9 servers V 9 Servers V 9 Servers Tournament.

9 servers V 9 Servers V 9 Servers Tournament.

in WvW

Posted by: VaticanIscariot.1732

VaticanIscariot.1732

I think we can make things interesting in the next tournament if Arenanet assign multiple servers into one team.

Currently there is 3 servers per tier and there are 8 Tiers (for NA). So basically there will be 3 teams. Each team will be have 1 server from 1 tier that is either randomly selected or selected based on points so the teams can be as even as possible. Winning would depend not only on your own server’s performance, but also the other servers in your team from other tiers.

It would still be 1 server vs 1 server vs 1 server, like how it currently is. Except your fate also depends on how the other tiers do.

Now hear me out. You might say.. “BOOOO, I want to feel like its OUR server that did it”. But this system would offer something that this game mode lacks… politics/alliances/backstabbing, making every tournament different and truly dynamic.

There can be a lot of positives from this for everyone:

-Prior to the tournament, the teams would be selected and announced. Then the servers within that team can work with one another to shuffle guilds around to shore up the coverage and number of other servers. It would require planning to make sure guilds are sent to where it’s needed to counter the other team’s movements of guilds. This would result in much deeper strategy and placement of troops. Think of it as a much larger battlefield now and each server is a territory.

-Maybe Team A and Team B is neck and neck, Team A can pay a server in tier 4 in Team C to focus and kill a server in tier 4 on Team B, thus giving Team A a larger lead.

-Related to the previous point, but Team A can pay off a server in Team B to lose on purpose to screw B over.

-Reshuffling of guilds can help spread the population. It can revitalize WvW in lower tiers (maybe the shuffled guild likes the new server). Maybe a guild will call the new server home.

-Unparalleled server to server cooperation, communication, coordination and community.

-Less queues since you’d want to be spread out as much as possible.

-Spying on other servers on other tiers to find out troop movements.

-MOST IMPORTANT: Mad money for Arenanet from the gem sales for server transfers from the massive movement of troops. (see? everyone wins). Also a nice gold sink when converting to gems.

Essentially, there are endless possibilities to keep things fresh, exciting and you just don’t know what would happen in every tournament.

Examples of the team would be

Team A
Server (tier)
Tarnish Coast (1)
Maguuma (2)
Fort Aspen (3)
Yak’s Bend (4)
Sanctum of Rall (5)
Sorrows Furnance (6)
Devona’s Rest (7)
Emry Bay (8)

Team B
Server (tier)
Jade Quarry (1)
Sea of Sorrows(2)
Henge of Denravi (3)
Northern Shiverpeaks (4)
Borlis Pass (5)
Darkhaven (6)
Kaineng (7)
Anvil Rock (8)

Team 3
Server (tier)
Blackgate (1)
Dragonbrand (2)
Stormbluff Isle (3)
Isle of Janthir (4)
Crystal Desert(5)
Gate of Madness (6)
Ferguson’s Crossing (7)
Eredon Terrace (8)

Optional
To go one step further, I would make each side of EOTM consist of members of servers from your team. Perhaps there can be some kind of “orb of power” type of a thing that can do something to help the borderlands/ebg. This may reduce karma trains because you actually have something to defend and make sure the enemy does not get it. At the moment, the only reason you’d defend is to troll the enemy karma train… If there are multiple “flows” for EOTM, then the orbs power would be spread out. So if the orb gives a 100 power buff and theres 4 instances, then it only gives 25 power buff per orb own on each of the instances.

Right now (aside from the recent development of Tier 1 NA), the winners are predictable and boring.

Ideally… all servers may become evenly populated and servers would be placed randomly into teams. If not evenly, then servers should be placed based on how well they do in the off season to make sure its an even fight between the teams.

9 servers V 9 Servers V 9 Servers Tournament.

in WvW

Posted by: slamb.4781

slamb.4781

Interesting idea.

Sir Kitty Litter
[QOP] Quaggan Op – Guild Leader

9 servers V 9 Servers V 9 Servers Tournament.

in WvW

Posted by: drunkrussian.4079

drunkrussian.4079

i really like the idea BUT… i dont like that sos and jq are on the same team… i see what you did but i think still needs a little tweaking. overall great interesting plan. maybe make the servers within a team cheaper to transfer while changing teams really expensive.

-MagPro
Yaks Bend (born and proud)

9 servers V 9 Servers V 9 Servers Tournament.

in WvW

Posted by: grifflyman.8102

grifflyman.8102

This would be pretty awesome, and I hope it’s what they end up doing.

Dividing the servers into 3 huge factions, similar to what Planetside 2 kind of has.

9 servers V 9 Servers V 9 Servers Tournament.

in WvW

Posted by: attrail.8613

attrail.8613

Thatd be sick. I know it was just an example but that second team with jaded quarry sos and henge would be SO SO SO stacked.

9 servers V 9 Servers V 9 Servers Tournament.

in WvW

Posted by: Akkadian.7206

Akkadian.7206

I posted this about a day ago. I’d like to hear some thoughts.

This is by far probably not the best solution, but could perhaps benefit the WvW community as a whole by combining everything earned in terms of points accumulated for the end of each week within each separate league.
Example: Green/Blue/Red (Green from 1 match, Blue from an entirely different match and Red from the last match), let me repeat, those servers from THREE DIFFERENT matchups within the same LEAGUE would have their score combined at the end of the week to help decide the winner.
If coverage is the name of the game, then you will almost always (with the exception of T1) have one or two servers who just out coverage the others. This system could possibly help prevent that indefinitely, ensuring that even the “little guy” has a chance at winning and isn’t just a spectator to the top contenders for the number 1 spot.
Using the current matchups for Silver League, I’ve made a sort of chart that helps detail somewhat how the matches play out. To make life easier, I’m using the current week as an example.
Match 1
GREEN: Henge of Denravi – 109 756
BLUE: Fort Aspenwood – 93 730
RED: Stormbluff Isle – 67 331
Match 2
GREEN: Yak’s Bend – 116 296
BLUE: Isle of Janthir – 83 306
RED: Northern Shiverpeaks – 62 473
Match 3
GREEN: Crystal Desert – 121 030
BLUE: Borlis Pass – 77 106
RED: Sanctum of Rall – 57 584
If the system were to be in place, Henge of Denravi, Isle of Janthir and Sanctum of Rall would all have their scores combined at the end of the week.The same would be done to Fort Aspenwood, Northern Shiverpeaks and Crystal Desert. Finally, Stormbluff Isle, Yak’s Bend and Borlis Pass have their scores combined as well. Now, as you can see, HoD/YB/CD are ALL winning their matches pretty comfortably, though FA could make a strong push and could perhaps close the gap on HoD, but that’s besides the point. The point is, the little guys don’t have a fighters chance. But what if they don’t have to rely solely on themselves?
Once all was said and done, if the scores were to be combined it would look like this:
HoD/IoJ/SoR: 250,646
FA/NS/CD: 277,233
SI/YB/BP: 260,729
So it’s Monday, and the lead from “1st” to “2nd” would only be 16,504 when everything is accumulated on paper. From 1st to 3rd is 26,587.
What does that mean? Well, with the exception of the HoD/FA/SI matchup which has a 16,026, deficit between 1st and 2nd, every other matchup is EXTREMELY closer and far more competitive due to the shared system. Matches 2 and 3 could be considered blowouts with one having a 30k+ lead and the other 40k+ but this system put in place cuts it down by more than half!
Of course, Anet could still do a 1 up, 1/2 down system at the end of the week to make sure they mix things up and to ensure some kind of variety, but this is honestly one of the ways I see Anet being able to salvage WvW and “fight back” the zerg/stack mentality a lot of people are seemingly fed up with.

Blackgate

9 servers V 9 Servers V 9 Servers Tournament.

in WvW

Posted by: ykyk.2740

ykyk.2740

This would work if servers are roughly equivalent coverage/strength-wise in their respective “tiers”. However T2 has been dominated by one server (BG, then TC, now SoS) for basically 95% of WvW history, so under this system whoever gets SoS will have one “T1” server and one “T1.5” server making them by far the strongest faction.

9 servers V 9 Servers V 9 Servers Tournament.

in WvW

Posted by: Akkadian.7206

Akkadian.7206

Agreed. Gold in NA is honestly just a migraine. I wouldn’t mind if anet did something special just for that tier specifically. Even if they used the excuse that the Gold tier has 6 servers instead of the normal 9.

Blackgate

9 servers V 9 Servers V 9 Servers Tournament.

in WvW

Posted by: DeadlySynz.3471

DeadlySynz.3471

A thread pops up like this about once a month. Basically replace 9vs9vs9 with faction vs faction vs faction. It can be tweaked for whatever would work out best for the current population. It usually gets great support but like many threads, it gets pushed far down the pages by a barrage of other threads that usually can be placed into 1. Hopefully this one stays at the top for awhile so Anet can take a good look at it.

It may not be the best solution, but it’s the best solution we have so far. It fixes WvW coverage disparities for the most part. It keeps a far more even playing field. It breeds more strategy. The only issue is, some players hold onto this false value of server pride. If there is ever one thing that will sink WvW the quickest it’s a players neglect to let this issue go in favor of making WvW better.

9 servers V 9 Servers V 9 Servers Tournament.

in WvW

Posted by: Phantom.8130

Phantom.8130

I like this idea, if not for any other reason than it promotes people spreading out to all of the servers instead of superstacking on only a few. That being said, however, the first time this sort of tournament would happen, it wouldn’t be so much about the tournament, but about getting everything sort out. It might take a couple attempts before competitive matches would be seen, but that would be across the board. Which is much better than 1 match, and even that match would be a maybe….. sometimes.

Once the population would be sorted out, they should mix in the other styles of tournaments, and use this one as a rebalance in between then.

9 servers V 9 Servers V 9 Servers Tournament.

in WvW

Posted by: Andrew Clear.1750

Andrew Clear.1750

not having the tiers would be good for the servers, because it would balance out the rankings better after all the season transfers are accounted for. Plus, this way, most servers wont be locked into matches they will always get blown out in (like DB, and SoR).

9 servers V 9 Servers V 9 Servers Tournament.

in WvW

Posted by: ManaCraft.5630

ManaCraft.5630

Many of us have promoted similar ideas for quite some time now. Basically WvW consisting – at least scorewise – of three factions instead of a multitude of smaller matchups. In my opinion this, or something similar, is still the best possible fix for population imbalances. Several different designs have been suggested already, yours is basically a revamping of the guesting system, relying on hard transfers to do the job instead. I think people might be less willing to move servers than you imagine, but I’ll still back your idea as being preferable to the status quo any day.

Good luck dealing with the server pride proponents, they will be your single biggest obstacle.