Guild Wars 2

Now eat this:

Over all WvW player limit for each server should be equal to the number of WvW players averaged over time of the server with the least WvW population. Transfers to servers with lower average WvW population should be free.

Aim: Equal out WvW population.

Problem solved, you are welcome.

TyPin.9860:

Now eat this:

Over all WvW player limit for each server should be equal to the number of WvW players averaged over time of the server with the least WvW population.

Funny. If the weak server puts 36 people at war for 2 hours prime-time (and nothing else), everyone will be restricted to have mostly 3 people online (thats the average over time in this example ) at anytime?

Afterwards they have only 3 player during these 2 hours (the rest is not allowed) , which would reduce the mean to 0.1 rounded to 0.

No WvW after second day, a pitty

Even if overall server population were level, coverage still remains a problem. They need to find a better way to reward servers during their respective prime times while not necessarily alienating the players who work at night and play during the day.

TyPin.9860:

Now eat this:

Over all WvW player limit for each server should be equal to the number of WvW players averaged over time of the server with the least WvW population. Transfers to servers with lower average WvW population should be free.

Aim: Equal out WvW population.

Problem solved, you are welcome.

More likely players would just transfer to another game with devs that have a clue how to design matches.

Of course the “forumula” has to be made a bit more detailed than that. What I wrote is more like a scetch.

Maybe ppl will quit WvW or GW2 as a whole, but with the system as it is, ppl will for sure quite.

Terrible, terrible idea.
Why should you limit the number of players playing the game ??? If it was possible, i’d love to have limitless maps. Queues are @ around 2 hours on my server

Fenrir.6183:

Terrible, terrible idea.
Why should you limit the number of players playing the game ??? If it was possible, i’d love to have limitless maps. Queues are @ around 2 hours on my server

Now that’s a terrible idea.

Why a limit? Because servers can only handle so much.
No limit = lagfest and most likely server crashing.

I can’t imagine the skill lag that would be. There are times now when all 3 servers are queued in eb and there is a 3 way fiight in sm. People not even near sm are complaining about the skill lag.

If queues are an issue then transfer. Most servers I hear don’t have queues. Eu servers really the only people who really have a legit excuse for not transferring if queues is a problem.

Jeda.5209:

Fenrir.6183:

Terrible, terrible idea.
Why should you limit the number of players playing the game ??? If it was possible, i’d love to have limitless maps. Queues are @ around 2 hours on my server

Now that’s a terrible idea.

Why a limit? Because servers can only handle so much.
No limit = lagfest and most likely server crashing.

I can’t imagine the skill lag that would be. There are times now when all 3 servers are queued in eb and there is a 3 way fiight in sm. People not even near sm are complaining about the skill lag.

If queues are an issue then transfer. Most servers I hear don’t have queues. Eu servers really the only people who really have a legit excuse for not transferring if queues is a problem.

How about simply putting in enough server capacity to meet the demand?

Yeah, I guess you’re right … it’s better to just strangle the game. Keep as many players out as possible in order to balance everything around the lowest common denominator because the devs can’t figure out a better way to set up matches. That’s going to be the best way for ANet to fend off the new games when they come out in a few months.

To be honest, the problem I think is not that the population is unbalanced, but as some ppl already said, this is mainly a server coverage problem. If your opponents outnumber you at times, you should always be able to fend em off. Communication is only thing u need. Ask some friends to help defend and your done. Also the server match-ups are usually always quite balanced if it comes to numbers, so its not that your total wvw population is 10 at some point and the other server has queu. This can not and will probably never happen with the match up system.

Cactus.2710:

Jeda.5209:

Fenrir.6183:

Terrible, terrible idea.
Why should you limit the number of players playing the game ??? If it was possible, i’d love to have limitless maps. Queues are @ around 2 hours on my server

Now that’s a terrible idea.

Why a limit? Because servers can only handle so much.
No limit = lagfest and most likely server crashing.

I can’t imagine the skill lag that would be. There are times now when all 3 servers are queued in eb and there is a 3 way fiight in sm. People not even near sm are complaining about the skill lag.

If queues are an issue then transfer. Most servers I hear don’t have queues. Eu servers really the only people who really have a legit excuse for not transferring if queues is a problem.

How about simply putting in enough server capacity to meet the demand?

Yeah, I guess you’re right … it’s better to just strangle the game. Keep as many players out as possible in order to balance everything around the lowest common denominator because the devs can’t figure out a better way to set up matches. That’s going to be the best way for ANet to fend off the new games when they come out in a few months.

Yea, I forgot ANET only created one server and they all have endless queues……..

there are many things that anet should have done long long time ago, but they can still do it now…..

1. like someone mentioned above, limit the players per world per map. queues ? hey look , there are other servers over there ! move there.. don’t want to move ? enjoy the queue…. of course ANET will need to open a limited time free transfer for this….

2. randomize the match up, not by grouping them into 2 groups but a complete randomness…… who cares if BG is fighting SF, no difference as to if they’re fighting CD…. roflstomping is a roflstomping anyway…..subdividing the servers into groups of match up will create huge gaps in the rating points…..

… but of course someone already mention he doesn’t like the idea, apparently he sees anet only made 1 server……

give incentive for guilds to move to the lower pop servers.

Free (or reduced up to free depending on the ranking of the server) transfers to low ranked servers.
Guild xp buff to get gets up and running quicker.

Do those… and we will start to see balanced WvW matches.

Lower WvW map population caps will increase queues and force us all to spread out a bit. That will help with the lag issues and make being outnumbered some hours of the day less of an issue. They just have to come up with some way to let people transfer easily down tiers but lock up transfers to the top ones.

It is really really very hard to control the wvw population and how the people behave. Maybe anet need to re-design their “server population status” algorithm because they have increased the server cap 1.5 month back. Re-design the algorithm to the point where it actually reflect the reality closer and have a dynamic transfer cost according to the different population instead of a flat transfer cost on a very general “very high”, “high” etc status.

What’s going to happen is everyone will eventually transfer to the top tiers because its the only way to get a balanced fight.

I’ve had enough trying to defend a map against a server with 40+ extra people, and so I’m taking a hiatus from the game, much like I did 4 months ago.

Corvus.3728:

To be honest, the problem I think is not that the population is unbalanced, but as some ppl already said, this is mainly a server coverage problem. If your opponents outnumber you at times, you should always be able to fend em off. Communication is only thing u need. Ask some friends to help defend and your done. Also the server match-ups are usually always quite balanced if it comes to numbers, so its not that your total wvw population is 10 at some point and the other server has queu. This can not and will probably never happen with the match up system.

That’s bullkitten, you obviously haven’t played on other servers. Asking for help on a server consisting of people who don’t care about WvW is impossible. Communication can only go so far and last for so long.

WvW is broken because it does not take into account the people who do not want to WvW. The mechanics are based around the idea that everyone on a server wants to WvW and that you can get more people by just asking and rallying people in, but you really can’t.

They need to combined server populations into factions, and changed WvW to faction vs faction.

Another large problem with this is that ‘WvW population’ =/= Server population. It’s kind of impossible for ANet to see who in the future might bother going into WvW, who might stop and take a break to play through Skyrim again, who plays WvW the most etc. so WvW population is constantly shifting and changing…

Preventing people from playing the game is clearly a terrible idea, fixing skill-lags not so much.

Anet should simply merge servers with low population, that´s all.

No need to balance population on the servers, just need to matching population of servers in one group. I’m sure this is not to hard to be done.

Let’s make PvW. Player versus World. The weak server should get 1 very strong player with a buff that makes him stronger than a champion NPC with tons of health.

This “problem” has been going on in every WvWvW/ RvR/ PvPvP type game made to-date.
Dark Age of Camelot had the same problems with one side having more players then the other 2 factions. WAR online had the same problem and Aion was a nightmare and SWOTOR was lol at unbalanced sides.
I am not going to go into details of all the other pvp based MMO’s I have played over 14 years. but this is nothing new.
Since most of the mmo population exploded when World of Warcraft was unleashed, a lot of players who did play since beta remember how something as simple as battlegrounds was horrid. The average Que to get into Alterac Valley was 3.5 hours. Do you know what Blizzard did? Something amazing called cross server battlegrounds. The que’s went to instant pop and the players rejoiced. Something along those lines has to happen in order for any realm vrs realm vrs realm or server vr server vs server or faction vrs faction to succeed.
Im not going to tell the DEVs what they need to do, because its their game and if I don’t like what is going on I will move to another game. Back when Dev’s did not listen to people crying about something or another during the days of the old school mmos it was common place for Devs to remind us that it is their game. If you don’t like it move on, but no game company will say that now because its all about the $.
The only way I can see a pop vrs pop game being balanced is to open a q to a static battleground ascross all servers. If 12 servers que for say EB then those players would go to a self existing EB until it was player capped, then it would go down to a lower teir where keeps would reset every 3 days. When that cap is full everyone else would be shoved into lower tier EBs that acted like overflows where keeps reset everyday. Sort of a ladder type deal. This way the every server’s population can be spread out and eventually with a q system u can choose to go up a tier map or what not. Of course they would have to change the system of upgrading keeps since on the lower tiers it would not make sense to upgrade them if they reset daily. That’s an idea just off the top of my head.

why not have it so a guild can keep their upgrades and influence if they transfer to a server that’s 5 or more ranks below the one they’re currently on? as has been pointed out, server population=! WvW population. giving benefits for transferring to a lower population server doesn’t equate to balancing out the WvW population. there’s no need for PvE or sPvP players to transfer servers. if there’s too many of them somewhere, oh well, they go into an overflow and continue on as normal. no big deal. if the WvW population between the 3 servers in a match isn’t close, it ends up as a stompfest with no side having nearly as much fun as they could. so they have to focus solely on balancing out the WvW population. and to do that, guilds need incentives to move to where they’re needed, not be punished for it under a one size fits all blanket system that has consistently proven to be a colossal failure. because if a guild is punished for staying on a server through queues, and punished for moving to a smaller server through losing all of their hard work, pretty much any other option on the market that doesn’t consistently punish its playerbase no matter what they do starts to look a whole lot more attractive.

grifflyman.8102:

Corvus.3728:

To be honest, the problem I think is not that the population is unbalanced, but as some ppl already said, this is mainly a server coverage problem. If your opponents outnumber you at times, you should always be able to fend em off. Communication is only thing u need. Ask some friends to help defend and your done. Also the server match-ups are usually always quite balanced if it comes to numbers, so its not that your total wvw population is 10 at some point and the other server has queu. This can not and will probably never happen with the match up system.

That’s bullkitten, you obviously haven’t played on other servers. Asking for help on a server consisting of people who don’t care about WvW is impossible. Communication can only go so far and last for so long.

WvW is broken because it does not take into account the people who do not want to WvW. The mechanics are based around the idea that everyone on a server wants to WvW and that you can get more people by just asking and rallying people in, but you really can’t.

They need to combined server populations into factions, and changed WvW to faction vs faction.

To be honest, if you are in a server, where u can’t find 3/4 people to help defending, I suggest u should mail me and I will give u 100g because chances are unlikely. Every server can have 3/4 people to help you cover something you want to defend. To be honest, if ur really that despirate to do WvW there are ways to fix it. For instance:
1. Change Server to a better WvW populated server that u can afford(gem prices are kinda huge nowadays)
2. You can rally people to help you promote your server for WvW on forum or guesting. I bet that there are guilds that are interested since, for instance, your server does not have any queu at all.
3. Herald in map chat in LA(own server) that your setting up and alliance(with alternative Guild) for all WvW people. I wanna bet you will slowly end up with 15-20 ppl, and then expand even further.

The reason why I know this is because UW also lacked people for WvW. UW player base was huge but only interested PvE. We had to promote WvW and set up a decent WvW community/alliance to make sure everything went better and better. This forum has loads of boards where u can advertise your server.

This post is not to flame back but it is an eye opener hopefully, that you have a lot of choices and that complaining at Anet is not the best choice to make.

I think the only way to balance population across maps for all servers would be to turn it into factions and have players join a faction and have those factions draw from all servers.

I don’t think they should bring back any form of free server transfers. It breaks down server loyalty, which I think is a part of the WvW experience.

People were spoiled by the free server transfers from before guesting was fully implemented. I remember the volatility it caused in the WvW match-ups and the scramble right before the free transfers ended.

Corvus.3728:

To be honest, if you are in a server, where u can’t find 3/4 people to help defending, I suggest u should mail me and I will give u 100g because chances are unlikely. Every server can have 3/4 people to help you cover something you want to defend.

I think you still underestimate how small the number of players can get at the bottom. I’ve been on the borderlands map at the end of US prime time on ET when some asked for everyone still on to reply in map chat and they got 8 responses. I’ve asked for help manning open siege while defending a tower I’d been maintaining outside of prime time and gotten no takers. Yes, I can get a good defense request response when we have a decent number of people on but not when the population is sparse.

So, what do I need to send you to get 100g? A video of an attack taking out a tower in our own borderlands or our corner of EB (not some lost cause tower on enemy turf) after numerous requests for help in the map chat and no help? I’m pretty sure I can get that for you because I’ve already seen it. There are nights where we don’t even have someone keeping up the siege equipment at all of our holdings.

No, I don’t want to transfer servers, ET is working on recruitment (so is FC), and we’ve gotten some good recent transfers. I’m willing to wait to see if thing improve.

If I had to make 3 suggestions to improve WvW for low WvW participation servers at this point, they would be:

1) Make defense more profitable and interesting so that players on low population servers will be willing to camp a location and defend it instead of capping supply camps over and over. I liked the suggestion about making refreshing defensive siege an event. Letting players take out NPCs using siege weapons only (they often auto-heal now and can’t be killed that way) and the occasional NPC raid to drive back could also help. This would help finding 3-4 people to defend and hold things.

2) Scale the rewards and loot to the relative number of combatants. You should get more of a base reward got taking out a well defended site than one defended by NPCs and a better reward for defeating 3 attackers than being part of a team jumping a lone opponent. PvDoor should produce tiny rewards while attacking a well-defended site should give big rewards, unless the number of attackers is also very low. Yes, I know loot bags from kills do this to a degree already, but I’m talking about making it even stronger and applying it to the event rewards, too.

3) Limit the number of opponents on a server’s borderland only to 2-4 times the maximim number of defenders in the last hour, minimum of 10. If there are more attackers than the current limit, they get to stay until they die. This will make sure a low population server can at least be competitive on their own home borderland, have a good chance of holding it with an off-hours skeleton crew, and generally have a decent experience there.

no thanks!

Jeda.5209:

Cactus.2710:

Jeda.5209:

Fenrir.6183:

Terrible, terrible idea.
Why should you limit the number of players playing the game ??? If it was possible, i’d love to have limitless maps. Queues are @ around 2 hours on my server

Now that’s a terrible idea.

Why a limit? Because servers can only handle so much.
No limit = lagfest and most likely server crashing.

I can’t imagine the skill lag that would be. There are times now when all 3 servers are queued in eb and there is a 3 way fiight in sm. People not even near sm are complaining about the skill lag.

If queues are an issue then transfer. Most servers I hear don’t have queues. Eu servers really the only people who really have a legit excuse for not transferring if queues is a problem.

How about simply putting in enough server capacity to meet the demand?

Yeah, I guess you’re right … it’s better to just strangle the game. Keep as many players out as possible in order to balance everything around the lowest common denominator because the devs can’t figure out a better way to set up matches. That’s going to be the best way for ANet to fend off the new games when they come out in a few months.

Yea, I forgot ANET only created one server and they all have endless queues……..

You didn’t forget anything. You just didn’t know anything in the first place. ANet merges server capacity for WvW and dynamically allocates it across all realms. What happens on one server can and does affect what happens on other servers.

azizul.8469:

there are many things that anet should have done long long time ago, but they can still do it now…..

1. like someone mentioned above, limit the players per world per map. queues ? hey look , there are other servers over there ! move there.. don’t want to move ? enjoy the queue…. of course ANET will need to open a limited time free transfer for this….

2. randomize the match up, not by grouping them into 2 groups but a complete randomness…… who cares if BG is fighting SF, no difference as to if they’re fighting CD…. roflstomping is a roflstomping anyway…..subdividing the servers into groups of match up will create huge gaps in the rating points…..

… but of course someone already mention he doesn’t like the idea, apparently he sees anet only made 1 server……

Glad some people understand, well put.

Cactus.2710:

Jeda.5209:

Cactus.2710:

Jeda.5209:

Fenrir.6183:

Terrible, terrible idea.
Why should you limit the number of players playing the game ??? If it was possible, i’d love to have limitless maps. Queues are @ around 2 hours on my server

Now that’s a terrible idea.

Why a limit? Because servers can only handle so much.
No limit = lagfest and most likely server crashing.

I can’t imagine the skill lag that would be. There are times now when all 3 servers are queued in eb and there is a 3 way fiight in sm. People not even near sm are complaining about the skill lag.

If queues are an issue then transfer. Most servers I hear don’t have queues. Eu servers really the only people who really have a legit excuse for not transferring if queues is a problem.

How about simply putting in enough server capacity to meet the demand?

Yeah, I guess you’re right … it’s better to just strangle the game. Keep as many players out as possible in order to balance everything around the lowest common denominator because the devs can’t figure out a better way to set up matches. That’s going to be the best way for ANet to fend off the new games when they come out in a few months.

Yea, I forgot ANET only created one server and they all have endless queues……..

You didn’t forget anything. You just didn’t know anything in the first place. ANet merges server capacity for WvW and dynamically allocates it across all realms. What happens on one server can and does affect what happens on other servers.

and this guy remains clueless…..

Yea, that’s why when tier 1 is having an epic SM fight on EB that lags players on tier 1 it also causes lag on tier 2 -8 servers EB as well….. [Insert Sarcasm here just for this guy]

Good riddance. Learn to read and comprehend before responding.

If free transfers were opened up to lower tier servers, I would leave t1 for t8. Until then, I’ll just try to skill lock maps in garrison/sm fights.

PariahX.6970:

Lower WvW map population caps will increase queues and force us all to spread out a bit. That will help with the lag issues and make being outnumbered some hours of the day less of an issue. They just have to come up with some way to let people transfer easily down tiers but lock up transfers to the top ones.

That is perhaps one of the fixes that Anet should consider. The population caps should be based on total amount of players in all 4 maps. To balance the matches if 20 people are on for server A combined on all 4 maps, then server B and C could not have more than 20 players in for each server. They’ll be on queue until an open slot is available. Once server A gets 10 more players, then other servers then can field additional 10 more players each. If such formula is used, then there won’t be much excuses about balance, zergs, and blobs…

Cactus.2710:

TyPin.9860:

Now eat this:

Over all WvW player limit for each server should be equal to the number of WvW players averaged over time of the server with the least WvW population. Transfers to servers with lower average WvW population should be free.

Aim: Equal out WvW population.

Problem solved, you are welcome.

More likely players would just transfer to another game with devs that have a clue how to design matches.

The only “clue” that’s needed is setting up wvw match queues, where the higher populace has to wait for the other servers to meet the queue quota.

Would you be happy with queues? Cause I wager there would be a slew of new threads condoning it.

I find it funny that it is clear to everyone that there is an issue here and can think of ways to fix it but the people taking our money are completely clueless and obviously don’t care because we are still giving them our money, perhaps the best fix to this issue is to queue up for another game? and leave these fine folks at Anet or whatever company that is actually running the show to THEIR game because that is what it is, THEIR game and everyone else be kitten ed.

Jeda.5209:

Cactus.2710:

Jeda.5209:

Cactus.2710:

Jeda.5209:

Fenrir.6183:

Terrible, terrible idea.
Why should you limit the number of players playing the game ??? If it was possible, i’d love to have limitless maps. Queues are @ around 2 hours on my server

Now that’s a terrible idea.

Why a limit? Because servers can only handle so much.
No limit = lagfest and most likely server crashing.

I can’t imagine the skill lag that would be. There are times now when all 3 servers are queued in eb and there is a 3 way fiight in sm. People not even near sm are complaining about the skill lag.

If queues are an issue then transfer. Most servers I hear don’t have queues. Eu servers really the only people who really have a legit excuse for not transferring if queues is a problem.

How about simply putting in enough server capacity to meet the demand?

Yeah, I guess you’re right … it’s better to just strangle the game. Keep as many players out as possible in order to balance everything around the lowest common denominator because the devs can’t figure out a better way to set up matches. That’s going to be the best way for ANet to fend off the new games when they come out in a few months.

Yea, I forgot ANET only created one server and they all have endless queues……..

You didn’t forget anything. You just didn’t know anything in the first place. ANet merges server capacity for WvW and dynamically allocates it across all realms. What happens on one server can and does affect what happens on other servers.

and this guy remains clueless…..

Yea, that’s why when tier 1 is having an epic SM fight on EB that lags players on tier 1 it also causes lag on tier 2 -8 servers EB as well….. [Insert Sarcasm here just for this guy]

Good riddance. Learn to read and comprehend before responding.

That’s exactly what it does … as just about everyone on my server can tell you. You may think you’re being sarcastic, but you are just being ignorant. Don’t believe me? Go watch the video that ANet presented just prior to game launch last year where they detailed all of that for the press.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/external?l=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gamasutra.com%2Fview%2Fnews%2F180776%2FVideo_Guild_Wars_2s_programming_tricks_revealed.php

I don’t expect you to be able to understand much of it, but hey … it’s worth a shot.

jadjay.8701:

I find it funny that it is clear to everyone that there is an issue here and can think of ways to fix it but the people taking our money are completely clueless and obviously don’t care because we are still giving them our money, perhaps the best fix to this issue is to queue up for another game? and leave these fine folks at Anet or whatever company that is actually running the show to THEIR game because that is what it is, THEIR game and everyone else be kitten ed.

While there are are faults with the present WvW system, particularly for lower tiers, how is Anet taking your money? Is there a monthly sub fee?

There aren’t many one time purchase titles that continue to add free content via patches etc. at the rate Anet with Guild wars 2 does.

Don’t know about you but looking at my one time purchased library of games that are presently collecting dust, GW2 has definitely been a good buy …. issues and all ….

scootshoot.6583:

Cactus.2710:

TyPin.9860:

Now eat this:

Over all WvW player limit for each server should be equal to the number of WvW players averaged over time of the server with the least WvW population. Transfers to servers with lower average WvW population should be free.

Aim: Equal out WvW population.

Problem solved, you are welcome.

More likely players would just transfer to another game with devs that have a clue how to design matches.

The only “clue” that’s needed is setting up wvw match queues, where the higher populace has to wait for the other servers to meet the queue quota.

Would you be happy with queues? Cause I wager there would be a slew of new threads condoning it.

I can’t believe people can’t understand how stupid that is. A low pop server could totally prevent a high pop server from even playing … even against the third server! Does that make any sense? A game where players complain about not being able to join the match becomes a game where a whole bunch more players can’t join the match. Does that make any sense?

I (and several others) have stated many times that there is no way for WvW to be both fair and fresh as long as the matches are based around servers. That is still the case, and it will always be the case, until ANet understands that they need to go to some sort of instanced match making for WvW.

GW2 has become the poster child for how to kitten up a once-promising open world PvP, and you can bet that the upcoming games will do their best not to make the same mistakes.

Cactus.2710:

Jeda.5209:

Cactus.2710:

Jeda.5209:

Cactus.2710:

Jeda.5209:

Fenrir.6183:

Terrible, terrible idea.
Why should you limit the number of players playing the game ??? If it was possible, i’d love to have limitless maps. Queues are @ around 2 hours on my server

Now that’s a terrible idea.

Why a limit? Because servers can only handle so much.
No limit = lagfest and most likely server crashing.

I can’t imagine the skill lag that would be. There are times now when all 3 servers are queued in eb and there is a 3 way fiight in sm. People not even near sm are complaining about the skill lag.

If queues are an issue then transfer. Most servers I hear don’t have queues. Eu servers really the only people who really have a legit excuse for not transferring if queues is a problem.

How about simply putting in enough server capacity to meet the demand?

Yeah, I guess you’re right … it’s better to just strangle the game. Keep as many players out as possible in order to balance everything around the lowest common denominator because the devs can’t figure out a better way to set up matches. That’s going to be the best way for ANet to fend off the new games when they come out in a few months.

Yea, I forgot ANET only created one server and they all have endless queues……..

You didn’t forget anything. You just didn’t know anything in the first place. ANet merges server capacity for WvW and dynamically allocates it across all realms. What happens on one server can and does affect what happens on other servers.

and this guy remains clueless…..

Yea, that’s why when tier 1 is having an epic SM fight on EB that lags players on tier 1 it also causes lag on tier 2 -8 servers EB as well….. [Insert Sarcasm here just for this guy]

Good riddance. Learn to read and comprehend before responding.

That’s exactly what it does … as just about everyone on my server can tell you. You may think you’re being sarcastic, but you are just being ignorant. Don’t believe me? Go watch the video that ANet presented just prior to game launch last year where they detailed all of that for the press.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/external?l=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gamasutra.com%2Fview%2Fnews%2F180776%2FVideo_Guild_Wars_2s_programming_tricks_revealed.php

I don’t expect you to be able to understand much of it, but hey … it’s worth a shot.

LOL good job of posting useless info that has nothing to do with the topic or the discussion at all. That states nothing about the problem in hand and suggestion of lowering the cap to balance all world wvw population.

He also states they have many servers in that video, not 1. I guess you can’t even listen or read. Here is tip for you, the (s) in his presentation indicates plural when he is talking about servers. So when he states they have server(s) it indicates more than 1. He even stated more or less how many servers they have. But thank you for posting how stupid you are.

oh btw judging from your tag you play on DR, so my guess you have 0 experience playing in a tier where there are epic 3 way fights on high tier servers. I have played in every NA tier 1-8 at some point. The only time when people are complaining about skill lag in wvw is when there is a large scale fight taking place usually in SM in EB where people cant even use skills and it is ONLY affecting the people on that map in that tier and not in any other tier. This happens way more often in high tier servers.

My suggestion to you is try transferring to tier 1 and wait for a big scale fight in SM and ask your buddies down in DR if the people in that server are feeling the skill lag as well at that very moment where a high tier is having a big scale fight and nothing is going on in your tier. Guess what they won’t.

Cactus.2710:

I can’t believe people can’t understand how stupid that is. A low pop server could totally prevent a high pop server from even playing … even against the third server! Does that make any sense? A game where players complain about not being able to join the match becomes a game where a whole bunch more players can’t join the match. Does that make any sense?

Yes, it makes perfect sense. And if Anet is to balance the matches and servers, it is then obvious the higher population server will face each other more often than facing a lower population server. Besides, this will force people to move out of the “super stacked” servers and move to a lower population server. Anet should and could have free limited time transfers out of “stacked” servers to non stacked servers to balance them out. The servers will then be locked down from free transfers once the low population server gets their share of players into WvW. Otherwise, the game will slowly wither away since casuals will eventually stop wanting to face blobs after blobs. It takes no skills other than fast pressing #1 key if you’re part of the huge blob.

Jeda.5209:

Cactus.2710:

Jeda.5209:

Cactus.2710:

Jeda.5209:

Cactus.2710:

Jeda.5209:

Fenrir.6183:

Terrible, terrible idea.
Why should you limit the number of players playing the game ??? If it was possible, i’d love to have limitless maps. Queues are @ around 2 hours on my server

Now that’s a terrible idea.

Why a limit? Because servers can only handle so much.
No limit = lagfest and most likely server crashing.

I can’t imagine the skill lag that would be. There are times now when all 3 servers are queued in eb and there is a 3 way fiight in sm. People not even near sm are complaining about the skill lag.

If queues are an issue then transfer. Most servers I hear don’t have queues. Eu servers really the only people who really have a legit excuse for not transferring if queues is a problem.

How about simply putting in enough server capacity to meet the demand?

Yeah, I guess you’re right … it’s better to just strangle the game. Keep as many players out as possible in order to balance everything around the lowest common denominator because the devs can’t figure out a better way to set up matches. That’s going to be the best way for ANet to fend off the new games when they come out in a few months.

Yea, I forgot ANET only created one server and they all have endless queues……..

You didn’t forget anything. You just didn’t know anything in the first place. ANet merges server capacity for WvW and dynamically allocates it across all realms. What happens on one server can and does affect what happens on other servers.

and this guy remains clueless…..

Yea, that’s why when tier 1 is having an epic SM fight on EB that lags players on tier 1 it also causes lag on tier 2 -8 servers EB as well….. [Insert Sarcasm here just for this guy]

Good riddance. Learn to read and comprehend before responding.

That’s exactly what it does … as just about everyone on my server can tell you. You may think you’re being sarcastic, but you are just being ignorant. Don’t believe me? Go watch the video that ANet presented just prior to game launch last year where they detailed all of that for the press.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/external?l=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gamasutra.com%2Fview%2Fnews%2F180776%2FVideo_Guild_Wars_2s_programming_tricks_revealed.php

I don’t expect you to be able to understand much of it, but hey … it’s worth a shot.

LOL good job of posting useless info that has nothing to do with the topic or the discussion at all. That states nothing about the problem in hand and suggestion of lowering the cap to balance all world wvw population.

He also states they have many servers in that video, not 1. I guess you can’t even listen or read. Here is tip for you, the (s) in his presentation indicates plural when he is talking about servers. So when he states they have server(s) it indicates more than 1. He even stated more or less how many servers they have. But thank you for posting how stupid you are.

oh btw judging from your tag you play on DR, so my guess you have 0 experience playing in a tier where there are epic 3 way fights on high tier servers. I have played in every NA tier 1-8 at some point. The only time when people are complaining about skill lag in wvw is when there is a large scale fight taking place usually in SM in EB where people cant even use skills and it is ONLY affecting the people on that map in that tier and not in any other tier. This happens way more often in high tier servers.

My suggestion to you is try transferring to tier 1 and wait for a big scale fight in SM and ask your buddies down in DR if the people in that server are feeling the skill lag as well at that very moment where a high tier is having a big scale fight and nothing is going on in your tier. Guess what they won’t.

Not sure how you’re not getting infracted for calling me stupid, but I told you that you wouldn’t understand what you were listening to and I was right. They clearly say that WvW >DYNAMICALLY< uses merged server capacity for balance, and there is no reason at all to make it “dynamic” if it is dedicated. I didn’t expect that part to register with you either, though. If you drop down to a lower tier server you can ask for yourself about how we get bursts of skill lag whether we’re in a large battle or not … and it happens even in PvE. Don’t take my word for it …. ask others.

And because you can’t figure it out, my original point was that balancing player populations across realms (because of the dynamic allocation of server capacity) isn’t going to help skill lag as long as roughly the same number of players are playing. It would help queues on the high pop servers, though, of course.

Cactus.2710:

Not sure how you’re not getting infracted for calling me stupid, but I told you that you wouldn’t understand what you were listening to and I was right. They clearly say that WvW >DYNAMICALLY< uses merged server capacity for balance, and there is no reason at all to make it “dynamic” if it is dedicated. I didn’t expect that part to register with you either, though. If you drop down to a lower tier server you can ask for yourself about how we get bursts of skill lag whether we’re in a large battle or not … and it happens even in PvE. Don’t take my word for it …. ask others.

And because you can’t figure it out, my original point was that balancing player populations across realms (because of the dynamic allocation of server capacity) isn’t going to help skill lag as long as roughly the same number of players are playing. It would help queues on the high pop servers, though, of course.

Except you haven’t been right about anything in this entire thread. Like I said , but I guess you still cant seem to understand, I been to the low tiers. Been there done that. Never ever had skill lag on the map I am on because of some big battle that occurred from another tier. The only time it has happen is when im in the tier, in the same map the epic 3 way fight is occurring (usually on a high tier) and sometimes don’t even need to be anywhere near the big fight, but you wouldn’t know anything about this.

Now perhaps, since they merged the capacity of the “SERVERS”, you may (I never did)get a spike on your tier, but nothing compare to what happens on the map and tier the actual battle is occurring due to a large scale battle. My guess the spikes you may have seen is from your own tier server. Anyway, adding an endless amount of people to this fight (no queue)will just cause more lag in the tier and map it is occurring.

Like I stated before you need to transfer to a high tier server and then talk.