Since January or thereabouts when free transfers ended, pretty much every server has been set to high or very high. There is no reason aside from corporate profit that Anvil Rock should field the same transfer cost as Blackgate.
Now that we are coming up on a year can we get the transfer costs more inline with WvW population levels? Transfers that cost north of 130g or roughly $20 per player locks many players onto a server since transferring can be prohibitively expensive. This is true particularly for hard core WvW players who aren’t swimming in gold.
Sarcasm For Hire [SFH]
“Youre lips are movin and youre complaining about something thats wingeing.”
It’s because Anet, for some unfathomable reason, still hasn’t tied transfer costs to average WvW participation, something I suggested many months ago. Having it based on total server population is completely meaningless and ineffective.
It’s because Anet, for some unfathomable reason, still hasn’t tied transfer costs to average WvW participation, something I suggested many months ago. Having it based on total server population is completely meaningless and ineffective.
You and everyone else. It should be based on several aspects, but not WvW participation, or the high ranked low/medium participation servers would receive the flux of band-waggoners (what happened to SFR or PS back in the days) and the low ranked high participation servers are doomed forever.
It should be based on:
Tier position
End tiers (T7-T9) should be free to transfer (Cooldown of 3/4 weeks or 500g to transfer sooner).
Lower Tiers (T5-T6) – 500 gems.
Mid Tiers (T3-T4) – 1000 gems.
High Tiers (T1-T2) – 1800 gems.
—————— ~~ ~~ —-————-
Charr’s need more Love. All is Vain
—————— ~~ ~~ —-————-
Yup we been over this a few times now but anet doesn’t seem to care. Devona’s Rest is now the lowest wvw population server on NA. Yet we are still very high population and 1800 gems to transfer here. I also have to guest to somewhere else to get anything pve wise like champ trains or temples done cus we don’t have any pve population either. I am now convinced anet is manipulating the populations for gems or they are counting all the inactive accounts. Don’t believe me come guest to DR check out our lions arch champ trains temples tiq etc….
Yup we been over this a few times now but anet doesn’t seem to care. Devona’s Rest is now the lowest wvw population server on NA. Yet we are still very high population and 1800 gems to transfer here. I also have to guest to somewhere else to get anything pve wise like champ trains or temples done cus we don’t have any pve population either. I am now convinced anet is manipulating the populations for gems or they are counting all the inactive accounts. Don’t believe me come guest to DR check out our lions arch champ trains temples tiq etc….
They are almost certainly counting inactive accounts (I know they used to not count them or it didn’t seem like it), I only say that because I have seen the same type of thing on other servers….“Very High” and 20 people in WvW and nothing going on in PVE to speak of.
Eredon is about the same state except we’re only High pop. (Gais it is 800 gems cheaper u shud tottally transfer to et. we r pro i sware.)
I would love transfer to be tier based as well since lower tiers generally means lower WvW population. It would be nice to get a bit more population on the lower tiers because it is getting harder to find people to fight right now.
Threnody of Belle – Necromancer and PvE Carebear (24,500 achievement points)
Maguuma
#allisvain
This has been discussed to no end, it was brought up in the CD population thread and the Dev’s acknowledged it. As I said before that thread was just a way to make us think they were listening. They don’t even have to use WvW population, base it off ranking than theres very little work involved as they only have to monitor rank.
Current population measures total number of players that declared this world their home since beginning of GW2, if they play during the last month/year or not is not distinguished.
This of course is totally unrelated to how many people actually play and even less related to how many people actually play WvW.
On the other side world-transfer is nearly meaning less for PvE people: they can guest everywhere for free.
Therefore transfers are mainly WvW-caused and the costs should be computed based on active WvW-measures:
- total number of person-hours spend in the last match (1 person on any map for 1 hour = 1 person-hour)
- total number of person-hours spend in the queue
- glicko-score/rank
- total WEXP acquired by people on this server during the last match
- sum of WEXP-score (at transfer) of newcomers during the last week
- ….
Any of them would work better to compute transfer costs than the currently used "amount of aktive and inactive (rotting in the catacombs of your server ) PvE+PvP+WvW-players " and a combination of several of them would be even better.
Yes they do count inactive accounts. What they need to do is create a distinction between server capacity (which is what the population levels currently tell us) and active population. Then base transfer costs on the latter.
Id like to transfer to a lower ranked server, but none of them ever say low pop. So Im stuck in Tier 1 not playing WvW.
You’re right. Servers are all medium & above. Server populations are totally different to world vs world. You could have a high pop server and still struggle to compete in world vs world because a good percentage of players play guild wars for other reasons outside of WvW.
I can think of three servers off the top of my head struggling for world vs world numbers; vabbi, whiteside ridge & fissure of woe in the European bronze league.
Id like to transfer to a lower ranked server, but none of them ever say low pop. So Im stuck in Tier 1 not playing WvW.
You’re right. Servers are all medium & above. Server populations are totally different to world vs world. You could have a high pop server and still struggle to compete in world vs world because a good percentage of players play guild wars for other reasons outside of WvW.
Both of you make too much sense. Anet doesn’t like sense making. Instead propose increasing map limit and create a system for people waiting in queue so they don’t have to transfer. o wait. anet already implementing that.
Might also be a decent use for our hoards of badges. Sure Anet wouldn’t make any money off it (initially), but it easily could deplete the thousands of badges people are hoarding.. especially if they scaled with each transfer..
1st transfer – 250 badges
2nd transfer – 500 badges
3rd transfer – 750 badges
4th transfer – 1000 badges
5th transfer – 2000 badges
6th transfer – 3000 badges
7th transfer – 4000 badges
8th transfer – 5000 badges (caps here)
Just throwing this out there. Considering I’d think that the players who primarily transfer are WvW’ers, why not use the primary WvW commodity to do so, the one we have an abundance of?
I’d assume that people with enough badges to front these transfer costs are primarily WvW’ers anyway.
Just throwing this out there. Considering I’d think that the players who primarily transfer are WvW’ers, why not use the primary WvW commodity to do so, the one we have an abundance of?
Every gem used is income for Anet (even if you buy them on the TP).
This would be perfect imo. Even the CD would serve a very important purpose. ANet still makes money off gem sales, and people can move down to help balance the pops without breaking the bank.
It should be free any time you transfer to a server with a lower population than yours, but obscenely high if you want to transfer up.
That would eventually equalize all servers I think
This would unfairly penalize people that are not in guilds. Large guilds help players pay the transfer costs, and in some cases the server the guild is moving to helps pay also.
The transfer costs have to be reasonable, and work fairly for everyone. Being in a top wvw guild where servers will pay you a lot of gold to transfer to them, should not give you an advantage.
My guild is transferring from a very high to a high server. After 6 of us moved, the new server changed to a very high population, shooting the price up. It’s hard to believe that 6 players can make that much of an impact in population.. and if that is the case, I think server merges need to happen. A dev told us to wait until very early in the morning for the population to change… Which leads me to believe their measure of population is based solely on the number of players currently logged on to that server. Has anyone from Anet actually explained how server population is calculated?
) PvE+PvP+WvW-players " and a combination of several of them would be even better.