More Servers for NA?

[Acemos.2856]

NA has 24 worlds, 16 are Full, 6 are Very High, and 2 High. No mediums 😞

Conversely, EU has 27 worlds, only 7 of which are Full. Has 6 mediums

 

Can NA get more worlds or can something be done about the population? It makes it harder to get all my friends together to play WvW, and without the option of having Medium population servers, we would have to pay 1000-1800 gems, as opposed to only 500. IDK it just kinda sucks. It sort of feels like I'm being punished when I meet new friends on GW2 to play with and want to do WvW with them.

 

Alliances seem to be forever on the backburner with the last update for it being years ago, so if we could have some sort of short-term quick solution like opening new worlds or something else, that'd be awesome. Thank you for coming to my Ted Talks.

 

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/284167364856119296/850711639366828032/unknown.png

[joneirikb.7506]

Basically, so many servers are full because ANet has tried to change the actual number for what is considered "full". They do this in a desperate attempt to try to control world population, without shutting off transfers completely.

 

If they abandoned Alliance, then it might indeed be in their plans to make more worlds, while at the same time continually reduce the population limit on all servers, effectively forcing players (Slowly) to split out between many small servers. This would give them somewhat more control over the server-linking process.

 

If anyone remembers, this is one of the things that devs asked us about in the past, if we where willing to consider making a lot of smaller servers and split out among them (delete existing servers, create a lot of new ones with smaller caps), and use that to link multiple servers together. As that would work easier than linking the current mega-size-servers.

 

It just depends on what sort of plan they have (if any).

[XenesisII.1540]

Finally, anet can enact this long lost plan that the community rejected the first time around!

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Hypothetically-Speaking-New-Worlds

Now we have no choice to accept it!

 

Actually all they need to do is move the population threshold back up to open up servers. Really not sure what they're currently trying to do, squeeze more gems out of transfers? or really try and stop the bandwagon transfers? The last bonus event seems to have inflated populations again as we went from 11 to 16 full servers, maybe in a couple weeks it'll come back down again, but anet seems to have lowered the threshold too much the last time they did it.

 

At this point there's no tournaments, there's no server rewards, if alliances is still on the table, I don't see why populations need to stay competitive, and all servers should just open up. If people want to stack they'll find themselves in boring stacked ppt heavy t1 anyways, and as usual the guilds will hop back down to lower tiers anyways.

[Gorem.8104]

Considering Anet keeps lowering the full cap instead of addressing issues, soon their only option will either be to add in new servers or raise the cap back up. Cause if people can't xfer to their linked server so they can keep playing with their buddies on the "full" servers, Anet will lose out on the money they have made by changing linked servers all this time. Its the only reason why this has existed for this long. 

 

It'd be great for them to open up the full servers, especially ones on the lower end. Let people stack if they want, in the end it doesn't really matter, you don't fight them all the time, and plus the outnumbered buff is great 😉 Also, people would xfer out of servers if all they see is que's on every map all day, that'd be boring in itself if you can't even get into wvw. 

[SWI.4127]

If they want people to destack full servers and populate smaller servers, this is the worst way to go about it.  Who's going to transfer when your only options are very high servers or 3 high servers? 

Edited June 5, 2021 by SWI.4127

[Gorem.8104]

1 hour ago, SWI.4127 said:

If they want people to destack full servers and populate smaller servers, this is the worst way to go about it.  Who's going to transfer when your only options are very high servers or 3 high servers? 

We down to 2 high servers now,  people paid/were paid to xfer over to IoJ, so its been boosted up into the very high range. 

[Acemos.2856]

I'll bet you the people who leave their bots farming WvW over night contribute quite a good amount to the "population" as well, because of how World population is calculated.

Edited June 6, 2021 by Acemos.2856

[Pacificterror.7805]

This week my server is matched up against my guild's server (that I'd love to transfer to but it always full).....it was pretty embarrassing going head-on into a clash against them on one of their runs and not noticing I was fighting my own guild until someone asked who the guildie in the opposing zerg was XD (I had already died/respawned so name was gone).

[SoftFootpaws.9134]

Its been stated before the solution is to make many small servers and link 2-3 or more servers at a time, this way the devs can more finely control population balance and coverage.

 

(Though, more frequent links would also be needed.)

 

It'd also make "bandwagoning" alot less useful since you could fit maybe one very large fight guild on an entire server, so players would be encouraged to spread out more to other servers and guilds, make new friends and try new things.

 

It'd be better for the game in the long run, but they're not going to do it because like all population balance problems with the game mode, it comes down to transfer costs benefitting the game; because gemstore isn't used much by WvWers.

 

(Though, that has to do more with poor monetization of things like gliders, Warclaw, and toys in WvW, but I won't get into that here.)

 

We're unlikely to see any changes before Alliances, if at all.

Edited June 7, 2021 by Hannelore.8153

[displayname.8315]

Don't need more servers.  Just make every map EB and remove the lockdowns so people start using more than one map per matchup.

Edited June 7, 2021 by displayname.8315

[Gorem.8104]

20 hours ago, Hannelore.8153 said:

Its been stated before the solution is to make many small servers and link 2-3 or more servers at a time, this way the devs can more finely control population balance and coverage.

 

(Though, more frequent links would also be needed.)

 

It'd also make "bandwagoning" alot less useful since you could fit maybe one very large fight guild on an entire server, so players would be encouraged to spread out more to other servers and guilds, make new friends and try new things.

 

It'd be better for the game in the long run, but they're not going to do it because like all population balance problems with the game mode, it comes down to transfer costs benefitting the game; because gemstore isn't used much by WvWers.

 

(Though, that has to do more with poor monetization of things like gliders, Warclaw, and toys in WvW, but I won't get into that here.)

 

We're unlikely to see any changes before Alliances, if at all.

Speaking of Bandwagon, Ioj Went from high-very high- the new full limit this week, which is kinda interesting. Looks like its going to keep happening until wvw alliances or some other plan comes into place 🙂

[Acemos.2856]

Hey it looks like A-net did what they could and listened 😄

[Gorem.8104]

6 hours ago, Acemos.2856 said:

Hey it looks like A-net did what they could and listened 😄

Goes to show sometimes feedback works 🙂