Linking/transfer system annihilating servers
If you lost 8 guilds with the unlink, it just means that your server never had these guilds in the first place. And if more people left in the process, well, we can’t create a glicko-supported system that accounts for server drama.
To make it better, server linkings need to be quicker. One month would be better, rather the two month period we have right now. The system will never be quick enough to consider mass bandwagons and implosions instantly because the numbers behind it are much more complex than “8 guilds in/out”, but reducing to a one month period would fix it a bit.
Agreed Pumpkin. As it stands right now, guilds will leave if things turn badly due to not having a server link or a bad link in general since they’re not having fun, and 2 months is a long time to wait. But if it becomes a monthly thing, they will stay since they know they only have to survive the month and things will change again.
For example, one of the guilds on my server is considering leaving due to WvW not being that fun right now. This is the 3rd week of links. If it was monthly, they’d cope for this week and next week, and then be back in the game. But as it stands right now, they will probably leave because they do not want to wait another month before we’re back on the ball.
PvE Main – Zar Poisonclaw – Daredevil
WvW Main – Ghost Mistcaller – Herald
The linking system is so broken it literally traverse space and time as the main fault for servers failing, since servers bouncing up and down the last 4 years has been standard practice.
If it was monthly, they’d cope for this week and next week, and then be back in the game.
Pretty much. One month is a reasonable timeframe for people to just hang on and see what happens in the next server linkings.
The linking system is so broken it literally traverse space and time as the main fault for servers failing, since servers bouncing up and down the last 4 years has been standard practice.
I can’t say about EU, but this is exactly the opposite in NA. NA never had this much matchup variance as before. Servers going up and down tiers, ex-link server becoming hosts, ex-link servers becoming enemy servers in the next link and so go on. Before the links, what happened in NA was that most of the tiers were locked by glicko walls and population size differences, while the bottom tiers were just dead. Server linkings are a good thing. They create more matchup changes and actually promote more balanced servers when the links are made. The problem is that a lot of things can happen in two months, and what was balanced at the start of the link can not be balanced anymore as time goes on. So a decrease of the time in between new links to make the system catch up faster to the players activity would be much better.
Pumpkin.5169, the 8 guilds out happened in the 3 weeks after unlinking, they were our servers guilds
(edited by Jacion.6302)
I can’t say about EU, but this is exactly the opposite in NA. NA never had this much matchup variance as before.
Well then welcome to the nightmare of being just like the rest of the world.
Your server must be DragonBrand. That server was going to lose a mass of guilds even if the link didn’t happen. This is simply due to the state of that server and the guilds that wanted to go. Not to mention weeks/months before the unlinking of DB, some of those very same guilds were in the process of talking to other servers about transferring.
Linking may have been what helped sustain DB for a period of time and while it did hurt DB population wise, theirs a lot more that went into why DB lost all those guilds other than linking. I wouldn’t blame how DB rose and fell just on that.
Malevolent Omen -Guardian
Mad King Mal -Rev
World Linking was a Pandora’s Genie Crack Bottle.
ANet asked the typical WvW player if they wanted to try it just once…a majority voted & agreed…let me try it just once.
Now try asking anybody who’s addicted to Zerg Fest Heaven if they want to come down off their WvW Server Linked High…
ANet had a fiduciary duty…and threw it away…imho
All we can do is wait & hope…
I’d seriously advise ANet to use their next XPack to replace World Linking with a different game mode that can support & encourage competitive Match-Ups.
(edited by Diku.2546)
Your server must be DragonBrand. That server was going to lose a mass of guilds even if the link didn’t happen. This is simply due to the state of that server and the guilds that wanted to go. Not to mention weeks/months before the unlinking of DB, some of those very same guilds were in the process of talking to other servers about transferring.
Linking may have been what helped sustain DB for a period of time and while it did hurt DB population wise, theirs a lot more that went into why DB lost all those guilds other than linking. I wouldn’t blame how DB rose and fell just on that.
But wait, rotations was supposed to revive WvW. Meanwhile, all it’s doing is harming those with server pride and those that cared about their community.
GJ on reducing our WvW population further.
NA never had this much matchup variance as before. Servers going up and down tiers, ex-link server becoming hosts, ex-link servers becoming enemy servers in the next link and so go on. Before the links, what happened in NA was that most of the tiers were locked by glicko walls and population size differences, while the bottom tiers were just dead. Server linkings are a good thing. They create more matchup changes and actually promote more balanced servers when the links are made. The problem is that a lot of things can happen in two months, and what was balanced at the start of the link can not be balanced anymore as time goes on. So a decrease of the time in between new links to make the system catch up faster to the players activity would be much better.
Anet had to manually manipulate Yak’s Bend’s glicko to get these different matchups. Had they not done that, T3 would’ve been YB vs. SoS vs. SBI for most of the linking.
DB is currently bleeding so many points that it would be very difficult for a T4 server to move up at the moment. There’s a new glicko wall developed between T2 and T3 (not that any T3 has any business being in T2 and no T2 wants to be in T3).
http://mos.millenium.org/na/matchups
So chances are good for the next couple of weeks the T3 and T4 matchups will stay the same.
Holy crap… DB estimated to bleed a -100 …. I’ve never seen that … ever. Seen it in the twenties and thought that was around the most movement you get in a single match. But a hundred? that’s crazy … Kinda feel for those who are literally all trying to be captain of the ship… this is faster glicko bleed than SoR’s collapse from t1
Holy crap… DB estimated to bleed a -100 …. I’ve never seen that … ever. Seen it in the twenties and thought that was around the most movement you get in a single match. But a hundred? that’s crazy … Kinda feel for those who are literally all trying to be captain of the ship… this is faster glicko bleed than SoR’s collapse from t1
“hemorrhaging”
Holy crap… DB estimated to bleed a -100 …. I’ve never seen that … ever. Seen it in the twenties and thought that was around the most movement you get in a single match. But a hundred? that’s crazy … Kinda feel for those who are literally all trying to be captain of the ship… this is faster glicko bleed than SoR’s collapse from t1
YB bled glicko in the 50’s, iirc, when it dropped in a massive glicko induced fall, and it hadn’t lost nearly the number of guilds DB has. Under the current glicko math, once you don’t perform as expected, it seems to overcompensate. So you get a server dropping fast, then, if glicko was wrong, bouncing back up, disrupting tiers and unbalancing matches along the way.
Your server must be DragonBrand. That server was going to lose a mass of guilds even if the link didn’t happen. This is simply due to the state of that server and the guilds that wanted to go. Not to mention weeks/months before the unlinking of DB, some of those very same guilds were in the process of talking to other servers about transferring.
Linking may have been what helped sustain DB for a period of time and while it did hurt DB population wise, theirs a lot more that went into why DB lost all those guilds other than linking. I wouldn’t blame how DB rose and fell just on that.
But wait, rotations was supposed to revive WvW. Meanwhile, all it’s doing is harming those with server pride and those that cared about their community.
GJ on reducing our WvW population further.
What…. What does DB being annihilated have to do with a rotation. Why are you saying GJ to me?
Malevolent Omen -Guardian
Mad King Mal -Rev
All is not lost. YB dropped to t3, rolled some t4 matches, and with a link fortunes have changed. It is just a long 8 weeks for the relink….
Bandwagons shoot up the list on formation, and down the list when the bandwagon breaks.
Nothing ‘broken’ about that.
You had 8 guilds to lose? Welcome to wood league! System is not broken. It just broke your dreams that you were actually skilled on your server.
Desert Spectre [VII]-Crystal Desert
“You’re never out of the fight.”
Sorry but as someone who was on DB, guilds left because its not a fun place for guilds to play. DB pugs are incredibly bad at fighting, there is siege everywhere so other servers respond with siege, there is absolutely no one to recruit, and there is an awful lot of whining in map chat when a guild wants to do their own thing and not worry so much about ppt every now and then. Server linking wasn’t what destroyed DB.
Come join SoS, we’ll make a run for T1.
You had 8 guilds to lose? Welcome to wood league! System is not broken. It just broke your dreams that you were actually skilled on your server.
Troll much? Crystal Desert
I do not want to go back up the rankings, I enjoy facing the 5-6 teams who do not sit on a hill above you and wait for 5-15 more before engaging solo roamers.
Hopefully the teams most skilled at leeching all fun from the game will face one another and those still enjoying GW2 will face one another.
Good luck
Tier fanboyz, lel
Gate of Madness