This wouldn’t work. The guilds on the top servers are linked very closely, and they would simply find a new home together again. A few might branch out, but those few would in all likelihood not be the core guilds of the top end servers. Who cares if #1 is JQ or EBay, if the guilds there are the same guilds that were #1 before?
Besides, why should that many players have to find new homes? Why not merge the bottom 2 tiers into the mid-tier servers? ANet has shown they are not going to forcibly move anyone. They are content to sit back and see if attrition works for them.
That’s some backwards thinking. You don’t fix population issues by breaking up the vibrant, populated, action packed, fun servers. You fix population issues by merging low pop crappy servers where there’s barely any action, so there are more very high/full servers.
Or the lower servers could actually learn how to play in wvw. Organize. That’s how you attract people. You only need so much players to cap a tower. Lack population? Cap and evade.
We saw some of the problem at last weeks matchup. It’s like a big part of the players on some servers cant even play. They just stand there getting farmed. They don’t even move out of aoe.
Want a living wvw server? Then you have to work for it. Nothing gets dropped in you lap for free.
Solution #1
- Delete top servers, spread them out on lower tiers and make everyone unhappy and angry by moving them from functional to disfunctional WvW.
Solution #2
- Delete bottom servers, spread them out on higher tiers and make everyone happy by moving them from disfunctional WvW to functional WvW.
This is a really really really tough choice for us, clearly.
Randomize the population and re-run the randomization every month. This would achieve the ultimate fair distribution (and kill the whole wvw game mode so maybe Anet shouldn’t do this after all).
So.. you de-stack the top servers, wherever they go will utterly destroy the servers they face, because they won’t just wander their own separate ways. So then you get one power server owning 2 others. How does this help?
Deleted the top 4 ranked servers and force players on those to choose from the remainder.
Doesn’t strike me as particularly rational, to break up the largest server communities, in order to serve the smaller ones. Seems to me that logic would dictate the display ement of the least amount of players, by doing away with the smallest servers.
Of coarse I am not in favor of that either. It seems to be very short sighted, in my opinion, to mess with the server community immediately before an expansion that will naturally increase the population of each and every server, with both returning and new players.
I think what would make more sense would be to (If possible of course) put the servers on a sort of ‘Megaserver’ system like other maps, merging smaller and larger servers in some form, then putting more emphasis in WvW on Guilds, what happens when they capture, and their presence in the world. It would be a big feat obviously though and who gets ‘Merged’ would be something that might take a bit to decide.
Deleted the top 4 ranked servers and force players on those to choose from the remainder.
this is stupid ideea why ? bcz not al lserver are fights server some are ktrain server and some community will not accept a strong guild/s who are only for fight and you will hear on ts “stop PPK we want ktrain” and will have a big que on all maps and less fun on wvw.
p.s now map cap on wvw is 100 and is lag if you fights 3 way so if anet will make high cap 120+ you will do only 1-1-1-1 skill if this will work ofc.
The “fix” is the same that has been proposed since release. Eliminate the server concept from WvW and make it a Guild Alliance system. Each reset would shuffle the deck of guilds that are playing with and against each other. Still three colors, same basic game play but the shuffle system would attempt to balance time zones.
Players that want to play together would be shuffled together via an alliance and players that want to fight each other would be shuffled together since Guilds could declare war on other Guilds.
Sarcasm For Hire [SFH]
“Youre lips are movin and youre complaining about something thats wingeing.”
The “fix” is the same that has been proposed since release. Eliminate the server concept from WvW and make it a Guild Alliance system. Each reset would shuffle the deck of guilds that are playing with and against each other. Still three colors, same basic game play but the shuffle system would attempt to balance time zones.
Players that want to play together would be shuffled together via an alliance and players that want to fight each other would be shuffled together since Guilds could declare war on other Guilds.
Spot on. Here’s the first in a series of blogs analysing the issue and solution, the whole series of 8 is worth reading:
There was this one thread that addressed this problem really well imo, I would credit him but it was a really long time ago and I cant remember his name, he said along these lines for a new tournament
- Divide all the servers in 3 teams ( e.g. Red/blue/green)
- in order to win first, your team must win the fights and each place earn points like the current system
- each server win grants points to your repsective team
- this helps population because if you want your team to win, you have to help the lower pop servers win too so this brings transfer from higher pop servers to lower pop servers to even the man power
- you can have a discount for server transfers at this time so anet can make some money too
- who knows maybe after these transfers these guild might want to permanently stay in that server as their new home
or something along those lines, anyone who was in that thread could probably elaborate more but i really liked the idea and almost everyone who replied thought so too, i guess you can say it promotes healthy cross server cooperation of a sort (in your own team)
Except that leaves out pugs who are not part of wvw guilds or guilds at all…..
I didn’t want to get into the full concept but in this case unaligned players and guilds would be considered mercenaries. They would be assigned to matches that best need them for balance. Medium and Large sized guilds would basically form the framework of the matchups and then based on typical play times “mercenaries” would fill in to create better battles.
The entire system is built to create more balanced fights with better coverage that continually rotate. Since rankings would be Guild and player based, guilds/players would have a scoreboard; something sorely lacking in GW2. I think the competition would be a magnificent boost to WvW.
Sarcasm For Hire [SFH]
“Youre lips are movin and youre complaining about something thats wingeing.”
Since the changes to how transfers worked I think the transfer problem isn’t that bad.
Population on all servers will get a boost once the expansion comes out and hopefully there’ll be less of a drain.
Reducing the number of servers though isn’t inherently a bad idea. The server numbers were set because that’s how many people you needed to host the whole Guild Wars 2 population but that don’t mean anything since megaserver.
Though I would like to point out WvW on lower population servers is still fun and even more fun to a great many people. People who think low population servers don’t know how to play or are not fun just have their head up their kitten .
Except that leaves out pugs who are not part of wvw guilds or guilds at all…..
I didn’t want to get into the full concept but in this case unaligned players and guilds would be considered mercenaries. They would be assigned to fights that best need them for balance. Medium and Large sized guilds would basically form the framework of the matchup and then based on typical play times “mercenaries” would fill in to create better battles.
The entire system is built to create more balanced fights with better coverage that continually rotate. Since rankings would be Guild and player based, guilds/players would have a scoreboard; something sorely lacking in GW2. I think the competition would be a magnificent boost to WvW.
This sounds like it will tear player from a community of players and friends they know, by punishing them for not being in a large WvW guild. What is worse, is that is does this to suit nothing more than your subjective perception of balance.
Deleted the top 4 ranked servers and force players on those to choose from the remainder.
I wouldn’t do that. I would however reduce map caps and delete bottom 2-3 tiers while simoultaneously providing positive incentives to destack overfilled servers. Then just give it some time and watch as things get better.
To control the “tag-teaming” of the top 2 servers which are JQ and BG – atm – Limit their online numbers to 50 per server. In this way even if they “tag-team” they will not be able to put up the numbers (together) to dominate the server. Problem solved.
With deleting servers, top or the bottom, you will achieve nothing. It’s maybe work for a month or two, after that the people are going to quit the game very fast cough warhammer cough.
Personally the transfer to T1 has renewed my fun to this game, otherwise I would have had quit it long time ago. I like to have many people around me, when ever I jump in to wvw. Being the sole defender sound honorable, but it’s pretty much useless. GW2 it’s still a mmo(rp)g.
This sounds like it will tear player from a community of players and friends they know, by punishing them for not being in a large WvW guild. What is worse, is that is does this to suit nothing more than your subjective perception of balance.
In a guild based system players can align themselves with other guilds/friends and the system will place them together for each match. That system is actually more friend oriented than the current server based system which locks entire servers out. If a player chooses to remain unaligned, they will be placed in the match that can best use them. It is actually a simple system and vastly superior to the current mess. Even GW1 didn’t have server division like this and PvE has been moving away from it for a while.
All balance in a game is subjective but the current system is clearly lopsided and stagnant. The best guilds/players cannot even fight each other. We don’t even know who the best guilds and players are.
Sarcasm For Hire [SFH]
“Youre lips are movin and youre complaining about something thats wingeing.”
All balance in a game is subjective but the current system is clearly lopsided and stagnant. The best guilds/players cannot even fight each other. We don’t even know who the best guilds and players are.
You say stagnant, yet in NA a few recent shifts occured, after post upon post, and thread upon thread, complaining about staleness. Once some shifts occured, all I saw was post upon post, and thread upon thread crying about uneven mathups.
The problem is, this proposed idea will do nothing to prevent staleness. Strong group that work and win will stick together to continue doing so. Due to that, I do not buy any argument suggesting this will prevent staleness.
You say stagnant, yet in NA a few recent shifts occured, after post upon post, and thread upon thread, complaining about staleness. Once some shifts occured, all I saw was post upon post, and thread upon thread crying about uneven mathups.
This is a perfect example of why a guild alliance system would be better. Currently significant server position changes are usually the result of a server implosion. Those implosions are usually because a major guild leaves to another server to mix up the stale matches. This causes one server in a tier to suddenly become WAY too strong for its rating and another to become WAY too weak. So either players complain that nothing changes or that it changed way too much. Given the way GLICKO works it takes several matches sometimes months of matches for parity to be established. Those that have been around long enough remember the great Kaineng run and fall. In a Guild Alliance system each week players/guilds are re-aligned so players will always have a very good chance of avoiding a lop sided match.
The problem is, this proposed idea will do nothing to prevent staleness. Strong group that work and win will stick together to continue doing so. Due to that, I do not buy any argument suggesting this will prevent staleness.
A player or guilds friends may remain relatively constant but their enemies won’t. Each reset will bring a fresh set of guilds to fight against. This also creates another interesting angle to the game which is the politics of guilds and their alliances. How long can alliance hold it together especially when guilds are fighting for their ranking on a scoreboard?
The other current issue this addresses is the entire timezone problem. Currently a server with a strong off hour presence dooms their NA into a death match. Off hour zergs PvDs all the maps, run up the score and leaves their lessor NA to fight one or two strong NA servers. That is boring for all involved IMO unless a player likes PvD and those players should go to EotM.
Sarcasm For Hire [SFH]
“Youre lips are movin and youre complaining about something thats wingeing.”
).