Is it time for 3 tiers in NA with next re-link

[Iozeph.5617]

@XenesisII.1540 said:

@Iozeph.5617 said:

1. Keep the borderlands maps and the Eternal battlegrounds.
2. Allow joining/queuing as a five man maximum but anything above that out of the question.
3. When you queue up you end up on whatever side you end up on randomly for that day.
4. The color team you're on is permanently set until the universal server reset the next day. So dropping out of the battleground and requeuing isn't going to change it.
5. Queuing, apart from small groups, will be treated as megaservers currently are for the purposes of dungeons or fractal LFGs.
6. When people are put onto red, blue, or green team for the day they are part of the game-wide(NA and EU being separated) red, blue, or green pool of players for that day with the server keeping track of the number of players on those respective teams and filling map queues with an eye toward even distribution.
7. Also, when entering the mode for the first time every reset, players will be asked to select which, among the many guilds they might be members of, they will be representing in WvW for that day.
8. This includes limiting random joins on certain maps to the five guild member limit, whether queued as a group or not, so long as there are plenty of maps being filled across the mode. The restriction being more relaxed if for some reason there aren't enough people to fill even one map at the time(the mode arguably having bigger problems if that's the case.)

Heavy restrictions on allowing you to play with friends and your guilds every day, temporarily getting dumped on a red blue green side daily, that would be the last sledgehammer hit to communities.

This isn't spvp, this is world vs world vs world, stop trying to slap on 5 player restrictions in an area where it's expected to have huge groups participating. There is no need to heavy hand the amount of people entering when you're also randomly distributing them on random sides to keep the sides even, and on a daily basis, there goes the point of weekly matches. You might as well have suggested wvw go full on eotm mode.

The alliance system still looks 100x better than this plan.

The last sledgehammer to hit communities? I don't buy it. And it isn't even world versus world anymore. It's host and hanger(s) on versus host and hanger(s) on which is just a hop and a step from randoms as it is. What sets the mode apart from SPvP is the scale of the maps, the objectives, and the scale of the battles within.

I don't believe raising the spectre of going full EOTM mode is quite the deterrent you believe it is. If anything such a change would be more fair and honest. People who want large-scale, balanced fights are going to queue up regardless because they love competitive play. All this is going to do is show who was telling the truth about their chosen play style being about fights as opposed to being about unfair fights for the sake of keeping the bags rolling. And that isn't necessarily such a bad thing. They'll either play or they'll quit- which is where we are now.

The community pride ship has long since sailed, and this is coming from someone who hasn't transferred off of their starting server(Devona's Rest) ever. Most of the server communities in wvw, with the exception of small groups of holdouts such as myself and those in our small guild, have either quit the mode, or the game, or have splintered long before this due to the bandwagoning problem. Many large wvw guilds have quit. The only 'communities' left who consistently enjoy themselves under this system are the same ones who've been doing so since the beginning -those stacked and organised to a point that they routinely steamroll over lesser servers(or pairings) - and they're still stacked with bandwagoners. If pride goes the way of the dodo for the last ogre lording it over everybody else it's not much of a sacrifice to make for a more enjoyable experience for all.

That said, I never pretended the plan I offered was perfect, few are, but how is Alliances, the two years and running vapourware bridge to nowhere, demonstrably better?

Where have the devs outlined how they intend to keep the people who, in this current iteration of the mode, are stacking the deck to their advantage population-wise from stacking it in that new system? If all we're getting is a semantic facelift with all the other attendant problems still left in place what is the point?

It's been proven, over and over and over, that the community isn't to be trusted to police itself in the interest of the health of the game mode when it comes to match-ups/population balance. Yet somehow, because you say so, this is magically going to change by Anet doing exactly the same thing- fobbing it off on the community -all while leaving in the option for paid transfers. Hear that flapping sound? That's the recorded playback of Anet's last F to give flying out the window.

Dismiss my suggestions all you want. That's fair enough. I'm still not hearing any better from you or from ANet. In the meantime I guess we'll all just set here, bicker back and forth, and watch as the game mode bleeds more players. In that regard nothing changes. Nobody wins.

Good day.

[XenesisII.1540]

Your suggestion to restrict groups entering to 5 people at a time, guilds entering to 5 people at a time, forcing players to choose 1 guild per day, to randomly shuffle the player base daily, yes that would be the last sledgehammer after the many other sledgehammers of megaserver, free transfers, links, allowed super stacking. You're basically suggesting to break wvw down to spvp eotm type daily matches.

Sure server community pride has been gone for a long time, because guilds have moved so much, players have moved or left the game, there's very little core of originals left on their original servers these days, but at least players are kept together to play for a duration of two months. Even so players tend to stick with their guilds at least, your system even wants to breaks that down.

That is the difference between your plan and Alliance, at least alliances will have the option to be with your friends, your guilds, your alliance without heavy restrictions to get into a map, be on one server for two months at a time. Stacking may still happen depending on how they handle transfers, (being in alliances will cut this down a little), but it will also full reset every two months, that is the missing piece to current servers which has plagued it for 7 years and not being able to reset super stacked servers.

Dismiss my suggestions all you want. That's fair enough. I'm still not hearing any better from you or from ANet. In the meantime I guess we'll all just set here, bicker back and forth, and watch as the game mode bleeds more players. In that regard nothing changes. Nobody wins.

I wasn't proposing anything, this isn't the thread for it. Maybe you should write out a nice new thread fully outlining your proposal and see how much the rest of the forums likes it, if you don't like my take. In the meantime I still don't see anything better from this proposal or the many others that have come and gone in the past few years. Game also isn't bleeding out from just population imbalance.

[Sovereign.1093]

each server should have a minimum or 40 players at all times in total all maps.

that should make things active. even if the other servers are always full queue.

[displayname.8315]

Voted for 2 tiers. Don't really see queues being a "problem", not on all 4 maps.

Even resets are pretty dead with the 4 tier matchups.

[Gop.8713]

I can't remember the last time I saw a queue on more than one map. I feel like it's been over a year . . .

[zhonnika.1784]

We don't have reset (or NA) queues on BG, and TBH I'd like to keep it that way. It's far easier to be able to hop around to any map you want (even EBG) when there's no queues. That said, we still need 3 tiers.