Guild Wars 2

Kraggy.4169:

As usual, this poll like all polls deceive to flatter .. knowing the % who are ‘for’ (or ‘against’) something is used by those who support that view to assert the ‘majority’ of players are of that view .. without the poll showing what percentage of the TOTAL population that the poll applies to (in this case the number of players to partake in WvW) are of this view, the claim of the ‘majority’ view is simply an unproven assertion.

Too True. It would be a good idea if we could get an actual counter of number of people polled. This wouldn’t be giving away the key metric of number of people that WvW but would help in understanding the actual percentages.

Difficult to see how this is a net bad idea. I would like to see the teams mixed up a bit especially more focus on balancing the time zones but otherwise it has been a good thing at least for most of us.

Voted “Yes” for the fact that activity has increased and has extended playing hours. It’s good to see action later into the night instead of shop being closed up at 12 midnight my time for the most part. Although, have to state that T4 has become stagnant. These servers are stuck. If they rose in Glicko (unlikely), they would get chewed up & spit out due to population differences between T4 & T3. Maybe unlinking servers to the upper tiers and linking them with the lowest ones would help? But, then “Culture Clash” might become too much of a barrier. My server gets along great with our linked server. But, this is not the case from much of what I have read here & other places. Also, TZ coverage seems an issue as it always has been on different servers. If there is coverage outside of NA or NA coverage on other servers who have mostly SEA & OCX-that is a big plus. Works both ways. So, what is the answer? IDK-will leave that up to y’all to find a solution. I play to enjoy myself, not to burn my circuits doing a job that others get paid for-a job that I don’t envy. What is the saying? “Ya can’t please all of the people all of the time”. But, compromises are possible even in GW2 -I think o_O

Hopefully server links remain, due to linked servers becoming full after the linking at least 5 players I know of paid to go to DR to be on Mag.

Kaiser.9873:

In the olden days you would still have X number of players, but instead of one blob there would be 4 different groups running around. Now those 4 groups of 15-20 voltron into a giant blob, and it isn’t as fun as it used to be.

I agree that low pop fights are better found in PvP as WvW is meant for larger clashes, but I do wish that the blobs would separate a bit more.

Yeah, but I’m not talking 5v5 fights (I am not sure why anyone thinks I want 3-5 people zergs) But I would like to have the option of one big zerg of like 10-20 people and then have a bunch of people NOT with the zerg doing support stuff. Taking camps, stopping yaks, scouting etc. That’s what I liked about being on a lower tier server as there is more strategy beyond “Blob up and fight 50-100 people vs 50-100 people”.

ET on regular basis at T8 was outnumbered on a regular basis, we were forced to adapt, and before the server link we were going to actually hit T7 (the week of actually). We did that through hard work in spite of our numbers.

But then the server was linked with Blackgate (who are very welcoming), without asking btw, what the lower tier servers felt about the matter. While tensions have lowered, we have entire guilds that LEFT higher tier servers because they didn’t like the Blob v Blob mentality, to be thrust back into it.

And then there are the 3-4 hour queue times. We were used to just hopping in and going around taking things, fighting skirmishes, building seige etc. at peak times or reset. We had rally nights (and later rally weeks). But we’re lucky if we can get more than 5 people in a single guild into the BL’s at the same time do to queue times. And that’s a GOOD change?

Linking servers saved WvW.

The guild I’m in is down to just two WvW rally nights a week, at severely reduced numbers, due to a combination of the ridiculous queues and the blob fights that are even blobbier than the ones we’d relatively recently paid to escape. People are getting fed up and quitting the game entirely.

We can’t play when or where we want due to the queues, and we can’t play how we want due to the map-queue omni-blob tactics that every ****ing high tier server is using—we either join the blob ourselves and become mindless bloblings, or get run over by the other hoard of mindless bloblings.

Since it’s looking like the blob servers have blobbed the poll, I can only hope you’ll make significant changes to your implementation of world linking, and soon—the current one is killing the “guest” servers.

sionnach.5391:

Speaking for myself on Kaineng, I am NOT in favor of World Linking as it stands right now. However, the poll seems to indicate that Linking will get some attention if this poll passes – so given an impossible choice, I guess it’s Yes. I’m hopeful it can be reworked into a positive system.

This was why I voted yes as well, however posts by the devs have me worried that they see the current system as it is as a solution to population disparities when it isn’t and that further development on it might not be until after other changes such as the scoring changes, in which case it might not be for 6-12 months.

TheHeretic.3529:

I voted yes because I wanted maps to be full again like a couple of years ago, and this addressed it.

Anyone who says this is a bandaid is just flat out wrong.

The OP stated that population has dropped significantly on TC, many on the smaller servers are clearly dissatisfied with the linkage system and therefore will probably stop playing as well, which implies nothing has really changed therefore it is a bandaid.

Kaiser.9873:

Cloud.7613:

Karnasis.6892:

I am from a T8 server, and want to go back to T8. My reasoning is that I enjoy low population fights. I think it can also be a bit more strategic than “let’s blob over everyone and make it blob v blob”.

If you want low population fights try PvP, because WvW isn’t designed for nothing but that which happens in T8 brackets.

Blobbing is strategic, just not how you’d like it. I don’t think blobbing is healthy for the mode, however this is entirely a different issue and it wont be solved by reversing the process.

In the olden days you would still have X number of players, but instead of one blob there would be 4 different groups running around. Now those 4 groups of 15-20 voltron into a giant blob, and it isn’t as fun as it used to be.

I agree that low pop fights are better found in PvP as WvW is meant for larger clashes, but I do wish that the blobs would separate a bit more.

I wish there was more reasons to split groups as well, but with an AoE cap and no player collision there is very few reasons not to blob up.

With that said, this game mode runs on having a big player base and linking servers helped that greatly with that.

Kaiser.9873:

Cloud.7613:

Karnasis.6892:

I am from a T8 server, and want to go back to T8. My reasoning is that I enjoy low population fights. I think it can also be a bit more strategic than “let’s blob over everyone and make it blob v blob”.

If you want low population fights try PvP, because WvW isn’t designed for nothing but that which happens in T8 brackets.

Blobbing is strategic, just not how you’d like it. I don’t think blobbing is healthy for the mode, however this is entirely a different issue and it wont be solved by reversing the process.

In the olden days you would still have X number of players, but instead of one blob there would be 4 different groups running around. Now those 4 groups of 15-20 voltron into a giant blob, and it isn’t as fun as it used to be.

I agree that low pop fights are better found in PvP as WvW is meant for larger clashes, but I do wish that the blobs would separate a bit more.

It was always this way in NA from about a year into the game, and only recently in EU.

Karnasis.6892:

Kaiser.9873:

In the olden days you would still have X number of players, but instead of one blob there would be 4 different groups running around. Now those 4 groups of 15-20 voltron into a giant blob, and it isn’t as fun as it used to be.

I agree that low pop fights are better found in PvP as WvW is meant for larger clashes, but I do wish that the blobs would separate a bit more.

Yeah, but I’m not talking 5v5 fights (I am not sure why anyone thinks I want 3-5 people zergs) But I would like to have the option of one big zerg of like 10-20 people and then have a bunch of people NOT with the zerg doing support stuff. Taking camps, stopping yaks, scouting etc. That’s what I liked about being on a lower tier server as there is more strategy beyond “Blob up and fight 50-100 people vs 50-100 people”.

I am though. That’s what I enjoyed, going in with a few friends, roam for fights, take a few things in between/to get fights, have some good fights, move about the map, perhaps follow a tag for a bit and act as a gank and move off of the tag to do our own thing at any time. But when you are talking one big blob, 3-5 people would make little difference anyways. It isn’t fun for everyone, and some keep saying “well just adapt” “it was meant for 50v50 fights only anyways” “just go to pvp”. Some will adapt by quitting, how is that good? And no Pvp is not the same thing by any means.

I want to know where these 15 on 15 PvP modes you guys are talking about.

WvW is fun since the new update. it would be nice if there are random linking of worlds to avoid guilds having spies,etc. The community is nice, my zerg did not randomly kill small parties in WvW.

I love it.it brought life back to WvW and to my server I am on..I love the constant fights,the interaction with other people from the other server we are merged with. WvW is pretty much all i do on GW2, and I was so excited when i heard about the merging of the servers..only thing i don’t like is the long que you have to wait in a borderland but i since i love WvW . i will wait it out. World vs World is so amazing now to play.

the fights are emptier than before the linking. i feel like i’m playing more out of habit these days.

Our server is doing worse since the link. It is awful.

Cloud.7613:

I wish there was more reasons to split groups as well, but with an AoE cap and no player collision there is very few reasons not to blob up.

With that said, this game mode runs on having a big player base and linking servers helped that greatly with that.

Actually I am wondering how the 5 minute ticks will impact this. In theory this should favor the smaller groups (at least in PPT terms) since taking a larger force to a smaller target would be less effective then taking 4 other targets at the same time. That should mean more work for havocs and soloers. In theory.

TheGrimm.5624:

Cloud.7613:

I wish there was more reasons to split groups as well, but with an AoE cap and no player collision there is very few reasons not to blob up.

With that said, this game mode runs on having a big player base and linking servers helped that greatly with that.

Actually I am wondering how the 5 minute ticks will impact this. In theory this should favor the smaller groups (at least in PPT terms) since taking a larger force to a smaller target would be less effective then taking 4 other targets at the same time. That should mean more work for havocs and soloers. In theory.

Not going to change the fact that the majority of the playerbase has a EOTM karma train mentality.

Nothing forces players to blob, they do it because they want to.

Us who don’t like blobbing all day are in the minority, years ago we were the majority but most of those players left a long time ago.

I vote NO.. and i know my vote means nothing by the way things are going. So thanks for the useless poll which will change nothing. How is going from facing 2 servers to facing 3 sometimes 4 servers against 1 balanced or even fun?

I appreciate that those in charge are try to balance things out , but it has only made some stronger by screwing others over. So thanks for screwing me over.

YES for the world linking, less chance for PvD/PvE, but it has room for improvement.
Thanks ANet! Please continue to make WvW fun

Up to 77% for yes.

XTR.9604:

Up to 77% for yes.

Sweet!

We are one step closer to my 3 super sided faction war! It’s going to be glorious!

Sry its better to have more ppl to fight then it have less at that just the truth of it at the end of the day. World ideintlys have been gone for a long time even before mega worlds for pve. Its more about guild ideintlys or leader ideintlys in wvw and it has been this way for a very long time nearly day one. I vote to keep it there are ppl to fight for once and it is enjoyable.

Tyler Bearce.3427:

Just curious, what world do you play for? I’m looking at the current breakdown of votes by world right now, and nearly every world has voted in favor of World Linking. There are a few that are 50/50, and one that is against it.

Sadly that just the way ppl think voting works if you cry about something you get your way even when things are not going your way. We send “attks” to ppl who do not think the way that a few want never understanding that they are not the main group of ppl. The current election is a realy good example of this ppl who are losing/lost cant deal with the fact that they are and so there group of ppl cant deal with the ideal too. No one can deal with lost any more it seems.

I’m willing to bet that the 50/50 are the ones that got thrown in with T1, possibly some T2, while FC is the one against it.

Those are individual problems which can be addressed in the next link.

To FC players:
Most links are not like what you guys are experiencing, its actually pretty nice. Yes there are kinks to work out, but that is a very small price to pay for having actual people to play with and against.

To the 50/50s:
Same as above, with regards to the blobbing playstyle, you do not have to partake in it. More often then not you can go havoc on another map etc. unless you’re stuck on T1 with all maps qued. You have options. If you are stuck, then hopefully the next link will improve the situation, also, not all servers will treat you the same. Most are friendly and glad to see and talk to and play with other people, if you guys got the short end of the stick on this, that is a bummer, but do give another rotation or 2 of this a try before passing final judgement.

I’m not certain why you can’t take 15 people and go do stuff on any of the T1 servers. You should be able to be perfectly useful and productive with 15 folks. But, it might take a mindset change to accomplish it, as that number no longer represents the bulk of your army. You’ll have to play the ninja instead of the brigade.

Speaking as someone who plays on BG, queues aren’t a problem right now. Plenty of people to play with and against, and you’ll see a queue sometimes, but it goes by quickly unless you’re dead-set on getting into one particular map.

I like the linkage system but understand it may be disruptive to server identity. If there were a way to solve that issue … server linking certainly gives Anet a way to use our server-stacking tendencies against us in a mostly healthy way. Perhaps if we ditched the idea of “host” and “guest” servers but kept the functionality?

Lowen.7109:

I’m not certain why you can’t take 15 people and go do stuff on any of the T1 servers. You should be able to be perfectly useful and productive with 15 folks. But, it might take a mindset change to accomplish it, as that number no longer represents the bulk of your army. You’ll have to play the ninja instead of the brigade.

Speaking as someone who plays on BG, queues aren’t a problem right now. Plenty of people to play with and against, and you’ll see a queue sometimes, but it goes by quickly unless you’re dead-set on getting into one particular map.

I like the linkage system but understand it may be disruptive to server identity. If there were a way to solve that issue … server linking certainly gives Anet a way to use our server-stacking tendencies against us in a mostly healthy way. Perhaps if we ditched the idea of “host” and “guest” servers but kept the functionality?

You can. I was just out the other night in T1, solo roaming, and running with some small(3-5 players) pug havoc squads. It is very doable. Just have to be careful.

Vote no because now you have to wait 5 more minutes to get into the gamemode?

yeah no ty.

#FirstTierProblems

WvW was dead for us (EU T9) and I’d rather cut myself than return to the state we’ve been suffering for 2.5 years while smart T1/2 kitten would insult us on forums just for mentionning it.

DiscoJacen.1590:

Vote no because now you have to wait 5 more minutes to get into the gamemode?

yeah no ty.

#FirstTierProblem

5 minutes? The T1 queues are literally hours at prime time. Some of us have jobs and can’t spend what precious little free time we have waiting in line. Before the linking, we didn’t have to, and we still had plenty of fun in T8.

DiscoJacen.1590:

Vote no because now you have to wait 5 more minutes to get into the gamemode?

yeah no ty.

#FirstTierProblems

WvW was dead for us (EU T9) and I’d rather cut myself than return to the state we’ve been suffering for 2.5 years while smart T1/2 kitten would insult us on forums just for mentionning it.

you always had the choice to transfer. maybe a simple merge dissolving the guests and giving the displaced 1 free transfer works for everyone currently on a guest server……

dank.3680:

TheGrimm.5624:

Cloud.7613:

I wish there was more reasons to split groups as well, but with an AoE cap and no player collision there is very few reasons not to blob up.

With that said, this game mode runs on having a big player base and linking servers helped that greatly with that.

Actually I am wondering how the 5 minute ticks will impact this. In theory this should favor the smaller groups (at least in PPT terms) since taking a larger force to a smaller target would be less effective then taking 4 other targets at the same time. That should mean more work for havocs and soloers. In theory.

Not going to change the fact that the majority of the playerbase has a EOTM karma train mentality.

Nothing forces players to blob, they do it because they want to.

Us who don’t like blobbing all day are in the minority, years ago we were the majority but most of those players left a long time ago.

It forces people who work together to blob, If I can stand on Commander X and make his front line survive a lot more than it could do with just a skeleton front line, that’s what I’m going to do.

The reason most of those players left was because they realized this, maybe you will soon. If it was up to me, there would be no AoE cap just like ESO had none. That way smaller tactical groups can do things against blobs other than run.

Not taking anything away from smaller groups, they can win the score war but blobbing does things that it shouldn’t necessarily be able to do.

Already voted NO long ago… I’m from Desolation server.

Server linking kinda ruins the culture of the server and everything becomes a globalized mess just like it did when they linked all servers outside of wvw. You start not recognizing the people of your server, no one knows anyone.

Cloud.7613:

dank.3680:

TheGrimm.5624:

Cloud.7613:

I wish there was more reasons to split groups as well, but with an AoE cap and no player collision there is very few reasons not to blob up.

With that said, this game mode runs on having a big player base and linking servers helped that greatly with that.

Actually I am wondering how the 5 minute ticks will impact this. In theory this should favor the smaller groups (at least in PPT terms) since taking a larger force to a smaller target would be less effective then taking 4 other targets at the same time. That should mean more work for havocs and soloers. In theory.

Not going to change the fact that the majority of the playerbase has a EOTM karma train mentality.

Nothing forces players to blob, they do it because they want to.

Us who don’t like blobbing all day are in the minority, years ago we were the majority but most of those players left a long time ago.

It forces people who work together to blob, If I can stand on Commander X and make his front line survive a lot more than it could do with just a skeleton front line, that’s what I’m going to do.

The reason most of those players left was because they realized this, maybe you will soon. If it was up to me, there would be no AoE cap just like ESO had none. That way smaller tactical groups can do things against blobs other than run.

Not taking anything away from smaller groups, they can win the score war but blobbing does things that it shouldn’t necessarily be able to do.

The problem is no AoE cap will probably encourage even larger blobs. The ktrain mentality isn’t going anywhere until it’s simply not usable, and boons are the most important part of the PvP formats, such that sharing and stacking is absolutely necessary. It’s not massive pugs groups winning WvW, in which case a target uncap probably would work (although we’d see even bigger performance issues/lag as a result); rather, it’s organized groups of 30+ and then some with pugs. The organized boon-share groups will have an even bigger reason to get more organized and bigger if they start taking more damage and thus need to share more boons, etc.

I don’t think there’s honestly a good solution to omniblobbing in respect to fights. Boons and strong cohesion let for some groups to bust zergs, but if these same people are in the blob, then zerg-busting isn’t and shouldn’t be possible. Strength in numbers really shouldn’t carry any disadvantages except for clumsiness in mobility, but the problem is structures don’t scale by attackers, and siege is hard and slow to build for smaller groups.

Really, the best way to bust blobs is probably on the objective-flip level by causing tower lords to scale much more aggressively in terms of health (it doesn’t need better damage to slow a flip) after about 5-10 people, and keep the scaling based on the number of enemies near the objective, not the lord, for a period of time. This would cause a 50-man blob to take much longer to take a tower than it currently does, making overall capture speed comparable to a group of maybe 10, and the scaling timer (which can have a large radius to account for manned siege) to prevent a blob from just dropping six catas and leaving for a group of five to flip really quickly; they have to commit to siege and take, or perhaps wait a period of seven minutes.

Of course, this poses a second, equally-difficult problem of then having issues where passing by a tower with a big fight guild going to defend an objective or press on in the midst of five people capping it would ramp the scaling into infinity and make the poor group of five unproductive, which would frustrate small groups enough to probably lose the desire to run in small groups even if it’s optimal PPT.

Create 2 tier types.

Tier 1 for the players / servers who want to stack to win.

Tier 2 for all the players / servers that prefer small group / roaming / solo play. Make the WvW server player limits much smaller on Tier 2.