Guild Wars 2

unless your a competitive server in the top three tiers whats the point of WvWvW? Or please take down rankings and FORCE players from over populated servers to play on the under populated servers.

there is no reason wvw servers have to be tied to pve servers.

other than the fact that it is that way now.

but they would not have to merge pve servers to rework the wvw ones.

fivekiller.1432:

there is no reason wvw servers have to be tied to pve servers.

other than the fact that it is that way now.

but they would not have to merge pve servers to rework the wvw ones.

were do you see anything in my post about PvE? There is no such thing as a PvE server. There are servers that have numbers and there are servers that dont. The servers with no numbers are a product of Anets poor planning and poor server swapping management that they did not try to fix until the gap between the haves and the have nots was to large to fix. But really whats the point in having a ranking system that will never change (unless people become bored with the game and large numbers of people quit playing), and having multiple tiers of dead servers were WvWvW looks like Spvp battles.

Servers need to be reworked period. Lowbie areas are barren.

Most zones have been empty since Flavor of the Month Dungeon was introduced

But on top yes after T# or T4 its like 5 v1 or 10 v6 and thats the entire population of the Map

Top 3 I laugh , tier 3 is a joke , did not try 2, all the real fun is in tier 1 , don’t hold back, join in

They don’t need server merges, If your server is to quiet move. Free transfers are there for a reason.
Also you realize that even the top tiers have gaps. If i don’t want to play on reset i will not see a queue most of the week (this is in tier 2).

you do know the points don’t matter right? what do you get for your server winning a week? nothin. so the low tier servers have the same thing the high tier servers have ppl who play WvW for the thrill of killing somethin not ran by AI and ppl who complain that its broke. Why can’t ppl enjoy the fights and quit whining about the completely useless scores?

WvW is fine in the lower tiers and we don’t have to wait an hour to get in…

no server has an long queue.. i am on deso and we had 2 bl’s empty in tier 2.

its better to tag wvw on the servers so people who only want to wvw can moved there.

Its not, communities from other servers enjoy fighting togheter and don’t want to join a server like desolation.

Piken Square (the unnofficial RP server for EU) actually doesn’t want to go any higher than we currently are. We don’t want the massive Q’s that happen at ‘higher levels’. We’re happy where we are, so no, servers shouldn’t start merging.

There are no massive queues in higher tiers.
As the only English T1 EU server, Blacktide has around 15-20 mins at most, the only time we do get longer queues is around reset afaik (though i’ve enver been in those, i’ve heard they’re usually longer than normal hours)

Those long queues people heard and complained about were from over a month ago.

daneo.9732:

fivekiller.1432:

there is no reason wvw servers have to be tied to pve servers.

other than the fact that it is that way now.

but they would not have to merge pve servers to rework the wvw ones.

were do you see anything in my post about PvE? There is no such thing as a PvE server.

you seem to have grossly misunderstood my post. after re-reading what i said i can see how i wasn’t very clear.

what i was saying was.. there are servers right now, for example – Maguuma..

Maguuma has two facets, the PVE maguuma and the WvW maguuma. There is no reason the people playing PVE in maguuma should be tied to those WvWing in Maguuma other than the fact that Anet set it up that way.

It does not have to be set up that way though.

They could create another server called, for the sake of example.. Daneo’s Crossing..

Daneo’s Crossing could then hold all of the people who PVE on Maguuma, Ferguson’s Crossing, and Stormbluff Isle.

So you see, i was supporting your idea while at the same time pointing out that there is a way to do it that doesn’t necessarily change what server anyone plays on for PVE.

Then all players would have a PVE server.. Maguuma, Blackgate, Yak’s Bend, etc..
and a WvW server.. Daneo’s Crossing and say.. 8 other servers.

Server mergers without effecting the PVE game and there would be no servers sitting at FULL because they happen to have more PVE people on them. They could then increase/decrease servers as the game changes without ever having to mess with the PVE servers they have going on now.

I think they should have just dedicated WvW servers and PvE servers. This way the WvW can remain competetive without being highly populated by PvE folks that do nothing for WvW.

TBH I don’t see why we have to waste our time and money in WvW to gain buffs for the whole server when PvE people do noting for WvW people. Its pretty one sided and total BS.

KensaiZen.3740:

I think they should have just dedicated WvW servers and PvE servers. <snip>

And for the people that enjoy doing both? What would they do?

KensaiZen.3740:

TBH I don’t see why we have to waste our time and money in WvW to gain buffs for the whole server when PvE people do noting for WvW people. Its pretty one sided and total BS.

You dont waste your time and money in WvW to gain buffs for the whole server. You spend your time and money in WvW because that’s what you enjoy doing instead of PvE. Server buffs are a side effect of WvW, nobody does it to get them

We’re in EU tier 8 and are having an incredibly fun even match with all three servers fighting strongly. Tier 9 is a bit more imbalanced but it seems like all the other scores aren’t blowouts so far. In other words, things mostly seem fine even at the bottom two tiers, so I’m not sure what prompted this post?

Just to say it, but I am typically against any action that would “FORCE” a player to do anything in a game that they didn’t want to do other than the standard “perform X action for X reward” template.

daneo.9732:

unless your a competitive server in the top three tiers whats the point of WvWvW?

I agree, WvW is only worth it if you’re near the top because if you win at tier 1 you get awesome rewards.

Wait, there’s no rewards for anyone winning, regardless of tier?

Oh.

Our T5 server had queues after the reset. On top of that, T5 has been the most enjoyable, best WvW I’ve experienced. Sure there’s some negatives with the low overnight population on our server, or the often completely empty opposing borderlands, but nothing that actually seems to need any change.

All they have to do is increase the Server Transfer to 30 days AND then sister servers w/ low WvW populations to T2 / T3 servers….for WvW maps only.

Simple, really. If you’re in a lower tier for WvW, when you zone into WvW you zone into your sister’s WvW map.

No! I like that there is almost never a queue for my server’s WvW. If your server is lacking in people, you need to compensate with tactics. I come from a relatively low population server, Furgeson’s Crossing, and I like it.

I think what really counts when it comes to merging servers is figuring the overall standard deviations for the server loads over time (regardless of PvE, sPvP, or WvW activity). This should be most telling regarding what servers are actually low enough in population that it interferes often enough with the social environments and dynamics necessary for successful group-event, dungeon, sPvP and WvW activities. Unless they begin selling items and boosts in Black Lion Trading that would somehow mitigate this “interference” (Instant Group in a Bottle!).

Suddenly, those silly Guild Wars NPC “pugs” are coming back to memory…

Tulisin.6945:

daneo.9732:

unless your a competitive server in the top three tiers whats the point of WvWvW?

I agree, WvW is only worth it if you’re near the top because if you win at tier 1 you get awesome rewards.

Wait, there’s no rewards for anyone winning, regardless of tier?

Oh.

lold.

Two statements in this thread I agree with:
WvW for fun, not for PvE benefits (who really gives a cat about those anyway?)
Increasing server-transfers to 30 days seems like a good idea to me.

No Q in tier2, at least in Baruch Bay.

Regards,

Haltair

They need to not only merge servers, but have two maps instead of four. Combine the three Borderlands maps into one single large map, so that you have it, and Eternal Battlegrounds.

Four maps allows for population issues to spiral out of control.

I don’t know if server merges are the answer. They need to attract more players into WvW and away from fractals, cursed shore and pointless legendary farming. WvW populations are laughable right now and a lot of it is because Anet hasn’t done anything with it.

daneo.9732:

unless your a competitive server in the top three tiers whats the point of WvWvW? Or please take down rankings and FORCE players from over populated servers to play on the under populated servers.

I would rather see better incentives for WvW as even if you server merge, people aren’t going to do WvW 24/7 unless there they can get something more tangible out of it.

Once you get your 500 badges, the only reason to WvW is for fun.

On weekends the servers are pretty crowded, merging would cause flooding.

I dont think server merges are necessary but an idea might be to get rid of server caps and just put on login caps with queues for the server. Don’t forget about all the people who quit the game and moved on to other things. Are these type of accounts contributing to maxing out the server capacity?

PS: I agree with Nut. PvE has been getting alot of more attention in terms of new content. WvW lost content (orbs). I hope that Anet comes out with something that will spice up the interest in WvW. Maybe a player ranking system/possible ways to get legendary/ascended items (could be different) from WvW could help.

middle tier servers are best.
no wvw queue times
ample pve players

not packed full of bad bandwagoners clinging to the zerg for dear life. Top servers are flavor of the week, kids get bored and jump cliff in lemming proportions.

Anet kinda lost the ball on server set ups.
There shouldn’t have been NA/EU servers, but they should have dedicated specific ones WvW oriented servers instead.

Most servers are full/High pop, even down in the low tiers anymore. Though the wvw community wants WvW competitively, and they aren’t really getting it.

No need to do all that. Just add more rewards for wvw and watch as people flock to it.

Komolov.5903:

No need to do all that. Just add more rewards for wvw and watch as people flock to it.

I agree on that.You can see that fact from WvW queues.If you are losing your tier , your server often has shorter queues while you win it’s always full.

They need to figure out culling first and add ascended gear. After that, it’s no secret WvW is horribly flawed with population (participation) balance issues—it’s a daily issue in tier 2. Perhaps pair up EU and US servers for WvW only to help with around the clock coverage issues.

Edit: and for people who think there are queues, without insult I think you are out of touch. WvW participation is in steep decline. Queues still exist Friday nights for a bit, and perhaps in EB here and there during peak hours.

Furey.6734:

I dont think server merges are necessary but an idea might be to get rid of server caps and just put on login caps with queues for the server. Don’t forget about all the people who quit the game and moved on to other things. Are these type of accounts contributing to maxing out the server capacity?

PS: I agree with Nut. PvE has been getting alot of more attention in terms of new content. WvW lost content (orbs). I hope that Anet comes out with something that will spice up the interest in WvW. Maybe a player ranking system/possible ways to get legendary/ascended items (could be different) from WvW could help.

According to a dev post a while back, server populations are calculated against “current online” not “total accounts.” At least that’s how it works for server transfers.

Syeria.4812:

According to a dev post a while back, server populations are calculated against “current online” not “total accounts.” At least that’s how it works for server transfers.

According to this post https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Server-Populations/first populations are calculated on accounts, not who is logged in, where is this dev post you speak of?

Sylosi.6503:

Syeria.4812:

According to a dev post a while back, server populations are calculated against “current online” not “total accounts.” At least that’s how it works for server transfers.

According to this post https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Server-Populations/first populations are calculated on accounts, not who is logged in, where is this dev post you speak of?

That post actually says “independently of where they created their accounts” but doesn’t actually make a comment about whether the cap is established by active or total accounts. I’ll try find the post. I’m fairly sure it was by a dev and not a community coordinator.

Edit to add: Apparently I’m not the only one who remembers this dev post. Link I’m having trouble finding posts older than a couple days right now, so I’m not sure if I’ll be able to find it. Hopefully a dev will see that thread and set down the facts.

Syeria.4812:

That post actually says “independently of where they created their accounts” but doesn’t actually make a comment about whether the cap is established by active or total accounts. I’ll try find the post. I’m fairly sure it was by a dev and not a community coordinator.

Edit to add: Apparently I’m not the only one who remembers this dev post. Link I’m having trouble finding posts older than a couple days right now, so I’m not sure if I’ll be able to find it. Hopefully a dev will see that thread and set down the facts.

It still seems to be saying it is down to the number of accounts on the server to me, nor does the alternative seem to tally with what happens at 3 AM, when I used to play, Desolation EU was still “full” at 3 AM, despite having a tiny fraction of the number of people on there that were on at primetime.

Nor does it seem very logical, if it was based on how many were currently logged on, then (to take an extreme example just to show th epoint) if everyone logged off for a couple of hours and a zillion people then transfered to that server, you have just doubled the population, there is no way to control the population with that system.

But yes it would be good if they clarified it again this is not the only thread it has come up in.

Don’t know about the merges but I think some kind of limits for WvWvW are needed.

First of all, changing server to another just because your server didn’t do well enough is lame. And that’s what destroyed Far Shiverpeaks. We were in Tier 1 until we got once outnumbered and then people started moving to the best server. And why we got outnumbered? Because of nightcappin.

So, at some point the real action will only be in Tier 1 and 2 beacause of… “Winning team joiners”. Don’t you think that’s lame?

Sylosi.6503:

Syeria.4812:

That post actually says “independently of where they created their accounts” but doesn’t actually make a comment about whether the cap is established by active or total accounts. I’ll try find the post. I’m fairly sure it was by a dev and not a community coordinator.

Edit to add: Apparently I’m not the only one who remembers this dev post. Link I’m having trouble finding posts older than a couple days right now, so I’m not sure if I’ll be able to find it. Hopefully a dev will see that thread and set down the facts.

It still seems to be saying it is down to the number of accounts on the server to me, nor does the alternative seem to tally with what happens at 3 AM, when I used to play, Desolation EU was still “full” at 3 AM, despite having a tiny fraction of the number of people on there that were on at primetime.

Nor does it seem very logical, if it was based on how many were currently logged on, then (to take an extreme example just to show th epoint) if everyone logged off for a couple of hours and a zillion people then transfered to that server, you have just doubled the population, there is no way to control the population with that system.

But yes it would be good if they clarified it again this is not the only thread it has come up in.

To make things even less clear, in this thread another CC “confirms” Eva’s statement, seemingly in contrast to a poster who believes it’s based on total accounts, active or not. We definitely need a single person of authority to set down the exact method of determining “full.” If I had to guess, I’d think it was based on some sort of short term average active population. The game has the overflow setup to handle sudden activity spikes, so it would make sense to balance based on who’s actually playing instead of who theoretically could be playing.

I agree with the OP. In fact is it way beyond time for server merges., we’re having a hell of a time in the lower tiers. Challenging is fun, but this is kittening ridiculous you kitten.