Guild Wars 2

When FULL at T3/T4 is equated to FULL at T1, things appear to be a bit wonky in the universe, to say the least.

What could be worse than the slow, painful, demoralization of all the host server communities so that they join the linked servers, an already demoralized group? Why try forced re-colonization? Why not try exploration? I argue the later is far, far and away more positive.

Isn’t it more obvious than ever that it’s time to activate the nuclear option? Let’s blow it all up and start over, so that we can begin to build our brave new world(s).

This could be one of the most exciting things to happen in WvW. It will be fresh, challenging, and risky. To go where no one has gone before….To march off into the horizon to form new worlds and conquer the unknown.

This story: All bandwagon to T1, Locked down, Not enough population, Lost Community Identity, Imbalanced Matchups …. is old, tired and needs to be shelved. No one… and I mean no one… wants to read this story any more!

“….That’s what exploration is all about. Going to places where others haven’t been and returning to tell a story they haven’t heard before. " J. Cameron.

Let’s do it! What say you?

So… forced moves, with a good chance people will be forced into servers that split up guilds?

Your signature states you are the leader of MaS. You recently (within 6 months) left BG and I applaud you for seeking out other options. But you did it by choice, and the guild mates you took went willingly.

I would not be in favor of blowing up servers and forcing moves.

Locking the hosts doesn’t say each of the locked servers have the same Population. It likely means they have reset what full means. And it will slowly push people to the linked servers. It will slowly spread out populations.

Likely, HoD sits on that fence. It doesn’t mean that Anet views them the same. Just that they want new players to go to other servers.

We have yelled for population balance. It will come slowly this way. Blowing it up will lead to more bandwagonning.

Like others will say, forced repopulation will split up guilds and friends. I offer an alternative idea. for those servers with highly active wvw populations, force them to contend with more than one match at a time. This could be accomplished by intelligently reviewing players’ normal wvw active periods as well as guild memberships, then selecting which match each player will be assigned to for that week. It could also be done at semi-randomly, while still working to keep guilds intact. It could also be left up to players to choose which match to participate in (or which they would prefer) for that week, but as we’ve seen, players tend to be selfish and that may not work very well. At any rate, I would like for the devs to attempt something other what has been tried recently.

I have a resounding “Mehh~” attitude to this problem. Guilds will move up or down depending on what they’re looking for. Most people are lazy and would prefer to move to a server with existing structure and leadership rather than set one up themselves (understandably so, way too much time invested).

We moved away from BG for our own reasons. Other people moved to BG for their own reasons. Guilds move around all the time. It really doesn’t matter.

Okay so here’s the issue.

Either A
You let people pick where they go, in which case you’ll just end up with the exact same issue as players pick a server to stack.
Or B
You don’t let people pick where they go, in which case they end up massively sharded with nobody they know.

A doesn’t do anything.
B kills the game.

The current system appears to be a pretty good third option, to be honest.

The GW2 devs allowed BandWagaon gate to concentrate most of the hardcore WvW players on one server.

WvW will never be a decent game mode as long as the devs continue to be blind to the obvious.

As tempting as any major changes are at this point (I think WvW could use a ton of them), they can’t come in a vacuum and I have zero faith in ANET’s ability or desire to do anything other than little tweaks from here on out. Just enjoy what you can while it lasts and I guess be happy for the memories. The months before launch when the communities were first organizing themselves into groups were some of the most entertaining but then the over-stack until you explode reality of that first year was so disappointing. Can’t fight short sighted human nature even when we’d all be better off if we did.

There is another alternative.

The basic idea would allow servers to be separate identities, allow players to choose the sort of game play they want and would make the impact of unbalanced server numbers much less significant.

Providing competition:

• Collect score per server – publish the league table
• Collect score per guild – publish the league table
• Collect score per player – publish the league table

Notice the highest scoring guild does not need to be on the highest scoring server, and the highest scoring players might well be from different guilds and servers. In theory the league tables could even cover both NA and EU at the same time.

Providing choice:

• Each server is assigned one of the three colours at the start of each week. Anet could start by assigning green, blue, red, green blue, red as they go down the list. Since servers will change place in the league table when their scores change they could be a different colour each week.
• Servers are NOT assigned a tier to play in. This is important.
• Each tier is set to a different map population – T1 – massive fights, down to T4 or T5 smallest population fights. This covers different play styles.
• Every time you log in, you – the player – choose which tier to play in at that time. If there’s a queue on your chosen tier you can wait or go to another – your choice.

Note: since the population of all the servers of one colour can be spread over all the maps of one colour there should be less impact from server population differences.

There are no big changes to WvW this way, but it would make a big change to how we experience it.
Advantages

• Anet can balance the matches by total population of Red, Green and Blue teams in a way that cannot be done with the current linking system.
• Maps are limited by map population not server population; an over stacked server would simply end up spread across different tiers. Stacking is no longer an issue.
• Players can vary their experience by their own choice, and whenever they want.
• Server identity regains meaning since any server can attempt to climb the league table. And remember, player position and guild position is not dependant on server position, so even if you are in the server at the bottom of the Server League, you have the chance to climb the Guild League or Player League.
• Guilds gain the chance to compete for league table position – the first true GvG opportunity perhaps.

and best of all, no one is forced to do anything and guilds and servers stay together.

It doesn’t make a lot of sense to me to just keep going on the way we’ve been for years now. You know that definition of ‘insanity’, right? Well, that’s where we get to every time. Oh no… don’t change anything. Don’t try for something dramatically different, cause… why? Because we are afraid it might be too different? We’re afraid it might get implemented with some problems?

Look around you…. what is so worth saving at this point that it doesn’t make sense to just toss it all up in the air and try for some radical, earth shaking change?

Just look at the amount of excitement that was generated by adding some new rewards and a backpiece. Now, imagine if we could re-invent our worlds, or how our worlds interact, just as Yuffi has done above?

And, what if we just threw out all the server names and created all new worlds. No ‘history’, no ‘baggage’, no clinging to the tired, dead corpses of our original servers.

If we’re going to go a different path, let’s just get started on it. Just the idea of charting some new direction is exciting in itself. But this slow death by a thousand drips of tiny, incremental change is exasperating!

Vive la revolution!

Pensadora.9478:

It doesn’t make a lot of sense to me to just keep going on the way we’ve been for years now. You know that definition of ‘insanity’, right? Well, that’s where we get to every time. Oh no… don’t change anything. Don’t try for something dramatically different, cause… why? Because we are afraid it might be too different? We’re afraid it might get implemented with some problems?

Look around you…. what is so worth saving at this point that it doesn’t make sense to just toss it all up in the air and try for some radical, earth shaking change?

Just look at the amount of excitement that was generated by adding some new rewards and a backpiece. Now, imagine if we could re-invent our worlds, or how our worlds interact, just as Yuffi has done above?

And, what if we just threw out all the server names and created all new worlds. No ‘history’, no ‘baggage’, no clinging to the tired, dead corpses of our original servers.

If we’re going to go a different path, let’s just get started on it. Just the idea of charting some new direction is exciting in itself. But this slow death by a thousand drips of tiny, incremental change is boring me to tears.

Vive la revolution!

So, you are willing to have your guild split between 12 servers? I mean, then what keeps you from moving them back together thus creating the bandwagon again?

You are mentioning a change, but no significant solution for keeping the same problem from happening again?

Because not splitting everyone from each server equally over all of the new servers, or giving ‘guilds’ preference to being together (which has not been suggested by you but has been suggested before) would be unfair to those unaffiliated players that enjoy working with certain guilds.

Honestly server mergers would be more effective, combining servers with some degree of benefit to each other using Blackgate as the ‘true full’ level.

Either way, linking is a bad mix. Too many volatile situations exist.

Strider Pj.2193:

So, you are willing to have your guild split between 12 servers?

It seems to me that there is a solution assumed here that I haven’t offered. Nothing about creating new worlds presumes that guilds or players will have to be split up.

The roadblocks to getting a reset on population that is spread across worlds seems always hindered by the existence of these legacy servers and the way that players move around.

Those who claim ‘it will never be right’ use – the ‘bandwagon’ nature of players, and the currently existing behemoth servers that are anti-competitive precisely because of the size of their player base.

ANet’s short term solution seems to be to bleed population off of lower tier servers to create smaller building blocks to match together. But, even this approach harms guilds and players.

So, what if we just get free… FREE… of the existing structure that most of us agree is ‘not working as intended’. Then, ANet could get on with rebuilding new worlds with us, with some new design for how things might, could, maybe, should work…..

If we’re willing to start here – with the elimination of all existing servers – then, and only then can we begin a reasonable discussion of what the future could look like. That way I’m not upset because of how my server is getting treated so that your server can survive. Or, that this week we’re a powerhouse because we have THIS link, and next week we are sinking to oblivion because we got relinked with THAT server. And, let’s also figure out how to get ANet free of needing to have their fingers in it, constantly.

We need a blank piece of paper to begin to talk over, not one cluttered up with all the baggage of past wrongs, past rivalries, and sentimentalities over some e-worlds.

Instead of the slow, painful process of de-populating host servers to force realignment of players, I’m proposing that we just get done with it. Eliminate one of the stumbling blocks and get on with envisioning something new – some brave, new worlds.

Some of the guest server havoc squads, while small, are oftentimes opting to not fight each other and instead double teaming the 3rd host. They just pass right by each other most times and sometimes even appear to scout for the other servers squads, it’s kind of hilarious actually, but also very destructive. Pushback was inevitable I suppose and the rebellion seems to be growing with each new link.

Creating new worlds and redistributing populations won’t solve the problems, it’ll only make them worse and on a bigger scale.

Sarrs.4831:

Okay so here’s the issue.

Either A
You let people pick where they go, in which case you’ll just end up with the exact same issue as players pick a server to stack.
Or B
You don’t let people pick where they go, in which case they end up massively sharded with nobody they know.

A doesn’t do anything.
B kills the game.

The current system appears to be a pretty good third option, to be honest.

But as you say, the two positions A & B aren’t the only available options. If you think of it like a spectrum with A & B as the endpoints, the ideal solution is going to be a lot closer to B than A, and certainly closer to B than we are now. It’s not like you can’t meet new ppl to play with . . .

Yuffi.2430:

There is another alternative.

So factions? You can already play factions in EotM.

Pensadora.9478:

… Isn’t it more obvious than ever that it’s time to activate the nuclear option? Let’s blow it all up and start over, so that we can begin to build our brave new world(s)…

McKenna Berdrow suggested doubling number of worlds and then having players to settle the new worlds (New Worlds). The suggestion was not well received. We preferred to cling to our over stacked servers that we paid so many gems to get into.

I personally would not mind blowing up the current worlds. Guilds and communities must be allowed to stay together (within reason). There also needs to be a migration policy to guard against players re-creating coverage imbalances.

For example some auction system for guilds to re-populate the wiped out worlds. The biggest guilds can make the highest bids and get to settle in first as long the migration policy is satisfied. Guilds losing the auction have to choose another world.

Gop.8713:

It’s not like you can’t meet new ppl to play with . . .

That’s not the problem. Doing this kind of thing, if you make a single mistake in how the game calculates where somebody should be ‘deported’ to, a player quits the game instantly. Proposing any kind of system which has such an obvious negative results should the slightest thing go wrong is not an option.

If you really want to do it, you can’t use sticks. You need to use carrots. Give link servers bonus pips, track reward progress, XP, MF. Remove the transfer price. Add new link servers if you like. People will move for that.

Carrots and sticks are the same thing. If you offer a reward to someone for doing something, it becomes a punishment to everyone who isn’t doing it . . .

But anyway I thought the problem was ppl moving too much? Groups planning transfers to the same server at the same time so everyone gets in before it closes, transferring to linked servers to make the host server op and then moving again at next linking, etc. It is entirely possible I do not understand the issue though, I just wanted to scout

Korgov.7645:

McKenna Berdrow suggested doubling number of worlds and then having players to settle the new worlds (New Worlds). The suggestion was not well received. We preferred to cling to our over stacked servers that we paid so many gems to get into.

Yep. That was 8 months ago. The experiences since just may have created more Revolutionaries ready for new worlds. Count me among them.

This discussion is more informed by experience, and one that has seen:

*linked servers
*locked host servers
*reward excitement boosting populations
*reward populations waning
*and… population imbalance continuing to create blowout matches

This week’s matchups:

It’s these changes that mean it may be time for something different. As a WvW player on a linked server I’m very conscious of how little credit my server gets for anything we do. I acknowledge that linking has been a help with populations but we’re seeing more new players with the rewards system and perhaps it’s time to make room for them.

The nuke everything and make Brave New Worlds is a good option because it would be fair to everyone. Please note that by “fair” I mean exactly that – it puts everyone in the same position, unlike linking. This makes it worth considering. It would take time to settle but so did WvW in the first couple of months, and a full server reset is preferable to the two class system that we currently have.

The alternative I suggested is just that – an alternative fair idea. It’s a way of keeping our server identities, staying together as guilds, and a way of gaining recognition as individual players.
It’s not “factions like EotM” because you are not the Red team or the Blue team or the Green team – you score for your server, your guild and yourself. Nor is it megaserver like EotM because there are fixed maps.
I propose the idea because it keeps what I see as the best bits of WvW and gives more flexibility to both players and Anet. To my mind this makes it an idea that is also worth looking into.

(edit for spelling)

Sarrs.4831:

…. if you make a single mistake in how the game calculates where somebody should be ‘deported’ to, a player quits the game instantly.

No one is suggesting that somebody should be deported. The nuclear option is everyone deported – all of us – out of the existing world and offered new worlds, ones we help define, conquer and settle.

We can no longer hamstring progress for WvW because we are afraid that something will not go perfectly. The current situation is far from perfect. Players are already taking a break or leaving entirely, and some of that is attributable to the staleness and the imbalances.

So, why not do something amazingly radical if these incremental changes show us that a reset is what is needed, as well as some courage to chart a new course for WvW?

What great changes have come without a little risk and the possibility of some loss?

This is Guild Wars 2…. not Utopia.

Strider Pj.2193:

So… forced moves, with a good chance people will be forced into servers that split up guilds?

Your signature states you are the leader of MaS. You recently (within 6 months) left BG and I applaud you for seeking out other options. But you did it by choice, and the guild mates you took went willingly.

I would not be in favor of blowing up servers and forcing moves.

Locking the hosts doesn’t say each of the locked servers have the same Population. It likely means they have reset what full means. And it will slowly push people to the linked servers. It will slowly spread out populations.

Likely, HoD sits on that fence. It doesn’t mean that Anet views them the same. Just that they want new players to go to other servers.

We have yelled for population balance. It will come slowly this way. Blowing it up will lead to more bandwagonning.

You are looking at it way too simple, too too simple. While on paper, it seems great but in reality, it isn’t. People are not gonna move just because you close up the server, people will rather die on the server than paying $$ to move, why pay for something that anet is responsible of? Thus, servers will die to attrition, people will quit, WvW thus get smaller. At the same time, not all servers will die to attrition at the same rate because we have to acount for matchup. Servers that keep getting hit by greater numbers will die faster than servers than are having that greater numbers, it isn’t hard to understand why they will die faster.

Furthermore, the population balance will not come this way simply because base pve population is different between servers. If the foundation is different, how can you expect it to be balanced? PvE population supply WvW population in the long run, if you don’t get what I mean.

Then, there also the numerous number of servers and not enough new players to spread among all issue. There is also the static cap’s cons.

All in all, it is impossible to balance population with the current structure.

CattivoUomo.7198:

Like others will say, forced repopulation will split up guilds and friends. I offer an alternative idea. for those servers with highly active wvw populations, force them to contend with more than one match at a time. This could be accomplished by intelligently reviewing players’ normal wvw active periods as well as guild memberships, then selecting which match each player will be assigned to for that week. It could also be done at semi-randomly, while still working to keep guilds intact. It could also be left up to players to choose which match to participate in (or which they would prefer) for that week, but as we’ve seen, players tend to be selfish and that may not work very well. At any rate, I would like for the devs to attempt something other what has been tried recently.

By blowing all up, you don’t have to force them on any servers. You are just simply forcing them to choose a new server. They can still liaise with each others on the new servers to join. The guilds can do that. The pugs not in any wvw guild can choose random servers. It will balance out if put in the proper systems.

Populations weren’t meant to be balanced.

I think that is the obvious fact that no one wants to admit from this whole system.

We have heard it from people in smaller pop servers that do not like to be held in que.

I don’t want a crapshoot to get into the same server as my guild. And if you tell me that guilds would get priority to go together, that is inappropriate also.

They have likely established a new population cap, which is why a T4 server is locked.

It will gradually start to even out.

But blowing them up, with no ties to the people you have played with for years is not a solution.. It’s a creator of more problems.

Sarrs.4831:

Okay so here’s the issue.

Either A
You let people pick where they go, in which case you’ll just end up with the exact same issue as players pick a server to stack.
Or B
You don’t let people pick where they go, in which case they end up massively sharded with nobody they know.

A doesn’t do anything.
B kills the game.

The current system appears to be a pretty good third option, to be honest.

You don’t have to. To blow up something doesn’t means you adapt to the old system again. To blow up something can be used to adapt a new system. The numerous number of servers made it near impossible to balance without any major sacrifices and this sacrifices affect gameplay. We have to cut down the number of servers, we have to set a new balancing approach.

SkyShroud.2865:

CattivoUomo.7198:

Like others will say, forced repopulation will split up guilds and friends. I offer an alternative idea. for those servers with highly active wvw populations, force them to contend with more than one match at a time. This could be accomplished by intelligently reviewing players’ normal wvw active periods as well as guild memberships, then selecting which match each player will be assigned to for that week. It could also be done at semi-randomly, while still working to keep guilds intact. It could also be left up to players to choose which match to participate in (or which they would prefer) for that week, but as we’ve seen, players tend to be selfish and that may not work very well. At any rate, I would like for the devs to attempt something other what has been tried recently.

By blowing all up, you don’t have to force them on any servers. You are just simply forcing them to choose a new server. They can still liaise with each others on the new servers to join. The guilds can do that. The pugs not in any wvw guild can choose random servers. It will balance out if put in the proper systems.

you are correct, it wouldn’t force them to a server, but if your guild isn’t all on when it happens, likely they won’t be together.

Strider Pj.2193:

Populations weren’t meant to be balanced.

I think that is the obvious fact that no one wants to admit from this whole system.

We have heard it from people in smaller pop servers that do not like to be held in que.

I don’t want a crapshoot to get into the same server as my guild. And if you tell me that guilds would get priority to go together, that is inappropriate also.

They have likely established a new population cap, which is why a T4 server is locked.

It will gradually start to even out.

But blowing them up, with no ties to the people you have played with for years is not a solution.. It’s a creator of more problems.

The fact that you think it isn’t meant to be balance itself is the problem. It can be balance if one want to balance it, it can be done if want to do it. There is no “no”. Also, I am not saying guilds get priority, I am saying guilds have a choice to liase with each other on what new servers to join. Naturally, while they are lasing, the new servers will slowly get filled by pugs before they even decide yet.

Strider Pj.2193:

SkyShroud.2865:

CattivoUomo.7198:

Like others will say, forced repopulation will split up guilds and friends. I offer an alternative idea. for those servers with highly active wvw populations, force them to contend with more than one match at a time. This could be accomplished by intelligently reviewing players’ normal wvw active periods as well as guild memberships, then selecting which match each player will be assigned to for that week. It could also be done at semi-randomly, while still working to keep guilds intact. It could also be left up to players to choose which match to participate in (or which they would prefer) for that week, but as we’ve seen, players tend to be selfish and that may not work very well. At any rate, I would like for the devs to attempt something other what has been tried recently.

By blowing all up, you don’t have to force them on any servers. You are just simply forcing them to choose a new server. They can still liaise with each others on the new servers to join. The guilds can do that. The pugs not in any wvw guild can choose random servers. It will balance out if put in the proper systems.

you are correct, it wouldn’t force them to a server, but if your guild isn’t all on when it happens, likely they won’t be together.

Thus they need to be thorough if they want to blow it up. Thorough to the point such that make servers not mandatory so people can get into the game and talk about it. It is really all about setting a new system, a system that can help balance while giving players good amount of freedoms.

Gop.8713:

Carrots and sticks are the same thing. If you offer a reward to someone for doing something, it becomes a punishment to everyone who isn’t doing it . . .

But anyway I thought the problem was ppl moving too much? Groups planning transfers to the same server at the same time so everyone gets in before it closes, transferring to linked servers to make the host server op and then moving again at next linking, etc. It is entirely possible I do not understand the issue though, I just wanted to scout

Nope. There are multiple problems, that lead to population balance issue, thus all the problems are interrelated with one another in one ways or many.

To give you some idea, though not the entire idea.

1. We have way too many servers.
This lead to population distribution issue. Even if we force everyone to spread equally all on servers, we will not have enough to cover a 24/7 gamemode.
This also has a another issue. New players too are distributed to that many servers but we don’t have that many new players to distribute to all servers. This lead to replacement issue which in turn lead to long term balance issue.

2. Fixed full threshold
I just realise that many people actually have this thinking that server has a hard cap. People actually think gw2 servers are like that of a counterstrike servers with hard cap. It isn’t, it never is. Gw2 has adapted a megaserver, megaserver is simply a cloud where server software will dynamically create instances of maps to accumulate players. Thus, since it can dynamically create instances, it naturally doesn’t have this so-called hard cap. “Instance” is a technical term. What we have now is a threshold and every server apparently has the same threshold but not every server are equal in base populations (pve+pvp+wvw). Any servers that exceed that threshold is consider full, you can exceed by large or by minimum, it doesn’t matter. This itself is a balancing issue as this fixed threshold does not account for population differences between servers.

3. Different base population
Every servers have their base population aka pve, wvw and pvp. Not all servers are the same though. All the servers have been around for 5 years, for the first 2 years, the population balance does not even exist. Guilds can and will stacks on few servers, likewise players. Also, before we had megaserver, servers work independently thus even pve players stack on servers. Then, 3 years down the road, only wvw population is use for the server status. But we already have a different base population. How can you balance something that is already different through the accumulated years?

Then another problem is new pve players can choose any open servers and the threshold back then was really high so most servers are open. As a pve player, many will likely to choose the populated ones so we have the dead servers become sure dead servers. This enlarge the base population disparity by days, months and years.

Conclusion
Just base on point 1 alone, you got no choice but to blow it up. People call for merge but people forgot that no matter how you merge it, the inherent population is just too different between servers to be balance. WvW is a 24/7 gamemode, it isn’t about matching simple numbers of 1000 to 1000. Likewise, you can’t solve problem 3 without blow it up since the base population already different. Even if devs decided to make servers not mandatory now and purge non-wvw participants, it is already too late since pve population already participating since the reward patch.

The reality is that 90%+ of existing server A would relocate to new server B.

This is not a very helpful suggestion.

New players can only pick open servers. With the upcoming expansion, it would likely lead to new players. Those will go to the servers who are not full, likely starting with the very high, then high until they fill. Of course that stinks for the servers who sit in the ‘just full’ category which from the OP would include a server like HoD, but like MaS did before, they could moVe again.

And run the risk of missing guildies.

Which they would run the risk of with blowing it up.

Turk.5460:

The reality is that 90%+ of existing server A would relocate to new server B.

This is not a very helpful suggestion.

That is only if they continue to use the old system. If balancing rule is to be enforced right from the start and dynamically increase or decrease the threshold across board by using the highest and lowest server differences as benchmark, it will be quite impossible to stack any server.

Strider Pj.2193:

New players can only pick open servers. With the upcoming expansion, it would likely lead to new players. Those will go to the servers who are not full, likely starting with the very high, then high until they fill. Of course that stinks for the servers who sit in the ‘just full’ category which from the OP would include a server like HoD, but like MaS did before, they could moVe again.

And run the risk of missing guildies.

Which they would run the risk of with blowing it up.

The risk will be minimum if a new system uses dynamic threshold instead of a static threshold. Now, servers are just waiting for the nails to be nailed into their coffin, some don’t even realise that is happening because their server is just that big but eventually they will and when that happen, it is all too late.

here is my official Brave new world suggestion. Put on your pants this ones got some sauce baby.

1. Blackgate is destroyed.
2. All players from BG are randomly distributed evenly between remaining servers. That’s what you get for bandwagon-ing, noone cares about your guilds and friendships. (I’m serious on this one, you’re all basic and I hate you).
3. Server transfers cost $5000 per Account.
4. All proceeds go towards one of two things. A children’s hospital, or a dedicated PvP balance team.
5. I collect any and all tears and provide drinking water to 3rd world countries.
6. Statues are erected of John Cena in every single WvW keep, tower, camp, and he also rides the dolyaks while trumpets play.

Absolutely everyone is happy under my 6 step guide. If you say different, you’re from blackgate and noone cares.

CrashTheGrey.1492:

here is my official Brave new world suggestion. Put on your pants this ones got some sauce baby.

1. Blackgate is destroyed.
2. All players from BG are randomly distributed evenly between remaining servers. That’s what you get for bandwagon-ing, noone cares about your guilds and friendships. (I’m serious on this one, you’re all basic and I hate you).
3. Server transfers cost $5000 per Account.
4. All proceeds go towards one of two things. A children’s hospital, or a dedicated PvP balance team.
5. I collect any and all tears and provide drinking water to 3rd world countries.
6. Statues are erected of John Cena in every single WvW keep, tower, camp, and he also rides the dolyaks while trumpets play.

Absolutely everyone is happy under my 6 step guide. If you say different, you’re from blackgate and noone cares.

LOL I take it there are still people out there who haven’t forgiven BG for not taking a turn at the “server implosion wheel” a la JQ, TC, MAG, etc. Well boo kitten hoo. Not our fault your server never took the time to create a “winning !” environment. :-)

Nuke it.

Keep guilds together (guild you’re currently repping on the last character you logged in with).

Now redistribute players + guilds to create servers with balanced activity + time zones.

They can’t just blow it up and create however many new NA/EU servers…

First, it wouldnt solve the problems.

Second, everyone has to select a server when they install the game, even those that never come into wvw, so they’d have to move EVERYBODY in the game.

Third, it wouldn’t be a quick activity…

Do you really think Anet would take the game offline for a week or more to redistribute every account in game to appease the wvw population?

Taking it offline for a week wouldn’t be necessary. Hell, ‘servers’ practically don’t exist any more. They’re just what team you play for in wvw. Everything else is megaservered.

It would solve lots of problems. In one swoop, it could balance active populations, off-hour activity, and shake up stacked servers/stale matchups.

Pensadora.9478:

When FULL at T3/T4 is equated to FULL at T1, things appear to be a bit wonky in the universe, to say the least.

What could be worse than the slow, painful, demoralization of all the host server communities so that they join the linked servers, an already demoralized group? Why try forced re-colonization? Why not try exploration? I argue the later is far, far and away more positive.

Isn’t it more obvious than ever that it’s time to activate the nuclear option? Let’s blow it all up and start over, so that we can begin to build our brave new world(s).

This could be one of the most exciting things to happen in WvW. It will be fresh, challenging, and risky. To go where no one has gone before….To march off into the horizon to form new worlds and conquer the unknown.

This story: All bandwagon to T1, Locked down, Not enough population, Lost Community Identity, Imbalanced Matchups …. is old, tired and needs to be shelved. No one… and I mean no one… wants to read this story any more!

“….That’s what exploration is all about. Going to places where others haven’t been and returning to tell a story they haven’t heard before. " J. Cameron.

Let’s do it! What say you?

You need to be much clearer than “blow it all up and start over”… You’re going to have to think this through, explain the entire process and how exactly we end up in a better place… instead of being completely vague and not offering any well thought out ideas to discuss.

Swagger.1459:

Pensadora.9478:

When FULL at T3/T4 is equated to FULL at T1, things appear to be a bit wonky in the universe, to say the least.

What could be worse than the slow, painful, demoralization of all the host server communities so that they join the linked servers, an already demoralized group? Why try forced re-colonization? Why not try exploration? I argue the later is far, far and away more positive.

Isn’t it more obvious than ever that it’s time to activate the nuclear option? Let’s blow it all up and start over, so that we can begin to build our brave new world(s).

This could be one of the most exciting things to happen in WvW. It will be fresh, challenging, and risky. To go where no one has gone before….To march off into the horizon to form new worlds and conquer the unknown.

This story: All bandwagon to T1, Locked down, Not enough population, Lost Community Identity, Imbalanced Matchups …. is old, tired and needs to be shelved. No one… and I mean no one… wants to read this story any more!

“….That’s what exploration is all about. Going to places where others haven’t been and returning to tell a story they haven’t heard before. " J. Cameron.

Let’s do it! What say you?

You need to be much clearer than “blow it all up and start over”… You’re going to have to think this through, explain the entire process and how exactly we end up in a better place… instead of being completely vague and not offering any well thought out ideas to discuss.

I have made one in the past and it was so well thought that people don’t want to discuss about it because most don’t want to discuss something that has too much substances. Most people in the forums just want to post count and not really make constructive comments.

HazyDaisy.4107:

They can’t just blow it up and create however many new NA/EU servers…

First, it wouldnt solve the problems.

Second, everyone has to select a server when they install the game, even those that never come into wvw, so they’d have to move EVERYBODY in the game.

Third, it wouldn’t be a quick activity…

Do you really think Anet would take the game offline for a week or more to redistribute every account in game to appease the wvw population?

If you make servers non-mandatory, then, wouldn’t that solve your second issue?

HazyDaisy.4107:

They can’t just blow it up and create however many new NA/EU servers…

First, it wouldnt solve the problems.

Second, everyone has to select a server when they install the game, even those that never come into wvw, so they’d have to move EVERYBODY in the game.

Third, it wouldn’t be a quick activity…

Do you really think Anet would take the game offline for a week or more to redistribute every account in game to appease the wvw population?

• How can we know with certainty that it wouldn’t solve the problems? What information is available to reach that conclusion?

• How can we know whether or not it will require a time-consuming effort or whether every account would have to be affected, until we know the specification for how world selection, or world assignment could be accomplished if we wanted to do it a different way – a way that started from scratch and was designed to AVOID all the known problems we’re experiencing now?

Those brave new worlds would be new AND improved.

I’m not nearly as pessimistic that starting with a clean slate, instead of trying to fix what has already gotten out of control, would result in a worse situation than we have now.

I would argue that it would be very freeing for both the WvW Community and ANet Developers to have the leeway to be creative in re-designing how it all works, so that they could overcome some of the challenges that weren’t designed around to begin with.

It could be a very fun, exciting time for everyone – to discuss how to overcome these issues – while knowing that they won’t be required to ‘wedge it into’ the existing server structures and populations.

Instead, implement a design that improves on what we have, regardless of existing server structures, populations, etc.

Yuffi.2430:

The alternative I suggested is just that – an alternative fair idea. It’s a way of keeping our server identities, staying together as guilds, and a way of gaining recognition as individual players.
It’s not “factions like EotM” because you are not the Red team or the Blue team or the Green team – you score for your server, your guild and yourself. Nor is it megaserver like EotM because there are fixed maps.
I propose the idea because it keeps what I see as the best bits of WvW and gives more flexibility to both players and Anet. To my mind this makes it an idea that is also worth looking into.

It is good to see alternative ideas, even if they are repetitive. Changing the principle of the game mode is not a trivial task. When players pause to think about alternatives, they appreciate design of the WvW more.

Your suggestion is still a lot like EotM. The only difference is a fixed amount of instances (5 tiers) and players able to choose which instance to play in at any given time.

The server/guild/player leaderboards could easily be added to the current WvW if it wasn’t for the coverage imbalance. The Glicko rating multipliers were never enough to compensate. The is no fair way to reward players/guilds/servers at the moment.

Even if you do not consider it as factions consider these points:

• There is no server community since it is only a label on a leaderboard. The map/team chat would include players from the entire faction.
  • Language barriers in EU.
• No server is responsible for defending any tier. If objectives are lost, the loss is collectively suffered by your rival servers.
• Having 5 tiers to choose from, the players will gravitate to a tier of least resistance.
• There is no guarantee T1 would be the highest populated tier. (unless you set very low map quotas to bottom tiers)
• There is no sense of progression for servers to fight from low tiers to the top tier. The server name may move up or down on a leaderboard but players see no other change.
• 5*4 maps is a huge battlefield for a nightcapping monoblob to level out all T3 while avoiding any opponents.
  • And karma training monoblobs you will get when your pool all servers together and noone cares to defend.

Grim West.3194:

The GW2 devs allowed BandWagaon gate to concentrate most of the hardcore WvW players on one server.

And… then locked everything up tight.
ftfy

Hexalot.8194:

CrashTheGrey.1492:

here is my official Brave new world suggestion. Put on your pants this ones got some sauce baby.

1. Blackgate is destroyed.
2. All players from BG are randomly distributed evenly between remaining servers. That’s what you get for bandwagon-ing, noone cares about your guilds and friendships. (I’m serious on this one, you’re all basic and I hate you).
3. Server transfers cost $5000 per Account.
4. All proceeds go towards one of two things. A children’s hospital, or a dedicated PvP balance team.
5. I collect any and all tears and provide drinking water to 3rd world countries.
6. Statues are erected of John Cena in every single WvW keep, tower, camp, and he also rides the dolyaks while trumpets play.

Absolutely everyone is happy under my 6 step guide. If you say different, you’re from blackgate and noone cares.

LOL I take it there are still people out there who haven’t forgiven BG for not taking a turn at the “server implosion wheel” a la JQ, TC, MAG, etc. Well boo kitten hoo. Not our fault your server never took the time to create a “winning !” environment. :-)

Did someone else hear that small, wimpy cry off in the distance? Maybe it was that group of blackgate guys that just ran from me (1v3) into the keep. I guess we’ll never know.

So, as a fairly prominent BG person (the elephant in the room), here’s my two cents. I don’t speak for everyone on my server, as a note, just myself. This is something that’s been brought up/debated cross server, and I’m not against it actually… If a new system is put into place, which is should be, servers should be nuked. But if servers are nuked then the same system is put in place? The same exact system will be formed again in 6 mos. to a year.

If you nuke servers without systemic change, you effectively force-implode all the servers. We don’t have experience with mass implosions, but we certainly have experience with individual imploding servers (SoR, YB-ish, TC, DB have all had their implosions).

What happens when we see a server implode?
1) Guilds distribute to other servers.
2) Guilds that were friends with eachother/share membership filter to the same servers together.
3) Of the servers those guilds distribute between, one starts to become more and more popular.
4) The popular server starts winning more.
5) Guildless people start going to the popular server.
6) A new bandwagon shakes out.

It might take a couple of months… But without systemic changes like Luffi proposed or the Battlegroup system that’s been leaked in the past, we’ll be right back to where we started: Different server names but the same problems we’ve had since the beginning of the game. It needs to be both. You can’t fix one without addressing the other. Otherwise you’ll just be adding another bandaid over a gaping wound exactly like relinks… Not a horrible idea, but not a fix either.

dagneyandleo.6378:

… But without systemic changes like Luffi proposed or the Battlegroup system that’s been leaked in the past, we’ll be right back to where we started: Different server names but the same problems we’ve had since the beginning of the game. It needs to be both.

Totally agree. My point is that the nuclear option must be applied first. And, the community has to realize that this is where we’re at right now. We have to pry the cold, dead fingers off the corpses of the cold, dead bodies of the ‘old time server/WvW’ idea.

It’s broken. It’s broken beyond the reach of the incremental, micro changes that are currently being tried – and might I add one more time – being tried under some guiding principle that is violated on behalf of maintaining that behemoth BG.

The benefit though is that every time they re-open BG and a group of guilds transfers in – instead of OUT – it reveals the true brokenness of the current way of doing things, and sucks out another level of hope from the Hopeful still clinging to the thought that maybe, sometime, in the near future this game is going to be fair and balanced.

After nuking is completed – a new system with brave, new worlds needs to be implemented for the enjoyment of all.

As many have pointed out, simply undoing the linking or blowing up the current worlds is not enough. We need something to prevent players re-creating the coverage imbalance: a migration policy.

The policy would be a set of rules that would make the system to converge towards balanced coverages by governing how players make transfers.

The current policy is ANet setting some worlds Full at whim. Further incentives are a transfer fees and the loyalty pip.

What would be a better migration policy?

I can’t believe this is being still talked about

There’s not enough leaders to spread between servers. There’s probably still enough true leaders left to run 3, maybe 4 servers well. Without these leaders, WvW will die a pretty quick death.

Servers didn’t die to due bandwagons and such, they died from their leaders leaving the server/game/going inactive, resulting in their followers also going with them or going inactive. Once that core’s gone, that server dies pretty quickly unless a replacement is found.

GW2 as a game doesn’t really promote leadership. There’s no rewards for maintaining or leading a community in this game. Often, it feels like a giant waste of time.

Blow up the servers. Full player choice as to where to go. But do it again every 3 months. Put the players and the guilds in charge of making their own lives more interesting.

Quaygal.5327:

Blow up the servers. Full player choice as to where to go. But do it again every 3 months. Put the players and the guilds in charge of making their own lives more interesting.

Agree with most of this.

Have to start with the nuclear option so the process isn’t hamstrung with current server structure – the bloated and the emaciated.

Implement a new system that maintains population & timezone balance, and one that….

Put the players and the guilds in charge of making their own lives more interesting.

Fun for all! Vive la revolution!