Guild Wars 2

I logged into WvW recently, and saw something that boggles my mind. How exactly did DB overtake both TC and BG? Did World Linking give so much of a boost to them that they’ve become a juggernaut? That brings up a question of fairness, because Commanders on TC say that we weren’t linked with anyone, putting us at a disadvantage. When servers are linked, does that mean their ratings are added together too?

On the flip side, variety in T1 is nice, since fighting the same people over and over gets stale over time. New opponents bring new guilds for GvGs. I do miss the T1 War Council meetings with JQ, BG, and TC.

The short answer: BG and TC were full, while a transfer to IoJ cost 500 gems and a lot of people seem to have left YB.

The long answer: BG, TC, and JQ aren’t as dominating they were since a while. And the strenght of linking is not the few people that got originally linked to DB, the strength of linking is the backdoor to join the winner for just 500gems and that it adds up on top of the full-status all T1 server have.

Even if it’s cheap to transfer to a low tier server just to be linked to a winner, isn’t it true that the linked server changes? So one week you could be paired with DB, and another week it could be Maguuma? I never fully understood the server link system since I’m on TC.

Even if voting resulted in1 month relinks, ANet decided to make 2 month out of it.

So mostly (maybe you keep the link) 500gems every 2 month to be linked to the top.

Dayra.7405:

Even if voting resulted in1 month relinks, ANet decided to make 2 month out of it.

So mostly (maybe you keep the link) 500gems every 2 month to be linked to the top.

Pretty cheap price to be the best! Right?

hello anet did you read that? pls fix this problem, ty!

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Proposal-Transfer-Costs-by-Rank

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Even if it’s cheap to transfer to a low tier server just to be linked to a winner, isn’t it true that the linked server changes? So one week you could be paired with DB, and another week it could be Maguuma? I never fully understood the server link system since I’m on TC.

Relinks happen every 2 months, not every week.

DB+IoJ have gotten a few transfers in since being in t2, I know of some that moved to IoJ just to play on DB because it’s cheaper, and well transfers were closed to BG(open now btw) and TC(although they were only open for a week).

The next relink IoJ could end up anywhere depending on how big they have grown. Eredon terrace was with BG the first link, and then got sent into the 4 server link in t4.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

I logged into WvW recently, and saw something that boggles my mind. How exactly did DB overtake both TC and BG? Did World Linking give so much of a boost to them that they’ve become a juggernaut? That brings up a question of fairness, because Commanders on TC say that we weren’t linked with anyone, putting us at a disadvantage.

TC had stacked their way to T1 and outnumbered pretty much everyone along the way. And then, while not linked, it was left open for transfers after the new linkings. Population isn’t it’s disadvantage.

DB is winning because it is playing to win – havoking, protecting its thirds, and maximizing the principles of mass, maneuver and economy of force.

Any server can be bandwagonned up the charts.

All aboard the Isle of Janthir band wagon lets see db actual be number one with out being link.

Thelgar.7214:

TC had stacked their way to T1 and outnumbered pretty much everyone along the way. And then, while not linked, it was left open for transfers after the new linkings. Population isn’t it’s disadvantage.

DB is winning because it is playing to win – havoking, protecting its thirds, and maximizing the principles of mass, maneuver and economy of force.

You say that like TC weren’t in t1 for over 2 years before. Yeah they had dropped into t2 for a short period while guilds moved around, but after the first links it was enough to bring them back to t1 as JQ started to falter and then DB dropped out of t1 before they went back up to replace YB. DB has also been open for transfers longer than BG TC JQ, who got stacked again?

DB is winning because of coverage and probably more pug commanders (that’s kinda obvious by now isn’t it?), and yes pvding and back capping when they can. I say this as my main account is sitting on DB.

Xenesis.6389:

Thelgar.7214:

TC had stacked their way to T1 and outnumbered pretty much everyone along the way. And then, while not linked, it was left open for transfers after the new linkings. Population isn’t it’s disadvantage.

DB is winning because it is playing to win – havoking, protecting its thirds, and maximizing the principles of mass, maneuver and economy of force.

You say that like TC weren’t in t1 for over 2 years before. Yeah they had dropped into t2 for a short period while guilds moved around, but after the first links it was enough to bring them back to t1 as JQ started to falter and then DB dropped out of t1 before they went back up to replace YB. DB has also been open for transfers longer than BG TC JQ, who got stacked again?

DB is winning because of coverage and probably more pug commanders (that’s kinda obvious by now isn’t it?), and yes pvding and back capping when they can. I say this as my main account is sitting on DB.

I say this having been in TC those two years before.
TC drove back to T1 by stacking it’s way to dominance in T2, which was capped by the alliance stacking right before the first linking. By the time TC closed after the second linking started, it had numbers over everyone.

Your main might be sitting on DB, but I don’t see how you could be playing on DB and claiming it is winning on coverage.

If your main is sitting, where is the account you’re playing on, because trying to call this :
“DB is winning because it is playing to win – havoking, protecting its thirds, and maximizing the principles of mass, maneuver and economy of force.”
Backcapping and PvDing sounds a lot like parroting a particular TC commander.

All of a sudden? DB has been creeping back up for a long, long time.

And you cant use the IoJ excuse, the pairings are based on population. ANet can lock transfers as soon as they need to. DB STILL wasn’t full until just 2 or 3 days ago. DB could be unlinked soon because of this.

And TC is still far overpopulated, despite losing.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

I logged into WvW recently, and saw something that boggles my mind. How exactly did DB overtake both TC and BG?

A number of various factors:

You have the whole, attempting to stack TC debacle where a bunch of people ban wagoned TC before server linkings happened. In turn this caused a lot of TC guilds to jump ship(a lot of which now are on db). A few guild that come to mind off the top my head were JOY and BP which were both pretty big guilds.

Population wise TC and BG have both been unlinked for a while. For a good period of time they were also in a complete lock out. Thus they were unable to retain numbers with the amount of people leaving.

Then you have the actual match ups, where TC and BG have to fight the population of linked servers as unlinked.

Lastly, add the bandwagon ktrain on top of it. Every two months a new set of servers becomes the host for the ktrain in each tier. The way I see it, db/ioj has been selected to be this tiers ktrain until the relinks happen again.

TheHeretic.3529:

All of a sudden? DB has been creeping back up for a long, long time.

And you cant use the IoJ excuse, the pairings are based on population. ANet can lock transfers as soon as they need to. DB STILL wasn’t full until just 2 or 3 days ago. DB could be unlinked soon because of this.

And TC is still far overpopulated, despite losing.

That’s your opinion. Personally I see DB as the stacked bunch atm. With the exception of prime time, DB has ktrain zergs running in eb and our home bl all day. You guys dominate the 75% of the time when people are just simply not on. It wins you the match up.

I have to say this though, DB is nothing like BG. At least when we fight BG and show up with half the numbers we get ran over by them. In contrast DB either run away or fold like cheap cardboard despite out numbering 2-4 to I. I am not just trying to talking smack here, the kdr of every week speaks for its self, this is the first week DB has been higher than 0.7 kdr since hitting tier 1. Despite totally dominating the scoreboard.

Do me a favor and run mouth after the 2 months when db no longer link ok please.

Thelgar.7214:

Xenesis.6389:

Thelgar.7214:

TC had stacked their way to T1 and outnumbered pretty much everyone along the way. And then, while not linked, it was left open for transfers after the new linkings. Population isn’t it’s disadvantage.

DB is winning because it is playing to win – havoking, protecting its thirds, and maximizing the principles of mass, maneuver and economy of force.

You say that like TC weren’t in t1 for over 2 years before. Yeah they had dropped into t2 for a short period while guilds moved around, but after the first links it was enough to bring them back to t1 as JQ started to falter and then DB dropped out of t1 before they went back up to replace YB. DB has also been open for transfers longer than BG TC JQ, who got stacked again?

DB is winning because of coverage and probably more pug commanders (that’s kinda obvious by now isn’t it?), and yes pvding and back capping when they can. I say this as my main account is sitting on DB.

I say this having been in TC those two years before.
TC drove back to T1 by stacking it’s way to dominance in T2, which was capped by the alliance stacking right before the first linking. By the time TC closed after the second linking started, it had numbers over everyone.

Your main might be sitting on DB, but I don’t see how you could be playing on DB and claiming it is winning on coverage.

If your main is sitting, where is the account you’re playing on, because trying to call this :
“DB is winning because it is playing to win – havoking, protecting its thirds, and maximizing the principles of mass, maneuver and economy of force.”
Backcapping and PvDing sounds a lot like parroting a particular TC commander.

medusashadow.3567:

Do me a favor and run mouth after the 2 months when db no longer link ok please.

So you’re saying you’ll be able to compete if you have a larger numerical advantage in two months…

Hibergate

It’s number one because it moved into t1 when the other two servers had stopped trying. Sleeping t1 sucks.

So bandwagoning is a part of the reason why the tiers are as they are now. I can accept that. But how about BG getting manually placed into T2? Somewhere there was a thread were Devon talked about the percentages of matchmaking. With BG’s rating, it should have been mathematically impossible for the #2 server to be knocked down a tier.

With DB artificially bumped to #1 in T1, and BG artificially knocked down to T2, is this just a way for Anet to spice up the competition?

Smooth Penguin.5294:

So bandwagoning is a part of the reason why the tiers are as they are now. I can accept that. But how about BG getting manually placed into T2? Somewhere there was a thread were Devon talked about the percentages of matchmaking. With BG’s rating, it should have been mathematically impossible for the #2 server to be knocked down a tier.

With DB artificially bumped to #1 in T1, and BG artificially knocked down to T2, is this just a way for Anet to spice up the competition?

Rolling a t2 matchup =/= dropping to t2

Cecilia.5179:

Rolling a t2 matchup =/= dropping to t2

One in the same. According to the leaderboards, BG is offically T2.

As for the current matchups and server linkings, when will we see a reset? I incorrectly assumed links were reset on a weekly basis. If they’re on a 2 month rotating basis, when does that end?

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Cecilia.5179:

Rolling a t2 matchup =/= dropping to t2

One in the same. According to the leaderboards, BG is offically T2.

As for the current matchups and server linkings, when will we see a reset? I incorrectly assumed links were reset on a weekly basis. If they’re on a 2 month rotating basis, when does that end?

Not really the same if you consider distinguishing the match tier from the server size. BG is a T1-sized server in a T2 match. I understand “dropping to T2” as usually meaning the server doesn’t have the population and coverage for T1, which it still does. The leaderboard distinguishes this by ranking servers according to glicko and then listing the match it is in.

Server links change Aug 29th or something like that.

Eval.2371:

I have to say this though, DB is nothing like BG. At least when we fight BG and show up with half the numbers we get ran over by them. In contrast DB either run away or fold like cheap cardboard despite out numbering 2-4 to I. I am not just trying to talking smack here, the kdr of every week speaks for its self, this is the first week DB has been higher than 0.7 kdr since hitting tier 1. Despite totally dominating the scoreboard.

That’s really the absolute truth.

DB loses almost every single fight against TC on even terms. And, when they outnumber us by a large margin, their odds of not dieing/running away are still poor.

Although, they are good at ppt/pvd. I wish we had BG back because they have many good guilds and made for many good fights.

Xenesis.6389:

You say that like TC weren’t in t1 for over 2 years before. Yeah they had dropped into t2 for a short period while guilds moved around, but after the first links it was enough to bring them back to t1 as JQ started to falter

What? TC got back into T1 on the back of the kittenters alliance moving there ie stacking before links came in.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Cecilia.5179:

Rolling a t2 matchup =/= dropping to t2

One in the same. According to the leaderboards, BG is offically T2.

Acccording to the leaderboards BG is ranked 2nd ie not actually T2.

morrolan.9608:

Xenesis.6389:

You say that like TC weren’t in t1 for over 2 years before. Yeah they had dropped into t2 for a short period while guilds moved around, but after the first links it was enough to bring them back to t1 as JQ started to falter

What? TC got back into T1 on the back of the kittenters alliance moving there ie stacking before links came in.

What did you think I meant with guilds moved around? they moved in and some guilds left. Even then it took TC more than another month after the link to even get back into t1.

Welp….looks like it’s JQ’s turn for kitten can hug it out with Maguuma lol

DB+IOJ has been in T1 for… I want to say 4 weeks. For that entire time, IoJ has had 500 gem immigrants and TC and BG have been closed. That’s the kind of advantage which, over the course of the matchup, will result in overbearing population power for DB+IoJ. I would not be surprised to see JQ+AR enjoy the same advantage, with immigrants heading to AR, and remain in T1; they are within takeover range of TC’s score at the moment. It’s possible we’ll even see a T1 entirely comprised of linked servers because of this advantage.

Consider the opposite; YB. YB was a T1 server which only lasted a single week in the current link set and over the course of the month has descended into T3, into a match which they are losing. I have to seriously wonder where those YB players went to cause such a catastrophic decline; I would not be surprised if they went to IoJ.

Another point of interest is that BG has recently had its transfers opened. Is this because BG’s population has naturally declined, and thus players have moved out? Is this because of the usual hibergate rar rar? I think it’s worth considering that players who have seen how these systems will work have moved to IoJ, AR or JQ, and the resulting population loss is what has created the opening.

I do think that linked servers have ultimately resulted, or at least been a major factor, in the current state of T1. I do not necessarily think this is an indictment of the system, though; the changes in populations are a growing pain, not a permanent issue, and the problem will relieve itself once players rearrange appropriately. We saw a relatively stable first set of links, when every server was linked with a single second server- I do not think there is any reason that stability could not be achieved again with the same model.

Xenesis.6389:

morrolan.9608:

Xenesis.6389:

You say that like TC weren’t in t1 for over 2 years before. Yeah they had dropped into t2 for a short period while guilds moved around, but after the first links it was enough to bring them back to t1 as JQ started to falter

What? TC got back into T1 on the back of the kittenters alliance moving there ie stacking before links came in.

What did you think I meant with guilds moved around? they moved in and some guilds left. Even then it took TC more than another month after the link to even get back into t1.

The way you’re saying it, you’re making it sound like TC broke even. TC was already stacked when the alliance arrived and the numbers the alliance brought significantly outweighed the number of people that left because of them.

People need to understand that every 2 months the standings are going to change. The top 3 teams aren’t going to stay there for years at a time anymore. This is a good thing. Different people get a chance to win & soon it’ll all change again. Now the just have to fix T4 & give them a chance.

Knob.6835:

People need to understand that every 2 months the standings are going to change. The top 3 teams aren’t going to stay there for years at a time anymore. This is a good thing. Different people get a chance to win & soon it’ll all change again. Now the just have to fix T4 & give them a chance.

Also realize BG is still the second ranked server and will likely remain there next week.

Thelgar.7214:

The way you’re saying it, you’re making it sound like TC broke even. TC was already stacked when the alliance arrived and the numbers the alliance brought significantly outweighed the number of people that left because of them.

And you’re making it sound like the same thing didn’t happen to DB, face it, they both got stacked to t1 levels. You forget the TC groups that had moved actually went to DB? Plus they gained players and guilds since being open for a few weeks through the links. TC had lost players already before the alliance arrived, when they were forced to t2 by YB which had been caused by the alliance stacking YB.

Thelgar.7214:

TC had stacked their way to T1 and outnumbered pretty much everyone along the way.

Outnumbered pretty much everyone along what way? back to t1? where they were outnumbered by BG?

Players had spread out from TC while they were in t2 before the alliance, go look back at the match history, they weren’t blowing out t2 other than a couple of weird weeks, they had a lot of close matches with DB, and DB won quite a few of them.

Population wise they may be similar now, but we won’t know for sure until ioj gets unlinked to see how many actually paid 500gems instead of 1800gems, coverage wise db has more, ppt wise db is doing more. Coverage will always win, that’s been established since day one.

Knob.6835:

People need to understand that every 2 months the standings are going to change. The top 3 teams aren’t going to stay there for years at a time anymore. This is a good thing. Different people get a chance to win & soon it’ll all change again. Now the just have to fix T4 & give them a chance.

The only thing we get for winning is pride at this point. Paying 500 Gems to transfer into a DB linked server just to win 1st place a few times doesn’t make sense. Now if we still have WvW Tournaments, then I could see why there’d be interest in teaming up with a 1st place DB.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Knob.6835:

People need to understand that every 2 months the standings are going to change. The top 3 teams aren’t going to stay there for years at a time anymore. This is a good thing. Different people get a chance to win & soon it’ll all change again. Now the just have to fix T4 & give them a chance.

The only thing we get for winning is pride at this point. Paying 500 Gems to transfer into a DB linked server just to win 1st place a few times doesn’t make sense. Now if we still have WvW Tournaments, then I could see why there’d be interest in teaming up with a 1st place DB.

It’s not a 500gem transfer to DB it’s a transfer to t1, meaning more population especially at non-standard times.

Xenesis.6389:

Thelgar.7214:

The way you’re saying it, you’re making it sound like TC broke even. TC was already stacked when the alliance arrived and the numbers the alliance brought significantly outweighed the number of people that left because of them.

And you’re making it sound like the same thing didn’t happen to DB, face it, they both got stacked to t1 levels. You forget the TC groups that had moved actually went to DB? Plus they gained players and guilds since being open for a few weeks through the links. TC had lost players already before the alliance arrived, when they were forced to t2 by YB which had been caused by the alliance stacking YB.

Thelgar.7214:

TC had stacked their way to T1 and outnumbered pretty much everyone along the way.

Outnumbered pretty much everyone along what way? back to t1? where they were outnumbered by BG?

Players had spread out from TC while they were in t2 before the alliance, go look back at the match history, they weren’t blowing out t2 other than a couple of weird weeks, they had a lot of close matches with DB, and DB won quite a few of them.

Population wise they may be similar now, but we won’t know for sure until ioj gets unlinked to see how many actually paid 500gems instead of 1800gems, coverage wise db has more, ppt wise db is doing more. Coverage will always win, that’s been established since day one.

I played that match history. I was playing on FA while TC was stacking before the alliance arrived and had been playing on TC for over two years before that. TC began to dominate when they started stacking. The stacking for advantage was in marked difference to what the rest of the tier was doing and when the alliance jumped on, it even further imbalanced the tier. As mentioned, the group that left TC and went to DB wasn’t large in comparison to what TC gained, and certainly didn’t constitute stacking.

Thelgar.7214:

Xenesis.6389:

Thelgar.7214:

The way you’re saying it, you’re making it sound like TC broke even. TC was already stacked when the alliance arrived and the numbers the alliance brought significantly outweighed the number of people that left because of them.

And you’re making it sound like the same thing didn’t happen to DB, face it, they both got stacked to t1 levels. You forget the TC groups that had moved actually went to DB? Plus they gained players and guilds since being open for a few weeks through the links. TC had lost players already before the alliance arrived, when they were forced to t2 by YB which had been caused by the alliance stacking YB.

Thelgar.7214:

TC had stacked their way to T1 and outnumbered pretty much everyone along the way.

Outnumbered pretty much everyone along what way? back to t1? where they were outnumbered by BG?

Players had spread out from TC while they were in t2 before the alliance, go look back at the match history, they weren’t blowing out t2 other than a couple of weird weeks, they had a lot of close matches with DB, and DB won quite a few of them.

Population wise they may be similar now, but we won’t know for sure until ioj gets unlinked to see how many actually paid 500gems instead of 1800gems, coverage wise db has more, ppt wise db is doing more. Coverage will always win, that’s been established since day one.

I played that match history. I was playing on FA while TC was stacking before the alliance arrived and had been playing on TC for over two years before that. TC began to dominate when they started stacking. The stacking for advantage was in marked difference to what the rest of the tier was doing and when the alliance jumped on, it even further imbalanced the tier. As mentioned, the group that left TC and went to DB wasn’t large in comparison to what TC gained, and certainly didn’t constitute stacking.

i just wonder how you can says TC full stacked with guild. are you ever online at OCX/SEA timezone? if not go look first when TC SEA got rolled by 4 guild by DB and 3 guild by JQ when TC SEA only have 1 guild

How? The server got better than the one you are apart of. Things change and staying at the top becomes harder with age. You can’t learn as much from someone else as they can from you.

Valuable info to understand context if you don’t already know:
http://mos.millenium.org/na

ANet fixed CD (plus 3 server) by putting them into T3. Except that YB should not even be in T3 as it is nowhere near what it used to be back in T1 and is more disorganized/lacks population than some T4 servers (+ linkage). The worst part is YB doesn’t even have a linkage to another server for some reason.

So YB continues to plummet after the mass guild exodus 3 months ago … the problem with Glicko is that it takes 4+ months (with manual Glicko adjustments to other servers + no extra population from server linkage) for a “T1” to get to “T4”. That’s insane.

I’m not sure why current WvW population is not taken into account on Glicko (look at what has happened) when linking – this is an odd ANet design to mask volatility.

FYI – The only reason BG is #2 is because they rolled T2 (or they were placed there) and even with dominating T2, they are still going down in Glicko score because there +100K lead (with a couple more days of PPT to go) against the other two T2 servers is not wide enough. … Clear example that Glicko doesn’t work in this model since other server scores are too wide spread.

Here you go ANet, same thing, much easier to implement – put back the old Tier 8 system and kill Glicko and all the manual adjustments to get volatility:

If 1st in Tier, move up; if last in Tier, move down. Server “colors” should be random (so ex. T1, the #1 server has just as much chance of being any side color green/red/blue as another – no more green only dominance + good to change up things).

Top T1 server still needs to come in 1st or 2nd (PPT) to stay in T1 (it’s “good to be the king”). Bottom of T8 server can still make it to T7 any given week if they come in first the during the week (if server pride is good and they don’t give up, bottom tier server can always move up).

You have volatility between tiers (no need to account for WvW population imbalances since it self corrects the following week(s) via PPT) and you can freely open up all server transfers except the T1 first and second winning PPT servers from the prior week (more money/more gems for ANet too).

Server community “pride” is restored.

Everyone wins. Done.

[Work on fixing (tweak) PPT values by clearly laying out the rules ahead of time.]

Speaking as someone on TC actually involved and pays attention to the WvW organization. . . .TC was not stacked before the alliance came over. The alliance coming over brought it to more of an even number across those in T1 at the time, despite the few guilds who left.

DB is open and most guild transfers are going to WvW and yes they have been rising w/o the link. We have many people who pay attention to the glicko and numbers; though I understand what I’m looking it, I am not one of these people watching it constantly.
TC has PvX guild transfers and many solo transfers for PvE and PvX guilds and community which is why we’re full but no, we are obviously not covered for all hours of WvW shown by score. . so we cannot possibly be stacked even now. We do not have a link because of server status, but it would benefit TC to have a link for more than current numbers across the board than it would DB. . . and I’d venture to say DB would take a much smaller hit if they lost their link as well. The Kaineng link was notable for TC.

@ the original post, I miss that too!! The variety is nice though; hopefully it stays as a variety though. I honestly do not know for sure if the ratings were linked as servers were, but I believe it is based off only the home server, DB in this case.

Missy.6803:

Speaking as someone on TC actually involved and pays attention to the WvW organization. . . .TC was not stacked before the alliance came over. The alliance coming over brought it to more of an even number across those in T1 at the time, despite the few guilds who left.

From before the alliance came over:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/It-seems-people-are-restacking-servers-again

By “actually involved” you mean involved in the stacking, excuse me, “server politics” right?

I went from a hardcore WvW to the occasional login for random dailies. Seeing the responses in this thread is enlightening on how different WvW is today. I do miss the days of organized GvGs, and the War Council meetings (Colhearth for Divinity’s Reach Commander!). The variety of the matchups is refreshing, but is the volatility from manual tier adjustments worth the new competition? With the link system, it seems server self-balance was thrown out, and now Anet determines rankings. With all this uncertainty, I wouldn’t be surprised if I see Maguuma as #1 after the new links happen.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

I went from a hardcore WvW to the occasional login for random dailies. Seeing the responses in this thread is enlightening on how different WvW is today. I do miss the days of organized GvGs, and the War Council meetings (Colhearth for Divinity’s Reach Commander!). The variety of the matchups is refreshing, but is the volatility from manual tier adjustments worth the new competition? With the link system, it seems server self-balance was thrown out, and now Anet determines rankings. With all this uncertainty, I wouldn’t be surprised if I see Maguuma as #1 after the new links happen.

Well TW are reportedly moving to Maguuma.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

I went from a hardcore WvW to the occasional login for random dailies. Seeing the responses in this thread is enlightening on how different WvW is today. I do miss the days of organized GvGs, and the War Council meetings (Colhearth for Divinity’s Reach Commander!). The variety of the matchups is refreshing, but is the volatility from manual tier adjustments worth the new competition? With the link system, it seems server self-balance was thrown out, and now Anet determines rankings. With all this uncertainty, I wouldn’t be surprised if I see Maguuma as #1 after the new links happen.

Speaking as a filthy havoc/scrub/militia, I don’t think it’s changed as much as you suggest. Outside of the Season competitions, War Councils never seem to have impacted what I see. Good commanders know what to expect from having the same foes every week and no one needs to discuss it for 3 hours.

I can’t speak to GvG, but it never impacted my game play. Or I should say, if GvG was going on as part of claiming objectives, everyone else tended to go elsewhere anyhow.

Speaking again for myself, I like the new volatility. Sure, it socks sometimes to find we’re outnumbered for hours and barely holding on (or barely nipping at their heels), but having something different every week has been fun.

I stopped playing WvW for months because every week was identical to every other week. We’d use the same tactics against the same opponents, everyone accused everyone of blobbing and running away from fair fights, and in the end, it came down to who had numbers during off-peak hours.

Now, it’s still numbers and everyone still accuses everyone of blobbing, but at least the opponents keep changing and I like the unpredictability.

tl;dr I’m happy to see DB in Tier 1, however they got there. It’s nice not to play the same two opponents every week.