Guild Wars 2

Wait what do we need to talk about? am i the only one who dont get this?

Devesion.5704:

Wait what do we need to talk about? am i the only one who dont get this?

You are certainly not the only one.

This is only a message to share an expectation of format and structure. The last discussion went from concise submissions to " my wish list and 2 paragraph suggestion" in less then 5 pages.

In general, I think ANet wants the community development discussions to be positive. So if you were frustrated during the last session, see if you can come up with something that would make you less frustrated (preferably not, “have that kitten kitten kitten answer each and everyone of my posts”).

For example, for me, my biggest frustration was the feeling of being ignored / not heard. Therefore, I especially like the summaries, because if something I am interested in shows up there, I’ll know they heard me, even if they did not respond.

I would like interaction from the get go if the topic we want to discuss is even something that will truly become a priority. I feel the last discussion was not a very good use of time since I don’t beleave its something the dev team is ready to work on.

The obvious thing is that there needs to be more dev responses.
One thing that became very apparent is that the WvW section only has one dev posting while pvp & pve have multiple devs. In general the amount of dev interaction is very low (except for pvp which seems to be on a good way, especially with all the posts by Justin ODell)

In the few posts Devon made he however showed that he put alot more thought into the issue of server population than most people on the forum.
The topic in general was imho not very productive. The balance of server populations is a very hard issue to solve and most suggestions made would do more harm than good and i don’t feel that anything in the thread brought us closer to a solution (except maybe transfer prices bound to WvW rating)

Dragan there were suggestions amongst the bad ideas that were actually very good.

Out of 100 ideas it doesn’t matter if 99% are bad, if there is 1 great idea and it gets recognized and Anet runs with it, then its a success. I’m sure it was quite a task though to read through all those pages of walls of text to find the good ideas though.

Just 1. A better kick-off of the topic

What I mean by this is start by clarifying what certain things are “off the table” as well as some of the major factors that need to be taken into consideration.

For example if the OP on population imbalance topic had stated that forcing transfers, blocking transfers, merging servers, and reducing WvW map limits are “off the table” then half or more of the discussion would have been preemptively eliminated, and the average post much more relevant and worth reading.

You should choose a topic that can actually be debated. Server population isn’t something players can discuss amongst ourselves and with developers. All we can do is complain about the imbalance and maybe a small fraction of ideas have any realistic way of being addressed. There just wasn’t anywhere for the discussion to move to. Was just back and forth complaining mostly.

Atherakhia.4086:

You should choose a topic that can actually be debated. Server population isn’t something players can discuss amongst ourselves and with developers. All we can do is complain about the imbalance and maybe a small fraction of ideas have any realistic way of being addressed. There just wasn’t anywhere for the discussion to move to. Was just back and forth complaining mostly.

again, wrong. some great ideas were mixed in with all the BS and Anet took note of them.

if you think any meaningful topic will be devoid of whiners you’re gonna have a bad time.

Solstice.1097:

Atherakhia.4086:

You should choose a topic that can actually be debated. Server population isn’t something players can discuss amongst ourselves and with developers. All we can do is complain about the imbalance and maybe a small fraction of ideas have any realistic way of being addressed. There just wasn’t anywhere for the discussion to move to. Was just back and forth complaining mostly.

again, wrong. some great ideas were mixed in with all the BS and Anet took note of them.

if you think any meaningful topic will be devoid of whiners you’re gonna have a bad time.

No, you see server population is largely a policy issue. What players want to happen and how players would resolve it is something ANet simply can’t do, as you mentioned in your other post. When you choose a topic and then tell players not to discuss server transfers, targeted moves, and server mergers, there’s very little else players have to discuss because we don’t set policy. There was no where the topic could go. It was just a circular mess rehashing the same thing discussed 2 pages earlier with the very rare idea thrown out that had merrit but was largely ignored by the players.

With respect you still don’t understand. Population imbalance topic was only partially about how to incentivize spreading out, but moreso about how to make fighting in an imbalanced match more enjoyable, including changes to rewards/loot, outnumbered buff, and how PPT is achieved and calculated.

Some of the ideas in there were fantastic and had nothing to do with blocking or forcing transfers or reducing map limits.

EDIT: you’re focusing on the bad ideas and not sure if you read through all 20+ pages but I did, and there was absolutely some “meat” in there that can work within the current foundation to largely alleviate the issues caused by population imbalance.

Summary

1. Detailed template (or format) of posted suggestions easy for devs to read
2. Summaries as suggested every three pages
3. Brief summary of direction looking to go in
4. More responses from devs if possible

Explanation

1. Structure of how you would like suggestions to be or a template, if you will, so that we can get our ideas and concerns into an easy to read acceptable format. This template should be in the first post of the thread. I say this because while I tried to write a summary of the ideas and suggestions, it feels like I ended up with a long post that wouldn’t get read. I also believe a template would allow the devs to easily go through the posts as they will all be standard and if needed for reference find the information they were looking for later.

2. Summaries would be great. Possibly what suggested ideas you are considering and which ones didn’t really fit. This gives people an idea of what you are looking for and what you are not. Maybe even going as far to say which idea the devs haven’t considered until it was mentioned. This would go a long way to help us help you.

3. This sort of goes with 2 but basically a general idea of the direction you’re looking to go in. Even just to say “hey look we don’t really know what we’re going to do yet so we’re looking for some ideas to steer our creativity in some direction.” This touches on a more personal level with your players and helps us understand where you are coming from. This also helps us to stay on course or to try and think within guidelines so we don’t stray too far off the path essentially wasting your time and ours.

4. This is something everyone hopes for but understands it might not be possible. We know you’re working on things (even if we forget sometimes) but communication is what helps make good things into awesome things. The more you can communicate with us the better. I think the above suggestions will help with this one as well.

Does this mean after 3 pages of comments on this thread we’ll get more information about what this thread is about? lolz

Kelly.5293:

Does this mean after 3 pages of comments on this thread we’ll get more information about what this thread is about? lolz

this thread is about your input on how the CDI process should flow moving forward.

its a CDI topic about CDI.

The discussion wasn’t really a discussion, just people not bothering (understandably so) to read through 15 pages containing walls of texts to see if their suggestion has been suggested before. Which is also why nobody discussed anything, it revolved around dropping your wall of text and pce out, because you can’t possibly keep up with a thread like that.

what on earth is CDI? is that California Department of Insurance?

DraganBlack.7864:

The obvious thing is that there needs to be more dev responses.
One thing that became very apparent is that the WvW section only has one dev posting while pvp & pve have multiple devs. In general the amount of dev interaction is very low (except for pvp which seems to be on a good way, especially with all the posts by Justin ODell)

Indeed. It seemed that there was a genuine attempt by the devs to engage in the other CDI discussions which I genuinely applaud.

Phrasing this in the most delicate way possible, I was not left with this impression regarding the WvW topic.

Transparency and engagement with the WvW community doesn’t seem a priority. Indeed, the former is ‘literally’ against company policy.

With respect to improving the CDI process, I would agree that a summary of the key aspects of the discussion would be helpful – however, I would suggest this summary is appended / merged into a single post (perhaps one-several reserved under the opening post). (With checkpoint posts regularly created within the main thread).

I believe this also ties into the aspect of more focused topics. Grouping up / taking suggestions / votes from the community is always likely to lead to fairly open ended ‘topics’. However these fairly general topics are going to have some core themes within them.

Some of these themes have natural questions to provide a framework for further discussion if required. Some themes, might be dead ends for further discussion. For example, different themes within the WvW population topic emerged – including (but not limited to):

1. Scoring
2. PvE vs WvW Population Levels
3. Map Capacity
4. Population statistics
5. Unfair matchups
6. Transfers
7. WvW ‘Teams’

By creating succinct summaries around each theme, you both demonstrate that you understand them and bring the reader up to speed with the debate around each one.

polls might be a step in the right direction imo.

This game really could use “in-game” polls to provide proper metrics.

Tongku.5326:

This game really could use “in-game” polls to provide proper metrics.

Is our game AWESOME?

• YES
• I want to be banned

Thanks Chris.

I believe before I can state my three, forums themselves only represent about 10% if that of the population, and many of us are biast. With that said.

1. Would love a carrot set to intice folks to join the conversations in the forum.
2. Surveys in game go along way and can be focused on select queries
3. An ongoing log discussed ideas that are being evaluated for consideration.

This I believe would be very helpful in the dicussions

1) Fix the bugs/exploits/hacks
2) Merge some servers to balance coverage
3) Allow people to easily switch in and out of vendor gear since we can’t salvage it anyways.

1. improving keeps and upgrades so a keep cant be taken in 1minute(walls need to be safer, gates need more hp, masteries are too strong, keep layout is too simple, etc)
2. class balance in wvw (spvp balance makes wvw unbalanced, 4 classes are dominating, 4 are either left out or utilitybots which is taking away the fun)
3. fix exploits, los issues( rezzing through walls, dragontooth, necros hitting u though walls,etc)

I want you to continue to address the difficult topics that have already been suggested ie. for WvW account bound WXP especially considering the announcement that fractal progression will be account bound with the next patch.

If you want to focus the topic down to a more manageable level, fine, but you have the suggestions that people have made.

Solstice.1097:

Just 1. A better kick-off of the topic

What I mean by this is start by clarifying what certain things are “off the table” as well as some of the major factors that need to be taken into consideration.

For example if the OP on population imbalance topic had stated that forcing transfers, blocking transfers, merging servers, and reducing WvW map limits are “off the table” then half or more of the discussion would have been preemptively eliminated, and the average post much more relevant and worth reading.

+1.

Entirely this.

Better feedback from the devs. I mean there were tons of ideas and suggestions from the community. The devs only mentioned like 2 or 3 in their responses.

If would be helpful to know if we were at least going down the right road. I mean what I and others based on the comments thought one of the best, most thought out and through suggestions (it wasn’t mine) was never mentioned. Does that mean the devs didn’t see it? Does it mean they ignored it? Does that mean it is impossible to implement? We have no idea.

Wait, did we actually reach a conclusion in the server population imbalance thread or are we just pretending that never happened.

I’m serious here, if any statements were made from anet about adjusting that (in a way that’s not complete trash) please direct me to them.

1. Fix the ability to get into jerrifers by “bypassing” the gate. This should take 5 minutes to block/shrink the ledge.

2. Fix WvW awards. Why does a 10 minute dungeon run award me with 1g, but a 1 hour keep take gets me crap? 1 tower, 1 keep, 1 SM per day for extra rewards. Like a dungeon path. Ppl will come to wvw, do it and leave. Some might stay. (Increasing queue for stacked servers isnt my concern).

3. See number 2.

There you go. Small steps that have been ignored for more than a year.

Just a few ideas which I think could improve WvW:

1. Points (war score) depending on how many players are currently on the map.

50 players control 10 structures = 100 points
100 players control 10 structures = 50 points

=> More balance between small and big servers (even at night which is probably the worst time). Also less mindless zerging, more small group roaming (or even solo) since you can control more structures with the same amount of players.

2. Improved queue.

Monday 8 p.m.: 2-3h queue
Tuesday 8 p.m.: 10mins queue
Wednesday 8 p.m.: 1h queue

=> The queues’re too long and there’s no indication on how long it might take. Sometimes it’s 10mins, the next day 3h. Approximate queue timer would help a lot. Shorter queues as well.

3. Better rewards for roamers and scouts.

If I scout there is no reward, roaming gives a few bags per hour but running in a zerg will fill my inventory within 20mins. Guess I’ll just follow the zerg like everyone else.

=> Give roamers and scouts a reason to do their job. Currently the majority of players prefer to run around in mindless zergs which should change.

4. Eternal Battlegrounds’ mercenaries.

They should have more impact on every map. If I convince the ogres to help me I want them to constantly attack multiple structures (and maybe capture them) and not to send a small group which can be killed by 2 players.

=> Improve the NPCs and send more/stronger groups. Currently they’re close to useless.

What process? All that happened was you guys said “Population imbalance is the most requested issue with WvW, discuss.” Then a lot of people posted ideas, Devon posted questions occasionally, and then closed the thread and said thanks for the input, will use as reference. Population imbalance is still an issue, I still have no idea what Anet plans to do to fix it, or even what direction they are taking. What exactly was accomplished other than fishing for ideas from players, which were already posted on the forums in the first place? How can you review a collaborative development initiation when there was no collaboration or development?

I hope I understood the OP, the explanation was a little confusing (what is a CDI?).

Topic choice sets up the entire thing.

I’m all for picking things people are interested in, but perhaps population imbalance wasnt the best topic for discussion. How about the devs exercise a bit more discretion, and pick from amongst the interesting topics that’s more appropriate/interesting for discussion, and not opening up the forum for a massive grief thread.

This is WvW right? How about we talk about siege, what the devs are doing with it, how it could be improved, masteries, what’s working, what’s not, etc etc. This is just an example, but it’s a whole different aspect of discussion concerning the game than the last topic chosen.

We posted like crazy thinking you guys would walk away with at least some idea of what we were after.
I’d like a dev written summary of what ideas you devs walked away thinking were good and what ideas you are going to try out.
That whole thread just felt like a gigantic waste of time and effort with no replies other than “oh, now you guys can talk about this for a bit…then this”.
Show us what you got from all that feedback please.

1. make the wvw dev’s actually show up
lets be honest the wvw version of the cdi was nothing like the pvp or pve version’s
the wvw dev’s only showed up when players started getting testy and then pretended they where active participants the whole time. the thread had a very poor discusion because the wvw dev’s barely showed up to have a discusion with.

i would post my thoughts, but i fear i would just get banned for another 2 weeks for dev bashing.

i would pm you, chris, so i would feel like if i was gonna get banned for negative criticism at least you would be the person doing so instead of the mod team, but i cant pm anybody as part of the punishment (?).

so i wont really say anything because i feel like negative feedback is seen as dev bashing by the people in power.

thats the biggest issue i see with the CDI.

One thing that anet could improve is the way they comunicate with us, they speak like politicians, they talk a lot and say nothing.

That said, I would like to know what anet intends to do for the server inbalance, they had tons and tons of suggestions fro us.

Show up more, answare questions, help the comunity like spvp devs are doing now.

Brutal Arts.6307:

Wait, did we actually reach a conclusion in the server population imbalance thread or are we just pretending that never happened.

I’m serious here, if any statements were made from anet about adjusting that (in a way that’s not complete trash) please direct me to them.

i do not believe they said they would actually do anything. They really did not take the wvw cdi seriously at all it was a giant mess compared to the other 2 threads.

About stacked servers:

Players think point system is wrong and cause people stack to win.

What devs think about current point system, do they think it’s work well and should not be changed? ETA on any changes?

Assuming this topic is on the CDI process, and not on WvW topics itself. I like your 3 main points as a guide line. One thing I would add. A message when people log into game that says something along the lines of "New CDI topics on GW2 Forums please visit “insert link” to follow/voice opinion etc." Hopefully this would get more people onto the forums to get a wider feedback

As we can clearly see in this thread we need tools to keep a thread on topic. We need to be focused. Drifting away has to be stopped as soon as possible. A tight moderation would be nice.

We need more communication with developers giving us more feedback and more guidance. What is possible and what not. This gives us a better insight what solution we can provide and discuss for certain topics.

We need smaller topics with concrete objectives to discuss.

Specific to WvW

1. Need more ANET presence in the WvW thread. The collaboration piece was very minimal for “World Population”.
2. Need to be open to all ideas, not just the easy ones. A significant portion of the discussion was dismissed outright. That’s not collaboration
3. Very focused topic.

Waffler.1257:

What process? All that happened was you guys said “Population imbalance is the most requested issue with WvW, discuss.” Then a lot of people posted ideas, Devon posted questions occasionally, and then closed the thread and said thanks for the input, will use as reference. Population imbalance is still an issue, I still have no idea what Anet plans to do to fix it, or even what direction they are taking. What exactly was accomplished other than fishing for ideas from players, which were already posted on the forums in the first place? How can you review a collaborative development initiation when there was no collaboration or development?

This ^^. The main theme I hope that Chris takes from this is that we need more collaboration on the WvW side. It seems there is a very set vision from ANET for how to implement WvW. Let’s start some real collaboration.

Compare the WvW thread with the PvE or PvP threads. Those seemed like a collaborative experience. The WvW one did not.

Would it be possible for mods to consolidate ideas so the collaboration thread doesn’t become TL;DR? Some way to keep the number of pages down? Maybe even give credit (gems) to the first person that made a suggestion that created a lively discussion. Give a chance for upvotes/downvotes for consolidated suggestions we feel strongly about.

I really would like to get to a point where I feel that I’m part of the GW2 design team but since way back to the BWE’s, I’ve never felt like I’ve been listened too. I’ve had comments that I’ve made responded to, but from the two areas I visit most, Necromancer and WvW, I feel that there’s nobody listening. In the first WvW collaboration thread, the players really wanted to know about population and queues but were told “we aren’t going to give away numbers”, or even talk about something that’s in development, uhhh what’s the “D” in CDI???
There should have been a way to present the data without giving away actual numbers. Why not try to be more transparent on ONE CDI issue and see if you get better player involvement.

Like I said they should preface the topic with “here are a few things that are currently not on the table as options, and here are some of the key factors that we have to consider when discussing X topic”

then after the discussion is closed they should give us a timeline such as “we will discuss and give an official response on the direction we intend to take. we hope to have an official response by XX date”

As much dev feed back as possible will make this better. If we give an idea and its can’t be done then we need to know that so we don’t continue down the road of thinking. If an idea is viable we also need to know so we can go down the road and expand on it. The process is ment to use many minds to find a solution. The more do focused we r on the viable options the better suggestions we can give

Solstice.1097:

Like I said they should preface the topic with “here are a few things that are currently not on the table as options, and here are some of the key factors that we have to consider when discussing X topic”

then after the discussion is closed they should give us a timeline such as “we will discuss and give an official response on the direction we intend to take. we hope to have an official response by XX date”

Along those same lines, maybe we could see what Anet’s WvW directives are, in order of importance, so we could make suggestions that don’t boost a lower priority over a higher priority. It would help if we were all heading toward the same goal with the same guidelines.

The main forum CDI thread had 1014 posts (and 51645 views).
The WvW forum CDI thread had 1134 posts (and 42389 views).

The main forum’s current CDI thread has 100 posts (and 2920 views).
The WvW forum’s current CDI thread has 47 posts and (1907 views).

Why is the ratio between the main form and WvW forums’ posts so drastically different this time? Could it be because players feel the devs aren’t listening and are already giving up on CDI?

Lord Kuru.3685:

The main forum CDI thread had 1014 posts (and 51645 views).
The WvW forum CDI thread had 1134 posts (and 42389 views).

The main forum’s current CDI thread has 100 posts (and 2920 views).
The WvW forum’s current CDI thread has 47 posts and (1907 views).

Why is the ratio between the main form and WvW forums’ posts so drastically different this time? Could it be because players feel the devs aren’t listening and are already giving up on CDI?

pretty much this notice the massive difference in dev participation in the other 2 cdi threads and the wvw one. chris himself abanded the wvw thread to the wvw dev’s who clearly did not want to participate in it.