Guild Wars 2

I feel the time has come to really shake up WvW.

The individual and alliance server models have clearly shown major flaws that can’t be fixed long term. Those flaws are…

1. Population balance issues. It will always exist under the current server based model.

*Hopefully these suggestions mean less linking work over time.

2. Scoring issues. Peak vs off peak scoring will always have problems. The current scoring system also leads to stacking on winning sides and demotivates the losing side from playing.

*Scoring changes are on the radar, and can still be used, but maybe these changes can have a good impact as well.

3. #1 and #2 make for unhealthy tournaments because players shift servers and matches become predictable.

*I feel it would be best for the long run to have developers balance “things” for 3 sides instead of needing to manage many different match ups.

This is a model that I feel will work best long term…

1. Have Mist “islands” or series of interconnected maps like we have in pve. All maps pool players from their assigned server color side.

2. World vs World vs World should feel like (excuse the wording, but I think it fits) Living World vs Living World vs Living World to fight over. Think of this in terms of having a WvW that’s full of “life”, objectives, events, special events and stories like in pve, epic monsters and creatures and npcs roaming the lands, unique champions and their minions that spawn to defend structures when players are not present to do so, unique resources to loot and gather to craft unique personal gear and guild stuff… Essentially, create a place with all the bells and whistles to make a truly epic pvp experience.

Having something like this offers gameplay styles for everyone and is more engaging. Meaningful personal and guild rewards can be achieved through playing at your pace. The shift goes from fighting for server PPT to earn tournaments scraps, to fighting for a “living and breathing” world that grows and evolves.

I understand that the EU will have some language barriers, but I feel that something like this could work well anyway.

Edit- This is the way I see it… Currently wvw and eotm are not epic enough. I personally feel their designs are outdated now. The Mists provide an opportunity to create new races, creatures, stories, events, tons of stuff… that won’t step on any GW lore.

Edit 2- The expanded suggestion…

Ok, I’ve put more thought into this suggestion and I’d like to present the following for the community to discuss. I’m going to take existing elements in game to build a better pvp zone space and experience… I don’t mean “space” as in a few maps where we watch points on the screen and need the devs to completely manipulate servers and scoring like we have going on now. I’m talking about a 1 “world” Mist War pvp place that feels “alive”, keeps players interested for the long term and hopefully improves participation rates.

Read through it. Think about it. Add to these framework ideas if you have any. Share constructive thoughts, not negative or disruptive comments.

The goals of these suggestion…

*To pool players from all servers into one big playground and create an epic 3 sided faction war.

*To encourage all types of players to get involved.

*To cater to different play styles.

*To provide a place where all players can contribute to their side in many ways despite possible queues.

*To make “scoring” more about personal and guild rewards instead, and placement means reward pace.

*To make WvW into a “living” WvW experience that receives closer to equal amounts of attention from the developers. I’ll be honest here and say that it is bothersome that PvE receives the majority of developers attention, while the PvP sides and profession development gets the short end of the stick.

*To make a space that both developers and players care more about.

Imagine a WvW like this…

PvP Maps

These maps are the “No PvE” zones that remain conducive to quality open space mass pvp.

*1 Eternal Battlegrounds.

*1 Alpine Borderland.

*1 revamped Desert Borderland.

*1 new Arctic Borderland.

*1 Edge of the Mists.

New PvP maps

These would be the EotM factions inspired borderland maps.

*1 expanded Badlands Borderland with a castle.

*1 expanded Frostreach Borderland with a castle.

*1 expanded Overgrowth Borderland with a castle.

Guild Wars inspired PvP/PvE Maps

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/The_Mists

Let’s call these “Hot Zones” (for this discussion) that draw elements from GW lore. Players can play and fight here as normal, and these maps are host to meta events as well. WvW wide alerts can be given to indicate a meta event will occur.

The main goal of these maps is to provide a good place for solo and small groups of players. I would like these maps to be more event and open area capture point based, and less structure capture based.

Homeland PvE maps

I’d like to take npcs and factions from EotM and WvW and expand on them. Let’s give them a purpose for their existence in the Mists, an open world story for players to go through and a compelling reason for players to be fighting the Mist War with them.

These homeland maps would be the entry zones for WvW depending on the color side you are on. From here you can portal to other maps. These homeland maps do not have to be just 1 map for each side, multiple smaller maps could be used as well or added later.

*Enemy players cannot enter opposing sides PvE homelands.

*These maps are treated and played like any Tyria PvE maps.

*Players are not forced into other types of WvW maps, they are only encouraged by rewards.

General “Stuff” for Maps

*I’d like to see underground maps and areas utilized more in the Mists. Homelands and Hot Zones would be great for this.

*Add tunnel systems, like in EotM, to various maps for strategic use and map travel.

*It would be great to have a cohesive story and consistent groups of npcs for each faction across all maps.

Map Copies

Ideally I’m looking to create 1 Mist “world”, but feel the PvE maps would need to use the map copy function.

Maps Recap

8 PvP maps (EB, AB, DB, Arctic B, EotM, BB, FB, OB) with 4 castles in total (EB, BB, FB, OB).

X number of PvP/PvE Hot Zone meta event maps that draw from Guild Wars lore.

3 PvE Homeland maps.

Scoring system and rewards

I’m going to try to bring up a basic outline of scoring and rewards. I feel the ideal scoring system would have more of an emphasis on reward pace, not just about 1st, 2nd and 3rd place rewards. To do this, I’d like to see a tiered reward vendor system (similar to Dry Top) based off of “war score”. Tiers would either scale up in quality for purchasable goods and rewards, or lower in cost for purchasable goods and rewards. Badges of Honor and gold are used as currency to purchase items.

*ALL maps contribute to the Mist War score total for each side. Yes ALL. The purpose behind this is to have all players contribute to the war effort in the way they feel comfortable.

*Personal reward tracks remain in place.

*Loot as normal from player kills, npc kills, events and capturing objectives.

*All maps have unique crafting materials to gather, and these materials are only found in the Mists. They are used to craft specialized Mist War gears, new guild stuff and used as a component in any new crafted items introduced to the game so they become part of the global economy.

Tournaments and Match Rotation

I’m not sure we need tournaments in the traditional sense, we could have “campaigns” every couple months for 2 weeks instead. Weekly rotations would still occur outside of “campaigns”.

*During these 2 week “campaigns” players could earn double rank points and double reward track points to improve participation.

*1st, 2nd and 3rd place rewards are given to players that complete repeatable “campaign” achievements.

*At the end of “campaigns” we can reevaluate and change linking if need be. Scoring as well.

Castles

I feel it would be a great change to have multiple capture points to castles. This would require some changes to EB, but feel it’s worth it.

I’d like to see more reasons to take and hold castles. Perhaps gaining access to unique armor, weapon and back piece skin vendors per castle. Huge bonuses to magic find while held by your side. Increased badges of honor per player kill… Stuff that doesn’t give an advantage during combat.

Unbalanced Populations

Currently the devs are attempting to balance populations through “linking”, but I feel it’s a lot more work than needed under the current segregated WvW design. I’m assuming it would be a bit easier in the long run to balance 3 sides total instead of multiple different match ups. I think the 1 “world” and 3 sided designs would provide more population stability overall for everyone, but if things become unbalanced then a few individual servers could be shuffled.

Outnumbered Buffs

Maps will always have population disparities at different times due to human and time factors. To support outnumbered sides on individual maps I’d like to see this…

*Any side that is outnumbered gets a bit of extra help from their homeland faction. Have an additional Champion, with tough minions, spawn to help protect structures.

New Races

The Mists provide a great platform to do many things without breaking Tyria lore. I believe that new playable races like Tengu (seen in DB), Kodan (in EotM) and Dwarves (need to make a comeback or I’m quitting forever)… could easily be added in flawlessly.

I originally had the Homeland PvE zones as starting points for races, but I changed it because weekly rotations add limits. However, there could be neutral PvE maps for this to happen.

I’ll update this more so expect some edits.

Thanks for reading!

Thoughts?

*Anyone good at making maps?

Sorry – no. The reason being is that is what EotM is and it has no server pride or anything else involved. It is just mindless blob vs. blob. There is no strategy involved and I think that is what makes WvW .

If you want megaservers, play EotM, after all that is what you are asking for.

NO, NO, NO, and NO

Megaservers have full AND empty maps. It would be disaster for those that didn’t end up on the full map. Sorry, bad idea.

I understand what you ask, but this is not GW2… Maybe CU….
But just imagine the work to do to have that…

Dusty Moon.4382:

Sorry – no. The reason being is that is what EotM is and it has no server pride or anything else involved. It is just mindless blob vs. blob. There is no strategy involved and I think that is what makes WvW .

If you want megaservers, play EotM, after all that is what you are asking for.

Actually I’m asking for an epic wvw where the place is “alive” and that pools all pvpers into a big space.

There are many issues with the current wvw model that will continue to get band aid fixes.

Players moving around shows there is less care for “server pride”. Whatever pride remains gets shifted to faction pride for the spoils of victory for individual players, their guild and faction.

There has to be a greater purpose than looking at points and chest thumping for a server, comprised of a bunch people who transferred from another server, to win by points on the board.

There also has to be a wvw where efforts and contributions are equal at any time of day or night.

WvW going forward now will be a system of the devs always tinkering with the scoring and interconnecting different servers every few months to keep things “balanced” because players are going to continue to hop all over…

Tournaments will always be “ok we are coordinating to stack here so we can win 500 tickets to buy a weapon this month”…

Arenanet is talented and creative enough to pull off a truly epic wvw experience if they devoted themselves to it.

Edit- And I don’t know about you people, but I’d rather have a WvW++ where I’m battling it out for loot and resources and badges… to make some kick kitten looking wvw legendary gears, have cool new stuff to drop in the guild bank for the scribes and to play at any time of day or night while progressing and contributing to my guild and faction.

I feel wvw has grown stale despite the recent changes and feel there will be too much manual manipulation needed by the devs going forward.

I understand your idea, and it’s really good on my opinion.
For what I understand you think about multiple map connected together.
Each faction control some of those map and fight the other faction to take control of other map.
Map have pve event or pve mobs who protect the area if no players are online, maybe some pve event to have action on “secure” place and force players to spread on map that are not on the frontline. Maybe this could be fun for the pve guys with some tower defense like event where mobs can attack unprotected keep or supply line. This could merge both community pve and pvp.

Then we can have multiple map to spread players, and allow the system to work without having everyone on the same map.
Probably the supply line for keep should be more complex (more ressources), guild should gain some benefit to claim something (gold, ressources, …). Keep should be longer to take with more “capture point”. Keep should be longer to build, etc…
This with a permanent match up or at least very long campaign.

But this is more like teso or CU in the GW2 environnement. This can be great, but I doubt that Anet have enough ressources and money to completly change how WvW work… This mean the creation of a lot of new map… And a lot of mechanic to develop.

So, it would be basically big PvE map with PvP enabled so everyone fights everyone else? Perhaps it would be easier to just create new PvP server where ALL game maps have PvP enabled and anyone can kill anyone else anywhere. Why start spending time and effort on something new when there is bunch of perfectly good maps done already?

@Fog : recycling some PvE map for something like this can be a good idea yeah.

Yes and No, deppends HOW and WHAT improvements that would bring to WvW.
And if those changes actually fixes many thing wrong on the core system.

@Swagger.1459, that is actually one of many solutions to solve the population issues, but Anet really needs the actual model, you see, the actual model creates a placebo effect of continuous fight with the redundancy and blob trains, w/o it WvW would die, also they dont actually do strong changes to make a real fix, they do minor patches over a broken system to make it decently playable, much cheaper than design the entire stuff again.

Iv’e said this in the past, but a 3 way faction system with several maps would be fine, no server rotation, more disperse guild and havoc groups across several maps, imagine WvW growing in number of maps, has its player base grows.

No thanks, I don’t feel like playing taxi wars to be able to wvw, or to lose my connection to my server community and guild, or for wvw to have no purpose.

X T D.6458:

No thanks, I don’t feel like playing taxi wars to be able to wvw, or to lose my connection to my server community and guild, or for wvw to have no purpose.

I should have specified. As mentioned, these would be big kitten maps with big kitten underground maps that will not require multiple versions. This would be 1 world.

I can’t honestly understand how people cling to something like server pride, especially when you claim stuff for your guild. Not to mention the fact that it’s one of the most selfish things presented here. You’d rather have a name that you personally like, written somewhere, instead of others having meaningful battles around the clock. It’s just mind baffling.

The issue here is that Anet needs to add a real incentive for you to fight, especially in a megaserver context. It’s one of the things that ESO does better in WvW. If you have pride for your alliance it’s due to the story + awesome lore. If not, you still fight for real end game rewards + the chance of becoming the freaking emperor.

If they ever implement this megaserver thingy they should further incentivise guilds somehow(exclusive rewards for top guilds maybe), so people can invest their pride where it belongs.

Sardath.8524:

I can’t honestly understand how people cling to something like server pride, especially when you claim stuff for your guild. Not to mention the fact that it’s one of the most selfish things presented here. You’d rather have a name that you personally like, written somewhere, instead of others having meaningful battles around the clock. It’s just mind baffling.

The issue here is that Anet needs to add a real incentive for you to fight, especially in a megaserver context. It’s one of the things that ESO does better in WvW. If you have pride for your alliance it’s due to the story + awesome lore. If not, you still fight for real end game rewards + the chance of becoming the freaking emperor.

If they ever implement this megaserver thingy they should further incentivise guilds somehow(exclusive rewards for top guilds maybe), so people can invest their pride where it belongs.

When your part of an actual server community that can coordinate, communicate and enjoys working together you will understand.

I don’t think you could do a wvw megaserver that would be playable. There are already a lot of players complaining about wvw lag on here(and I do it read it in game, as well) and a megaserver for wvw would just send lag off the charts for a lot of players.

If there was a way to do it without making lag worse, then I might be interested in the idea.

X T D.6458:

When your part of an actual server community that can coordinate, communicate and enjoys working together you will understand.

Anything you can do with a server you can do with a guild. Not to mention that guilds are mandatory by game design – servers are not.

No. Please no. Go to EOTM instead and leave WvW for people who like it…

X T D.6458:

Sardath.8524:

I can’t honestly understand how people cling to something like server pride, especially when you claim stuff for your guild. Not to mention the fact that it’s one of the most selfish things presented here. You’d rather have a name that you personally like, written somewhere, instead of others having meaningful battles around the clock. It’s just mind baffling.

The issue here is that Anet needs to add a real incentive for you to fight, especially in a megaserver context. It’s one of the things that ESO does better in WvW. If you have pride for your alliance it’s due to the story + awesome lore. If not, you still fight for real end game rewards + the chance of becoming the freaking emperor.

If they ever implement this megaserver thingy they should further incentivise guilds somehow(exclusive rewards for top guilds maybe), so people can invest their pride where it belongs.

When your part of an actual server community that can coordinate, communicate and enjoys working together you will understand.

We understand that the individual server models aren’t working… Shouldn’t this be obvious now that they are combining servers and manipulating the point systems?

I see the skill-lag coming

I don’t think that 1 map can work with the GW2 engine…
But multiple connected map can work fine.
The hard thing is to not have everyone one front line and then have big queue…
Then you need multiple “contact” zone to spread players, and you need some pve thing to allow players to have something to do on more “safe” map. This will give something to do to the pve players, and allow more pvp players to wait in queue for some map.
But the core mechanics need to be more complex… Keep need to be harder to take, take more time to be build, need more ressources to be build, etc.
And guild need to earn something at claiming and defending something (ressources, gold, …).

Swagger, you’ve been pushing for megaservers since HoT came out, and countless people have said no, given numerous reasons why it wouldn’t work. Which you’ve blatantly ignored, while you’ve single mindedly pushed your agenda of turning WvW into the EotM that you love. WvW is not, nor should it ever be EotM 2.0. You can spew the same few lines of rhetoric all you want, but it doesn’t change that.

The server linking showed that people do still have server pride. While, yes, the bandwagon guilds that hop from server to server never had any, they’ve also been kitten to WvW as a whole, and should never be catered to. Catering to those bandwagoners, by killing off server communities, would be the biggest disaster WvW’s ever seen. If you thought things were empty in the Desert Borderland after HoT released, you’d quickly find out what empty really is when there aren’t enough players left to fill one tier worth of servers.

It’s a bad idea, that will kill WvW if implimented, and one that people (aside from server hopping bandwagon guilds) have been rejecting and will continue to reject. Let it go.

Now, moving on to the single map idea, that’s just plain not feasible. There are indeed technical limitations. The devs have already flat out stated that the maps are as large as they possibly can be already. They just plain can’t make them any larger. So that’s not going to work either.

Phantom.8130:

Swagger, you’ve been pushing for megaservers since HoT came out, and countless people have said no, given numerous reasons why it wouldn’t work. Which you’ve blatantly ignored, while you’ve single mindedly pushed your agenda of turning WvW into the EotM that you love. WvW is not, nor should it ever be EotM 2.0. You can spew the same few lines of rhetoric all you want, but it doesn’t change that.

The server linking showed that people do still have server pride. While, yes, the bandwagon guilds that hop from server to server never had any, they’ve also been kitten to WvW as a whole, and should never be catered to. Catering to those bandwagoners, by killing off server communities, would be the biggest disaster WvW’s ever seen. If you thought things were empty in the Desert Borderland after HoT released, you’d quickly find out what empty really is when there aren’t enough players left to fill one tier worth of servers.

It’s a bad idea, that will kill WvW if implimented, and one that people (aside from server hopping bandwagon guilds) have been rejecting and will continue to reject. Let it go.

Now, moving on to the single map idea, that’s just plain not feasible. There are indeed technical limitations. The devs have already flat out stated that the maps are as large as they possibly can be already. They just plain can’t make them any larger. So that’s not going to work either.

Yup, because it’s an absolutely amazing idea that the devs came up with that has a tremendous amount of potential.

Server linking showed us that the devs will have to continue to manipulate servers and scoring. Every few months we will have various linking of random servers comprised of groups of people who came from other servers… Look at all the tranfers to tier 2 recently, hardly anyone gives a kitten about server pride, they want to fight, get rewards and win… Guarantee a ton of people will shift again as soon as the devs unlock transfers.

Again, I suggested an absolutely amazing idea, as per usual, that was inspired by the devs.

Ok, didn’t know. I also suggested having interconnected surface and underground maps, but you happened to miss that.

Once in a moon he comes with another glorious idea….

Stick with EotM if you realy like that megaserver idea.

Instead of mega server, I will prefer dynamic servers which is basically recreating X number of servers every X months to shuffle population by allowing them to choose a new server again and it is a friendly choice to casuals since no golds is involved with each shuffle.. Then, the people who are hardcore on the server community issue can convert to the alliance community to decide on the server to join on every recreation. Additionally, a dynamic cap to be implemented by analyzing the disparity of the selected server and lowest server’s population, closing the selected server when the disparity is too big. This will enforce servers to be in similar population level which then allow greater variety of matchup and better balance, at the same time prevent stacking situation.

Aezyr.5304:

Once in a moon he comes with another glorious idea….

Stick with EotM if you realy like that megaserver idea.

Yeah, it is glorious! Thanks!

I’m selflessly trying to make WvW great again for all of you. You’ll thank me later for it.

Problem is that for EU we have 6 tiers, this make 24 maps…
Because I think that with the recent server merge most of the map are queued on every server, then you need place to allow the actual population to actually play the game.
And with the idea of multiple map connected together you will only have fight at the border, not everywhere…. You can make pve event to make players play those map but the majority want pvp, not pve….

Now just imagine that Anet need to make those maps…. They need 1 years to make 1 map…. Or less with HoT, but HoT was an expansion and had not so much map…

Now you can use less map and make different “campagn”, and give players the ability to choose where to play… Then you need less maps… But at least 3 safe zone map, 1 for each team… 3 map / faction as “home” and 1 central map…. This make already 13 maps…

And now with that you can start your territory war… Giving bonus / malus if you control territory close or far from your “spawn map” to not make 1 side overrun the others…

Honestly for me this could be interesting, but with more complex game core mechanics… Guild reward for holding / claiming stuff… Some reward when your team control territory, etc..

Probably need to lock each faction depending on population to allow more population balance…

But don’t dream, making so much maps, working on new mechanics, changing the community (remove server, keep only few factions, problem with national server, …) will totally change the game… And need too much money and work…

@Jayne

Let’s be civil here.

I have not claimed to speak for any developer, you obviously misread.

The devs designed a megaserver pvp zone that doesn’t suffer from the ongoing issues with wvw, so that’s where I drew part of my inspiration from…

Sich.7103:

Problem is that for EU we have 6 tiers, this make 24 maps…

No, that isnt a problem.

The problem with megaserver WvW is how on earth you would solve scoring and matchups.

Without a ladder or some sort of matchup system, it would all boil down to have 33% chance of being #1. Which would get pretty boring after a while. Especially if the sides become so unbalanced that we become locked in a perpetual state of absolutely zero movement. If you kept the servers and shuffled them around every week, it would still just be completely randomized victory. Pure luck depending on which color you are for the week.

Scoring is even harder since maps would have to dynamically close and open or it wouldnt be megaservers. We could do small time slices every 3h like EoTM and tally up the score at the end of a week, true. But that would really loose on of the main charms of WvW – a perpetual battlefield. WvW would become just large sPvP rounds where you only join to win that round.

Short of simply saying kitten it lets do EoTM for everything I honestly dont see how megaserver WvW would ever work in practice.

The day this happens is the day I leave gw2 to never return. Leave WvW how it is, go to eotm for this.

Dawdler.8521:

Sich.7103:

Problem is that for EU we have 6 tiers, this make 24 maps…

No, that isnt a problem.

The problem with megaserver WvW is how on earth you would solve scoring and matchups.

Without a ladder or some sort of matchup system, it would all boil down to have 33% chance of being #1. Which would get pretty boring after a while. Especially if the sides become so unbalanced that we become locked in a perpetual state of absolutely zero movement. If you kept the servers and shuffled them around every week, it would still just be completely randomized victory. Pure luck depending on which color you are for the week.

Scoring is even harder since maps would have to dynamically close and open or it wouldnt be megaservers. We could do small time slices every 3h like EoTM and tally up the score at the end of a week, true. But that would really loose on of the main charms of WvW – a perpetual battlefield. WvW would become just large sPvP rounds where you only join to win that round.

Short of simply saying kitten it lets do EoTM for everything I honestly dont see how megaserver WvW would ever work in practice.

This would be a 1 world pvp zone that doesn’t have map copies… Think of it as a pvp server that draws players from all servers.

Swagger.1459:

This would be a 1 world pvp zone that doesn’t have map copies… Think of it as a pvp server that draws players from all servers.

Which isnt megaserver WvW.

NO NO and more NO

Sardath.8524:

I can’t honestly understand how people cling to something like server pride, especially when you claim stuff for your guild.

Just because you haven’t experienced something, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist…

I’m really against this idea, it sounds cool in theory but in practice I think it would end up being like EOTM with ktrains running and large blobs of random players. I’m also not seeing how one set of interconnected wvw maps is going to solve population balance or scoring issues, you’d be trading “servers” for guild alliances at this point.

As for adding in more PVE, I don’t think that’s a good idea – players go into WvW for PVP. There’s also the issue of builds….players use completely different builds for PVE and PVP. Having to switch builds to take on some epic raid style monster, then getting wiped when you get jumped by gankers because you’re on a PVE build isn’t fun.

It would be akin to a smaller scale pvp server… This style is not uncommon in mmo games. Do you all classify players on any number of mmos that have filled pvp servers as “loot trainers”? No. Players are playing and having a great time, duking it out and getting a better experience than watching points on a screen while developers need to manipulate match ups and scores…

Y’all really need to think beyond “eotm k train blobs” because wvw is almost the same, except that wvw will continue to struggle with population and scoring issues despite the devs efforts unfortunately.

You’re all getting a touch of eotm now with alliances, and just wait until server match ups are a mess of 1 server vs 2 allied servers vs 3 allied servers for 3 months, then changes to all random and mixed up alliances keeps cycling through every few months…

What’s happening now is an expiremental fix, but sadly it’s not a long term solution.

If 4 years of a struggling wvw doesn’t cause you all to think of alternatives then I don’t know what will…

Character builds will fine, there are zero issues beating up npcs now with pvp builds…

Edit- Arenanet is also a business that has to try stay competitive in the market. Band aid fixes like these to the pvp side wont generate long term interest and income among pvpers.

Swagger.1459:

It would be akin to a smaller scale pvp server… This style is not uncommon in mmo games. Do you all classify players on any number of mmos that have filled pvp servers as “loot trainers”? No. Players are playing and having a great time, duking it out and getting a better experience than watching points on a screen while developers need to manipulate match ups and scores…

Y’all really need to think beyond “eotm k train blobs” because wvw is almost the same, except that wvw will continue to struggle with population and scoring issues despite the devs efforts unfortunately.

You’re all getting a touch of eotm now with alliances, and just wait until server match ups are a mess of 1 server vs 2 allied servers vs 3 allied servers for 3 months, then changes to all random and mixed up alliances keeps cycling through every few months…

What’s happening now is an expiremental fix, but sadly it’s not a long term solution.

If 4 years of a struggling wvw doesn’t cause you all to think of alternatives then I don’t know what will…

Character builds will fine, there are zero issues beating up npcs now with pvp builds…

How are server alliances anything close to EotM style play? You apparently don’t play much WvW if you believe this. Server alliances are two communities that work together. Your super server garbage is a bunch of randoms thrown together.

The current beta fixes are experimental but I’m glad that you have already decided that they aren’t a step in the right direction. After 4 years of WvW struggling I’m happy with the direction Anet is currently headed.

If you do play WvW I’m pretty sure that your play style and mine are completely different.

bloodletting wolf.2837:

Swagger.1459:

It would be akin to a smaller scale pvp server… This style is not uncommon in mmo games. Do you all classify players on any number of mmos that have filled pvp servers as “loot trainers”? No. Players are playing and having a great time, duking it out and getting a better experience than watching points on a screen while developers need to manipulate match ups and scores…

Y’all really need to think beyond “eotm k train blobs” because wvw is almost the same, except that wvw will continue to struggle with population and scoring issues despite the devs efforts unfortunately.

You’re all getting a touch of eotm now with alliances, and just wait until server match ups are a mess of 1 server vs 2 allied servers vs 3 allied servers for 3 months, then changes to all random and mixed up alliances keeps cycling through every few months…

What’s happening now is an expiremental fix, but sadly it’s not a long term solution.

If 4 years of a struggling wvw doesn’t cause you all to think of alternatives then I don’t know what will…

Character builds will fine, there are zero issues beating up npcs now with pvp builds…

How are server alliances anything close to EotM style play? You apparently don’t play much WvW if you believe this. Server alliances are two communities that work together. Your super server garbage is a bunch of randoms thrown together.

The current beta fixes are experimental but I’m glad that you have already decided that they aren’t a step in the right direction. After 4 years of WvW struggling I’m happy with the direction Anet is currently headed.

If you do play WvW I’m pretty sure that your play style and mine are completely different.

I would suggest rereading what I wrote.

Eotm has combined servers with randoms.

WvW is getting combined servers with randoms. And you’ll get new randoms every few months.

Eotm has blobs.

WvW had blobs.

There are some similarities between the two modes and I know the differences…

What’s helping now will be a short term fix and will require constant match up and scoring manipulation by the devs because that’s the plan to keep wvw afloat.

I’m not here to poll personal play styles, that’s irrelevant to me. I’m here to discuss possible long term solutions.

Edit- “From the WvW team”… “for the future, we may redistribute worlds as populations drift over time and because the system is flexible, we can potentially link 3 or more smaller worlds as appropriate.”

Inevitable server hopping + matches that need to be manually manipulated + scoring that needs to be manually manipulated = constant issues and band aids fixes.

And so much for the “server pride” when we all know populations shift…

Have fun with server shifting and random combinations instead of looking for ways to make a more stable wvw that solidifies, grows and evolves in a healthy way…

The title is probably wrong, it’s not megaserver, but less team, more map, and longer MU.
There is no map opening when there is queue, all map are unique. But you have less team and more map at 1 time.
Map are inter connected (because GW2 engine can’t support one unique big map), then you can fully control 1 map and push to another.
This make that if you control completly your map you will have nothing to do on that map, except maybe building the structures (auto upgrade should not be part of this kind of game). Then I speak about PVE to give something to do on those map, and to need players to be on those map to hold stuff.

This will make a good territory war. But tower and keep must have strategic use, not like on DBL, and we probably need tower or outpost controling the passage to the other map. Or ennemy will be able to go to the core of your zone.

Honnestly this can be a good way to merge both PvE and PvP with safe are near the start location (no PvP) and mid safe area on secured territory. With high reward in high risk zone.

But as I say before this is a completly other game… With GW2 engine, but another game… So much work to do… And the dev can’t be sure how the community will accept the game like this.

And about balance, if you make only 3 team, if you have to lock the team with the most important population, and give good bonus to the team with the less people. It’s probably easier to balance that the actual server system.
But then people will complain that they can’t join their friends because one team is full…

Then you can do something like this (territory war)but smaller and centered around guilds alliance… And make guild fight other guild for 2/3 weeks…

Honestly there is a lot of thing that you can do with the GW2 engine and WvW… You can see the game differently without PPT and useless claim or territory control…

For the fun it can be be interesting to speak about that, but I seriously doubt that Anet will just try to think about something like this. What we are speaking here is more about CU WvW play style.

So no limits, probably zergs of hundreds of players, the return of culling/skill lag and the re-screwing of the Anet servers.

Yeah… no.

Chiolas.1326:

So no limits, probably zergs of hundreds of players, the return of culling/skill lag and the re-screwing of the Anet servers.

Yeah… no.

Not if you have a bunch of maps to conquer because it spreads players out…

Read my op and think if the Mist War zone was big. Think if there were 10 maps, with underground maps as well, and 8 servers fighting per side…

There are more ways to “do” wvw justice than just having 4 maps with server and scoring manipulation out of necessity.

Emergency fixes are happening now, but these current developer changes are not going to be long term fixes.

Could you imagine if the devs made a wvw expansion that blew up wvw and eotm to give us some epic massive pvp war zones instead? Could you imagine if the devs continuously updated wvw with “nice things”? Could you imagine if MO came out and said “We have 100 devs kicking kitten to bring you the coolest rvr experience out there!”?

I appreciate whatever the devs have done and are trying to do with wvw, but I don’t feel it will hold up long term honestly.

Nice to see that someone post here
Honestly, you should think about is proposed here.
This can be a good evolution to WvW to not be stack on 2 map only (3 same + EB).
Just imagine something like the PvE world (lot of map connected together) but in PvP, with castle, outpost, farm, tower, quarry, mill…
This will be more tactical / build / PvP. Probably that the fight people only will not want that.

This is like mentioning mounts in the GW2 discussion forum. Different reasons same dead horse.

Server pride is about the only thing that keeps WvW fun. Take away the ability for guilds to coordinate with each other and you get left with.. well Edge of the Mists. No server wide teamspeak, no coordinated rushes between guilds, no reset night storm, no pushes to tiers. There is one final thing…

Megaserver doesn’t support map local progress. See any HOT map as proof. Why do people Taxi dragon stand, Auric basin, etc? Now apply that to WvW. You have 1 shard where all the action is and 5 shards that are dead with no normal way for players to move about on them on their own. The last thing a guild raid wants to see after they flip garrison is “map closing in 1 hour” and getting bumped to a map that’s overrun.

I agree with those who say NO to megaserver in wvw

Sich.7103:

Nice to see that someone post here
Honestly, you should think about is proposed here.
This can be a good evolution to WvW to not be stack on 2 map only (3 same + EB).
Just imagine something like the PvE world (lot of map connected together) but in PvP, with castle, outpost, farm, tower, quarry, mill…
This will be more tactical / build / PvP. Probably that the fight people only will not want that.

Thanks!

I have been putting some basic ideas together to present something to think about. I may try to post the framework for it so we can discuss the idea more in-depth.

lioka qiao.8734:

This is like mentioning mounts in the GW2 discussion forum. Different reasons same dead horse.

Server pride is about the only thing that keeps WvW fun. Take away the ability for guilds to coordinate with each other and you get left with.. well Edge of the Mists. No server wide teamspeak, no coordinated rushes between guilds, no reset night storm, no pushes to tiers. There is one final thing…

Megaserver doesn’t support map local progress. See any HOT map as proof. Why do people Taxi dragon stand, Auric basin, etc? Now apply that to WvW. You have 1 shard where all the action is and 5 shards that are dead with no normal way for players to move about on them on their own. The last thing a guild raid wants to see after they flip garrison is “map closing in 1 hour” and getting bumped to a map that’s overrun.

I agree with those who say NO to megaserver in wvw

Please read the suggestion and my other comments because you are just fixated on the word “megaserver”. I used “megaserver” as a way to describe the map mechanic that pools players.

Just one thing to notice in EU, we have national server…
Then we need at least 1 EU team, 1 FR team, 1 DE team, probably ES.
To balance all that you need probably 2 or 3 EU team.

This mean probably 2 tiers for 6 servers. Or make something where all 6 servers can fight together on a lot of map.

It would be it’s own separate map, with it’s own separate objectives, not connected to WvW or the current PvE maps in any way.

It could be a way to add FoW and UW: PvE’esque maps, where people can fight.

Problem though: if it’s server bound (you can’t fight your own server) people will still “zerg”

If it’s done, and multiple servers are on the same maps, it should be a free-for-all. So you can even fight your own server.

Sounds fun enough, until the only people you ever run into are condi bunkers and perma-stealth gankers.

If you still want teams… then it is EotM… that’s what you want

Sich.7103:

Just one thing to notice in EU, we have national server…
Then we need at least 1 EU team, 1 FR team, 1 DE team, probably ES.
To balance all that you need probably 2 or 3 EU team.

This mean probably 2 tiers for 6 servers. Or make something where all 6 servers can fight together on a lot of map.

Yup, EU is a bit different because of language barriers, but I think it can be done and become a minor technicality. I believe some tools could be added to help with chat communication and notifications.

I updated the original post with a framework idea so check it out and let’s talk more.

I have read the edit post.
I think that in this system we probably need something more like Planetside, but with multiple map. On planetside you can walk from 1 “zone” to another without issue. I doubt that GW2 engine can make that. I mean lot of small map / area, and not only few big map. But with that you have to be able to resupply keep from other map… Maybe with depot between map… 1 dolly from supply camp to the border of the map to bring supply. And then on the other map, you have another doly who take sups from the supply and take them to the keep.

>e probably need more smaller map, maybe with a smaller map cap to avoid lag. The small map, with only 1 tower, few outpost and production area can be limited to 30 players. This will avoid big zerg running on everthing on those small structures.

On central place you will have big castle, with multiple capture point. Maybe you can add tower and you need to take tower before being able to capture the keep.

And you need to completly control at least 1 map near the map with that keep to be able to take the keep.

We can add “outpost” that you can upgrade with wood wall. No wall when you take it but you can upgrade it. Those outpost should work like actual sentry. Marking ennemy. But with a little more npc. More something like the friendly outpost on the Orr map.

ofc holding stuff should give bonus to the team who hold those stuf. More magic find, loot…
I’m for more “supply”. Like wood, stone, maybe food for the npc guard. Claiming stuff can give regular bonus to the guild (wood, ore, gold, …). Each guild can only claim 1 thing at 1 time. Catapult and treb should require “ammo” with the stone supply. Maybe shield gen should use some energy that you can produce somewhere. Those 2 thing together will avoid the perma shield gen, or will need to the attacker that they resups to continu shooting.

The existant map will probably not work with this system.

To not build too much map maybe have multiple tiers at the same time to be able to have all players on less map.

I don’t know really how to balance the 3 side… Probably with more dynamic locking for the more populated server / side.
You can make other thing about map control. More closer to your “home” then you have bonus to defend (armor/vitality). But if you go to far you will have malus.. Less damage, less armor… This to help server who have difficulty. Lot of game have thing like this when your new city is too far away from your “capital”.

I’m ok with mixed map near the spawn. Some PVE event and PvP activated. Central map (not close to the home map) will have only PvP.
The event can be that thief will attack your supply camp / caravan, take outpost to disturb supply line, etc. If there is no human defender then you should loose your position.

This can give another life to WvW. But will need really a lot of work for Anet… And this will reduce the “fight” only side… With more ressources to manage… Probably a lot of players won’t like that..

Hope this helps with your suggestion. Please expand & explain.

Issues you mention:

1. Population balance. It will always exist under the current server based model.

Might want to correct this typo as “inbalance or imbalance”.

Solution you’re propsing:

1. Have Mist “islands” or series of interconnected maps like we have in pve. All maps pool players from their assigned server color side.

Question that quickly come to mind needing an expanded detail behind the mechanics:

How do you assign players a server color?

What if everybody wants to be on Green team?

How do you prevent players from always joining the Green team?

If you offer more than 3 Colors to choose from…How do you handle requests for Guilds and Friends to be on the same Green or whatever Color team?

Glad you mentioned Language…it’s a concern for many EU players. Any mechanism being proposed to help coordinate this?

Currently I see Map Taxi being used in a lot PvE maps to get players together to play on the same map for the same event. Would this be the approved way to ferry in friends & family to fight together?

I wouldn’t depend on players to naturally spread out over the islands & Color teams being offered.

Past player behavior from my observation…is that they will want to be on the team that Wins more often.

Long term:

1) Can Players easily join a Color Team to play with Friends & Family?
2) Can Players really build communities around Team Color – TeamSpeak, Website, etc?
3) Will Match-Up always be between 3 Color Teams?

Sadly…from a Dev’s perspective…it’s a challenge to make things work.

Hope you can provide more insight & details on the mechanisms that will allow this to happen.

See issue #1 – Everything else falls apart if this isn’t addressed properly…imho.

Diku.2546:

Hope this helps with your suggestion. Please expand & explain.

---

Issues you mention:

1. Population balance. It will always exist under the current server based model.

Might want to correct this typo as “inbalance or imbalance”.

---

Solution you’re propsing:

1. Have Mist “islands” or series of interconnected maps like we have in pve. All maps pool players from their assigned server color side.

---

Question that quickly come to mind needing an expanded detail behind the mechanics:

How do you assign players a server color?

What if everybody wants to be on Green team?

How do you prevent players from always joining the Green team?

If you offer more than 3 Colors to choose from…How do you handle requests for Guilds and Friends to be on the same Green or whatever Color team?

Glad you mentioned Language…it’s a concern for many EU players. Any mechanism being proposed to help coordinate this?

Currently I see Map Taxi being used in a lot PvE maps to get players together to play on the same map for the same event. Would this be the approved way to ferry in friends & family to fight together?

---

I wouldn’t depend on players to naturally spread out over the islands & Color teams being offered.

Past player behavior from my observation…is that they will want to be on the team that Wins more often.

---

Long term:

1) Can Players easily join a Color Team to play with Friends & Family?
2) Can Players really build communities around Team Color – TeamSpeak, Website, etc?
3) Will Match-Up always be between 3 Color Teams?

---

Sadly…from a Dev’s perspective…it’s a challenge to make things work.

Hope you can provide more insight & details on the mechanisms that will allow this to happen.

---

See issue #1 – Everything else falls apart if this isn’t addressed properly…imho.

Hi Diku,

Oh those silly typos, I’ll fix it up soon thanks.

“How do you assign players a server color?” The devs assign like they have done.

“What if everybody wants to be on Green team?” The devs change faction make up like they do with alliances.

“How do you prevent players from always joining the Green team?” Players move where they want. The devs make new faction make ups to balance like they will do with alliances. Transfers can be locked prior to “campaigns” and sides balanced accordingly before matches start.

“Can Players easily join a Color Team to play with Friends & Family?” Yes, through paid server transfers.

“Can Players really build communities around Team Color – TeamSpeak, Website, etc?” Yes, the players have the tools to coordinate that on their own like they do now.

“Will Match-Up always be between 3 Color Teams?” It’s a 3 sided faction war that would only need 3 colors used as identifiers.