Guild Wars 2

Maybe as a community we can have understandings to keep the fights fun until anet comes up with tech in game solutions as well.

So I propose…

when in a match where 1 server is obviously larger than the 2 opponents combined –
the smaller servers become an alliance and the fight becomes 1v1

when in a match, where 2 servers obviously outsize 1 small server, the smaller server can choose to have an alliance with their server of choice OR the smaller of the 2 larger servers ( when obvious) – and the fight becomes 1v1

the score then becomes understood as the 2 allied servers totaled vs the larger server.

You should visit the WvW matchup forums, the inter-server community is not nearly as friendly as you might think ^^

ya, but lets consider that to real life, it’s not always a perfect agreement / peace treaty.
But at least if we can make an effort to not zerg / blob allies ….the smaller servers have a better chance at fending off rogue groups that don’t want an alliance. There’s always going to be “That” guy that puts fun boxes on chests, but the raw military force should be more reasonable.

I suppose we can say these are rules that honorable commanders follow. and yes, there will always be the dictator, but that will give us something to gossip about when someone insists on being a kitten in the game.

if nothing else it will give an RPG story to the chaotic mess that wvw is right now.

also like in real life, i think we can all agree that we want wvw to be fun again. being our different perspectives of wvw ….we can find a common objective. – no different than world governments agreeing to what defines war crimes. We don’t need Urth turning into one big wvw chaotic mess. ( which corporations are doing anyways….t1 being the rothchilds, exxon and opec lol )

While it is a nice idea, I think it doesn’t happen for the same reason people bandwagon onto a server. People want to log on and have the easy win and not have to put in a lot of effort for a victory.

In this case, it is picking on the weakest server not teaming up against the strongest server.

yeah, but as a community, we can impose penalties – ie – all other servers agree to a war crimes act, – the offensive server will be teamed up on no matter what their odds as a result of their misconduct – so an otherwise fair balanced match – wouldn’t be fair to them. and obviously they’d lose their rights to complain about it for being dictators / war mongrels – we’d also make dissension operations to get their servers to abandon offending commanders and not follow them around.

again, it probably has more value as roleplay – than actually balancing the game….but even as roleplay – being ganged up in game after game can be a real penalty

i don’t think even the most populated server could withstand a constant team up against them.

Or we could just AJ eachother? I’m cool with it. ( No kitten Intended)

Ricky.4706:

when in a match where 1 server is obviously larger than the 2 opponents combined –
the smaller servers become an alliance and the fight becomes 1v1

is this an upper tier mentality rules of engagement?
and its not new either…..

here to save you the trouble as RlyOsim said
http://www.gw2wvw.net/forum

PS: I sometimes forget that im on the official gw2 forum and post like im on that site thats why my posts here always gets deleted lol
say hi to the trolls there for me

well then, maybe it’s something servers in our tiers might be interested in doing – by simple default – we make being a bloated server a war crime. simple. it’s not like there has to be only 1 world alliance.

Ricky.4706:

Maybe as a community we can have understandings to keep the fights fun until anet comes up with tech in game solutions as well.

So I propose…

when in a match where 1 server is obviously larger than the 2 opponents combined –
the smaller servers become an alliance and the fight becomes 1v1

when in a match, where 2 servers obviously outsize 1 small server, the smaller server can choose to have an alliance with their server of choice OR the smaller of the 2 larger servers ( when obvious) – and the fight becomes 1v1

the score then becomes understood as the 2 allied servers totaled vs the larger server.

You’re the red color I kill you, end of story.

what tier / server are you ?

Just doesn’t happen. The average player doesn’t think this way. Then there’s the veteran players who purposely exploit it, still living in 2013. And since the game allows it, the easier player choice is going to happen.

all it takes is a few to start a wvw Nato alliance lol

again, if for nothing else, for the rpg value and laughs.

something to do till someone figures out what to do in wvw (or ignore ) that we will all really dislike and complain about!

we declare war on the top 3 servers! it doesn’t even have to be complicated.

Think of it this way, we would be expanding their pvp experience.

or even better a challenge, can you guys work together enough to knock them out of t1 – that’s unless you are already accustomed to living under them

can this meaningless “Leader Board” turn into a ladder of political power ?

or is the majority that much into pew pew, shinies and all things pve ?

Anet, can we have an alliance option till you guys figure out how to address the balance ?

this might be the quickest way to respond to blobs, and settle some old scores.

New Rule, top 5 servers enter a mode of 1v1

to hold your top 5 rank, you have to fight vs 2 allied servers.

bottom 5 servers get the same in protection from servers above them.

The only thing we really need, is to build up the spirit of fighting against the "top-dog" in any match-up, instead of going for sucking points form the "under-dog".

Then this would happen naturally.

Many guilds and people get this, you gain points from beating the "green" (typically) server since it is strongest. You don’t gain much points from beating up on the red one. Many goes after "green" for the challenge etc. If more people thought like this, things would solve itself.

Unfortunately, a lot of people doesn’t think like this. Thus we’re stuck with green + blue karma training red, and other such "solutions".

You should go propose this idea on the GW2WvW.net forums. Be prepared to use small words and visual aids though, because the collective IQ on that site lingers in single digits.

RodOfDeath.5247:

Ricky.4706:

Maybe as a community we can have understandings to keep the fights fun until anet comes up with tech in game solutions as well.

So I propose…

when in a match where 1 server is obviously larger than the 2 opponents combined –
the smaller servers become an alliance and the fight becomes 1v1

when in a match, where 2 servers obviously outsize 1 small server, the smaller server can choose to have an alliance with their server of choice OR the smaller of the 2 larger servers ( when obvious) – and the fight becomes 1v1

the score then becomes understood as the 2 allied servers totaled vs the larger server.

You’re the red color I kill you, end of story.

What are you 12?

sparc.3649:

RodOfDeath.5247:

Ricky.4706:

Maybe as a community we can have understandings to keep the fights fun until anet comes up with tech in game solutions as well.

So I propose…

when in a match where 1 server is obviously larger than the 2 opponents combined –
the smaller servers become an alliance and the fight becomes 1v1

when in a match, where 2 servers obviously outsize 1 small server, the smaller server can choose to have an alliance with their server of choice OR the smaller of the 2 larger servers ( when obvious) – and the fight becomes 1v1

the score then becomes understood as the 2 allied servers totaled vs the larger server.

You’re the red color I kill you, end of story.

What are you 12?

He’s highlighting the fact that such agreements are extremely difficult to make. WvW is a sandbox environment and people play how they want, including players who don’t read this forum. Unless the game is designed for it, it will not happen. That isn’t to say that players can’t try, just to say “don’t get your hopes up”.

Chaba.5410:

sparc.3649:

RodOfDeath.5247:

Ricky.4706:

Maybe as a community we can have understandings to keep the fights fun until anet comes up with tech in game solutions as well.

So I propose…

when in a match where 1 server is obviously larger than the 2 opponents combined –
the smaller servers become an alliance and the fight becomes 1v1

when in a match, where 2 servers obviously outsize 1 small server, the smaller server can choose to have an alliance with their server of choice OR the smaller of the 2 larger servers ( when obvious) – and the fight becomes 1v1

the score then becomes understood as the 2 allied servers totaled vs the larger server.

You’re the red color I kill you, end of story.

What are you 12?

He’s highlighting the fact that such agreements are extremely difficult to make. WvW is a sandbox environment and people play how they want, including players who don’t read this forum. Unless the game is designed for it, it will not happen. That isn’t to say that players can’t try, just to say “don’t get your hopes up”.

I was just asking if he/she was 12. I know everyone enjoys the game for different reasons and in different ways. Even the same “game mode” (such as WVW) can be enjoyed in different ways by different people, but the whole “OMG you’re red name I HAVE to kill you” just seems so, twelve years of age mentality.

Despite varying “playstyles” I’ve had plenty of “dance parties” with “red names”. And that, is my point. Seems so immature to me to be like “ZOMG you’re red, you MUST die” when – we all play the same game. Like you couldn’t even be friends with someone if they’re on a different server (immature)? I have a few (even “RL friends”) that play on different servers. Sure if matched against them it’s not a “oh I wont kill you cuz you’re my friend”, but still – it sure seems WvW brings out A] the kids! B] the immaturity of people!

Again, we all play the same game – enjoy it a lil!

“lighten up francis”!!! Is something I would definitely say if they feel the need to ALWAYS kill ANYONE that’s a “red name”! You haven’t lived until you’ve had a dual zerg dance party at OW tower in EB >.>

And I didn’t even mean it insultingly, it was a serious inquiry because I have to wonder if A] they’re serious and B] why they feel the need to take a GAME so seriously LOL!

and that’s what I see as the culture clash going on in wvw

Different goals, I’m with sparc in just having fun with friends, no different than a poker night

but the pew pew crowd is very dodgeball to the face.

completely different mindsets. there are several servers we fight that are fun to fight win or lose.

my suggestions are more to liven up the ladder some. It’s unbalanced already, why not have fun with it.

sparc.3649:

Chaba.5410:

sparc.3649:

RodOfDeath.5247:

Ricky.4706:

Maybe as a community we can have understandings to keep the fights fun until anet comes up with tech in game solutions as well.

So I propose…

when in a match where 1 server is obviously larger than the 2 opponents combined –
the smaller servers become an alliance and the fight becomes 1v1

when in a match, where 2 servers obviously outsize 1 small server, the smaller server can choose to have an alliance with their server of choice OR the smaller of the 2 larger servers ( when obvious) – and the fight becomes 1v1

the score then becomes understood as the 2 allied servers totaled vs the larger server.

You’re the red color I kill you, end of story.

What are you 12?

He’s highlighting the fact that such agreements are extremely difficult to make. WvW is a sandbox environment and people play how they want, including players who don’t read this forum. Unless the game is designed for it, it will not happen. That isn’t to say that players can’t try, just to say “don’t get your hopes up”.

I was just asking if he/she was 12. I know everyone enjoys the game for different reasons and in different ways. Even the same “game mode” (such as WVW) can be enjoyed in different ways by different people, but the whole “OMG you’re red name I HAVE to kill you” just seems so, twelve years of age mentality.

Despite varying “playstyles” I’ve had plenty of “dance parties” with “red names”. And that, is my point. Seems so immature to me to be like “ZOMG you’re red, you MUST die” when – we all play the same game. Like you couldn’t even be friends with someone if they’re on a different server (immature)? I have a few (even “RL friends”) that play on different servers. Sure if matched against them it’s not a “oh I wont kill you cuz you’re my friend”, but still – it sure seems WvW brings out A] the kids! B] the immaturity of people!

Again, we all play the same game – enjoy it a lil!

“lighten up francis”!!! Is something I would definitely say if they feel the need to ALWAYS kill ANYONE that’s a “red name”! You haven’t lived until you’ve had a dual zerg dance party at OW tower in EB >.>

And I didn’t even mean it insultingly, it was a serious inquiry because I have to wonder if A] they’re serious and B] why they feel the need to take a GAME so seriously LOL!

You sure felt the need to explain yourself, so serious lol

being that i feel the same, imagine trying to play poker and some kid jumps up and just throws a 90mph dodgeball hitting you right between the eyes. then starts jumping up and down screaming “I Win, I Win… LoOoOoOOOSeR!” i mean….what those servers need is to be 2 v 1nd, and I thought about it, it might not be a great idea to ask them if they are up to it.

Ricky.4706:

what tier / server are you ?

Black Gate atm, my former was Gate of Madness
now farming gold to return to GoM
transfered here out of curiosity, too lazy make an alt account

ahh sweet, one of the servers we are conspiring against! Cheers!

which one?
my latter or former….
so my assumption is correct, if it is the latter then it is indeed an upper tier mentality rules of engamement
if its the former, no one can ever beat them on an open field
ive been on different tiers, i know whats on their head bruh

well there you go, poker 0 – dodgeball 1

i’m starting to think balance isn’t the problem – cough cough-

then may i reintroduce to you the https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Your-top-5-priorities-for-WvW-Overhaul/page/13#post6050692

on what you think the problem is.

or we can meet in http://www.gw2wvw.net/forum so that we can discuss the rules of engagement

Ricky.4706:

Maybe as a community we can have understandings to keep the fights fun until anet comes up with tech in game solutions as well.

So I propose…

when in a match where 1 server is obviously larger than the 2 opponents combined –
the smaller servers become an alliance and the fight becomes 1v1

when in a match, where 2 servers obviously outsize 1 small server, the smaller server can choose to have an alliance with their server of choice OR the smaller of the 2 larger servers ( when obvious) – and the fight becomes 1v1

the score then becomes understood as the 2 allied servers totaled vs the larger server.

You still have 3 corners on EB and 3 BLs – it doesn’t really matter wther or not the smaller servers team up, they still have to defend “their” stuff.

but not from each other – they can both focus more on the east and west of a server alliance. – politics. it will give top 5 slots of the ladder more value and meaning – you need to be 2v1 to hold it. for the most part the top 5 category has enough of a wvw attendance to sustain it or at least climb back up if they cant.

politics might liven things up a bit while anet comes up with a better solution for balance. u know, like the ladder can suddenly become rigged by the mob or illuminati or some other secret server society thing lol

I rarely really encounter everybody pushing the smallest server. This matchup it is, I think, but tbh I’ve only seen the third server once this week and that was today.
Even if the two smaller servers then wouldn’t fight each other, they still have the same amount of objectives to care for = twice as many when combined and also twice as many as the biggest server.
Another problem: We’re a weirdo server and mostly run with a public and one or other guilds on EB (always have) – if we try to combine forces it always fails because of the two tags – the same would happen in your suggestion = It would never ever work.
You could make the smallest servers have new maps and being 1 vs 1 or only have EB for them, probably would make more sense.

But: Like I tried to tell you over hours in a different thread: If the score is adjusted to how many people are fighting at the same time and if there is something like “zerg balance”, then the populations of the servers will even out over time.

ETA: To make it more clear: The problems you guys on NA have got is because you want to achieve a 24/7 population. It is fuelled by how PPT currently works and by the patches which favoured the bigger groups – there’s literally no point to be on a lower tier server on NA.

i’m not sure about that, u have to consider some of these servers are low population to begin with, and probably most of that population is pve – so the few that want to dabble are a minority in their server. – in reality even matching up 2 lowest tier servers in an alliance may not balance them out in some of these matches. but at least they’d have more company without the drastic measure of a mega-server

so i’m rather convinced on that point, the fights will never really be balanced – at least not for only 1 set of rules where most coverage wins. so for now at least, I’m thinking of ways to keep it fun…less focus on the actual score, more humor in watching servers bounce up and down the ladder lol

Yes, so you have a low populated server.
These guys have a chance to beat “bigger” servers because the PPT is adjusted to how many people are online and because the fight mechanics (CC, condis, siege, banners etc etc) don’t favour the bigger group.
New players come to wvw, learn that with a bit more effort they can achieve something – they might stick. People who are sick of their server and/or queues on bigger servers consider to transfer down, because coverage/population doesn’t really matter.

Get my point now?

ETA: In your example all 3 servers would nearly be equally strong if PPT was adjusted and if the skills were adjusted. The 2 smaller servers still had a pretty hard time against the bigger server but if they’re more skilled they could still win.

but you are talking about adjusting the score …..the score and the way it’s calculated is useless and meaningless – if one server has around the clock coverage vs another server that has good coverage during day times …..that renders ppt completely moot.

This thread is about making wvw fun – not about making it ‘fair’ because it will never be completely fair as long as the numbers are constantly imbalanced – it will be fair from 9am to 10 pm then go out of whack from the server that recruited the most from a different time zone.

I’m completely 150% against the current scoring system, they need to focus on individual contribution.

ppt is worth it’s pronunciation!! lol :pppt

PPT isn’t useless.
It is reponsible for what matchups you face, it is partly the reason why anyone defends anything.
PPT is what got NA in this mess and what led to huge differences in population = it’s the core of the problem you want to solve.

ppt will do nothing for bringing serious pvprs to the game – recognition of individual contribution , and a fun game will.

so while you are talking about fixing a broken system, I’m talking about fixing a broken community.

Watching the two of you trying to talk to each others reminds me of back when I was a kid, and talked with a friend of mine for 30 minutes, before we realized we where talking about two completely different things.

I should find an image of a dog chasing its own tail and link

heheh yeah, and it actually helps underline my point of a clash of cultures…

I really can’t see one solid solution to balancing wvw for everyone to enjoy the way they like playing, i see wvw as a pvp sandbox, and see how many players have found fun ways of uniquely pvp’ng in it.

Nothing wrong at all for what Jana is suggesting, but it’s just a different game mode.

what i’m trying to say is as a community, we can have fun by bending the rulez a bit, and making the ladder jump!

thus wvw is not yahtzee to me with a fixed set of rules, it’s a deck of cards. 5 card stud, jokers wild for the next match. – a roamer may want to play solitaire…and so on…

can we change how wvw functions as a community, simply by the way we perceive it.

I kinda want to start a wvw illuminati myself -shrug-

dunno, can I convince maguuma to be an ally server, and next time we fight a top 5 server together, we aim for a 500 gold ransom to not gang up on the t1 peeps. – 250gold split for each server if the t1 server pays. otherwise we’ll knock them off the top 5. surely if score is so important to them, it has a monetary value.

darkhaven is full of mercs, we don’t give a rats kitten, we are all about profit. keep the fame and the score.

Don’t know, from my point of view I tried to explain to Ricky why all of his ideas wouldn’t work at all and why wvw has got the problems in the first place – but he thinks I’m talking about something completely different, so he doesn’t listen – but alas, that’s my perception.