Guild Wars 2

I don’t think it will be as bad as the kakra invasion if that’s what you’re saying. We have had tons of new content in very small zones since then and never as much lag.

In fact I don’t think i’ve had any problems with doing content since that event.

Or are you saying overflows in general are a nightmare? It doesn’t look like there will be any big bosses so I don’t see the problem with overflows for this update.

And you never learn that overflows exist for a reason.

I think it will be instanced, at least some part of it. I hope it will be instanced.

Same problem. Same solution.

Dont bandwagon on the same 2-3 servers. These events, at least the first few days, are a lot more fun on the less populated servers.

Stop thinking you have to be on a T1 server to enjoy content. Spread out a little.

ZudetGambeous.9573:

Or are you saying overflows in general are a nightmare?

I haven’t been a fan of overflow since it was invented, as a response to the karka catastrophe. Shortly after that event we players had a chance to fill out a survey from Anet itself and the responses were overwhelming; that Anet doesn’t develop these super massive events very well.

Since then we’ve been given large scale boss invasions that have triggered overflows and in my opinion overflow technology is not a good bandaid for events that attract large numbers of players, never mind the massive numbers we had for the karka event, and what we will get again next week.

Many players can’t even get a map to load, never mind play with friends. Events start to fail and the resulting imbalance in rewards is really distasteful. Lions Arch might end, but it wont end well.

It depends what the content involves. In something like queens jubilee it seemed fine to me. It depended on which overflow but most of them were ok.

There is nothing wrong with playing content in the overflows, period.

Also at least they aren’t doing it as a one time release/event like they did for the Lost Shores content. Now that was epic because it happened only once and never again. A shame too many people were angry about that.

Herr der Friedhoefe.2490:

ZudetGambeous.9573:

Or are you saying overflows in general are a nightmare?

I haven’t been a fan of overflow since it was invented, as a response to the karka catastrophe. Shortly after that event we players had a chance to fill out a survey from Anet itself and the responses were overwhelming; that Anet doesn’t develop these super massive events very well.

Since then we’ve been given large scale boss invasions that have triggered overflows and in my opinion overflow technology is not a good bandaid for events that attract large numbers of players, never mind the massive numbers we had for the karka event, and what we will get again next week.

Many players can’t even get a map to load, never mind play with friends. Events start to fail and the resulting imbalance in rewards is really distasteful. Lions Arch might end, but it wont end well.

Overflows have been in the game since well before launch, they were added as a way to combat server limitations, and not in response to the karka at all, optimizations have been made in response to the karka event. As far as designing events that are too popular, i have no clue what to tell you. Maybe they should make bad content so they don’t have as many players, I guess that’s the only real solution.

Aye, we all prefer being unable to even play at all.
Oh wait..

lordkrall.7241:

Aye, we all prefer being unable to even play at all.
Oh wait..

Or… they could give us control and let us pick overflows manually, like GW1 did with districts.

Shinzan.2908:

Or… they could give us control and let us pick overflows manually, like GW1 did with districts.

Doesn’t really work when overflows are full though
And people seem to have issues with overflows overall, not specifically the part that you can’t decide which one to join.

Funnily enough I am almost sure that the same people complaining about overflows now would be the ones complaining loudest about not being able to play due to queues as well.

I have never understood all the hate aimed at Overflow, yes the Karka event was a nightmare, but sense then they have fixed it. I would rather have overflows then trying to log in and being told server is full, please sit in a cue for 45 mins. While not perfect Overflow is a lot better then not being able to play the content at all.

I don’t really understand what you want from Anet, what is there to learn? Do you want them to just make LA a solo instance? A group instance? Or do you just want them to allow 5,000 people in one map?

We want Anet to learn that overflow is bad, random system and it needs some changes.
I want to play with my friends, guild, not with random upset ppl! I want to do events like Tequatl, Marionette, Wurm, without afk 1-2h. Its so simple – for large bossess make raid/instances for guilds/teams/players – it works so well in other mmorpg, why it would not work here?
For world/map large scale events make districts, so I can switch to district 24 (like in GW1) to join my guild mates! I dont want to be put random to overflow that already have dozens of players that are not making event because they dont want to be on that overflow, so the event fails…

Its killing this game, Karka was a warning, Tequatl was yellow card, Wurm/Marionette was frustration festival, now we have grand finale HOW BAD overflow is after so many players switched servers to more populated, just to be able to play this game properly in other content…

Herr der Friedhoefe.2490:

Seriously. They never learn.

So basically, you’re suggesting that all servers have a current limit of only 100 to 150 players per map, and the rest of the players have to wait in a queue in order to access content? Kinda like how WvW is now?

So… how is that better than Overflows?

No instanced content. Never.

lordkrall.7241:

Shinzan.2908:

Or… they could give us control and let us pick overflows manually, like GW1 did with districts.

Doesn’t really work when overflows are full though
And people seem to have issues with overflows overall, not specifically the part that you can’t decide which one to join.

Funnily enough I am almost sure that the same people complaining about overflows now would be the ones complaining loudest about not being able to play due to queues as well.

It would mean players from 3 underpopulated overflows could join a single one getting the numbers these events often require, or that a guild or other organized group could decide to meet up in, say overflow 9 instead of having to taxi people one by one and hope it doesn’t get full in the meanwhile.

Shinzan.2908:

It would mean players from 3 underpopulated overflows could join a single one getting the numbers these events often require, or that a guild or other organized group could decide to meet up in, say overflow 9 instead of having to taxi people one by one and hope it doesn’t get full in the meanwhile.

You are aware that new overflows are created when the first one is full, right?
So “3 underpopulated overflows” wouldn’t be able to somehow join a single overflow, unless a rather big amount of people rage-quit due to being put in overflow (in which case new players logging in would be added to that overflow anyway, and thus there wouldn’t really change anything).

You also seem to either not recall or simply ignore the fact that you couldn’t join full districts in GW1 either.

lordkrall.7241:

You are aware that new overflows are created when the first one is full, right?
So “3 underpopulated overflows” wouldn’t be able to somehow join a single overflow, unless a rather big amount of people rage-quit due to being put in overflow (in which case new players logging in would be added to that overflow anyway, and thus there wouldn’t really change anything).

You also seem to either not recall or simply ignore the fact that you couldn’t join full districts in GW1 either.

When doing marionette I often ended up in an overflow with few people but when asking in guild chat I was able to taxi into an overflow with more players and free slots, so for whatever reason overflows do spread out players over several rather than just filling up one then, a second, then a third.

And no, the point is a guild could move into an empty one rather than being spread out over several and unable to fit into one overflow because of other players.

There are two different kinds of full.
One is a soft-cap. That have a set number of people being able to join it the regular way (just entering the map). Then there is the hard-cap which is higher, but until that is full you are able to join people in that overflow if you are in their party.
When the hard-cap is reached however, no one can join the overflow.

Neither in GW1 or in GW2 have you ever been able to create your own district/overflow, and definitely not locking it specifically for your guild. And it is unlikely that this will ever happen.

lordkrall.7241:

Neither in GW1 or in GW2 have you ever been able to create your own district/overflow, and definitely not locking it specifically for your guild. And it is unlikely that this will ever happen.

Yup, in GW1 you could. You’d simply choose a region that was sparsely populated and go there. E.g go to Italian Dist 1 for ToA. It would create your very own district just for you and whoever you wanted to bring along

Or you could cram in alliance members until a new district was made and then go there. Did that loads of times for Canthan new years.

Vol.7601:

And you never learn that overflows exist for a reason.

And you never learn that’s no excuse.
Technical limitations should never impair content on purpose. They should either design their content in such a way overflows won’t be a problem or enhance their server capacity.

If they are creating an event that can only be played by 100 people, but they know thousands of players are gonna want to play it then they should prepare for that.

I don’t mind overflows, except when I try to do an event that requires a lot of organisation, has a reload time of 2 hours and I end up in an overflow where everyone speaks languages I don’t understand.

Shinzan.2908:

lordkrall.7241:

Shinzan.2908:

Or… they could give us control and let us pick overflows manually, like GW1 did with districts.

Doesn’t really work when overflows are full though
And people seem to have issues with overflows overall, not specifically the part that you can’t decide which one to join.

Funnily enough I am almost sure that the same people complaining about overflows now would be the ones complaining loudest about not being able to play due to queues as well.

It would mean players from 3 underpopulated overflows could join a single one getting the numbers these events often require, or that a guild or other organized group could decide to meet up in, say overflow 9 instead of having to taxi people one by one and hope it doesn’t get full in the meanwhile.

It could also mean that an Overflow that is half full, but with enough players to do content, suddenly has a large guild leave for their own Overflow and thus leave a small group behind that now has to switch servers. That small group would be angry.

I honestly don’t think there is much of an issue with the current overflow system. It seems pretty easy and the Taxi system works if needed. The devs have mentioned that they are looking into it, so who knows, they may switch to a district like system.

Windu The Forbidden One.6045:

Vol.7601:

And you never learn that overflows exist for a reason.

And you never learn that’s no excuse.
Technical limitations should never impair content on purpose. They should either design their content in such a way overflows won’t be a problem or enhance their server capacity.

If they are creating an event that can only be played by 100 people, but they know thousands of players are gonna want to play it then they should prepare for that.

Wait, what? So if they make an event that 100 people can do, but 10,000 people show up to do it, they should have a server that can handle that? Would you as a player want 10,000 people there tagging a boss? People complain now about organizing 80 people for Tequatl. Could you imagine a server with 10,000 people and trying to get 100 to do what is needed? Would it scale to 10,000 people? Talk about a health pool.

That would ruin any game. Not to mention the monetary value of running and maintaining those servers.

Delvoire.8930:

Windu The Forbidden One.6045:

Vol.7601:

And you never learn that overflows exist for a reason.

And you never learn that’s no excuse.
Technical limitations should never impair content on purpose. They should either design their content in such a way overflows won’t be a problem or enhance their server capacity.

If they are creating an event that can only be played by 100 people, but they know thousands of players are gonna want to play it then they should prepare for that.

Wait, what? So if they make an event that 100 people can do, but 10,000 people show up to do it, they should have a server that can handle that? Would you as a player want 10,000 people there tagging a boss? People complain now about organizing 80 people for Tequatl. Could you imagine a server with 10,000 people and trying to get 100 to do what is needed? Would it scale to 10,000 people? Talk about a health pool.

That would ruin any game. Not to mention the monetary value of running and maintaining those servers.

So you are putting words in my mouth, then ask me to justify them?
No one ever said anything about having 10.000 people in one boss fight.
I said anet should, if they know thousands of people are going to do an event, prepare for it somehow. This could be done in many different ways, for example have the event spread out over different maps so not everyone has to be in the same map.

Windu The Forbidden One.6045:

Delvoire.8930:

Windu The Forbidden One.6045:

Vol.7601:

And you never learn that overflows exist for a reason.

And you never learn that’s no excuse.
Technical limitations should never impair content on purpose. They should either design their content in such a way overflows won’t be a problem or enhance their server capacity.

If they are creating an event that can only be played by 100 people, but they know thousands of players are gonna want to play it then they should prepare for that.

Wait, what? So if they make an event that 100 people can do, but 10,000 people show up to do it, they should have a server that can handle that? Would you as a player want 10,000 people there tagging a boss? People complain now about organizing 80 people for Tequatl. Could you imagine a server with 10,000 people and trying to get 100 to do what is needed? Would it scale to 10,000 people? Talk about a health pool.

That would ruin any game. Not to mention the monetary value of running and maintaining those servers.

So you are putting words in my mouth, then ask me to justify them?
No one ever said anything about having 10.000 people in one boss fight.
I said anet should, if they know thousands of people are going to do an event, prepare for it somehow. This could be done in many different ways, for example have the event spread out over different maps so not everyone has to be in the same map.

Sorry. I made up that high of a number to try to prove my point.

So for instance, instead of having Scarlet invade one map, she would invade 10 at once?

I’ve never played an MMO with events like this in open world. Normally if a server is full you have to wait in que, then you do raids and wait in those ques.

Nivelis.8763:

We want Anet to learn that overflow is bad, random system and it needs some changes.
I want to play with my friends, guild, not with random upset ppl! I want to do events like Tequatl, Marionette, Wurm, without afk 1-2h. Its so simple – for large bossess make raid/instances for guilds/teams/players – it works so well in other mmorpg, why it would not work here?
For world/map large scale events make districts, so I can switch to district 24 (like in GW1) to join my guild mates! I dont want to be put random to overflow that already have dozens of players that are not making event because they dont want to be on that overflow, so the event fails…

Its killing this game, Karka was a warning, Tequatl was yellow card, Wurm/Marionette was frustration festival, now we have grand finale HOW BAD overflow is after so many players switched servers to more populated, just to be able to play this game properly in other content…

I concur. What I want from a game like this is quite easy:
-Never an overflow
-No instanced maps either
-Just plain and simple: wandering though a map and than engaging group event on a random, not predictable time scale and than the choice to either leave it if not enough players are around or team up and slay the beasts… On the world map and not in a team based instance.

The only reason why its done differently is lack of server capacity. THAT should change!

Before you declare something tastes bad, actually try tasting it first.

So there’s really two (major, still lots of sub-proposals) crowds of people complaining about overflows, and I think its important to distinguish that. You have the people who are frusturated that they can’t play with their friends. To them I think the general consensus, is yeah, it definetly sucks to a certain degree, but you have the Taxi system, so you’re not that bad off while Anet works out a solution for you. Then you have the Anet needs to magically summon up the server space to hold all of the players that want to do an event. These people either lack basic the understanding of computer systems and money required to understand what they request is impossible, expect anet to develop 10x as much content so that we can have epic invasions spread out across the maps, or are pro trolls. Whichever it is, they are immune to logical argument, so lets just leave them out of this and have an otherwise reasonable discussion

The problem with Anet’s overflow events is the scaling.

For instance the marionnette: if you arrive a little late (but still before the beginning of the event) you are guaranteed to end up in an overflow with only a few people and then you don’t even stand a chance because you don’t have enough people to fill the warden platforms.

Dra Keln.2015:

So there’s really two (major, still lots of sub-proposals) crowds of people complaining about overflows, and I think its important to distinguish that. You have the people who are frusturated that they can’t play with their friends. To them I think the general consensus, is yeah, it definetly sucks to a certain degree, but you have the Taxi system, so you’re not that bad off while Anet works out a solution for you. Then you have the Anet needs to magically summon up the server space to hold all of the players that want to do an event. These people either lack basic the understanding of computer systems and money required to understand what they request is impossible, expect anet to develop 10x as much content so that we can have epic invasions spread out across the maps, or are pro trolls. Whichever it is, they are immune to logical argument, so lets just leave them out of this and have an otherwise reasonable discussion

A district system should actually lead to less servers for Anet overall.

With the current system they need to have 27 servers which are always up, in addition to however many overflows. This means that players trying to get into Desolation cold spawn their 4th overflow while other servers are actually empty.

There is also the psychological factor, being put into an overflow feels inferior to being on a main server. If you only had numbered districts people would consider them to be more equal.

Shinzan.2908:

lordkrall.7241:

Aye, we all prefer being unable to even play at all.
Oh wait..

Or… they could give us control and let us pick overflows manually, like GW1 did with districts.

This! I’ll never get tired of repeating this. hugs Shinzan
In order to play with friends, and not have to rely on AFKers or people that a) don’t listen, b) have poor builds, d) don’t care to improve/help, the overflow problem must be taken care of! Preferably before new megabosses and definitely before another Elder Dragon finale.

Blaeys.3102:

Dont bandwagon on the same 2-3 servers. These events, at least the first few days, are a lot more fun on the less populated servers.

Stop thinking you have to be on a T1 server to enjoy content. Spread out a little.

I don’t approve it, but I see why ppl do that.
- T1 servers have more people and more good players.
- The overflow will likely have more good players that can get organised.
So everyone who cares goes to those servers after getting tired of trying with pugs that never learn. Small pop servers have more limited supply of good players and they’ll mostly end up on main, while the overflow usually fails. Again, choice of overflows and choosing who to play with in events that require organisation is necessary.

They should have done away with a logical server architecture altogether for PvE, and people choose a ‘team’ (aka what we call server names now) for WvW when they first create an account.

Then you can load balance WvW and PvE separately making empty servers for PvE a non issue, keeping the integrity of WvW and getting rid of this whole overflow mess in the first place.

Far to late to change it now, so we’re stuck with this sub-optimal, community breaking and inefficient mess