Guild Wars 2

Fact 1: BG is the ONLY server, NA or EU to never finish a skirmish this match in third.

Fact 2: BG is not linked, the other two opponents are linked.

Fact 3: ANet Dev starts thread about creating more servers to improve matches, gets 6 pages of responses. Closes thread for lack of interest. Afterwards BG and JQ open up for transfers.

There was a time in EU that nobody wanted a match with Vizunah, has NA got to the point where it’s best to tank your server out of a match with BG?

We should probably all transfer there, especially if they are adding rewards for winning each skirmish.

great in theory but not enough ppl would boycott it for it to matter.

boycott wont be needed – people will simply take the week off at some point in any severely unbalanced match – no matter which servers are involved. the question is how soon in the week it happens.

People are not really going to boycott their playing time, unless they’re getting overwhelmed pretty badly by BG. So you can call for a boycott but doubt it’ll happen, same as hardcore double teams never happen.

But if you can’t beat’em, join’em.

Xenesis.6389:

People are not really going to boycott their playing time, unless they’re getting overwhelmed pretty badly by BG. So you can call for a boycott but doubt it’ll happen, same as hardcore double teams ALMOST never happen.

But if you can’t beat’em, join’em.

fixed, we all know the one time that did happen, it was pretty glorious.

Yes kittening boycott them.

Jerus.4350:

Xenesis.6389:

People are not really going to boycott their playing time, unless they’re getting overwhelmed pretty badly by BG. So you can call for a boycott but doubt it’ll happen, same as hardcore double teams ALMOST never happen.

But if you can’t beat’em, join’em.

fixed, we all know the one time that did happen, it was pretty glorious.

Well yeah that one time lol.
Too bad it doesn’t happen more often.

-slips on floor-

…omg, what did I just slip on? Is that…oh jeez, who got salt all over the forums…

Scampy.9506:

-slips on floor-

…omg, what did I just slip on? Is that…oh jeez, who got salt all over the forums…

Salt is used for traction…

0/10 bud

RodOfDeath.5247:

Scampy.9506:

-slips on floor-

…omg, what did I just slip on? Is that…oh jeez, who got salt all over the forums…

Salt is used for traction…

0/10 bud

That’s true, I typically salt my kitchen floor so my bare feet have a better grip.

Guys, call off the search. I found our salt perpetrator.

RodOfDeath.5247:

Scampy.9506:

-slips on floor-

…omg, what did I just slip on? Is that…oh jeez, who got salt all over the forums…

Salt is used for traction…

0/10 bud

Ok, I love you a little bit for this.

Scampy.9506:

RodOfDeath.5247:

Scampy.9506:

-slips on floor-

…omg, what did I just slip on? Is that…oh jeez, who got salt all over the forums…

Salt is used for traction…

0/10 bud

That’s true, I typically salt my kitchen floor so my bare feet have a better grip.

Guys, call off the search. I found our salt perpetrator.

Why do you have to post with an account you haven’t posted with in one year?

Swamurabi.7890:

Scampy.9506:

RodOfDeath.5247:

Scampy.9506:

-slips on floor-

…omg, what did I just slip on? Is that…oh jeez, who got salt all over the forums…

Salt is used for traction…

0/10 bud

That’s true, I typically salt my kitchen floor so my bare feet have a better grip.

Guys, call off the search. I found our salt perpetrator.

Why do you have to post with an account you haven’t posted with in one year?

Well, probably because it’s my only account and I have been a BG member for years. All this QQ against HateGate is just too irresistible to stay quiet. We have fewer players than JQ, as stated by ANet, yet everyone wants to boycott BG.

Thanks for you interest in me, though. No idea how long ago or how many times you’ve posted, nor do I care.

RodOfDeath.5247:

Salt is used for traction…

0/10 bud

Only on ice (or rather to melt ice) On everything else salt would decrease traction.

Scampy.9506:

We have fewer players than JQ, as stated by ANet

The same post also said BG have less players than CD+Dh+DR who barely even compete in T4.
You really want us to take it seriously?

Jayne.9251:

RodOfDeath.5247:

Scampy.9506:

-slips on floor-

…omg, what did I just slip on? Is that…oh jeez, who got salt all over the forums…

Salt is used for traction…

0/10 bud

Ok, I love you a little bit for this.

:)

Scampy.9506:

Well, probably because it’s my only account and I have been a BG member for years. All this QQ against HateGate is just too irresistible to stay quiet. We have fewer players than JQ, as stated by ANet, yet everyone wants to boycott BG.

Take a look at recent results even before BG opening, that will tell you how great Anets population calculations are. Seriously BG was winning T1 before it opened. Opening it up has led to at least 4 guilds moving there and undoubtedly numerous pugs, so why shouldn’t those players on other servers who simply want an even playing field be salty?

Jeknar.6184:

Scampy.9506:

We have fewer players than JQ, as stated by ANet

The same post also said BG have less players than CD+Dh+DR who barely even compete in T4.
You really want us to take it seriously?

why not have a matchup of BG vs T4 then, population # dont mean anything if 1 side has machine gun and the other side has pocket knife lol.

Is this the hipster’s version of a hunger strike? Wouldn’t mind BG vs us in T4. Think I would have fun, just don’t let us get stuck with them for a whole year in the name of tier balance. They got more guilds transferring to them than all of T4 combined rofl.

Next weeks T1 matchup after glicko adjustments. BG/JQ/CD

Battle of the overstacked.

It might just be wiser to boycott wvw and hope for a company that can do population balance right in an RvR setting.

The salt is real, just ask anet for a glico adjust down or buy the gems again and transfer out

Taxidriver.2043:

Jeknar.6184:

Scampy.9506:

We have fewer players than JQ, as stated by ANet

The same post also said BG have less players than CD+Dh+DR who barely even compete in T4.
You really want us to take it seriously?

why not have a matchup of BG vs T4 then, population # dont mean anything if 1 side has machine gun and the other side has pocket knife lol.

I think that’s a great idea. But then players will come to forum to complain about how they want their old T4 matches.

so the T4 linked servers have more players than BG whos fault is that I wonder??? if thats true shouldnt T4 linked server matchup against T1?

Swamurabi.7890:

Fact 3: ANet Dev starts thread about creating more servers to improve matches, gets 6 pages of responses. Closes thread for lack of interest. Afterwards BG and JQ open up for transfers.

Just gonna stop you right there on that one. Just because a thread is 6 pages long doesn’t mean its 6 pages of positive responses. I didn’t read all of the posts on that thread, but a lot of the ones I did read were against the idea (for whatever stupid reason). You shouldn’t go around accusing ANet like this in such a biased way. Long threads do not automatically mean support.

OriOri.8724:

Swamurabi.7890:

Fact 3: ANet Dev starts thread about creating more servers to improve matches, gets 6 pages of responses. Closes thread for lack of interest. Afterwards BG and JQ open up for transfers.

Just gonna stop you right there on that one. Just because a thread is 6 pages long doesn’t mean its 6 pages of positive responses. I didn’t read all of the posts on that thread, but a lot of the ones I did read were against the idea (for whatever stupid reason). You shouldn’t go around accusing ANet like this in such a biased way. Long threads do not automatically mean support.

Most of them partially suported the idea if all servers were closed and we started fresh in new ones and everyone that said so pointed out why. But they just disregarded everything we said with “they have no interest in our proposal” when they did asked us what we would change on it in the first place.

OriOri.8724:

Swamurabi.7890:

Fact 3: ANet Dev starts thread about creating more servers to improve matches, gets 6 pages of responses. Closes thread for lack of interest. Afterwards BG and JQ open up for transfers.

Just gonna stop you right there on that one. Just because a thread is 6 pages long doesn’t mean its 6 pages of positive responses. I didn’t read all of the posts on that thread, but a lot of the ones I did read were against the idea (for whatever stupid reason). You shouldn’t go around accusing ANet like this in such a biased way. Long threads do not automatically mean support.

It’s one of the top 5 threads in terms of both posts and views in the last 20 pages of threads. Is that enough proof for you?

Swamurabi.7890:

OriOri.8724:

Swamurabi.7890:

Fact 3: ANet Dev starts thread about creating more servers to improve matches, gets 6 pages of responses. Closes thread for lack of interest. Afterwards BG and JQ open up for transfers.

Just gonna stop you right there on that one. Just because a thread is 6 pages long doesn’t mean its 6 pages of positive responses. I didn’t read all of the posts on that thread, but a lot of the ones I did read were against the idea (for whatever stupid reason). You shouldn’t go around accusing ANet like this in such a biased way. Long threads do not automatically mean support.

It’s one of the top 5 threads in terms of both posts and views in the last 20 pages of threads. Is that enough proof for you?

That doesn’t mean that it had positive support. This is a gaming forum, people come out in droves to complain about stuff. Large threads are not guaranteed to be in support of something, which is exactly what you are trying to imply. Large threads are just as often, if not more often, critiquing the idea or being in outright disagreement with it.

I’m not saying I agree with Anets decision, but you absolutely cannot go around claiming that a large thread automatically means support. It could just as easily mean huge opposition to the idea, as evidenced very clearly by the threads on the change to GoB vendor when it was made.

Swamurabi.7890:

Next weeks T1 matchup after glicko adjustments. BG/JQ/CD

Battle of the overstacked.

CD+Dh+DR is currently the bottom of the barrel and losing in T4. Here’s the hint people, ANet’s definition of “population” is flawed.

Don’t kid yourselves. This proves it. Anet’s definition of WvW Population is NOT the means to balance servers and never has been. The inherent bias to large servers is allowed because they have created their own perceived problem when ANet decided to link servers.

And ANet still not addressed the core WvW issue.

OriOri.8724:

Swamurabi.7890:

OriOri.8724:

Swamurabi.7890:

Fact 3: ANet Dev starts thread about creating more servers to improve matches, gets 6 pages of responses. Closes thread for lack of interest. Afterwards BG and JQ open up for transfers.

Just gonna stop you right there on that one. Just because a thread is 6 pages long doesn’t mean its 6 pages of positive responses. I didn’t read all of the posts on that thread, but a lot of the ones I did read were against the idea (for whatever stupid reason). You shouldn’t go around accusing ANet like this in such a biased way. Long threads do not automatically mean support.

It’s one of the top 5 threads in terms of both posts and views in the last 20 pages of threads. Is that enough proof for you?

That doesn’t mean that it had positive support. This is a gaming forum, people come out in droves to complain about stuff. Large threads are not guaranteed to be in support of something, which is exactly what you are trying to imply. Large threads are just as often, if not more often, critiquing the idea or being in outright disagreement with it.

I’m not saying I agree with Anets decision, but you absolutely cannot go around claiming that a large thread automatically means support. It could just as easily mean huge opposition to the idea, as evidenced very clearly by the threads on the change to GoB vendor when it was made.

I never claimed that a large thread equaled support, I claimed that the players have shown interest in the thread, which means that it is a issue that is of concern to a lot of players. Support doesn’t equal interest and interest doesn’t equal support.

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

Blackgate and Jade Quarry both opened because they were below the population cap. Blackgate currently has a smaller population than Jade Quarry and some of the combined linked worlds populations (combined linked worlds population example being Crystal Desert + Darkhaven + Devona’s Rest combined has a higher population than Blackgate). With all that being said, we do keep track of the transfers that happen. Since we have been seeing an increase in transfer behavior with the past 2 world links, we are discussing whether we want to change how we calculate WvW world populations or if we want to lower the WvW population caps.

It’s obvious from Anet’s perspective that CD>BG and that JQ>BG. Put them in a matchup. It should be esport worthy.

BG’s population is nothing to be afraid of. Even when they have one gigantic omni-blob that’s 80 people deep, they don’t win every fight. Their coverage can be troublesome but many players have stopped caring much about the score long ago. BG, YB and NSP are probably the only NA servers left that have a large community still interested in maintaining score. Every other server just wants good fights and focuses on attacking objectives to draw out the fights.

Well whatever the number of transfer they get, the quality of fights against BG are still laughable.