Proposal: Close EU-T5 for the next Relink

[Dayra.7405]

Less players need less Tiers, currently they hardly fill their maps even in prime.Also currently you have only 12 minors for 15 majors to link, resulting in at least 3 server without link.With only 4 tiers this would be better 15 minors for 12 majors, everyone not totally overstacked can get a link.

[Dawdler.8521]

I must agree that I am a little surprised that this was not the intent of Anet with the national change all along (I even asked in the thread and they said nope). It was the logical conclusion of why they even bothered pushing this change, aside from preparing for alliances (where it seems likely to only have 4 tiers anyway, the total populations of 3 servers should be easily averaged out among the remaining 12 without even hitting high populations on all of them)

[Cambeleg.7632]

By the time when megaservers arrived to PvE, servers stopped to be "essential" for the game, since only had some meaning in WvW. Since population were dropping by these days, logical step was about revitalizing WvW with proper rewards (they were added time later), not-messed events (ehem), encouraging every different way to play WvW in a whole frame where all them had its importance and value, etc. When this didn't happen (truth hurts, I know), the less painful step was about...

... riiiight, to close those servers with less population and allowing the players in them to transfer freely or with a low cost for a short time.

Anet, tho... surprised us with the Linking System, that became the dripping loss of players in a constant waterfall.

I'm sorry, Dayra, but this idea is suggested too late in the actual state of WvW.

[Diku.2546]

WvW uses a Fixed 3-Way Battle between servers stuck in Gold, Silver, and Bronze Tiers as its fundamental Match-Up model.

I don't think we can "just close down" just the EU-T5. Only ANet can say if this is technically possible.

Here's my take on this suggestion...

You're free to agree or disagree...this is only an opinion based on my perspective.

I guess we could close down & remove all servers in the Bronze Tier in an effort at "keeping things simple".

Once again...not sure if this is technically possible.

This closing & removal of all "Bronze Tier" servers will force players on these servers to pick a new server to represent from the remaining servers that are "open" for them to join.

Match-Up mechanics will then require ANet to appoint servers from the remaining pool of existing servers to replace the "Bronze Tier" servers that got purged. The Gold, Silver, and Bronze Tier servers will then have to re-establish their player communities after this server purge event...that mashes players together to re-consolidate player population.

If that's what you mean...then ok...but this still wouldn't solve the in-balance of population caused by player's bandwagon behavior...and in a few months things will be back to where we started...just with a smaller population...and the vicious cycle will repeat all over again...based on the observed history of how things have turned out.

---

Nothing gets solved & we get stuck in a vicious cycle...if we "just close" a Tier.

Why not replace the Match-Up model instead & break out of this vicious cycle by doing 5 simple things:

1) Remove the current match-up system, but keep a system for World Ranking.2) Assign each World server a "single map" to defend - (Single BL or a Single unit of Multiple maps owned by the same server).3) Let players pick any three "server owned maps" to fight on weekly.4) During the week show players the top three enemies attacking their "home owned maps".5) Finally only reward players when they fight on a map or an enemy map that is "Ranked Higher or Equal to" their home map.

We really need a solution that takes into account that differences in server populations...even huge ones...are a natural part of things...imho

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

@Diku.2546 said:WvW uses a Fixed 3-Way Battle between servers stuck in Gold, Silver, and Bronze Tiers as its fundamental Match-Up model.That hasn't been true since they replaced Glicko with one-up|one-down. Worlds move up and down all the time; tiers are essentially meaningless when 3 good weeks moves a world from T4 to T1. While it's true that some worlds tend to bounce between just two tiers, it's not true of all worlds.

[Dayra.7405]

@Diku.2546 Hey my proposal was not a proposal to replace alliances with something completly different after another few years of development time, but a quick-fix to bridge the time till alliances.

@Cambeleg.7632 said:I'm sorry, Dayra, but this idea is suggested too late in the actual state of WvW.

To late? you mean it only needs 1, 2 or 3 tears not 4 or 5 tiers?

[Cambeleg.7632]

@Dayra.7405 said:

To late? you mean it only needs 1, 2 or 3 tears not 4 or 5 tiers?

With the actual state of WvW? With two tiers would be enough, tbh. So dramatical situation we're having.

[Dayra.7405]

Just 2 tiers seems to much compression to me, don't forget its summer now, where people always played less,

But ANet knows the numbers, make it such that every link in every tier has all maps full for at least 2h a day.

[shiri.4257]

just make it 1 tier. so everyone can be a top tier fight guild.

[reddie.5861]

@Cambeleg.7632 said:

@Dayra.7405 said:

To late? you mean it only needs 1, 2 or 3 tears not 4 or 5 tiers?

With the actual state of WvW? With two tiers would be enough, tbh. So dramatical situation we're having.

wait what?

nope, thats not EU.

[Cambeleg.7632]

@Dayra.7405 said:Just 2 tiers seems to much compression to me, don't forget its summer now, where people always played less,

But ANet knows the numbers, make it such that every link in every tier has all maps full for at least 2h a day.

Let me doubt they know them. Time proved me this point.

And no, there are many servers where not even one map is full for even one hour a day. And I don't mean in summer. Facts.

[Revolution.5409]

This month it's your server's turn, the next one will happen to someone else not to have the link.

[Diku.2546]

@Dayra.7405

Apologies...I understand your sentiments...it would be nice to have a quick fix.

Well...whatever solution we end up with...needs to take into account that differences in server populations....guild populations....alliance populations...can all be huge in number...and the Match-Ups should use these natural differences in a positive way...or we're forever going to be locked in this never-ending discussion on how to fix these out-of-wack Match-Ups.

Solutions that in-directly try to use Team-Creation mechanics to fix these out-of-wack Match-Ups are always going to be circumvented by players in the Long-Term.

It's more effective to directly replace the Match-Up model & remove the mechanics that's creating these out-of-wack Match-Ups to begin with.

If we had the right Match-Up model in place...we wouldn't be having these discussions anymore. It just takes 5 simple steps to drastically change the dynamics to use these differences in "Team Sizes" in a positive way...imho

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.