I’ve been reading a lot of scattered complaints on various sites about how the current population distribution within WvW is handled. I did some thinking and wanted to hear more on the subject.
(As I understand it) Current Method-
I have no real grudge against the current state. In fact I think it will probably balance out and it is the best choice for the game. At the moment the only restriction is a population cap. Let’s say the population cap is at 100 per server. In the current system numbers such as these could appear at anytime during a WvW match, Server A 50/100, Server B 95/100, and lastly Server C 43/100. These numbers are clearly messed up at that time. However, every server has its peak times and down times so in theory A and C will have their turn at some point. This is not always the case. B could be at 50/100 but A and C could end up in a stalemate at 87 to 90 players. They would fight to no gain and B would eventually own all during their unopposed peak time. There are a million other factors one could come up with when looking at the system. So the system works in a perfect world however this is not a perfect world. Things might even out as they go on or they might not.
Dynamic Capping Method-
This is another idea that simply sounds good but would not apply to the game very well. The main idea behind this method is that there will always be an equal or similar amount of players. This sounds good right or does it? Let’s say Server A, B, and C have 100/100. All three decline, the new numbers end up being A: 80/100, B: 70/100, C: 55/100. C is once again still at a disadvantage. And since A and B are still at high populations no new players can join significantly increasing que time. Further on there is a major Decline. Now all three servers have 20 people. Neither server can acquire more people because it’s capped to stay equal. Que times are hugely increased once more. It would also take much longer to reach max population on all 3 servers. So once again the idea has its benefits but even more negatives. I personally do not like this idea.
Little radical idea of mine-
What if it were possible to have the worlds filled on every server without actually having to have any players even being around? Sounds like crazy talk at first but I think this idea is pretty practical. Some people on here may have played the Star Wars Battlefront games in the past. Remember how each side was equal in the massively scaled battles? This is because of the use of Npcs. Some of you might groan at the fact of adding npcs but what if they were made viable to command and control. So lets go back to servers A, B, C all 3 are now capped due to AI players. It’s during peak time for B so 100/100 of the players are alive not Npcs. A and C however, will still be at 100/100 even though only about 50% are actually human players. I really believe that if this were to work it would really help balance the worlds and make battles more interesting. There are no disadvantages that I can see other than the AI might be terrible, but I think terrible is a lot better than being outnumbered 2 to 1. At least with this it would be more like 2 to 1.4.
Really though, what other ideas do you guys have to help A, B, and C be balanced? And what do you think of my radical idea that will probably never happen? lol
(edited by Mr X.6098)