Guild Wars 2

Thank you anet for finally after some years giving us a legendary backpack, ascended armor/weapons from wvw, a wvw tab with stats, some rewards tracks, changing stuff to 1 up 1 down.

The desert bl from the expansion was previously ( and sort of still) too big and oddly spaced for the terrain. Thank you for adjusting it somewhat and taking out the laser event and barriers and etc because that was awful getting lag from that.

This last wvw update to me has revitalized wvw and to me this feels like an early expansion gift to us wvw players or a long overdue update to it.

I would just ask if you can please now do a vote for unlinking servers since now we have queues and wvw has more people who have come back.

Make the 3rd floor of smc not able to have trebs built there because it’s not fair for a server to not have to leave smc and take every tower from a treb in there.

Also re-space the desert bl map so the keeps and towers are situated on the map how they are on the alpine maps.

Also if you can cut the amount of skirmish tickets needed in 1/2 for the backpack and armor to make it more do-able. If I were to try for the backpack it’d take over 2k tickets and that’d probably take me a yr of grinding many hrs and for the armor like probably the same

For color blind blind people maybe add shapes to tags or a symbol to them also.

Can you bring back also the quaggans we gave things to?

Add a thing to tactics so if someone pulls it it shows the name of who last pulled it.

Make it so people can’t spam the same item in map chat a thousand times because people troll chat by linking an item hundreds of times in a row.

Last thing work a bit more on wvw balance for skills. Condi (too much ability to apply so many condition) seems to have taken over instead of skill I’d rather it go back to power builds having the advantage than so much darn condi. H.o.t. builds seem cheesy sometimes or certain ones overpowered. If you look back at the meta from 2014 that was the most balanced meta. ( except then mesmers were very over powered, but oh well).

I am asking this as a 4+ wvw veteran with many thousands of hrs logged.

Also tyvm anet for everything and we love you for this last update again.

This has revitalized wvw and gw2 and people are coming back to the game. Guilds that have died off are coming back this summer too

This is a lot to process…

Some of which I agree with. The condi stuff, I think?

I did a lot of wvw in a week and only have 70 skirmish tickets It will take forever to get the 2,450 tickets needed for a main part of the backpack and the 350 for essence of annihilation.

and 2620 for the nice ascended armor a full set for the tickets XD

We don’t need to vote on unlinking, just don’t give FA a link next time as its seems from multiple sources not to want one.

SMC is fine, leave it alone.

Desert bl would probably require too much effort and time to rearrange structures, time they could be using on another new borderland map.

Don’t cut down skirmish tickets needed, do an equal balance the amount you get from every chest instead of back loading more than half into the last chests.

Every commander tag should have it’s own shape for each color, and sides should have have their own shapes as well not just enemy shown as triangles.

Bring back quaggans for what?

Put in chat suppression for chat spammers.

Wvw team has no control over pve skill balancing or elite specs.

XenesisII.1540:

We don’t need to vote on unlinking, just don’t give FA a link next time as its seems from multiple sources not to want one.

SMC is fine, leave it alone.

Desert bl would probably require too much effort and time to rearrange structures, time they could be using on another new borderland map.

Don’t cut down skirmish tickets needed, do an equal balance the amount you get from every chest instead of back loading more than half into the last chests.

Every commander tag should have it’s own shape for each color, and sides should have have their own shapes as well not just enemy shown as triangles.

Bring back quaggans for what?

Put in chat suppression for chat spammers.

Wvw team has no control over pve skill balancing or elite specs.

What are the sources that they do not want a pairing? I hear SF has been helping them nicely.

Bigpapasmurf.5623:

What are the sources that they do not want a pairing? I hear SF has been helping them nicely.

aandiarie.7195
Chaba.5410
XTR.9604

They all want links and queues to go away for FA.
FA is currently full.
So take out their links.

Well, it’s Friday. I’ll give this a bump for a happy weekend to everybody!

Now I have to put something on topic in my post or it’ll get reported:
SO..
I agree with the original poster on many of their points.
I enjoyed playing with the Quaggan pearls, but I really like the ruins in the middle of the map and think the ruins are an improvement.
Regarding the 3rd floor of smc – I have some sympathy with the OP, but I think the spoils of war are the ability to treb your towers. This ability “forces” your side to take action, but it doesn’t mean they can roll over your keep. That’s why EB is such a good design.
Disclaimer: everything in this post is my opinion – this should be everybody’s signature, I mean… What’s wrong with stating opinion as fact? That’s what makes us human.

I am hoping anet can tweak wvw a bit more.

XenesisII.1540:

Bigpapasmurf.5623:

What are the sources that they do not want a pairing? I hear SF has been helping them nicely.

aandiarie.7195
Chaba.5410
XTR.9604

They all want links and queues to go away for FA.
FA is currently full.
So take out their links.

Please don’t put words in my mouth. I never said nor implied anything of the sort.

I suspect you are misrepresenting an earlier post of mine asking only for Anet to reevaluate links right after the June 6th patch.

As for TC/GoM/Kain, our queues have gone way down over the last couple weeks and the outmanned buff has been showing up more often (at least during 21:00-24:00 PDT). Some pairings may need looking at, but I suspect after the initial rush and subsequent disappointment in the rewards system by fairweathers, other pairings are not as bloated anymore.

Chaba.5410:

XenesisII.1540:

Bigpapasmurf.5623:

What are the sources that they do not want a pairing? I hear SF has been helping them nicely.

aandiarie.7195
Chaba.5410
XTR.9604

They all want links and queues to go away for FA.
FA is currently full.
So take out their links.

Please don’t put words in my mouth. I never said nor implied anything of the sort.

I suspect you are misrepresenting an earlier post of mine asking only for Anet to reevaluate links right after the June 6th patch.

And you were complaining about queues, FA is locked, what else would you want them to do for FA if not take away the link? That’s the only thing that will clear up your queues.

Btw I stated we just needed to ride things out 3 weeks ago, so is FA still dealing with 4 map queues other than reset, or has the population numbers gone back to normal? For Mag it’s business as usual with only ebg queued on most nights and maybe another map every other day.

XenesisII.1540:

And you were complaining about queues, FA is locked, what else would you want them to do for FA if not take away the link? That’s the only thing that will clear up your queues.

You don’t know that. That’s extremely simplistic thinking by you. I don’t pretend to know the best solution without access to the actual data. Only Anet knows how full “Full” is.

Moreover, the goal of server links is to provide teams of relatively even strength. I would not write something stupid like “we don’t want a link” contrary to that goal. Link status should always be based on relative strength against other teams. The patch made those outdated.

Here’s the thread in reference for anyone interested: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/June-6-Patch-Server-Links-and-Pops/first

TLDR:
1- Patch was going to spike population averages upwards and make server pairings quickly outdated.
2- Outdated server links can exacerbate the length/size of queues.
3- Long queues are a negative impact on the WvW experience which can hinder player retention.

Here three weeks later the rolling average still increased from what it was two weeks ago – more Very High servers, one less Medium, and an additional Full server:

aandiarie.7195:

…
Add a thing to tactics so if someone pulls it it shows the name of who last pulled it.

…

this ^^ thank you

Chaba.5410:

XenesisII.1540:

And you were complaining about queues, FA is locked, what else would you want them to do for FA if not take away the link? That’s the only thing that will clear up your queues.

You don’t know that. That’s extremely simplistic thinking by you. I don’t pretend to know the best solution without access to the actual data. Only Anet knows how full “Full” is.

Moreover, the goal of server links is to provide teams of relatively even strength. I would not write something stupid like “we don’t want a link” contrary to that goal. Link status should always be based on relative strength against other teams. The patch made those outdated.

Here’s the thread in reference for anyone interested: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/June-6-Patch-Server-Links-and-Pops/first

TLDR:
1- Patch was going to spike population averages upwards and make server pairings quickly outdated.
2- Outdated server links can exacerbate the length/size of queues.
3- Long queues are a negative impact on the WvW experience which can hinder player retention.

Here three weeks later the rolling average still increased from what it was two weeks ago – more Very High servers, one less Medium, and an additional Full server:

So XenesisII, what are your sources for this claim again? Seeing how one of your “sources” called you out, I would like a confirmed source please.

Also, thanks Chaba for clearing your side up

Go read the thread bigpapasmurf, sounds like you’re trying to get a win over me or something lol.

Chaba wanted to know what Anet was going to do with links since it was expected that populations would go up. So what did they want to do if not lose their link to help FA queues? relink with the lowest server? even though it was expected every single server would get an increase in population? (nevermind there are 5 other single link servers that could warrant them getting the lowest first like YB). Did they think somehow that would fix their queue problem?

I stated that we would need to to wait and see what actions they need to do, because anet would probably need weeks of data to do the appropriate action. Whether that was to adjust links, or map caps since some servers don’t even have links, or even pop caps if a server was full but not really getting queues as much. We all really had no idea how much of a difference the changes would make, how many players would actually play, or how many would actually stick around, not even Anet would know that from just that week.

Now Chaba has changed their tune, they “don’t pretend to know what the best solution is without access to actual data”. Then why did you put up a thread about changing links? and then arguing with me about them needing to collect data to make the appropriate move?

My question hasn’t been answered yet, is FA still experiencing 4 queue nights other than reset? (oh hell you know what I’ll just log into my alt account there and see for myself over the next week). Being full doesn’t mean you experience 4 queues a night, Mag has been full a while and they don’t experience 4 map queues a night, just EBG. Chaba panicked about queues, I’m sure they all want links now because FA losing theirs would probably mean them dropping to T4.

Anet didn’t need to do a knee jerk reaction to the spike in population, when three weeks later it looks like it’s calmed down. Guess what the best solution was? ride it out and three weeks later get proper links redone tomorrow.

XenesisII.1540:

Go read the thread bigpapasmurf, sounds like you’re trying to get a win over me or something lol.

Chaba wanted to know what Anet was going to do with links since it was expected that populations would go up. So what did they want to do if not lose their link to help FA queues? relink with the lowest server? even though it was expected every single server would get an increase in population? (nevermind there are 5 other single link servers that could warrant them getting the lowest first like YB). Did they think somehow that would fix their queue problem?

I stated that we would need to to wait and see what actions they need to do, because anet would probably need weeks of data to do the appropriate action. Whether that was to adjust links, or map caps since some servers don’t even have links, or even pop caps if a server was full but not really getting queues as much. We all really had no idea how much of a difference the changes would make, how many players would actually play, or how many would actually stick around, not even Anet would know that from just that week.

Now Chaba has changed their tune, they “don’t pretend to know what the best solution is without access to actual data”. Then why did you put up a thread about changing links? and then arguing with me about them needing to collect data to make the appropriate move?

My question hasn’t been answered yet, is FA still experiencing 4 queue nights other than reset? (oh hell you know what I’ll just log into my alt account there and see for myself over the next week). Being full doesn’t mean you experience 4 queues a night, Mag has been full a while and they don’t experience 4 map queues a night, just EBG. Chaba panicked about queues, I’m sure they all want links now because FA losing theirs would probably mean them dropping to T4.

Anet didn’t need to do a knee jerk reaction to the spike in population, when three weeks later it looks like it’s calmed down. Guess what the best solution was? ride it out and three weeks later get proper links redone tomorrow.

I did not change my tune. I take issue with you making speculations then trying to ascribe it to me as if it were something I wrote. Own up to your own thoughts.

I don’t answer the questions of people who go around saying false things about others.

Chaba.5410:

XenesisII.1540:

Go read the thread bigpapasmurf, sounds like you’re trying to get a win over me or something lol.

Chaba wanted to know what Anet was going to do with links since it was expected that populations would go up. So what did they want to do if not lose their link to help FA queues? relink with the lowest server? even though it was expected every single server would get an increase in population? (nevermind there are 5 other single link servers that could warrant them getting the lowest first like YB). Did they think somehow that would fix their queue problem?

I stated that we would need to to wait and see what actions they need to do, because anet would probably need weeks of data to do the appropriate action. Whether that was to adjust links, or map caps since some servers don’t even have links, or even pop caps if a server was full but not really getting queues as much. We all really had no idea how much of a difference the changes would make, how many players would actually play, or how many would actually stick around, not even Anet would know that from just that week.

Now Chaba has changed their tune, they “don’t pretend to know what the best solution is without access to actual data”. Then why did you put up a thread about changing links? and then arguing with me about them needing to collect data to make the appropriate move?

My question hasn’t been answered yet, is FA still experiencing 4 queue nights other than reset? (oh hell you know what I’ll just log into my alt account there and see for myself over the next week). Being full doesn’t mean you experience 4 queues a night, Mag has been full a while and they don’t experience 4 map queues a night, just EBG. Chaba panicked about queues, I’m sure they all want links now because FA losing theirs would probably mean them dropping to T4.

Anet didn’t need to do a knee jerk reaction to the spike in population, when three weeks later it looks like it’s calmed down. Guess what the best solution was? ride it out and three weeks later get proper links redone tomorrow.

I did not change my tune. I take issue with you making speculations then trying to ascribe it to me as if it were something I wrote. Own up to your own thoughts.

I don’t answer the questions of people who go around saying false things about others.

Also losing the link may not be the answer as queue’s are determined by all servers in the matchup trying to get into WvW in general, meaning that it doesn’t necessarily mean (In FA’s case) that’s its due to FA having a pairing with SF so its both populations alone thats causing the queue.

I do agree that anet will be/should be looking at the relinks to help balance out the overall population of the linkings, however tomorrow night will def be an indication of what’s to come.

side note – at the risk of sounding like a jerk (which is not my intention), getting called out twice by the same person should indicate that assumptions should not be stated unless there is a clarified statement to back up the claim….just saying for future reference and in my earlier post, I was looking for this clarified statement as your post held no proof of who said what…which is a totally legit inquiry and I apologize if it came off that I was “trying to win one”, however to jump to that immediate conclusion without clarification also adds to this side note’s meaning.

Next feature update: February 31st 2025.