World Restructuring Update 1

Sojourner.4621 · July 3, 2018

@Dawdler.8521 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Dawdler.8521 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Seera.5916 said:
@"GDchiaScrub.3241" said:So. What happens to the RPer's and their server(s)?
D:

Find PvE maps or custom PvP rooms to do the RP you do in WvW. Because, personally, RP should not be done in WvW due to the map cap of players.

There are only X number of spots for people to come into WvW. RP can happen on any map, anywhere. WvW can only happen on a specific map. And a large number of RP'ers on an active WvW player map is a hinderance for the world of those RP'ers. It means that the map gets overrun by enemies as the players who own the land can't get enough players onto the map to defend.

Which means I'm basically saying that RP concerns should be the very very very very very last thing ANet devs consider when designing this system. And things put in place for RP'ers should only happen if they wouldn't negatively impact WvW players or would benefit WvW players.

He's not talking about RPing IN WvW... no one is EVER talking about that when they say RPers regarding this change. Currently, your WORLD/SERVER choice affects what PVE maps you get put in to. If WORLDS/SERVERS are now 100% determined by a PvP mode such as WvW, then RPERS will no longer be matched with other RPERS on PVE maps. Stop being obtuse. All we're asking is for a way to flag ourselves as RPers to increase our chances of being put on the same map as other RPers when we enter any PVE map, since we will no longer be able to get in to maps with other RPers by simply joining the "unofficial RP servers" Tarnished Coast or Piken Square.

Its is my belief that Anet will take the easy way out - they simply wont touch the current server system. At least not at the start.

Alliances and WvW worlds can be added

on top

of existing servers.

So in short, I would still be on the server Far Shiverpeaks and my PvE instances will still filter as the server Far Shiverpeaks, but when I join WvW it will put me with my WvW repped alliance Far Shiverpeaks Community Guild in the WvW world Glorious Danger Noodles.

Get it? The servers dont matter for WvW anymore. Nothing changes for PvE, the servers are still there. Anet can make up new WvW worlds.

All they need to do then is remove the population limiter in the server list, since it doesnt matter.

If course Anet

could

do it much fancier and streamline the PvE megaserver, but they dont need to in order to maintain PvE as is.

They already said, in the original and this post, that worlds are going away completely for everyone, and that your world will be 100% based on the WvW world that you are matched in to. That's why they are considering giving people titles for the server they are on when the change happens... because that world won't exist anymore. They also, in the original post, said that they hadn't considered the impact that this would have for RPers and would have to look further in to it, further suggesting that we are correct in assuming this would screw our pve instance selection. We're just looking for an update.

Have they?

All I read about is worlds, which arent servers.

All they need to do is to maintain a single text string in the player database and keep filtering PvE instances by that, while they use the server for WvW.

"This is why, in the new World Restructuring system, we will remove all players from their current worlds, and make new worlds every eight weeks. This will create more granular pieces, which allow us to avoid situations like the Crystal Desert example.

Since worlds will not exist any longer, the "World Selection" that currently is available in character select will be eliminated, and instead a selection for playing in either North America or Europe will replace it."

Directly from the original announcement.

@FrizzFreston.5290 said:
@Dawdler.8521 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Seera.5916 said:
@"GDchiaScrub.3241" said:So. What happens to the RPer's and their server(s)?
D:

Find PvE maps or custom PvP rooms to do the RP you do in WvW. Because, personally, RP should not be done in WvW due to the map cap of players.

There are only X number of spots for people to come into WvW. RP can happen on any map, anywhere. WvW can only happen on a specific map. And a large number of RP'ers on an active WvW player map is a hinderance for the world of those RP'ers. It means that the map gets overrun by enemies as the players who own the land can't get enough players onto the map to defend.

Which means I'm basically saying that RP concerns should be the very very very very very last thing ANet devs consider when designing this system. And things put in place for RP'ers should only happen if they wouldn't negatively impact WvW players or would benefit WvW players.

He's not talking about RPing IN WvW... no one is EVER talking about that when they say RPers regarding this change. Currently, your WORLD/SERVER choice affects what PVE maps you get put in to. If WORLDS/SERVERS are now 100% determined by a PvP mode such as WvW, then RPERS will no longer be matched with other RPERS on PVE maps. Stop being obtuse. All we're asking is for a way to flag ourselves as RPers to increase our chances of being put on the same map as other RPers when we enter any PVE map, since we will no longer be able to get in to maps with other RPers by simply joining the "unofficial RP servers" Tarnished Coast or Piken Square.

Its is my belief that Anet will take the easy way out - they simply wont touch the current server system. At least not at the start.

Alliances and WvW worlds can be added

on top

of existing servers.

So in short, I would still be on the server Far Shiverpeaks and my PvE instances will still filter as the server Far Shiverpeaks, but when I join WvW it will put me with my WvW repped alliance Far Shiverpeaks Community Guild in the WvW world Glorious Danger Noodles.

Get it? The servers dont matter for WvW anymore. Nothing changes for PvE, the servers are still there. Anet can make up new WvW worlds.

All they need to do then is remove the population limiter in the server list, since it doesnt matter.

If course Anet

could

do it much fancier and streamline the PvE megaserver, but they dont need to in order to maintain PvE as is.

Yeah I expect something like this too.

They are eliminating world selection and all existing worlds. There is actually nowhere in game where they are called servers.

Slow Lightning.4592 · July 3, 2018

Thanks for your update.

I'm curious about two things:

Voice Communication. This is currently integral to organised public WvW and the overall gaming experience - currently most servers have thier own TS and/or Discord. In the alliance system, where presumably the Worlds will be re-configured on a fairly regular basis, how will it be possible for all players on a World to have access to a central voice communication system? Worlds with single large alliance(s) may simply impose thier own voice communication on the rest of the World..... this would already put them at a significant advantage to other Worlds who cant organise that or have no sizeable alliance (i.e. fragamented worlds). The setting up / moderation / admin of a TS/discord is not a small task. Has Anet given thought to this.
Its mentioned the idea is to create balanced worlds with no skill bias. I play in EU and I can tell you there is already 2 very strong existing alliances who are already fairly organised for this change and who have a high concentration of experienced and skilled players. I dont have a problem with this and credit to these people for caring enough to organise this already.... but my point is there is no way to create a level playing field when its possible to stack an alliance with the best players. Will Anet be looking at a system to somehow ensure that 'pro' alliances are balanced with lesser skilled players on a single world? How will bandwagoining be prevented where 'try-hards' who are not in these alliances simply transfer to that world to leech success of the pro alliance?

Dawdler.8521 · July 3, 2018

@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Dawdler.8521 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Dawdler.8521 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Seera.5916 said:
@"GDchiaScrub.3241" said:So. What happens to the RPer's and their server(s)?
D:

Find PvE maps or custom PvP rooms to do the RP you do in WvW. Because, personally, RP should not be done in WvW due to the map cap of players.

There are only X number of spots for people to come into WvW. RP can happen on any map, anywhere. WvW can only happen on a specific map. And a large number of RP'ers on an active WvW player map is a hinderance for the world of those RP'ers. It means that the map gets overrun by enemies as the players who own the land can't get enough players onto the map to defend.

Which means I'm basically saying that RP concerns should be the very very very very very last thing ANet devs consider when designing this system. And things put in place for RP'ers should only happen if they wouldn't negatively impact WvW players or would benefit WvW players.

He's not talking about RPing IN WvW... no one is EVER talking about that when they say RPers regarding this change. Currently, your WORLD/SERVER choice affects what PVE maps you get put in to. If WORLDS/SERVERS are now 100% determined by a PvP mode such as WvW, then RPERS will no longer be matched with other RPERS on PVE maps. Stop being obtuse. All we're asking is for a way to flag ourselves as RPers to increase our chances of being put on the same map as other RPers when we enter any PVE map, since we will no longer be able to get in to maps with other RPers by simply joining the "unofficial RP servers" Tarnished Coast or Piken Square.

Its is my belief that Anet will take the easy way out - they simply wont touch the current server system. At least not at the start.

Alliances and WvW worlds can be added

on top

of existing servers.

So in short, I would still be on the server Far Shiverpeaks and my PvE instances will still filter as the server Far Shiverpeaks, but when I join WvW it will put me with my WvW repped alliance Far Shiverpeaks Community Guild in the WvW world Glorious Danger Noodles.

Get it? The servers dont matter for WvW anymore. Nothing changes for PvE, the servers are still there. Anet can make up new WvW worlds.

All they need to do then is remove the population limiter in the server list, since it doesnt matter.

If course Anet

could

do it much fancier and streamline the PvE megaserver, but they dont need to in order to maintain PvE as is.

They already said, in the original and this post, that worlds are going away completely for everyone, and that your world will be 100% based on the WvW world that you are matched in to. That's why they are considering giving people titles for the server they are on when the change happens... because that world won't exist anymore. They also, in the original post, said that they hadn't considered the impact that this would have for RPers and would have to look further in to it, further suggesting that we are correct in assuming this would screw our pve instance selection. We're just looking for an update.

Have they?

All I read about is worlds, which arent servers.

All they need to do is to maintain a single text string in the player database and keep filtering PvE instances by that, while they use the server for WvW.

"This is why, in the new World Restructuring system, we will remove all players from their current worlds, and make new worlds every eight weeks. This will create more granular pieces, which allow us to avoid situations like the Crystal Desert example.

Since worlds will not exist any longer, the "World Selection" that currently is available in character select will be eliminated, and instead a selection for playing in either North America or Europe will replace it."

Directly from the original announcement.

@FrizzFreston.5290 said:
@Dawdler.8521 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Seera.5916 said:
@"GDchiaScrub.3241" said:So. What happens to the RPer's and their server(s)?
D:

Find PvE maps or custom PvP rooms to do the RP you do in WvW. Because, personally, RP should not be done in WvW due to the map cap of players.

There are only X number of spots for people to come into WvW. RP can happen on any map, anywhere. WvW can only happen on a specific map. And a large number of RP'ers on an active WvW player map is a hinderance for the world of those RP'ers. It means that the map gets overrun by enemies as the players who own the land can't get enough players onto the map to defend.

Which means I'm basically saying that RP concerns should be the very very very very very last thing ANet devs consider when designing this system. And things put in place for RP'ers should only happen if they wouldn't negatively impact WvW players or would benefit WvW players.

He's not talking about RPing IN WvW... no one is EVER talking about that when they say RPers regarding this change. Currently, your WORLD/SERVER choice affects what PVE maps you get put in to. If WORLDS/SERVERS are now 100% determined by a PvP mode such as WvW, then RPERS will no longer be matched with other RPERS on PVE maps. Stop being obtuse. All we're asking is for a way to flag ourselves as RPers to increase our chances of being put on the same map as other RPers when we enter any PVE map, since we will no longer be able to get in to maps with other RPers by simply joining the "unofficial RP servers" Tarnished Coast or Piken Square.

Its is my belief that Anet will take the easy way out - they simply wont touch the current server system. At least not at the start.

Alliances and WvW worlds can be added

on top

of existing servers.

So in short, I would still be on the server Far Shiverpeaks and my PvE instances will still filter as the server Far Shiverpeaks, but when I join WvW it will put me with my WvW repped alliance Far Shiverpeaks Community Guild in the WvW world Glorious Danger Noodles.

Get it? The servers dont matter for WvW anymore. Nothing changes for PvE, the servers are still there. Anet can make up new WvW worlds.

All they need to do then is remove the population limiter in the server list, since it doesnt matter.

If course Anet

could

do it much fancier and streamline the PvE megaserver, but they dont need to in order to maintain PvE as is.

Yeah I expect something like this too.

They are eliminating world selection and all existing worlds. There is actually nowhere in game where they are called servers.

That this would affect PvE still assumes that PvE instance filtering works by where the player account is on seperate physical servers. Which I highly doubt. The account database is probably just one server and your player server is just a variable, which the PvE filter uses to dump players om instances.

Of course its guess work and I dont know how GW2 is coded but its not hard to see ways around this.

Deleting all worlds doesnt necessarily mean deleting that original server link. Whats stated by Anet could technically mean no new players can join RP servers, nor move there. A problem for sure, but one for the PvE devs to solve.

dragontree.8092 · July 3, 2018

accidentally posted quotes here

Sojourner.4621 · July 3, 2018

@Dawdler.8521 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Dawdler.8521 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Dawdler.8521 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Seera.5916 said:
@"GDchiaScrub.3241" said:So. What happens to the RPer's and their server(s)?
D:

Find PvE maps or custom PvP rooms to do the RP you do in WvW. Because, personally, RP should not be done in WvW due to the map cap of players.

There are only X number of spots for people to come into WvW. RP can happen on any map, anywhere. WvW can only happen on a specific map. And a large number of RP'ers on an active WvW player map is a hinderance for the world of those RP'ers. It means that the map gets overrun by enemies as the players who own the land can't get enough players onto the map to defend.

Which means I'm basically saying that RP concerns should be the very very very very very last thing ANet devs consider when designing this system. And things put in place for RP'ers should only happen if they wouldn't negatively impact WvW players or would benefit WvW players.

He's not talking about RPing IN WvW... no one is EVER talking about that when they say RPers regarding this change. Currently, your WORLD/SERVER choice affects what PVE maps you get put in to. If WORLDS/SERVERS are now 100% determined by a PvP mode such as WvW, then RPERS will no longer be matched with other RPERS on PVE maps. Stop being obtuse. All we're asking is for a way to flag ourselves as RPers to increase our chances of being put on the same map as other RPers when we enter any PVE map, since we will no longer be able to get in to maps with other RPers by simply joining the "unofficial RP servers" Tarnished Coast or Piken Square.

Its is my belief that Anet will take the easy way out - they simply wont touch the current server system. At least not at the start.

Alliances and WvW worlds can be added

on top

of existing servers.

So in short, I would still be on the server Far Shiverpeaks and my PvE instances will still filter as the server Far Shiverpeaks, but when I join WvW it will put me with my WvW repped alliance Far Shiverpeaks Community Guild in the WvW world Glorious Danger Noodles.

Get it? The servers dont matter for WvW anymore. Nothing changes for PvE, the servers are still there. Anet can make up new WvW worlds.

All they need to do then is remove the population limiter in the server list, since it doesnt matter.

If course Anet

could

do it much fancier and streamline the PvE megaserver, but they dont need to in order to maintain PvE as is.

They already said, in the original and this post, that worlds are going away completely for everyone, and that your world will be 100% based on the WvW world that you are matched in to. That's why they are considering giving people titles for the server they are on when the change happens... because that world won't exist anymore. They also, in the original post, said that they hadn't considered the impact that this would have for RPers and would have to look further in to it, further suggesting that we are correct in assuming this would screw our pve instance selection. We're just looking for an update.

Have they?

All I read about is worlds, which arent servers.

All they need to do is to maintain a single text string in the player database and keep filtering PvE instances by that, while they use the server for WvW.

"This is why, in the new World Restructuring system, we will remove all players from their current worlds, and make new worlds every eight weeks. This will create more granular pieces, which allow us to avoid situations like the Crystal Desert example.

Since worlds will not exist any longer, the "World Selection" that currently is available in character select will be eliminated, and instead a selection for playing in either North America or Europe will replace it."

Directly from the original announcement.

@FrizzFreston.5290 said:
@Dawdler.8521 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Seera.5916 said:
@"GDchiaScrub.3241" said:So. What happens to the RPer's and their server(s)?
D:

Find PvE maps or custom PvP rooms to do the RP you do in WvW. Because, personally, RP should not be done in WvW due to the map cap of players.

There are only X number of spots for people to come into WvW. RP can happen on any map, anywhere. WvW can only happen on a specific map. And a large number of RP'ers on an active WvW player map is a hinderance for the world of those RP'ers. It means that the map gets overrun by enemies as the players who own the land can't get enough players onto the map to defend.

Which means I'm basically saying that RP concerns should be the very very very very very last thing ANet devs consider when designing this system. And things put in place for RP'ers should only happen if they wouldn't negatively impact WvW players or would benefit WvW players.

He's not talking about RPing IN WvW... no one is EVER talking about that when they say RPers regarding this change. Currently, your WORLD/SERVER choice affects what PVE maps you get put in to. If WORLDS/SERVERS are now 100% determined by a PvP mode such as WvW, then RPERS will no longer be matched with other RPERS on PVE maps. Stop being obtuse. All we're asking is for a way to flag ourselves as RPers to increase our chances of being put on the same map as other RPers when we enter any PVE map, since we will no longer be able to get in to maps with other RPers by simply joining the "unofficial RP servers" Tarnished Coast or Piken Square.

Its is my belief that Anet will take the easy way out - they simply wont touch the current server system. At least not at the start.

Alliances and WvW worlds can be added

on top

of existing servers.

So in short, I would still be on the server Far Shiverpeaks and my PvE instances will still filter as the server Far Shiverpeaks, but when I join WvW it will put me with my WvW repped alliance Far Shiverpeaks Community Guild in the WvW world Glorious Danger Noodles.

Get it? The servers dont matter for WvW anymore. Nothing changes for PvE, the servers are still there. Anet can make up new WvW worlds.

All they need to do then is remove the population limiter in the server list, since it doesnt matter.

If course Anet

could

do it much fancier and streamline the PvE megaserver, but they dont need to in order to maintain PvE as is.

Yeah I expect something like this too.

They are eliminating world selection and all existing worlds. There is actually nowhere in game where they are called servers.

That this would affect PvE still assumes that PvE instance filtering works by where the player account is on seperate physical servers. Which I highly doubt. The account database is probably just one server and your player server is just a variable, which the PvE filter uses to dump players om instances.

Of course its guess work and I dont know how GW2 is coded but its not hard to see ways around this.

Deleting all worlds doesnt necessarily mean deleting that original server link. Whats stated by Anet could technically mean no

new

players can join RP servers, nor move there. A problem for sure, but one for the PvE devs to solve.

I've given you a quote from a dev already that said they hadn't originally considered the impact to RPers, and that they would have to look in to it. Why would the dev have said that if this weren't EXACTLY how it works? The removal of worlds will effect pve mega-server matchmaking. We've had confirmation on this. I gave you one quote, but there were also others in the original post that you apparently didn't read. I am NOT pulling this out of my rear, the discussion was had over about 28 pages in the original post. We're just asking for an update to a statement that was made in that original post, that they would be looking in to a solution for PvE matchmaking, particularly for RPers, once the world restructure goes live.

XenesisII.1540 · July 3, 2018

@Sojourner.4621 said:
@XenesisII.1540 said:Maybe the rp players should like go to the general forums section and ask for a RP tag, since that involves pve megaserver sorting, not the wvw alliance sorting. In fact it's something they should have continued to ask for ever since megaserver first came out 4 years ago. There are also other methods to meet up with like minded people already, lfg/squads/guilds/friends list, which will still be usable after the world changes.

The WvW alliance sorting will directly effect the current PvE mega-server sorting. The two are inextricably linked. And just because something isn't important to you personally doesn't mean it can't be for other people. Maybe some wvw players should like, let a question be asked BECAUSE IT IN NO WAY EFFECTS OR EVEN HURTS THEM THAT THIS QUESTION GETS AN ANSWER. We even got dev confirmation that this WvW sorting will screw PvE sorting.

@Raymond Lukes.6305 said:
@Tolmos.8395 said:I would like to reiterate the previous questions posed, and not yet answered, about how this will affect Roleplayers.This is something we hadn’t fully considered and we’ll start looking into possible solutions.

It will only affect players on a server, every other sorting method will remain, all the methods to meet up with other people will remain. Server/guild/friends/squad are the sorting tags for whenever you enter a pve zone, server is the only thing that will be removed, so again go to the the general forums and ask for a RP sorting tag. The alliance is a sorting tool for wvw guilds at world creations, not every day zoning, not megaserver pve. You all should have been asking for this for 4 years now.

Signed a former rper.

dragontree.8092 · July 3, 2018

@Astralporing.1957 said:
@Raymond Lukes.6305 said:
@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:
I ask, because I'm a pretty casual WvW player, honestly, and I'm currently on a T1 world. Everyone else at that level is way more serious than I ever expect to be, so I'm a bit of both an easy target, and inclined to feel like a bit of a hinderance -- even if I play competently with the groups, I'm likely to make unwise decisions because I just don't have the same commitment they do.

Ideally you can find a guild that has a similar play style and approach to WvW that you do and join them. That way you have a group that plays like you'd like.

And then you'd end up in an alliance of casual players matched against WvW veterans. Which might be fun for the latter, but definitely won't be for the former.

Trust me, it won't be fun for either side. Unless you're up against those players that don't care for fights but solely bag farming. I play wvw for fights, i like bags, but i love playing because of the fights and guilds. It's not fun playing against players who are not challenging. Which is why having guilds stacked in one timezone on one server is boring. We also need pugs in a server, otherwise the fight guilds will have to ppt q.q

Sojourner.4621 · July 3, 2018

@XenesisII.1540 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@XenesisII.1540 said:Maybe the rp players should like go to the general forums section and ask for a RP tag, since that involves pve megaserver sorting, not the wvw alliance sorting. In fact it's something they should have continued to ask for ever since megaserver first came out 4 years ago. There are also other methods to meet up with like minded people already, lfg/squads/guilds/friends list, which will still be usable after the world changes.

The WvW alliance sorting will directly effect the current PvE mega-server sorting. The two are inextricably linked. And just because something isn't important to you personally doesn't mean it can't be for other people. Maybe some wvw players should like, let a question be asked BECAUSE IT IN NO WAY EFFECTS OR EVEN HURTS THEM THAT THIS QUESTION GETS AN ANSWER. We even got dev confirmation that this WvW sorting will screw PvE sorting.

@Raymond Lukes.6305 said:
@"Tolmos.8395" said:I would like to reiterate the previous questions posed, and not yet answered, about how this will affect Roleplayers.This is something we hadn’t fully considered and we’ll start looking into possible solutions.

It will only affect players on a server, every other sorting method will remain, all the methods to meet up with other people will remain. Server/guild/friends/squad are the sorting tags for whenever you enter a pve zone, server is the only thing that will be removed, so again go to the the general forums and ask for a RP sorting tag. The alliance is a sorting tool for wvw guilds at world creations, not every day zoning, not megaserver pve. You all should have been asking for this for 4 years now.

Signed a former rper.

We're asking here because here is where the original thread was posted, and where the original Dev Comment that they would look in to it was made. We're looking for a follow-up. And we HAVE posted it over there too. It is important to some people that this gain traction, and it is relevant to the topic of conversation. You can feel free to ignore the comments that don't pertain to your own concerns rather than being kinda kitten about the whole thing to people trying to get a question answered from the SAME people who brought it up before. The fact is, though, that IF the current mega-server sorting system remains in place, your WVW alliance/world sorting WILL STILL have an effect on PvE sorting. We're asking then, I suppose, for two things. Remove world sorting as a factor for mega-server sorting, and allow us to tag ourselves as RPers with a sorting algorithm to give us a better chance of finding other RPers. Guild/Friend list sorting only works if you already know those people... which... kinda defeats the point of meeting new people and RPers?

Edit: Also, we HAVE been asking for this for 4 years. We asked for this when the mega-server system was first implemented and were told "Oh, it'll be fine, your world choice will still play a priority sorting role, so just make sure you're on the same server". That won't work anymore. It's not good enough.

FrizzFreston.5290 · July 3, 2018

@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Dawdler.8521 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Dawdler.8521 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Seera.5916 said:
@"GDchiaScrub.3241" said:So. What happens to the RPer's and their server(s)?
D:

Find PvE maps or custom PvP rooms to do the RP you do in WvW. Because, personally, RP should not be done in WvW due to the map cap of players.

There are only X number of spots for people to come into WvW. RP can happen on any map, anywhere. WvW can only happen on a specific map. And a large number of RP'ers on an active WvW player map is a hinderance for the world of those RP'ers. It means that the map gets overrun by enemies as the players who own the land can't get enough players onto the map to defend.

Which means I'm basically saying that RP concerns should be the very very very very very last thing ANet devs consider when designing this system. And things put in place for RP'ers should only happen if they wouldn't negatively impact WvW players or would benefit WvW players.

He's not talking about RPing IN WvW... no one is EVER talking about that when they say RPers regarding this change. Currently, your WORLD/SERVER choice affects what PVE maps you get put in to. If WORLDS/SERVERS are now 100% determined by a PvP mode such as WvW, then RPERS will no longer be matched with other RPERS on PVE maps. Stop being obtuse. All we're asking is for a way to flag ourselves as RPers to increase our chances of being put on the same map as other RPers when we enter any PVE map, since we will no longer be able to get in to maps with other RPers by simply joining the "unofficial RP servers" Tarnished Coast or Piken Square.

Its is my belief that Anet will take the easy way out - they simply wont touch the current server system. At least not at the start.

Alliances and WvW worlds can be added

on top

of existing servers.

So in short, I would still be on the server Far Shiverpeaks and my PvE instances will still filter as the server Far Shiverpeaks, but when I join WvW it will put me with my WvW repped alliance Far Shiverpeaks Community Guild in the WvW world Glorious Danger Noodles.

Get it? The servers dont matter for WvW anymore. Nothing changes for PvE, the servers are still there. Anet can make up new WvW worlds.

All they need to do then is remove the population limiter in the server list, since it doesnt matter.

If course Anet

could

do it much fancier and streamline the PvE megaserver, but they dont need to in order to maintain PvE as is.

They already said, in the original and this post, that worlds are going away completely for everyone, and that your world will be 100% based on the WvW world that you are matched in to. That's why they are considering giving people titles for the server they are on when the change happens... because that world won't exist anymore. They also, in the original post, said that they hadn't considered the impact that this would have for RPers and would have to look further in to it, further suggesting that we are correct in assuming this would screw our pve instance selection. We're just looking for an update.

Have they?

All I read about is worlds, which arent servers.

All they need to do is to maintain a single text string in the player database and keep filtering PvE instances by that, while they use the server for WvW.

"This is why, in the new World Restructuring system, we will remove all players from their current worlds, and make new worlds every eight weeks. This will create more granular pieces, which allow us to avoid situations like the Crystal Desert example.

Since worlds will not exist any longer, the "World Selection" that currently is available in character select will be eliminated, and instead a selection for playing in either North America or Europe will replace it."

Directly from the original announcement.

@FrizzFreston.5290 said:
@Dawdler.8521 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Seera.5916 said:
@"GDchiaScrub.3241" said:So. What happens to the RPer's and their server(s)?
D:

Find PvE maps or custom PvP rooms to do the RP you do in WvW. Because, personally, RP should not be done in WvW due to the map cap of players.

There are only X number of spots for people to come into WvW. RP can happen on any map, anywhere. WvW can only happen on a specific map. And a large number of RP'ers on an active WvW player map is a hinderance for the world of those RP'ers. It means that the map gets overrun by enemies as the players who own the land can't get enough players onto the map to defend.

Which means I'm basically saying that RP concerns should be the very very very very very last thing ANet devs consider when designing this system. And things put in place for RP'ers should only happen if they wouldn't negatively impact WvW players or would benefit WvW players.

He's not talking about RPing IN WvW... no one is EVER talking about that when they say RPers regarding this change. Currently, your WORLD/SERVER choice affects what PVE maps you get put in to. If WORLDS/SERVERS are now 100% determined by a PvP mode such as WvW, then RPERS will no longer be matched with other RPERS on PVE maps. Stop being obtuse. All we're asking is for a way to flag ourselves as RPers to increase our chances of being put on the same map as other RPers when we enter any PVE map, since we will no longer be able to get in to maps with other RPers by simply joining the "unofficial RP servers" Tarnished Coast or Piken Square.

Its is my belief that Anet will take the easy way out - they simply wont touch the current server system. At least not at the start.

Alliances and WvW worlds can be added

on top

of existing servers.

So in short, I would still be on the server Far Shiverpeaks and my PvE instances will still filter as the server Far Shiverpeaks, but when I join WvW it will put me with my WvW repped alliance Far Shiverpeaks Community Guild in the WvW world Glorious Danger Noodles.

Get it? The servers dont matter for WvW anymore. Nothing changes for PvE, the servers are still there. Anet can make up new WvW worlds.

All they need to do then is remove the population limiter in the server list, since it doesnt matter.

If course Anet

could

do it much fancier and streamline the PvE megaserver, but they dont need to in order to maintain PvE as is.

Yeah I expect something like this too.

They are eliminating world selection and all existing worlds. There is actually nowhere in game where they are called servers.

Which was open ended and not definitive. They clearly stated that was their intend, yes. Hence why we're asking for an update on it and stating our expectations.

It not like I read it that selectively.

Sojourner.4621 · July 3, 2018

@FrizzFreston.5290 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Dawdler.8521 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Dawdler.8521 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Seera.5916 said:
@"GDchiaScrub.3241" said:So. What happens to the RPer's and their server(s)?
D:

Find PvE maps or custom PvP rooms to do the RP you do in WvW. Because, personally, RP should not be done in WvW due to the map cap of players.

There are only X number of spots for people to come into WvW. RP can happen on any map, anywhere. WvW can only happen on a specific map. And a large number of RP'ers on an active WvW player map is a hinderance for the world of those RP'ers. It means that the map gets overrun by enemies as the players who own the land can't get enough players onto the map to defend.

Which means I'm basically saying that RP concerns should be the very very very very very last thing ANet devs consider when designing this system. And things put in place for RP'ers should only happen if they wouldn't negatively impact WvW players or would benefit WvW players.

He's not talking about RPing IN WvW... no one is EVER talking about that when they say RPers regarding this change. Currently, your WORLD/SERVER choice affects what PVE maps you get put in to. If WORLDS/SERVERS are now 100% determined by a PvP mode such as WvW, then RPERS will no longer be matched with other RPERS on PVE maps. Stop being obtuse. All we're asking is for a way to flag ourselves as RPers to increase our chances of being put on the same map as other RPers when we enter any PVE map, since we will no longer be able to get in to maps with other RPers by simply joining the "unofficial RP servers" Tarnished Coast or Piken Square.

Its is my belief that Anet will take the easy way out - they simply wont touch the current server system. At least not at the start.

Alliances and WvW worlds can be added

on top

of existing servers.

So in short, I would still be on the server Far Shiverpeaks and my PvE instances will still filter as the server Far Shiverpeaks, but when I join WvW it will put me with my WvW repped alliance Far Shiverpeaks Community Guild in the WvW world Glorious Danger Noodles.

Get it? The servers dont matter for WvW anymore. Nothing changes for PvE, the servers are still there. Anet can make up new WvW worlds.

All they need to do then is remove the population limiter in the server list, since it doesnt matter.

If course Anet

could

do it much fancier and streamline the PvE megaserver, but they dont need to in order to maintain PvE as is.

They already said, in the original and this post, that worlds are going away completely for everyone, and that your world will be 100% based on the WvW world that you are matched in to. That's why they are considering giving people titles for the server they are on when the change happens... because that world won't exist anymore. They also, in the original post, said that they hadn't considered the impact that this would have for RPers and would have to look further in to it, further suggesting that we are correct in assuming this would screw our pve instance selection. We're just looking for an update.

Have they?

All I read about is worlds, which arent servers.

All they need to do is to maintain a single text string in the player database and keep filtering PvE instances by that, while they use the server for WvW.

"This is why, in the new World Restructuring system, we will remove all players from their current worlds, and make new worlds every eight weeks. This will create more granular pieces, which allow us to avoid situations like the Crystal Desert example.

Since worlds will not exist any longer, the "World Selection" that currently is available in character select will be eliminated, and instead a selection for playing in either North America or Europe will replace it."

Directly from the original announcement.

@FrizzFreston.5290 said:
@Dawdler.8521 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Seera.5916 said:
@"GDchiaScrub.3241" said:So. What happens to the RPer's and their server(s)?
D:

Find PvE maps or custom PvP rooms to do the RP you do in WvW. Because, personally, RP should not be done in WvW due to the map cap of players.

There are only X number of spots for people to come into WvW. RP can happen on any map, anywhere. WvW can only happen on a specific map. And a large number of RP'ers on an active WvW player map is a hinderance for the world of those RP'ers. It means that the map gets overrun by enemies as the players who own the land can't get enough players onto the map to defend.

Which means I'm basically saying that RP concerns should be the very very very very very last thing ANet devs consider when designing this system. And things put in place for RP'ers should only happen if they wouldn't negatively impact WvW players or would benefit WvW players.

He's not talking about RPing IN WvW... no one is EVER talking about that when they say RPers regarding this change. Currently, your WORLD/SERVER choice affects what PVE maps you get put in to. If WORLDS/SERVERS are now 100% determined by a PvP mode such as WvW, then RPERS will no longer be matched with other RPERS on PVE maps. Stop being obtuse. All we're asking is for a way to flag ourselves as RPers to increase our chances of being put on the same map as other RPers when we enter any PVE map, since we will no longer be able to get in to maps with other RPers by simply joining the "unofficial RP servers" Tarnished Coast or Piken Square.

Its is my belief that Anet will take the easy way out - they simply wont touch the current server system. At least not at the start.

Alliances and WvW worlds can be added

on top

of existing servers.

So in short, I would still be on the server Far Shiverpeaks and my PvE instances will still filter as the server Far Shiverpeaks, but when I join WvW it will put me with my WvW repped alliance Far Shiverpeaks Community Guild in the WvW world Glorious Danger Noodles.

Get it? The servers dont matter for WvW anymore. Nothing changes for PvE, the servers are still there. Anet can make up new WvW worlds.

All they need to do then is remove the population limiter in the server list, since it doesnt matter.

If course Anet

could

do it much fancier and streamline the PvE megaserver, but they dont need to in order to maintain PvE as is.

Yeah I expect something like this too.

They are eliminating world selection and all existing worlds. There is actually nowhere in game where they are called servers.

Which was open ended and not definitive. They clearly stated that was their intend, yes. Hence why we're asking for an update on it and stating our expectations.

It not like I read it that selectively.

I'm just looking for an update as well. I'm tired of being attacked about asking for an update about something that WILL affect portions of the community that aren't WvW players if something isn't done. We just want word that they are still looking in to it and considering options. Even in this brand new updated thread, however, they have said that since the old worlds won't exist anymore they are looking in to a title for whatever world people were on before the change-over... so chances are slim that this is correct. They don't give titles to people that haven't actually been forced to abandon their world choice.

Etheri.5406 · July 3, 2018

@"Slow Lightning.4592" said:Thanks for your update.
I'm curious about two things:
Voice Communication. This is currently integral to organised public WvW and the overall gaming experience - currently most servers have thier own TS and/or Discord. In the alliance system, where presumably the Worlds will be re-configured on a fairly regular basis, how will it be possible for all players on a World to have access to a central voice communication system? Worlds with single large alliance(s) may simply impose thier own voice communication on the rest of the World..... this would already put them at a significant advantage to other Worlds who cant organise that or have no sizeable alliance (i.e. fragamented worlds). The setting up / moderation / admin of a TS/discord is not a small task. Has Anet given thought to this.
Its mentioned the idea is to create balanced worlds with no skill bias. I play in EU and I can tell you there is already 2 very strong existing alliances who are already fairly organised for this change and who have a high concentration of experienced and skilled players. I dont have a problem with this and credit to these people for caring enough to organise this already.... but my point is there is no way to create a level playing field when its possible to stack an alliance with the best players. Will Anet be looking at a system to somehow ensure that 'pro' alliances are balanced with lesser skilled players on a single world? How will bandwagoining be prevented where 'try-hards' who are not in these alliances simply transfer to that world to leech success of the pro alliance?

It's sandbox. Players will create their own discords / teamspeaks and use them. Maybe several. Setting up an alliance discord shouldn't be difficult nor expensive. It does require effort. It requires people to care about the community and interact with the players they play with. Something which casual groups will never bother with, and even if all they need to do is join and listen appears to be too much effort. I know it's rude but, not having voice comms is a tiny fraction of why fragmented groups and pugs are at a disadvantage. Fragmented groups, by definition, lack organisation and structure. And unless they manage to play together, they'll be at a significant disadvantage. And since most GW2 players are used to the openworld mantra of "I can play whatever I wanna and my team and performance are both irrelevant" I wager they'll wipe, a lot. This means yes, random pugs will either get lucky RNG and have a good alliance or continue to get farmed. They won't be able to bandwagon as easily. This is perfectly fine.
The goal is not to match skill between worlds. That's obvious from the current post. And while players say 500 cap is "to avoid stacking all good players on one server", a group of 200-300 good players is more than enough to heavily dominate a timezone. Vabbi and WSR both have a core which is less than 500 players. The skill level in WvW is exceptionally low, and you only need very few veterans to waltz over most groups. No metric anet makes will ever change that.

They're measuring hours played, not any type of skill. So those veteran players are counted exactly the same as random newbs. These "veteran" guilds will be counted the same as ... collections of casual ktrain guilds. And as long as most veterans can't enjoy most worlds due to a lack of organisation, leads, somewhat acceptable gameplay and a community to play the game with; they will not split up entirely. Either way most veterans play with their guilds and interact with their guilds and communities far more than the casual pugs which are the vast majority in WvW at this point. And as always, fairweather players will suddenly drop their activity whenever their alliance gets farmed rather than trying to improve.

This system does NOT plan to fix the L2P issues which many players face. It will "not" balance your servers so each of you have a fighting chance, and you just get more good players to make up for how badly some people play. It's also nearly impossible to fix, short of creating servers where people cant' just bandwagon to winning sides. There's nothing that will stop certain groups from getting farmed. It's not a population balance issue; it's a skill / L2P / refusal to improve issue.

Frankly they just gotta fix PPT / coverage so these groups end near the bottom and fight eachother. Then you get decent groups fighting decent groups and bad ones fighting bad ones. Problem is PPT is won of coverage; not skill; and unless players get the methods to actually control their server and the influx / outflux of players to fix alliances to be balanced in terms of timezone coverages, roam / blob balance, commanders and so forth it will be incredibly RNG to see how servers turn out.

You can be the strongest group in your timezone, but if RNG screws you over and puts you in an alliance with more players that play in /your/ timezone, then you'll just kill the map and sit in queue whenever you can play; be vastly outnumbered the rest of the time and struggle with the PPT required to create a challenge. Yay for 2 dead months. It's ok; what's 2 more dead months - it wouldn't be the first time and it won't be the last.

Etheri.5406 · July 3, 2018

@dragontree.8092 said:
@Astralporing.1957 said:
@Raymond Lukes.6305 said:
@"SlippyCheeze.5483" said:
I ask, because I'm a pretty casual WvW player, honestly, and I'm currently on a T1 world. Everyone else at that level is way more serious than I ever expect to be, so I'm a bit of both an easy target, and inclined to feel like a bit of a hinderance -- even if I play competently with the groups, I'm likely to make unwise decisions because I just don't have the same commitment they do.

Ideally you can find a guild that has a similar play style and approach to WvW that you do and join them. That way you have a group that plays like you'd like.

And then you'd end up in an alliance of casual players matched against WvW veterans. Which might be fun for the latter, but definitely won't be for the former.

Trust me, it won't be fun for either side. Unless you're up against those players that don't care for fights but solely bag farming. I play wvw for fights, i like bags, but i love playing because of the fights and guilds. It's not fun playing against players who are not challenging. Which is why having guilds stacked in one timezone on one server is boring. We also need pugs in a server, otherwise the fight guilds will have to ppt q.q

There's maybe 95% pugs and 5% veterans left. If you spread them evenly - which will never happen - then they can do 15 man raids against eachother at best. On maps which still have 95% pugs for both sides with no interest in creating even fights, of course. So they'll still get more pugs than they have players to begin with; because those 15 players will still be vastly better then the average group. And pugs like following good groups to leech from; I mean it's just more fun to be a winner.

In reality not all servers will have decent groups, and many servers will continue to be completely devoid of challenge and only there to PPT and get farmed. This isn't a fixable issue at this stage; there are no incentives to force bad players to improve. There are no systems to motivate players who enjoy a challenge to look for one in WvW. There are no incentives to improve outside of personal fun / enjoyment; and it appears for the average player getting a few bags is good enough.

IF they stay with this system, then they need to make "skill" have an impact on PPT / scoring. That way you get high skill tiers towards the top and low skill tiers towards the bottom. Then casual groups can fight between themselves and be "competitive" and hardcore players can do the same. It appears current iteration is again trying to mix hardcore and casual players evenly over all servers; but the amount of casual players is so large i don't think this is possible unless guilds come back for the alliance system. Maintaining a hardcore community on a server which is dominantly casual is nearly impossible, mostly because of no-strings attached fairweather casual gameplay.

Veterans fighting is a somewhat stable / competitive system. Most "stacked" groups I know are strong because they ENJOY challenges. If someone wipes vabbi or WSR, very often they'll GAIN players and organisation as their core wants the challenge. Sure, even these servers have many fairweather players that will leave, and that's exactly what makes their overal group quality improve as they lose as long as players think it's winnable.If you wipe piken 2-3 times, they lose 20-30 players. At this point it's done, there is NOTHING the comm can do. If the comm is a 20 man veteran group, there is still nothing they can do. They'll be vastly outnumbered the moment they're down. And it goes the other way around too. Imagine they raid with limited numbers and start killing the enemy group; they'll quickly draw pugs who want a piece of the action - or loot - especially when winning. Because winning is fun! But that takes the challenge away from the veterans completely, who just get bored.What happens? The veterans leave because it's impossible to create a healthy environment for them. There are so many fairweather pugs that evenly dividing players just doesn't work; at least for EU prime. I assume that like now they'll end up more or less organised. Perhaps not at first, but at least over time, on a number of alliances. It's not because we hate balance and wanna walk over low skilled casual hordes; it's because no matter what you do fighting with or against casuals isn't very fun for veteran players.

Nothing will ever stop casual players from getting farmed; shy of forcing them to get better at the game. If you want to stop casuals getting hardfarmed by vets, you need to create matchmaking and matchups in a way that veterans can reliably farm eachother. Either in T1 or T5 is fine. Communities have done this serveral times by stacking a few servers and fighting eachother in "fight tiers"; and anet can naturally do the same through PPT balance if they want to.

TL DR : I'm sorry pugs who "dont want to join a guild" but expect to be on a nice, coordinated WvW server which offers them tags and other players to have fun with; this requires player interaction and communication. If you refuse to organise and coordinate, then you probably don't deserve a server that does these things for you. You take them for granted; but you're slowly but surely bullying away all the players who provide these things.

On other news, pretty sure RT has left FSP and several of their pugmanders will go with them. I guess FSP is another server to add to the list of "4 map queues with pugs but not a single commander in sight".

Slow Lightning.4592 · July 3, 2018

On the Voice coms - im more talking on the practical side.... no one really wants to have to join a different voice coms everytime a different commander or alliance tags up. It just wont happen. And no one is going to go to the effort of setting up a new World voice coms every time the worlds are recast.. maybe the first couple of times but after that no way (unless someone wants to do a business with this along the lines of the wvwintel etc i.e. a centralised world voicecoms hub). So this will lead to yet more skill degradation and widen the gap between larger alliances that can get x people on thier own TS/Dsicord and those that can't. And yes this is bad for 'pro' alliances too - because they will have even less challenge than they do now! Once again im talking about this from a practical POV. I mean say I tag up on World X, what TS do I even use? I have to invent my own or maybe my guilds (less than 60 people)... how do i then convince other people to join it? And then have to do it all over again when ever I want to tag up.... the reality is I wont be able to convince enough people to join that TS and I wont have the patience either and that will mean I wont tag up since I won't be able to create a group that challenges me or the enemy. My point is, voice coms is critical and if we want to promote strong gameplay (whether its casuals or hardcore) it aboslutely needs to be as easy as possible to organise - what i would expect is Anet to acknowledge this and preferrably provide some kind of voice coms platform per world.

On server skill, i just think there are definately stats out there beyond just playtime hours that can help them balance the Worlds 'better' i.e. Total Kills / WvW Ranks. Of course you can have bad players with a high kill count etc but its atleast better than nothing.

I just think there are basic things that can be done to try and create a balanced field beyond just telling everyone to 'l2p'. There is no fun for anyone in completly one sided fights.

phokus.8934 · July 3, 2018

@Astralporing.1957 said:
@Raymond Lukes.6305 said:
@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:
I ask, because I'm a pretty casual WvW player, honestly, and I'm currently on a T1 world. Everyone else at that level is way more serious than I ever expect to be, so I'm a bit of both an easy target, and inclined to feel like a bit of a hinderance -- even if I play competently with the groups, I'm likely to make unwise decisions because I just don't have the same commitment they do.

Ideally you can find a guild that has a similar play style and approach to WvW that you do and join them. That way you have a group that plays like you'd like.

And then you'd end up in an alliance of casual players matched against WvW veterans. Which might be fun for the latter, but definitely won't be for the former.

@Seera.5916 said:
@GDchiaScrub.3241 said:So. What happens to the RPer's and their server(s)?
D:

Find PvE maps or custom PvP rooms to do the RP you do in WvW. Because, personally, RP should not be done in WvW due to the map cap of players.If you have actually read what was being said, you'd find it had nothing to do with RPing in WvW, but a lot to do with servers still having impact on open world instances. And impact many people count on, which, after that change, will be gone.

So, basically, that change may be beneficial in WvW, but is going to have some negative sideeffects in PvE that might not have been well thought out by the devs.

That’s not entirely accurate.

If there’s only one shard instance opened then it’s irrelevant to what server you’re on. Your guild and party take precedence so as someone mentioned earlier if you’re overly concerned then create an RP placeholder guild.

Etheri.5406 · July 3, 2018

On voice comms, I don't think it's very difficult to get a discord set up which players can join. I imagine most bigger alliances will have a discord set up, and I imagine most will allow pugs to join them on said discord. At least the more organised alliances will get this in order. The less organised ones, well yeah.

Getting players to join is already a struggle. Mostly a community issue, existing because players promote treating WvW as something you shouldnt' care about. As it's players who promote joining WvW groups while ignoring what they want and not going on voice. It's the community that decided this is acceptable; and it's the community that faces the consequences; like dealing with veterans that rather stack and wipe them than play with them and a vast lack of commanders / pugmanders / organised groups for casuals to join and have fun with in EU.

Once again im talking about this from a practical POV. I mean say I tag up on World X, what TS do I even use? I have to invent my own or maybe my guilds (less than 60 people)... how do i then convince other people to join it? And then have to do it all over again when ever I want to tag up.... the reality is I wont be able to convince enough people to join that TS and I wont have the patience either and that will mean I wont tag up since I won't be able to create a group that challenges me or the enemy. My point is, voice coms is critical and if we want to promote strong gameplay (whether its casuals or hardcore) it aboslutely needs to be as easy as possible to organise

I agree with all your points. You will not manage to organise unless you bring your own core to which (some) pugs will add. This is already reality. You CANNOT tag or play organised on most servers. This is NOT because they don't have a clear well organised TS - most servers even SFR still do. It's because PLAYERS refuse to use it yet expect to perform as well as players who don't. Anet shouldn't provide a discord or TS or their own system - that's a lot of work and it doesn't fix the core issue : players refusing to do it.Don't worry, 500 players is far, far more than enough to establish active communities which can rule alliances entirely. Splintered pugs don't really have much community impact, they're too shy to interact with other players or even listen to voice ;). I don't doubt htat unless anet fixes things properly, we will actively steer towards having a few stacked alliances with strong communities which farm plebs and aim to fight eachother at a higher level.

Again in my opinion anet should restructure PPT to be more skill-oriented and less siege-oriented. This will require coverage balance or minor restructure of PPT / nightcap too. Like the skirmish system "they will build upon" but they never did. Then at least you get groups who are stronger towards the higher tiers; and groups who are weaker towards the bottom. But on bottom end servers - at this point honestly most of them - there is no point leading unless you have a core of players that will follow you because they know you. You will NOT get enough players interested in playing with you unless you continuously lead for prolonged times, building that following. It's probably better to create this following through guilds / alliances than trying to establish it on a random world.

Take FSP or gankdara. Both incredibly active servers, but it's just not fun to lead there without bringing your own group. Commandres don't enjoy leading for these players, so the commanders continue to leave. It's not a lack of discord or TS; they have both. It's the fact that barely 20% of the server is willing to use it.

There is NO metric anet can use to balance player skill and coverage to create matchups which work at all ends. I don't believe anet has the resources even if they scrap living world completley. Keep in mind I'm assuming they use a metric they measure; and they devide us into groups. The info we've had so far clearly states "We cannot and will not account for any of these things" which is why population balance will remain in the hands of players - yet it's not promoted.

What they SHOULD do is what I posted on reddit. They should just put population balance ENTIRELY in the hands of the players; by making alliances FULLY control servers. They decide which guilds / players join, and they can kick players too. You don't just "get a server" and if you dislike it you go to somewhere the grass is greener. An alliance ENTIRELY controls a world; and the lowest rated worlds are relegated and reformed under new alliances. This creates WvW as an overall "competitive" environment.

What do I mean? I mean that there's a place for everyone; and a reason for everyone on a server to work together. If your server cannot keep up; it literally dies and you are forced to join another one. So groups have real incentive to organise servers in a healthy way. Servers need to fix their own coverage. Servers need to fix their own leads and pugs and PPT. PPT done well requires scouts, blobs, roamers, defenders, pugs, fighters; literally all of them. It promotes organisation yet it does not make it strictly required. It allows communities to do what they enjoy and have their own flavours.

This can work because you remove bandwagonning. It's currently easier to move to a better world than to create a good world. It's less effort to be "helping" than it is to just only play when your side is a winner anyways. But if alliances decide which players they want and which they don't; players are responsible for their behaviour and so are alliances as they have a mutual contract. Players can leave, and alliances can kick. "But nobody will invite any casuals to their alliance!!!" yeah that's BS. You need massive coverage to deal with massive coverage; and coverage wins PPT. I don't doubt that you'd get plenty of alliances recruiting a LOT and if other alliances want to remain smaller; they will have to be competitive with these large alliances just to survive.

I think this system is far more stable than what anet proposed, in terms of balancing all the aspects of WvW; but they'll never do it because competitive aspects scare the hell out of them. They always try to create gimmicks to avoid the competitive nature, which then fail miserably. See : 2 PvP leaderbords which had 0 correlation with skill and the current state of WvW. Which is sad, because as far as match quality goes competition is very good. It's much more healthy to face skilled players against eachother and unskilled players against eachother in a ladder of natural progression than to have skilled players continuously wipe the floor with unskilled ones.

Slow Lightning.4592 · July 3, 2018

Also just to add, If you remove the WSR/Vabbi from the equation - the fights between most of the other servers are actually quite competitive... yes thats because they are less skilled, but the other servers (not all but most) can all put out blobs there are fairly evenly matched. So perhaps the argument is not so much about how to deal with those maybe 5% of 'hardcore' players... its how best to cater for the other 50-70% of players who log in regularly, know what they are doing, but are not 'hardcore'. The other lost % is the dross that cant be helped any which way.

LINKAZZATORE.8135 · July 3, 2018

@Slow Lightning.4592 said:Also just to add, If you remove the WSR/Vabbi from the equation - the fights between most of the other servers are actually quite competitive... yes thats because they are less skilled, but the other servers (not all but most) can all put out blobs there are fairly evenly matched. So perhaps the argument is not so much about how to deal with those maybe 5% of 'hardcore' players... its how best to cater for the other 50-70% of players who log in regularly, know what they are doing, but are not 'hardcore'. The other lost % is the dross that cant be helped any which way.

that 5% wasn't 5% if the gamemode wasn't left to die off, it was way higher.

are the the skilled people that make something interesting, not the others that aren't as good, otherwise nobody would watch professional spots but only watch random matches of people that are unknown.

reddie.5861 · July 3, 2018

still dont understand the point of this system.. instead of making money, you let people make a huge alliance 500? i bet u can suck up whole hardcore WvW community into this alliance.. anyway so instead of making money by forcing people to transfer around to follow bandwagon u make it easier for em to bandwagon a massive alliance..

i mean a map can hold up to 60? players *3 180 players before queues pop? either way even if im wrong if u get 500 play happy people together you will have perma queue going during prime times even if map supports more then 60.

GrubySzymek.1362 · July 3, 2018

@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Rysdude.3824 said:
@Sojourner.4621 said:
@Seera.5916 said:
@"GDchiaScrub.3241" said:So. What happens to the RPer's and their server(s)?
D:

Find PvE maps or custom PvP rooms to do the RP you do in WvW. Because, personally, RP should not be done in WvW due to the map cap of players.

There are only X number of spots for people to come into WvW. RP can happen on any map, anywhere. WvW can only happen on a specific map. And a large number of RP'ers on an active WvW player map is a hinderance for the world of those RP'ers. It means that the map gets overrun by enemies as the players who own the land can't get enough players onto the map to defend.

Which means I'm basically saying that RP concerns should be the very very very very very last thing ANet devs consider when designing this system. And things put in place for RP'ers should only happen if they wouldn't negatively impact WvW players or would benefit WvW players.

He's not talking about RPing IN WvW... no one is EVER talking about that when they say RPers regarding this change. Currently, your WORLD/SERVER choice affects what PVE maps you get put in to. If WORLDS/SERVERS are now 100% determined by a PvP mode such as WvW, then RPERS will no longer be matched with other RPERS on PVE maps. Stop being obtuse. All we're asking is for a way to flag ourselves as RPers to increase our chances of being put on the same map as other RPers when we enter any PVE map, since we will no longer be able to get in to maps with other RPers by simply joining the "unofficial RP servers" Tarnished Coast or Piken Square.

Why not make an RP guild? Then right click and join instance?

Because there are way more than 500 RPers...

I'm 100% positive you dont play with most of them.

Etheri.5406 · July 3, 2018

@"Slow Lightning.4592" said:Also just to add, If you remove the WSR/Vabbi from the equation - the fights between most of the other servers are actually quite competitive... yes thats because they are less skilled, but the other servers (not all but most) can all put out blobs there are fairly evenly matched. So perhaps the argument is not so much about how to deal with those maybe 5% of 'hardcore' players... its how best to cater for the other 50-70% of players who log in regularly, know what they are doing, but are not 'hardcore'. The other lost % is the dross that cant be helped any which way.

The only reason those fights are close to competitive is because players do not know what they're doing. I'm sorry but less than 20-30% of players even plays half organised.This might be toxic elitist, but over 50% might as well be randomly pressing buttons. They are genuinely that bad. They're essentially just a distraction for the enemy team to keep them engaged; but they don't really contribute to any side. Their main contribution is adding numbers. I somewhat regularly play on my alts with a few other bored vabbians. I'm sorry but 2-3 of us can kill "competitive fights". Join a slightly losing group with 3 good players playing together and you will win. You'll be facerolling faster than you know it. Anddd then it's done again.

The fights are competitive, yes. But not because players kind of know what they're doing; but the opposite. They're competitive because players have NO FUCKING CLUE what they're doing. I saw commanders who genuinely kill their own blob more than the enemy blob because of their movement. I see 10-20 man half decent players in these zergs at best, with more than 30-40 being almost negative impact. This is the reality on both sides; and the only competitive aspect is the extent to which these bad players rally eachother. And the moment you have a few players who actually grasp the game? These 30-40 bad pugs die like flies...

The competitive fights you talk about are so... low level that the balance is broken by a few good players on either side; and they're made to seem competitive because players can't organise and die like flies in this meta. Imagine you have 10 half decent players that will follow your comm on both sides; and then 40 random pugs. That's how these groups work. Most pugs running random builds which are not specced for WvW zergs, and even if they are they don't have the groups, support or knowledge required. The moment you push anything, anywhere, you die because you push 10v50. Bonus points because they end to fight over chokes, sm and structures 24/7 making this even worse. These aren't competitive fights; these are stalemates in which pushing kills yourself because your players cannot and will not follow. In my opinion; there's a difference between having competitive fights and having a prolonged pirateship because neither side is capable of organising more than a fraction of their group; which is required to push.

And again, 2-3 decent range players and you just win the pirateship through range damage. And what does the losing server do? Well just use an ac or two and it'll make quick work of the enemy group if they push still. The fights are competitive because the moment they are "not", you instantly create a stalemate. All it requires is a choke, some acs or a structure to defend. Defense is so overpowered the stalemate is instantly reached. Fights aren't competitive because groups are EVEN, they're competitive because you can avoid losing fights entirely whenever you're weaker unless the enemy is organised enough to bully you around despite the massive advantages.

Now look at the effect this competition has on WvW. Who ends up leading pugs? Who's the 10 man cores and commanders of half these squads? Still typically more hardcore players. FSP was a strong competitive server? And now? Each and every one of its public leads is ragequitting or refuses to ever lead again. Where are the pugmanders of these "competitive" servers gone to?

Howmany pugmanders does EU have left?Monty rq fsp. WSR rq fsp. Dye and friends rq deso. Blue and another gankdara comm showed up on vabbi, got told they should go other servers for now and both ended up not going back and pugleading at all anymore. Rav quit game. Jak ragequit pugmanding. Tpot ragequit pugmanding. Roy rq pugmanding. Nation rq more servers than I can count. Dominate quit game. Ins quit game. Oni quit game. Androuw inactive. I don't know ANY active GvG guild at the moment; LAYS on break entire summer, Ash disband, Amp disband, I guess vI might still be running? The big german comms? Just kidding half of them are stuck on kodash / RS in T5 and also increasingly less and less active. I guess atleast kodash should get out of T5 for now.

Every prime on both FSP and vabbi, I see a queue on EB or at least a fairly full map, generally begging for comms and not getting them; yet when they do the vast majority won't follow, organise or play with them. The most active comms on vabbi are still not "fight" players; our most active EB comm is a bane signet guardian followed by a 3x signet momentum sigil druid. Not particularly high end.

You can assume you should cater to the masses; just like anet did in the past when ignoring WvW. Here's the truth : most casuals just want to join a fun group and play a bunch. And the only way to have this frequently and sustainable? Veterans that run these groups nearly constantly fighting eachother, allowing them to join. That was WvW in the past, too. But at this point, that isn't possible. There aren't enough vets left to make this sustainable. So what do you get instead? Vets finding ways to avoid being overrun with hundreds of casuals looking for an easy leech and desperately trying to fight eachother; and casuals not having any communities to join. They're just left on their own. It's not healthy for either groups; and it will continue to get worse.

aintiarna.1038 · July 3, 2018

When I read the original post on alliances way back, I couldn't quite understand why so many of these problems weren't being brought up. At least now we're getting a good discussion and Anet will be aware of them. Sometimes I think many WvW veterans are just bored and tired of the game and the game mode in general and want change, any change, to try and freshen it up and will downplay many of the potential drawbacks.

At the moment we have a relatively egalitarian system. Doesn't matter if you are a veteran guild leader commander or a random pve pug just wanting gift of battle, you get to choose what world you want to be a part of and how involved you are in WvW. Want a hard core fight server or a low population server where you can roam and ppt maybe? It's your choice.

With alliances, the proposal is to take the power from the individual and place it into the hands of guild leaders. It's an important change. No one can kick you out of your world no matter how bad a day you're having. I'm currently in 3 different WvW guilds, but many people just don't have the time/energy/inclination, etc. for guilds but don't necessarily want to be randomly assigned to a different world every 8 weeks. This is a very big change for a significant proportion of the playerbase.

Voice chat has already been brought up. It's hard enough getting pugs to join when tagging up despite having an established and well known world TS server, but imagine how much harder it would be with multiple alliance voice chats all being involved in whatever new world gets created every 8 weeks. And that's just for the alliances that are organised enough to make and maintain them.

Bandwagoning. Yes, it's a problem atm, especially when organised guilds switch servers to farm pugs because it's apparently fun. Hardcore alliances will almost definitely form under the new system and any world matched against them based on coverage, playtime or other metrics I've seen discussed so far will just get hard farmed as they do now. As guild leaders and officers can control their own members and consequently the makeup of alliances, it may lead to even more unbalanced match-ups.

With all that in mind and I'm probably wasting my time saying this, but is it not possible to tweak the existing worlds system a little to improve things? For example, re-link every 6 weeks instead of 8 (or impose 3 resets until rewards received for transfers) to reduce bandwagoning and also improve the link algorithms you use so that players experience of the game mode feels more balanced.

Ultimately though I think many veteran players see alliances as some kind of magic bullet that will re-vamp the game mode for them, but even if it all works out perfectly and we have the new system in place, a whole new set of complaints will just take its place and people will be bored all over again. Probably.

Lonami.2987 · July 3, 2018

No words about language matchmaking?

It's going to be a huge mess if they mix French, German, and Spanish players who don't know English.

Garrus.7403 · July 3, 2018

@Lonami.2987 said:No words about language matchmaking?
It's going to be a huge mess if they mix French, German, and Spanish players who don't know English.

They said guilds choose their language. If you are not in a guild they will take the language from your game settings.

Etheri.5406 · July 3, 2018

@"aintiarna.1038"

Bandwagoning. Yes, it's a problem atm, especially when organised guilds switch servers to farm pugs because it's apparently fun. Hardcore alliances will almost definitely form under the new system and any world matched against them based on coverage, playtime or other metrics I've seen discussed so far will just get hard farmed as they do now. As guild leaders and officers can control their own members and consequently the makeup of alliances, it may lead to even more unbalanced match-ups.

You don't seem to grasp bandwagoning. Veteran guilds have 2 choices : they can run mostly closed raids on trash servers or form a "stacked" server and keep their guild alive outside of guild raids. Most veterans have 0 interest in playing with trash servers; it's incredibly unfun.

Veteran style of play that used to be standard on many WvW servers is no longer possible. It's not about "hard", it's about literally not possible. Imagine I go do a guildraid with 15-20 players on any server. I'll have more than 20 pugs adding to every fight I do; regardless of numbers. If I want to fight another guild and GvG? Nope, still added by pugs.

Ok, go open raid to teach them then? Just kidding, they still won't organise and come do anything. There's still no interest.The better you play, the more entitled bad pugs will chase you around because you are literally a loot machine. You enable them to feel like winners; and that's exactly what they want. So these guilds transfer to DEAD servers. Vabbi and WSR were literally the most empty WvW servers on EU. And they're both full and stacked; because the moment guilds moved there to get away from pugs hundreds of pugs followed.

On servers like piken, deso, SFR and even FSP there is genuinely nothing most guilds and communities can do. You do closed raid? Jk you're open leading for casual pugs who won't listen but will stalk you no matter where you go. You do open raid? Well you'll get the same pugs, but they still won't come listen to you; and if you lose fights they'll go afk or leave again. You want to push? Wait no they can't push. You want to push and don't care about your pugs?

During guild raids? your players barely have fun. Outside of guild raids? Well dead servers without any organised / coordinated play, so no fun for your veteran players still. Eventually your guild just bleeds players and dies because your players are plain NOT HAVING FUN; almost ever.

You CANNOT play on these servers without having a stable raiding guild; or a group that doesn't care about organisation and quality at all. Casual pugs nowadays are insanely toxic. While they're "nice" in small doses, they join and try around some stuff, if every server is 50%+ pugs that do not lead; do not do anything on their own and simply search a group which is doing well to follow around then they destroy the chance for veterans to play the game, ever.

There are simply too much casual pugs who won't do an ounce of effort yet still expect to win. Nothing will ever change for these fairweather players; they're bad and they will get farmed whenever matched against better players. And after getting farmed abit, they'll just go back to PVE, afk or go another map. The issue is their attitude and expectations. You can't expect good communities set up, commanders leading, nice fights and to actually win them when the average pug is too lazy for guilds, builds, voice, listening to leader, trying to improve or even willing to play when their side is losing a bunch.

I'm sure it's the veterans bandwaggoning to those dead servers to farm T5... We had fun on vabbi before we had the same numbers as other servers; fighting 20v50 against casuals is an actual challenge and fun. But even that is now impossible because the moment we come close to fighting 20v50; oh right, you get +30 pugs most of the time. And well... 50v50 the casuals are chanceless.

Veteran guilds bandwagon AWAY from pugs in order to be able to play the game. Anets system won't fix this. Just wanted to make clear that the bandwagoning and farming casuals isn't something fight guilds do to "get fights"; it's something they do to keep their communities alive and a lesser of two evils. Something forced by the huge amount of casual players who joined WvW who stalk these guilds yet are too casual to just cooperate with them. It's not the same 20 players doing this, it's more that the amount of veterans compared to the amount of casuals is so small they can't handle the numbers. And it continues to get worse.

This system is not toxic enough. We don't need evenly balanced populations, if you want casuals to be able to fight veterans then the casuals need 2x as much numbers. After all, after a single weekend of farming PPT servers half their players refuse to play for the rest of the MU ;)

Jalad Lantana.3027 · July 3, 2018

I have read through the original post and all the comments, and the linked to worlds redo post, and I am totally confused. Why can't someone at Anet summarize the end result of the world and alliance system change, and describe in two sentences how it will basically work.

World Restructuring Update 1

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in