World Restructuring

[wavemix.2653]

I'm not sure if someone said this already, but an important suggestion:

Allow guilds to flag themselves as GvG, OpenZerg, Roaming, All around, etc.

WvW is kind of a game mode with subgame modes inside, I think this flags would help the balance match-ups for anet, so you don't get GvG guilds/allys all on same server against a server that has very low number of GvG guilds/allys, as my understanding GvG guilds want to fight each other, not facerroling zergs.

I'm not a veteran wvw, pls no flame :).cheers.

[moonstarmac.4603]

Well, people have been asking for Alliances for a while now. Looks like WvW is about to become closer to a true Guild War battle ground.

Alas, farewell Ehmry Bay. Been with you since Beta 1

[Rampage.7145]

@wavemix.2653 said:I'm not sure if someone said this already, but an important suggestion:

Allow guilds to flag themselves as GvG, OpenZerg, Roaming, All around, etc.

WvW is kind of a game mode with subgame modes inside, I think this flags would help the balance match-ups for anet, so you don't get GvG guilds/allys all on same server against a server that has very low number of GvG guilds/allys, as my understanding GvG guilds want to fight each other, not facerroling zergs.

I'm not a veteran wvw, pls no flame :).cheers.

GvG guilds do enjoy facerolling zergs it is part of the game and the reasson we play for, fighting that massive 50 man pugblob with our 20 man guild and pushing our limits is part of what we actually love doing in WvW during our raid time, if we didint have zergs/blobmanders and other guilds to fight game would be very boring.

[Tiawal.2351]

Use your mind, not just your heart, please people. Loyalty is amazing and even heavenly, and you can be loyal to your team, always. Team means the players you care about, the unhappy players of the whole WvW, thirsting to have great time again. WE ARE your team. Even the "enemies" are YOUR team. Everyone matters, the game dies otherwise. Everyone should have fun, have a chance to win, a chance to fight back, and feel good even if lost... We need each other to make this happen. Your current world NEEDS "enemies", so the game can live on.

Would be fantastic to have just 3 realms, each of them 3 levels: top level, advanced and starter. Or something. But no matter, the current state must go, already died when megaserver killed it. Let the dead be buried, and help the newborn live.

[Skynet.7201]

@"BlazeQ.1095" said:So the NA servers have very few guild that run in certain time zones. For example the "OCX" time zones. What is there to prevent the OCX guilds from creating an alliance that puts the majority of them on a single server eliminating any chance of coverage balance?

I doubt that's going to happen, unless they did it for pure ppt. Otherwise they'd never get any fights.

[PrettyShield.8107]

I have a question about guilds in general relating to making them WvW focused.... Say you made a guild with a name that is fit for a PvE style but you have poured your heart & money into getting it upgraded.... Say you would like to change the name of said guild to make it Pop more for a WvW focused guild could that be done in the future... If a guild wanted to change the name of the guild itself like a player can change the name of a toon? Maybe a silly question but I think that would be a nice option to have.

[Dawdler.8521]

@"Eowin Of Rohan.2619" said:

• In order to retain the main goal (granularity for match making), Alliances can't be too big and imho shouldn't have their size at more than 20-30% of a world's activity. Knowing that they'll probably be composed of the most active wvw players, that's probably less than 10% of target population. In the end, I don't see it going further than 3-4 guilds with ~50 people, unless you somehow ensure that their raid times are different in the first place (but this should be a matchmaker rule, it's hard to enforce that as an alliance rule). 500-1000 players seems huge : if people form alliances that include basically most prime time guilds of current worlds, no granularity will be gained.

I still fail to see the the point of alliances lower than current guild cap. If 2 alliances of 3-5 "normal" guilds each with a total of 500 players go up against 500 players in a single guild that just have the players never repping it, the later definetly have an advantage. Single channel coms and announcements (guild chat) and passive guild missions (more loot woopwoop) not to mention a much bigger community (whats left of it) and pool of players. Why would I wanna be in a much more limiting alliance?

The OP mention no particular boon for being in an alliance otherwise.

[PrettyShield.8107]

@wavemix.2653 said:I'm not sure if someone said this already, but an important suggestion:

Allow guilds to flag themselves as GvG, OpenZerg, Roaming, All around, etc.

WvW is kind of a game mode with subgame modes inside, I think this flags would help the balance match-ups for anet, so you don't get GvG guilds/allys all on same server against a server that has very low number of GvG guilds/allys, as my understanding GvG guilds want to fight each other, not facerroling zergs.

I'm not a veteran wvw, pls no flame :).cheers.

I think that would be cool.... It would also be nice if a tag/ commander could do the same when making a squad if the tag is moused over it has a little note; Running Havoc or Doing Missions. & so on

[Zjuu.5431]

WvW needed a change like this.

[Menaka.5092]

This looks promising, but I have a few concerns.

• Kill/Death ratio directly influences the result of skirmishes, but you don't seem to be considering it at all in the "player score" - I strongly believe you should.
• To create a balanced world population seems like a daunting task. What constitues a good mix for a world population? (more on this below)
• How to create a good alliance: alliances could possibly have the same problem and the players don't have statistics to rely on to have a good picture of what our alliances lack. As the bare minimum you can consider to expose the amount of hours played, the timezone covered and the kdr for Players and Guilds, but there's a lot more that could be useful (see below)
• Small guilds and guild cap for alliances: in my WvW guild with about 40 people in the roster, only a few are still playing. If the guild size is not calculated based on active players I would probably have to kick my friends that are not playing, or I should join another WvW guild. Both those options are bad :(

Balancing for roles

Any player could have a "profile" accounting for how much of these activities they performed. In some cases, maybe the activity of the whole squad could influence the role for each participant?

Note: commanding is tracked separately, so you could have an Assaulter Commander, a Sieger Commander and so on.

Assaulter

Kills players in enemy territories.Hopefully, you already have the metrics to keep track of this!

Sieger

Builds and uses offensive siege. Captures enemy "walled" objectives (towers, keeps, castles).Not sure if ANet can already keep track of this:

• siege building in enemy territory
• siege usage that damages enemy objectives
• if the objectives are captured by the player's faction before the siege is destroyed or the defense timer expires (if the siege is destroyed or the defense time expire it should be considered a failed attempt)

Caretaker

Builds and refreshes siege in allied territories. Escorts dolyaks. Claims and applies upgrades to objectives.

Probably needs a few metrics added for the defensive siege?Could possibly be exploited by trolls.

Defender

Kills players in friendly territories.Again, hopefully you already have the metrics for this.

Roamer

Captures enemy "open" objectives: camps, ruins and shrines. Kills dolyaks.Again, hopefully you already have all the metrics for this.

Additional Metrics

A few more ideas of stuff I would like tracked.

This would apply to Guilds, single Players and even Commanders where it makes sense.

• Was engaged in a fight, but went off combat before any participant died
• Has failed to capture an enemy objective
• How many times has fired siege X (cannon, arrowcart, mortar, etc...)

[Vast Green.2369]

I have never changed server, and wvw is a big reason why I´m still in the game. If everything moves to this random game type you envision, have fun, see ya in a couple years maybe. The people I care about are in dozens of guilds and are not playing for 8 week temporary success hunts.

[Baldrick.8967]

So if it's based on play time and pip decay is still a thing, all those people standing around waiting on pip decay will now count towards your total alliance play time.

I can see this leading to threats of 'log out now or gkick!' 'you're ruining our numbers', etc.

Or have a guild go dormant just before start of new season, so it has 500 slots filled but only 100 count towards the alliance play total. Season starts, 500 become active, steam rolled match up. Or play on alts for 8 weeks then come back to main guild, same thing.

Or 'stop following us you're ruining our stats'.

Elitism will run rampant, especially if they then make a decent prize for winning, and within a few months we'll be back to steam rolled matches and empty borders.

[Swamurabi.7890]

Will the Anet WvW guild switch alliances each week or will they be locked into an alliance for the season?

[dolcolax.1268]

@Rampage.7145 said:

@dolcolax.1268 said:

@Rampage.7145 said:

@"zerorogue.9410" said:Let me just put this Simple

YOU ARE DESTROYING WvW

WvW Has survived on one and one thing alone, community. A feeling that when you go into wvw you see players you have always known. This is essentially cutting off player's arms and legs because you can't figure out how to match up two Athletes. With this system were going from community to . No more rankings, No more competition, No more strategy. Just Generic large scale pvp. We can go play battlefield for that!

Yes alliances will allow SOME of the people you've seen, but they are limited and people will have to be cut out to keep them. This will create toxic and anger within groups as Guild A has too many players to ally with Guild B so Guild B kicks 20 players.

This is Just putting a band-aid on a band-aid. It fixes nothing.

WvW needs dynamic balancing, that can adapt minute by minute.

You can't predict when player's are going to play a game. you can do a good job, But players can also take advantage of this.What if a guild decides to run on a different time?What if One world of player's get's matched up with one world of pro's?

The only thing this will do is make WvW slightly better at the cost of anything unique about it. DO NOT DO THIS. PLEASE!

you are massively wrong here imo, if anything all thise will strenghten the comunity, you will be part of a whole WvW comunity now with 100s of guilds instead of a server comunity, you can still form up alliances with the people you enjoy playing with and still be able to play with a whole lot of new peopel you didint know existed untill now soooooo yeah this argument is wrong in every possible way.

i dont think theres a community if you get swapped servers every 8 weeks. sure you have your "alliances" but i doubt this alliances will fill the entire server.

So, do you think PVE comunity or PvP comunity is not a thing????? those are mega servers and those comunities are far stronger than WvW is or ever was, you play with the people you enjoy playing, end of the story dosnt matter which server they are ¨on¨, you join discords you join guilds you intereact with them in game, server system just alienates people into yet another subgroup. Sure there is some people u wanna play with in your current server but you don't get to play with the other hundreds of people on other servers that u would potentially enjoy playing with.

im just stating my opinion. and for the record i have a pve and wvw guild. my wvw guild still is active compared to my pve guild. for some people it takes time to accept someone to be part of his community. a server rotation of 8 weeks isnt that long to form a bond with other people. to me this implememtation is just like a few have said a meaningless group vs group. this new system was created to introduce a sense of balance. but im sure by now the wvw guilds are already making alliances. leaving out smaller groups. in the end, it will be like a random moba game of randoms vs an organized group. these sure are changes. but are they addressing some of the core issues like ping lag and skill delay

[Menzo.2185]

And the maps? There will be changes in the maps, Apine, Desert, new, since we are all already tired?Will there be new siege weapons? Air combat, Mount Combat?

[Lehtikali.4152]

what a wonderful surprise!

[Rampage.7145]

@"danserafim.7051" said:And the maps? There will be changes in the maps, Apine, Desert, new, since we are all already tired?Will there be new siege weapons? Air combat, Mount Combat?

Please ignore the maps and whatver add ons like mounts or whatver focus on making the game good and balanced active and fun again, then worry about all those new things, if anything 99% of the players do not really care about any of them tbh we just wanna come home from work and have fun playing with our friends, dosnt matter if it is the same 5 year old map over and over as long it is fun. Look at games like counter strike DOTA LOL or whatver same old maps, it is all about the gameplay being fun, sure u can add stuff once you actually accomplish the first.

[GDchiaScrub.3241]

I see this is the only way to stop the longest lasting camaraderie that is Maguuma. Finally a solution to stop the only consistent community in this game mode (with the help of being a toxic one).

RIP Toxic Community.

Hello MagSwagAlliance

[PabbyGaul.9682]

Anet cant win. All these ppl think making wvw = eotm is the answer?

Well..I guess colin was right. If you love wvw then you really love pve. Lets hope the gates and walls getbsome break bars and telegraphed attacks cuz the "balance" isnt really about numbers. 10000 pugs vs 10000 alliance wvwers wont be much of a matchup...wont happen you say? ..... stack those alliances to "win". If history has taught us anything its that humans will always fund a way to unbalance a system in their favor. I think things will be more unbalanced than ever, locked into 8 wks of hell. You thought wvw was dieing now. What new player is going to pug against coordinated groups? Back to pve land for them. The squeky wheels need to stop pretending anet will save them from unfairness.

[Jerry CCH.9816]

@"Gaile Gray.6029" said:A message from McKenna Berdrow:Excuse me " how many WvW Tiers for New Alliance?8 weeks Season so long. 4 is ehough and better

[Heibi.4251]

@Vermillion.4061 said:

@Klipso.8653 said:

@Vermillion.4061 said:

@Klipso.8653 said:Does Anet have plans to add in-game voice communication so that our squads can talk to ourselves and allow commander chat between tags?

This is an important feature that will prevent this change from becoming a new version of EotM

Takes 5 seconds to have a discord link posted in team chat with API verification already being a thing anet doesn't have to add in-game voip.

Discord does not support commander chat, problem remains

Nobody outside of Blackgate uses commander chat anymore and you can do workarounds on discord with multiple accounts.

Um, you are blatantly wrong. Our server uses commander chat all the time. And I'm sure other servers with TS do as well.

[Vael Victus.2654]

I like the sound of this.

I feel like 4 weeks would be better for both "managing" guilds/alliances and for balance.

Ideally the system will assign a new player to a world on which their friends or guild mates play, thereby making it easier than it is at present for people to play with friends in WvW.

&

When World Restructuring happens at the start of a season, as long as you have specified your WvW guild, you will be assigned to the same world as everyone else in your WvW guild, guaranteeing you will be able to play with your guild mates.

My friends are currently on break, so I hope that if they return mid-season, they can choose to be sorted based on our WvW guild. Because it's likely they have 2+ WvW guilds. So, something where they're forbidden from entering WvW until choosing which guild to represent would be ideal.

Finally, rewards. I want something more than a title for placing 1st-2nd-3rd. Bonus skirmish tickets would be nice, and it would be even nicer if you had a kind of global participation that offered extra rewards for people who earned their gold chest each week, or something similar in dedication. Extra rewards only seem fitting now that matchups should be more balanced.

[Drinks.2361]

So there is a pile of people in this thread worrying about "top tier alliances", why do you even think there will be anything like tiers? We'll just get a matchup & that's it, there will be no relationship between the different matchups & the sides will be shuffled before the next match starts.

So many people that have left for other games are excited for this, there are piles of games out there that have slightly different versions of open world PvE & raids but WvW really sets this game apart. Hopefully we'll see enough support to make a real competitive scene out of it.

[Prophet.1584]

This is the single best change that could be made for WvW. thanks Anet!

[Mylerian.9176]

I like this idea. However, I think it might possibly hurt some smaller fight guilds in WvW. For instance, I know of several small guilds (including mine) that can fight and wipe larger groups. And again maybe I read this wrong? I do however very much appreciate you letting us know what you are hoping to do. It seems a great step in the right direction.