Guild Wars 2

forums bug … eeeeekk!!!!!

DeWolfe.2174:

Choppy.4183:

Nokaru.7831:

I think what you want is more of this: Gerrymandering.

Pretty much, yeah. Watching all the contortions to justify excluding people from having a say is disheartening for sure.

No, we’re talking about ensuring 1 man, 1 vote. Also, to ensure players are informed voters by having some experience in WvW.

Anyone below rank 500 don’t have much experience

CrimeMaker.8612:

DeWolfe.2174:

Choppy.4183:

Nokaru.7831:

I think what you want is more of this: Gerrymandering.

Pretty much, yeah. Watching all the contortions to justify excluding people from having a say is disheartening for sure.

No, we’re talking about ensuring 1 man, 1 vote. Also, to ensure players are informed voters by having some experience in WvW.

Anyone below rank 500 don’t have much experience

and how many above 500 were eotm warriors? basing on ranks when eotm was the means for so many EASY ranks…. what about newer players < 500 who play way more than the old vets that just whine these days?

sorry ranks mean diddly squat….

wait… my post on here was not about basing it on Rank like the OP but, on a Reward track. That way players have to have present experience in WvW.

Choppy.4183:

Nokaru.7831:

I think what you want is more of this: Gerrymandering.

Pretty much, yeah. Watching all the contortions to justify excluding people from having a say is disheartening for sure.

It’s only disheartening if you expected better from people.

Or ranks earned via roaming vs blobbing… roaming ranks come with a lot more time in game than blobbing.

But let’s be real… The impact of people with multiple accounts, or the importance of focusing on just “experienced” players is almost nihl. The latter in particular, since it’s the people who will play that are important, not the people who did play.

At the end of the day, Anet is a business. The only players that matter are the ones that spend money.

They should weight everyone’s vote based on the financial investment that each player has made in the game.

This is the only way to ensure that GW2 and WvW will survive.

My logic is irrefutable.

Jesus it never stops. Having a higher rank than someone else does not mean you know more about WvW than they do, or that you know anything about how WvW should work. It only means that you have enjoyed the game mode thus far, which biases you to not want it to change.

If you have a rank above 5000 that means jack squat, and you guys need to face that fact. You aren’t any better or more important than other/newer players. Whether you like it or not, the community has voted and the community has decided that they want DBL to stay. If you can’t handle that then leave. No one is forcing you to play WvW. No one is forcing you to play DBL. Absolutely no one. And no one is forcing you to complain. Ya’ll are just so buttsore that everyone doesn’t think exactly like you, but that doesn’t make you any better or worse than the people that think differently from you.

What does make you worse is your absolute kitten attitudes towards other players though.

Xenesis.6389:

Forgotten Legend.9281:

one of the reasons i hate Alpine so much, is that there’s only one tower per side. towers are a lot smaller than a keep, so there should be at least 2 towers for every keep on a map, in my opinion. i will admit that i was disappointed in DBL for not having more towers as well, but it felt different.

That’s kinda the point of a borderland, where the home team has a slight advantage in having an extra tower closer to their spawn. Which is why every side needs a borderland to keep it fair. EBG is the middle ground map that has equal amount of towers and keeps and camps for each side.

i didn’t say anything about removing home team advantage…. i didn’t ask for the extra tower to be removed from the home team …

i asked for more towers… right now there’s basically 1 tower per keep. i want at least 2 towers per keep to make it more interesting. i’d prefer at least 3 towers per keep on the larger DBL

(and what i mean is… there’s 3 sides, so add 3 more towers. there’s 3 keeps, there should be at least 6 towers. because the tower is a smaller objective than a keep. so there should more towers than keeps: in my opinion, at least twice as many towers as there are keeps. if there’s currently 4 towers and 3 keeps on the map, i want there to be 7 towers and 3 keeps. (4+3=7, after all) )

the home team would still have it’s advantage if each side was given an equal number more towers… especially if they’re placed correctly.

adding towers means more objectives to fight over.

home team advantage is based on position of objectives in relation to starting positions, not total number of objectives.

that’s all i have to say about that. off top the kitchen for more bacon… that i will not share with people who try to explain something to me that’s totally irrelevant to my suggestion, and that i already know. i will however share the bacon with those who freely admit to Bacon Defeciency Disorder striking again. especially since i suffer from it greatly, and sometimes misinterpret posts and respond based on my misinterpretations.

tl;dr adding more towers would not affect home team advantage as long as the towers are strategically placed to maintain the home team advantage without dramatically changing the overall percentage of the advantage. ( i fell i shouldn’t have had to explain this because adding towers =/= removing home team advantage ) i suffer from Bacon Defeciency Disorder and as a result, sometimes grumpiness. my bad

OriOri.8724:

Jesus it never stops. Having a higher rank than someone else does not mean you know more about WvW than they do, or that you know anything about how WvW should work. It only means that you have enjoyed the game mode thus far, which biases you to not want it to change.

If you have a rank above 5000 that means jack squat, and you guys need to face that fact. You aren’t any better or more important than other/newer players. Whether you like it or not, the community has voted and the community has decided that they want DBL to stay. If you can’t handle that then leave. No one is forcing you to play WvW. No one is forcing you to play DBL. Absolutely no one. And no one is forcing you to complain. Ya’ll are just so buttsore that everyone doesn’t think exactly like you, but that doesn’t make you any better or worse than the people that think differently from you.

What does make you worse is your absolute kitten attitudes towards other players though.

I couldn’t agree more. Great post.

DeWolfe.2174:

Skynet.7201:

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

Hey guys, since I’m seeing this topic pop up a lot, I wanted to step in and clear up some misconceptions.

1. Nearly every player that voted, plays WvW at least somewhat regularly.

2. Whether they play 1 hour a week, or dozens of hours a week, the breakdown between people who voted ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ remains very constant around the 65/35 split.

3. The in-game poll notification mail is only sent to players who are actively playing WvW. They must be at least rank 10, and have ranked up while the poll was running.

One hour a week???!!! O.O

Probably just folks grabbing easy WvW dailies and then using us for gathering the synthesizers

That is why I think they really have to determine server population by total hours played and when they are played , not just numbers of players. In addition, I do not think rank should play a factor simply because you can have a server that queues multiple maps but actually makes sure they lose, and you can have people outnumbered that actually try to win. The rank should not be a factor, but rather number of hours played and when they play.

Currently they match up servers with no maps queued during NA prime with a server with all maps queued during NA prime, and neither server can gain population to correct their deficiencies due to how the population is determined.

Choppy.4183:

Or ranks earned via roaming vs blobbing… roaming ranks come with a lot more time in game than blobbing.

But let’s be real… The impact of people with multiple accounts, or the importance of focusing on just “experienced” players is almost nihl. The latter in particular, since it’s the people who will play that are important, not the people who did play.

People were already saying they voted 6 times on these polls… I think you greatly underestimate the number of WvW player multiple accounts that currently exist in the game . I know players who made accounts for every single server, both NA and EU so that if they ever needed them they would have them. Everyone was talking about all the accounts they were buying when they went on sale for $10 in the map TS channels that day and many guilds were having players make sure they made accounts for specific servers that they wanted to make sure all their members bought one for so they could play as a guild on multiple servers at the time. People who missed that were not aware I guess of how wide scale this actually was.

In addition, someone who logs into WvW just to do dailies isn’t going to understand whether or not all classes skills work in all zones, the strategic value of objective placement and how it interacts with other objectives, how many ways an objective can be attacked, how each class can be played on a map, what glitches and bugs need to be repaired so you cannot glitch into keeps, where the mesmer hiding spots are, or even how to refresh siege. How can they vote on these things when they have no understanding of them or how they work or what they even need to work?

It isn’t a matter of trying to exclude people, it is just trying to make sure those who are going to be affecting these things actually understand them. Someone who does not understand the use of strategic building placement, for example, should not be voting on things that affect that.

I am sure those who like to raid dungeons wouldn’t want me to go over there and vote on their dungeon raid builds as well considering I do not do that. I personally would hope they would exclude me from voting in PvE raiding polls since I really shouldn’t be sticking my nose in to things I do not understand.

These polls, just like the surveys they used to create this game should be done by Invite only . In this case those players who have put in enough time to playing the game mode that they actually understand what it is they are voting on.

Yeah, I just don’t agree. First, while neither of us have the numbers of total votes or votes from the same person with multiple accounts, my expectation is the total votes is high enough to dwarf the number of people trying to use multiple accounts. Second, I’ve been playing this game long enough to know that for every Wvw veteran with a good, rational idea, you have another with a totally irrational one. Same goes with new players, so no, I don’t personally buy the “experience argument”.

Anet also wouldn’t poll is about things like “strategic building placement”. They’re interested in long term viability and direction, and that means taxing the people who will our might play wvw, not just the crusty old kittens who’ve been playing long enough to argue about whether the quaggans should come back or not….

Choppy.4183:

Yeah, I just don’t agree. First, while neither of us had the numbers of total votes or votes from the same person with multiple accounts, my expectation is the total votes is high enough to dwarf the number of people trying to use multiple accounts. Second, I’ve been playing this game long enough to know that for every Wvw veteran with a good, rational idea, you have another with a totally irrational one. Same goes with new players, so no, I don’t buy the “experience argument”.

Anet also wouldn’t poll is about things that would “affect siege placement”. They’re interested in long term viability and direction, and that means taxing the people who will our might play wvw, not just the crusty old kittens who’ve been playing long enough to argue about whether the quaggans should come back or not….

This was a poll that affects siege placement. This was a poll about objectives that can be glitched into. This was a poll about skills not being able to be used in zones. This was a poll about wanting new maps. This was a poll about Strategic objective placement.
That IS the issue being discussed. What was the total number of votes? Sure there may be more players just doing dailies in WvW, but that does not mean they understood what was affected by this.

See since they cannot fix the topography as long as the map is in the live game, they would have to send the DBL back to beta to solve those problems. Since the map is going to stay in the live game, this was a vote for many problems to never be fixed at all. They told us that they would not give us new maps if we didn’t accept the DBL “as is” so people who hated the DBL had to vote for it to get the new maps they were waiting on Alpine to receive.

EDIT: I also would like to say, yes 1000 may be a bit high, 500 sounds much more reasonable. 10 is a joke.

Forgotten Legend.9281:

snip

Dude… you went from saying you want 2 towers per keep…

Alpine so much, is that there’s only one tower per side. towers are a lot smaller than a keep, so there should be at least 2 towers for every keep on a map, in my opinion.

Which means it would have taken the home tower advantage away, gari already has 2, bay and hills has 1. So you wanted to add another 2 towers, 1 each to bay and hills

Then 3 towers per keep for dbl…

i’d prefer at least 3 towers per keep on the larger DBL

Which is 9 towers in total btw for dbl… but you would need 10 to maintain the home team advantage.

Then 6 towers on abl became 7 towers… which of course you mention after I said home bl has an extra tower for a reason…

(and what i mean is… there’s 3 sides, so add 3 more towers. there’s 3 keeps, there should be at least 6 towers. because the tower is a smaller objective than a keep. so there should more towers than keeps: in my opinion, at least twice as many towers as there are keeps. if there’s currently 4 towers and 3 keeps on the map, i want there to be 7 towers and 3 keeps. (4+3=7, after all) )

Look at the run around you did to end up at 7 towers…

And expected not to have to explain it to people?

( i fell i shouldn’t have had to explain this because adding towers =/= removing home team advantage )

Ok…. Could have simply said, they should add 3 more towers to alpine bl.

lil devils x.6071:

Choppy.4183:

Or ranks earned via roaming vs blobbing… roaming ranks come with a lot more time in game than blobbing.

But let’s be real… The impact of people with multiple accounts, or the importance of focusing on just “experienced” players is almost nihl. The latter in particular, since it’s the people who will play that are important, not the people who did play.

People were already saying they voted 6 times on these polls… I think you greatly underestimate the number of WvW player multiple accounts that currently exist in the game . I know players who made accounts for every single server, both NA and EU so that if they ever needed them they would have them. Everyone was talking about all the accounts they were buying when they went on sale for $10 in the map TS channels that day and many guilds were having players make sure they made accounts for specific servers that they wanted to make sure all their members bought one for so they could play as a guild on multiple servers at the time. People who missed that were not aware I guess of how wide scale this actually was.

In addition, someone who logs into WvW just to do dailies isn’t going to understand whether or not all classes skills work in all zones, the strategic value of objective placement and how it interacts with other objectives, how many ways an objective can be attacked, how each class can be played on a map, what glitches and bugs need to be repaired so you cannot glitch into keeps, where the mesmer hiding spots are, or even how to refresh siege. How can they vote on these things when they have no understanding of them or how they work or what they even need to work?

It isn’t a matter of trying to exclude people, it is just trying to make sure those who are going to be affecting these things actually understand them. Someone who does not understand the use of strategic building placement, for example, should not be voting on things that affect that.

I am sure those who like to raid dungeons wouldn’t want me to go over there and vote on their dungeon raid builds as well considering I do not do that. I personally would hope they would exclude me from voting in PvE raiding polls since I really shouldn’t be sticking my nose in to things I do not understand.

These polls, just like the surveys they used to create this game should be done by Invite only . In this case those players who have put in enough time to playing the game mode that they actually understand what it is they are voting on.

Let’s chuck out all those people who spent all those hours in game following someone else around and pushing buttons when someone told them to and all those running set builds they didn’t create themselves at the same time. Those obviously show a lack of understanding of the game compared with people running in groups where they have to know and understand their skills and when to use them and groups where they make their own decisions on what gear they should be using.

A thousand ranks of doing what you’re told when you’re told with your guild doesn’t show you learned or know anything on its own. Maybe have a test that the special people with a thousand ranks can create among themselves, well among ourselves? We can add it to the gerrymandering to get you the voters you want…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_test

1 hour per week? Rank 10? So in other words, these polls are a joke.

This caters to karmatrain zombies, nothing more. DBL is a lot easier for brainless karmatraining, which got already easier and more profitable. I am seeing a continuing degradation of skill among the increasing mass of brainless PvErs who follow a tag around for reward spam. Of course they will vote for DBLs to return since those are the maps they first experienced and karmatraining is not as easy on the Alpines since these maps actually get upgraded and defended. Even just 2 guys can hold off many times their number at Lake because they can see all 3 walls from one spot, so you can’t simply attack a wall or gate and send a guy or two to cata a wall on another side. Sparkplug has, what, 5 walls?

Not everyone who prefers the DBL is a blob mouthbreather, obviously. However the problem is that the results now are skewed by a large number of votes by people who will ditch this game mode the minute something with easier, less-effort-required means of acquiring loot and reward track progress comes along. What you are then left with are only the committed WvW players who are in it for the competitive play, and far too many of those would rather leave WvW than play on the DBL.

When my server got a free transfer for a tournament season, we got a massive influx of PvErs who just wanted to be, for free, on a server that would win its league. We breezed through those boring matches with an overpowering 24/7 force of skillspammers who then promptly vacated the game mode once the tournament was over. That left us in a tier higher than we in reality were built for and we kept getting our teeth kicked in for weeks before Glicko adjusted.

Of course every clown that gets this email will vote on it without the least bit of consideration for the longevity of the game mode.

But c’est la vie. When you refuse to learn from your mistakes, you’ll just continue repeating them.

msalakka.4653:

1 hour per week? Rank 10? So in other words, these polls are a joke.

This caters to karmatrain zombies, nothing more. DBL is a lot easier for brainless karmatraining, which got already easier and more profitable. I am seeing a continuing degradation of skill among the increasing mass of brainless PvErs who follow a tag around for reward spam. Of course they will vote for DBLs to return since those are the maps they first experienced and karmatraining is not as easy on the Alpines since these maps actually get upgraded and defended. Even just 2 guys can hold off many times their number at Lake because they can see all 3 walls from one spot, so you can’t simply attack a wall or gate and send a guy or two to cata a wall on another side. Sparkplug has, what, 5 walls?

Not everyone who prefers the DBL is a blob mouthbreather, obviously. However the problem is that the results now are skewed by a large number of votes by people who will ditch this game mode the minute something with easier, less-effort-required means of acquiring loot and reward track progress comes along. What you are then left with are only the committed WvW players who are in it for the competitive play, and far too many of those would rather leave WvW than play on the DBL.

When my server got a free transfer for a tournament season, we got a massive influx of PvErs who just wanted to be, for free, on a server that would win its league. We breezed through those boring matches with an overpowering 24/7 force of skillspammers who then promptly vacated the game mode once the tournament was over. That left us in a tier higher than we in reality were built for and we kept getting our teeth kicked in for weeks before Glicko adjusted.

Of course every clown that gets this email will vote on it without the least bit of consideration for the longevity of the game mode.

But c’est la vie. When you refuse to learn from your mistakes, you’ll just continue repeating them.

They aren’t restricted to rank 10 to vote in the poll, you don’t even have to be rank 10…that was just to trigger the message telling you there was a poll in the game. If you already know there is a poll, you could vote on any of your accounts. Even lvl 1 could vote…

Forgotten Legend.9281:

Xenesis.6389:

Forgotten Legend.9281:

one of the reasons i hate Alpine so much, is that there’s only one tower per side. towers are a lot smaller than a keep, so there should be at least 2 towers for every keep on a map, in my opinion. i will admit that i was disappointed in DBL for not having more towers as well, but it felt different.

That’s kinda the point of a borderland, where the home team has a slight advantage in having an extra tower closer to their spawn. Which is why every side needs a borderland to keep it fair. EBG is the middle ground map that has equal amount of towers and keeps and camps for each side.

i didn’t say anything about removing home team advantage…. i didn’t ask for the extra tower to be removed from the home team …

i asked for more towers… right now there’s basically 1 tower per keep. i want at least 2 towers per keep to make it more interesting. i’d prefer at least 3 towers per keep on the larger DBL

(and what i mean is… there’s 3 sides, so add 3 more towers. there’s 3 keeps, there should be at least 6 towers. because the tower is a smaller objective than a keep. so there should more towers than keeps: in my opinion, at least twice as many towers as there are keeps. if there’s currently 4 towers and 3 keeps on the map, i want there to be 7 towers and 3 keeps. (4+3=7, after all) )

the home team would still have it’s advantage if each side was given an equal number more towers… especially if they’re placed correctly.

adding towers means more objectives to fight over.

home team advantage is based on position of objectives in relation to starting positions, not total number of objectives.

that’s all i have to say about that. off top the kitchen for more bacon… that i will not share with people who try to explain something to me that’s totally irrelevant to my suggestion, and that i already know. i will however share the bacon with those who freely admit to Bacon Defeciency Disorder striking again. especially since i suffer from it greatly, and sometimes misinterpret posts and respond based on my misinterpretations.

tl;dr adding more towers would not affect home team advantage as long as the towers are strategically placed to maintain the home team advantage without dramatically changing the overall percentage of the advantage. ( i fell i shouldn’t have had to explain this because adding towers =/= removing home team advantage ) i suffer from Bacon Defeciency Disorder and as a result, sometimes grumpiness. my bad

I do think that BL maps could use more towers. I agree with you in that Towers are smaller, easier objectives so there should be more of them than there are keeps. If each map has 3 keeps then they should have 6 towers (+-1 for balance depending on size of the map and whatnot) and have at least 9 camps. It just makes sense to me to have more of the easier objectives than about the same amount as the harder objectives.

CrimeMaker.8612:

Taking surveys of people rank 10 and above is bs because people who are below rank 500 don’t know anything about WvW or how it used to be. You should just send mails to people with rank 500 and above or 1000 and above because they actually know how WvW should be and how to fix it. With DBL poll I bet those 35% people who said completely remove it were rank 1000 above and people with rank 10 amd above prolly only voted for bring it back just bcz “another map”.

The bolded part is accurately the reason why rank 10 is fair. Polls are not about what WW “used to be”, and they wouldn’t make any sense if the point was to keep WvW how it “used to be”. Moreover, when you read the forums, you learn that WvW is stale, unbalaned, boring etc. etc. so I guess that would be a bad idea to keep WvW how it “used to be”.

If you want WvW to actually evolve, you must ask ppl who are not stuck to what it “used to be”, hence new somehow experienced players that have a guess what WvW is about, and ideas on what they want it to be.

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

2. Whether they play 1 hour a week, or dozens of hours a week, the breakdown between people who voted ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ remains very constant around the 65/35 split.

It’s safe to think one’s rank (let’s even add ranks for multi-account players) is somehow related to the amount of time spent. And as stated by the devs, the 65/35 split is constant whatever the rank.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

A suggestion to future WvW surveys – Limit responses to players with a minimum WvW rank. Something like a threshold of Rank 1000. It’s low enough that a casual WvWer would be able to achieve in the last 3 years of playing, but high enough to sort out those who don’t play WvW enough to have a say.

Hi, I’m one of those casual WvWers. I’d probably only put in around 15-30 hours a week when I’m feeling like WvW’ing. No, not much, but that’s still 2+ hours a day on average.

I am still in the Bronze rank titles. That means, yes, less than 500. Despite playing from headstart – now, I didn’t play WvW from the headstart, but I’m fairly sure I’ve been casually playing for a long time now with no more breaks than I would for the game in general.

So by your argument, I should be incapable of voting.

By your argument, new players should be incapable of voting.

In fact, by your argument, everyone I know would be incapable of voting, even those with 800+ rank.

I disagree.

lil devils x.6071:

So this means:
1) Past and present WvW players over a certain rank were not notified via email. If players were unable to log into the game this week for whatever reason ( for example: the hospital I have been at most of the time has GW2 blocked) they do not know the poll is happening at all.

2)There is no restriction on the poll itself to limit voting of non WvW players or multiple accounts.

3) WvW rank 10 would never be high enough to impact multiple accounts. Rank 1000 would be a much more appropriate measure.

1) Why would people who aren’t playing the game be notified about the game’s progress? If they’re not playing but are active in the community, they’d find out via forum or reddit.

3) I think 1000 is too high, however. It would keep casual WvW’ers out.

I could agree on 100, or 200 even, though. I would argue that you need to have reached Bronze rank titles to vote – which, if wiki is right, is 150.

Ovalkvadratcylinder.9365:

W never got to vote on that. Just that the reward tracks were here to stay.
What they do with the reward tracks is up to Anet, atleast right now.

We were told the gift of battle would be turned to only reward track when the WvW reward tracks exited beta.

There was a poll asking if the WvW reward tracks were ready to exit beta.

lil devils x.6071:

These polls, just like the surveys they used to create this game should be done by Invite only . In this case those players who have put in enough time to playing the game mode that they actually understand what it is they are voting on.

The main problem with your argument is that your suggested method of basing it on WvW rank is flawed. Rank is a good reflection of time spent playing the game mode. It is not a good reflection of the level of understanding. And before you try to say that my rank is too low to have an opinion, I’m close to 1800 on this account which is higher than the 500 and 1000 being thrown about, and if I combine all three of my accounts I’m well over 2.5k

I do not believe that my opinion on WvW should be valued more than others purely based on some arbitrary figure. Some people with high rank are intelligent and level headed with good ideas, so are some people with low ranks. Some people with high ranks are selfish idiots with horrible ideas and so are some people with low ranks.

I think the rank requirement simply makes no sense because you have no steady income of WXP and therefore can’t make a connection between WXP and true experience. (Not to mention eotm)

I myself got about 4000hours in GW2 of which at least 3000 have been in WvW. I’ve been in small WvW guilds, bigger WvW guilds and played in plenty of pug zergs and you know what rank I am? I am only at 630. That’s the beginning of silver ranks.

Getting WXP is a pain if you are not actually farming for it (like ktraining all day long) and has nothing to do with your actual WvW experience or understanding of the gamemode.
And what about scouts who are sitting in keeps for hours straight without any reward? Or the lowest servers where you maybe have 10 guys on every map…how are they supposed to get 1000 ranks in your opinion?

It simply doesn’t make sense. If you wanted to keep out the very fresh noobs I’d say rank 50-100 could be considered a limit. But even reaching this could easily take you over 100 hours of playtime at which point people can definitely tell what they want from this gamemode if you ask me.

msalakka.4653:

This caters to karmatrain zombies, nothing more. DBL is a lot easier for brainless karmatraining, which got already easier and more profitable. I am seeing a continuing degradation of skill among the increasing mass of brainless PvErs who follow a tag around for reward spam. Of course they will vote for DBLs to return since those are the maps they first experienced and karmatraining is not as easy on the Alpines since these maps actually get upgraded and defended. Even just 2 guys can hold off many times their number at Lake because they can see all 3 walls from one spot, so you can’t simply attack a wall or gate and send a guy or two to cata a wall on another side. Sparkplug has, what, 5 walls?

…Huh? I thought the main complaints about DBL were that it was too big and too confusing to navigate. Doesn’t that make it really, really bad for a karmatrain passenger or commander? Understanding the map and its unique elements including air shrine fall damage immunity, how the lava portals work, using the sand stealth and understanding how the haypiles work mean that the average karma drone is even worse than a skilled player.

Making the case that DBL is bad because towers and keeps are larger and have more attackable walls seems really, really odd to me. You’re only looking at it from that angle. The towers and keeps also have other unique properties. Towers have back entrances for defensive teams, meaning small rapid-response teams can more easily enter towers. The abundance of walls mean havoc teams have more options when it comes to making their stealth attacks. Distance between objectives means that splitting forces becomes a more viable strategy. Extra smaller objectives (shrines) give roamers and roam teams more options to provide assistance to their larger teams. A lot of elements on DBL mean that multiple coordinated smaller teams can actually fight more effectively than karmatrain blobs.

Saying “since alpine borderlands gets defended and upgraded”, implying that DBL doesn’t… Well that’s a problem that you can easily fix. Get some friends and go defend and upgrade DBL. Like, you say “two dudes can see all walls from one point”… Hey, hello, you have two dudes. You can see every wall+gate from two points in the DBL towers. Why not try splitting up your two dudes.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Smooth Penguin.5294:

A suggestion to future WvW surveys – Limit responses to players with a minimum WvW rank. Something like a threshold of Rank 1000. It’s low enough that a casual WvWer would be able to achieve in the last 3 years of playing, but high enough to sort out those who don’t play WvW enough to have a say.

Hi, I’m one of those casual WvWers. I’d probably only put in around 15-30 hours a week when I’m feeling like WvW’ing. No, not much, but that’s still 2+ hours a day on average.

I am still in the Bronze rank titles. That means, yes, less than 500. Despite playing from headstart – now, I didn’t play WvW from the headstart, but I’m fairly sure I’ve been casually playing for a long time now with no more breaks than I would for the game in general.

So by your argument, I should be incapable of voting.

By your argument, new players should be incapable of voting.

In fact, by your argument, everyone I know would be incapable of voting, even those with 800+ rank.

I disagree.

lil devils x.6071:

So this means:
1) Past and present WvW players over a certain rank were not notified via email. If players were unable to log into the game this week for whatever reason ( for example: the hospital I have been at most of the time has GW2 blocked) they do not know the poll is happening at all.

2)There is no restriction on the poll itself to limit voting of non WvW players or multiple accounts.

3) WvW rank 10 would never be high enough to impact multiple accounts. Rank 1000 would be a much more appropriate measure.

1) Why would people who aren’t playing the game be notified about the game’s progress? If they’re not playing but are active in the community, they’d find out via forum or reddit.

3) I think 1000 is too high, however. It would keep casual WvW’ers out.

I could agree on 100, or 200 even, though. I would argue that you need to have reached Bronze rank titles to vote – which, if wiki is right, is 150.

Ovalkvadratcylinder.9365:

W never got to vote on that. Just that the reward tracks were here to stay.
What they do with the reward tracks is up to Anet, atleast right now.

We were told the gift of battle would be turned to only reward track when the WvW reward tracks exited beta.

There was a poll asking if the WvW reward tracks were ready to exit beta.

1) For years GW dedicated players who have been here from the beginning came to Anet over and over and over and let their concerns be known for years and had zero response. No one responded, answered anything at all. Their concerns fell on deaf ears and even though these dedicated players who filled out the surveys used to create this game, promoted the game in gaming communities and preordered it and have been with Anet from the beginning. They sadly gave up and left after getting no response.

Reaching out to those players to let them know things have changed and include them in the feedback is how you actually improve the game to increase the overall player base. The goal is to increase game interest and population, increase player satisfaction, and increase game longevity. You do not accomplish that by alienating your dedicated player base and not even finding out why. You do that by growing your playerbase and keeping your current player base happy. You do not have to make decisions to alienate anyone. The goal should be to make decisions that make everyone happy and that can be accomplished by thinking through decisions much better and including more informed feedback.

If you take feedback on an area that the player doesn’t understand well, you are not going to get an informed enough point of view to help make the current players happy that play the different play styles in the game mode. Usually players who have been around a long time understand how each of these things affect the different play styles and not just one way. You have attackers, defenders, roamers, scouts, havoc, strategist, zerglings, and duelers all in one zone. Someone who just comes in to do dailies isn’t going to understand how all these different players play and what will affect how they play, what is needed for them to be able to play at all. Making not well thought out decisions for the different players in this mode means that it can make any of these playstyles unplayable all together and you are going to have angry players at that point.
The goal is to grow the population, not reduce it.

3) Yes, 1000 is a bit high. 100 would still not be enough to keep out many multiple accounts though. Maybe 500 would be more reasonable.

So basically you are saying because we poor souls who played since beta haven’t been heard for 4 years it is unfair to listen to anyone with less than 4 years of experience?

The current voting process is fine…

I’d still like to see a %-# conversion from the polls to get an idea of the overall WvW population.

Entenkommando.5208:

So basically you are saying because we poor souls who played since beta haven’t been heard for 4 years it is unfair to listen to anyone with less than 4 years of experience?

Not at all, I said all WvW players past and PRESENT over a certain rank( preferably kill count would be an even better idea). Should players be able to vote with all 24 of their accounts? NO. Players who only think WvW is another stop to do dailies and farm nodes? NO. Players who have never fought another player in WvW? No…

Emailing surveys only to WvW players treats past players who never received a response and present players equally and will give them a better idea of how to best improve the game mode to both keep and grow the population and improve player satisfaction. Should the players that were here at Beta be worth any less? Of course not. Simply because players were ignored while WvW was neglected is not a reason to exclude them.

Xen, you’ve quoted me twice as saying “at least 2 towers per keep” …

I think it’s more than safe to assume that “at least” means at minimum, and that “at least” doesn’t necessarily mean each side has to have the same number of towers.

I never said anything about making each side have equal numbers of towers. Only that there should be “at least two towers per keep”. That leaves plenty of room to allow the home team to have more towers than the other sides… How are you not understanding this?

Basically , you are putting words in my mouth that I never said. I have no idea why you think the way you do concerning my wanting more towers. Can’t you take it at face value that I just want more towers? I never said anything about removing home team advantage. Never. You made that up on your own. And then falsely accused me of it…

Swagger.1459:

The current voting process is fine…

Yep… both from a technical perspective and for what the surveys are supposed to achieve.

And then i remember that time someone achieved Diamond Legend in EOTM and everyone gave him crap for it….

Easy to suddenly emphasize the importance of rank when it’s convenient, right?

Honestly, what is a good rank for 4 years of play? We didn’t have rank for the 1st year so that didn’t get counted. But then again, rank 1000 is a paltry rank for consistent play…. if you’re a zergling. Hmmph. Hit more doors? I know people that show up regularly that have an unusually low rank because they suck at farming wxp. Doesn’t mean they suck at WvW though.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

We were told the gift of battle would be turned to only reward track when the WvW reward tracks exited beta.

There was a poll asking if the WvW reward tracks were ready to exit beta.

Hm I musta missed that memo somewhere.

In any case I’m doing the track right now, not a big deal, I mean we had to sink so much more hours grinding pve just to get our guildhalls upgraded and wvw buffs back.

Spending 8-9 hours in wvw for the reward track or collecting 500 badges is not really unreasonable, we’ve all had to do stuff in this game that we don’t want to do to progress.

Forgotten Legend.9281:

Xen, you’ve quoted me twice as saying “at least 2 towers per keep” …

I think it’s more than safe to assume that “at least” means at minimum, and that “at least” doesn’t necessarily mean each side has to have the same number of towers.

I never said anything about making each side have equal numbers of towers. Only that there should be “at least two towers per keep”. That leaves plenty of room to allow the home team to have more towers than the other sides… How are you not understanding this?

Basically , you are putting words in my mouth that I never said. I have no idea why you think the way you do concerning my wanting more towers. Can’t you take it at face value that I just want more towers? I never said anything about removing home team advantage. Never. You made that up on your own. And then falsely accused me of it…

All your original post mentioned was that abl needed at least 2 towers per keep. You didn’t say they should add 3 towers, you didn’t say they should add at least 1 more tower per keep, which would have made the intention of your suggestion clearer. You left the number up in the air.

I was simply pointing out the reason for a home borderland, that’s it. So many others have already made the mistake of treating it like a regular map in their suggestions, like making dbl as an ebg or eotm map, which wouldn’t work if they knew the purpose of both types of maps.

Now would you go to a coffee shop and tell them you would like at least 2 muffins? They come out with 4 and then you tell them, well no I said at least 2 but I really wanted 3.
(any server would just bring you 2 to start, and wait for you to ask for more, just saying you left that number open for them to do whatever)

Dunno why we’re going back on and forth on this, it’ll never happen anyways cause abl is basically set in stone now, this would be a suggestion on future maps.

Cindas.6149:

None of the WvW surveys have adhered to any standard methodology. If you want to simply ask seemingly random questions and have nearly random results, then continue with the current survey formats. However, if you want anything meaningful returned, you should hire a professional.

ref: Survey Methodology – Reliability and Validity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survey_methodology

What are you talking about? Their sampling universe includes the entirety of the Wvw population, and they’ve also instituted an alert system to help better target active wvw players. Moreover, they have the data with which to slice the responses into more targeted populations and to determine the statistical significance of those results.

They aren’t random questions and the results aren’t random by definition.

I’m starting to think Anet should probably just go back into silent mode, since we can’t even appreciate the effort they’re making in trying to communication with us lately, we begged and pleaded for years to be heard and now people just want to nitpick and break down everything they present to us.

These polls aren’t viable!, we have more pve players voting on stuff they don’t care about! sacrilegious!, we don’t have the hardcore players who quit two years ago voting! outrageous!, a rank 10 that gained a level this week gets to vote? wickedness!, well you worded it wrong it should be the other way so we get the majority of votes!, that guy has 20 accounts he spammed the votes the wrong way! lawlessness!,

Wait I thought this was a majority poll?, wait this wasn’t a majority poll? hold on I need my glasses, you didn’t explain this poll enough!, you explained the answers too much so people got confused!, you put too many yes answers so people got confused and didn’t vote no!, you need a year and 1000 ranks of experience to vote! the more ranks you get the more bonus votes you get veteran of the mist eotm’er!, they should hire a real professional survey company cause everything is random!

They have enough information on what to work on for the next year anyways.

Xenesis.6389:

I’m starting to think Anet should probably just go back into silent mode, since we can’t even appreciate the effort they’re making in trying to communication with us lately, we begged and pleaded for years to be heard and now people just want to nitpick and break down everything they present to us.

These polls aren’t viable!, we have more pve players voting on stuff they don’t care about! sacrilegious!, we don’t have the hardcore players who quit two years ago voting! outrageous!, a rank 10 that gained a level this week gets to vote? wickedness!, well you worded it wrong it should be the other way so we get the majority of votes!, that guy has 20 accounts he spammed the votes the wrong way! lawlessness!,

Wait I thought this was a majority poll?, wait this wasn’t a majority poll? hold on I need my glasses, you didn’t explain this poll enough!, you explained the answers too much so people got confused!, you put too many yes answers so people got confused and didn’t vote no!, you need a year and 1000 ranks of experience to vote! the more ranks you get the more bonus votes you get veteran of the mist eotm’er!, they should hire a real professional survey company cause everything is random!

They have enough information on what to work on for the next year anyways.

LMAO!!!! Perfect.

My favorite ones were the ‘people with 20 accounts that skewed the poll’, and ‘you should have to be rank 1000 or above in wvw to vote’……..

Those ones made me cry I was laughing so hard.

ArchonWing.9480:

And then i remember that time someone achieved Diamond Legend in EOTM and everyone gave him crap for it….

Easy to suddenly emphasize the importance of rank when it’s convenient, right?

Honestly, what is a good rank for 4 years of play? We didn’t have rank for the 1st year so that didn’t get counted. But then again, rank 1000 is a paltry rank for consistent play…. if you’re a zergling. Hmmph. Hit more doors? I know people that show up regularly that have an unusually low rank because they suck at farming wxp. Doesn’t mean they suck at WvW though.

Yea, that was why I was thinking kill count might be a better measure. When I know numerous players who have accounts on all servers, and numerous more who have accounts on 5 or more servers and hear people saying " I voted 6 times".. there has to be some way we can reduce that in addition to making sure players who have come into WvW more than just do a daily or farm some nodes have an impact on the game mode. To some people they would be happy taking out PvP from WvW all together… That isn’t exactly fair to those who want to actually play the game mode.

Cindas.6149:

None of the WvW surveys have adhered to any standard methodology. If you want to simply ask seemingly random questions and have nearly random results, then continue with the current survey formats. However, if you want anything meaningful returned, you should hire a professional.

ref: Survey Methodology – Reliability and Validity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survey_methodology

Yes, and when someone brings this up .. people want to act like it isn’t a problem. AS I have been saying, from the first poll on here, this is a mess. ( I said that on polls that were decided in favor of what I wanted them to) The way these polls are being done means they should not be used for any type of data gathering or analysis because they are doing nothing to ensure the data gathered is accurate or going to be beneficial to the game.

lil devils x.6071:

Cindas.6149:

None of the WvW surveys have adhered to any standard methodology. If you want to simply ask seemingly random questions and have nearly random results, then continue with the current survey formats. However, if you want anything meaningful returned, you should hire a professional.

ref: Survey Methodology – Reliability and Validity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survey_methodology

Yes, and when someone brings this up .. people want to act like it isn’t a problem. AS I have been saying, from the first poll on here, this is a mess. ( I said that on polls that were decided in favor of what I wanted them to) The way these polls are being done means they should not be used for any type of data gathering or analysis because they are doing nothing to ensure the data gathered is accurate or going to be beneficial to the game.

Except he’s completely wrong. Making a claim and then posting a link that doesn’t even support that claim is not a convincing argument.

Anet’s approach is well in line with standard survey methodology.

lil devils x.6071:

Yea, that was why I was thinking kill count might be a better measure.

Obsidian… Sanctum… Kill… Farm…

Choppy.4183:

Cindas.6149:

None of the WvW surveys have adhered to any standard methodology. If you want to simply ask seemingly random questions and have nearly random results, then continue with the current survey formats. However, if you want anything meaningful returned, you should hire a professional.

ref: Survey Methodology – Reliability and Validity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survey_methodology

What are you talking about? Their sampling universe includes the entirety of the Wvw population, and they’ve also instituted an alert system to help better target active wvw players. Moreover, they have the data with which to slice the responses into more targeted populations and to determine the statistical significance of those results.

They aren’t random questions and the results aren’t random by definition.

But he posted a wikipedia link to a page that contains words that he said, clearly he must be right =P

Xenesis.6389:

lil devils x.6071:

Yea, that was why I was thinking kill count might be a better measure.

Obsidian… Sanctum… Kill… Farm…

I don’t know anyone that has been in the OS kill farm that didn’t play WvW before making it that far, so that is not as bad. The alternative is to let people vote as many times as they like or think WvW exists as a “nice place to farm nodes”. I will take the kill farm over the latter.

Xenesis.6389:

lil devils x.6071:

Yea, that was why I was thinking kill count might be a better measure.

Obsidian… Sanctum… Kill… Farm…

Or Alpine ruins farm from the PvE players popping in for their daily.

I think they should base it on ranks earned in WvW maps , and remove ranks earned in eotm. Then set a low bar threshold say rank 50 or so.

This should eliminate a high cap rank req farmed outside of WvW, allowing access to newer players who have invested a decent amount of time to have their voices heard, or the solo / roamers who collect points and rank much less frequently than say a commander. Includes everyone, gets rid of eotm ranks

Or do something like sending the mail to all players who earned 2 ranks that week

Choppy.4183:

lil devils x.6071:

Cindas.6149:

None of the WvW surveys have adhered to any standard methodology. If you want to simply ask seemingly random questions and have nearly random results, then continue with the current survey formats. However, if you want anything meaningful returned, you should hire a professional.

ref: Survey Methodology – Reliability and Validity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survey_methodology

Yes, and when someone brings this up .. people want to act like it isn’t a problem. AS I have been saying, from the first poll on here, this is a mess. ( I said that on polls that were decided in favor of what I wanted them to) The way these polls are being done means they should not be used for any type of data gathering or analysis because they are doing nothing to ensure the data gathered is accurate or going to be beneficial to the game.

Except he’s completely wrong. Making a claim and then posting a link that doesn’t even support that claim is not a convincing argument.

Anet’s approach is well in line with standard survey methodology.

By allowing players to vote as much as they want and who do not even understand how the game mode will affect the different play styles? Mhmmm..
Being a bit more professional or even as the above poster suggested, hire a professional to assist with the polls could help.

why would anyone assume its the pve players with 20 accounts on different servers and not the wvw players with the 20 accounts? there is no ‘pve server’ and wasn’t ‘pve servers’ when the 10$ accounts came out. if you were pve why create another account other than daily reward login?

the more likely scenario is the wvw player with 20 accounts on 20 servers since they had a reason to do this. Hence the ballot box stuffing more likely a wvw player not pve player.

most likely scenario is that the amount of people voting more than 2-3 times is negligible…

lil devils x.6071:

By allowing players to vote as much as they want and who do not even understand how the game mode will affect the different play styles? Mhmmm..
Being a bit more professional or even as the above poster suggested, hire a professional to assist with the polls could help.

You’re assuming an issue without any evidence of the size of its influence. You’re also assuming they didn’t consult a professional, or have one on staff for the polls. Controls for confounding factors are applied both before and after data collection, and their alert system is an example of a pre-collection control. Another control is their high bar in support of a major change in order for it to occur.

The fact that this latest poll was such a blowout completely decimates your argument here. Not only would this pool of “illegitimate votes” from multiple account holders and people who don’t meet your standard of sufficient expertise have to be between 50% and 100% the size of “legitimate votes” in your eyes, they’d have to somehow, miraculously, all vote the same way.

The methodology is absolutely in line with standard survey practice. Accept the evidence that most Wvw players don’t agree with what you wanted, stop looking for ways to gerrymander the results you want, and move on.

Liston.9708:

why would anyone assume its the pve players with 20 accounts on different servers and not the wvw players with the 20 accounts? there is no ‘pve server’ and wasn’t ‘pve servers’ when the 10$ accounts came out. if you were pve why create another account other than daily reward login?

the more likely scenario is the wvw player with 20 accounts on 20 servers since they had a reason to do this. Hence the ballot box stuffing more likely a wvw player not pve player.

most likely scenario is that the amount of people voting more than 2-3 times is negligible…

WvW players have multiple accounts, not PvE players. If you are making polls that are supposed to reflect the overall WvW community and not those who do not play the game mode or not just a few players onions ( as the case with multiple votes from the same individuals), you send out invites to the target audience ( as they did for the surveys used to create the game and for the HoT survey feedback) and place restrictions on voting to prevent the same players from voting repeatedly.

PvE players and Multiple accounts are two serrate issues that both impact the polls due to them not being filtered at all. More needs to be done to ensure:
1 WvW player 1= 1 WvW Player Vote

A player that comes in to mine nodes isn’t going to have a clue if all classes are PvP zone playable on the terrain of the map or not.

Liston.9708:

why would anyone assume its the pve players with 20 accounts on different servers and not the wvw players with the 20 accounts? there is no ‘pve server’ and wasn’t ‘pve servers’ when the 10$ accounts came out. if you were pve why create another account other than daily reward login?

the more likely scenario is the wvw player with 20 accounts on 20 servers since they had a reason to do this. Hence the ballot box stuffing more likely a wvw player not pve player.

most likely scenario is that the amount of people voting more than 2-3 times is negligible…

Because it’s not about being rational, it’s about finding the most appropriate scapegoat.