Guild Wars 2

1. Start to combine some of the lower tier servers with the higher tier servers, there is no reason that wvw shouldn’t always have a que (yet it never does).

2. Switch up said server combinations, who doesn’t like a new twist every week.

3. Add a new map, EotM is a karma grind, instead make it actually count towards wvw, add another map on top of that one and now you have 4 maps, instead of 3 of the same maps + eb.

4. Add gvg, add the score to wvw now they are actually helping their server out.

Thoughts or comments?

1. Some people don’t like to play in WvW when the maps have queue’s all the time. Some people would instead prefer lower map caps and encourage people from higher tiers to move to lower, not vice versa.

2. Yes and No. New twists and new enemies is always a refreshing thing, but with the current server pool there is roughly 1 or 2 equal servers for each server. Meaning if you wanted optimal and not slopsided matches you would need to fight the same two servers every week.

3. I’ve read a lot about EotM and it being unbalanced color wise. I wouldn’t like to see an unbalanced map having a deciding factor in WvW. More maps would always be nice. Can’t argue against that.

4. I don’t see any reason for GvG to affect WvW. GvG, in a true form where guilds fight other guilds should only affect the guilds own ratio in GvG-ladder. Even if this ladder was implemented in the system itself or player driven, doesn’t matter.

1. When was the last time a server changed tiers? & some poeple probably doesn’t make up the majority of what players want. If riot party was inserted you could go out in small teams and avoid the blobs.

2. As far as I know the same servers win just about every week. So how is that not lopsided? not to mention if the que’s were nearly full that gets rid of the “lopsidedness”

3. what game is perfectly balanced? obviously that would need to be looked into.

4. Good point. That one really could go either way, and i would rather have gvg with megaserver teamies.

1. What I ment was that when you change something that affects a lot of people, like this population thing you are talking about, there will be people who like it and people who don’t. Should we try to satisfy both or just the major group?

2. The same servers wins when it comes to T1. Around silver it depends what kind of RNG you get. Do you get 5 ranks higher than you or 5 ranks lower than you to fight against. The variation between servers is rather big. If you want to have queues all the time you should look more at lowering the player cap in maps than mergin lower servers to higher ones.

3. Basic idea is that if every team has the same settings into the game it’s balanced. Map wise you can bypass the balance issues by:
- Making half a map, mirror it and paste them together. Both teams have the same looking base, balance bypassed.
- Or make one map (borderlands) and make it so that every team gets to be in every spot as it is now.

If we removed EB it would be more balanced but way more boring as well. But EB is rather balanced as it is though. Some sides might have some advantages and others other, but its still in a pretty good spot in my opinion when it comes to map balance.

Balance should not always be the only thing we look into though, I agree on that.

all interesting observations paavotar. Back to number 1 I feel like if you are in a small party not zurging, it’s fairly easy to find other groups like that and so how full the map is shouldn’t be to much of a bother. Any one else care to comment?