Guild Wars 2

The idea actually started from LouDiamond.5381. Credit should be given to him too. I made just a few alterations.

I would like to suggest that the WvWvW week cycle stay the same but they would introduce a new system within it which is mini-matches.

Mini-matches are 42 hour shifts of WvWvW where the next match up would “Reset”
This introduces a “reset experience” for every major timezone: Na – Eu – Sea – Ocx.

Moreover, this mini-matches would keep track of who has the most PPT for that corresponding mini-match and who has the second most and the least. Then award them with a point system. 5 points for the server with the most PPT for that mini-match, 3 points for the second highest and 1 point for lowest.

Then the winner of the WvWvW match-up would be decided by the sum of the points from the 4 mini-matches.

This system would make the WvWvW match-up more about who wins those mini matches than the 7 day coverage PPT. This deters players from giving up the match-up on the later part of the week and keeps everyone on their toes to try and win every mini-match.

Feel free to make suggestions, say why you like it or why you hate it but please be CONSTRUCTIVE. Thank you.

this is a good idea, the 1,3,5 pts will introduce server politics because of the time zone, people will double team for server politics, and probably this will lessen the issue of 24/7 ppt coverage.

Hmmm, pretty good idea. So if I’m calculating correctly, for NA resets would be at:

Fri – 8 pm server time – NA Prime, 9 pm NAEast/6pm NAWest
Sat
Sun – 2 pm server time – EU Prime, 8pm UK/9pm Germany
Mon
Tue – 8 am server time – SEA Prime/Late AUS Prime, 9pm Tai/10pm Kor/11pm Syd
Wed
Thu – 2 am server time – Pacific Islands Prime
Fri – back to 8 pm server time

It also gives incentive to fight late into the week. Also allows more time zones to make a difference.

Although potential problems are again related to population. The mini-match ending Tuesday would be determined by the server who has the best SEA/OCX population. The mini-match ending Friday would be determined by EU population.

Hard to say if it would be better population wise than it is now or not. But it’s worth a try I say. I honestly don’t know why Anet can’t try some easy changes to see how they work. I would think this would be easy – Devon even mentioned something similar in one of the CDI’s so it can already be done I would think.

Its not a sollution for the coverage problem. 8 hours matchups would be better.

if your gonna do 8 hour matchups,
1) no point in getting t3 keeps (and i hate defending keeps/castles, but some people do enjoy getting t3 on all there stuff, also if becomes 8 hr matchups then wvw will basically be the same as EOTM, where no one defends, its all fights or karma train, which i dont like either, but i like have the 2 different, sometimes i look for one or the other)
2)42 hr matchups atleast give people enough time to get there keeps to t3 and defend it, but at the same time it will be more costly to defend as well than what we have right now, since you cant refresh the sieges from a previous mini match, you have to use fresh supply again.
3)obviously it is still about population, a t3 server still will have no chance against a t1 server but what it comes down to is that servers who are on the same tier and are used to fighting each other will have a more equal fight….PPT doesnt mean one server is the best, it doesnt mean they win every or most fights either, all it means is that they have more coverage, breaking the week to mini matchups makes it a more equal fight between coverage issues.

Ex. if server 1 has the most NA coverage they will probably win the weekend and win matcup 1.
If server 2 has better SEA coverage they will have a boost at the start of matcup 2, know that The other servers can still win and catchup to server 2 but since server 2 has better SEA coverage, they will have faster PPT at the start of the matchup so the other 2 servers will have to work extra hard to play catchup, but obviously server 2 has the better chances of winning matchup 2.
If server 3 has good OCX coverage they have better chances of winning matchup 3.
Then lastly it will depend on who will have the better EU coverage to win matchup 4, but obviously even if 1 server is better at starting in resets does not necesarrily mean they will win the matchup. Other time zones still have to work for it as well.

Scoring it 1 for 3rd,3 for 2nd,5 for 1st per matchup makes more variability in who could win the end of the week, obviously if 1 server wins most mini matchups they would still win, but it would also show every servers strengths and weaknesses and what they can do about it. Also it will give more incentive for all servers to play across the whole week, since there is an issue where servers fight kitten weekends at the start of the matchup but by monday it is a bit obvious who would win at the end of the week, it comes down to who worked harder to ppt on the weekend basically wins, separating the week into mini matchups will make people play less hardcore during the weekend and balance there gametime across the week since 1 matchup wont win u the whole week.

Hello! Thank you all for the replies.

Johje Holan.4607 Your calculations are spot on. This would mean that every week the reset timings will stay the same. And being mostly a SEA player myself, I would love to experience reset nights more which is why I hope this suggestion could get some attention. I’ve joined my fair share of reset nights for my world but I would always have to wake up so early so sometimes I don’t make it. I think having more resets in a week match-up would make WvWvW more interesting.

Another thing I think this suggestion can do is make server politics come into play more. Moreover, the gap between PPT will most likely lessen because it always reset so every mini-match is a fresh start so even if for example Server A dominates Server B and C by thousands of points on the first mini-match, the PPT gap would not carry on the next mini-match which will motivate Server B and C to try harder for the next mini-match.

McWolfy.5924: This suggestion is not meant to address the coverage problem. It is meant to lessen the 7 day PPT coverage advantage of servers and to make matches more interesting. I’m pretty sure you’ve experience a week where the other servers just totally dominate you and create such a huge gap that the rest of your server just gives up because it is impossible to catch-up.

J envy.5270: My thoughts exactly.

I second that motion. some good ideas to spice up the WvW.

Iunfortunately have no fun playing it. whether it be my characters build, being zerged all the time or one on one’d i still melt. I have very little interest playing against other players because I always come up lacking, be it in experience, timing, skill, or just plain endurance i have died every time i have got into an engagement.

I prefer the PvE side of things but I hate how to get the legendaries I have to participate in forced PvP, so many times over the past 2 weeks I have been comstantly hounded harrassed and chased across the map and murdered whilst trying to get the pois and vistas. I just spent 6 hours trying to open up the gate of the last fort to claim my 100% map completion when me and my allies got steamrolled by a single elementalist.

I am not complaining about his power, undoubtably he has been playing for a while and has min/maxed his butt off or something.

my point is I wish they had a system in place for people like me who are not competent with PvP to explore the map without constant grief from other players. I don’t know, a potion you opt for in the main spawn base that turns you into a neutral trader looking guy who can’t attack but can freely visit and explore. it would remove an obstacle but one persons challenge is anothers utter nightmare. I am sure the dev team didn’t design it in mind of making people like me want to throw their pc through the window and it is really detracting from my gaming experience now.

Any thoughts on this?