Guild Wars 2

the WvW Population needs to be balanced out or there is going to be alot of major issues

keep it simple since there are 3 teams no 1 team should out number the other 2 teams combined

say Red has 15 players and Blue has 20 players
Green should have a limit of 35 placed on them

this is not going to hurt the game if a player is interested in WvW they can transfer to another World

if a player enjoys WvW they do not want to end up in a 50v5 battle that is not enjoyable for anyone

So if a server have 100 PvPers and the other server has only 5… only 10 people would be able to enter WvW!? Sorry I dont think it would be good.

I use your own words, if your server does not have enough people that PvP just transfer.

Limits are needed, but one server may not pay the price of other server having few PvPers.

You have two options:

1) Force people to participate in WvWvW
2) Force people out of WvWvW.

Which do you support? And how do you intend to explain it to the people being forced to do something against their will?

The majority of “solutions” for the so called fixing of WvWvW seem to focus on penalizing the winning server and rewarding the losing servers.

I agree the current match-ups are very lopped sided. I believe in many cases however, it’s because some of the servers have decided to give up until the next match-ups are made .

Restricting player participating based on how many people from a losing server decide to venture into WvWvW is plain silly.

albotelho.2931 you can transfer servers if you want to play WvW so it ends up balanced instead of a 1 sided joke

Estus.1726:

The majority of “solutions” for the so called fixing of WvWvW seem to focus on penalizing the winning server and rewarding the losing servers.

I agree the current match-ups are very lopped sided. I believe in many cases however, it’s because some of the servers have decided to give up until the next match-ups are made .

Restricting player participating based on how many people from a losing server decide to venture into WvWvW is plain silly.

how is allowing the winning server to have the same number of players in the WvW map as both the other servers combined penalizeing?

its making the game more enjoyable for everybody the way you view things is messed up

lets go play football and carry knifes to stab the other team wait what we cant use knifes why would u penalize us

No, forced ballance is a horrid idea.

I tend to agree with Daish here. The large servers at the top with all 24/7 coverage won’t notice much difference, but it will encourage wvwer’s with long queues to balance out the server population a bit more.

While I don’t think that Anet should dump people out of wvw if they enemy decided to leave the map in order to cut down on people attacking a keep, it would be a good idea to prevent new people from joining the map on the over-populated sides.

This sounds like a great idea, of course I wouldn’t recommend kicking people out, however holding the queue, and not letting more in as people leave, would help balance the fights. From reading the forums it sounds like this may need to be done, as the higher population servers will either end up constantly battling each other, after 1 week of smashing lower population servers in between.

There has to be a way to force people to play on other servers and it seems Anet isn’t going to push it to happen. Sadly WvW is a major draw and the servers have higher caps then the WvW battleground, which is creating a huge issue.

Step 1: Prevent higher pop servers from having more people enter WvWvW.
Step 2: Higher pop server is probably winning, so higher pop people, knowing they’re the higher pop server, stay in WvWvW as long as possible.
Step 3: Lower pop server people drop out of WvWvW, higher pop people continue to steamroll them.

Yes, clearly, that solves the problem.

All this does is implement a useless limit, because the above is what already happens.

I always love these ‘youre forcing people out’ arguments. THEY ALREADY DO, its called the existing Queue. I know a lot of guys who cant get in during primetime because of the queue, the queues are that long. So what is the difference there? One is limited there just like they would be if there was a dynamic cap in place. had there ALWAYS been one people wouldnt even have noticed. They would just figure there was a queue because every wannabe moved to their server for free when the scores were posted.

So there will be NO, NADA, NOTHING different if they put in a dynamic queue than is already in place. Some servers will be S.O.L. during the ‘off times’ but will still have the same chance as they do now during peak times.

If people dont like queues move (back) to the server you left and not worry about it.

This whole argument that it forces people to not be able to play is the stupidest thing I ever heard. Guys who are in a queue right now on the east coast right now could claim they are also being punished and not allowed to play because the cap isnt big enough in prime time to get everyone in who wants to play.

So stop the stupid inane argument that having a dynamic cap would do something that isnt already being done with the cap limit that is already in place. You just look dumb when you keep chanting the same mantra.

But it fixes nothing. It’s useless code. It solves absolutely no problem.

Daish.6139:

the WvW Population needs to be balanced out or there is going to be alot of major issues

keep it simple since there are 3 teams no 1 team should out number the other 2 teams combined

say Red has 15 players and Blue has 20 players
Green should have a limit of 35 placed on them

this is not going to hurt the game if a player is interested in WvW they can transfer to another World

if a player enjoys WvW they do not want to end up in a 50v5 battle that is not enjoyable for anyone

This is just plain dumb.

We want to not have queues. If your server does not want to participate – too bad.
I am alright with some kind of an actual buff if you are underrepresented – but definitely not additional limits. Worst idea ever. (In fact, remove all limits and use quantum computing so there are no queues or lag)

Players or servers should never be rewarded for not participating – it’s really that simple. We have servers with 40,000 people on, even if only 10% of them are logged on at any time you should be able to get 400-500 of those to participate.

A server willing to W3 should not be penalised because another servers players would rather PvE, idle in Lions Arch, Craft etc to the extent that they cannot get 400 people to W3 – if that is your server… well lets be honest it shouldn’t be a problem for you as it’s obviously a server not interested in W3 – if you find yourself on such a server then move to one that is.

If your suggesting this as a solution to rolling time zones – then it’s still a lousy solution.

If you do not have enough people in W3 then you will be matched with servers with similar problems. In time the servers will balance out – we are still only a month into the game.

Aedgyth.4790:

Players or servers should never be rewarded for not participating – it’s really that simple. We have servers with 40,000 people on, even if only 10% of them are logged on at any time you should be able to get 400-500 of those to participate.

A server willing to W3 should not be penalised because another servers players would rather PvE, idle in Lions Arch, Craft etc to the extent that they cannot get 400 people to W3 – if that is your server… well lets be honest it shouldn’t be a problem for you as it’s obviously a server not interested in W3 – if you find yourself on such a server then move to one that is.

If your suggesting this as a solution to rolling time zones – then it’s still a lousy solution.

If you do not have enough people in W3 then you will be matched with servers with similar problems. In time the servers will balance out – we are still only a month into the game.

What if a server has 40K people on it but during prime time 20K of them are online and 5000 of them that want to WvW but only a few hundred spots? But during off peak and work hours there are only 5000 people online and maybe 100 of them want to WvW.

How do you solve that? Recruit more people to a server with already 40K people on it? While it might ‘work’ during the week, on the weekends there would be a queue just to log in to play at all.

These are obviously made up numbers but so are yours, or at least your argument is so I guess that makes them both equal in terms of ‘validity’.

Another half baked Daish idea.

Daish.6139:

albotelho.2931 you can transfer servers if you want to play WvW so it ends up balanced instead of a 1 sided joke

Why do we have tp transfer, wouldnt it make since you should transfer if you are having the issue?

So you have an artificial population cap like the OP suggests. I can see the following happening:
1) Dominant side is better organised and keeps beating the two weaker sides regardless of the cap.
2) The weaker side players keep leaving WvW because they aren’t winning.
3) The cap gets lower and lower until there is no-one in WvW at all.

Never heard ppl argue that one server should be allowed to field 400 players vs 50. Wouldn’t the cap also allow those playing on the large server to enjoy WvW more? Or is the argument that not only should we not attempt to fix server pops, but also continue to shrink the WvW interested ppl on the smaller servers, by having them steam rolled continuously?

Simply add Health, damage, and toughness bonuses for the team that is physically out numbered.

This system was successfully used in World of Warcraft.

The current bonuses for being out numbered 50 to 1 are purely a joke.

Lastly, getting “Steam Rolled” is no fun for any player except the group doing the rolling.

If not fixed then myself like others will join “Stacked Servers” and make the low pop servers even lower.

zerofaults.6192:

Wouldn’t the cap also allow those playing on the large server to enjoy WvW more?

Maybe, maybe not. What it definitely will do is ensure that less people get to play.

Many of these suggestions ignore the fact that there is a sizeable portion of fairweather players. They will only play when they are winning. So if you pop cap based on the losing sides then its a downward cycle.

zerofaults.6192:

Never heard ppl argue that one server should be allowed to field 400 players vs 50. Wouldn’t the cap also allow those playing on the large server to enjoy WvW more? Or is the argument that not only should we not attempt to fix server pops, but also continue to shrink the WvW interested ppl on the smaller servers, by having them steam rolled continuously?

yep none is enjoying a 400v50

in World of Warcraft someone mentioned the low population team got + damage buffs

this system did not work at all they ended up turning a 300v300 battle ground into 80vs80 so the teams would not be unbalanced

i dont think anyone wants to see such small limits put on WvW

Me personally am completly against limiting on players in WvW, i play on Gunnars hold and at peak time the wait is at least an Hour normally 2+ and placing a limit would only make it more impossible to join.

Swapping Servers is now not a viable option with the 24 hour wait to swap back, my opinion is that when you sign up for WvW IF your side is full it gives you the option to either A. Queue or B. Play on one of the teams thats under balanced either as solo or party or guild.

I dont see why you would need to server swap to join a different team in WvW as your all placed in the same zones anyway and tbh i wouldnt care if i played WvW for another server as long as Friends/Guild were there as i dont care what the other 99% of the players are doing as long as im able to get in.

This solves unbalanced teams as players on a high pop server will play for the underdogs just to get in therefore no limiting is required, this may cause a problem with server match ups.

Thats my idea for a solution any feedback on that?

Im going to disagree for arguments sake. Last night my server was getting crushed, 500k points to 60k points. We could not get out of our spawn it was so bad.

While it was frustrating and i was yelling and raging. Deep down inside it made me want to log in and assemble an army to CRUSH THEM.

I think a lot of games these days lack the ability to give you that feeling ^^ instead they just say "here: balance and free sparkle gear.

So your saying you wouldn’t want players from the winning server that cant get in on their side to join yours and make it more balanced?

Well make points divided by player in currently in WvW. Fixed

Phaedryn.3698:

No, forced ballance is a horrid idea.

its not forceing anything

its encouraging the lower population servers to get in there and play they will know they are never going to be in a 50vs10 battle

Fusion.4905:

Me personally am completly against limiting on players in WvW, i play on Gunnars hold and at peak time the wait is at least an Hour normally 2+ and placing a limit would only make it more impossible to join.

Swapping Servers is now not a viable option with the 24 hour wait to swap back, my opinion is that when you sign up for WvW IF your side is full it gives you the option to either A. Queue or B. Play on one of the teams thats under balanced either as solo or party or guild.

I dont see why you would need to server swap to join a different team in WvW as your all placed in the same zones anyway and tbh i wouldnt care if i played WvW for another server as long as Friends/Guild were there as i dont care what the other 99% of the players are doing as long as im able to get in.

This solves unbalanced teams as players on a high pop server will play for the underdogs just to get in therefore no limiting is required, this may cause a problem with server match ups.

Thats my idea for a solution any feedback on that?

if your guild is that interested in WvW what is stopping you from making the other server your new home?

Bad idea.

I aggree that they should change the limit from map based to server based, but it most definitively should not be based on the amount of players other servers bring to the fight. If they don’t want to fight and get outnumbered it’s their problem.

Daish.6139:

if your guild is that interested in WvW what is stopping you from making the other server your new home?

The fact that you lose everything, you influence and you upgrades.

Fusion.4905:

So your saying you wouldn’t want players from the winning server that cant get in on their side to join yours and make it more balanced?

its got nothing to do with server population or who is winning

its all to do with number of players in the WvW map

if there are
200 blue players queued up
25 red players in the map
10 green players in the map

the limit should be 35 only 35 blue players should be alowed into the map unless more players from the other servers enter the battle

whatever server has the most population is still going to have a massive advantage but the lower population servers wont feel like its pointless to queue up

if the lower population servers dont feel like its a lost cause more of them are likely to keep playing

Daish.6139:

whatever server has the most population is still going to have a massive advantage but the lower population servers wont feel like its pointless to queue up

if the lower population servers dont feel like its a lost cause more of them are likely to keep playing

As I said: Change the limit to be server based instead of map based and we are fine.
Currently there can be 600 (IIRC they increased it from 500) players per map. Change that to 200 players per map and server and everything is fine.
Yes, servers can still be outnumbered, but not because the map is flooded by too many enemies, it’s now because the server doesn’t want to fight.

Rodarin.6058:

I always love these ‘youre forcing people out’ arguments. THEY ALREADY DO, its called the existing Queue. I know a lot of guys who cant get in during primetime because of the queue, the queues are that long. So what is the difference there? One is limited there just like they would be if there was a dynamic cap in place. had there ALWAYS been one people wouldnt even have noticed. They would just figure there was a queue because every wannabe moved to their server for free when the scores were posted.

Have you ignored every thread that complains about the WvW queues that we already have? The solution is not to make the queues even longer.

Your solution is “restrict entry” which means fewer people will get to play. In a video game, every solution that says fewer people should get to have fun will be a bad solution. Other games have plenty of examples of that stupid approach blowing up in their face.

If we really need balanced player counts, add a bunch of NPCs to the lower pop sides. Just put in mindless zerg AI for those NPCs and nobody would even know they weren’t real players.

Richard.8207:

Rodarin.6058:

I always love these ‘youre forcing people out’ arguments. THEY ALREADY DO, its called the existing Queue. I know a lot of guys who cant get in during primetime because of the queue, the queues are that long. So what is the difference there? One is limited there just like they would be if there was a dynamic cap in place. had there ALWAYS been one people wouldnt even have noticed. They would just figure there was a queue because every wannabe moved to their server for free when the scores were posted.

Have you ignored every thread that complains about the WvW queues that we already have? The solution is not to make the queues even longer.

Your solution is “restrict entry” which means fewer people will get to play. In a video game, every solution that says fewer people should get to have fun will be a bad solution. Other games have plenty of examples of that stupid approach blowing up in their face.

If we really need balanced player counts, add a bunch of NPCs to the lower pop sides. Just put in mindless zerg AI for those NPCs and nobody would even know they weren’t real players.

thats a horrible idea are you trying to kill PVP?

nothing is stoping players or guilds to make another server their home world and have a instant queue every time they wish to take part in WvW

there is nothing stoping players from taking part in WvW with this idea its making the game more enjoyable for everybody

Estus.1726

The majority of “solutions” for the so called fixing of WvWvW seem to focus on penalizing the winning server and rewarding the losing servers.

When the “winning side” is playing by itself, you can’t really say it is winning. It just decided to be winning. Like that sad kid playing alone with the ball.

Elusive.9162

We want to not have queues. If your server does not want to participate – too bad.

Wait, so I paid for this game and I’m not allowed to play it? Or rather, I’m allowed to play, but I’m to be punished because I chose server “A” instead of “B”? That is absolutely ridiculous. If this is the case, then WvW server stats should be presented on the server selection screen.

Kamos.2897:

Estus.1726

The majority of “solutions” for the so called fixing of WvWvW seem to focus on penalizing the winning server and rewarding the losing servers.

When the “winning side” is playing by itself, you can’t really say it is winning. It just decided to be winning. Like that sad kid playing alone with the ball.

Elusive.9162

We want to not have queues. If your server does not want to participate – too bad.

Wait, so I paid for this game and I’m not allowed to play it? Or rather, I’m allowed to play, but I’m to be punished because I chose server “A” instead of “B”? That is absolutely ridiculous. If this is the case, then WvW server stats should be presented on the server selection screen.

yep Kamos understands it

there is just 1 other factor the morale of the server

you have quests to kill mobs to lower their morale so they leave the same thing happens in WvW servers if a team thinks it has no hope they are going to leave and the server is going to become dead

a limit like this will raise the morale of players and make them think they have a chance and more players will hang around and stay in the game

its going to end up with all servers being full and this limit will be a thing of the past at prime time

Daish.6139:

Richard.8207:

If we really need balanced player counts, add a bunch of NPCs to the lower pop sides. Just put in mindless zerg AI for those NPCs and nobody would even know they weren’t real players.

thats a horrible idea are you trying to kill PVP?

nothing is stoping players or guilds to make another server their home world and have a instant queue every time they wish to take part in WvW

there is nothing stoping players from taking part in WvW with this idea its making the game more enjoyable for everybody

Of course it’s a horrible idea. That was my point. There are PvP-oriented games with AI bots, and that solution is received far better than games where developers intentionally prevent people from playing the game. Developers are God in their video games, and there is just no point fighting against God.

I have an account on Kaineng. Even Kaineng does not always have instant queues, and Anet even released graphs showing that. Not to mention it is silly to tell players they need to move away from their friends if they want to actually play the game anyways. If I wanted a game where I can’t play with friends, I’d buy a single-player game.

People have told you plenty of reasons your idea will not make the game more enjoyable for everyone. You just choose to ignore their points rather than actually addressing them. It doesn’t really make for a very convincing argument, especially when other games have implemented your idea and the consequences are very real and seem to happen every time developers are stupid enough to think “this time will be different.”

Richard.8207:

Daish.6139:

Richard.8207:

If we really need balanced player counts, add a bunch of NPCs to the lower pop sides. Just put in mindless zerg AI for those NPCs and nobody would even know they weren’t real players.

thats a horrible idea are you trying to kill PVP?

nothing is stoping players or guilds to make another server their home world and have a instant queue every time they wish to take part in WvW

there is nothing stoping players from taking part in WvW with this idea its making the game more enjoyable for everybody

Of course it’s a horrible idea. That was my point. There are PvP-oriented games with AI bots, and that solution is received far better than games where developers intentionally prevent people from playing the game. Developers are God in their video games, and there is just no point fighting against God.

I have an account on Kaineng. Even Kaineng does not always have instant queues, and Anet even released graphs showing that. Not to mention it is silly to tell players they need to move away from their friends if they want to actually play the game anyways. If I wanted a game where I can’t play with friends, I’d buy a single-player game.

People have told you plenty of reasons your idea will not make the game more enjoyable for everyone. You just choose to ignore their points rather than actually addressing them. It doesn’t really make for a very convincing argument, especially when other games have implemented your idea and the consequences are very real and seem to happen every time developers are stupid enough to think “this time will be different.”

their friends can move with them

your the 1 thats silly if you think 200v10 is enjoyable for eaither side

your way of thinking will kill WvW unless players decide to move servers without anything encorageing them to

All the people complaning about queues should go look at how small most servers queues are already. The dynamic cap is only going to effect off peak hours, which if you look at most charts that have been provided would effect maybe 3 servers out of the 24 NA servers. Now that isnt to say that if a dynamic cap were in place it wouldnt cause a few of the higher pop servers to start having off peak queues, but I doubt it would be significant enough to cause any major issues.

Feel free to look at the charts, you know what they tell ME? That people arent queueing for WvW nearly as much as they were last week, they all saw massive decreases (other than Crystal Desert) in terms of the amount of people looking to play.

People can jump to their own conclusions but I have my reasons.

Rodarin.6058:

All the people complaning about queues should go look at how small most servers queues are already. The dynamic cap is only going to effect off peak hours, which if you look at most charts that have been provided would effect maybe 3 servers out of the 24 NA servers. Now that isnt to say that if a dynamic cap were in place it wouldnt cause a few of the higher pop servers to start having off peak queues, but I doubt it would be significant enough to cause any major issues.

Feel free to look at the charts, you know what they tell ME? That people arent queueing for WvW nearly as much as they were last week, they all saw massive decreases (other than Crystal Desert) in terms of the amount of people looking to play.

People can jump to their own conclusions but I have my reasons.

thats very easy if you understood anything about humans you would see thats because servers are matched for up to 7 days now

servers that are loseing and keep loseing will lose morale and will not want to play

when the servers are rematched the ammount of people who queue will go up again

i know its hard for simple people to understand but thats whats happening

So because the players of the other 2 servers don’t want or can’t play at a certain time I shouldn’t be allowed to play either ?

Seem legit. Thanks for sharing this great idea !

The only thing that it would do is making the queue even longer. We sure really need it !

Fingolfin.3018:

So because the players of the other 2 servers don’t want or can’t play at a certain time I shouldn’t be allowed to play either ?

Seem legit. Thanks for sharing this great idea !

The only thing that it would do is making the queue even longer. We sure really need it !

whats stoping you from moving to another server to do WvW if its such a important part of the game for you?

and this queue system would alow 1 server to have basicly 2x more players then the other servers in the same matchup

you are #$ed in the head if you think a 30vs5 fight is enjoyable for anyone

THERE IS NOTHING FOR YOU TO DO IN THERE WITHOUT THE OTHER SERVERS YOU MAY AS WELL GO AFK IN LIONS ARCH

I don’t wanna move to another server because I’m on the server I like, the one I fought for, the one my guild is on…

Maybe you should be the one moving to another server and find one matched up with other servers with the same population

So here’s what you’re saying:
The people on your server don’t want to play unless they’re winning:
“servers that are loseing and keep loseing will lose morale and will not want to play”

And your solution is: ‘Enemy servers are not allowed to play unless my server wants to play.’

Which, if we follow your logic, means:
1. ‘We don’t want to play because we lose.’
2. ‘You don’t get to play if we don’t want to play.’
3. ‘You don’t get to play because you win.’

And ultimately, that means your logic works out to:
‘The more you win, the less you’re allowed to play.’
Which would effectively discourage people from winning.

Great idea.

What happens when a low pop server has “0” people on a given map? Does that mean no one can play it and it remains evenly spread between all sides?

ClockRhythmEcho.1395:

So here’s what you’re saying:
The people on your server don’t want to play unless they’re winning:
“servers that are loseing and keep loseing will lose morale and will not want to play”

And your solution is: ‘Enemy servers are not allowed to play unless my server wants to play.’

Which, if we follow your logic, means:
1. ‘We don’t want to play because we lose.’
2. ‘You don’t get to play if we don’t want to play.’
3. ‘You don’t get to play because you win.’

And ultimately, that means your logic works out to:
‘The more you win, the less you’re allowed to play.’
Which would effectively discourage people from winning.

Great idea.

no people dont want to play unless they have some kind of chance

if people are being spawned camped and have no towers no keeps no garrisons they are going to lose the will to give it a real go

this system would let people know that they wont be in a 50v10 and will have a real chance

it would cause the loser servers to try team up the Commanders would ask players not to attack the other low population server and cause more drama and fun inside the game

you dont understand logic

in a 1v1v1 if your attacking both teams at the same time your #%ed if your defending vs 1 and attacking vs another your going to be alot stronger

Franks.2579:

What happens when a low pop server has “0” people on a given map? Does that mean no one can play it and it remains evenly spread between all sides?

can you explain to me when you want to PVP and your in a map thats only PVE what are you going to do whats fun for you? is there anything thats fun?

your logic is a joke

Unfortunately OP, since I’ve only posted once in this thread, that means you should only be allowed to post three times.

But since you’ve already posted 14 times, you’ll have to wait until I reach my 5th post until you can post again.

Personally I don’t see how limiting people based on the participation of others is fair, but it is by your logic so I guess you’ll understand.

Mif.3471:

Unfortunately OP, since I’ve only posted once in this thread, that means you should only be allowed to post three times.

But since you’ve already posted 14 times, you’ll have to wait until I reach my 5th post until you can post again.

Personally I don’t see how limiting people based on the participation of others is fair, but it is by your logic so I guess you’ll understand.

because there is no game if the other teams dose not think they can win…………

the game ends
nothing to do
no pvp
nothing

Guild Wars 2 WvW idea slowly dies

morale is whats causing WvW to be unpopulated not player population -.-

servers are going to keep loseing morale i bet the numbers of players queueing shot up big time after the reset