Guild Wars 2

Wondering if it would make sense to have 6 active borderlands instead of 3, each map with the cap set to half what it is now? Barring any technical limitations preventing Anet from implementing this it seems like this could help with a couple issues: 1) Blobs would generally be smaller (maybe not an issue, more of a personal preference) and 2) it would likely help with skill lag considering skill lag is a function ( O(n^2) ) of how many people are running around in a region of the map. I’m sure there are downsides. Any thoughts?

The halving of the population per map takes care of the largest problem.

The bad effects I can think off would be mostly for servers that can put larger numbers on maps, generally t1-2. They might not enjoy being so split up over 7 maps instead of 4.

Interesting idea, looking forward to see more ideas and input about this.

The provlem I have with this idea is that my guild alone often has more players on then half a map cap is. I cannot support any idea that locks my guild out of playing together.

It’s not a bad idea but I think Just implementing something to fix the larger number advantage would be more worthwhile than creating a completely new wvw map as well as reworking all the back end code to support 7 maps.

And what about mid and low tier matchups? Would mean more running around looking for fights.
This would also enhance the population and coverage imbalance on many matchups.

I don’t think the WvW population is big enough for this atm. Maybe in top tier servers, but it’s their own choice to stack there and it’s no news that it gets blobby there.

There’s gonna be a new map in HoT anyways that will likely attract most people.

With the amount of people playing in the lower tiers that would result in 6 deserted maps.

The only way to get rid of that silly population problem is to get rid from the obnoxious non working anymore Server World System and instead change World versus World into a Realm versus Realm Gameplay System with rotating Realms where every single player gets put by random für every Match Up in a Realm.

The game System however does this always only so long, until 1 of the Realms has hit a certain Playyer CAP and once that CAP has been reached, no more players will be put into the realm for a Match, that has been already reaching its cap, so that further following Players get automatically put only to those Tealms, which yet haven’t reached its Cap.

This way its more guaranteed, that no side will be completely overpopulated, while other sides are totally underpopulated.

Instead of having 3 Worlds that fight each other, it would be also a good choice for further Balancing to make 4 Realms. That will then stop also these annoying and lame 2 sides versus 1 scenarios that one side can easily get surpressed by the other two.

Realms would work basucall then like 4 different Factions that reside in the Mists:

1) The Circle of Dhuum
2) The Inquisition
3) The Lords of the Mist
4) The Freelancers

just to come up with some random factions i came up with in my mind now for example which all are different and have different Pros and Cons in WvW.

As long as anet stays in its old Server vs. Server Gameplay, there will be always population problems among them.
Anet can get rid of this pupulation problem on,y, if they make for this Gameplay Mode a game Systme, that tries to stay as good as possible independent from putting players of only one side together.
Players must get mixed up together, its the only way how Anet can make a Gameplay, that looks for itself to balance out the total amount of players to split that amount in a population balanced way as good as possible to make all sides mostly even.

When you have like 3 WvW Servers with 3 different sums of players like this:

Server A = 1000 Players
Server B = 750 Players
Server C = 250 Players

then you have a total amount of currently 2000 Players in that simple example. where it would make much more sense to make out of them this:

Realm A = 500 mixed up by Random Players
Realm B = 500 mixed up by Random Players
Realm C = 500 mixed up by Random Players
Realm D = 500 mixed up by Random Players

and all sides would be equal.

sffogg.6018:

Wondering if it would make sense to have 6 active borderlands instead of 3, each map with the cap set to half what it is now? Barring any technical limitations preventing Anet from implementing this it seems like this could help with a couple issues: 1) Blobs would generally be smaller (maybe not an issue, more of a personal preference) and 2) it would likely help with skill lag considering skill lag is a function ( O(n^2) ) of how many people are running around in a region of the map. I’m sure there are downsides. Any thoughts?

1. of all it would be impossible – atm only gold servers have queue, bronze servers have 80 ppl at all – vabbi maybe 10 per border. So making 6 borders will split them into even smaller groups and spoil whole fun – it would be nice for ogld servers tho. U wrote that ppl might stop blobbing…They will never do that At the moment with this meta u blob u win 2. More maps, more calculating etc. – IT WOULDN’T HELP SERVERS AT ALL. The lag will be much bigger. And again, u will have 100 groups of players ta other maps – for example deso have 50 queue at each border with 3 borders, so giving em 3 more borders they will lbob other maps That is all i think.

What they could is make more maps available as the population as increases.

So smaller maps would be forced to play on less maps, maybe even just 1.

But people would complain about that for sure.

Sube Dai.8496:

What they could is make more maps available as the population as increases.

So smaller maps would be forced to play on less maps, maybe even just 1.

But people would complain about that for sure.

Actually it would be too hard to make For exampe, u have medium server facing very high server( vabbi against blacktide) so according to what u wrote vabbi will play at 1 map while bt since very high population wil play at 3 maps? No sense at all.

6 Borderland-maps would make coverage imbalances even worse.

I hope that they reduce the Borderland-maps to just 1 Map. It would suck during reset night, but would make for better balanced fights during the rest of the week.

Pixelninja.6971:

6 Borderland-maps would make coverage imbalances even worse.

I hope that they reduce the Borderland-maps to just 1 Map. It would suck during reset night, but would make for better balanced fights during the reset of the week.

Well not with those servers, U alrwady have amazing lags with 100 vs 100, what woudl happend with 300 vs 300 or even more? Cos it is sure that ppl will blob at new map, they will always blob now, cos u blob u win with new stabillity

Kasteros.9847:

Pixelninja.6971:

6 Borderland-maps would make coverage imbalances even worse.

I hope that they reduce the Borderland-maps to just 1 Map. It would suck during reset night, but would make for better balanced fights during the reset of the week.

Well not with those servers, U alrwady have amazing lags with 100 vs 100, what woudl happend with 300 vs 300 or even more? Cos it is sure that ppl will blob at new map, they will always blob now, cos u blob u win with new stabillity

1 BL-Map and leave the max number per Map like it is now. Screw the overstacked servers, let’em play EOTM.

Pixelninja.6971:

Kasteros.9847:

Pixelninja.6971:

6 Borderland-maps would make coverage imbalances even worse.

I hope that they reduce the Borderland-maps to just 1 Map. It would suck during reset night, but would make for better balanced fights during the reset of the week.

Well not with those servers, U alrwady have amazing lags with 100 vs 100, what woudl happend with 300 vs 300 or even more? Cos it is sure that ppl will blob at new map, they will always blob now, cos u blob u win with new stabillity

1 Map and leave the max number like it is now. Screw the overstacked servers.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHGHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH. Yyeah let’s queue the world. Silver would have about 100, bronze around 10 and gold around 1k They would need to set up mooooore servers then and make server lag even more since they can’t handle calculating now :P

Pixelninja.6971:

Kasteros.9847:

Pixelninja.6971:

6 Borderland-maps would make coverage imbalances even worse.

I hope that they reduce the Borderland-maps to just 1 Map. It would suck during reset night, but would make for better balanced fights during the reset of the week.

Well not with those servers, U alrwady have amazing lags with 100 vs 100, what woudl happend with 300 vs 300 or even more? Cos it is sure that ppl will blob at new map, they will always blob now, cos u blob u win with new stabillity

1 BL-Map and leave the max number per Map like it is now. Screw the overstacked servers, let’em play EOTM.

Hmmm how about 3 total WvW maps instead, one copy each of Alpine, EB & Desert (new HoT) maps. Yes T1&2 would have huge queues in certain time zones and the people that wanted to WvW during those hours would have to consider transferring down. If done in conjunction with some kind of responsible population rebalancing effort, pre Season 4 reduced transfer costs to lower tiers and some way of changing how active world population is calculated to more reflective of WvW population in the age of megaservers then it might be successful or at least a lot better than the feast or famine thing we having going on now.

I’d be in favor of lower WvW map population caps as well for the lag problems but ANET has never seemed to try that option after all this time so kind of doubt they will now. Seems like it should have been a no brainer choice awhile back that never materialized so there has to be reason for that right?

PariahX.6970:

Pixelninja.6971:

Kasteros.9847:

Pixelninja.6971:

6 Borderland-maps would make coverage imbalances even worse.

I hope that they reduce the Borderland-maps to just 1 Map. It would suck during reset night, but would make for better balanced fights during the reset of the week.

Well not with those servers, U alrwady have amazing lags with 100 vs 100, what woudl happend with 300 vs 300 or even more? Cos it is sure that ppl will blob at new map, they will always blob now, cos u blob u win with new stabillity

1 BL-Map and leave the max number per Map like it is now. Screw the overstacked servers, let’em play EOTM.

Hmmm how about 3 total WvW maps instead, one copy each of Alpine, EB & Desert (new HoT) maps. Yes T1&2 would have huge queues in certain time zones and the people that wanted to WvW during those hours would have to consider transferring down. If done in conjunction with some kind of responsible population rebalancing effort, pre Season 4 reduced transfer costs to lower tiers and some way of changing how active world population is calculated to more reflective of WvW population in the age of megaservers then it might be successful or at least a lot better than the feast or famine thing we having going on now.

I’d be in favor of lower WvW map population caps as well for the lag problems but ANET has never seemed to try that option after all this time so kind of doubt they will now. Seems like it should have been a no brainer choice awhile back that never materialized so there has to be reason for that right?

Well if they do so the forum war will begin. Just imagine all those players that would want gold from Anet for transfers cos those changed would lead to amazing queues. I think best option to balance low tiers is to fuse them and then make 1 addicitonal border – i think new map should be 5. border but…

Depending on the size of the server population this could work.

Though for many of the servers below T2 it would be a a bad thing as many cannot even fill a que on 1 map even if they got everyone intrusted to pile on at once.

That’s not to say those servers are not full of people however, most simply just dislike WvW.
& That ^ is why I & many people I know wish they would rework WvW into a system based on guild alliances (guilds control who belongs to them & can remove people) with a cap smaller then what the T1 servers have to ensure a good distribution of players.

Kasteros.9847:

PariahX.6970:

Pixelninja.6971:

Kasteros.9847:

Pixelninja.6971:

6 Borderland-maps would make coverage imbalances even worse.

I hope that they reduce the Borderland-maps to just 1 Map. It would suck during reset night, but would make for better balanced fights during the reset of the week.

Well not with those servers, U alrwady have amazing lags with 100 vs 100, what woudl happend with 300 vs 300 or even more? Cos it is sure that ppl will blob at new map, they will always blob now, cos u blob u win with new stabillity

1 BL-Map and leave the max number per Map like it is now. Screw the overstacked servers, let’em play EOTM.

Hmmm how about 3 total WvW maps instead, one copy each of Alpine, EB & Desert (new HoT) maps. Yes T1&2 would have huge queues in certain time zones and the people that wanted to WvW during those hours would have to consider transferring down. If done in conjunction with some kind of responsible population rebalancing effort, pre Season 4 reduced transfer costs to lower tiers and some way of changing how active world population is calculated to more reflective of WvW population in the age of megaservers then it might be successful or at least a lot better than the feast or famine thing we having going on now.

I’d be in favor of lower WvW map population caps as well for the lag problems but ANET has never seemed to try that option after all this time so kind of doubt they will now. Seems like it should have been a no brainer choice awhile back that never materialized so there has to be reason for that right?

Well if they do so the forum war will begin. Just imagine all those players that would want gold from Anet for transfers cos those changed would lead to amazing queues. I think best option to balance low tiers is to fuse them and then make 1 addicitonal border – i think new map should be 5. border but…

Simply fusing them would be a quick fix but in the long run would do no good because many of those servers already have good sized populations. The majority of those populations just don’t care about WvW.

The best solution I have heard was balancing WvW around guild alliances with each alliance having control over it’s membership & a set cap being set on how many people can belong to it.

Then for the people who cannot be bothered to maintain the time/standards etc… needed to keep a membership in such a guild they can simply be tossed into a “randoms” group every week kind of like EOTM does.

This would ensure that each side has roughly equal numbers in terms of membership so as to prevent one side from completely steam rolling the others with numbers all the time.