Guild Wars 2

Dear ArenaNet,

I currently play on you Far Shiverpeaks server and spend most of my time in WvW. Now what I’m going to write is only from my experience of 8 months of playing WvW on EU servers.

Now from my PoV and many others your lack of interest into this game mode has almost come to a head, i.e simply stop playing your game.
Now I know many people have listed what is wrong with WvW before etc etc, but I going to list them again:

• Server lags, WvW servers have been lagging for an age now. How I see it is simply lower the player limit on a map? 50 vs 50 vs 50 seems from what I’ve seen playing the game is what the servers can handle before the servers seem to get overloaded.

• Population imbalance, now I can only speak for EU servers here, but we’ve simply got guilds and masses of people transferring to other servers just to 1. Look for more diverse fights and 2. To actually sort this population imbalance out because people have become fed up with your lack of interest and commitment to sorting your own problem out.
  A solution I see to this problem is to make transferring free for 1 month/30days. Completely scrap BL maps, and create a 1 new map (on top of the HoT map) but keep the tactical(ness) i.e terrain playing a factor whether that be siege placement or for that BIG push that the Borderland maps offers.
  A quick round up of things: 3 maps:
  Eternal Battlegrounds
  New map
  HoT map

Max 150 players playing on a server at one time or what ArenaNet truly feel that would prevent server imbalance and what it can handle without unplayable lag.
Imagine all 20 odd servers competing for 1st in the server rankings?

• Siege, now I’ve got no problem with people jumping on siege to defend or attack a enemy structure. What I find ridiculous is the amount of siege you can place in e.g 1200 range. Now I’ve done zero research at all only from what I’ve seen from playing the game, but the amount of Arrow Carts you can fit into 900 range is unreal.
  I’d suggest e.g: say every 2000 range you can place 5 pieces of siege equipment, something along those lines.

• Stability, This is the blood of the zerg/blob. Without this what happens? You die, simple. Now your preview video shows max 10-15 people running around like headless chickens. This simply is not the case in WvW, this is what I mean by ArenaNet being out of touch with this game mode.
  I’m not going to say the new stability is awful because its not been played enough with the determine that. But what I would say is don’t most people want to fight against a 60+ blob with 20-25 and actually win due to your individual and collective skill?
  Please just keep this in mind ArenaNet.

• PPK, why hasn’t Point Per Kill come into effect permanently yet? That was the only successful addition to WvW I’ve seen in all of the my playing time. You get to punish an unorganised server/opposition right where it SHOULD hurt! And that is in the overall score.

Overall this post about what I feel would improve WvW of course and that for is promoting fights whether that be inside an enemy keep or not which we know at the moment actually hinders your server/score more often than not.
Why can’t ArenaNet just put a poll up asking whether or not people enjoy WvW or not? Then ask what they enjoy and look to get out of it?
I know that if any of my customers had an issue with anything I’d at least try to find out the issue at very least.

Yours sincerely,

Chris.

HERE HERE! Where do I sign?

You get all bandwagon blob guilds and now you wanna change game.

Zephyr The Tainted.5962:

Dear ArenaNet,

I currently play on you Far Shiverpeaks server and spend most of my time in WvW. Now what I’m going to write is only from my experience of 8 months of playing WvW on EU servers.

Now from my PoV and many others your lack of interest into this game mode has almost come to a head, i.e simply stop playing your game.
Now I know many people have listed what is wrong with WvW before etc etc, but I going to list them again:

• Server lags, WvW servers have been lagging for an age now. How I see it is simply lower the player limit on a map? 50 vs 50 vs 50 seems from what I’ve seen playing the game is what the servers can handle before the servers seem to get overloaded.

• Population imbalance, now I can only speak for EU servers here, but we’ve simply got guilds and masses of people transferring to other servers just to 1. Look for more diverse fights and 2. To actually sort this population imbalance out because people have become fed up with your lack of interest and commitment to sorting your own problem out.
  A solution I see to this problem is to make transferring free for 1 month/30days. Completely scrap BL maps, and create a 1 new map (on top of the HoT map) but keep the tactical(ness) i.e terrain playing a factor whether that be siege placement or for that BIG push that the Borderland maps offers.
  A quick round up of things: 3 maps:
  Eternal Battlegrounds
  New map
  HoT map

Max 150 players playing on a server at one time or what ArenaNet truly feel that would prevent server imbalance and what it can handle without unplayable lag.
Imagine all 20 odd servers competing for 1st in the server rankings?

• Siege, now I’ve got no problem with people jumping on siege to defend or attack a enemy structure. What I find ridiculous is the amount of siege you can place in e.g 1200 range. Now I’ve done zero research at all only from what I’ve seen from playing the game, but the amount of Arrow Carts you can fit into 900 range is unreal.
  I’d suggest e.g: say every 2000 range you can place 5 pieces of siege equipment, something along those lines.

• Stability, This is the blood of the zerg/blob. Without this what happens? You die, simple. Now your preview video shows max 10-15 people running around like headless chickens. This simply is not the case in WvW, this is what I mean by ArenaNet being out of touch with this game mode.
  I’m not going to say the new stability is awful because its not been played enough with the determine that. But what I would say is don’t most people want to fight against a 60+ blob with 20-25 and actually win due to your individual and collective skill?
  Please just keep this in mind ArenaNet.

• PPK, why hasn’t Point Per Kill come into effect permanently yet? That was the only successful addition to WvW I’ve seen in all of the my playing time. You get to punish an unorganised server/opposition right where it SHOULD hurt! And that is in the overall score.

Overall this post about what I feel would improve WvW of course and that for is promoting fights whether that be inside an enemy keep or not which we know at the moment actually hinders your server/score more often than not.
Why can’t ArenaNet just put a poll up asking whether or not people enjoy WvW or not? Then ask what they enjoy and look to get out of it?
I know that if any of my customers had an issue with anything I’d at least try to find out the issue at very least.

Yours sincerely,

Chris.

Everything nice etc. but…

1. 50 ppl per map? Look like low cap, dunno how fsp now( when i left no queues there) but at deso we have 40 ppl queues at each border, with this chnage it would swap to 100 ppl queue and result in no ppt for prime time( guilds will queue earlier and fight) so some ppl will rage at forums about us fighting in a place of capping.

2. Siege, there are always trolls, that is why u can place such much siege in 1 place. Imagine situation where some troll put rams in a place of acs etc. it would ruin whole thing( I would like it since i hate to fight against tons of acs) and some ppters will QQ at forum

3. yeah stabil is huuuuge problem for skilled players. It doesn’t matter how much skilled u and ur group is, how good builds, coordination and leader u have. Why? Cos u can stand against other zergs etc. but can’t against 2-3x bigger blob cos of massive CC spam and stabil stacks disadvantage.

4. Yeah, PPK should return, this will shut down some PPTers that QQ about us fighting.

I think ur post is amazing, but probably anet don’t even read it – last answer from devs in this subforum was 5 months ago? Or so. And last time I saw Dev running with ppl at border was same amount of time ago.

Thank you Kasteros, on your first point though it is meant to not force but nudge players into servers like Vabbi and Fissure of Woe but not make them feel like they are missing out on aspect of WvW.
Second point, yes true, but I feel this is going to happen in another form in the current state we are in e.g: building rams on the supply depot to waste supps for example. There should be something in place where if an account gets a large amount of reports within a time space of 15 minutes it should be look into within 24 hours and should be ran through an account banning procedure e.g: 1st offense = 24hrs ban, 2nd = 1 Week etc etc you catch my drift.
And your last point about ArenaNet taking no notice of this post. Well that is up to them as a company not listen or even interact with its customers.

Indeed, I know that in its current state im not logging into GW2!

If they fix whatever in the patch is causing this lag the player cap is not needed.
Looks like a lot of thought went to your post, I like most if not all ideas. With the PPK the best of them all, and this should also is the easiest one to implement. Just set it back to “on” again

Signed /15 characters

i like these ideas. my only concern is the PPK idea. I can see “kill trolls” being a thing (basicly people who spawn and run to the enemy side and die over and over again even if it is just to guards at a nearby tower/camp if that even added points, i cant remember). other than that, it might not be too bad (still might not be terrible if groups are constantly fighting each other).

Gobble D Goop.4081:

i like these ideas. my only concern is the PPK idea. I can see “kill trolls” being a thing (basicly people who spawn and run to the enemy side and die over and over again …..

If you got guys on your server who would do that, there’s a bigger problem.

/signed.

Honest, nice and humble thread Zephyr The Tainted

I disagree completely with you stating population imbalance is Anet’s fault. Anet did not force people to transfer servers. Players choose to transfer servers and make fights one-sided.

/Signed 15 characters

I agree with the OP except the 50 player per side cap. That’s not massive. ANET should be upgrading their hardware to support the current player caps and end the lag.

Ppk was great. Bring it back.

Delete T8 and T9, merge with T6 and T5.

PPK will just have people ignoring the objectives and allow some people to believe WvW was meant to just be open-field zergfests. I politely disagree with this point.

I mean, it goes two ways. Some players don’t enjoy seige wars. My personal playstyle is I enjoy capping/defending objectives while seeking open-field fights.

Dondagora.9645:

PPK will just have people ignoring the objectives and allow some people to believe WvW was meant to just be open-field zergfests. I politely disagree with this point.

Sooooo some ppters bullkitten fighters for not helping their servers win and when posibillity is appearing u don’t want it? O_o WvW is about objectives yes, but on the other hand it is about fights too

Dondagora.9645:

PPK will just have people ignoring the objectives and allow some people to believe WvW was meant to just be open-field zergfests. I politely disagree with this point.

Or, or hear me out, people are going continue to do what they find fun anyway and contribute to the score as a by-product?

Dondagora.9645:

PPK will just have people ignoring the objectives and allow some people to believe WvW was meant to just be open-field zergfests. I politely disagree with this point.

This doesn’t follow at all. ESO has a PPK system in place and objectives are still a primary focus. If you peruse their forums you’ll see that they tend to complain about a lack of incentive for zerging. I’m obviously flattening out all kinds of important differences here, but the lesson is that a PPK system doesn’t necessarily lead to “open field zergfests”. For starters, you could implement diminishing returns (any given player X can only award Y points every so often), and of course points per kill would have to be significantly less than points per objective.

I’ve never been a PPT player myself, but I’d argue that implementing a PPK system similar to ESOs (more PPK the smaller the group that tagged the dead player) would help diffuse zergs.

PPK problem is that players let blob guilds farm them. It’s much more entertaining make blob guilds bored. Go hit some tower and when blob guild come teleport away and continue doing this until they rage quit.

xev.9476:

Dondagora.9645:

PPK will just have people ignoring the objectives and allow some people to believe WvW was meant to just be open-field zergfests. I politely disagree with this point.

This doesn’t follow at all. ESO has a PPK system in place and objectives are still a primary focus. If you peruse their forums you’ll see that they tend to complain about a lack of incentive for zerging. I’m obviously flattening out all kinds of important differences here, but the lesson is that a PPK system doesn’t necessarily lead to “open field zergfests”. For starters, you could implement diminishing returns (any given player X can only award Y points every so often), and of course points per kill would have to be significantly less than points per objective.

I’ve never been a PPT player myself, but I’d argue that implementing a PPK system similar to ESOs (more PPK the smaller the group that tagged the dead player) would help diffuse zergs.

It would be nice, but ESO work totally diffrent than GW2 – at last for points. Also Making something like less players kill more points wouldn’t change anything about zerging, cos atm fighters don’t give a kitten about ppting so adding PPK would just take those all ppters away form zergs

Kasteros.9847:

It would be nice, but ESO work totally diffrent than GW2 – at last for points. Also Making something like less players kill more points wouldn’t change anything about zerging, cos atm fighters don’t give a kitten about ppting so adding PPK would just take those all ppters away form zergs

I acknowledged that I was glossing over important differences, but I see no reason to think a PPK system couldn’t be adapted to GW2. That fights-oriented players don’t care about PPT does nothing to diminish my claim that PPK may help diffuse zergs, though. Although fights-oriented players don’t care about PPT, a significant number of players, at least in NA t1, do. If more points were awarded for smaller groups I think a significant number of players would feel less inclined to zerg.

xev.9476:

Kasteros.9847:

It would be nice, but ESO work totally diffrent than GW2 – at last for points. Also Making something like less players kill more points wouldn’t change anything about zerging, cos atm fighters don’t give a kitten about ppting so adding PPK would just take those all ppters away form zergs

I acknowledged that I was glossing over important differences, but I see no reason to think a PPK system couldn’t be adapted to GW2. That fights-oriented players don’t care about PPT does nothing to diminish my claim that PPK may help diffuse zergs, though. Although fights-oriented players don’t care about PPT, a significant number of players, at least in NA t1, do. If more points were awarded for smaller groups I think a significant number of players would feel less inclined to zerg.

I said they can add it! Just like they did during xmas. I wrote that heye couldn’t give us same system like in ESO…In EU lot of players think about fight only, not cos of loot etc. they just like fights. Also much more blob to not let enemy wipe u which is logical with new stabil meta – why to get wiped by blob when u can make a blob yourself :P

waSte.8640:

Delete T8 and T9, merge with T6 and T5.

Better. Force half of T1 and T2 into the lower tiers.

PPK was fun during the test run. I wonder if a majority would support bringing it back as it was. Simple 1 pt. each kill is perfect.

FrizzFreston.5290:

waSte.8640:

Delete T8 and T9, merge with T6 and T5.

Better. Force half of T1 and T2 into the lower tiers.

Yeah, then nobody will be able to login and find a tag or fight… Make It unfun for all haha. Seriously, why would you suggest breaking apart 3 stable servers? Not everyone enjoys seeing tumbleweeds and barren maps. I moved to T2 for action at all timezones.

waSte.8640:

FrizzFreston.5290:

waSte.8640:

Delete T8 and T9, merge with T6 and T5.

Better. Force half of T1 and T2 into the lower tiers.

Yeah, then nobody will be able to login and find a tag or fight… Make It unfun for all haha. Seriously, why would you suggest breaking apart 3 stable servers? Not everyone enjoys seeing tumbleweeds and barren maps. I moved to T2 for action at all timezones.

Ahh sweet irony

Less arguing and more debating people!

Thank you DarkSyze.8627, a lot of people have mentioned the cap. Don’t get me wrong I would love to see 100+ vs 100+ vs 100+ but lets get back to reality here. 1. Do you think the game has enough players at this moment in time that are interested in WvW to have all 3 maps filled around the clock? Multiplied by 20+ servers? I don’t personally from my experience in this game. 2. Can the current hardware support this without overloading in which it appears to be doing at the moment? Again I don’t think so.

As for closing down 3 servers for the sake of moving them players into other tiers, is that fair? Would it not save a lot of commotion if the players decided to move at their own will (for free for the first 1 month/30 days I may add) because they would rather play the game more often than que to enter a map?

As for the PPK debate it is important that we don’t stray away from the objective base we currently have because this is the foundations I believe to WvW. All them 3 way fights for the enemy keep etc etc. That sense of togetherness and achievement when you do finally take the enemy keep.
And I don’t know how we all feel about the +1 point per kill? Seeing as it contributed around 15-20% to the total score I believe. Maybe every xx amount kills your server achieved you gained an additional xx towards your total score? Just thought I’d throw that one out there.

waSte.8640:

FrizzFreston.5290:

waSte.8640:

Delete T8 and T9, merge with T6 and T5.

Better. Force half of T1 and T2 into the lower tiers.

Yeah, then nobody will be able to login and find a tag or fight… Make It unfun for all haha. Seriously, why would you suggest breaking apart 3 stable servers? Not everyone enjoys seeing tumbleweeds and barren maps. I moved to T2 for action at all timezones.

Oh but it’s fine if they break other servers, as long as it’s not yours? Because you live under the assumption everyone wants that in the lower servers.

Anet has only a couple options to deal with population issues.

1) They can force people off certain servers by closing them, this may upset a few people who like a more empty server (though tbh tier 3 is empty enough already, unless you need a whole borderland to yourself).

2) They can make it voluntary by giving a free transfer. At very best they get lucky and a couple of big guilds from T1 move to T3 or so and try to bring a server up to T1/T2. At worst you end up with even fewer people at lower tiers and exacerbate the issue.

Bear in mind that everyone is assigned a server for WvW, and Anet has to have a server assigned even to those who haven’t entered WvW in a year or more. This causes issues with voluntary reassignment because it screws over returning players or players who just don’t pay attention to WvW but then want to try it out.

Quite frankly I don’t see the harm in removing T7/T8 and merging them up with T6/T5. It doesn’t involve splitting up any guilds or friends (do 1 to 1 server mergers), it can shake up the tiers a little bit (allowing them to compete with higher pop servers) and it doesn’t leave any players stranded.

Voluntary options just leave people stranded and could lead to the people just jumping into tier 1 servers (which is not all that productive).

Edit:
I am also for the return of PPK, I think more emphasis should be on fighting people than fighting doors. But that does nothing to population issues.

The population issue has more than one cause, but one of the main ones is poor rewards and totally stale gameplay, playing the same maps for three years.

Many wvw players have left the game after waiting and waiting and waiting for any movement from Anet- whether they come back with the new borderland map is debatable, I’m sure we’ll see a rush of pve’rs taking a look for a few months but after that…

Zephyr The Tainted.5962:

Dear ArenaNet,

I currently play on you Far Shiverpeaks server and spend most of my time in WvW. Now what I’m going to write is only from my experience of 8 months of playing WvW on EU servers.

Now from my PoV and many others your lack of interest into this game mode has almost come to a head, i.e simply stop playing your game.
Now I know many people have listed what is wrong with WvW before etc etc, but I going to list them again:

• Server lags, WvW servers have been lagging for an age now. How I see it is simply lower the player limit on a map? 50 vs 50 vs 50 seems from what I’ve seen playing the game is what the servers can handle before the servers seem to get overloaded.

• Population imbalance, now I can only speak for EU servers here, but we’ve simply got guilds and masses of people transferring to other servers just to 1. Look for more diverse fights and 2. To actually sort this population imbalance out because people have become fed up with your lack of interest and commitment to sorting your own problem out.
  A solution I see to this problem is to make transferring free for 1 month/30days. Completely scrap BL maps, and create a 1 new map (on top of the HoT map) but keep the tactical(ness) i.e terrain playing a factor whether that be siege placement or for that BIG push that the Borderland maps offers.
  A quick round up of things: 3 maps:
  Eternal Battlegrounds
  New map
  HoT map

Max 150 players playing on a server at one time or what ArenaNet truly feel that would prevent server imbalance and what it can handle without unplayable lag.
Imagine all 20 odd servers competing for 1st in the server rankings?

• Siege, now I’ve got no problem with people jumping on siege to defend or attack a enemy structure. What I find ridiculous is the amount of siege you can place in e.g 1200 range. Now I’ve done zero research at all only from what I’ve seen from playing the game, but the amount of Arrow Carts you can fit into 900 range is unreal.
  I’d suggest e.g: say every 2000 range you can place 5 pieces of siege equipment, something along those lines.

• Stability, This is the blood of the zerg/blob. Without this what happens? You die, simple. Now your preview video shows max 10-15 people running around like headless chickens. This simply is not the case in WvW, this is what I mean by ArenaNet being out of touch with this game mode.
  I’m not going to say the new stability is awful because its not been played enough with the determine that. But what I would say is don’t most people want to fight against a 60+ blob with 20-25 and actually win due to your individual and collective skill?
  Please just keep this in mind ArenaNet.

Chris.

Hundreds of people leave after season ends.

What Anet doesn’t understand is that other games are becoming “like” this game and when they get to a certain point (i.e. listening to players instead of ignoring them), people leave and don’t come back easily, if at all.

Want proof?

Star Wars The Old Republic

Star Wars Galaxies

Wildstar (ahem)

Diablo 3

I could go on and on with even older games, all very lucrative in their times but losing faith with their gaming community one by one and turning success into a limping enterprise, depending on cash stores but no real efforts to improve the game for those who are outside the dev world.

WvW is the end game of Guild Wars 2. Nowhere else most of the “people” the same week after week, year after year, PvP can’t touch it and PvE is just the luck of the draw, you can’t get to know anyone on a megaserver.

The gamers who have spent over two years waiting for WvW to be fixed are now beset with issues they’ve never seen before and more hacking than ever before – reported all but these same players are still glitching across maps and doing things that are outside the parameters of the program.

Pets can’t be put on “don’t attack”, as soon as one attacks, regardless of the setting, the pet will attack. Nothing harms the community more than skills that aren’t working, especially when it’s a pet that can and will go astray and aggro something or someone you can’t afford to have aggro’d, not in WvW, pvE or PvP.

I agree… we’re being pushed out of WvW by Anet’s own hands and I can’t understand it at all.

FrizzFreston.5290:

waSte.8640:

Delete T8 and T9, merge with T6 and T5.

Better. Force half of T1 and T2 into the lower tiers.

OK, but who is gonna give me gold to do so?

Zephyr The Tainted.5962:

Less arguing and more debating people!

Thank you DarkSyze.8627, a lot of people have mentioned the cap. Don’t get me wrong I would love to see 100+ vs 100+ vs 100+ but lets get back to reality here. 1. Do you think the game has enough players at this moment in time that are interested in WvW to have all 3 maps filled around the clock? Multiplied by 20+ servers? I don’t personally from my experience in this game. 2. Can the current hardware support this without overloading in which it appears to be doing at the moment? Again I don’t think so.

As for closing down 3 servers for the sake of moving them players into other tiers, is that fair? Would it not save a lot of commotion if the players decided to move at their own will (for free for the first 1 month/30 days I may add) because they would rather play the game more often than que to enter a map?

As for the PPK debate it is important that we don’t stray away from the objective base we currently have because this is the foundations I believe to WvW. All them 3 way fights for the enemy keep etc etc. That sense of togetherness and achievement when you do finally take the enemy keep.
And I don’t know how we all feel about the +1 point per kill? Seeing as it contributed around 15-20% to the total score I believe. Maybe every xx amount kills your server achieved you gained an additional xx towards your total score? Just thought I’d throw that one out there.

Well yeah, but does any1 want to stay in queue at 50 man cap? I don’t think so. Also as I wrote before, u know here is fighter X ppt war right? Try to imagine what happen with 50 ppl cap. I can tell u what, guild will get in before prime time and ppters won’t or they will not get enough ppl to cap anything without wasting 1 hour to cap keep. And yes, game have enough players to fill it, but they just don’t want to play For example BT, very high server with tons of ppl at pve and only few at wvw

Next thing is that u wrote hardware won’t hold, it is anet’s fault for low servers not players so why players have to suffer? Just let them buy better servers and everything will be ok. Seriously, u can find lot of better servers than those dat anet bought – just look into wtfast’s servers…

Well… u miss something, in t1-3 u have lot of fights, in silver league u have nothing, and what happen when some players move there to meet…nothing? I would rather stay in queue than run ppt and farm towers…And the most important issue about FREE TRANSFER, what about players not moving from t1-3 but instead much more masses moving from t4 and less? Cos if anet give free transwer to gold players then silver and bronze should get them too. Atm. lot of players( i know it from recruitment for guild, where ppl ask for gold to transfer…) from lower servers want to move up but they don’t want to pay 300g for it.

Baldrick.8967:

The population issue has more than one cause, but one of the main ones is poor rewards and totally stale gameplay, playing the same maps for three years.

Many wvw players have left the game after waiting and waiting and waiting for any movement from Anet- whether they come back with the new borderland map is debatable, I’m sure we’ll see a rush of pve’rs taking a look for a few months but after that…

It will be like with eotm, pve masses will rush for around the month and decent wvw players will farm them. And after that no1 will care about pve at new map cos pvers will rage quit due to too many wipes. While guilds and zergs will fight each other instead of doing dull pve events…

Kasteros.9847:

Baldrick.8967:

The population issue has more than one cause, but one of the main ones is poor rewards and totally stale gameplay, playing the same maps for three years.

Many wvw players have left the game after waiting and waiting and waiting for any movement from Anet- whether they come back with the new borderland map is debatable, I’m sure we’ll see a rush of pve’rs taking a look for a few months but after that…

It will be like with eotm, pve masses will rush for around the month and decent wvw players will farm them. And after that no1 will care about pve at new map cos pvers will rage quit due to too many wipes. While guilds and zergs will fight each other instead of doing dull pve events…

Why would having rewards turn it into EotM? You suggest it, but offer no argument for it at all.

I am fairly certain if they make the “rewards” come from player kill loot bags it will not even remotely resemble EotM

Of course we all would want more loot, but tbh I don’t play WvW for the loot I play for the challenge.
Also what we have to remember about the so called PvE player is that their game mode can survive without the WvW population and is currently enjoyable (for the most part) for them. Ours? Who really thinks that if we didn’t have the PvE players dipping their toes into WvW that the game mode will last say another 2-3 years if it keeps getting neglected like it has been.

On to the ques that people think will be created if the map cap is reduced. Bare in mind that people already sit in 50 man ques already are happy to an extent that they know when their que pops, they will have somewhat an enjoyable experience.
I speak for Far Shiverpeaks server here, on reset night we have 100+ que for EB, and roughly 20-30 for all the other borders. So that is say 190 people waiting to play still which would be if we had what I suggest is another whole server willing to play WvW.
Multiply that with the likes of Desolation and Seafarer Rest, lets say they have 2x what they can fit on the ALL of the maps on reset night. There we have 3 more FULL servers the play against. Is this not what we all want?

I do personally think that free transfers to the right servers, not aiming at the server population but more the WvW activity (if it can be measured), would do great.

For example EU gold league have done quiet well in moving guilds around trying to balance the ratings and more matchup variety etc. Even recently a large NA looking for an EU server to join, and any EU server would normally Jump hoops to get an NA guild, but most of us are/have been trying to drive them to opposing servers that need to also fall into our parameter, and not upset the balance we have partially restored.

Yes this is currently on EU gold League, not brilliant, but getting there, but would be great if all server could do the same, we partly created this mess along with Anets free transfers at start of the game (not taking WvW activity into consideration). We have to stop this obsession with over stacking servers, we have seen the results of it.

Now if we are playing our part, I think it only fair that Anet play their part too in the population fix by giving us free transfers. Not like they have done in the past, and said “here you go free transfers for x amount of days, go where you like”.

More like monitor WvW activity (even it its from queue activity), base the server to get free transfers on that information, give 1 week of Free transfers to them servers only. Monitor ratings and WvW activity and queu activity for 2 weeks, then repeat free transfers for another week for other servers based on this info. Yes it will be a long solution, but no matter how quick things take to mess up, to get them right will always take longer to solve.

Rough Rating difference in EU 1-9 to NA 1-9 servers atm:

EU 1-9 roughly 175 difference in rating. (would be even better, if more would leave SFR to lower servers) But we have a decent amount of diversity in MU atm.
NA 1-9 roughly 560 difference in rating.

@Twinny
My server, which is #14 in EU has ratings similar to #8-9 in NA, they have a huge gap between #7 and #8 which I think totally messes up matchmaking for them.

Also, both T4 and T5 matchups are pretty balanced point-wise and we get matchup variety in silver too.

pejot.4806:

@Twinny
My server, which is #14 in EU has ratings similar to #8-9 in NA, they have a huge gap between #7 and #8 which I think totally messes up matchmaking for them.

Also, both T4 and T5 matchups are pretty balanced point-wise and we get matchup variety in silver too.

yeh no doubt, i was using EU gold as an example, most of us (as servers) have been careful, not to cause unbalance, and turned away many guilds we would normally beg for.

The 560 rating difference between servers 1-9 NA is roughly the same difference between 1-19 EU. 1 single NA guild coming to EU silver league can easily put that server mid gold in a couple of weeks, maybe more.

Point i’m making is as a community there is a lot we can do ourselves in regards to population, but help from Anet would be an added bonus, since we cant physically see figures of WvW activities and moving guilds server to server is costly.