Guild Wars 2

Linking the NA Servers to a Euro Server partner in WvW.

What would this do?

-Allow coverage over all time slots & Spread the population among all servers.

-If 2 servers were in the same WvW team, the queues will become crazy, almost forcing players to spread around to other servers to avoid that.

What would that do?

-Create more, better, and more equal fights among all the tiers; bettering the ‘WvW’ competition.

-Servers would be less dominant because there will be more competition.

Why did I think of this?

-The current NA Winners are determined by who who has the better COVERAGE not SKILL. Why should it be like that?

Just a crazy idea I thought of, what do you think?

Edit:

Blackmoa.3186:

Like a lot of people I’ve experienced alot of lag the last few days and because of that checked my connections.
Turns out all the connections from GW2 direct to servers in Texas.
Now that makes me want to ask 2 questions:
1.) Why are the servers in texas? o.0 Where there some problems with the EU servers and they had to be shut down for maintenance? If that’s teh case, why was there no official announcement?
2.) Why can’t we play with American players if the servers are in Texas?

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/EU-Servers-and-lag/first#post1563927

Why not combine EU and NA if they are on the same host?

Pvp.2758:

Linking the NA Servers to a Euro Server partner in WvW.

What would this do?

-Allow coverage over all time slots & Spread the population among all servers.

-If 2 servers were in the same WvW team, the queues will become crazy, almost forcing players to spread around to other servers to avoid that.

What would that do?

-Create more, better, and more equal fights among all the tiers; bettering the ‘WvW’ competition.

-Servers would be less dominant because there will be more competition.

Why did I think of this?

-The current NA Winners are determined by who who has the better Oceanic/Euro coverage (PvDoor). Why should it be like that?

Just a crazy idea I thought of, what do you think?

I think it would cause a bunch of transfers as guilds on EU servers with weaker NA partners move and guilds on NA servers with weaker EU partners move.

A lot of people don’t like losing. They will do anything to avoid it in a game.

This is a great idea, because i play a NA server already and forced to read languages i dont know,so why not unite all server i mean wvw is garbage right now any way, and fail to see anet fix anything to do with it. On dragonbrand server, we are stuck in mid T3 where the lower tier come ups are overpowered, and the tier 2 drop outs overpower us .
Sick cycle that is very very endless, all though it is fun its very demoralizing to servers.
why not have a weekly rating where every day you get put up with server of the same wvw player numbers, and work for weekly point counts, so it calculates the points every server got at the end of week and take tiers away all together.

Porky.5021:

Pvp.2758:

Linking the NA Servers to a Euro Server partner in WvW.

What would this do?

-Allow coverage over all time slots & Spread the population among all servers.

-If 2 servers were in the same WvW team, the queues will become crazy, almost forcing players to spread around to other servers to avoid that.

What would that do?

-Create more, better, and more equal fights among all the tiers; bettering the ‘WvW’ competition.

-Servers would be less dominant because there will be more competition.

Why did I think of this?

-The current NA Winners are determined by who who has the better Oceanic/Euro coverage (PvDoor). Why should it be like that?

Just a crazy idea I thought of, what do you think?

I think it would cause a bunch of transfers as guilds on EU servers with weaker NA partners move and guilds on NA servers with weaker EU partners move.

A lot of people don’t like losing. They will do anything to avoid it in a game.

Free transfers could happen to stabilize the change.

The way I see it, servers won’t be so populated because WvW space will be limited so guilds will spread to weaker servers, making stronger servers on both the NA and EU side.

Do we have euro players on NA servers? I thought the ping difference would make them suffer more than playing in their own region.

Your idea is a good concept but the technological limitations would cause more lag when playing against people from other side of the world. The lag is bad enough as it is with culling.

Platinumz.8756:

Do we have euro players on NA servers? I thought the ping difference would make them suffer more than playing in their own region.

Your idea is a good concept but the technological limitations would cause more lag when playing against people from other side of the world. The lag is bad enough as it is with culling.

thats where your wrong on db we have euro guilds even they dont lag.

They must have good internet then, not every country can play half a world away with no lag.

There are plenty of Euro’s and Oceanics in NA… They have no troubles with lag.

yea lol i even lag tho but i mean we need feed back on this type of stuff how many people in joy wvw but think its unfair for other server and players ?

I’m curious, you guys haven’t experienced any culling issues since the last few recent patches? I’m Oceanic, true I don’t feel lag when in combat except when the server lags but, the culling seems to have gotten worse, as me and a group of mates I know can’t see the same number of players on the field.

Were I see 1 or 3 people on screen they see 10 or more thus I sometimes end up running into a zerg without realizing it before its too late.

Platinumz.8756:

I’m curious, you guys haven’t experienced any culling issues since the last few recent patches? I’m Oceanic, true I don’t feel lag when in combat except when the server lags but, the culling seems to have gotten worse, as me and a group of mates I know can’t see the same number of players on the field.

Were I see 1 or 3 people on screen they see 10 or more thus I sometimes end up running into a zerg without realizing it before its too late.

I think the majority of the lag is overcrowding during ‘primetime’. With the spread of the population, primetime won’t be so prime because players will be playing at all time slot.

I made this suggestion many times.

Tie the servers together with 30 minute overlap on either side of a 12 hour session. Each region can only loggin to the other severs W3 once theirs was down giving the home server the advantage of joining the question first.

Makes a hole lot of sense and you would have 12 fully packed servers and 12 decreasing in number and people could move to the server density thy like.

To the person saying you wold get a hole lot of xfers to the more populated / winning servers – that not already happening.

Wouldn’t be a bad idea until you get to the higher tiers that I’m assuming already have full coverage and Que’s.

When I was in Germany I could play without much lag on NA servers… around 80-120 ping

Now I’m in Riyadh and its terrible… if I have 1-2sec delay its a good moment… sometimes can be 5-10secs lag due to the crappy internet…

Nuzt.7894:

Wouldn’t be a bad idea until you get to the higher tiers that I’m assuming already have full coverage and Que’s.

People would need to xfer obviously and they would.

Nuzt.7894:

Wouldn’t be a bad idea until you get to the higher tiers that I’m assuming already have full coverage and Que’s.

Then the winner would be determined by skill, not by coverage.

Anet screwed up by splitting NA/EU. If they wanted balanced WvW they would’ve had merged servers. Now all we have is imbalanced WvW and qqing all the time.

Lag is not an issue. I have an account on both EU and NA, and I don’t notice any difference at all in combat.

Gab Superstar.4059:

Lag is not an issue. I have an account on both EU and NA, and I don’t notice any difference at all in combat.

So because you have no issue or don’t notice the issues, that magically makes it fine for everyone, newsflash it isn’t fine for everyone.

The reasons being:

- not everyone has the same quality of internet connection.
- not everyone lives in a geographically favourable location (e.g – you have less performance issues in regard to a connection to NA from say the UK than you do further east in Europe where you have to go through more hubs.
- Some people just aren’t very observant, if you watch some of the streams where NA players play on EU (sPvP) it is fairly apparent that the NA players get lag issues far, far more and they get issues where their skills are just off, which makes a differnence, at least to the more observant / less bad.

It is like when some people come out with rubbish like Aussies play on NA servers fine, many of them don’t, they play at 300-400ms latency, higher % packet loss, etc, they simply suffer through it and play at a disadvantage, because they have no choice.

But anyway, it has already been stated by a dev in one of these threads that they are seperated for technical / perfomance reasons.

I never understood why ANET divides the servers by NA/EU, but not Oceanic/Asiatic too. Seems to be the same thing to me. But then again, we had the same thing in DAoC. So it must be a deployment/financial decision.

Pvp.2758:

Porky.5021:

Pvp.2758:

Linking the NA Servers to a Euro Server partner in WvW.

What would this do?

-Allow coverage over all time slots & Spread the population among all servers.

-If 2 servers were in the same WvW team, the queues will become crazy, almost forcing players to spread around to other servers to avoid that.

What would that do?

-Create more, better, and more equal fights among all the tiers; bettering the ‘WvW’ competition.

-Servers would be less dominant because there will be more competition.

Why did I think of this?

-The current NA Winners are determined by who who has the better Oceanic/Euro coverage (PvDoor). Why should it be like that?

Just a crazy idea I thought of, what do you think?

I think it would cause a bunch of transfers as guilds on EU servers with weaker NA partners move and guilds on NA servers with weaker EU partners move.

A lot of people don’t like losing. They will do anything to avoid it in a game.

Free transfers could happen to stabilize the change.

The way I see it, servers won’t be so populated because WvW space will be limited so guilds will spread to weaker servers, making stronger servers on both the NA and EU side.

In theory, this should work, but when server transfers were free, it didn’t work out that way.

More people will transfer to the winning servers rather than the servers that need help.

Sylosi.6503:

Gab Superstar.4059:

Lag is not an issue. I have an account on both EU and NA, and I don’t notice any difference at all in combat.

So because you have no issue or don’t notice the issues, that magically makes it fine for everyone, newsflash it isn’t fine for everyone.

The reasons being:

- not everyone has the same quality of internet connection.
- not everyone lives in a geographically favourable location (e.g – you have less performance issues in regard to a connection to NA from say the UK than you do further east in Europe where you have to go through more hubs.
- Some people just aren’t very observant, if you watch some of the streams where NA players play on EU (sPvP) it is fairly apparent that the NA players get lag issues far, far more and they get issues where there skills are just off, which makes a differnence, at least to the more observant / less bad.

It is like when some people come out with rubbish like Aussies play on NA servers fine, many of them don’t, they play at 300-400ms latency, higher % packet loss, etc, they simply suffer through it and play at a disadvantage, because they have no choice.

But anyway, it has already been stated by a dev in one of these threads that they are seperated for technical / perfomance reasons.

Just fine for me? I was in a guild of 100 people, mainly european, playing on NA servers since release, and no one ever complained about lag. Including people from Poland / Czech Republic / Scandinavia / Germany / UK.

But it’s quite apparent you speak from no experience at all, so I am not sure why I even bother discussing this with you.

Gab Superstar.4059:

Just fine for me? I was in a guild of 100 people, mainly european, playing on NA servers since release, and no one ever complained about lag. Including people from Poland / Czech Republic / Scandinavia / Germany / UK.

But it’s quite apparent you speak from no experience at all, so I am not sure why I even bother discussing this with you.

Clearly from more experience than yourself who came out with the argument “I don’t lag, therefore there is no lag problem” and demonstrates a total lack of understanding both of basic logic and of the technology.

Many people have noticeable performacne drops when they try and play accross continents, it has been stated in these threads many times before, I have several Auusie friends that have to play at 300-400ms & higher packet loss, they play at a permanant disadvantage. Same goes for some guys from NA who play on EU, some can manage it, but have more occasiosn when lag is an issue, others simply don’t even bother as the performance is too bad for them.

So in future try not to speak for everyone, because you don’t. As already stated in one of these threads, they are seperated for performance reasons, and you throwing your toys out of the pram won’t change that reality. (newsflash – companies don’t go to the added expense of setting up localized servers simply for fun)

Sylosi.6503:

Gab Superstar.4059:

Just fine for me? I was in a guild of 100 people, mainly european, playing on NA servers since release, and no one ever complained about lag. Including people from Poland / Czech Republic / Scandinavia / Germany / UK.

But it’s quite apparent you speak from no experience at all, so I am not sure why I even bother discussing this with you.

Many people have noticeable performacne drops when they try and play accross continents, it has been stated in these threads many times before, I have several Auusie friends that have to play at 300-400ms & higher packet loss, they play at a permanant disadvantage. Same goes for some guys from NA who play on EU, some can manage it, but have more occasiosn when lag is an issue, others simply don’t even bother as the performance is too bad.

Are we talking about having the servers in Europe? I guess I must have missed that part. Your aussie friends would still be playing on NA servers, no?

But then again I don’t have to speak for everyone. The fact that everyone played on American servers in GW1 is proof enough.

To Americans saying Euros on your server have no lag: not entirely true. I with 100mb/s when I play on NA on my ele often rubberband when I do my ride the lightning and if I ever try to do updraft directly after my ride the lightning it will always miss because of the increased latency, on EU it never misses in the same situation due to the better latency.

The latency issue is manageable though and won’t decrease your gameplay performance too much, the times I’ve had on NA servers have been fun and worth it.

Gab Superstar.4059:

Lag is not an issue. I have an account on both EU and NA, and I don’t notice any difference at all in combat.

Lag is no issue for you
i have 50-70 lattency on EU and 350-390 in US
So do not generailize your situation, if i will have to play with 390 latency i will 100% avoid WvWvW. And i am not the only 1 with huge latency on US and decent on EU

Gab Superstar.4059:

Sylosi.6503:

Gab Superstar.4059:

Just fine for me? I was in a guild of 100 people, mainly european, playing on NA servers since release, and no one ever complained about lag. Including people from Poland / Czech Republic / Scandinavia / Germany / UK.

But it’s quite apparent you speak from no experience at all, so I am not sure why I even bother discussing this with you.

Many people have noticeable performance drops when they try and play accross continents, it has been stated in these threads many times before, I have several Auusie friends that have to play at 300-400ms & higher packet loss, they play at a permanant disadvantage. Same goes for some guys from NA who play on EU, some can manage it, but have more occasiosn when lag is an issue, others simply don’t even bother as the performance is too bad.

Are we talking about having the servers in Europe? I guess I must have missed that part. Your aussie friends would still be playing on NA servers, no?

But then again I don’t have to speak for everyone. The fact that everyone played on American servers in GW1 is proof enough.

My Aussie friends play on NA, we were in the same EVE corporation. The fact they play on NA is irrelevant, you claim (in direct opposition to how the internet actually works) there is no performance difference regardless of where people live / connection, etc, they play with a permanent performance disadvantage, the fact they choose to do that is up to them (though some avoid WvW, given the issues it already has (culling / zerg lag), with their added performance burden it is just unplayable for some of them).

I and many others bought a game on the basis it was sold as having localized servers in the EU.

I’ve already played a game where they switched the servers to NA, LOTRO, there was a noticable performance dip, to the point half our guild left the game.

As for GW1, different games have different technical requirements, for instance the EVE servers are in London (other than for the Chinese), but data is only polled on a 1 second interval so is much less demanding on latency.

Quite why you find it so hard to grasp that many games set up localised servers precisely becasue there are performance issues playing in a different continent is a mystery…

who is the biggest group of players in absolute numbers ? the euro or NA servers ?

muylaetrix.2096:

who is the biggest group of players in absolute numbers ? the euro or NA servers ?

probably NA, only EU,russians, south africans and ME play on EU region.

I wonder if they can switch server host at certain times of the day/night. EU Prime can be EU Host, and Na Prime can be NA Host.

I can’t say I dislike the idea, but I can’t imagine the lag would make it playable. Look at how bad the servers can be at present and then add another 200ms ping to that.

sostronk.8167:

I can’t say I dislike the idea, but I can’t imagine the lag would make it playable. Look at how bad the servers can be at present and then add another 200ms ping to that.

A lot of the servers are extremely laggy because a mass of NA players play at one time, if the population was spread through twice as many servers, it wouldn’t be as bad and it would create more competition throughout the tiers.

I’m not saying it wouldn’t be as laggy, but you never know.

I thought all servers are located in Texas… lncluding EU????

So it doesn’t matter if you pick EU or NA, they sit next to each other.

I would like to point out the most immediate issue about this
NA has 24 servers
EU has 27 servers
so untill they remove 3 EU servers or add 3 NA servers this whole disscussion is pointless.

The login servers are located in Texas, the Euro servers are in Germany.

Can I get some more feedback on this idea? I honestly think this would be an amazing change to the game. It would promote growth to not only the other servers/tiers/wvw, but to the game aswell because people wouldn’t quit because they are on a dead server.

No. Just by reading the title of the thread i clearly state NO. I am on a T7 server and i enjoy no queues or what so ever everyday of the week.. now kthxbai.

There won’t be queues all the time. The reason there are queues is because too many players play the SAME time. The population will be spread around to all the servers making it so you many servers might have 10min queues, but the top servers will no longer have 4 hour queues.

Pvp.2758:

There won’t be queues all the time. The reason there are queues is because too many players play the SAME time. The population will be spread around to all the servers making it so you many servers might have 10min queues, but the top servers will no longer have 4 hour queues.

The current top server currently don’t have 4 hour queues. Atm they have no queue or maybe 1-2minutes on a BL or somewhere. The only exception being right on reset where it various alot from week to week from around 30m-1hour for the most populated map and this drops off after the first few hours.

There’s more to a server’s capacity than the WvW population.

Also plenty of people don’t want their WvW with queues and people everywhere. We had months to go to tiers that had better coverage and didn’t. It was free and totally not a secret and somehow we still consciously turned it down.

Tiers 1-2 (I am going to guess the original poster is from these tiers): Please deal with the above fact.

While I appreciate the idea and point, the truth is all that would happen is that all the coveragewar champions would just flock to the same servers and the end result would be the same.

styx.7294:

There’s more to a server’s capacity than the WvW population.

Also plenty of people don’t want their WvW with queues and people everywhere. We had months to go to tiers that had better coverage and didn’t. It was free and totally not a secret and somehow we still consciously turned it down.

Tiers 1-2 (I am going to guess the original poster is from these tiers): Please deal with the above fact.

The servers themselves wouldn’t be combined. Only the WvW ‘battlegroup’ would.

Niim.9260:

While I appreciate the idea and point, the truth is all that would happen is that all the coveragewar champions would just flock to the same servers and the end result would be the same.

This wouldn’t be possible because there will be a limited number of WvW spots.

Look at it this way.

There are 8 tiers in NA and 9 tiers in EU.

They would eliminate a tier to equal it out, match up servers, then combine ALL the servers into 8 tiers.

There won’t be anymore powerhouse servers because there population would be condensed and spread throughout the 8 tiers.

Do you see what I’m saying? There will be some servers more popular that others, but it won’t just be tier 1 and tier 2, it will probably be the top 5 tiers with the most people in them.

Pvp.2758:

There are plenty of Euro’s and Oceanics in NA… They have no troubles with lag.

Not all EU players are in EU, those that are not in the NA server aren’t there for a reason. Most southern hemisphere countries (below EU) need to bounce through UK before hitting the cable to NA: so add 200-300ms on top of the latency between EU and NA (usually comes to about 600ms to 700ms, up to 1 second at times).

I can see the merit in this idea. However, if you host the games in NA the southern hemispheres will suffer, if you host the games in EU the Australians/New Zealanders will suffer.

If latency wasn’t an issue there wouldn’t be a larger amount of NA players in NA servers, and there wouldn’t be a larger amount of EU players in EU servers. However the contrary is true because coverage is being complained about here: which means players did chose servers to play in which latency is minimal for them – it clearly does affect them in a way that they care about.

In terms of fixing that a page can be taken from the MOBA book: run 1 week in NA and run 1 week in US: meaning that WvW match-ups would take 2 weeks instead of one; keep the tally over the duration of the two weeks.

This would be a very terrible idea. It would help the top two tiers in both regions and screw over everyone else big time. Enjoy pvdoor? I hope so, because your opponents prime times wouldn’t overlap so it would be a Pvdoor fest 24/7 with no skill and no real fighting. Then there is the lag issue. Unless you want arena net to dump the servers in the middle of the Atlantic ocean one region or the other would have to suffer serious lag and terrible ping. The qq would get even worse than it already is. Things won’t change, nor should they.

The 10th place EU server should combine with the worst NA server (24th). And the 7th place NA server should combine with the worst EU server (27th). The top 9 EU servers and top 6 NA servers should not be combined. They are strong enough.

The rest are combined in reverse order.

i dunno know about tehcnicalities
but is it possible for EU vs EU in their timezone and NA vs NA in thier times zone on their own servers but share the same map?

so 2 copies of a map be hosted, 1 on EU and 1 on NA and whoever logs in from either region can play, and yet accounting towards a common score.

Platinumz.8756:

Do we have euro players on NA servers? I thought the ping difference would make them suffer more than playing in their own region.

Your idea is a good concept but the technological limitations would cause more lag when playing against people from other side of the world. The lag is bad enough as it is with culling.

While im playing on NA server being on Euro zone my ping is quite acceptable, and for what i noticed got some friends on euro servers that have a 2sec delay on skills (they have better connections than me also).

Aeolus.3615:

and for what i noticed got some friends on euro servers that have a 2sec delay on skills (they have better connections than me also).

Now add your latency to their latency; that’s what they will be forced to play with.

I only see one problem with this..who would want to be paired with a German or French speaking server? (No offence to them, I’m just talking about the language barrier).

I’m pretty sure most Americans aren’t that great at French or German (do they even teach you foreign languages in the USA- oh wait, Mexican is your most spoken language!), so don’t think the ‘merge servers’ idea would fly.

What would be much more fun would be server vs server match ups across the regions on a 30 vs 30 basis (or choose, from 10,15,20,25,30 and join a queue for a match up with your guild/server), where guild vs guild battles can take place and a rating table for each size battle can be seen- guild with most players gets the points, even if players from other guilds took part, with partial points for those other guilds and of course individual point tables too based on battle wins not personal kills (so support classes get equal ratings). Oh wait. I’m dreaming of something that was already done, with great success, in GW1- Guild Wars.

Victory.2879:

I only see one problem with this..who would want to be paired with a German or French speaking server? (No offence to them, I’m just talking about the language barrier).

I’m pretty sure most Americans aren’t that great at French or German (do they even teach you foreign languages in the USA- oh wait, Mexican is your most spoken language!), so don’t think the ‘merge servers’ idea would fly.

What would be much more fun would be server vs server match ups across the regions on a 30 vs 30 basis (or choose, from 10,15,20,25,30 and join a queue for a match up with your guild/server), where guild vs guild battles can take place and a rating table for each size battle can be seen- guild with most players gets the points, even if players from other guilds took part, with partial points for those other guilds and of course individual point tables too based on battle wins not personal kills (so support classes get equal ratings). Oh wait. I’m dreaming of something that was already done, with great success, in GW1- Guild Wars.

You would be surprised how many Germans and French have passable English. I don’t think language is a barrier in this. Its not like you can speak to players from opposing servers anyway. :-p