Jump to content
  • Sign Up

World Restructuring


Recommended Posts

On 7/3/2021 at 9:57 AM, Zychuu.7294 said:

We need to start thinking what we will be memeing about after alliance drops. What about steam release? Was this announced to be dropped, or it is still 'on hold'? 

 

It's a no brainer...

 

#MyEoDPurchaseComingSoon

 

Looking forward to the next chronicle of Guild Wars 2!

Edited by Diku.2546
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In the July 2 blog we said we'd be back in August with more information on Alliances. It's coming, don't worry. 🙂

We're aiming to have the post out on Friday. A little bit of a weird work week for us with the long Labor Day holiday weekend.   I'll keep you folks updated if anything changes!

ICYMI  - the first World Restructuring beta is slated for Sep 24 - Oct 1.   https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/guild-wars-2-live-fall-and-winter-2021/

4 hours ago, Kylden Ar.3724 said:

Can't dangle the promise with no details and still be taken seriously.

You mean like they've done 3-4 times already in the past? 🤣

 

Anyway, since no one responded to my question a week back I decided to go and double check myself now. The Studio Update news article says details in august. In the announcement stream Grouch also says "beta in summer". Anyone who knows their months knows that summer is june, july and august. September is autumn. This makes 2 weeks left for both information and a beta start or new memes to entertain ourselves with. I guess both we and this thread will soon see.

 

Edited by subversiontwo.7501
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some random Yak facts while we await alliance news/beta.

 

Both Bay and Undercroft (the west keeps on the BLs) are fed by camps to the north and south of them, though Bay is also fed by a third camp in the south center of the map.


For Bay, the yak from the south west camp has a 64 second travel time.  The yak from the north west camp has a 169 second travel time.  The yak from the south center camp has approximately a 213 second travel time.  The total number of yaks entering per 5 minute (300s) period is 4.7 + 1.8 + 1.4 or 7.9 yaks per 5 minute period.  This means that a maximum of 316 supply enters Bay every 5 minutes.


For Undercroft, the south yak has a 133 second travel time while the north yak has a 130s travel time.  The total number of yaks entering per 5 minute period is 2.3 + 2.3 or 4.6 yaks per 5 minute period.  This means that a maximum of 184 supply enters Undercroft every 5 minutes.

 

SWC on ABL delivers more supply to the west keep alone than both SWC and NWC do on DBL.  That yak also travels the shortest path and is easiest to protect.

 

Edited by Sviel.7493
direction mix-up
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, subversiontwo.7501 said:

Snip 8<

 

This makes 2 weeks left for both information and a beta start or new memes to entertain ourselves with. I guess both we and this thread will soon see.

 

 

Hmm...based on your observation...it's coming soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • ArenaNet Staff
13 hours ago, Kylden Ar.3724 said:

I'm looking forward to actual details on Alliances now.

 

Can't dangle the promise with no details and still be taken seriously.

 

ALLIANCES...  soon¿? Communication when!?

 

 

In the July 2 blog we said we'd be back in August with more information on Alliances. It's coming, don't worry. 🙂

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 8
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Josh Davis.7865 said:

In the July 2 blog we said we'd be back in August with more information on Alliances. It's coming, don't worry. 🙂

Thanks for the update at this late hour! And also want to extend gratitude to the entire team working long hours behind the scenes to make it happen, should there be anything ‘we’ the player base can help with in order to lighten the burden (whether it be giving good feedbacks, testing, or to share ideas), please let us know! Thank you! 👍

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's reassuring to see a red post and get an update, but I'm still going to be a little worried.

I think, after 126 pages and several years, it's reasonable for me to have a few trust issues.

Unrelated: If a server on ABL holds SWC and Bay but no other camps feeding into Bay, they can still upgrade the keep from T0 to T3 in as little as ~37 minutes using Packed Yaks and Superspeed.  The yak path is also the shortest in the game and half of it is through the camp itself so the yak is only exposed for ~20 seconds.  If it is being escorted by someone giving it Superspeed, it is impossible to assassinate for a small group.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Sviel.7493 said:

It's reassuring to see a red post and get an update, but I'm still going to be a little worried.

I think, after 126 pages and several years, it's reasonable for me to have a few trust issues.

Unrelated: If a server on ABL holds SWC and Bay but no other camps feeding into Bay, they can still upgrade the keep from T0 to T3 in as little as ~37 minutes using Packed Yaks and Superspeed.  The yak path is also the shortest in the game and half of it is through the camp itself so the yak is only exposed for ~20 seconds.  If it is being escorted by someone giving it Superspeed, it is impossible to assassinate for a small group.

Then you bring a bigger group.

 

One of the most amusing and/or confusing events to witness in WvW is a tagged commander assaulting a keep with 50+, failing to take it due to so much supplies for defenses and yet... he refuse to control the camps. And when he yells on roamers to do their job and those roamers note that 2 people cant exactly cap a camp defended by 15+... then the keep becomes T3 mid siege. And its everyones fault except the commanders, of course.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Then you bring a bigger group.

 

One of the most amusing and/or confusing events to witness in WvW is a tagged commander assaulting a keep with 50+, failing to take it due to so much supplies for defenses and yet... he refuse to control the camps. And when he yells on roamers to do their job and those roamers note that 2 people cant exactly cap a camp defended by 15+... then the keep becomes T3 mid siege. And its everyones fault except the commanders, of course.

It breaks my heart when I call out that SWC has packed yaks and a dozen defenders but the tag runs off to attack an EBG keep or something then is surprised Bay upgraded when they get back.  I mean...T2 in 15 minutes is not even hard.  It's completely busted.

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/17/2021 at 6:49 AM, Josh Davis.7865 said:

In the July 2 blog we said we'd be back in August with more information on Alliances. It's coming, don't worry.

It's been coming for three years....

 

Maybe just maybe this time they will use a PTR and let real players test it before deciding to fix it in stone and repeat the fckup that was desert BL...

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as we know, the current plan is for a live test.  The idea is precisely to iron out the kinks before it's set in stone.

Unrelated: On ABL, the northern towers are fed only by North Camp.  The yaks from North Camp have the longest and second-longest travel paths on any borderland.  For this reason, these towers take far longer to upgrade than any other objective--over twice as long, in fact.

 

The Northeast Tower takes 653.3 minutes to upgrade assuming North Camp never flips and no yaks are killed or slowed by sentries.  That's about 11 hours.  The Northwest Tower takes 732.7 minutes to upgrade under the same circumstances.  That's just over 12 hours.

 

On DBL, both northern towers are fed by North Camp and either Northwest Camp or Northeast Camp.  They still upgrade slower than any other objective on DBL, but are much faster than their ABL counterparts.

The Northeast Tower on DBL takes 286.4 minutes to upgrade, or a little under 5 hours.  The Northwest Tower on DBL takes 279.4 minutes to upgrade, which is also a little under 5 hours.

 

For this reason, as far as the northern towers are concerned, there is a significant PPT advantage to having DBL as your home borderland as well as a much higher chance of actually seeing the towers hit T3 in general.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is now one week left in August.  That means we should be getting information and dates for Alliances within that time.  Or, perhaps, a delay announcement--which would be better than nothing.  We did get some information unofficially, at least.

Unrelated:
Prior to HoT, it took 10,200 supply to upgrade a keep to roughly the equivalent of T3 today.  Yaks delivered 80 supply per run back then so it took 128 yaks to get enough supply to upgrade the keep.  The actual time depended on the run speed of the workers inside and could be shortened by standing in the keep and giving them swiftness.

After HoT and the subsequent upgrade rework, it now takes 140 yaks to upgrade a keep to T3.  This can be shortened by going out into the field and giving Yaks swiftness.

However, SMC is an entirely different story.  It's the only objective fed by 6 camps and thus upgrades starkly faster under the new system rather than the old.

Edited by Sviel.7493
Forum first vomited several copies of the post, then ate the original.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sviel.7493 said:

Unrelated:
Prior to HoT, it took 10,200 supply to upgrade a keep to roughly the equivalent of T3 today.  Yaks delivered 80 supply per run back then so it took 128 yaks to get enough supply to upgrade the keep.  The actual time depended on the run speed of the workers inside and could be shortened by standing in the keep and giving them swiftness.

Honestly, we need that back. Spending supply on upgrades should be part of the war. Do you save the supply for an enemy attack or do use it to upgrade the walls, give yourselves a WP, or add cannons?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Bristingr.5034 said:

Honestly, we need that back. Spending supply on upgrades should be part of the war. Do you save the supply for an enemy attack or do use it to upgrade the walls, give yourselves a WP, or add cannons?

With HoT, supply delivered by yaks was cut in half.  I think this was intended as a compromise between spending supply on upgrades and supply in the keep constantly being at 0--making defense largely impossible.

While I think there's room to improve on the system, I don't want to go back to never having supply to defend instead of mostly never having it because a hungry zerg ported in then left the map.

 

13 hours ago, Josh Davis.7865 said:

ICYMI  - the first World Restructuring beta is slated for Sep 24 - Oct 1.

 

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/guild-wars-2-live-fall-and-winter-2021/

I totally missed it.  I stopped reading news articles because there wasn't anything relevant to me, but I guess I should get back in the habit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We know you’re eager for the gritty details about world restructuring. We’ll be posting a dedicated blog on the feature well in advance of the first beta event, which will include an up-to-date overview of the system and our plans for the betas.

 

Will the feedback for beta be public or be hidden behind a NDA?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/24/2021 at 11:29 AM, Josh Davis.7865 said:

ICYMI  - the first World Restructuring beta is slated for Sep 24 - Oct 1.

 

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/guild-wars-2-live-fall-and-winter-2021/

 

If the HUD + Commander Radial UI/UX upgrades are added, it will help better the team-up experience for players of all levels, hope it's still on the drawing sheet 🤞
 

  • When map population is low: system auto-prompt high rank players to become commanders
  • Radial/Hud similar to Apex or Battlefield for quick in-game commands (for those that don't use actual voice-comm)
  • Ability for commanders to assign "Squad leads" with numbers as sub-tags for a subgroup of say 5 players (allows micro-management + strategies)
  • When a commander leaves (has to eat/sleep), system auto-assigns/prompts a high-rank player or Squad lead to take over as commander
  • Alternative when commander leaves, 'keep' the current squad leader tag numbers (squad can still run tagless) just so the squad won't disappear & map becomes empty
  • "Looking for Group" function needs overhaul + automation (encourage team-ups) depending on map/player numbers/statuses
  • Color coding of subgroups (5-players for example) inside the same 50-man squad, the Asia version of gw2 had 'pink names' in order to differentiate a subgroup from the main group (blue names), maybe that can be enabled/borrowed?
  • GW1 Alliance battles always standardized gear stats + player numbers for a fair match, guessing GW2 can't since PvE gear is for monetization

 

Reference below of a old battlefield game, all the functions honestly are all there:

 

Edited by Woop S.7851
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/26/2021 at 6:25 PM, Swamurabi.7890 said:

We know you’re eager for the gritty details about world restructuring. We’ll be posting a dedicated blog on the feature well in advance of the first beta event, which will include an up-to-date overview of the system and our plans for the betas.

 

Will the feedback for beta be public or be hidden behind a NDA?

An NDA for a closed beta would be absolutely hilarious. 

What's Anet going to do, sue you for saying the population balancing is kitten even with the new matchup system? Totally different from what people keep ranting about all the time.

If it's short period, I am still guessing on a week of open beta, live in WvW with constant reshuffles (every skirmish, every day or something like that) and afterwards we all reset to the worlds we where on previously. Since they did mention only guilds would be a factor in this beta, I suspect they will use them as the base and just randomly match larger guilds together as if they are alliances, then goes down to smaller guilds and solos to equal out worlds.

A longer "beta" (ie all changes continous in live WvW until it's arbitrarily "not beta" anymore) sort of falls on the fact that we have heard literally nothing yet on the actual client functions. It's a prerequisite that's needed weeks or months in advance. They talked about doing server backend stuff on the 31st patch sure, but the alliance system itself (ie guilds joining alliances and the management of them) has been mysteriously absent all this time. 

Edited by Dawdler.8521
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...