Guild Wars 2

NOTE: Warning! Walls of text ahead! This was pieced together after long days of thinking and from other points made in other suggestions. Please keep this thread constructive on the topic! If you disagree with these suggestions then please explain why in a polite manner! If you agree +1 this post! Thank you!

Some Background/The Problem:
So there has been a problem that has started to slowly creep up on Guild Wars 2. The issue is a slight issue that upon first glance isn’t too menacing, but can really downgrade the game and if scrutinized can seriously hamper the game’s progress to becoming better. The problem is empty lower level zones. So first of all, I need to give some reference here to help explain the problem. Yes, i will mention WoW (gasp!) not because it is “the best” but because that is the only other MMO I’ve played extensively.

After the GW2 hype had died down and all the one timers, rage quitters, everyone else, and the general population hit 80 and spread out, lower level zones (20-70) became emptier. This is normal in any MMO (even in WoW it is very common to find a mid level zone just completely empty of people except for the occasional few). So no, the game isn’t dying because of empty zones but rather this is a typical issue in MMO’s. So what’s the problem you might ask?

Well when someone compares many of the typical quest-hub genre’s of MMO’s and Guild Wars 2 you notice something different. Guild Wars 2 quest system is structured differently and is more about cooperation and others helping you via hearts and dynamic events, while as in quest-hub games you are relatively independent and can do most of the quests by yourself with no trouble. Here is where the problem starts to occur. In games like WoW you can easily level up from level 1 to max level all by yourself. This is easy, as quests are centered around your character alone, meaning you don’t need the help of someone else. GW2 is different. GW2 promotes and rewards cooperation between players in hearts and events. During the early months of the game, I flew to level 80 in a breeze because of how the game works. You work on hearts and other players will come along to aid you, then if you are lucky an event will spawn nearby and then you and your rag-tag team of players would finish the event and it’s possible chain-leveling up considerably. It was quite enjoyable.

However, because most zones are empty with only a few (1-5) players spread across ONE map, the leveling is extremely hindered. Since cooperation and help with dynamic events speed up the leveling, when no one is helping you the leveling is slowed down tremendously. I’ve had multiple occasions on alts where it can take anywhere from 10-30 minutes to complete one event because no one comes around to help (even if i point it out in map chat). Or I simply can’t do the event because it is too difficult to handle by myself. One could say to ask your guild mates for help, while I have done so it still doesn’t address the issue at hand (either way, why would my guild mates come to help me when there will be only 2 silver rewards? That won’t even cover their teleporting fee! It’s more like a band-aid rather than a fix to a problem). Other events are simply just left there and are finished once every couple of hours or days if no one comes around. It puts a huge slow-down on the leveling process and makes it much more of a grind than it really is. A side-affect of this is that many events never get to see the light of day, as they are never completed or rarely finished.

The solution: Simple yet effective:
GW2 has a unique system (which I don’t know why they use more often). This is the Overflow system. Basically, when there are too many people in one map on your server you are sent to an overflow- a mish-mash of other people from different servers. You are then put into a queue for your server’s map and can join if you want to when it has room. My question is this: Why don’t we use this system for all the maps? Do away with server based maps and make them overflows. Let each server have multiple overflows for maps. This concept has also been addressed as “underflow” in other suggestions. Let me get a little more in depth here and show an example:

Let’s assume i want to go to Blazeridge Steppes to level up. When I enter the portal, the game could use an algorithm to determine where I end up. It will first check to see if i have any party members in one overflow. If i do-it puts me there. If i don’t it checks to see if i have friends/guild mates. If i do- it puts me in the one with the most and if i don’t meet any of those requirements-it puts me in the highest populated overflow. This ensures that I will always end up on a map with large amounts of people in it. Ta-da! Now whichever zone i go into, i can always expect to see a lot of people in there.

Now then, for the issues that many may argue or bring up I will resolve them here:

What if i like playing alone and don’t enjoy other people helping me? Well, A-net could add a little box in the upper-right hand corner that has a drop down menu. From this menu you can select different overflows to choose from and you can join any of those overflows. It can even sort them from high population to low population (this would also help with lower-end PC’s).

Let’s say my friends and I get into separate overflows, then what? Well, keep in mind you can right click them and select join overflow. Even if that doesn’t work, you could always use the drop-down menu suggested above and choose an overflow of that particular map.

What about my server? I think of it as my community. Well, to be fair, I don’t find servers my community but rather my guild. I mean heck, you can guest to other realms, people in other realms can be in the same guild as you, and they can even join your dungeon! Then again, this is also subjective to the person and what they believe is their community. Overall i think it wouldn’t be too bad, since you get to see more faces rather than the occasional 1-3 you see on one map.

What about Guild missions? Well, assuming you can now easily jump from overflow to overflow, it would make large guilds have more people joining for guild events (as those who are limited to guesting can still aid them). What if the overflow gets full of players then of said guild and other guild mates can’t join? Well, keep in mind, this system already exists (if there are too many players in one map they get put in an overflow) its just that the threshold for players is high enough to support many players in one map should that ever happen.

What about high-population places like Lions Arch? Would there be multiple overflows? No, not necessarily. A-Net could make it so that cities have VERY high population overflows-meaning there can be a bunch of people in one overflow. Or, they could not have any overflows for Cities, making them the “true” area of your server.

If every map is an overflow, what about WvW? Won’t servers have no meaning? This wasn’t really an issue in the early months of the game (when there were many overflows) as people easily identified who they were. Either way, A-net could always make it so that you are put in a queue the second you enter the map to be put into your server’s version of that map (like they currently have it set up, but instead set it so that you always enter an overflow for default instead of the other way around).

What about world bosses? Won’t those be a pain to keep track of? Well, not if the system was done this way: Let’s assume every map has 1 overflow for each server and is named after it (e.g. Crystal Desert Blazeridge Steppes Overflow-this would be the title of the overflow). Boss tracking would work the same, you go onto your timers and just select your server. It would also make it easier for people to actually be able to attend these world events. For example, let’s say Bob is a busy working man. Bob can only play 1 hour a day and gets home at 8 p.m. When he gets home, he notices all the world bosses just recently died 10 minutes ago. With the current system, he wouldn’t be able to get to do those bosses. However, if with the overflow system he merely finds an overflow in which the boss will spawn soon, he can simply warp to said overflow and do it. This gives busy players more opportunities to do daily bosses.

Why not just use an underflow system? Well, there are a couple of problems. The basic concept of underflow is that if a zone meets a too low of a threshold of players, it is merged into an overflow. The first question would be when does the threshold of too low players get reached? The second would be what would happen to players already in the zone? Would they get warped and teleported (perhaps not getting to finish the event they were doing?). Overall it is too complicated compared to the already current overflow system.

Post your opinions and thoughts below and I will do my best to respond and debate with you and if you agree, +1 this thread!

The town areas in Guild Wars 1 had a district system which acted like the overflow here.. When you ported into a town it put you into one of the districts. If you wanted to go to a more crowded district or one with fewer people, you clicked on the tab and asked to go to district 1 or district 5 or whichever. Then as long as there was room, you went there. There were not only American districts but foreign districts as well, that you could go to if you wanted.

I wish they had kept that sort of system for the game. It allowed you to go to the level of crowding that you preferred and if there were annoying people where you were then you just switched districts.

I can see how they would need to keep server names for WvW and because of lag maybe no longer mix the continents. But I agree, the district or overflow/underflow system would help to fix some of the problems caused by areas emptying out of population.

My only problem with this idea is playing with friend. Back when the game first started everyone was in dozens of overflows because of the fact that everyone playing the game was doing so in 1 of 5 starter zones. For that first month or so it was terrible trying to play together with your friends and all get into the same overflow together or to decide to join the regular server or not. In the end I like the way it is currently with servers. I agree I hate the lack of players, but I do not personally think this is the way to do it.

Narcemus.1348:

My only problem with this idea is playing with friend. Back when the game first started everyone was in dozens of overflows because of the fact that everyone playing the game was doing so in 1 of 5 starter zones. For that first month or so it was terrible trying to play together with your friends and all get into the same overflow together or to decide to join the regular server or not. In the end I like the way it is currently with servers. I agree I hate the lack of players, but I do not personally think this is the way to do it.

What if you could see which overflow you were in, the number? And if you could choose which overflow to go to? If you both choose overflow 5, for example and both go there then you would stay together.

Iirc, the district system kept party members together when they zoned into an area. It fit all members of the party into a district with enough open slots.

This does not address why there is a lack of population in certain zones in the first place and will only treat the symptoms, while the problem continues unabated.

The following post is taken from a topic in the general Discussion forum talking about the actual problem.

Here is my statement based on my opinion: (wall of text inbound)
World population has taken a hit with the introduction of chests to easily farmable world events. People like to farm these events because it’s an easy way to get rares which can give ectos or to just use them for the Mystic Forge or to make money from them. Because these events are such an easy way to farm for mats, it pulls people out of the open world and into small clusters who waypoint from boss to boss and do little of consequence between. As more and more of the player population hits level cap and is searching for ways to make money or create legendaries, more and more people either choose to do these events or go to farm pent/shelt. While there will always be places where players will accumulate naturally, these places were created artificially. These groups can number from between fifteen to the upper limit of server capacity.
This in turn concentrates more and more of the population in these areas, leaving leveling areas where new players are first experiencing the game lightly populated (not starting zones, these are generally full due to events or players looking for easy daily completions). As there are less people in these areas, it creates a “less fun”, less immersive experience for some new players. Especially ones who may have chosen a server which is not as highly populated as others, either because they did not understand the way Anet labels server activity or for some other unknown to me reason. As time has progressed, more and more unique posters have posted on the forums asking why the world seems dead. They are greeted with derision by other posters who choose to ignore the problem or they are offered ideas to alleviate the symptoms instead of discussing what may be the cause of the perceived lack of population in the first place, at worst they are labeled trolls and written off.
It is my opinion that in order to alleviate these situations of perceived lack of population that rewards should not be put into easily farmable events and that vets and champs have loot tables that directly reflect their challenge. That each zone should have a chest event that is tied to a meta chain that spans the zone entirely, not just a small area, and that rewards should be tied to a percentage of meta completion much the way events are now. Also a look must be taken at the downscaling of level 80’s, not the upscaling of events. Either a greater removal of attributes or special debuffs applied as the way 80’s are now downscaled is not effective and trivializes most events. An 80 in Queensdale should be just as vulnerable as a level 15.
The perceived loss of population of servers and zones can also be addressed with cheaper realm transfer prices, perhaps free in some cases, and a buff system akin to wvw now. This population loss will not be seen across all servers, especially due to some servers being unofficially known for this or that. Or possibly a server merge, although none of these actually serve to distribute the population. While a population will never be truly equal across all zones, avoiding population concentrations if possible are the ideal, not the exception.

I think I will sum this up and simply say that Guildwars 2 is a screwed up when it comes to this problem, because they released a vertical leveling system in a game that’s apparently meant to be horizontal.

So of course lower level zones are going to be empty when there’s higher level zones suited for high levels, also the loot system is connected to this, why farm ore or blood in the low level zones (Which is designed for low levels), when your recipe for crafting requires ore or blood from a high level zone / creature?

Arenanet wanted to make this game so unique and yet, they have used the generic design for this. Someone clearly didn’t think it through.

Gustoril.4195:

So of course lower level zones are going to be empty when there’s higher level zones suited for high levels, also the loot system is connected to this, why farm ore or blood in the low level zones (Which is designed for low levels), when your recipe for crafting requires ore or blood from a high level zone / creature?

I am confused, because this is simply not the case.

I just read a thread that complained about Orr (level 75+) being “empty”. Now you’re telling me that the low level zones are “empty”. Well, they aren’t in TC.

- I (and other level 80s that I know) adventure in 1-15 zones ALL THE TIME, they never feel particularly empty to me.
- Maguuma starter zones have the best jumping puzzles.
- Easy chests.
- Maw, SB, Jungle Worm, Fire Elemental…
- Metrica reactor: very easy daily kill variety, daily veteran killer, etc.
- Flame & Frost brought even more population to level 1-25 zones and I’m sure future living story elements will do the same.
- If you level up all your crafts, you need equal amounts of materials from all tiers. It is impossible to level up your 3rd-6th craft while adventuring in high level maps only.

I generally adventure in the zone that I feel like spending time in (many times it will be in Maguuma as it is so nice there) and/or what the dailies suggest (krytan killer, etc.) and/or living story and/or personal story – so many different reasons. Farming for high level mats is only one reason in the list.

Arguably, some mid-level zones are emptier than others. I haven’t been back to Harathi Hinterlands in ages, for example, but I heard it’s pretty barren. I’m sure ANet has statistics, and maybe will place some living story elements there in the future (as they did with Southsun Cove, previously known as the emptiest of zones), or maybe give the meta-events there an overhaul / better reward.

So, yeah, I don’t get the whole “starter zones are empty” premise in the first place.

+1 Overflow idea is great and excellent.
I would love your overflow idea, the game is doomed if it stays that way.

But they do not want and could not do it. As they said earlier they have big problem with server programmer capacity.

And there are lots of problems and background works:
- Home server, on overflow u don’t see WvW, and do buffs work correctly on overflow?
- Guild system, that is a big problem now, the guild is half-serverbound half-global, that is not good. They should be transformed into a fully global. If players play, the guild got the influence, doesn’t metter where are they playing: which home server, which overflow.
- Erasing borders, not necessary Guesting.
- Everything global (materials, chests, etc) should not get an advantage by switch between overflows.
- Party transport UI play together

The automated overflow system would be the GW2 paradise. It hurts to imagine, because we know, need it, but we never get this.

Pixelpumpkin.4608:

Gustoril.4195:

So of course lower level zones are going to be empty when there’s higher level zones suited for high levels, also the loot system is connected to this, why farm ore or blood in the low level zones (Which is designed for low levels), when your recipe for crafting requires ore or blood from a high level zone / creature?

I am confused, because this is simply not the case.

I just read a thread that complained about Orr (level 75+) being “empty”. Now you’re telling me that the low level zones are “empty”. Well, they aren’t in TC.

- I (and other level 80s that I know) adventure in 1-15 zones ALL THE TIME, they never feel particularly empty to me.
- Maguuma starter zones have the best jumping puzzles.
- Easy chests.
- Maw, SB, Jungle Worm, Fire Elemental…
- Metrica reactor: very easy daily kill variety, daily veteran killer, etc.
- Flame & Frost brought even more population to level 1-25 zones and I’m sure future living story elements will do the same.
- If you level up all your crafts, you need equal amounts of materials from all tiers. It is impossible to level up your 3rd-6th craft while adventuring in high level maps only.

I generally adventure in the zone that I feel like spending time in (many times it will be in Maguuma as it is so nice there) and/or what the dailies suggest (krytan killer, etc.) and/or living story and/or personal story – so many different reasons. Farming for high level mats is only one reason in the list.

Arguably, some mid-level zones are emptier than others. I haven’t been back to Harathi Hinterlands in ages, for example, but I heard it’s pretty barren. I’m sure ANet has statistics, and maybe will place some living story elements there in the future (as they did with Southsun Cove, previously known as the emptiest of zones), or maybe give the meta-events there an overhaul / better reward.

So, yeah, I don’t get the whole “starter zones are empty” premise in the first place.

“It’s obviously ok if I don’t see it on TC”…..wow, just wow. TC is one of, if not the, most populated server, so that server won’t encounter near as much lack of population in zones. Also starter zones (1-15) are great, except for the charr area now that F&F is gone, because they each have an event chest and are used to grind out dailies.

killcannon.2576:

“It’s obviously ok if I don’t see it on TC”…..wow, just wow. TC is one of, if not the, most populated server, so that server won’t encounter near as much lack of population in zones. Also starter zones (1-15) are great, except for the charr area now that F&F is gone, because they each have an event chest and are used to grind out dailies.

That’s not what I meant to say. But if your server population is low in general, then that is a separate problem.

Anyway, are you telling me that on other servers people don’t do the meta-events in low level areas for guaranteed yellow items? The dragontimer suggests otherwise. That would be a big surprise to me.

Narcemus.1348:

My only problem with this idea is playing with friend. Back when the game first started everyone was in dozens of overflows because of the fact that everyone playing the game was doing so in 1 of 5 starter zones. For that first month or so it was terrible trying to play together with your friends and all get into the same overflow together or to decide to join the regular server or not. In the end I like the way it is currently with servers. I agree I hate the lack of players, but I do not personally think this is the way to do it.

While there were issues like these, they were later addressed and is now not a problem (since all you can do is just right click on your friend and join the instance). If that didn’t work, you could always just switch overflows via the menu if A-net added it.

Gustoril.4195

I think I will sum this up and simply say that Guildwars 2 is a screwed up when it comes to this problem, because they released a vertical leveling system in a game that’s apparently meant to be horizontal.
So of course lower level zones are going to be empty when there’s higher level zones suited for high levels, also the loot system is connected to this, why farm ore or blood in the low level zones (Which is designed for low levels), when your recipe for crafting requires ore or blood from a high level zone / creature?
Arenanet wanted to make this game so unique and yet, they have used the generic design for this. Someone clearly didn’t think it through.

This is typical for any game and isn’t so much vertical progression but lack of better rewards. Realistically speaking, if you got T6 mat drops from level 1-15 zones, the opposite would happen. People would abandon higher level areas as they have now found an lower level area in which they can easily face-stomp and receive the same amount of high quality items items.

killcannon.2576

snip

While this is indeed the issue I could counter-argue that your issue is simply a solution. The reason is because players will always seek the best way to make money, regardless of how boring/repetitive it is (cof 1 is an perfect example). Which is indeed, one of the problems but it isn’t a community/design problem-that is just human nature. The problem with your approach is that: A) A-net doesn’t seem to enjoy getting nice rewards/money from events as they have nerfed many events in the past (plix/shelters for example). B) If downscaled worked perfectly and you got level 80 drops at 1-15 zones (I would assume that would count with the difficulty too because harder content doesn’t make people more likely to go to other zones), the higher level zones would become empty (even more so the upper level zones) and now there are much more people in lower level zones (1-15 as 15+ wouldn’t be worth it) as they are now killing everything that twitches. C) It is much effort that will take months/years to make the entire world and maps with meta chains worth it with a chest at the end.

So while yes, reward vs risk is a problem, but unfortunately the solution you suggested is unlikely to happen. Yes, the overflow system is also unlikely but it has a higher chance of making it as it already exists within the game.

chucky.4798

And there are lots of problems and background works:
- Home server, on overflow u don’t see WvW, and do buffs work correctly on overflow?
- Guild system, that is a big problem now, the guild is half-serverbound half-global, that is not good. They should be transformed into a fully global. If players play, the guild got the influence, doesn’t metter where are they playing: which home server, which overflow.
- Erasing borders, not necessary Guesting.
- Everything global (materials, chests, etc) should not get an advantage by switch between overflows.
- Party transport UI play together

Not sure if WvW buffs work on overflow and yes the WvW would be a problem. Once again though, if you just join your server’s version of the map and it wouldn’t be a problem and if it’s full you can queue for it. I wouldn’t see how materials get an advantage over switching overflows as switching from low population areas to high population areas doesn’t make people want to farm/kill more stuff. Care to evaluate?

I do see the point with chests, but the loot from chests is usually/mainly comprised of equipment relative to that level area (keep in mind the daily bonus chest is bound to per account, meaning if you do Shatterer once, even if you kill it again in a different overflow you won’t get the bonus chest).

Keep the feedback/support coming!

Wow, incredible post and looked really good at quick glance. Ill have to come back to read this further which is one reason why I am posting.

But I will say (being on CD) that for the most part the most empty zones seem to be mid level zones (40-65 areas mainly) that do not have any big meta events, dragontimer related events or popular dungeons. I personally dont really think this is a terrible issue relating to balancing of players in the zones.

Having played more than my share of WoW and some other MMOs I can say that usually what determined the population of a given zone was what you could get for time invested.

For example in WoW there were many zones that people just never bothered to go to because 1) the mobs in that zone may have been more bothersome than in others 2) quests weren’t as good or 3) there was some other benefit to leveling in a different area. the multiple options imo was the major factor in WoW in the pre 60 areas. When you got into the 60-70 and 70-80 areas this balance changed because 1) there were fewer zone options though they were also much larger and 2) the time required to complete quests in a given zone and to level were extended so much that one could pretty easily reach the given level cap by only going to 1-3 zones especially if you were familiar with the areas and lvling alts, etc (I stopped that game with almost a dozen lvl 80s lol, so I did the lvling thing a lot)

Moving on to another MMO I played way too much of was FFXI, and this one the biggest factor was the ‘friendliness’ of the zone, some places were just way too cumbersome to lvl in unless you had a specific setup so there was no reason to be in many places. The reason this sort of thing came about was that in games where lvling can be a bit of a ‘grind’ people want to maximize the time spent online so why bother going to a place that isnt as good.

The other games Ive played pretty much all have the same reasons so I wont keep citing more examples but this is where I feel that GW2 is quite different. Now I will say I would like to see some changes but Ill get to those in a moment. First off with the empty zones I personally spend time in a wide variety of zones regardless of my level. While it would be nice to be able to roll back through a lowby zone and actually be lvl 80 so you can quickly clear hearts for completion sake you wouldnt get all the other benefits that go with it. I thus feel that the level capping system Anet implemented is quite awesome. It allows me to play with friends wherever we want and wherever they are regardless of lvl difference.

Now with that said they did get some things right with the level gap and that you usually get appropriate exp and gold rewards based on your level for completing hearts and events rather than the level of the area but it would be nice if the gear rewards reflected this as well. Since zone completion is on a per character basis there isn’t a need to gather gear in a zone to give to an alt per-say since you will get the same rewards when you come back on the lower level. They did get part of this right with the chest rewards though so that part is nice.

In regards to the gatherables which is the other major thing that doesn’t scale. Frankly I feel this is done right. Would I like to be able to gather mithril or ori just outside Lion’s Arch on a level 80? Well ya I guess but at the same time I have obvious options on where I need to go to get the materials I need to level up other crafts and having to mess with getting the right level for the area so the proper gathering points appear would be tedious and I still have the options in every other zone to get what I need already. Plus it would just have the inverse affect, there would be no reason to go to the other zones if you could get the same thing anywhere you went and the further away you get from a city the emptier the zone would be since there would be no reason to pay to port or time to walk way out to whatever when you can get all you need right outside the gate.

I also haven’t had any trouble leveling ‘solo’ in this game either, sure sometimes there are group events that you obviously cant solo but I have never turned away from an event in any area and been able to solo it. Even more true for hearts.

Any argument relative to grouping with friends or guilds shouldn’t be relevant imo because if you are doing something with your own group then you have a group to do stuff with in that zone, doesn’t matter what others are doing.

I don’t honestly see why this is really a huge problem and it is completely normal in any MMO.

Zelkovan.2630:

What about Guild missions? Well, assuming you can now easily jump from overflow to overflow, it would make large guilds have more people joining for guild events (as those who are limited to guesting can still aid them). What if the overflow gets full of players then of said guild and other guild mates can’t join? Well, keep in mind, this system already exists (if there are too many players in one map they get put in an overflow) its just that the threshold for players is high enough to support many players in one map should that ever happen.

This is an actual problem. My guild ran a bounty and we got Ander “Wildman” Westward. Since the Southsun Cove story event is on, we left to do this one for last, assuming would be easier since we have a lot of farmers on the place. Conclusion: bounty failed because we got divided by the overflow.

I haven’t got overflow for the other bounties yet, but ET is a “small” server comparing to the others. So, at the very least, I think Anet should disable Ander “Wildman” Westward bounty until the Southsun Cove event finish or the overflow for Guild Missions are fixed.

It is a 2 months old post, very important topic and problem, and few answers, few talks. Just a little refresh.

Balanced PVE zones.
Let see an example. Calderon forest. At this moment 2402 player playes on zone Caledon forest. EU there are 48 server. For example 1 zone = max 100 players.

‘First full’ algorythm. It means 24 full, 1 almost empty server zone (23 empty but it is not important) . This is not good. 24 full server zone bad because too many players, and all event done. Starvation problem, u must w8 too much for active events. 1 almost empty server zone. Empty problem, you are alone, bad feeling.

‘Balanced’ algorythm. 46 servers – 50 players, 2 servers – 51 players. Better solution.

‘Very balanced’ algorythm.
3 important variable
- MaxZoneCount, ZoneOptimalPlayers, ZoneMaxPlayers
Same Example: Caledon Forest.
MaxZoneCount = 200
ZoneOptimalPlayer = 30
ZoneMaxPlayer = 100
With this algoryth 78 server zones 30 players, 2 server zones 31 players. This algoryth watches what is the optimal player count.

Home server, WvW
Home Server do not exist anymore. The new is the WvW server. The guilds’ property is what is your WvW server (as a guild member).
- Yes it means, you should become a guild’s member, if you want to participate in WvW.
- You (as a guild member) you must choose a main guild. If you represent your main guild you can participate in WvW otherwise error message.
- You cant fly between guilds because of you want different WvW advantage every week. If you change your main guild, it costs some gems.

(Of course you would left the guild and would join to other. It would be free, but you wouldn’t join back again to the guild for a week.)

If a guild want to change WvW server it costs merit, influence and gems.

Why it is good? main reason for migration between servers it is the WvW. You can read above the PvE solution, not necessary the migration. If guilds’ strength are determined the WvW and not the server (like now) the WvW will be better experience, enjoyment.

With the new update coming and all bosses getting a daily chest, low level zones will get more attention. No one doesn’t really want to farm low level zones when they could farm high level zones and get better farm, yeah GW2 is mostly about farming gold. So daily chests for all bosses will increase the numbers of players you see in low level zones. Anet probably have more stuff coming to the game which will give all zones more attention and not only high level zones and dungeons.

Here’s another solution:

When ever the average population of an explorable zone drops below a certain limit, this allows a special boss to spawn in that zone, with great rewards, but it requires a ton of players to take down. Thus giving players a reason to flock back to that zone again. Such a dynamic system could help bring in people to any explorable zone that is empty for too long, as long as the rewards are good.