Guild Wars 2

There is a situation that might not be affecting all servers but the ones affected are suffering greatly. This calls for a change in order to preserve game content enjoyment. We are talking about low population or low WvW player participation/support/backup on certain servers.

We suggest tiers are removed and a new implementation is put into place called layers.

There will be 3 sides, just like we have now, red, green and blue.
Once a player chooses to join WvW the player will be automatically sent to the less populated color.
Players on a party will be sent to the same color.
Players on a guild will be sent to the same color. Since guild members can be cross-server this will let players from other servers stay with their comrades on WvW.
Individual players will be prompt a color if all 3 colors have the same population.
Once the layer reaches the population cap a new layer is created (just like an overflow for world maps). The first layer will be called Layer 1, second Layer 2, and so on.
Once a player on a lower layer logs out a higher layer player will be prompted to join the more populated layer. Same rules apply on this for guilds and parties.
On all layers colors with less players on it will receive a stat boost to accommodate for the lack of balance. The boost won’t be too significant since all layers will retain a fair amount of players on all colors at all times.
Ranking will be based not on servers but on individual performance, participation and support.
Servers will be granted bonus depending on how many players participated on a particular color. If a server had 200 players participate on red, 100 on green and 150 on blue, this server will get server bonus based on the red awards.

A preferred color system can be put into place to allow players to always join that particular color. If that color is full they will enter a join WvW waiting queue.

Risk: New layers will be boring and empty while it’s getting filled up. Only lower layers will always be in constant balance. Higher layers will always be a bit unbalanced. But this won’t mater because people are going to be constantly logging in and out and higher layers will get moved to the more balanced ones.

Sounds a bit complicated but we think is way better to preserve constant fun among players on WvW than rank them. We want to have fun playing the game and nobody likes to be forced to side with 3 people against 30.

We want to have our fun back and to do so we require balance, fairness and opportunity.

Unfortunately, every suggestion ever made here ever, goes unnoticed.

Is there a forum section where I should redirect this post to?

This is an untenable proposal for a WvW type of contest. It puts ALL of the emphasis on the individual with no viable way of accurately measuring individual performance, and it isolates the individual from any team strategy or map progress because he will likely end up in a different layer if he logs out and comes back an hour later. This is fundamentally nothing other than a really large scale sPvP.

Ruufio.1496:

Unfortunately, every suggestion ever made here ever, goes unnoticed.

+1

Cactus.2710:

This is an untenable proposal for a WvW type of contest. It puts ALL of the emphasis on the individual with no viable way of accurately measuring individual performance, and it isolates the individual from any team strategy or map progress because he will likely end up in a different layer if he logs out and comes back an hour later. This is fundamentally nothing other than a really large scale sPvP.

The suggestion being nothing other than a large scale PVP is accurate and straight to the point. People want to have the most fun out of the time spent playing.

Players ending up in different layers after log in/log out will keep helping on the bigger picture by selecting the same color they were before leaving thus continuing the global effort. I can see how it would be bad on map progress but the bigger picture is what maters here.

Individuals will be playing not only for their “ranking” but also for their color. This will give players more incentive to play and compete.

This would amount to a giant middle finger to all the server WvW communities that have grown over the past few months.
You’ve grown to like seeing certain faces and trust certain commanders? guild alliances/rivalries, server forums and teampseak? Yeah, might as well throw all that out the window.

Dante.1283:

Cactus.2710:

This is an untenable proposal for a WvW type of contest. It puts ALL of the emphasis on the individual with no viable way of accurately measuring individual performance, and it isolates the individual from any team strategy or map progress because he will likely end up in a different layer if he logs out and comes back an hour later. This is fundamentally nothing other than a really large scale sPvP.

The suggestion being nothing other than a large scale PVP is accurate and straight to the point. People want to have the most fun out of the time spent playing.

Players ending up in different layers after log in/log out will keep helping on the bigger picture by selecting the same color they were before leaving thus continuing the global effort. I can see how it would be bad on map progress but the bigger picture is what maters here.

Individuals will be playing not only for their “ranking” but also for their color. This will give players more incentive to play and compete.

I said it was nothing other than large scale sPvP, not just large scale PvP. The “s” stands for “structured”, and is not at all the same as WvW. Your proposal wouldn’t necessarily make for bad game play, but it would ruin WvW. It takes away the strategy, tactics, opportunity for lower ranked players to make a contribution, and most of the team play. Quit trying to turn WvW into something totally different.

Cactus.2710:

Dante.1283:

Cactus.2710:

This is an untenable proposal for a WvW type of contest. It puts ALL of the emphasis on the individual with no viable way of accurately measuring individual performance, and it isolates the individual from any team strategy or map progress because he will likely end up in a different layer if he logs out and comes back an hour later. This is fundamentally nothing other than a really large scale sPvP.

The suggestion being nothing other than a large scale PVP is accurate and straight to the point. People want to have the most fun out of the time spent playing.

Players ending up in different layers after log in/log out will keep helping on the bigger picture by selecting the same color they were before leaving thus continuing the global effort. I can see how it would be bad on map progress but the bigger picture is what maters here.

Individuals will be playing not only for their “ranking” but also for their color. This will give players more incentive to play and compete.

I said it was nothing other than large scale sPvP, not just large scale PvP. The “s” stands for “structured”, and is not at all the same as WvW. Your proposal wouldn’t necessarily make for bad game play, but it would ruin WvW. It takes away the strategy, tactics, opportunity for lower ranked players to make a contribution, and most of the team play. Quit trying to turn WvW into something totally different.

To fix the lack of balance WvW needs to be changed into something a bit different. If it stays the same it will keep on having the same amount of flaws that is making players not use this fantastic feature. Can’t blame them, people get bored doing nothing but dying to 40 vs 3, or even not having a challenge.

As for taking away strategies, tactics, opportunities, etc. you mentioned above, that’s completely inaccurate. Players will keep on enjoying the same thrill and sense of organized warfare, it just won’t let them stay completely in touch or participate with the same players. In fact, it will help people stay together with their guilds and form alliances. This suggestion calls for a bigger picture perspective than just a server population but a nationwide organization, whether it is red, green or blue. Lower rank players will be equal to top ranked players in terms of opportunity, because it doesn’t mater where they end up playing at, layer 1 2 3 4, they will keep on helping their respective color.

I might not have explained the proposed system in a detailed manner and I understand steady servers will suffer from any change to the WvW system, but we all know that balanced servers are just a the minority.

Ragnar.4257:

This would amount to a giant middle finger to all the server WvW communities that have grown over the past few months.
You’ve grown to like seeing certain faces and trust certain commanders? guild alliances/rivalries, server forums and teampseak? Yeah, might as well throw all that out the window.

While this is true, it’s a minor sacrifice for the sake of all the players who are not content with the, well, content. Which happens to be the majority of GW2 players.

I won’t even go into the complexity of your proposal or the law of unintended consequences.

Server communities would be destroyed by this proposal. The majority of the game population is doing well as you mentioned yourself. The problem you describe only impacts low pop/low participation which are the minority. The majority should not have to sacrifice for the minority as that wouldn’t be fair.

ANet has been upfront all along that WvW is not intended to be fair or balanced. That said they do try to keep matches as balanced as possible with the Glicko rating system.

I know you have good intentions but there is this phrase. “The road to hell is paved with good intentions”.

Fortunately ANet seems to be ignoring most of the player suggestions and sticking to their vision and philosophy. After all I bought the game based on their vision and philosophy and not those of a bunch of forum warriors.

Dante.1283:

Cactus.2710:

Dante.1283:

Cactus.2710:

This is an untenable proposal for a WvW type of contest. It puts ALL of the emphasis on the individual with no viable way of accurately measuring individual performance, and it isolates the individual from any team strategy or map progress because he will likely end up in a different layer if he logs out and comes back an hour later. This is fundamentally nothing other than a really large scale sPvP.

The suggestion being nothing other than a large scale PVP is accurate and straight to the point. People want to have the most fun out of the time spent playing.

Players ending up in different layers after log in/log out will keep helping on the bigger picture by selecting the same color they were before leaving thus continuing the global effort. I can see how it would be bad on map progress but the bigger picture is what maters here.

Individuals will be playing not only for their “ranking” but also for their color. This will give players more incentive to play and compete.

I said it was nothing other than large scale sPvP, not just large scale PvP. The “s” stands for “structured”, and is not at all the same as WvW. Your proposal wouldn’t necessarily make for bad game play, but it would ruin WvW. It takes away the strategy, tactics, opportunity for lower ranked players to make a contribution, and most of the team play. Quit trying to turn WvW into something totally different.

To fix the lack of balance WvW needs to be changed into something a bit different. If it stays the same it will keep on having the same amount of flaws that is making players not use this fantastic feature. Can’t blame them, people get bored doing nothing but dying to 40 vs 3, or even not having a challenge.

As for taking away strategies, tactics, opportunities, etc. you mentioned above, that’s completely inaccurate. Players will keep on enjoying the same thrill and sense of organized warfare, it just won’t let them stay completely in touch or participate with the same players. In fact, it will help people stay together with their guilds and form alliances. This suggestion calls for a bigger picture perspective than just a server population but a nationwide organization, whether it is red, green or blue. Lower rank players will be equal to top ranked players in terms of opportunity, because it doesn’t mater where they end up playing at, layer 1 2 3 4, they will keep on helping their respective color.

I can’t believe that you can be so oblivious to the probable consequences of your proposal. Look at it this way … it’s virtually the same as if you were playing the game now in a balanced tier but were randomly assigned to a different team every time you logged in. You work your butt off to cap and put defensive siege in a tower or keep, you take a break for dinner, and when you come back you find yourself on the other side of all your previous effort. It’s lame, it’s discontinuous, and it defeats all sense of strategy and community.

It isn’t a “fantastic feature” just because you thought of it.

Cactus.2710:

Dante.1283:

Cactus.2710:

Dante.1283:

Cactus.2710:

This is an untenable proposal for a WvW type of contest. It puts ALL of the emphasis on the individual with no viable way of accurately measuring individual performance, and it isolates the individual from any team strategy or map progress because he will likely end up in a different layer if he logs out and comes back an hour later. This is fundamentally nothing other than a really large scale sPvP.

The suggestion being nothing other than a large scale PVP is accurate and straight to the point. People want to have the most fun out of the time spent playing.

Players ending up in different layers after log in/log out will keep helping on the bigger picture by selecting the same color they were before leaving thus continuing the global effort. I can see how it would be bad on map progress but the bigger picture is what maters here.

Individuals will be playing not only for their “ranking” but also for their color. This will give players more incentive to play and compete.

I said it was nothing other than large scale sPvP, not just large scale PvP. The “s” stands for “structured”, and is not at all the same as WvW. Your proposal wouldn’t necessarily make for bad game play, but it would ruin WvW. It takes away the strategy, tactics, opportunity for lower ranked players to make a contribution, and most of the team play. Quit trying to turn WvW into something totally different.

To fix the lack of balance WvW needs to be changed into something a bit different. If it stays the same it will keep on having the same amount of flaws that is making players not use this fantastic feature. Can’t blame them, people get bored doing nothing but dying to 40 vs 3, or even not having a challenge.

As for taking away strategies, tactics, opportunities, etc. you mentioned above, that’s completely inaccurate. Players will keep on enjoying the same thrill and sense of organized warfare, it just won’t let them stay completely in touch or participate with the same players. In fact, it will help people stay together with their guilds and form alliances. This suggestion calls for a bigger picture perspective than just a server population but a nationwide organization, whether it is red, green or blue. Lower rank players will be equal to top ranked players in terms of opportunity, because it doesn’t mater where they end up playing at, layer 1 2 3 4, they will keep on helping their respective color.

I can’t believe that you can be so oblivious to the probable consequences of your proposal. Look at it this way … it’s virtually the same as if you were playing the game now in a balanced tier but were randomly assigned to a different team every time you logged in. You work your butt off to cap and put defensive siege in a tower or keep, you take a break for dinner, and when you come back you find yourself on the other side of all your previous effort. It’s lame, it’s discontinuous, and it defeats all sense of strategy and community.

It isn’t a “fantastic feature” just because you thought of it.

That whole message tells me you didn’t quiet read the original post well. It sates: “A preferred color system can be put into place to allow players to always join that particular color. If that color is full they will enter a join WvW waiting queue.”

This will allow players to always support a color no mater how many times they log in or out. They do have to join a different layer, but the battle will be for the same purpose, to allocate points for the preferred color.

And while we are on the Internet, the place where all inhbitions go away faster than getting drunk, I would like to ask you to keep your comments as less personal as possible and more argumentative. Personal attacks such as your last line won’t help the conversation at all.

Sureshot.6725:

I won’t even go into the complexity of your proposal or the law of unintended consequences.

Server communities would be destroyed by this proposal. The majority of the game population is doing well as you mentioned yourself. The problem you describe only impacts low pop/low participation which are the minority. The majority should not have to sacrifice for the minority as that wouldn’t be fair.

ANet has been upfront all along that WvW is not intended to be fair or balanced. That said they do try to keep matches as balanced as possible with the Glicko rating system.

I know you have good intentions but there is this phrase. “The road to hell is paved with good intentions”.

Fortunately ANet seems to be ignoring most of the player suggestions and sticking to their vision and philosophy. After all I bought the game based on their vision and philosophy and not those of a bunch of forum warriors.

Clever, respectful and to the point. I like your post. But you are basing all your thoughts on one error. It isn’t the majority. The majority is the unbalanced servers. Just go by the numbers, I am not making this up.

Surely that defeats the point of assigning players to a colour based on population, in order to keep populations roughly even?
If everyone can say “I want to join Green, and if I can’t I’ll just queue for it”, how is that an improvement?

I like the motivation behind the suggestion, I just see too many holes.

Dante.1283:

Cactus.2710:

Dante.1283:

Cactus.2710:

Dante.1283:

Cactus.2710:

This is an untenable proposal for a WvW type of contest. It puts ALL of the emphasis on the individual with no viable way of accurately measuring individual performance, and it isolates the individual from any team strategy or map progress because he will likely end up in a different layer if he logs out and comes back an hour later. This is fundamentally nothing other than a really large scale sPvP.

The suggestion being nothing other than a large scale PVP is accurate and straight to the point. People want to have the most fun out of the time spent playing.

Players ending up in different layers after log in/log out will keep helping on the bigger picture by selecting the same color they were before leaving thus continuing the global effort. I can see how it would be bad on map progress but the bigger picture is what maters here.

Individuals will be playing not only for their “ranking” but also for their color. This will give players more incentive to play and compete.

I said it was nothing other than large scale sPvP, not just large scale PvP. The “s” stands for “structured”, and is not at all the same as WvW. Your proposal wouldn’t necessarily make for bad game play, but it would ruin WvW. It takes away the strategy, tactics, opportunity for lower ranked players to make a contribution, and most of the team play. Quit trying to turn WvW into something totally different.

To fix the lack of balance WvW needs to be changed into something a bit different. If it stays the same it will keep on having the same amount of flaws that is making players not use this fantastic feature. Can’t blame them, people get bored doing nothing but dying to 40 vs 3, or even not having a challenge.

As for taking away strategies, tactics, opportunities, etc. you mentioned above, that’s completely inaccurate. Players will keep on enjoying the same thrill and sense of organized warfare, it just won’t let them stay completely in touch or participate with the same players. In fact, it will help people stay together with their guilds and form alliances. This suggestion calls for a bigger picture perspective than just a server population but a nationwide organization, whether it is red, green or blue. Lower rank players will be equal to top ranked players in terms of opportunity, because it doesn’t mater where they end up playing at, layer 1 2 3 4, they will keep on helping their respective color.

I can’t believe that you can be so oblivious to the probable consequences of your proposal. Look at it this way … it’s virtually the same as if you were playing the game now in a balanced tier but were randomly assigned to a different team every time you logged in. You work your butt off to cap and put defensive siege in a tower or keep, you take a break for dinner, and when you come back you find yourself on the other side of all your previous effort. It’s lame, it’s discontinuous, and it defeats all sense of strategy and community.

It isn’t a “fantastic feature” just because you thought of it.

That whole message tells me you didn’t quiet read the original post well. It sates: “A preferred color system can be put into place to allow players to always join that particular color. If that color is full they will enter a join WvW waiting queue.”

This will allow players to always support a color no mater how many times they log in or out. They do have to join a different layer, but the battle will be for the same purpose, to allocate points for the preferred color.

And while we are on the Internet, the place where all inhbitions go away faster than getting drunk, I would like to ask you to keep your comments as less personal as possible and more argumentative. Personal attacks such as your last line won’t help the conversation at all.

It doesn’t matter whether or not you end up the same color … if you end up in a different layer you will be playing with different folks and whatever effort you expended in the previous layer is lost to you. It’s a disconnect in several ways, pure and simple.

And I wasn’t being disrespectful by pointing out your dogged defense of a flawed proposal. I truly doubt that you would be so rabidly supportive of it had someone else proposed it. Be that as it may, it is clear that you are really locked onto it so there is no reason to further argue it with you. The rest of us can simply take solace in knowing that Anet won’t ever implement it.

Dante.1283:

Sureshot.6725:

I won’t even go into the complexity of your proposal or the law of unintended consequences.

Server communities would be destroyed by this proposal. The majority of the game population is doing well as you mentioned yourself. The problem you describe only impacts low pop/low participation which are the minority. The majority should not have to sacrifice for the minority as that wouldn’t be fair.

ANet has been upfront all along that WvW is not intended to be fair or balanced. That said they do try to keep matches as balanced as possible with the Glicko rating system.

I know you have good intentions but there is this phrase. “The road to hell is paved with good intentions”.

Fortunately ANet seems to be ignoring most of the player suggestions and sticking to their vision and philosophy. After all I bought the game based on their vision and philosophy and not those of a bunch of forum warriors.

Clever, respectful and to the point. I like your post. But you are basing all your thoughts on one error. It isn’t the majority. The majority is the unbalanced servers. Just go by the numbers, I am not making this up.

Your original post stated:

“We are talking about low population or low WvW player participation/support/backup on certain servers.”

Hmmmm…..I’m pretty sure the majority of servers are not low pop/low participation.

Do I have a reading comprehension issue or do you have an issue communicating clearly?