New Worlds

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Caius.8094

Caius.8094

Please see my thread: Dynamic changes for WvW to survive.

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Sarrs.4831

Sarrs.4831

Quickly reviewing…

I think some opportunity costs would involve:

  1. Strong server identities with existing servers will be watered down
  2. Easier coordination with TeamSpeak will be reduced
  3. Server Choice Overload – Too many things to pick from the menu is confusing

Reducing the popcap might have ripple effects that I can’t think of atm.

Free transfers will only increase the effects of stacking if not done correctly, or it might not have any impact…if players don’t use it the way ANet wants them to.

Those aren’t opportunity costs. Those are design flaws.

Opportunity cost is “how much developer time will it take”, as developers might otherwise be working on something else. Also monetary opportunity cost from providing free server transfers.

If it takes 5 minutes for someone to spin up 3 new link servers, another 5 minutes to get someone to put “if (serverpop=medium){this.transferPrice=0;}” into code, and another 5 minutes to drop the pop cap to 80% of what it currently is, then there’s not really a reason not to do it from an opportunity cost standpoint. 15 minutes of work for their experiment, ezpz.

Of those actual complaints the only one I think has much merit is the first one but I don’t even know if that’s a real one. Blackgate will still be Blackgate, Tarnished Coast will still be Tarnished Coast, everyone will still be everyone as things only start happening when players start transferring out- and a lot of identity is carried in guilds rather than the server. TS is not an issue with API keys available for bot automation & WvW-wide teamchat. Server choice overload is as funny as saying there are only 9 deck slots in Hearthstone so people don’t get confused, though I don’t really mind the idea of protections for new players who picked a random server and then need to transfer to WvW with friends.

Nalhadia – Kaineng

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: sansintierra.2685

sansintierra.2685

1. How do you feel about this proposal?
2. What, if anything, would you change about this current proposal?
3. Would you be interested in transferring to a new free world?

I feel there’s something you’re completely missing in the problem with the current state of wvw, and is the fact that population and coverage have a HUGE impact in the outcome of skirmishes. Defense is absolutely impossible against a blob, no matter what siege, no matter how fortified the target is. If the enemy army is 2-3 times yours, there’s nothing you can do other than capping back after the ktrain has moved on, and thus it makes server coverage matter more than anything else.

It doesn’t matter if you have “balanced” populations. That percentage is not constant at all times, so a player logging on a mostly OCX server at SEA time is going to have a very bad experience of wvw, since all he can do is roam, small havoc, recap stuff and -luckily- do dailies.

I’d transfer to a new world, if i felt that would change the state of things; i don’t think it will, so i think it’s a wrong approach you’re taking. Or, at least you should be addressing some other problems first (don’t get me started with lag).

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Swagger.1459

Swagger.1459

Think y’all missed this…

Thanks for the feedback everyone! It still seems like there is a general lack of interest in the idea, so we’ll pass on it again.

New Main- 80 Thief – P/P- Vault Spam Pro

221 hours over 1,581 days of bank space/hot pve/lion’s arch afk and some wvw.

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Diku.2546

Diku.2546

Thanks for the feedback everyone! It still seems like there is a general lack of interest in the idea, so we’ll pass on it again.

Thanks for the update.

It’s true there’s a general lack of interest in the posted idea concerning New Worlds, but there seems to be an incredible amount of interest in other alternative solutions instead.

Hope some of these alternative long term solutions make it into your developer discussions.


For a Better Long Term Solution to WvW – Try a Google Search for – wvg world vs globes

(edited by Diku.2546)

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Byron.1902

Byron.1902

This is a really bad idea for a few reasons:

1) This is, in effect, exactly what you did before. Small ‘Linked’ servers are already those empty servers anyone can transfer too. Except they are now playing ‘Kingmaker’ every month or so.

Fighting guilds leave for these ‘Linked’ servers so their match-ups freshen up every so often. Leaving established servers subject to heavy ranking swings as they carry the ‘PUG’ populations.

2) You’re totally looking at the wrong metrics (as usual…sry but it’s accurate). You need to look (and understand) the population drop-off of plummeting servers. What is actually happening and why.

3) You have always failed to properly grasp that you have more than one type of player within the WvW gamemode and you always fail to cater to any as a result.


Suggestions:

1) As many have mentioned, your current population metrics are false. Its time you either re-iterate on EotM or disable it completely.

I’d suggest having 2 versions running – one for under lvl 80 players so you don’t erode that established leveling path – except boost every players stats to template (per class) thresholds. This way it doesn’t run as a frustrating player farm where achievement hunters bully out new players from sticking with WvW.

The second, a level 80 version (with free stat choices) only open over the prime time window. In doing so you can keep that playmode for anyone who prefers it, keep the over-flow queuing option but also encourage players to migrate to actual WvW.

2) The WvW population is slowly dying, there aren’t enough (or strong enough) incentives for players to stick with it. As a result you now have very strong bouts of bandwagoning.

Either close transfers except for a week mid-linking rotation or start with totally new servers all together.

3) Change WvW to an Alliance War model. Every guild with a roster of 10 or more signs-up to a server every 2/3 months.

All players are also given a ‘Solo’ option in the WvW UI where they are placed with a different assigned server when linkign occurs. Every region has enough new ‘Solo’ servers to match ‘Alliance’ Servers 1:1 = reduced change of dominant Kingmaker Linking.


Having said all that, what WvW actually needs to survive is a complete re-think. The players have evolved how they play the game-mode but you’re still shoveling the same perspective onto them.

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Xillllix.3485

Xillllix.3485

So i guess that’s it for population balance in 2016:

1- Anet links server so that a handful of players on empty servers have someone to play against.

2- Anet makes a poll about a pretty bad idea and gives up

That’s the long list of EVERYTHING that has been done for WvW balance in 2016.
Will 2017 be the year where Anet starts doing more than the strict minimum?

gg

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: bambam.7243

bambam.7243

Their dev thought Crystal Desert and friends had higher population than BG and JQ (who isn’t even winning t4), so that says how much they know about the WvW right now

Salty Sea Dog | Tarnished Coast
Delayed [LATE] (guild leader) | OCX

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Doll Mistress.9267

Doll Mistress.9267

Anet, I believe you are taking a wrong approach. This is a band aid on a gaping wound. Instead of getting balanced mathcups by lowering server population caps you should be focusing on bringing in NEW players into wvw to fill up the smaller server.

How to do this? One very very simple answer, wvw only legendary backpiece and more unique wvw only skins.

Personally, I don’t think wvw only skins will ahve enough "oomph" to get many new players in, but a long grinded wvw only backpiece will.

This person may on to something. It’s a good place to start at the very least.

I am on a server which is considered higher population, but, we have few people who actually wvw regularly or work together in large groups for long periods(We do have many that turn out for reset and dailies). As soon as we stopped having "server only" places, I noticed our server’s participation in wvw begin to decline. We have had many people and guilds come and go. Those who are left are mainly the diehards who run around in groups of 3-5.

Along with the above suggestion, we need "Server Chat", and a something for small groups to embark on in wvw. Something involving strategy would be fantastic for those who don’t want to blob everything all the time.

We also need another way to "balance the maps". My suggestion for this would be that instead of the "outnumbered buff", that you close the map to the side of those outnumbering, and send them to another wvw map of their choice. Otherwise, make the outnumber buff something that can truly help those who are outnumbered.

What I would like most of all is for you to fix what is broken in wvw. Mesmers should not be able to "Blink" up to the 3rd floor of Stonemist, or for that matter, through any floor or wall...especially those that normally require siege to enter. Thieves should not be able to kill and stomp without ever being seen.

My final suggestion is probably not going to win me any friends. I would suggest to open a few more servers(maybe about half of what we currently have), and have transfers free for 1 or 2 or months. After that time, only allow people to transfer up to 3 times yearly, have it cost more each time(reset annually), and do not allow the person to participate in wvw for a period of time after transfer or before lvl 70.

If you have a yearly wvw celebration/competition/tournament, and if it includes free transfers for a week(beforehand), as well as unique items/incentives/prizes, it could drive up interest in wvw, and give us something to use our leftover WvW Claim Tickets on.

(edited by Doll Mistress.9267)

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: RyuDragnier.9476

RyuDragnier.9476

As much as this hurts…if you’re going to add new servers Anet, gut some of the larger servers. Meaning lock and drop the pops for BG, JQ, Mag, etc etc. I know that sucks, forcing it on people, but that’s the only way to do it, short of completely resetting all the servers at teh start of the new year.

[hS]
PvE Main – Zar Poisonclaw – Daredevil
WvW Main – Ghost Mistcaller – Herald

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Draeyon.4392

Draeyon.4392

Said it before, I’ll say it again.

Remove linkings.
Bring back the Battlegroups concept.

No more overstacked servers.

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Gudradain.3892

Gudradain.3892

It would create more balanced match up, but sadly it’s missing a very important part : group identity.

You can’t build your group identity when it’s destroyed every 2 months and you are placed with completely new players. And, without group identity, caring is impossible.

The reason WvW was so awesome is that people cared about it. Players would go out of their way to try and improve their servers. Why would you want people to care right now when they don’t feel like they belong in the group they are placed in? They don’t of course because it doesn’t make sense.

Sure, linking brought more activity, opponent variety and balanced? match up, but WvW lost its soul in the process. We had a clear goal in the past : make our server #1 and stay there. It didn’t matter that it was a completely ridiculous goal because at least we had one. What exactly do you want people to fight for right now when servers don’t even have an identity because of the linking?

It’s hopeless…

Afala – Ehmry Bay

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Jim Hunter.6821

Jim Hunter.6821

It would create more balanced match up, but sadly it’s missing a very important part : group identity.

You can’t build your group identity when it’s destroyed every 2 months and you are placed with completely new players. And, without group identity, caring is impossible.

The reason WvW was so awesome is that people cared about it. Players would go out of their way to try and improve their servers. Why would you want people to care right now when they don’t feel like they belong in the group they are placed in? They don’t of course because it doesn’t make sense.

Sure, linking brought more activity, opponent variety and balanced? match up, but WvW lost its soul in the process. We had a clear goal in the past : make our server #1 and stay there. It didn’t matter that it was a completely ridiculous goal because at least we had one. What exactly do you want people to fight for right now when servers don’t even have an identity because of the linking?

It’s hopeless…

+1

Also known as Puck when my account isn’t suspended
LGN

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Grim West.3194

Grim West.3194

Just putting my support behind adding more worlds.

Group identity will be fine, and will probably be better than what we have now. Right now all we have is a bunch of people who transfer from server to server. There is no group identity.

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Swagger.1459

Swagger.1459

It’s done, no new worlds thankfully. Let’s move on and talk about other topics like Legendary armor, trinkets, infusions, runes and sigils for wvw!

Thanks for the feedback everyone! It still seems like there is a general lack of interest in the idea, so we’ll pass on it again.

New Main- 80 Thief – P/P- Vault Spam Pro

221 hours over 1,581 days of bank space/hot pve/lion’s arch afk and some wvw.

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Nuzt.7894

Nuzt.7894

It’s done, no new worlds thankfully. Let’s move on and talk about other topics like Legendary armor, trinkets, infusions, runes and sigils for wvw!

Thanks for the feedback everyone! It still seems like there is a general lack of interest in the idea, so we’ll pass on it again.

Good point, no new worlds, so lets now discuss new server. What are your thoughts on new servers vs new world ?

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: EKAN.4051

EKAN.4051

1. How do you feel about this proposal?
2. What, if anything, would you change about this current proposal?
3. Would you be interested in transferring to a new free world?

1. Well, it’s seams better becouse atm it’s “broken”
2. -
3. Depends what happen with my current world/server. But how it’s now, yes. (hope you mean as free, for free

“Death is just another path”

(edited by EKAN.4051)

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Xillllix.3485

Xillllix.3485

Having outlined some of the thinking behind this proposal, we’d like your feedback on these three topics.
1. How do you feel about this proposal?
2. What, if anything, would you change about this current proposal?
3. Would you be interested in transferring to a new free world?

Again, in case you didn’t read my feedback properly:
1- It’s bad but it doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t do anything to fix population balance
2- Explore something else more meaningful, this proposal won’t bring players back
3- Hell NO, I want to play with all my friends, adding worlds and transfers will just split the community apart furthermore.

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Swagger.1459

Swagger.1459

Having outlined some of the thinking behind this proposal, we’d like your feedback on these three topics.
1. How do you feel about this proposal?
2. What, if anything, would you change about this current proposal?
3. Would you be interested in transferring to a new free world?

Again, in case you didn’t read my feedback properly:
1- It’s bad but it doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t do anything to fix population balance
2- Explore something else more meaningful, this proposal won’t bring players back
3- Hell NO, I want to play with all my friends, adding worlds and transfers will just split the community apart furthermore.

I’m sure the devs can read things “properly”…

Thread is done.

Thanks for the feedback everyone! It still seems like there is a general lack of interest in the idea, so we’ll pass on it again.

New Main- 80 Thief – P/P- Vault Spam Pro

221 hours over 1,581 days of bank space/hot pve/lion’s arch afk and some wvw.

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Jim Hunter.6821

Jim Hunter.6821

I’m sure the devs can read things “properly”…

Can they though….?

Also known as Puck when my account isn’t suspended
LGN

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: TheMountain.6204

TheMountain.6204

I’m not overly attached to my world so moving wouldn’t bother me if it helped create more balanced gameplay.

I am not sure if it’s possible but if you blow up worlds would you be able to keep guilds together? I think quite a few would be more apt to like it as long as they can stay in the same world as their guild.

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Sarrs.4831

Sarrs.4831

I’m sure the devs can read things “properly”…

Thread is done.

People want to comment on or discuss the idea. Nothing wrong with that.

I am not sure if it’s possible but if you blow up worlds would you be able to keep guilds together? I think quite a few would be more apt to like it as long as they can stay in the same world as their guild.

A very lazy analysis on my part; yes, it would be very easy to keep guilds together. Players nominate a guild before the explosion; all players who nominated the same guild will be sent to the same server.

The problem is when people either game the system (make a guild explicitly to nominate so that 500 players remain on the same server) or when people have multiple guilds to whom they are equally invested and therefore can’t make a decision.

Nalhadia – Kaineng

(edited by Sarrs.4831)

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: dwctek.7613

dwctek.7613

I read your solution through and I am not in agreement with this proposed solution because it does not solve the problems that exist right now. If you continue on with this proposed solution we will end up right back to what we players have been saying all along and saying right now. It brings us right back to the present world matchups system, which obviously you (ArenaNet Devs) are stifling by closing all threads that pertain to the current matchups system. However, you can’t ignore the matchups issues. As I recall, it was you ArenaNet who stated that this current matchups system was/and still is in (BETA) and that we could roll it back or reverse if it did not work out. Well, it’s not working out. I’m telling you ArenaNet, “It’s not working out.” And this proposal will not work. If you continue with this proposal, you would have to matchup the FAT populated Tier 1 and Tier 2 worlds with one another and let them stay there and not match them up with the lower thin populated worlds because they would compromise all the maps thereby preventing them from the WvW progression which everyone is freely entitled to. That is the WvW level ranking, WvW Kills progression towards the “Ultimate Dominators” Title and the usual materials farming and karma trains.

See my proposed possible solution:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Making-WvW-Mode-More-Fun/first#post6402257

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Nuzt.7894

Nuzt.7894

I’m thinking some of you missed the official dev response…

Thanks for the feedback everyone! It still seems like there is a general lack of interest in the idea, so we’ll pass on it again.

That’s nice, the thread has not been closed, don’t like it? don’t read it.

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Nethod.7068

Nethod.7068

1. How do you feel about this proposal?
Sounds complicated

2. What, if anything, would you change about this current proposal?
I would Dump all WvW servers, just get rid of those silly things that mess with population. Remove EOTM, but keep its population features. Add WvW maps as if they were EOTM, but put in an Auto-balance join menu like PVP has.

3. Would you be interested in transferring to a new free world?
I don’t want to pay to transfer.

Mercellas,
Guardian, Chef

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: sniperman.1738

sniperman.1738

1. How do you feel about this proposal?
I personally don’t like this form of a proposal because this idea is pretty much the reason we started world linking because there were to many servers in the first place. Reality is some of us would still prefer to ditch world linking and would rather have you guys come up with a better algorithm that based matchups purely on the population of your WvW rather than the amount of glicko and rank in which you hold. But it seems you guys working on the WvW team don’t want to bother taking the time to create a algorithm which bases matchups purely on population, cause i’m sorry if Planetside 2 can do a population balance system although there’s is slightly different i’m pretty sure you guys can to.
2. What, if anything, would you change about this current proposal?
Everything we don’t need more servers, you guys need to actually stop taking the easy route and take the hard long route for once and prospect out a new algorithm that bases matchups based on population then we won’t need world linking any longer, because all these new ideas you guys keep trying keep killing off the WvW population even further.
3. Would you be interested in transferring to a new free world?
Not even close I have server pride and would rather be back to not being paired up with anyone like most servers, not everyone cares for blob warfare.

One of the Main Commander’s Grims Bane
Darkhaven
PPT Pusher/Fightmander

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: joneirikb.7506

joneirikb.7506

1. How do you feel about this proposal?
I personally don’t like this form of a proposal because this idea is pretty much the reason we started world linking because there were to many servers in the first place. Reality is some of us would still prefer to ditch world linking and would rather have you guys come up with a better algorithm that based matchups purely on the population of your WvW rather than the amount of glicko and rank in which you hold. But it seems you guys working on the WvW team don’t want to bother taking the time to create a algorithm which bases matchups purely on population, cause i’m sorry if Planetside 2 can do a population balance system although there’s is slightly different i’m pretty sure you guys can to.

Actually the LINK’s are based on population calculations, and not glicko. The first link was just a reverse order combo, but after that they’ve actually changed it around. The match-up’s however are still based on glicko.

One of the devs mentioned in another thread that going by pure population numbers, the last CD link would be similar or slightly larger than BG or JQ etc.

But there are other problems interfering in this, the main one is Fair-Weather effect, if Server A leads in the weekend, the other servers Fair-Weather population tends to grow bored with losing, and just logs off for the week waiting for next week. This makes all the Fair-Weathers on Server A come out of the wood works for easy wins. And you end up with the common Server A karma trains all week long, Server B+C has a few rabid roamers left, and a small zerg in prime, outnumbered entire week etc.

There is absolutely nothing ANet can do about that, since it is player behavior.

Other problem is Coverage, if you have no players in NA, but a decent amount in all the other timezones you’ll win.

Elrik Noj (Norn Guardian, Kaineng [SIN][Owls])
“Understanding is a three edged sword: your side, their side, and the truth.”
“The objective is to win. The goal is to have fun.”

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Supernatural Dawn.3194

Supernatural Dawn.3194

Right to work just destroy all server names and have players chose a new server when the log into wvw.

New Worlds

in WvW

Posted by: Supernatural Dawn.3194

Supernatural Dawn.3194

I think if they split the scoring between all participating servers it’ll increase a sense of purpose.