World Restructuring Status Update

[Cuks.8241]

1 hour ago, Chaba.5410 said:

It doesn't though.  No one can pick which team they are placed on unless that account has not played in ages.  As soon as they pick and play, that account will be auto-balanced in the next team formation cycle.  So what you're suggesting just won't happen the way it has been happening.  The new system frustrates that behavior.  It reshuffles teams because of these fluctuations.

It's not entirely clear what your thinking is here.  Do you think that a player who splits their playtime between 5 accounts should have their total playtime all credited to only one team where their main account is?  How does that provide any balance?

If he splits his playtime. If he plays the most favorably matched account its basically bandwagoning and the reason we went from servers to WR.

[Chaba.5410]

44 minutes ago, Cuks.8241 said:

If he splits his playtime. If he plays the most favorably matched account its basically bandwagoning and the reason we went from servers to WR.

Where is the mass of players who can all bandwagon to the strongest team using WR?  You are conflating splitting time playing across multiple accounts with everyone hopping to the winning team and at worst attempting to redefine what bandwagoning is.

Edited July 5 by Chaba.5410

[Cuks.8241]

1 hour ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Where is the mass of players who can all bandwagon to the strongest team using WR?  You are conflating splitting time playing across multiple accounts with everyone hopping to the winning team and at worst attempting to redefine what bandwagoning is.

Having multiple options and choosing the most favourable is the definition of bandwagoning and stacking servers/worlds. You're not suppose to bail the losing team for a better one. That's what brought us here. The term stands regardless of the mechanic used.

[Chaba.5410]

14 minutes ago, Cuks.8241 said:

Having multiple options and choosing the most favourable is the definition of bandwagoning and stacking servers/worlds. You're not suppose to bail the losing team for a better one. That's what brought us here. The term stands regardless of the mechanic used.

No one can stack a server/world anymore.  Can't you understand that?  And you can only choose the "most favorable" from among where your alts are, not that which is the most winningest server.  And you can't stay on it either because the entire thing gets reshuffled.  And when it gets reshuffled, you have no guarantees of which team you will be placed on.  You can have all your alts end up on the worst performing teams.

WR doesn't generate the "same problem".

Edited July 5 by Chaba.5410

[Mistwraithe.3106]

3 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Where is the mass of players who can all bandwagon to the strongest team using WR?  You are conflating splitting time playing across multiple accounts with everyone hopping to the winning team and at worst attempting to redefine what bandwagoning is.

Hmmm, I'm guessing you have multiple alt accounts yourself which is why you are trying to defend it.

Get real tho, if a significant amount of the community creates multiple alt accounts so they can pick which team they want to play on then that will produce exactly the same effects as server transfer bandwagoning. There is a bit less control for a player who only has 1 or 2 alts but that's just going to inspire players to have even more alts so they have more control and can choose to always be on the winning team. In some ways it's rather worse as once players get established this way then it's free for them to swap teams (unlike server transfers) and it's virtually impossible for Anet to do anything about it (unlike server transfers where they could mark servers as full or make server transfers more expensive, etc).

If it became prevalent then it would likely be the end of WvW. So, don't bother trying to downplay it and say it's fine.

[globe.7238]

On 7/4/2024 at 1:17 PM, obastable.5231 said:

T5 on NA was/is a temporary solution to ease the inevitable uptick in population during a new feature rollout. It did exactly what it was supposed to do. Once activity on NA dies down so, too, should the number of matches. That's like one of the key features of World Restructuring - to dynamically respond to population & activity booms and busts as needed by automatically adding more matchups and dispersing populations into paired matches. If / when there are spikes the system makes more worlds so there's less likely to be heavily queued matches. Predicably, as the weeks pass, activity has lessened, and the need for that extra tier is lessening. 

And while you may not have queues, other matchups still very much do, and cannot get their groups together on maps. Your experience is not everyone's. We have consistently been unable to get 20-25 players on a map together due to persistent activity from small groups and roamers on our world. We are overpopulated almost every single night since WR launch during NA prime and queued across multiple maps. 

It isn't perfect, I agree, but it's working to some degree and it can be improved to work better. 

You may be on the flip side of it, but that just shows the glaring issues. Theres problems at both ends, and this will not get better. Their track record proves it alone.

On 7/4/2024 at 1:31 PM, One more for the road.8950 said:

First of all, this was the reality for a lot of people during servers. You picked a server when you started your account, having no idea what it was for, and if coming from other games, you might even pick a low or medium one thinking a highly populated one would give you longer loading times in any game content. Meaning, that before WR, a lot of new players would log into completely dead servers, links and content, ask questions and get crickets (if not just flamed). Just imagine a new player logging into the recent MUs with WSR where both the two other sides just stopped logging in for the week.

Second, do you think those players that helped new people on servers before aren't around any more? It's not like they were retired with the server. I have seen plenty of helpful advice and new players. Even helping people how to keep participation up during hours where the other teams are much stronger.

Not once did I ever state the first system was perfect, did I? Linking was loads better than what we have now, it gave you choice to play in what tier you wanted. Oh you had to use gems to change tiers/links?

Who said anything about pugmanders/friendly people quitting? Is reading comprehension not your strong suit or are you just cherry picking nonsense? To sustain any game mode you need an influx of new players, this current system does not benefit new players anymore than the previous system. "New" isn't always better, but myself and many other people feel linking was a better solution to what we've been given.

On 7/4/2024 at 1:36 PM, One more for the road.8950 said:

Oh, and I actually forgot this part.

The only reason I have several accounts is because it was the only way to get content and/or hang with friends without chasing out gems or gold for transfers all the time WHILE WE HAD SERVERS. Good for you if you had a server with just a few deadzones. A lot of people did not have your game experience.

Absolutely it was good for me, but you not transferring and making multiple accounts was YOUR choice. You act like its my or someone else's fault when you very easily could've paid to transfer. So now you all can be in an alliance together..but you couldn't all transfer to a server together? Oh its because you didn't want to spend gold or money..gotcha! Broke boy mentality right there. Using your argument against you, i'm in the same boat you were in, now that it benefits you its not a problem? My my..how the world works! 

[Chaba.5410]

2 hours ago, Mistwraithe.3106 said:

Get real tho, if a significant amount of the community creates multiple alt accounts so they can pick which team they want to play on then that will produce exactly the same effects as server transfer bandwagoning

I agree about the get real part.  Where is this "if" scenario?  Don't you think it hasn't already happened?  Where is the huge impact of this occurring?  Seems like the impact is rather small.

Since the very first WR beta, plenty of players got an alt account so they could continue playing with guilds that were not going to be in the same alliance.  There's also a lot of long time players with alt accounts since before then.  They don't all have them "so they can pick which team they want to play on".  That's your "significant amount" that is playing diffused across multiple teams, not all bandwagoning to the same team.  Maybe the real problem is not enough players have alt accounts like those still playing on MoL and bored out of their minds.

Edited July 6 by Chaba.5410

[Chaba.5410]

2 hours ago, Mistwraithe.3106 said:

Hmmm, I'm guessing you have multiple alt accounts yourself which is why you are trying to defend it.

I need to also add how misplaced ire towards players with alt accounts is.  Cowboy came here to give his opinion about WR balancing and revealed he has 5 accounts and it was suggested he's the problem.  Players with alts want their alts to be placed on balanced teams too.  Alt account are not and never have been the problem with bandwagoning.

Edited July 6 by Chaba.5410

[One more for the road.8950]

45 minutes ago, globe.7238 said:

On 7/4/2024 at 7:31 PM, One more for the road.8950 said:

On 7/4/2024 at 6:48 PM, globe.7238 said:

How does ANET plan to bring in new players to WvW and keep them interested when this alliance feature isn't friendly to them? ie. You have people who just started, are in T5 and theres not a single commander and OM buff on every map. Do you honestly think that player is going to keep trying WvW? There always needs to be a certain number of new players being introduced to fill the spots of players taking breaks, leaving etc.

First of all, this was the reality for a lot of people during servers. You picked a server when you started your account, having no idea what it was for, and if coming from other games, you might even pick a low or medium one thinking a highly populated one would give you longer loading times in any game content. Meaning, that before WR, a lot of new players would log into completely dead servers, links and content, ask questions and get crickets (if not just flamed). Just imagine a new player logging into the recent MUs with WSR where both the two other sides just stopped logging in for the week.

Second, do you think those players that helped new people on servers before aren't around any more? It's not like they were retired with the server. I have seen plenty of helpful advice and new players. Even helping people how to keep participation up during hours where the other teams are much stronger.

Not once did I ever state the first system was perfect, did I? Linking was loads better than what we have now, it gave you choice to play in what tier you wanted. Oh you had to use gems to change tiers/links?

Who said anything about pugmanders/friendly people quitting? Is reading comprehension not your strong suit or are you just cherry picking nonsense? To sustain any game mode you need an influx of new players, this current system does not benefit new players anymore than the previous system. "New" isn't always better, but myself and many other people feel linking was a better solution to what we've been given.

What? What does having to use gems to change links have to do with what meets new people that goes into the game mode? You said the new system was horrible to new players, but it's not any more horrible than what we had. I don't know about who's doing the cherry picking about what here. Or reading comprehension either, considering I didn't say a word about pugmanders. We're talking about new people, that goes into a system, and they have never experienced anything else, and I haven't seen you in any way explain how the new system would be worse for new players than the old one. So, go ahead, do tell. And explain how any negative thing you can come up with didn't happen in the old server linking system.

 

45 minutes ago, globe.7238 said:

On 7/4/2024 at 7:36 PM, One more for the road.8950 said:

On 7/4/2024 at 6:48 PM, globe.7238 said:

• Why am I forced to play on multiple accounts just to get content? Before alliances our server had a few deadzones but they weren't large, I could stay on my main account and enjoy content from logging on to logging off. Now it is the complete opposite, I login for my guilds 2 hour raid 3 times a week then log out due to zero coverage, consistently being OM on each map etc. Roaming is a thing of the past, esp when you run into nothing but "small groups" of 6+ - Being someone who frequently buys gems to support, I can assure you i'm not spending a penny until this system is reverted/better solution put forward.

Oh, and I actually forgot this part.

The only reason I have several accounts is because it was the only way to get content and/or hang with friends without chasing out gems or gold for transfers all the time WHILE WE HAD SERVERS. Good for you if you had a server with just a few deadzones. A lot of people did not have your game experience.

 

Absolutely it was good for me, but you not transferring and making multiple accounts was YOUR choice. You act like its my or someone else's fault when you very easily could've paid to transfer. So now you all can be in an alliance together..but you couldn't all transfer to a server together? Oh its because you didn't want to spend gold or money..gotcha! Broke boy mentality right there. Using your argument against you, i'm in the same boat you were in, now that it benefits you its not a problem? My my..how the world works! 

You were the one who said you were forced to do it, not me. I am not a broke boy, not sure where you got that from. Coming back to cherry picking and reading comprehension clearly you are forced but I choose to.

But yes, since you ask, earlier one of my guilds met several problems in transferring to servers together, while now we can easily stay in a guild and play together. Most of the problems we met was guilds descending upon servers and the bandwagoning that would follow, then the moving on to next server leaving it dead in the water. I might not be a broke boy, but several of my friends gave up and we ended up being spread all over. And since you can't transfer every few days but have to wait a week, I couldn't hop around like a maniac with one account either. Some pretty easy math made it clear that it was much cheaper to get several accounts instead of keeping to pay for my transfers, and sometimes even my friends' transfers. So yes, I have had several accounts so that when I am able to game, I can join different friends to play WvW.

And I never said that things that benefits me is not a problem, again making up stuff I apparently said. But I will tell you that the old system was killing WvW slowly, and it was getting more and more apparent in EU where we had some seriously out of whack MUs in the old system that WR still haven't managed to replicate. And I believe the only way forward is to have dynamic teams and dynamic amount of tiers where people can't transfer back and forth at will, and ruin the matchmaking the same day it's done. There's still things to do, like fixing the algorithm, but it clearly couldn't stay like it was.

 

[Arya Whitefire.8423]

6 hours ago, Mistwraithe.3106 said:

Hmmm, I'm guessing you have multiple alt accounts yourself which is why you are trying to defend it.

Get real tho, if a significant amount of the community creates multiple alt accounts so they can pick which team they want to play on then that will produce exactly the same effects as server transfer bandwagoning. There is a bit less control for a player who only has 1 or 2 alts but that's just going to inspire players to have even more alts so they have more control and can choose to always be on the winning team. In some ways it's rather worse as once players get established this way then it's free for them to swap teams (unlike server transfers) and it's virtually impossible for Anet to do anything about it (unlike server transfers where they could mark servers as full or make server transfers more expensive, etc).

If it became prevalent then it would likely be the end of WvW. So, don't bother trying to downplay it and say it's fine.

I have enough accounts, that I can literally play anywhere I want, any time I want.  But like, it's still feeling pretty dead.  And since there's no incentive to play to win, there's also very little incentive to play on the winning team.

I mostly just to choose play with the people I know and like, both commanders and individuals.  Or to work on whichever account needs a legendary, or similar, atm.  If the enemy team is stacked, and I have an account there, I almost never switch to it, in the moment.

Back when the cloud vs zerg balance wasn't so whack, I'd often switch away from the team with the best blob, to try and stop them.  But that stopped having any noticeable effect between 2017 and 2019, so now-a-days, I usually just log out.

I would guess the only large effect from people with multiple accounts would be people who do it as a guild.

 

Edited July 6 by Arya Whitefire.8423

[joneirikb.7506]

8 hours ago, Cuks.8241 said:

Having multiple options and choosing the most favourable is the definition of bandwagoning and stacking servers/worlds. You're not suppose to bail the losing team for a better one. That's what brought us here. The term stands regardless of the mechanic used.

I'd describe that more as advanced Fair-Weather rather than bandwagon.

I do agree that if entire guilds start doing this with multiple accounts and multiple WR-guilds, and figure out how to game the algorithm doing that, would be a problem. But not a couple of individual players.

[Mouja.8130]

Quote

If you mean that your people are the only people on the map for your side, then you have different problems other than the other side playing the game mode right. 

That is exactly what I mean. we don't even have a group to work together with. All we can do is make sure the camps are only turned but not kept from the others. The other day a group of 5 enemies could even keep a camp for over 20 minutes as they camped there while they also defended our garri from getting it back. 5 people. We had not even enough to fight them evenly.

[Cuks.8241]

12 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Where is the mass of players who can all bandwagon to the strongest team using WR?  

6 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Since the very first WR beta, plenty of players got an alt account so they could continue playing with guilds that were not going to be in the same alliance.  

You're answering your own questions. Different guilds/alliance with their players are distributed over different worlds for a reason. 

The more players do it, the more skewed the match making becomes. The intention is really irrelevant. I'm pretty sure that players that have this option will generally gravitate away from worlds that got shafted for the matchup. Away from servers that would need them most. I mean it's been stated in this forum by users that do it.

[Evenge.4067]

23 minutes ago, Mouja.8130 said:

That is exactly what I mean. we don't even have a group to work together with. All we can do is make sure the camps are only turned but not kept from the others. The other day a group of 5 enemies could even keep a camp for over 20 minutes as they camped there while they also defended our garri from getting it back. 5 people. We had not even enough to fight them evenly.

I find it hard to believe that you had less than 5 people for 4 maps. If you couldn't take Garri back or other things on your map, then leave that frigging map. Go to their map maybe. Let them get bored. You're the same type of person that gets spawn camp but keeps going out and dieing instead of just leaving the map.  Try playing smarter.

[TheGrimm.5624]

6 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

I need to also add how misplaced ire towards players with alt accounts is.  Cowboy came here to give his opinion about WR balancing and revealed he has 5 accounts and it was suggested he's the problem.  Players with alts want their alts to be placed on balanced teams too.  Alt account are not and never have been the problem with bandwagoning.

Cowboy is not the best example, I would suggest to skip that. 2 cents. 

[Mabi black.1824]

15 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

It's not entirely clear what your thinking is here. 

I just highlighted the symptom, I didn't explain anything because I thought it was obvious. But let's go deeper to share this.

In this genre of PvP game mode, you need to have one side that wins and one side that loses. It's impossible to do without it. Having an alternate account is the way the player uses to circumvent the game that the system (ANET) has built for him. It's a clear method to 'not play' when you're on the more complicated side. Everything else like ''I'm looking for content'' is just talk. The truth is that you go online, you see your team struggling, losing, outnumbered, no tags, so you switch to an alternate account for the whole week. So you'll always be on the right side. the winning one. This should not be allowed, because with a knock-on effect, it discriminates the game against other players as well. You're just breaking the game even more. 

Then there are those who purposely organize themselves to break games. I'll give you an example by taking the numbers to the limit just to understand better. Let's say my guild of 500 players has organized itself with a second WVW guild of the same 500 players on an alternate account. or rather 5 other WVW guilds on 5 alternative accounts. So when WR works we can choose between 5 different games. check the one we like the most. Maybe the one that distributed the guilds/alliances that we like the most. And we play all week where we choose, and of course it's going to be a great week on the right side. the winning one. With the result (once again) of breaking even more the matches that Anet proposed. 

and when we do this. We're not just overloading our chosen team with 500 players, who until last month were ghosts, so the mechanics didn't even consider them. But we're also hollowing out another side of 500 players, who have been playing regularly for 1 month, and suddenly disappear. So, that poor pug that Anet has chosen to use as a 'filler'', who comes in a couple of nights a week, or the new player who comes to WVW just by chance, will find himself in a heavily outnumbered game. few players no tags. Fantastic experience, surely you will be stimulated to spend more hours in this game mode.

[Mabi black.1824]

8 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Cowboy came here to give his opinion about WR balancing and revealed he has 5 accounts and it was suggested he's the problem. 

He's not the problem. It was only mentioned to make us understand how ''normal'' it is today to have 5 accounts. when we often read on this forum as if no one has alternative accounts. How he then chooses to exploit his 5 accounts is his personal matter.

Edited July 6 by Mabi black.1824

[One more for the road.8950]

When it comes to bandwagoning, it seems some forgets that it doesn't involve just a guild. Bandwagoning in the old server link system meant one of two things happening: 

-  Guilds joining a new server, often because their old one got too stacked or full of people following them around, just to have other guilds and random people transferring to their new server. This usually meant that the old server lost most of the population, either because guilds and people followed the first guild or went other places now that the server wasn't stacked any more. 

- There was hosts too full or too expensive to let in a full guild so guilds and random people would transfer to the link to stack and play with them, meaning we had link servers that would boom, then get put as a host in the next link cycle, just to have everyone transfer off the same or following days to follow the original host. Leaving a now dead server as a host to a weak link, causing more people to transfer off both as it would be 8 weeks of pain. 

None of these two can be replicated in WR by some people having alts.

[Arheundel.6451]

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

When it comes to bandwagoning, it seems some forgets that it doesn't involve just a guild. Bandwagoning in the old server link system meant one of two things happening: 

-  Guilds joining a new server, often because their old one got too stacked or full of people following them around, just to have other guilds and random people transferring to their new server. This usually meant that the old server lost most of the population, either because guilds and people followed the first guild or went other places now that the server wasn't stacked any more. 

- There was hosts too full or too expensive to let in a full guild so guilds and random people would transfer to the link to stack and play with them, meaning we had link servers that would boom, then get put as a host in the next link cycle, just to have everyone transfer off the same or following days to follow the original host. Leaving a now dead server as a host to a weak link, causing more people to transfer off both as it would be 8 weeks of pain. 

None of these two can be replicated in WR by some people having alts.

How this WR is any better? You still have stacked worlds vs the ppters who can't fight for kitten....players still leave hopeless matches and never come back. I bet "organized" worlds are enjoying farming ppters who have the skill level of a badly programmed bot but there is a limit even to their "don't care" attitude and they will keep leaving till you on "organized" worlds will have nothing to do but capping empty towers or chase with 20+ people, that poor fella who just wanted to cap a camp for the daily.

I look forward to the imminent day where all the apologetic BS will come heavily crushing down so....celebrate now farming that bunch of ppters...eventually they will quit, their number is steadily decreasing every week, ANET and the lot must have noticed already....

[One more for the road.8950]

5 minutes ago, Arheundel.6451 said:

How this WR is any better? You still have stacked worlds vs the ppters who can't fight for kitten....players still leave hopeless matches and never come back. I bet "organized" worlds are enjoying farming ppters who have the skill level of a badly programmed bot but there is a limit even to their "don't care" attitude and they will keep leaving till you on "organized" worlds will have nothing to do but capping empty towers or chase with 20+ people, that poor fella who just wanted to cap a camp for the daily.

I look forward to the imminent day where all the apologetic BS will come heavily crushing down so....celebrate now farming that bunch of ppters...eventually they will quit, their number is steadily decreasing every week, ANET and the lot must have noticed already....

I am not sure what you are reading in the words I posted or replying to, random assumptions aside, I just explained what bandwagoning has been in the old system and how it can't be replicated in the new. 

Edited July 6 by One more for the road.8950

[Mabi black.1824]

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

I am not sure what you ate reading in the words I posted or replying to, random assumptions aside, I just explained what bandwagoning has been in the old system and how it can't be replicated in the new. 

And I've just shown you how in a ''different'' way you can achieve basically the same thing.

[One more for the road.8950]

Just now, Mabi black.1824 said:

And I've just shown you how in a ''different'' way you can achieve basically the same thing.

No, you haven't. 

[Cyninja.2954]

On 7/4/2024 at 6:44 PM, C Cspace Cowboy.5903 said:

Reading comprehension not a strong I'm guessing?

It's ok I'll repeat it.

 

I have 3 accounts all in t1 on opposing sides.

I love this so I had to highlight it:

You are literally a player complaining about content who actively undermines the WR system. Yes, I know it's common to have alt accounts to go to where there is content in WvW and there was/is hope that the WR system made this more difficult to achieve, aka reduce the effectiveness of alt accounts and create pressure from guilds to demand players stick to their main account.

It is a great example of players directly undermining a system, then in the same moment coming back and complaining about said system. Your self-serving behavior is part of the problem, no matter how justified it might be for personal enjoyment.

Now does that absolve the issues with the WR system? Absolutely not, but it does shed a nice light on how self centered some players are in regards to THEIR enjoyment (which is fine, everyone is out for themselves mostly) while pretending it's about the game mode as a whole.

The WR system needs some heavy tweaking (and while it is nice that CS moves players and entire guilds around freely atm, it does undermine the distribution and shard creation) mostly in regards to:

- adjust not only for play hours but also for type of activity (and this would be far more difficult to achieve, but could be tracked via ppt, k/d, etc stats)

- Stacking multiple large fight guilds on 1 shard or few shards is counter productive

- placing such an active shard in T6 for it to ruin every single tier while moving up is similar to the over-stacked servers from the past

- time zone coverage would be nice to also get implemented

Edited July 6 by Cyninja.2954

[Cuks.8241]

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

None of these two can be replicated in WR by some people having alts.

Ive been in a guild that moved servers alot. We were spending lots of gems on transfers. I quit at some point because it just felt silly, they were never happy with server.

What Im trying to say, having alt accounts, multiple guilds and playing on the favorable world for the matchup would be easier and probably cheaper in the long run.

[One more for the road.8950]

3 minutes ago, Cuks.8241 said:

Ive been in a guild that moved servers alot. We were spending lots of gems on transfers. I quit at some point because it just felt silly, they were never happy with server.

What Im trying to say, having alt accounts, multiple guilds and playing on the favorable world for the matchup would be easier and probably cheaper in the long run.

But with WR, even if a guild did that, you wouldn't have the entire reaction chain happening that did before, there is no way for that to happen. Not to mention that  the different guilds might even end up on the same team. Talked to someone that has three accounts on the same team the other day.