Guild Wars 2

Since we’ve been discussing links the last few days, and proper matching wasn’t exactly done for the first links. Plus we have the poll going on whether or not linking should stay, which seems like it will win. The fact that T1 servers probably shouldn’t have links, T8 servers stating they don’t want to be linked to T1, maybe they should linked to T4.

Is relinking still scheduled to be done at the next quarterly update in maybe july?
Or is there any thought to do it earlier?

Would be nice to see how matches would turn out if proper matching was done. I’d say the glicko has settled enough as even T4 is now locked on itself. The current size of T4 servers probably couldn’t compete in T3.

Hummm, the re- linking is still happening for testing purposes, or it doesnt matter and those server will be randomlly linked with other bigger servers?
Wont that damage smaller servers even more?
Wont that create more imbalance on the process?

Why make even that temporary, why not stabilize the game popupalation with locks and small merges?

Thanks for the reply McKenna, appreciate it.

It looked like the servers were just folded over in order, to create the current links, and we’re not sure if other factors were taken into consideration at that time, factors which have been revealed in the last 5 weeks.

But it gave me the answer I was looking for, if it’s still going to stay at the quarterly update for now, it’s still safe to do a transfer and I won’t have to worry about relinks happening in the the next coming weeks at the very least.

If you’re planning on moving the “guest” servers around ever then you need to do something to actually allow their communities to survive. This was mentioned as an issue in the original post about linking servers and nothing has been done to help retain the smaller servers identity.

• We used to have our own TS – but now usually use the “host” server one because that’s where the greater number of players are.
• We used to have our own Borderlands but now play on the “host” server BL.
• We used to have our own score but now can only contribute to the score of the “host” server.

Servers only exist in WvW now, and the only place you get to map-meet and map-chat with new players on your server used to be in your home BL – we can’t even do that now because you don’t know if a new player is on your server or the linked one. I know that once you start playing it doesn’t make a difference – but it will if you remove the linking and players find friendships and guilds split as a result.

If you’re planning on relinking servers, ever, then you need to give the servers somewhere to meet up with fellow server members (with the ability to invite guests for meetings).
I’d suggest server halls (could be copies of guild halls to save time provided you let enough people on the map) with all the crafting stations moved from citadel into the server hall and a mystic forge. That gives a reason to be there, a quick jump in and out and a place you can go to shout for help. For simplicity I’d have a key short cut to get in and exiting would put you in citadel on your home BL (or your spawn at your last WvW map).

I don’t really care how you do it, but give us a place to call home, or you won’t be “relinking servers”, you’ll be shuffling unpaid mercenaries at best and homeless refugees at worst.

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

Proper matches is subjective, but as for the relinking schedule we plan to hold a poll to determine how often it should happen (this is assuming World Linking wins the current poll).

It is also important to clarify that even though we might be able to hold relinking more regularly than quarterly there will still need to be some amount of weeks, we are still determining how many, before we can hold another relink because of glicko and time spent to make the match ups.

Will you fix population for world transfers for linked servers? Or give options to those that transferred in this time a choice to be on the linked server?

My guild just started playing WvW together again but they had paid to go through DR to be on Mag.

sephiroth.4217:

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

Proper matches is subjective, but as for the relinking schedule we plan to hold a poll to determine how often it should happen (this is assuming World Linking wins the current poll).

It is also important to clarify that even though we might be able to hold relinking more regularly than quarterly there will still need to be some amount of weeks, we are still determining how many, before we can hold another relink because of glicko and time spent to make the match ups.

Will you fix population for world transfers for linked servers? Or give options to those that transferred in this time a choice to be on the linked server?

My guild just started playing WvW together again but they had paid to go through DR to be on Mag.

they aren’t on mag. if the goal was to ensure friends playing together, you all needed to go to a guest. imagine all of et incorporated into bg – can you say super stacked?

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

Proper matches is subjective, but as for the relinking schedule we plan to hold a poll to determine how often it should happen (this is assuming World Linking wins the current poll).

It is also important to clarify that even though we might be able to hold relinking more regularly than quarterly there will still need to be some amount of weeks, we are still determining how many, before we can hold another relink because of glicko and time spent to make the match ups.

glicko shouldn’t come into the equation. the first links were admitted ‘bad’ links. no need to keep them any longer……

Liston.9708:

sephiroth.4217:

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

Proper matches is subjective, but as for the relinking schedule we plan to hold a poll to determine how often it should happen (this is assuming World Linking wins the current poll).

It is also important to clarify that even though we might be able to hold relinking more regularly than quarterly there will still need to be some amount of weeks, we are still determining how many, before we can hold another relink because of glicko and time spent to make the match ups.

Will you fix population for world transfers for linked servers? Or give options to those that transferred in this time a choice to be on the linked server?

My guild just started playing WvW together again but they had paid to go through DR to be on Mag.

they aren’t on mag. if the goal was to ensure friends playing together, you all needed to go to a guest. imagine all of et incorporated into bg – can you say super stacked?

Most of us came from T1 and only some of us got to Mag before they linked the servers, when the servers got linked, Mag became full due to the link so they went to DR so they could still be on Mag.

I read forums and kind of knew it wasn’t going to be permanent with it being called BETA and all but majority of players DON’T read forums and paid money to be on certain servers…

I only want to see WvW flourish again, not constantly be given reasons to quit or think “What a waste of time and money” which is what it is to those that paid for transfers during this BETA, people who had no idea the link was temporary.

don’t know what to tell you. if the server linkings were meant to be permanent, they could have just merged them….. I expect there to be a lot of complaints on how often they re-link and how they are re-linked. I voted No to the linkings so don’t care anymore myself.

Liston.9708:

don’t know what to tell you. if the server linkings were meant to be permanent, they could have just merged them….. I expect there to be a lot of complaints on how often they re-link and how they are re-linked. I voted No to the linkings so don’t care anymore myself.

I actually tough the link was a way to test it before merging, having re-links all the time.. looks weird, and not logical for the people playing always with diferent players.

Imo what they should do would be re-link some and add a 3rd link server to some servers that need it.

Population is a very very unstable variable for the re-link to work… it will be a mess.

Aeolus.3615:

having re-links all the time.. looks weird, and not logical for the people playing always with diferent players.

If the goal is to use server links as a poor-man’s population balancing mechanism, then it doesn’t look weird at all. And how is it different from people transferring around to play in different matches with different players anyway?

So basically, we’re stuck with Vabbi and will probably get more bandwagoners for at least a few more weeks?

Chaba.5410:

Aeolus.3615:

having re-links all the time.. looks weird, and not logical for the people playing always with diferent players.

If the goal is to use server links as a poor-man’s population balancing mechanism, then it doesn’t look weird at all. And how is it different from people transferring around to play in different matches with different players anyway?

Not knowing how they will be re-linked and at what interval is part of the issue. Another issue is even if the people who were t8 and may enjoy t4 style of play instead of t1 style were willing to transfer, all hosts are full. Moving to a t4 guest may not be permanent. I would think there needs to be some mechanism to allow people to move to at least some of the hosts. maybe even 1 free transfer from any nomad server to T4.

Right now I am not sure how anyone can build/rebuild a server. A server is either locked or a nomadic existence. If this is the case, why have servers?

Hope I am a negative Nellie and all works out, just not seeing it right now….

if you fixed the stacking issue, this wouldn’t matter