If you play solitaire with only one suit, your game is going to end faster and feel lacking.
(edited by Daemonne.5018)
Will not be sidetracked...
I’ve been saying for a long time that the Tier locks were a good thing. It allowed matches to have differing themes and rules of engagement. If players wanted a change, they had the capacity to move. Right now, the mode is an amalgam of similarity not of the players choosing.
I believe what’s needed is a new level or order placed above Worlds. That is the Alliance level of matches. These matches can have themes, differing play styles, different maps, etc. Then Worlds get to shuffle and fill these matches. This way the Dev’s do not have to undo Worlds, communities are not destroyed, and the websites and third party tools we’ve built are not wasted.
[AwM] of Jade Quarry.
It does seem that the combination of server linking and moving back to the smaller alpine map has resulted in Blob v Blob.
If you don’t like where you were paired with, transfer to a lower population server in the bottom tier.
As it currently stands, we have 5 tier 1 servers in NA. Blackgate, Yaks Bend, Jade Quarry, Dragonbrand and Tarnished Coast. The populations of those servers are incredible, and they were already incredible before the world linking. In my opinion, none of those servers should have been linked with another server, but its fine I suppose. I am on Blackgate and I would be fighting queues rather the server linking happened or not.
If you don’t like where you were paired with, transfer to a lower population server in the bottom tier.
As it currently stands, we have 5 tier 1 servers in NA. Blackgate, Yaks Bend, Jade Quarry, Dragonbrand and Tarnished Coast. The populations of those servers are incredible, and they were already incredible before the world linking. In my opinion, none of those servers should have been linked with another server, but its fine I suppose. I am on Blackgate and I would be fighting queues rather the server linking happened or not.
There were some on those lower tier servers that enjoyed having a lower population because it better fit their play style.
Transferring to a slightly less populated server isn’t going to solve that problem.
If you don’t like where you were paired with, transfer to a lower population server in the bottom tier.
As it currently stands, we have 5 tier 1 servers in NA. Blackgate, Yaks Bend, Jade Quarry, Dragonbrand and Tarnished Coast. The populations of those servers are incredible, and they were already incredible before the world linking. In my opinion, none of those servers should have been linked with another server, but its fine I suppose. I am on Blackgate and I would be fighting queues rather the server linking happened or not.
But I came from the bottom tier server, been on ET since the game launched, why should I have to pay to once again move to a bottom tier server?
…and I agree those top 2 tiers should never have been part of the linking process :-)
If you play solitaire with only one suit, your game is going to end faster and feel lacking.
I also look at this from a business perspective, which is sometimes hard to do when you’re the customer.
Having 24 servers is expensive, 12 servers is likely half the cost. It is hard to justify having the bottom 2 tiers at all because there was probably a total of 40 people tops a week (between all time zones) on those servers that even entered WvW. From a business stand point, those 40 people aren’t supporting keeping those servers open.
Keep in mind, your $0-$100 you spent to buy the game/expansion doesn’t go too far. Lets say every one of the 40 people paid $100, that is $4000. Now that is enough money to buy a decent server, but it wouldn’t be enough to host it. So basically the lower tier servers are losing money.
Now all of that above is assuming the way that their servers are set up – they may all be hosted on 4 physical servers for all I know, but if each server has its own physical server, that gets expensive quick.
I also look at this from a business perspective, which is sometimes hard to do when you’re the customer.
Having 24 servers is expensive, 12 servers is likely half the cost. It is hard to justify having the bottom 2 tiers at all because there was probably a total of 40 people tops a week (between all time zones) on those servers that even entered WvW. From a business stand point, those 40 people aren’t supporting keeping those servers open.
Keep in mind, your $0-$100 you spent to buy the game/expansion doesn’t go too far. Lets say every one of the 40 people paid $100, that is $4000. Now that is enough money to buy a decent server, but it wouldn’t be enough to host it. So basically the lower tier servers are losing money.
Now all of that above is assuming the way that their servers are set up – they may all be hosted on 4 physical servers for all I know, but if each server has its own physical server, that gets expensive quick.
I thought all servers were virtualized clusters these days. If that is how Anet does it, load is more a factor than # of servers. There may be some additional overhead for adding new maps but I suspect the real load comes from active parts of the system … ie the players themselves. IN this case reducing the load of WvW would be to literally get rid of the WvW population. I doubt that is Anets goal.
But I haven’t worked in IT in a long time and have never worked on MMO’s so I could be wrong here.
I also look at this from a business perspective, which is sometimes hard to do when you’re the customer.
Having 24 servers is expensive, 12 servers is likely half the cost. It is hard to justify having the bottom 2 tiers at all because there was probably a total of 40 people tops a week (between all time zones) on those servers that even entered WvW. From a business stand point, those 40 people aren’t supporting keeping those servers open.
Keep in mind, your $0-$100 you spent to buy the game/expansion doesn’t go too far. Lets say every one of the 40 people paid $100, that is $4000. Now that is enough money to buy a decent server, but it wouldn’t be enough to host it. So basically the lower tier servers are losing money.
Now all of that above is assuming the way that their servers are set up – they may all be hosted on 4 physical servers for all I know, but if each server has its own physical server, that gets expensive quick.
I have no issues with linking or merging servers. Anet just did it in the extreme. Bottom 2 tiers could have been merged maybe even bottom 3, larger populations but with playstyle more in common. Even if things did escalate, it would happen over time and and we wouldn’t be thrust into the zerg mentality we see on the top tiers.
Bottom tiers would stick to their playstyles until they gradually adapted an appropriate playstyle that works with a slightly higher population of players, hopefully never becoming a zerg ball of greater than 30 in one group and definately no more than one of them at a time.
If you play solitaire with only one suit, your game is going to end faster and feel lacking.
I also look at this from a business perspective, which is sometimes hard to do when you’re the customer.
Having 24 servers is expensive, 12 servers is likely half the cost. It is hard to justify having the bottom 2 tiers at all because there was probably a total of 40 people tops a week (between all time zones) on those servers that even entered WvW. From a business stand point, those 40 people aren’t supporting keeping those servers open.
Keep in mind, your $0-$100 you spent to buy the game/expansion doesn’t go too far. Lets say every one of the 40 people paid $100, that is $4000. Now that is enough money to buy a decent server, but it wouldn’t be enough to host it. So basically the lower tier servers are losing money.
Now all of that above is assuming the way that their servers are set up – they may all be hosted on 4 physical servers for all I know, but if each server has its own physical server, that gets expensive quick.
I thought all servers were virtualized clusters these days. If that is how Anet does it, load is more a factor than # of servers. There may be some additional overhead for adding new maps but I suspect the real load comes from active parts of the system … ie the players themselves. IN this case reducing the load of WvW would be to literally get rid of the WvW population. I doubt that is Anets goal.
But I haven’t worked in IT in a long time and have never worked on MMO’s so I could be wrong here.
I’m a software developer personally. I am not sure how ANet had their servers set up though. I figure that the load the servers are under for WvW would merit having separate physical servers but I could not say for sure.
My playtime in WvW has dropped considerably because I still dislike T1 WvW tacitcs. I’ve played in the BLs consistently since the linking began and I can definitely say for myself and for quite a few members of my guild and the guilds we run with (no not speaking for everyone) that we still prefer the mid sized battles that take a somewhat moderate amount of skill in knowing your character and team, tactics and a decent leader calling out commands to take down an enemy party or defensive team guarding a tower or keep to the mindless full server zergs that can appear out of nowhere and destroy anything in its path like it was the Nothing from the Neverending Story.
Come on now, my guild normally runs between 5 and 10 and we have no problem with “zergs.” You just need to know when to call it quits and run, other than that we still get plenty of good fights.
Koolgai Smurf – Thief | Dazin U – Mesmer | Whats Healing Power – Ranger|
I Bought Hot – Revenant | [QQ]
I Bought Hot – Revenant | [QQ]
I also look at this from a business perspective, which is sometimes hard to do when you’re the customer.
Having 24 servers is expensive, 12 servers is likely half the cost. It is hard to justify having the bottom 2 tiers at all because there was probably a total of 40 people tops a week (between all time zones) on those servers that even entered WvW. From a business stand point, those 40 people aren’t supporting keeping those servers open.
Keep in mind, your $0-$100 you spent to buy the game/expansion doesn’t go too far. Lets say every one of the 40 people paid $100, that is $4000. Now that is enough money to buy a decent server, but it wouldn’t be enough to host it. So basically the lower tier servers are losing money.
Now all of that above is assuming the way that their servers are set up – they may all be hosted on 4 physical servers for all I know, but if each server has its own physical server, that gets expensive quick.
I thought all servers were virtualized clusters these days. If that is how Anet does it, load is more a factor than # of servers. There may be some additional overhead for adding new maps but I suspect the real load comes from active parts of the system … ie the players themselves. IN this case reducing the load of WvW would be to literally get rid of the WvW population. I doubt that is Anets goal.
But I haven’t worked in IT in a long time and have never worked on MMO’s so I could be wrong here.
I’m a software developer personally. I am not sure how ANet had their servers set up though. I figure that the load the servers are under for WvW would merit having separate physical servers but I could not say for sure.
my understanding these days is that hardware is cheap and labor is expensive. I doubt the merger had anything to do with dollars and more to do with making some players happy.
This is capitalism, so if Anet wanted to maximize its revenue it would track who the big spenders are in WvW and try to accommodate them. And then build a misery index to ensure that the desired changes for the big spenders didn’t drive off other common spenders. So long as they maintain a low enough misery score, they wont see the flight of the remaining occasional spenders.
By the time they are done the will have a game that their paying public mostly wants and cheap people like me will go play BDO.
Pay the piper, pick the tune. And maybe the tune makes you the big winner.
I also look at this from a business perspective, which is sometimes hard to do when you’re the customer.
Having 24 servers is expensive, 12 servers is likely half the cost. It is hard to justify having the bottom 2 tiers at all because there was probably a total of 40 people tops a week (between all time zones) on those servers that even entered WvW. From a business stand point, those 40 people aren’t supporting keeping those servers open.
Keep in mind, your $0-$100 you spent to buy the game/expansion doesn’t go too far. Lets say every one of the 40 people paid $100, that is $4000. Now that is enough money to buy a decent server, but it wouldn’t be enough to host it. So basically the lower tier servers are losing money.
Now all of that above is assuming the way that their servers are set up – they may all be hosted on 4 physical servers for all I know, but if each server has its own physical server, that gets expensive quick.
This is the one time I can agree with you. The linking did nothing in my mind but cut costs…..
YB→YB→YB→YB→YB→YB→YB→most likely YB
My playtime in WvW has dropped considerably because I still dislike T1 WvW tacitcs. I’ve played in the BLs consistently since the linking began and I can definitely say for myself and for quite a few members of my guild and the guilds we run with (no not speaking for everyone) that we still prefer the mid sized battles that take a somewhat moderate amount of skill in knowing your character and team, tactics and a decent leader calling out commands to take down an enemy party or defensive team guarding a tower or keep to the mindless full server zergs that can appear out of nowhere and destroy anything in its path like it was the Nothing from the Neverending Story.
Come on now, my guild normally runs between 5 and 10 and we have no problem with “zergs.” You just need to know when to call it quits and run, other than that we still get plenty of good fights.
Some may not consider ganking 5v1 “fights”…..
YB→YB→YB→YB→YB→YB→YB→most likely YB
I also look at this from a business perspective, which is sometimes hard to do when you’re the customer.
Having 24 servers is expensive, 12 servers is likely half the cost. It is hard to justify having the bottom 2 tiers at all because there was probably a total of 40 people tops a week (between all time zones) on those servers that even entered WvW. From a business stand point, those 40 people aren’t supporting keeping those servers open.
Keep in mind, your $0-$100 you spent to buy the game/expansion doesn’t go too far. Lets say every one of the 40 people paid $100, that is $4000. Now that is enough money to buy a decent server, but it wouldn’t be enough to host it. So basically the lower tier servers are losing money.
Now all of that above is assuming the way that their servers are set up – they may all be hosted on 4 physical servers for all I know, but if each server has its own physical server, that gets expensive quick.
I thought all servers were virtualized clusters these days. If that is how Anet does it, load is more a factor than # of servers. There may be some additional overhead for adding new maps but I suspect the real load comes from active parts of the system … ie the players themselves. IN this case reducing the load of WvW would be to literally get rid of the WvW population. I doubt that is Anets goal.
But I haven’t worked in IT in a long time and have never worked on MMO’s so I could be wrong here.
I’m a software developer personally. I am not sure how ANet had their servers set up though. I figure that the load the servers are under for WvW would merit having separate physical servers but I could not say for sure.
my understanding these days is that hardware is cheap and labor is expensive. I doubt the merger had anything to do with dollars and more to do with making some players happy.
This is capitalism, so if Anet wanted to maximize its revenue it would track who the big spenders are in WvW and try to accommodate them. And then build a misery index to ensure that the desired changes for the big spenders didn’t drive off other common spenders. So long as they maintain a low enough misery score, they wont see the flight of the remaining occasional spenders.
By the time they are done the will have a game that their paying public mostly wants and cheap people like me will go play BDO.
Pay the piper, pick the tune. And maybe the tune makes you the big winner.
BDO – The game for “cheap” people where you need to spend a minimum of $60 dollars in the store after purchasing the game for $30 just to be on even footing with other people. We must have different definitions of cheap. That or you pretend the Ghuille Suit and Pets are not required.