Guild Wars 2

Swamurabi.7890:

When has locking servers balanced T1?

When has unlocking full servers balanced anything?

@Jim Hunter

Yh that makes sense, transfer 30 ppl to play with 5, instead of the other way around. -.-

By the same logic, T1 and T2 would be a carousel of leaving guilds and be left as zombie pug hordes. Good work.

Also, the ladder would become stale. Guild was made when Deso was r10, now we’re punished for becoming established and landing Vabbi as partners for 2 months. Go figure.

Now T1 is locked into bickering over PPT coverage (literally no guild cares) and waiting till the casuals leave as we ship rating like crazy.

Is there actually a WvW development team? or is it an Urban Myth?

Byron.1902:

@Jim Hunter

Yh that makes sense, transfer 30 ppl to play with 5, instead of the other way around. -.-

By the same logic, T1 and T2 would be a carousel of leaving guilds and be left as zombie pug hordes. Good work.

Also, the ladder would become stale. Guild was made when Deso was r10, now we’re punished for becoming established and landing Vabbi as partners for 2 months. Go figure.

Now T1 is locked into bickering over PPT coverage (literally no guild cares) and waiting till the casuals leave as we ship rating like crazy.

Is there actually a WvW development team? or is it an Urban Myth?

If your guild really cared about them you’d transfer.

Byron.1902:

By the same logic, T1 and T2 would be a carousel of leaving guilds and be left as zombie pug hordes. Good work.

And what’s exactly the problem in that? It would filter the mindless drones from people who actually want to play as a guild and improve.

Byron.1902:

By the same logic, T1 and T2 would be a carousel of leaving guilds and be left as zombie pug hordes. Good work.

And then they’d drop as ‘lower’ tier servers filter up and beat them based on skill and organisation?

Hmmmm.

Byron.1902:

@Jim Hunter

Yh that makes sense, transfer 30 ppl to play with 5, instead of the other way around. -.-

By the same logic, T1 and T2 would be a carousel of leaving guilds and be left as zombie pug hordes. Good work.

Also, the ladder would become stale. Guild was made when Deso was r10, now we’re punished for becoming established and landing Vabbi as partners for 2 months. Go figure.

Now T1 is locked into bickering over PPT coverage (literally no guild cares) and waiting till the casuals leave as we ship rating like crazy.

Is there actually a WvW development team? or is it an Urban Myth?

I don’t know about EU, but in NA T2 already became a carousel of guilds leaving for either T1 or T3 to avoid T2.

Thanks to McKenna for the reply, some kind of communication concerning these “full” servers is appreciated.

So, if i’m reading right, these servers are not actually “full” compared to numbers that were previously used for determining this. However, due to population loss in wvw in general it has now been decided to change the numbers needed to make a server full.

Would it not be a better idea to address the loss of wvw population rather than adjust the numbers? By lowering population limits ANET has admitted (finally) that less and less people are playing the game mode.

If ANET think that by closing servers that are not full they are going to balance the populations then they are very deluded. What the game mode needs is some serious LONG TERM efforts not “quick fixes” or "lets try this " ideas.

Nightingale.8364:

Thanks to McKenna for the reply, some kind of communication concerning these “full” servers is appreciated.

So, if i’m reading right, these servers are not actually “full” compared to numbers that were previously used for determining this. However, due to population loss in wvw in general it has now been decided to change the numbers needed to make a server full.

Would it not be a better idea to address the loss of wvw population rather than adjust the numbers? By lowering population limits ANET has admitted (finally) that less and less people are playing the game mode.

If ANET think that by closing servers that are not full they are going to balance the populations then they are very deluded. What the game mode needs is some serious LONG TERM efforts not “quick fixes” or "lets try this " ideas.

There are multiple ways to look at this, an example of how they might view this from their perspective:

“No matter what we do people just keep stacking on the top servers, emptying the lower servers, this even makes linking useless, since the bottom half servers aren’t large enough to even balance out the larger ones any-longer. If this continues the largest servers will grow so large we can’t make any kind of pairings at all. So, lets set a lower Server Population Limit, so players are forced to over time move to the other servers, or strangle. One low enough that they can’t fix it with a ‘Blackout’ until they’re small enough that we can handle them with the linking system.”

This might (or not) be their reasoning, but it is one perspective. And honestly nothing else has ever worked on stopping the stacking of the top tiers, what are they to do ? Force people to move servers ?

It still comes down to what kind of vision ANet has/had (if they had any at all) about WvW, and what they’re going to do about it. But as usual, we have no clue what vision/design they’ve ever had for WvW. (And I still suspect that EotM is closer to what they had originally envisioned than traditional WvW is).

Can people please stop with the ridiculous comments in regards to telling others where and how they should be playing, just stop it, get off your high horse and stop with the condescending posts.

Now, here is what I am curious about regarding this change. Is this a permanent change or temporary? If permanent it could seem like a more heavy handed attempt to funnel people to lower tier servers and starve higher tiers of new blood to keep up with player attrition and stay competitive. It could very well have the opposite effect in that it might boost the populations of lower tier servers, but hurt the populations of higher tiers servers regardless of whether or not players transfer off, essentially resulting in no gain for the player base. Now if this is a temporary adjustment, I can understand it.

The timing of this is rather odd, the populations of the 5 now full servers has to be greatly varied. I seriously doubt YB has the same population or activity level as BG does.

Does this mean they will not be tiered with a lower tier server?

X T D.6458:

Can people please stop with the ridiculous comments in regards to telling others where and how they should be playing, just stop it, get off your high horse and stop with the condescending posts.

Now, here is what I am curious about regarding this change. Is this a permanent change or temporary? If permanent it could seem like a more heavy handed attempt to funnel people to lower tier servers and starve higher tiers of new blood to keep up with player attrition and stay competitive. It could very well have the opposite effect in that it might boost the populations of lower tier servers, but hurt the populations of higher tiers servers regardless of whether or not players transfer off, essentially resulting in no gain for the player base. Now if this is a temporary adjustment, I can understand it.

The timing of this is rather odd, the populations of the 5 now full servers has to be greatly varied. I seriously doubt YB has the same population or activity level as BG does.

not even close to JQ and I don’t think TC / JQ are close to BG/Mag…..

Didn’t anet lower caps over the summer and then up them again at the end of summer? Why don’t you just come out and say you guys have zero clue what in the hell you’re doing its so obvious at this point.

Do you guys throw darts at a dart board of stupid ideas that Carl in the corner came up with and call it the “scientific method” to solving problems?

Chaba.5410:

It was perfectly said. The threshold needed to be lowered a long time ago, before BG had opened up. Before that there was possibility of relatively even-populated servers rotating with each other but afterwards the population disparity between tiers became too great. No, no one can stack a server to BG/old T1 levels anymore without a link. Let BG rot with boredom if they won’t destack. No, they’re not going to destack just because someone on Mag decided to buy everyone to beat them down.

The issue is though having servers with populations that are actually reflective of the size of the mode (4 maps holding ~75 players each at any 1 time). I have never seen Mag with queues on all maps under the previous population cap just for example. Lowering the cap spreads the low population even further and is not a solution and leads to less and less competitive play style. They either need to say lower map caps as well, reduce the numbers of maps, or rather than lower population caps have less tiers and link servers by some other metric other than what they are using, which does not work.

And I’ve said before but the issue is exacerbated for those playing in off hours, spreading them further means a further decline in the quality of their gameplay.

There are also issues with getting guilds to spread out due to guilds wanting a population they can recruit from and not wanting to have to carry a server.

So does this also lower the population limits per map?

If not all this does is to ensure that the more populated servers continue to dominate.

Let’s be honest, JQ has more active WvW players than YB. Guilds are leaving YB left and right for TC and SOS (no clue why).

Is it true guilds/people are moving to TC? Would be so cool to get a 3rd active server for WvW. I just moved there bout a week ago but have yet to see any activity. Left maguuma cuz the “transfer for easy wins” bandwagon showed up.

Still no reason to play no matter what server your on, but hey fingers crossed.

Anet will cave.

Again.

Just wait.

This will get people rushing back into wvw.

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

For population balance reasons, we’ve lowered the population thresholds for a world to be considered ‘Full’. This is to keep the population disparity between high pop and low pop servers more similar.

You can’t possibly be counting ONLY people who are playing WvW and you should be by now.

YB against six servers? Anet isn’t playing its own game so it can’t possibly see the inequities in any time zone or server.

This is just plain ridiculous to lock YB when we are nowhere near ‘full’ in reality.

Let us know when you count the WvW populations only, that’s when your ‘metrics’ and algorithms will finally make some sense.

Right now, they do not.

Kaiser.9873:

So does this also lower the population limits per map?

If not all this does is to ensure that the more populated servers continue to dominate.

When one sees SIXTY people on each side, six servers worth, green and blue attacking red, you know that there are no limitations at all.

And no logic.

Numbers are not skill, never will be.

I thought WvW was for skilled players and tactics… right now it’s nothing more than stacking servers and making sure you can 2v1 – 6v1 any other server.

atheria.2837:

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

For population balance reasons, we’ve lowered the population thresholds for a world to be considered ‘Full’. This is to keep the population disparity between high pop and low pop servers more similar.

You can’t possibly be counting ONLY people who are playing WvW and you should be by now.

As we’ve concluded after previous nonsensical population related decisions, when a player passes a certain threshold he is counted as part of the population for that server. A player could probably play for an hour a week and be counted as 1 player the same as someone who say plays 20 hours a week. The metric is fundamentally flawed in trying to match servers. A metric of say total player hours would be far far better.

Well as T1 is locked, at least one T1 server(I will just refer to them as Bandwagoner Giganticus), has came out from Hibergating, welcome back bags!

They’ve said before (at least couple of times) that they count “man hours in WvW”, so basically how much time is spent from multiple people. If 100 people spend 1 hours each its’ 100 man hours, if 10 persons spends 10 hours each it’s 100 man hours. Or something similar (they never explain it in detail).

It’s been ages since they counted pve and what nots for population, at least I’ve forgotten how long since, and can’t be kittened to search it up.

These linkings and locking choices are comical. I’m hoping Anet realizes just how bad this round is before it does too much damage.

Sarika.3756:

These linkings and locking choices are comical. I’m hoping Anet realizes just how bad this round is before it does too much damage.

The same thing was said about the round of th 4headed server and nothing was done until the 6th week.
I expect no changes.

Jeknar.6184:

Sarika.3756:

These linkings and locking choices are comical. I’m hoping Anet realizes just how bad this round is before it does too much damage.

The same thing was said about the round of th 4headed server and nothing was done until the 6th week.
I expect no changes.

Neither do I. But there is always hope.

Bandwagoning failed. Let’s whine and cry . Why you piece of kittens can’t select server in launch and stay there like normal people?

It’s not about being unable to bandwagon. It’s about being able to fight the bandwagons.

morrolan.9608:

Nobody left at anet has any vision for WvW, perhaps with the exception of Tyler B but of course he was moved off WvW development.

I don’t know where this idea of Tyler B being some amazing savior of a dev to WvW came from. Is there something specific that you could point to that Tyler championed for WvW?

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

For population balance reasons, we’ve lowered the population thresholds for a world to be considered ‘Full’. This is to keep the population disparity between high pop and low pop servers more similar.

That’s a step in the right direction. However it needs to be further supported by merging lower population servers to enliven the play and increasing rewards in WVW so people will actually profit from that play rather than it being a gold sink.

There are all sorts of good ideas including a Legendary WVW backpiece, being able to purchase ascended items using WVW map currencies, achievement points for WVW ranks etc.

Otherwise WVW will have a continual problem attracting and keeping players. It’s a shame that Arena Net seems to be throttling what is otherwise an innovative and interesting game mode.

atheria.2837:

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

For population balance reasons, we’ve lowered the population thresholds for a world to be considered ‘Full’. This is to keep the population disparity between high pop and low pop servers more similar.

You can’t possibly be counting ONLY people who are playing WvW and you should be by now.

YB against six servers? Anet isn’t playing its own game so it can’t possibly see the inequities in any time zone or server.

This is just plain ridiculous to lock YB when we are nowhere near ‘full’ in reality.

Let us know when you count the WvW populations only, that’s when your ‘metrics’ and algorithms will finally make some sense.

Right now, they do not.

And yet
Dragonbrand +Anvil Rock, Borlis Pass = 11 points
Stormbluff Isle +Sanctum of Rall, Eredon Terrace = 13 points
Yak’s Bend = 12 points

In the most balanced matchup so far. Maybe people need to stop freaking out so early on how many servers they’re up against, they all obviously don’t have the same population hence why they need to be linked to others.

I’m surprised YB was one of those locked, but maybe they have more wvw players than people realize.

They also count population by wvw activity not entire server population since like august 2015, what qualifies as wvw activity whether it’s 1 hour or 10 hours per week well who knows but anet.

Naix.8156:

morrolan.9608:

Nobody left at anet has any vision for WvW, perhaps with the exception of Tyler B but of course he was moved off WvW development.

I don’t know where this idea of Tyler B being some amazing savior of a dev to WvW came from. Is there something specific that you could point to that Tyler championed for WvW?

Well he was the one that seemingly led the battlegroup design that was then scrapped after anet got cold feet.

Its not just that, it came across in his communication that he understood the mode better than the other devs.

joneirikb.7506:

They’ve said before (at least couple of times) that they count “man hours in WvW”, so basically how much time is spent from multiple people. If 100 people spend 1 hours each its’ 100 man hours, if 10 persons spends 10 hours each it’s 100 man hours. Or something similar (they never explain it in detail).

They’ve never said anything like that AFAIK. They have said players that are only in WvW for a short time won’t be counted as part of the population. The implication being that once a player passes that threshold of time or WvW activity they are counted as part of the population and treated the same as someone who spends a lot more time in WvW. This is why JQ kept getting locked, they have a lot of casual players who spend short amounts of time in WvW in comparison to other servers like Maguuma which is primarily composed of players who spend large amounts of time in WvW.

morrolan.9608:

joneirikb.7506:

They’ve said before (at least couple of times) that they count “man hours in WvW”, so basically how much time is spent from multiple people. If 100 people spend 1 hours each its’ 100 man hours, if 10 persons spends 10 hours each it’s 100 man hours. Or something similar (they never explain it in detail).

They’ve never said anything like that AFAIK. They have said players that are only in WvW for a short time won’t be counted as part of the population. The implication being that once a player passes that threshold of time or WvW activity they are counted as part of the population and treated the same as someone who spends a lot more time in WvW. This is why JQ kept getting locked, they have a lot of casual players who spend short amounts of time in WvW in comparison to other servers like Maguuma which is primarily composed of players who spend large amounts of time in WvW.

Anet has only ever said that populations are based upon an Activity Level, which has never been defined. This activity level is averaged over time, which has said to be longer than a week. That’s all that has been said about population.

But remember, Anet opened up BG, saying that they had less players than JQ or even the T4 link of CD and 2-3 other servers. I don’t believe for a second that Anet knows the accurate “activity level” of servers.

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

For population balance reasons, we’ve lowered the population thresholds for a world to be considered ‘Full’. This is to keep the population disparity between high pop and low pop servers more similar.

for population balance reasons…. thats nice!
my question is, did you also limit the population per map per team color or not?
i hope not for the population problems would still exist

can we just have a chat command on where we can find the number of players per sides

Norbe.7630:

can we just have a chat command on where we can find the number of players per sides

It’s easier to get water out of a rock than numbers out of Arena Net.

Naix.8156:

morrolan.9608:

Nobody left at anet has any vision for WvW, perhaps with the exception of Tyler B but of course he was moved off WvW development.

I don’t know where this idea of Tyler B being some amazing savior of a dev to WvW came from. Is there something specific that you could point to that Tyler championed for WvW?

Tyler gave a kitten about us and WvW. He worked to fix A LOT of stuff. Before he had taken the lead, WvW never got any attention whatsoever on the forums and was basically left to rot for years. Taking him off the wvw team angered a lot of us.

A lot of issues that affect WvW cannot necessarily be blamed on the wvw devs in all honesty. WvW has been neglected for whatever stupid reason since the start by anet management. Longstanding issues like Lag and class balances are mostly out of the control of the WvW team. And they can really only do so much with the resources allocated to them by the company. Think about how many people work on PvE, then think about how many work on WvW lol, its not even remotely close.

We may give them a hard time, but they do deserve a lot of credit when and where its due, considering the tough spot they are put in constantly. It almost always seems like kitten ed if they do, kitten ed if they don’t, cant please anyone for them.

And for those that complain about not enough dev posts on this forum section…sometimes it might be due to not wanting to cause controversy with the playerbase because often times it seems that even the most well intentioned change or post can rile up a bunch of people.

morrolan.9608:

joneirikb.7506:

They’ve said before (at least couple of times) that they count “man hours in WvW”, so basically how much time is spent from multiple people. If 100 people spend 1 hours each its’ 100 man hours, if 10 persons spends 10 hours each it’s 100 man hours. Or something similar (they never explain it in detail).

They’ve never said anything like that AFAIK. They have said players that are only in WvW for a short time won’t be counted as part of the population. The implication being that once a player passes that threshold of time or WvW activity they are counted as part of the population and treated the same as someone who spends a lot more time in WvW. This is why JQ kept getting locked, they have a lot of casual players who spend short amounts of time in WvW in comparison to other servers like Maguuma which is primarily composed of players who spend large amounts of time in WvW.

I suspect it might be man hours. DK would count as his own zerg for YB if counted that way……

Swamurabi.7890:

Anet has only ever said that populations are based upon an Activity Level, which has never been defined. This activity level is averaged over time, which has said to be longer than a week. That’s all that has been said about population.

Yeah the activity level is a players activity level, hence once they pass a certain threshold of activity they are counted as part of the population. JQ being closed previously and the statements on BG are all in accordance with this scenario.

Jeknar.6184:

Norbe.7630:

can we just have a chat command on where we can find the number of players per sides

It’s easier to get water out of a rock than numbers out of Arena Net.

i only know one command on GW2, and that number which is the most important one
….is the time you’ve wasted on the game

source: http://www.onlinegamecommands.com/

X T D.6458:

Naix.8156:

morrolan.9608:

Nobody left at anet has any vision for WvW, perhaps with the exception of Tyler B but of course he was moved off WvW development.

I don’t know where this idea of Tyler B being some amazing savior of a dev to WvW came from. Is there something specific that you could point to that Tyler championed for WvW?

Tyler gave a kitten about us and WvW. He worked to fix A LOT of stuff. Before he had taken the lead, WvW never got any attention whatsoever on the forums and was basically left to rot for years. Taking him off the wvw team angered a lot of us.

A lot of issues that affect WvW cannot necessarily be blamed on the wvw devs in all honesty. WvW has been neglected for whatever stupid reason since the start by anet management. Longstanding issues like Lag and class balances are mostly out of the control of the WvW team. And they can really only do so much with the resources allocated to them by the company. Think about how many people work on PvE, then think about how many work on WvW lol, its not even remotely close.

We may give them a hard time, but they do deserve a lot of credit when and where its due, considering the tough spot they are put in constantly. It almost always seems like kitten ed if they do, kitten ed if they don’t, cant please anyone for them.

And for those that complain about not enough dev posts on this forum section…sometimes it might be due to not wanting to cause controversy with the playerbase because often times it seems that even the most well intentioned change or post can rile up a bunch of people.

Very good post, wish I could give it more than +1