rate and adds it into the pool of all the other player's participation rates, for the purpose of how to match you and where. This is literally a guild rating system.

Thanks for your response. So calling this a "guild rating system" is your invention/opinion, not a statement from Anet.

And no, this is not a real “guild rating system”. There's still a lot missing for that. Also, it's not a guild that's rated (including all the players in the guild), but only a group of players (a subset of members of that guild) who have selected a certain guild as an "Alliance/WvW guild" and who are then later placed on the same team/server.

 

1 hour ago, Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

If you chose NOT to select a guild as your wvw guild, it will take your own individual participation rate and place you as a yolo somewhere wherever it thinks you belong.

That's not how the system actually works at the moment. If an account has never selected a WvW guild, the account will not be placed on a server/team but can freely choose any WvW server/team once. That's exactly what I did today with two alt accounts that had not yet participated in any WvW beta and had not yet selected a WvW guild. 

[jul.7602]

1 hour ago, Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

Here you go bud->Alliances - Guild Wars 2 Wiki (GW2W) - World Restructuring - Guild Wars 2 Wiki (GW2W)

Allow me to list some things to pay attention to:

1. Alliances are the second phase of World Restructuring, where World vs World uses Player guilds for matchmaking instead of servers.
2.  all allied Guilds would be considered as a single unit for the purposes of matchmaking
3. The system then creates new worlds (or WvW teams) by matching people in the same Region (NA or EU) with similar predicted participation, whilst keeping players with the same nominated Guild together.

The participation rates come from the players individually. However, due to the nature of how this is all working, when you select a guild to be your wvw guild, the guild as an entity picks up your participation rate and adds it into the pool of all the other player's participation rates, for the purpose of how to match you and where. This is literally a guild rating system. That's the whole purpose of it my guy.

If you chose NOT to select a guild as your wvw guild, it will take your own individual participation rate and place you as a yolo somewhere wherever it thinks you belong. But if you do nominate a guild as your wvw guild, it considers ALL the people's participation rates who are in your guild, as one entity, and places you ALL together wherever it feels you should be.

It is definitely designed for a guild rating system. It's just that the rating is participation rating, not necessarily "how good you are" rating.

This is a grievously flawed way of making teams. A sum of the parts=whole doesn't apply to wvw. 25 skilled players, that organized under 1 purpose bring vastly more combat power than 25 skilled players randomly lobbed together. Further, not all participation is equal, because guilds have commanders which enhance the participation and productivity of everyone else. 

[Asuran.5469]

1 hour ago, Zok.4956 said:

Thanks for your response. So calling this a "guild rating system" is your invention/opinion, not a statement from Anet.

it is obvious and most others noticed except you

1 hour ago, Zok.4956 said:

And no, this is not a real “guild rating system”. There's still a lot missing for that. Also, it's not a guild that's rated (including all the players in the guild), but only a group of players (a subset of members of that guild) who have selected a certain guild as an "Alliance/WvW guild" and who are then later placed on the same team/server.

sounded like you said it wasn't a guild rank system and then said it was a guild rank system lol

1 hour ago, Zok.4956 said:

That's not how the system actually works at the moment. If an account has never selected a WvW guild, the account will not be placed on a server/team but can freely choose any WvW server/team once. That's exactly what I did today with two alt accounts that had not yet participated in any WvW beta and had not yet selected a WvW guild. 

that because those accounts have 0 history for match maker to read

after first match you do it makes history and uses it to place you

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

1 hour ago, Zok.4956 said:

Thanks for your response. So calling this a "guild rating system" is your invention/opinion, not a statement from Anet.

Ok so when you look in this link: Alliances - Guild Wars 2 Wiki (GW2W) 

Read the opening setence: "Alliances are the second phase of World Restructuring, where World vs World uses Player guilds for matchmaking instead of servers." 

Edited June 17 by Trevor Boyer.6524

[Teknomancer.4895]

3 hours ago, Burial.1958 said:

The system also do not recognize which Guilds are Roamers and which are Zergers. So that leads and ends up with teams which are overstacked with Zerg Guilds and others which do have like trillions of roamers.

But how would that work? My guess is that as far as the matching code is concerned, a guild is a guild is a guild. How would it be able to determine what the players in a given guild are using it for, which could well change depending on which members are logged in at any given time? A guild's zerger population might mostly play during time A, where most of its roamers might instead be active at time B. How would it then be able to adjust matchups on the fly to make sure it's properly balanced (and whose definition of balance would be relevant)? I doubt this is something that's even possible.

[Junkpile.7439]

I don't know. Seems kind of dead to me. Wasn't idea that blobbers make 500 man guilds? Seems to me that couple 40 man bottom tier guilds dominate matchups. 🤦‍♂️

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

22 minutes ago, Teknomancer.4895 said:

But how would that work? My guess is that as far as the matching code is concerned, a guild is a guild is a guild. How would it be able to determine what the players in a given guild are using it for, which could well change depending on which members are logged in at any given time? A guild's zerger population might mostly play during time A, where most of its roamers might instead be active at time B. How would it then be able to adjust matchups on the fly to make sure it's properly balanced (and whose definition of balance would be relevant)? I doubt this is something that's even possible.

Three things I noticed when trying to figure out what Arenanet is doing with this system, which are in these two links:

World Restructuring - Guild Wars 2 Wiki (GW2W) - Alliances - Guild Wars 2 Wiki (GW2W)

Right here:

1. "The system then creates new worlds (or WvW teams) by matching people in the same Region (NA or EU) with similar predicted participation"
2. "Correctly generating teams of comparable player sizes and activity"
3. "Checking that matches are close, by watching Victory Point disparity"

To me, it sounds like this system is looking at both participation rates and victory points scored.

So since everyone who selects a guild plays with that guild, the guild becomes the old server system. I don't think the match maker is doing ANYTHING DIFFERENTLY in terms of which servers get placed against which servers. It's just that now it's which guilds get placed against which guilds.

In other words, it would seem that the guild alliance we select is our new server, and it will be tallying the score for our guilds for match making, in the same exact way it would have tallied a server for match making.

Pretty sure that's what's going on, that's definitely what it looks like, but hey! I could be wrong.

[Teknomancer.4895]

17 minutes ago, Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

1. "The system then creates new worlds (or WvW teams) by matching people in the same Region (NA or EU) with similar predicted participation"
2. "Correctly generating teams of comparable player sizes and activity"
3. "Checking that matches are close, by watching Victory Point disparity"

To me, it sounds like this system is looking at both participation rates and victory points scored.

OK but on the original point I was responding to, I'm still not convinced that those 3 indicate their algorithms are going to know the difference between a zerg guild and a roaming one. "Predicted participation" presumably refers to the tiers and pips distribution; if it refers to something else that would be confusing. The "player sizes and activity" is almost certainly just a raw numbers thing, checking how many people are in the game mode actively earning "participation." IDK if "victory point disparity" or any of the rest of it would even factor into a matching algorithm knowing whether a given guild on a team is for zerging or roaming.

It's probably more about making the numbers add up reasonably well without caring too much whether they're Arabic or Roman numerals.

[Sowing Season.1723]

I hate it. I miss my server and seeing familiar names. 

[Anjo.3170]

2 hours ago, Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

Ok so when you look in this link: Alliances - Guild Wars 2 Wiki (GW2W) 

Read the opening setence: "Alliances are the second phase of World Restructuring, where World vs World uses Player guilds for matchmaking instead of servers." 

You should read a little further down where it says:

"There was a beta for Alliances planned for early to mid-Summer 2023 however it did not happen as part of the June 6, 2023 World Restructuring beta test .

In September 2023, ArenaNet announced that Alliances were deprioritised, wanting to release the main World Restructuring changes first In December 2023, an interview with ArenaNet's Game Director revealed that they're looking at solutions for allowing "super guilds" that don't require the investment that Alliances would.^"

 

^"As we started digging into Alliances implementation, it became increasingly clear to us that we were on the path to building a system that would largely be duplicative of Guilds and the functionality that they offer. Players can already create alliance-like guilds that contain up to 500 players. Now, the main downside of this pivot is that not every player has a free guild slot they’re willing to use to join a new ‘super guild’. We’re actively looking into solutions for this that don’t require the steep development investment that alliances would. We should have more news to share on that front early next year."

 

Alliances is live and in game.  Its your 6th Guild slot.

 

 

[Mistwraithe.3106]

It's too early to say how well the system is going to work. I am surprised they are keeping the current alliances for 6 weeks tho, taking the opportunity to have a faster 2 week iteration to start with would seem an ideal way to improve their matching system quickly before people get upset about any issues from the first alliances.

However, personally, it's worse so far.

I read a post from someone else who said that for those on crap servers this new system is going to be an improvement, but for those who were already on good servers it's going to be worse.

I was already on a good server. There were players I knew, a good number of open tag commanders, a few different guilds I could run zergs with and there was usually a decent number of players in the evening when I play (I'm on NA server but not in US timezones). None of this has been true of the new alliance. I picked one of the PvX guilds I play WvW with so I see some of them online at times but they only run a commander twice a week (unfortunately days I'm usually not available). I have only seen a few other players I know. There have been tags on EBG fairly often but they are often not open (tho several have accepted my attempt to join) and I have yet to see an organised zerg (ie more than 15 players who actually stay on tag). Last night when I logged on at my normal time and couldn't find anyone on any of the BLs I tried asking a couple of times whether there were any tags outside of EBG and what was going on in general. I didn't get any replies, in fact there were no other comments on team chat for the next 30 minutes other than a short discussion (4 lines) about how someone had pulled all the tactics in our HBL Garri.

So yeah, pretty dire. I know people throw their toys out of the cot and threaten to leave all the time, but realistically unless things somehow improve (maybe there's a perfect guild in my alliance which runs weeknights at my time that I just haven't seen yet) I don't see myself playing much WvW over the next 5.5 weeks until the next alliance relink.

It's just the first alliance relink. Hopefully things will improve. Just a shame they are making us wait 6 weeks with this sad (for me) link.

[Stone.6751]

I like the idea of the new system and can see the benefits. Currently, the huge imbalance in the matchups is overshadowing any benefit. It may take weeks for the servers to sort themselves out and a lot of player perceptions about the new system will already be formed before we have balance.

I don't know how Anet plans to ensure servers are paired fairly after each realignment. If we have to go through weeks of trying to determine which server should be paired against which server, were going to have so much imbalance that I do worry people will stop playing WvW.

This is the first week I can remember when my WvW guild gave up trying to find decent WvW content, where we aren't over run constantly by squads 2-3x our size and went to do PvE content.

[Dinas Dragonbane.2978]

I am lucky to be in one of the matches that is relatively competitive (t2 na), but looking at most other matchups there were only 2 others both similarly close in terms of vp and kills and both of those are eu. I need to look again to see if things are doing better or worse in all matches, and time is needed for tiers to smooth out. I do worry a bit at each reshuffle though, as if anybody recalls when links first began it looked good on paper for anet to make triple linked servers and some of those somehow came out as monstrous beasts compared to who they were supposed to be similar to.