Guild Wars 2

I am seriously tired of every Friday having the hope that the server matchups will be close enough to be fun. And as the reset occurs, Once again, there is 1 server that has twice the population as the other 2 servers, and will dominate the week doubling the scores of the other 2 servers. They zerg around, karma farming, they don’t have to bother with skills, they just steam roll the 20 man groups that are trying so hard to cap one objective. THIS IS NOT FUN!
/endrant

WvW is borked on my server Kaineng it is usually dead so unfortunately I do not participate in that mode at all.

kitten .9460:

WvW is borked on my server Kaineng it is usually dead so unfortunately I do not participate in that mode at all.

I’m also in Kaineng.. can definitely relate :<

Fergusons crossing feels your pain!

How would you propose to make it better?
Any other match up would be worse if your server is at the bottom of the tiers.
People are not going to transfer to low tier servers, at least not enough to make a difference.

I hate to say it but currently there are only 2 potential solutions:

1) ANET merge lower tier servers and make all those server residents mad

2) People on those servers that want to play WvW transfer to servers with better WvW game play.

To be honest, with mega servers, it really doesnt matter what server you are on for PvE. There is no longer any identity in PvE because we are all one big community now.

Katahdin.8714:

To be honest, with mega servers, it really doesnt matter what server you are on for PvE. There is no longer any identity in PvE because we are all one big community now.

Precisely, so why would anyone be mad over a server merge? The only thing that matters is WvW when it comes to server.

oh look, Desolation has another week with SFR.
Another week w/o roaming.
10/10 happy

Katahdin.8714:

How would you propose to make it better?
Any other match up would be worse if your server is at the bottom of the tiers.
People are not going to transfer to low tier servers, at least not enough to make a difference.

I hate to say it but currently there are only 2 potential solutions:

1) ANET merge lower tier servers and make all those server residents mad

2) People on those servers that want to play WvW transfer to servers with better WvW game play.

To be honest, with mega servers, it really doesnt matter what server you are on for PvE. There is no longer any identity in PvE because we are all one big community now.

I think one thing that needs to be done is to remove the Tick. Why should a server gain points while the other one is sleeping? Is that how you win a war?
“U.S. Forces are holding a town in Iraq, the Taliban is just hanging out in their caves sleeping, But since we are occupying that town, we’re somehow winning the war?”

There should be a scoring system based on taking objectives, not taking an objective, and gaining points because there is no one around to take it back.

example:
DR takes a tower = 35pts, HOD takes that tower back = 35 pts, DR successfully defends that tower = 60 pts. There could be variations in the scoring where if you defend the same tower twice w/o it being taken, you get bonus points.
They already have the “defend the tower” event system in place.

Changing servers because your server has a low population, is not a solution to unfair matchup problem. That just highlights the idea that it doesn’t matter who wins, as long as “I” am on the server that wins. But we can’t all be on the server that wins. I am not complaining that our server loses, I am kittened off that we lose by twice our score, as well as the other server losing by twice their score also.
If I can go in, and have fun, with a chance that this week we will come out on top, because of better game play. Not because we had more people online.

kitten .9460:

Katahdin.8714:

To be honest, with mega servers, it really doesnt matter what server you are on for PvE. There is no longer any identity in PvE because we are all one big community now.

Precisely, so why would anyone be mad over a server merge? The only thing that matters is WvW when it comes to server.

Because there are people who actually choose to not be on the high tier servers and enjoy a “not-so-bloby” WvW.

do you look at the matchup probabilities posted each week? some servers are stuck in a position where they are very nearly guaranteed a bad matchup every week. if you’re on one of those servers there may be no option except to transfer.

-ken

Reanne.5462:

I think one thing that needs to be done is to remove the Tick. Why should a server gain points while the other one is sleeping? Is that how you win a war?
“U.S. Forces are holding a town in Iraq, the Taliban is just hanging out in their caves sleeping, But since we are occupying that town, we’re somehow winning the war?”

There should be a scoring system based on taking objectives, not taking an objective, and gaining points because there is no one around to take it back.

Outside maybe T1, is there actually a time where any 3 servers are on at the same time outside the first 4 hours of reset? Or should a weeklong match be decided by those 4 hours because at any given time, 1 of the servers is asleep?

Go play EOTM. Matchups are different every week with different players, guilds, commanders etc etc.

echo.2053:

Outside maybe T1, is there actually a time where any 3 servers are on at the same time outside the first 4 hours of reset? Or should a weeklong match be decided by those 4 hours because at any given time, 1 of the servers is asleep?

3 people can take a tower, the week wouldn’t be decided by the first four hours on reset, there are always people playing, they just are not noticeable because one of the servers will always have more coverage.
If a three person team takes a tower the way things are now, they will most likely not increase their servers score, because it will immediately be flipped back by the server with the most coverage. If that 3 person team received points/recognition that they took an objective IMO it would better represent their effort and successful captures.

Less of an all or nothing approach to scoring.

nirvana.8245:

Go play EOTM. Matchups are different every week with different players, guilds, commanders etc etc.

I have no idea what you’re talking about, EOTM is exactly the same no matter the week, either you have a zerg, karma farming, or you don’t. No more fun in EOTM then there was doing the Queensdale champ train.

always same answer tho " merge the lower server" how about for a change delete top 3 servers giving everyone free transfer to a lower server of their choice that would balance the population abit

Snowreap.5174:

do you look at the matchup probabilities posted each week? some servers are stuck in a position where they are very nearly guaranteed a bad matchup every week. if you’re on one of those servers there may be no option except to transfer.

-ken

Transferring isn’t the answer. In fact, there is a substantial number of people who think transferring is a betrayal and wouldn’t dream of leaving – a merge, however, would be perceived as honourable and keep them with their community.

Just for the record, I don’t believe merges are the answer to the population nightmare.

Reanne.5462:

echo.2053:

Outside maybe T1, is there actually a time where any 3 servers are on at the same time outside the first 4 hours of reset? Or should a weeklong match be decided by those 4 hours because at any given time, 1 of the servers is asleep?

3 people can take a tower, the week wouldn’t be decided by the first four hours on reset, there are always people playing, they just are not noticeable because one of the servers will always have more coverage.
If a three person team takes a tower the way things are now, they will most likely not increase their servers score, because it will immediately be flipped back by the server with the most coverage. If that 3 person team received points/recognition that they took an objective IMO it would better represent their effort and successful captures.

Less of an all or nothing approach to scoring.

nirvana.8245:

Go play EOTM. Matchups are different every week with different players, guilds, commanders etc etc.

I have no idea what you’re talking about, EOTM is exactly the same no matter the week, either you have a zerg, karma farming, or you don’t. No more fun in EOTM then there was doing the Queensdale champ train.

3 man team…. what??? idk where thats came from. since current match up is too new I randomly picked a server and went to last match up.

http://mos.millenium.org/servers/view/46/217

What do you notice in the income evolution? one server peaks generally at the same time, then few hours later another one takes over and so forth. we have coverage gaps like this because people want to play with other players in the same time zone, no one wants to be out when they are severely outnumbered.

Keeping these gaps in mind how would the scoring be tallied up? If it required all 3 servers to be on at the same time then that would really be the point where the 1st 4 hours would decide the week since there isnt many times where any 3 servers are on at the same time. If only 2 servers need to be on to advance the score… whats to stop them from just trading captures?

WvW is a sport. Your team scores points, points are tracked to determine a winner, there are tournaments, and there are divisions. Merging servers, changing scoring systems, or transferring servers doesn’t address the underlying problem with WvW. One team can bring more players than another.

Football, rugby, soccer….I can’t think of any team sports where one team gets to field more players than the other. In WvW, one side is allowed to bring/field far more players than the other. Until Anet decides to address this issue, WvW (and to some extent the game) will continue to bleed players who no longer wish to participate in one-sided, unbalanced match-ups.

echo.2053:

What do you notice in the income evolution? one server peaks generally at the same time, then few hours later another one takes over and so forth. we have coverage gaps like this because people want to play with other players in the same time zone, no one wants to be out when they are severely outnumbered.

Keeping these gaps in mind how would the scoring be tallied up? If it required all 3 servers to be on at the same time then that would really be the point where the 1st 4 hours would decide the week since there isnt many times where any 3 servers are on at the same time. If only 2 servers need to be on to advance the score… whats to stop them from just trading captures?

If one server has the ability to maintain coverage over a 18 hour period, and their opponent only has a player base that plays 6 hours a day. that is different than 3 equal servers just playing at different times.

I am not saying all three have to always be on at the same time, My suggestion was to get rid of the tick. so that points are scored by taking objectives, not by the amount of time you hold an objective. A server with more people is still going to have an advantage, they just won’t be racking up points while the other server is asleep., As and example, DR controls their whole BL, they received points when they acquired each of the towers, camps etc. on the map. but if there isn’t a server trying to take those points, they won’t increase their score. But. if they do successfully defend one of those areas when another server tries to take it, they could get points, which would increase their score. Its still not perfect, but I think it would discourage zerging, and would keep matches closer in point totals.

Reanne.5462:

echo.2053:

Outside maybe T1, is there actually a time where any 3 servers are on at the same time outside the first 4 hours of reset? Or should a weeklong match be decided by those 4 hours because at any given time, 1 of the servers is asleep?

3 people can take a tower, the week wouldn’t be decided by the first four hours on reset, there are always people playing, they just are not noticeable because one of the servers will always have more coverage.
If a three person team takes a tower the way things are now, they will most likely not increase their servers score, because it will immediately be flipped back by the server with the most coverage. If that 3 person team received points/recognition that they took an objective IMO it would better represent their effort and successful captures.

Less of an all or nothing approach to scoring.

nirvana.8245:

Go play EOTM. Matchups are different every week with different players, guilds, commanders etc etc.

I have no idea what you’re talking about, EOTM is exactly the same no matter the week, either you have a zerg, karma farming, or you don’t. No more fun in EOTM then there was doing the Queensdale champ train.

Sounds like you need to join a real WvW guild. There are some awesome tagless guild raids in EoTM.

nirvana.8245:

Sounds like you need to join a real WvW guild. There are some awesome tagless guild raids in EoTM.

If your guild is raiding in eotm, you’re doing something wrong. Is wiping up-level pve zergs really that thrilling?

Typhus.3502:

nirvana.8245:

Sounds like you need to join a real WvW guild. There are some awesome tagless guild raids in EoTM.

If your guild is raiding in eotm, you’re doing something wrong. Is wiping up-level pve zergs really that thrilling?

It is to raise their confidence.

kins.3294:

Typhus.3502:

nirvana.8245:

Sounds like you need to join a real WvW guild. There are some awesome tagless guild raids in EoTM.

If your guild is raiding in eotm, you’re doing something wrong. Is wiping up-level pve zergs really that thrilling?

It is to raise their confidence.

I see HB guildies in EoTM almost everyday. Do they have a confidence problem?

nirvana.8245:

I see HB guildies in EoTM almost everyday. Do they have a confidence problem?

I see ND there aswell…

It’s kind of the opposite problem in T1. BG/JQ/TC are fairly well matched (although BG has far bigger numbers when it counts), but it’s a bit stale fighting the same old servers week after week after week. But on the other hand, T1 numbers are just SO massive that the lower ranked servers just can’t compete with us when they get matched up with us. (During TC’s match with FA and Mag, it was like a sea of blue 24/7!)

A lot of people go to EoTM to level up alts or just relax outside of raiding hours.

I think WvW suffers from too many fairweathers and not enough dedicated players, causing population shifts depending on the matchup making it very hard to get an even matchup. Probably the main attraction of T1 tbh. It might be stale, but at least you always have people to play with and against, which is better than tumbleweeds rolling through the maps

go to mid-tier server. they have better match up variation. T3,T4,T5.

azizul.8469:

go to mid-tier server. they have better match up variation. T3,T4,T5.

Even Bronze (T6,T7,T8) have some variation… This week, T8 is having SoR (rank 19 or T7), who was at T6 match last week.

Reanne.5462:

Katahdin.8714:

How would you propose to make it better?
Any other match up would be worse if your server is at the bottom of the tiers.
People are not going to transfer to low tier servers, at least not enough to make a difference.

I hate to say it but currently there are only 2 potential solutions:

1) ANET merge lower tier servers and make all those server residents mad

2) People on those servers that want to play WvW transfer to servers with better WvW game play.

To be honest, with mega servers, it really doesnt matter what server you are on for PvE. There is no longer any identity in PvE because we are all one big community now.

I think one thing that needs to be done is to remove the Tick. Why should a server gain points while the other one is sleeping? Is that how you win a war?
“U.S. Forces are holding a town in Iraq, the Taliban is just hanging out in their caves sleeping, But since we are occupying that town, we’re somehow winning the war?”

There should be a scoring system based on taking objectives, not taking an objective, and gaining points because there is no one around to take it back.

example:
DR takes a tower = 35pts, HOD takes that tower back = 35 pts, DR successfully defends that tower = 60 pts. There could be variations in the scoring where if you defend the same tower twice w/o it being taken, you get bonus points.
They already have the “defend the tower” event system in place.

Changing servers because your server has a low population, is not a solution to unfair matchup problem. That just highlights the idea that it doesn’t matter who wins, as long as “I” am on the server that wins. But we can’t all be on the server that wins. I am not complaining that our server loses, I am kittened off that we lose by twice our score, as well as the other server losing by twice their score also.
If I can go in, and have fun, with a chance that this week we will come out on top, because of better game play. Not because we had more people online.

I assume you are HoD… For what it’s worth it’s not fun on our end either for many of us who wish to see closer match-ups. So yes a majority of us are in agreement.

@Kaineng: I remember the first time my server defeated yours (like the fourth or fifth week of game release, way back when.) felt so bad, you guys had like 5 people…on all 4 maps.

That said, faced you guys for 1 round during the recent Tourny, you gave us some good fights. So, kudos and respect. Not really relevant, but felt like saying so. I respect servers that WORK to be good, keep it up guys.

nirvana.8245:

kins.3294:

Typhus.3502:

nirvana.8245:

Sounds like you need to join a real WvW guild. There are some awesome tagless guild raids in EoTM.

If your guild is raiding in eotm, you’re doing something wrong. Is wiping up-level pve zergs really that thrilling?

It is to raise their confidence.

I see HB guildies in EoTM almost everyday. Do they have a confidence problem?

Running a guild raid is a lot different from one or two people speed-leveling through k-train.

Server vs server was always a bad idea especially with servers like BG and JQ stacking the deck with dedicated WvW guilds. Not sure what the solution is, but I’d prefer a system like in WoW where it was Horde vs Alliance and people got assigned randomly to matches. Perhaps this could be done here with three different teams competing with each other and individuals assigned to each on a rotating basis. In fact , why not get rid of the three team thing and go with just two sides fighting each other with random players, like most fps shooters but on a weekly basis?

My idea is not fleshed out and I am just tossing this out there but the real issue is utter lack of balance in WvW and people getting frustrated with being stomped by zergs or being the ones stomping small groups, which is even more frustrating and demoralizing.

Cuchullain.3104:

Server vs server was always a bad idea especially with servers like BG and JQ stacking the deck with dedicated WvW guilds. Not sure what the solution is, but I’d prefer a system like in WoW where it was Horde vs Alliance and people got assigned randomly to matches. Perhaps this could be done here with three different teams competing with each other and individuals assigned to each on a rotating basis. In fact , why not get rid of the three team thing and go with just two sides fighting each other with random players, like most fps shooters but on a weekly basis?

My idea is not fleshed out and I am just tossing this out there but the real issue is utter lack of balance in WvW and people getting frustrated with being stomped by zergs or being the ones stomping small groups, which is even more frustrating and demoralizing.

Your comment seems to encompass everything that WvW isn’t.

• WvW is about communities working together (guilds are an important part of that). So we can’t have randomised players.
• When Warhammer was made a 2-sided battle, everybody (lots of vocal people, but not me) complained to the ceiling and back about how it was a fundamental flaw and that a 3-sided game would be the holy grail and would balance the uneven fights. It turns out that the 3-sided game needs some… regulation.

Cuchullain.3104:

Server vs server was always a bad idea especially with servers like BG and JQ stacking the deck with dedicated WvW guilds. Not sure what the solution is, but I’d prefer a system like in WoW where it was Horde vs Alliance and people got assigned randomly to matches. Perhaps this could be done here with three different teams competing with each other and individuals assigned to each on a rotating basis. In fact , why not get rid of the three team thing and go with just two sides fighting each other with random players, like most fps shooters but on a weekly basis?

My idea is not fleshed out and I am just tossing this out there but the real issue is utter lack of balance in WvW and people getting frustrated with being stomped by zergs or being the ones stomping small groups, which is even more frustrating and demoralizing.

That would make guilds obsolete as far as wvw is concerned. Unless entire guilds were assigned to the same server together.

I wish deso had some other enemies except Sfr and Kodash

Dark FQ.1038:

I wish deso had some other enemies except Sfr and Kodash

Yeah, I believe that most of Deso is taking a break this week as a rest from fighting SFR.

Dark FQ.1038:

I wish deso had some other enemies except Sfr and Kodash

Be careful what you wish for.

Nidome.1365:

Dark FQ.1038:

I wish deso had some other enemies except Sfr and Kodash

Yeah, I believe that most of Deso is taking a break this week as a rest from fighting SFR.

Looks like we’ll be taking another weeks break then, SFR again….now 6 weeks out of the last seven.

I heartily agree, the current assymetry in WvW hurt the game, and Anet will be well advised to address it lest their player base decline.

The decoupling of guilds from servers, and the mega server system for PvE may be suggesting an answer. In keeping with the name of the game, make WvW guild centric rather than server centric.

Some possible variations/options

Create a system where guilds can choose to form a team, name it, and get added to the the list of teams competing.

Limit total player count on each team.

Require guild rep when playing with your team (change rep and you get booted from the instance)

Require “refresh” of towers, etc. outside of your own BL in order to pick up points for tick.

Towers not refreshed revert to the owning team. Alternatively, towers become uncontrolled (4th AI team?) and have to be taken.

Organize tiers according to team player count.

Create AI mercenary units which can be hired by teams below a given tic level. Make them more potent than current mercy.

Permit teams with lower scores to add additional guilds.

More later possibly, as I think of it.

Some additional thoughts On hire able mercs;

They should be tough enough to be a challenge 1v1 with a level 80 player

Should be attachable to a squad, and follow that squads commander.

Should be limited to the map they spawn on.

Stay hired as long as the commander is tagged up.

Attack as the commander directs.

Re spawn when killed, and attempt to rejoin the commander. Alternatively, commander will need to return to spawn to collect them.

Makes you think that, since all worlds are megaservers, why not change WvW to GvG and make it so all the WvW maps are catered to guilds fighting each other. So if you want to WvW you gotta join a guild. You want to go up against the best, you gotta be apart of the best guilds.

Anet probably needs to find a way to ensure reasonably similar numbers of average players in each of the 3 corners each week in WvW.

By measuring average attendance of the past week, they could elevate a lower ranked server to join an out-manned higher tier server – providing the server positions for that week were going to remain unchanged.

Obviously the mechanics of the league table would change somewhat, but hopefully it would provide new inspiration when two servers get joined for the week.

Tyeme.6589:

…

Football, rugby, soccer….I can’t think of any team sports where one team gets to field more players than the other. …

I present to you…Hockey!

:D

Is going to war a team sport? Surrender now, or prepare to face my million man army. (You only have 300).
Another victory for Xerxes!

Batdogi.7142:

Tyeme.6589:

…

Football, rugby, soccer….I can’t think of any team sports where one team gets to field more players than the other. …

I present to you…Hockey!

:D

As far as I know, hockey plays with both teams having the same number of players…

Jeknar.6184:

Batdogi.7142:

Tyeme.6589:

…

Football, rugby, soccer….I can’t think of any team sports where one team gets to field more players than the other. …

I present to you…Hockey!

:D

As far as I know, hockey plays with both teams having the same number of players…

He is talking about forcing people to sit out and stuff. Penalties are a thing in hockey.

Bringing the thread back to my point. Once again, the matchup is crap.

Ynot.8397:

He is talking about forcing people to sit out and stuff. Penalties are a thing in hockey.

Well, even on soccer you get penalities that put players from your team out of the field… I guess most games have this kind of stuff. But none of them start with already uneven teams.

Reanne.5462:

Bringing the thread back to my point. Once again, the matchup is crap.

Odd that this thread hasn’t been locked yet. But, yeah, the matchup is crap. The problem here is that both our and BP’s glicko ratings are very close, whereas the next nearest server either higher or lower is a loooong way away. There is no 3rd server in Silver that can possibly give either of us an even matchup right now.

HoD has not gotten a first place win in 22 weeks. I guess I’ve just gotten used to it.

Reanne.5462:

Bringing the thread back to my point. Once again, the matchup is crap.

Just build a treb by the JP and they NSP will surrender and cry cheater, hacker, etc.