Guild Wars 2

There’s another big PvP game out there that’s younger than Guild Wars 2 but they’re doing server merges tomorrow. And they’re doing it before paid transfers are in! They understand that other players are the content and they’re looking to keep the battles massive.

What about Guild Wars 2? The existing number of servers is not doing any justice to WvW right now and having paid transfers is insulting. I’m in a T6 server right now in the middle of prime time (8 pm EST) and we can’t even get 10 people together to run a siege breaker event in Eternal Battlegrounds. If this is what T6 feels like, I feel even more sorry for the T7 and T8 matchups.

Can we please have server merges to bring back the large epic battles?

It would neat if you could merge European and American servers together to make 17 tiers. Yes, there will be an issues when it comes to time zones and some other things. But still battles will be more epic and you will play a variety of servers each week.

Sid.8512:

It would neat if you could merge European and American servers together to make 17 tiers. Yes, there will be an issues when it comes to time zones and some other things. But still battles will be more epic and you will play a variety of servers each week.

We already have issues with timzones… What different it would make? There are NA servers with Euro presence, and Euro servers with NA presence… To not mention Asia and Oceanic.

I see no issue in merging both ladders.

I think that would be a good idea. Another option would be to have 6-9 dedicated WvW servers per time zone and the rest 18-15 to be pve/spvp, free transfers between wvw/pve servers. It would free alot of system resources to improve the game play experience including probably larger scale battles and distribute population based on preferences.

The best system as far as WvW population goes would be one that removed the WvW server from being tied to the PVE server imo.

Even from a mere gem cost perspective it currently costs as much to move to anvil rock as it does to move to jade quarry.

if we had separate wvw servers wvw populations would only be indicative of wvw populations.

server mergers, transers, server transfer caps.. all of these things are better off separating the wvw populations from the pve populations.

i belive march update will drag lot more ppls in wvwvw

Rayya.2591:

i belive march update will drag lot more ppls in wvwvw

if the reason those people left in the first place was anything but culling though we will be in the same place or worse population wise after match.

Rayya.2591:

i belive march update will drag lot more ppls in wvwvw

I think some people are just dedicated PvE’rs and love fighting NPC’s only. Some they will find excuses like grinding for better gear and some do not even bother. I think even if some PvE’rs would be attracted in WvW via rewards they will probably not contribute just running around for achievements and make queue’s longer.
Best solution is to have WvW and PvE separate servers.

Zen.8497:

Best solution is to have WvW and PvE separate servers.

Or remove all WvW requeriments for PvE stuff…

Jeknar.6184:

Zen.8497:

Best solution is to have WvW and PvE separate servers.

Or remove all WvW requeriments for PvE stuff…

this will increase numbers for 2 hours at peaks maybe, and will only increase queue on high tiers. An guy who likes to play wvw or find it funny , will have no problem to pve for few days, in order to be competitive.
I played few weeks against Fr servers ,most of the times on theyr own borderland, and they got always underlvled guys on wvwvw. Even at 3-4 am you see 20 guys with green arrow near the name, so if somebody enjoy the wvwvw they will go there from lvl 1 in white armors.

Rayya.2591:

i belive march update will drag lot more ppls in wvwvw

Even if the update doubles WvW population, it’s going to be 40 v 40 v 40. In EB. This is nothing compared to the kinds of battles we had at release.

Like i suggested before merge the bottom three tiers into one tier with one server from each tier merging with the other two servers from their tier. This would effectively make it 6 tiers instead of 8 with much better battles for the lower tier servers. This would be the most logical solution in my opinion.

I humbly invite you to JQ T1 where fun is never in short supply

Fuzzion.2504:

I humbly invite you to JQ T1 where fun is never in short supply

True.

We didn’t all stack in the first 2 tiers for no reason.

What other big pvp game?

i like how ESO is planning their structure,
1 mega server where everybody from every region can log in and then divided in 3 factions.

i wish GW2 had something similar.

The way I see it the top 6 servers from NA and EU, so the top 12 servers, do not need merging. They are already very strong.

The rest are fair game. Why not give them all a boost?

The problem though is the ranking situation in EU is not as clear as the ranking situation in NA.

ESO is having the 1 Mega Server for PVE, and you can separate out the PVE in instances based on who you want to play with.

However its PvP system is similar to TSW, as in you pick a “Campaign” kind of like picking say JQ as a server…in that Campaign you’ll fight the the opposing realms who also picked that Campaign.

The map however for ESO makes this game look small though… It’s about 4x the size of all 3 Servers Maps combined.

Fuzzion.2504:

I humbly invite you to JQ T1 where fun is never in short supply

Sure, that sounds good. But Anet wants to charge me half of the cost of this game to do a server transfer. $40 to buy the game in any one of the regular sales, or $25 to buy gems to perform a server transfer. And I’d be doing it blind. I’d have to take it on word whether the PvP is accessible (super long queue times), alive and well, and friendly to newly joined players. It’s bad enough I’d be leaving my guild behind and the influence I’ve built up for my personal guild bank.

So my options are pay to play a game I’ve already paid for, or go play a different game.

I definitely think they’ll have to do this at some point. Couldn’t come soon enough for me. I’d much rather have queues than not enough people to play.

Having guested to other low pop servers and saw what their PvE communities were like (Im on FA).

I doubt they’ll merge servers simply for the WvW community in the said server not being all that strong.

It was kind of the job of the tier/glicko system to match communities to rightful opponents. I bet such system would do wonders if WvW a 1v1 encounter, it’s just that it’s hard to completely match 3 ‘equal’ WvW communities together.

The problem is that you can’t merge “WvW servers” without also merging PvE servers.

A strong WvW server doesn’t mean it’s a strong PvE server or vice versa and frankly if they do any merges at all it will be based on PvE population. You could see Kaineng (T2) merged with Ehmry Bay (T4) purely because their PvE populations are lower without regard for WvW.

Really it’s kinda faulty in that the endgame of GW2 is not necessarily WvW like it was in DAOC. You can have a full PvE end-game and still have an empty WvW area.

Xsorus.2507:

ESO is having the 1 Mega Server for PVE, and you can separate out the PVE in instances based on who you want to play with.

However its PvP system is similar to TSW, as in you pick a “Campaign” kind of like picking say JQ as a server…in that Campaign you’ll fight the the opposing realms who also picked that Campaign.

The map however for ESO makes this game look small though… It’s about 4x the size of all 3 Servers Maps combined.

But TES:O isn’t out yet and it’s unknown how the announced systems are going to play out once live.
Besides, this is a subforum to discuss WvW in GW2, not about listing features of other games that aren’t even stated as a posible solution to a perceived problem in GW2.
I’m not hating on TES:O, I’ll probably also play it at some point as I try out every major mmo release since 1999 but it’s a bit silly to just list features of another game here because you’re hyped up for it.

today i learned t6 is more abandoned than t8 o.O

Mylon.4135:

I’m in a T6 server right now in the middle of prime time (8 pm EST) and we can’t even get 10 people together to run a siege breaker event in Eternal Battlegrounds.

To be fair, your experience was on a Thursday night of a match that’s been decided for days and in a matchup that’s been the same for almost 2 months.

Also, just because players don’t want to join you to start the Break Out doesn’t mean there aren’t enough players in the map, just that they don’t consider your objective to be their top priority.

Again, it’s Thursday, most ppl don’t care about sieging at this point, only doing skirmishes for practice and badges.

GrandmaFunk.3052:

Also, just because players don’t want to join you to start the Break Out doesn’t mean there aren’t enough players in the map, just that they don’t consider your objective to be their top priority.

We didn’t have any territory, at least not in EB. That’s why we had the siegebreakers available. I know Thursday evening may not be the best time to play, but it’s just a symptom of why I put the game down for a couple months.

jazzllanna.1278:

What other big pvp game?

I was specifically talking about Planetside 2. They just put server merges through because they understand that other players is their content.

Mylon.4135:

jazzllanna.1278:

What other big pvp game?

I was specifically talking about Planetside 2. They just put server merges through because they understand that other players is their content.

Planetside 2 is FPS and as such is uncompareable to GW2 a RPG.

As for your server merge well all NA servers are at least high pop so you have no chance of a merge when 8 EU servers are perma med pop still

Also remember that because of the W3 system you have to merge servers in 3s aswell

holska.4127:

… it’s a bit silly to just list features of another game here because you’re hyped up for it.

It isn’t if you’re trying to convince ANet to modify GW2 accordingly. Yes, we could all just let GW2 fade into oblivion (pun intended) when TESO (or AA) arrives, but I don’t see how it’s silly to let ANet know what we find exciting.

That listed server pop has got to be population of people who at one time or another logged into the server. Cause even the PvE areas are not very populated on my server and we’re High or Very High.

One of the reasons for the Frost thing is to get people to enter zones other than Orr. And there aren’t even that many people in Orr.

Sid.8512:

It would neat if you could merge European and American servers together to make 17 tiers. Yes, there will be an issues when it comes to time zones and some other things. But still battles will be more epic and you will play a variety of servers each week.

I don’t understand why this bad idea keeps coming up since ANet has already pointed out the increased lag that would occur if they did that. Packets that have to travel further take longer to do so because they almost always have to be received and forwarded by more intermediate servers … some of which may have their own temporary bottlenecks. Time zones aren’t the issue … lag is.

Cactus.2710:

Sid.8512:

It would neat if you could merge European and American servers together to make 17 tiers. Yes, there will be an issues when it comes to time zones and some other things. But still battles will be more epic and you will play a variety of servers each week.

I don’t understand why this bad idea keeps coming up since ANet has already pointed out the increased lag that would occur if they did that. Packets that have to travel further take longer to do so because they almost always have to be received and forwarded by more intermediate servers … some of which may have their own temporary bottlenecks. Time zones aren’t the issue … lag is.

that could be fixed by splitting the bl between the timezones. 12 hours on a NA server and 12 hours on a paired EU server then combine the points. meaning it will be lag free during the timezone primetimes and the only people that will be negatively effected is the small group of off hour players.

kingkillar.6714:

As for your server merge well all NA servers are at least high pop so you have no chance of a merge when 8 EU servers are perma med pop still

Server population is just a fancy lie. Low pop servers are seen as a sign of a weak game and thus people stay away. Every MMO producer ever has an incentive to do the fast-food method of having “medium, high, very high” instead of having a low population server.

Additionally, server population as a single term isn’t very descriptive. Right after launch, a server might be very high population because all of the 1-30 zones are full. The people start to spread out, but unless the numbers are tweaked server side, the server still appears very high even though it isn’t!

And even more, the tech is already in placed to handle busy servers. Overflow instances! We could be running the exact same method of GW1 where there was no sharding of servers. It scales with any number of players and it reduces the chances of running into low pop areas. There’s nothing in the way of server merges except potential bad publicity, lost revenue (for otherwise paid transfers), or outright neglect.

No just no… I have a lot of pride in my server and even should we rank last I still wouldn’t want to merge with another. Having 24/7 zergs isn’t everything and some of us don’t find doing that enjoyable.

Cactus.2710:

holska.4127:

… it’s a bit silly to just list features of another game here because you’re hyped up for it.

It isn’t if you’re trying to convince ANet to modify GW2 accordingly. Yes, we could all just let GW2 fade into oblivion (pun intended) when TESO (or AA) arrives, but I don’t see how it’s silly to let ANet know what we find exciting.

Indeed if. But it wasn’t posted in the format of a suggestion, only a list of features which makes it more of a trollpost than a suggestion to improve the game.
It’s not what you say, it’s how you say it