Guild Wars 2

What do you think about this system?

Each server gets equal rewards and they divide up among the population.

If the reward is:

Gold – fixed amount divided among all players who qualified for reward
Badges – prices for badge-bought items scales with server pop
Loot bags etc – drop frequency scales inversely with server pop
Finishers – don’t care, let everyone have it
WxP – amount earned scales inversely with server pop, or points needed to rank scale, either way

Lastly I really like the idea of R.I. based on population. If you outnumber your opponents greatly enough, you get no R.I. on captured structures. If you are extremely outnumbered, R.I. might even increase to 10 minutes for capping something.

You end up with 2 choices – either A) play on a stacked server for easier kills/captures/wins but less chance of rewards proportionately, or play on a lower pop server for a much higher chance of rewards but you have to really work for them.

This would encourage transfers like Anet loves to do, and it would also be a huge step towards population re-balancing and ensuring WvW survives.

The rewards can also be increased for your server based on your enemies. If you beat a server higher ranked than yours, you would get more rewards than if you beat a server ranked lower than you.

Do they win because they have more people? Yes. Punish them because they have more people? No. I’ve said it a thousand times, there will be no balance as long as its server vs server in a “persistent” world.

Honestly, if they just cut the amount of people allowed in a map before que kicks in by half, the problem would fix itself.

However, I think I like your idea better… rewards those willing to work for it and keeps the zerglings at bay. At bay, not at Bay.

Neeho.3859:

Honestly, if they just cut the amount of people allowed in a map before que kicks in by half, the problem would fix itself.

However, I think I like your idea better… rewards those willing to work for it and keeps the zerglings at bay. At bay, not at Bay.

How does that solve anything? Servers that are winning with night/morning capping will still do that. And everyone else just gets even more queue’s, even the lower pop servers.
Again, punishing players with excessively long queue’s, which are bad enough at times as it is.

Solstice.1097:

Lastly I really like the idea of R.I. based on population. If you outnumber your opponents greatly enough, you get no R.I. on captured structures. If you are extremely outnumbered, R.I. might even increase to 10 minutes for capping something.

Now that’s not a bad idea. Gives the lower population a chance to siege it up. Since it takes a lower pop a longer time to run siege this would be a good balancing effort.

honestly i think the only way that server balance will be achieved is if they open up free transfers fora week. Now before we all poopoo this let me explain

first let me state that i understand that that would allow people to move to higher tier servers… so maybe we limit the servers that can take free transfers. The servers in the “T1” remain as they are and cost to move into, the “T2” server maybe half price and “T3” and lower make free. This would allow for people to move out of the upper tier and become “less stacked”.

so allowing to move down but not up may result in a more fair ability for say the top 6-9 servers to be able to face each other competitively as opposed to only 3 servers that can face each other competitively.

secondly this would allow for more fights on the lower tier servers because there will be more population there to wvw.

this all being said i also realize that it could have negative consequences such as everybody going to stack a now free to transfer to server.

i just feel the best way to solve population problems is to promote a shift in population.

Honestly if they just did free transfer to the lowest ranked server this will be the end result.

Those that WANT to move to play with their guild will jump down. With the increased numbers that server will not be lowest ranked very long. Then the newest bottom becomes free to transfer too.

After a few weeks of that… the population will be at least closer then what it is. The longer this goes on the more balanced it becomes naturally. Stacked servers might still be better because of more dedicated and organized guilds playing in WvW. but at least it wont be a shear numbers game and those servers would now have a CHANCE to organize and field a force.

This also does not take away much from the money that Anet makes on transfers. since those servers that want to pay for high end guilds to move to them still can.

I love this idea. +1

Terrahero.9358:

Neeho.3859:

Honestly, if they just cut the amount of people allowed in a map before que kicks in by half, the problem would fix itself.

However, I think I like your idea better… rewards those willing to work for it and keeps the zerglings at bay. At bay, not at Bay.

How does that solve anything? Servers that are winning with night/morning capping will still do that. And everyone else just gets even more queue’s, even the lower pop servers.
Again, punishing players with excessively long queue’s, which are bad enough at times as it is.

if the queues become unbearable enough, organized guilds will flock from stacked servers and spread. coattailers will follow them but trying not to stack too much again, so they will be more spread aswell..
and that is true for night/morning cappers too in the top servers, they will spread thin

worst case scenario, the WvW will be the same as it is now, but instead of 2-3 allpowerful servers , you will have 5-8 more equivalent. thats an improvement.

the idea behind low pop queues is to force people to spread. and they would work kitten well at it.

also, since stacking servers is a player-created problem, I see nothing wrong with punishing them for it.

Konrad Curze.5130:

Terrahero.9358:

Neeho.3859:

Honestly, if they just cut the amount of people allowed in a map before que kicks in by half, the problem would fix itself.

However, I think I like your idea better… rewards those willing to work for it and keeps the zerglings at bay. At bay, not at Bay.

How does that solve anything? Servers that are winning with night/morning capping will still do that. And everyone else just gets even more queue’s, even the lower pop servers.
Again, punishing players with excessively long queue’s, which are bad enough at times as it is.

if the queues become unbearable enough, organized guilds will flock from stacked servers and spread. coattailers will follow them but trying not to stack too much again, so they will be more spread aswell..
and that is true for night/morning cappers too in the top servers, they will spread thin

worst case scenario, the WvW will be the same as it is now, but instead of 2-3 allpowerful servers , you will have 5-8 more equivalent. thats an improvement.

the idea behind low pop queues is to force people to spread. and they would work kitten well at it.

also, since stacking servers is a player-created problem, I see nothing wrong with punishing them for it.

Maybe it’s different on NA, but in EU even T7-8 servers are capable of having queues during primetime. It’s just naive to think that the only reason we have queues is because of stacking servers, and to think that queues induce people to change server. More likely; they’ll just stop playing.

The problem of population imbalance is usually most noticeable when there’s a late-night group of 30 flipping a map defended by 5 guys. In that situation lower-pop-caps won’t help at all, unless you’re seriously suggesting dropping it that low.

Solstice.1097:

Lastly I really like the idea of R.I. based on population. If you outnumber your opponents greatly enough, you get no R.I. on captured structures. If you are extremely outnumbered, R.I. might even increase to 10 minutes for capping something.

I really like this idea, actually. If it came with some kind of protection for your fortifications if you recapped quickly enough, even better.

why not to open a free transfer to “low populated” servers and give those who uses it a bonus like WvWboosts or a free set of wvw weapons (golem, trebushet, ballista etc) or WvW exp (like 2-3 istant levels)… and make it all non-reversible for a month (so no one can exploit it)…

also i want to underline that i’m on piken square (a low populated server) and we are always in the top tier wvw matches so the population not always means wvw player.

The point is that there are servers with 3/4 of RP guilds or PvE oriented guilds so no one go for WvW; why to care about them so? If they don’t want to WvW and you are on one of those servers leave it, simply.

chedder.6302:

honestly i think the only way that server balance will be achieved is if they open up free transfers fora week. Now before we all poopoo this let me explain

first let me state that i understand that that would allow people to move to higher tier servers… so maybe we limit the servers that can take free transfers. The servers in the “T1” remain as they are and cost to move into, the “T2” server maybe half price and “T3” and lower make free. This would allow for people to move out of the upper tier and become “less stacked”.

so allowing to move down but not up may result in a more fair ability for say the top 6-9 servers to be able to face each other competitively as opposed to only 3 servers that can face each other competitively.

secondly this would allow for more fights on the lower tier servers because there will be more population there to wvw.

this all being said i also realize that it could have negative consequences such as everybody going to stack a now free to transfer to server.

i just feel the best way to solve population problems is to promote a shift in population.

At release they allowed free transfers to go on for four whole months purely for PVE concerns, without any thought on the destructive effect on WvW it had. Why do you think they would now conceivably implement free transfers for WvW reasons? Lol.

@ gennyt – this is not “punishing” high population servers. This is “un-punishing” low population servers. In a high pop server you simply get a ton more kills. Does that mean you should get a ton more loot for the same (or less) amount of effort? No! The lower pop you have, the harder you have to work for your kills/caps/etc so the rewards should be better. All in all the goal is regardless of server you will have the SAME opportunity at loot, making your preferred playstyle the only real difference. If you’re going to get the same loot either way and your choice is now between mass zerging (tier 1) or tactical combat (more common in lower tiers) then it would be a lot more common for guilds to transfer DOWN and less common for guilds to transfer UP.

Also I am in favor of doubling transfer costs, but only charging when it’s a server that’s a higher rank than yours. All down-transfers would be free, and up-transfers 2x cost.