Jump to content
  • Sign Up

World Restructuring


Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...
  • 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/

Let's face it, they'd be better off resurrecting EotM. As the value of worlds was decimated, so were the weekly matches. The players that cared and played to win were lost for good. The only players left just want to log in, smash stuff, and log out, without any other concern. Alliances is just going to be a continued design failure because the people playing don't care about winning the week anymore. No matter if the teams are labeled Worlds, Guilds, Numbers, or Colors, a weekly match is the core issue. Short matches like EotM is likely to be the better design for today's players.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So WoW destroyed servers and everyone hates it.and ArenaNet told them self ..."let's do the same mistake!"???

by destroying the servers you are destroying individuality of players.

also competing for you server means much more than compete for some... blob of people, so much less players will play WvWvW. in other words, this is the worst idea that you could have.

if this goes life, i quit gw2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"MartinTT.4123" said:So WoW destroyed servers and everyone hates it.and ArenaNet told them self ..."let's do the same mistake!"???

by destroying the servers you are destroying individuality of players.

also competing for you server means much more than compete for some... blob of people, so much less players will play WvWvW. in other words, this is the worst idea that you could have.

if this goes life, i quit gw2.


At least you can say...

"Told you so"

I agree with you...we've thrown away the one thing that made this game mode endearing & unique.

But then again...we can say....

"Told you so"

Those that argue that server identity doesn't exist....we warned you that Server Linking would continue to destroy server identity (heart & soul of WvW) that is supposedly "non-existant". Changing the game mode mechanics to satisfy veteran players demand for big blob fights was a wrong decision. We continue to dump our immature small fry players from guest servers into the host servers big tank where they're "toxicly" challenged to survive by the veteran sharks...so it nice to say...

"Told you so"

When Alliance Linking kicks in...just saying we can not depend on transient Guilds within an Alliance to provide a stable base for the WvW game mode to build a strong & self-sustaining Long Term community without the toxic culture that is made possible when players are involved with who stays & goes...so it's nice to say once again...

"Told you so"

There's a better alternative...imho.

Yours truly,Diku

p.s.See some of my past posts...please vote Helpful or Thumbs up if you agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"MartinTT.4123" said:So WoW destroyed servers and everyone hates it.and ArenaNet told them self ..."let's do the same mistake!"???

by destroying the servers you are destroying individuality of players.

also competing for you server means much more than compete for some... blob of people, so much less players will play WvWvW. in other words, this is the worst idea that you could have.

if this goes life, i quit gw2.

That may be true for you, but based on the comments and results of polls, most players don't care about a "server" or "server identity". For them, it's closer to home - the guild they fight with/for and the friends they fight with/for. The "server" they're on doesn't matter at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Dear ArenaNet

We fully support this idea to bring "server" pride into Alliance & Guild pride rather.

Ignore the "few' naysayers and go-ahead.

Its time the Guild* gets back into the wars. This game is not called "server" wars. Servers are boring to fight for. It is much more fun to build a guild and be part of it + choose your own alliance - not like servers where if you get a few Ds there, then you're stuck with them...

Now, a system that resets every 8 weeks is awesome, and having an alliance that will be able to opt-in or out every 8 weeks is great and it will force "guilds" to be nice with each other and also make for good sport, rivals and that is fun!

Players might start wearing their Guild Gear to rep their "alliance" and the Alliance can choose an emblem or Tabard or flags etc. It will also be harder for people to make alt accounts as they presently do on servers to "pull tactic leavers" with their alts, before they invade. It will be harder to "spy" on alliances, than servers. - You know it happens, idiots who tell enemy team where a squad is going to attack. Much harder to infiltrate - 1000s of alliances ;)

Also, it will make guild pride more, it will forge a new dawn.

Yes people are already proud of their guilds, however, "alliance" pride should be a thing. + leader boards and such. If there are top guilds/alliance, it should unlock a special Tier of Mistforge items that lights up or shows titles or emblems to pick from, as long as you are in the top.

PS: Those who moan, just forge an alliance with your present server's guilds, call it your server name or w/e - problem solved. (If they don't want to ally, then start asking was it really then a "sever") - Roamers, join a roam Guild or make one, and join an alliance - stop complaining.

With that said, go for it Anet! We stand by you!

Adventure And Dragons [KING] Guildwww.AdventureAndDragons.com

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Redponey.8352 said:

@Sovereign.1093 said:looking forward to the change. it will finally be guild wars. guild.vs guilds vs guilds.

It..... really won't....

because?

I think that world restructuring as it has been presented wont work on long term.I explain: Many veterans players left the game due of lack of competition (vs servers , vs an reward ladder) and objectives, the fight (metabuild) and the overhelming DPS which create fully onesided fight for nearly most of all.

The major issue is the reason why vet players have left? because of this. They got tired to be bench WvW have been left to dust many years and still now change remain far too long, no deadline, no planning. if anet doesnt bring new features which can keep vet in, WvW will just transform into EOTM 2.0 just loot.

how can it be fun to be one or two shot by someone who press 1 or 2 skill ? check this
DPS is far too much (condi and power) or Def stats arenot enough except healing stat)? when i check GvG round before Hot it last in general for more than 2-3min easily but now it's more less than 1 min... often it's only 1 impact. Moreover all Expansion spec is far more stronger than a core build.

Less damage (condi (duration/stacks?) and power) and less healing efficiency would be really nice. Moreover adding an leader board ingame with servers, WvW guilds (kills/cap etc? surely weighted by guild member?) would be really nice. Some and big part of players (in WVW) really like competition especially in WvW and Spvp. i know game is having fun but we had fun in defending our server, on epic and tremendous fight , grinding a ladder... but now all of this fun vanish no more reason to play... when you have unlock skin and loot..

Before=>

Now =>

Fight # ARENT FUN anymore. Fight need more teamplay and rythm. major healing should not remain on 1 support class but on synergy of class (water +blast?)

I'm not a hardcore player but more like a casual but regular in WvW and i like tryhard.

I really think WvW devs may directly talk with vet WvW players (casual, hardcore, regular) in game, it could bring some nice idea, features for WvW and FIX SOME MAJOR ISSUE as soon as possible.

The problem is not of 1 & 2 button XD

But I do agree, the 100 red circles, one spot bam dead, is a bit meh - if there's a way to balance it perhaps longer cooldowns... more siege or more counters, great - but in real war... if a guy nukes you, you can't go ./cry... he used a nuke on you not a small army...

(but what you really want) might be a debuff - that stacks the bigger a squad gets... that way various types of squad formations and fight styles or combos can develop? The "mark/spam AOE" blobs... can get a debuff could weaken the AOE? More GS battles eh!? Like the warriors on the load screen - yush!

If your squad leader and his sub commanders, sort the squad correctly, marks the FBs, etc. Your blob will survive. Having guilds/alliance will allow for better player management especially teaching new players and monitoring their progress and helping them get into the right builds or find their "path" be it roaming, havoc or zergs.

Condi spams can be countered... there's tactics for each type of defence and attacks. - Coordination is much better in guilds+alliances than a "random" server website - where someone decided to call them self boss of server.

Let smaller pools of players(guilds) organise themselves into alliances, which then can formulate their own strat, etc.

Getting a bunch of joe randoms - who are just duelling the whole day at their "spots" instead of actually doing something, to join up to guilds is a pain and they waste server que. Alliances should be able to "ally" with a roam guild, if that guild is doing actual scouting and killing off reinforcements on their way to a squad. But these gentle-men duels should really go to a separate map, and there is one... there should be a LFG for it + a point system, so roamers can also earn some stuff or status.

I love roamers, I love Havocs and I love blobs, have a toons for each. I feel that "you" as a player should be able to choose your "server aka alliance" culture, and people you WANT to be with.

There should be a fair system, that lures veterans, casuals and new players. - There should be match ups Tiers, that you can select, "mixed" = hardcore guilds+some public players+some casual guilds which makes up a "server" for those 8 weeks. The hardcore guilds/alliances can cary it... it will reward more pips or something, than say,

Pure hardcore only servers, or casual servers or new player friendly server "match ups" - However, being in a hardcore match-up - your alliance, will unlock you the path to earn a temp "title" + unlock skins, that only activate in this system.

The mixed system, will give rewards like there is now, armour, mistforgred stuff, back item, etc. The hardcore match up (that your alliance signs up to) can then earn stuff, that display when they top of the leader board. They will also earn some permanent stuff if they won the final round.

Your alliance should not be able to join a newby match up, if there's too many "vets" in your alliance, then it will need to join a "mixed" or "hardcore" match up.

Just like you choose guild missions for the guild, same concept. This will just be the "alliance's" mission.

This will also make advertisement better, as players will then want to either join, new, mixed or hardcore... or casual!

Give the Hardcores their carrots on their sticks, they deserve it!

Just my 2 cents - Rough idea, but its something.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@dynomite.5834 said:

@"MartinTT.4123" said:So WoW destroyed servers and everyone hates it.and ArenaNet told them self ..."let's do the same mistake!"???

by destroying the servers you are destroying individuality of players.

also competing for you server means much more than compete for some... blob of people, so much less players will play WvWvW. in other words, this is the worst idea that you could have.

if this goes life, i quit gw2.

That may be true for you, but based on the comments and results of polls, most players don't care about a "server" or "server identity". For them, it's closer to home - the guild they fight with/for and the friends they fight with/for. The "server" they're on doesn't matter at all.

This is true, for the simple reason that most people who played for their server left WvW long ago. For several years the mode was all about server pride but successive design changes put an end to that. Now most of what's left is people who just want to fight for the sake of fighting which, as is frequently mentioned, represents a small fraction of the population the game mode once had. Whether ANet now decide to cater for the players they still have or try to attract new ones is a different question...

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is never the design that push people off their server pride. It is human nature. The design changes only accelerate it.

It is normal for people to just want to achieve certain goals in the fastest and easiest manner.Look at pve raid, people only want to play with exp players, so that they can complete their raid. Same thing for fractal or dungeon or whatever.WvW is not a exception. People only want exp players so they will not lose fights or end up with a one sided losing fights. That is why stacking exist, to stack only exp players. That is a never changing nature of normal players.

While server pride do exist but it really only for the minority. The majority never once care about server pride, not at launch, not now. Many often abused the sympathy for server pride inorder to protect what they have, basically their current server's strength. It is almost always about winning and benefits.

The game mode has been going about its self destructive path since launch. People keep bandwagoning, keep stacking. It just keep driving people away, people still do it anyway. When servers die, they complain about (while mixing in with voice of others) and demand anet to fix it. Lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@SkyShroud.2865 said:It is never the design that push people off their server pride. It is human nature. The design changes only accelerate it.

It is normal for people to just want to achieve certain goals in the fastest and easiest manner.Look at pve raid, people only want to play with exp players, so that they can complete their raid. Same thing for fractal or dungeon or whatever.WvW is not a exception. People only want exp players so they will not lose fights or end up with a one sided losing fights. That is why stacking exist, to stack only exp players. That is a never changing nature of normal players.

While server pride do exist but it really only for the minority. The majority never once care about server pride, not at launch, not now. Many often abused the sympathy for server pride inorder to protect what they have, basically their current server's strength. It is almost always about winning and benefits.

The game mode has been going about its self destructive path since launch. People keep bandwagoning, keep stacking. It just keep driving people away, people still do it anyway. When servers die, they complain about (while mixing in with voice of others) and demand anet to fix it. Lol.

This is very true, and it's the very nature of many players (not all) is the reason server pride died long ago. Many players (and we see this now with a couple servers) only want lop-sided fights and have no interest in engaging even remotely evenly. Ironically, these servers have become so bad at fighting, they lose even when they literally double their enemy.

It's these players that are causing the issue, and these players causing the acceleration of the declining population in WvW. These players will still exist in alliances, and will still continue to be a bane on the game mode. We can applaud Anet for at least trying to do something with the game mode to even things out even though there is no set date yet.

I've suggested this a few times before, a simple implementation until alliances are ready, cap the maps at 20-25 players max. There is no need to have 70-80 per map when nearly all servers can't field those numbers. First start out by allowing only 20 players per map, then IF all maps have 20 players, increase the map cap to 25, and 25 remains the max a map can have. This would end blobbing and would be a direct blow to the stacking behavior of these players. This would also be a lot easier on their servers and provide relief for many whose computers crash during large battles. Even after alliances start, keep the map cap to 20-25 players only.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

This whole idea seems very nice for the very big WvW only guilds but for a guild that is PvX and loves to go around to all types of content such as raids, fractals, open world events, or wvw, this change sounds like a living hell. I dont know if there have been changes made since there are almost 50 pages of comments but it sounds to me if this goes through that player will be forced to play with 1 guild or another for WvW and be unable to play with their main guild that isnt very focused on wvw but still enjoyes it from time to time.IE my guild has been SBI for 6 years now and we of course there are those of us who wvw more than others and are in a separate guild for more intense wvw sessions, but we currently have the ability to play together without trying to get into an alliance who doesn't want us simply because we don't wvw as much as a whole will make trying to play with each other a nightmare.Ive heard nothing but excitement from my friends who ONLY wvw and ONLY play with their wvw guilds but it does not seem like the right path for the majority of the playerbase who likes to just occasionally dip into wvw with some friends when those friends are in guilds that require players to wvw a certain amount or alliances that will be against a guild joining that only a handful of players are heavily into wvw.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

That changes are needed is obvious. but I feel this has not been thought through well enough.

Servers want to win, Guilds want to win. Currently, when someone new and inexperienced dives into WvW, they can. Nobody can deny them access because of their experience, fighting skills, level etc.

Aliances will throw that upside down. New players likely won't get into the WvW Guilds unless they have skills to show, meaning they CAN be denied access to WvW maps they want to play in, and end up in, call it a "beginners" maps with players spit out by Guilds for not running the right equipment, skills, class etc.

This is giving Guilds way, WAY too much power to control who can or cannot join. That should be prevented.

I am member of a very small Guild, and enjoy playing WvW with them. I am not the best player and already have to deal with higher ping times in order to be able to play with my friends, due to the rediculous seperation of EU and US servers. Now you are going to make that even harder?

By all means, go destroy WvW and give that much power to Guilds and forget about the casual player and small Guilds.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"Tuna Bandit.3786" said:That changes are needed is obvious. but I feel this has not been thought through well enough.

Snip - 8<

This is giving Guilds way, WAY too much power to control who can or cannot join. That should be prevented.

Snip - 8<

By all means, go destroy WvW and give that much power to Guilds and forget about the casual player and small Guilds.


I get what you're trying to say...

Hope you can find comfort in knowing that this shared insight which over time has been proven true by saying to others...

"Told you so"

Alliance Linking will continue to repeat the same mistake of suppressing the Long-Term population growth that Server Linking mechanically & systematically does now...imho

There's still a better alternative based on my perspective.

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"Tuna Bandit.3786" said:That changes are needed is obvious. but I feel this has not been thought through well enough.

Servers want to win, Guilds want to win. Currently, when someone new and inexperienced dives into WvW, they can. Nobody can deny them access because of their experience, fighting skills, level etc.

Aliances will throw that upside down. New players likely won't get into the WvW Guilds unless they have skills to show, meaning they CAN be denied access to WvW maps they want to play in, and end up in, call it a "beginners" maps with players spit out by Guilds for not running the right equipment, skills, class etc.

This is giving Guilds way, WAY too much power to control who can or cannot join. That should be prevented.

I am member of a very small Guild, and enjoy playing WvW with them. I am not the best player and already have to deal with higher ping times in order to be able to play with my friends, due to the rediculous seperation of EU and US servers. Now you are going to make that even harder?

By all means, go destroy WvW and give that much power to Guilds and forget about the casual player and small Guilds.

I totally agree with you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"Tuna Bandit.3786" said:That changes are needed is obvious. but I feel this has not been thought through well enough.

Servers want to win, Guilds want to win. Currently, when someone new and inexperienced dives into WvW, they can. Nobody can deny them access because of their experience, fighting skills, level etc.

Aliances will throw that upside down. New players likely won't get into the WvW Guilds unless they have skills to show, meaning they CAN be denied access to WvW maps they want to play in, and end up in, call it a "beginners" maps with players spit out by Guilds for not running the right equipment, skills, class etc.

This is giving Guilds way, WAY too much power to control who can or cannot join. That should be prevented.

As far aas i know you wont need a guild to join wvw at all - the new server willl be made of one or two alliances a few random guilds and single players. If I remember anets concept correctly your whole point is invalid. Only if you want to get into the more competitive wvvw scene you will need to get gear, skill etc, which I would assume is allready a present requirement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"Tuna Bandit.3786" said:That changes are needed is obvious. but I feel this has not been thought through well enough.

Servers want to win, Guilds want to win. Currently, when someone new and inexperienced dives into WvW, they can. Nobody can deny them access because of their experience, fighting skills, level etc.

Aliances will throw that upside down. New players likely won't get into the WvW Guilds unless they have skills to show, meaning they CAN be denied access to WvW maps they want to play in, and end up in, call it a "beginners" maps with players spit out by Guilds for not running the right equipment, skills, class etc.

This is giving Guilds way, WAY too much power to control who can or cannot join. That should be prevented.

I am member of a very small Guild, and enjoy playing WvW with them. I am not the best player and already have to deal with higher ping times in order to be able to play with my friends, due to the rediculous seperation of EU and US servers. Now you are going to make that even harder?

By all means, go destroy WvW and give that much power to Guilds and forget about the casual player and small Guilds.

Your small guild won’t want to be together?

Mine runs mostly 6-10 at our busiest in WvW, but we have maybe 30 active.

Most of us will select our guild as a WvW guild, but not join an alliance.

Soooo, we will always play together and kind of get a new shuffle every 8-12 weeks.

If we find an alliance we like, and that likes us, we might join them if it can be worked out. But our guildies will determine that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

This world idea of yours going to mess things up. I say.. Just forget about the Worlds completely, remove the World vs. World completely from the game and instead call it "Guild Wars". A league where single guilds, or alliences of up to 4 guilds can fight for supremecy in their ranks. Make the season 10 weeks, 8 weeks of combat with 2 weeks of "Off season" time where guilds can make new alliences and get new players into the Guild War ranks of the guild (players that had joined them during the combat part of the season.) IMO the guilds shouldn't have the option to mark themselves as a "WvW guild", it should rather be all guilds having an option to create a "Guild War" army within itself where members that want to play the "Guild Wars can join, but only during the 2 week "Off Season" time.This would require a ranking system so that newer guilds wont be able to ally themselves with guilds that have been doing "Guild Wars" for a while, or meet guilds that are ranked higher in combat.I'm pretty sure this 8 weeks world idea of yours will just screw it up more than it is now with the open servers for the rest of the game and restricted servers for WvW that we have now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"Tuna Bandit.3786" said:Aliances will throw that upside down. New players likely won't get into the WvW Guilds unless they have skills to show, meaning they CAN be denied access to WvW maps they want to play in, and end up in, call it a "beginners" maps with players spit out by Guilds for not running the right equipment, skills, class etc.

This is giving Guilds way, WAY too much power to control who can or cannot join. That should be prevented.And I already know what map is going to be that "beginners and casual map".

Alliance A: "Lets make a 50+ Zerg tomorrow at 6pm on Blue BL."Alliance B: "OK, then we will go to Green BL."Alliance C: "OK, then we will go to EBG."The Rest: "Uhmm, 3 queues. Hello Desert BL :# "

And if you manage to get on one of the other maps, you are just not part of the "team".

@"Tuna Bandit.3786" said:By all means, go destroy WvW and give that much power to Guilds and forget about the casual player and small Guilds.They just have to make 2 seperate modi with 2 seperate matchmakings: "competitive WvW" and "casual WvW". Otherwise, the "I dont want to play with XY, because of reasons." problem will get even worse and make it even harder to get together enough ppl to play with, even if every world then is well-populated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"Gaile Gray.6029" said:A message from McKenna Berdrow:The goals of the World Restructuring system are:

  • Create great matches
  • Handle population fluctuations
  • Balance teams
  • Diversify WvW experiences

Below is an "analysis" of GW1 Alliance Battles versus GW2 WvW, please note this post is only an analytical approach in order to address the above 4 items mentioned. GW1 Alliance Battles (even though small in scope compared to WvW) had elements that worked in the long-run, and possibly could inspire direction/creativity, it's always good to challenge our own opinions in order to remove blind-spots that can cost us dearly; is it really the Server links that is the issue? Is it the design? Mechanics? Player behavior? Why are Commanders always competing on the same side or in voice? Why is blobbing the main trend? in PvP mode (5v5), similar skills/traits are used, but at an smaller scale, could what's done there be carried over to balance a 10 v 20 fight?10v100 fight? (Scenario analysis needed from Big Data) Why is the WvW party search window always empty? In no way do I claim what is right or wrong, but only offer an perspective below. GW2 WvW has tons of potential! the scope of WvW is very big, it is my hope this post might inspire "Constructive Feedback" that could help the developers to improve this Game-mode in the long-run, with the reality of limited resources, to re-develop servers of this magnitude is no easy feat, something to keep in mind. Constructive comments welcomed! :)

XNt2DQN.jpg

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...