Guild Wars 2

This attempted population balance tool “Server FULL” need to be removed as soon as possible.

After megaserver became a thing server population limiting has only 1 area of influence left – WvW.

But right now after the server linking for WvW became a thing too this limitation is cripling several servers quite a lot.

I’m in one of those FULL servers but yet we’re with out manned buff whole morning on all borders till primetime and at least several hours till mid-day even in EBG.

We have people willing to join our server’s WvW Community from other actually overstacked T1 servers but they can’t because our server is full.

Why does this thing still exist when it dont affect PvE and as you can clearly see from my example with my server it negatively affects WvW in many servers ?

This ancient population balance tool need to be removed at once forever and stop be a burden for us.

Luna.9640:

We have people willing to join our server’s WvW Community from other actually overstacked T1 servers but they can’t because our server is full.

That’s what the lower populated linked server is for. There’s quite a few guilds transferring around like that already.

Working as intended. The plan is for you to want to transfer to a host server that is full. You will then pay 500 gems to transfer to the guest server of that host. After 4 months, you will get linked to a different host server and pay 500 gems again to transfer to the new guest server of the host server that you like. As a result, you will spend 500 gems every four months in order to play with the host server that you want.

Its definitely weird how its working out. You can clearly see some T1 servers in NA that don’t have near the numbers of other servers yet are still marked “full”. My guild and I guessed that this could have been done manually as well to prevent stacking. Its definitely annoying though, we are marked as “full” too but are outmanned/outnumbered on every map.

First of all, what server are you on?

Second, those populations are ONLY based on WvW population now. They’re not based on the PvE population.

If you’re in an NA server, it is “linked” with another server which people could still transfer to in order to boost your coverage.

EotM.2513:

Working as intended. The plan is for you to want to transfer to a host server that is full. You will then pay 500 gems to transfer to the guest server of that host. After 4 months, you will get linked to a different host server and pay 500 gems again to transfer to the new guest server of the host server that you like. As a result, you will spend 500 gems every four months in order to play with the host server that you want.

I’d agree with you if this was Black Desert Online.

Host server are full to spread population to low server…
It’s a good thing !
You want to play with your friend ? Just transfer to some open server with all your friends then…
Stop stacking on top server, or leech on top server…

My guildmates who had quit months ago wanted to come back and join us but can’t. The majority would have to transfer for something that is beta and might change. Not to mention that there are some server communities that we’d like to avoid. The result? Overwatch TS channel is filling up.

I agree that they need to raise the threshold when server becomes full….
They additionally Anet should limit transfers.. say you can transfer only 2 times year per account or something like that to prevent people hopping servers all the time…

EotM.2513:

Working as intended. The plan is for you to want to transfer to a host server that is full. You will then pay 500 gems to transfer to the guest server of that host. After 4 months, you will get linked to a different host server and pay 500 gems again to transfer to the new guest server of the host server that you like. As a result, you will spend 500 gems every four months in order to play with the host server that you want.

Would hope that was not the intent of Anet, if it was I would quit the game.

TBH being able to transfer to the lower ranked servers in a matchup is not an answer anyway cause of the dynamic nature of server linking.

morrolan.9608:

EotM.2513:

Working as intended. The plan is for you to want to transfer to a host server that is full. You will then pay 500 gems to transfer to the guest server of that host. After 4 months, you will get linked to a different host server and pay 500 gems again to transfer to the new guest server of the host server that you like. As a result, you will spend 500 gems every four months in order to play with the host server that you want.

Would hope that was not the intent of Anet, if it was I would quit the game.

TBH being able to transfer to the lower ranked servers in a matchup is not an answer anyway cause of the dynamic nature of server linking.

it is the answer when the goal is for overall population balance. By filling up the lower ranked servers they can eventually become competitive by themselves without needing to be linked to a higher tier server.

Nate.3927:

morrolan.9608:

EotM.2513:

Working as intended. The plan is for you to want to transfer to a host server that is full. You will then pay 500 gems to transfer to the guest server of that host. After 4 months, you will get linked to a different host server and pay 500 gems again to transfer to the new guest server of the host server that you like. As a result, you will spend 500 gems every four months in order to play with the host server that you want.

Would hope that was not the intent of Anet, if it was I would quit the game.

TBH being able to transfer to the lower ranked servers in a matchup is not an answer anyway cause of the dynamic nature of server linking.

it is the answer when the goal is for overall population balance. By filling up the lower ranked servers they can eventually become competitive by themselves without needing to be linked to a higher tier server.

You really think the overall population is enough to fill 24 servers? 12 servers is probably too many nowadays. If anet really think the mode can sustain 24 servers……………….

Vova.2640:

I agree that they need to raise the threshold when server becomes full….
They additionally Anet should limit transfers.. say you can transfer only 2 times year per account or something like that to prevent people hopping servers all the time…

I like the idea of limited transfers.

This tool is very good. Finally no more bandwagoners. They can transfer to linked server ofcourse, but most of them are brainless pugs that want to earn gold, not lose it so they don’t want to transfer twice. As result we don’t have many bandwagoners, but unfortunatly some of them came and atm community is divided so… Yeah i Type about Desolation here :/

Josh XT.6053:

First of all, what server are you on?

Second, those populations are ONLY based on WvW population now. They’re not based on the PvE population.

If you’re in an NA server, it is “linked” with another server which people could still transfer to in order to boost your coverage.

They aren’t based on wvw population or JQ wouldn’t be full. And the problem with linked server is that you don’t know if this linking is permanent. What if they decide that your world gets linked with a new one after you transfered?

I think the “full” status was set manually.

gebrechen.5643:

Josh XT.6053:

First of all, what server are you on?

Second, those populations are ONLY based on WvW population now. They’re not based on the PvE population.

If you’re in an NA server, it is “linked” with another server which people could still transfer to in order to boost your coverage.

They aren’t based on wvw population or JQ wouldn’t be full. And the problem with linked server is that you don’t know if this linking is permanent. What if they decide that your world gets linked with a new one after you transfered?

JQ may not be “full” for NA prime time anymore now that a decent bit of their guilds went to TC, but they still have some pretty impressive coverage at other times. You’re not really fooling me anyway and not going to get a pity party from me over JQ falling apart. I’m on Blackgate on my main account and on BP/FA on my alt account that is fighting JQ right now. If you guys spent more time trying to do something rather than running away from fights to get to siege, you might not be in the situation you’re in.

Josh XT.6053:

JQ may not be “full” for NA prime time anymore now that a decent bit of their guilds went to TC, but they still have some pretty impressive coverage at other times.

JQ fell to high status just prior to the server linking not even very high so no its definitely not full.

How is WvW population even calculated, im from JQ and there is hardly any people here.

Probably some super advanced code like this

If (server.name == "Jade Quarry") { 
  server.status.set("full"); 
}

well, it feels like most of my server stopped playing after the team ups, i’ve even seen outnumbered……looks like wvw is pretty dead from my screen.

Chiaope.6397:

How is WvW population even calculated, im from JQ and there is hardly any people here.

Depends what tz you play. JQ has very few EU, low NA relative to the other top servers, competitive OCX and high SEA.

For the record we’re not discussing the “Hired guns” guilds that transfer from server 2 server once in a while when they find a new server to pay for their transfers and screw up every WvW community they leave behind.

We’re talking about small guilds who are willing to join a different servers to join new WvW communities and expirience different match-ups.

WvW Communities have internal Politics you like it or not and its in human nature to disagree with each other so when a conflict rises one of the sides chooses to leave the current community to solve the argument moving to another server – this is not possible with this Ancient “server full” mechanic and creates unnecessary drama and overburdens some communities.

I really hoped anet is working on world linking instead of jumping to score so soon when world linking isn’t finalized yet.

I am so afraid of getting people to go to the guest server because my server is full, afraid that anet will suddenly decided to change the world linking which will leave my guys isolated =,=.

This ‘server FULL’ thing is a serious problem. We have some guild members who are spread across other servers that want to transfer to participate in our WVW activities. Obviously transferring to a linked partner is only a very temporary solution.

Basically this bonehead idea of locking down servers completely is crippling guilds on about half of the servers in GW2. The is horrific because guild membership and strong guilds is the most positive thing this game has going for it, and WVW’s long term health depends on it.

It needs to be fixed RIGHT NOW.

Glass Hand.7306:

This ‘server FULL’ thing is a serious problem. We have some guild members who are spread across other servers that want to transfer to participate in our WVW activities. Obviously transferring to a linked partner is only a very temporary solution.

Basically this bonehead idea of locking down servers completely is crippling guilds on about half of the servers in GW2. The is horrific because guild membership and strong guilds is the most positive thing this game has going for it, and WVW’s long term health depends on it.

It needs to be fixed RIGHT NOW.

Bonehead idea? What server are you even on?

Here is the problem, people want to stack servers that are already stacked. Sure, servers like Yaks Bend are falling apart. I am sorry that I can’t feel bad for them with how hard they bandwagoned and how much siege they used to get to where they are. Eventually people get tired of it and leave.

I think locking down all T1 and T2 servers was a smart idea. The bar should not be set at servers being able to queue every map in NA prime, that means it is OVER populated. Queuing 2 maps in NA prime time, to me, should mean it is full. Generally that means that you have some sort of presence on each map, but 2 of the maps are completely filled up.

Plus, news flash – PPT doesn’t ACTUALLY matter. There are no rewards for winning in over all points, so why do you care? lol. Go takes your guild and friends to a low population server instead of to an over stacked server, then your problem is solved. You’ll get paired with maybe a different server every quarter, make new friends, etc.

Solution is to stop stacking over stacked servers, that is why they’re full. Yaks Bend is a server I’d like to watch fall back to Tier 3 and stay there personally.

Also consider this, if the T1 servers were switched back to “Very high” instead of full, it would cost 1500 gems (I think it was?) to transfer to it, you can transfer THREE PEOPLE to one of the lower pop servers for that cost, so if you have a guild of 30 active people and 10 people want to transfer in to help you, it costs the same to transfer those 30 people to a lower pop server verses transferring those 10 in to an over populated server lol…

I transferred my whole guild to Borlis Pass from Blackgate and it barely cost me anything. We’re getting just as many fights as we were on Blackgate and we’re not sitting in queues to get them. Just transfer, there are a lot of fun servers out there and the server pairing makes it even more fun in my opinion.

@JoshXT you could end up back with BG or against BG when the re-link occurs. Still no “rules” on how often the re-link will occur, exactly how the re-link works, and if the cost will change to transfer again. Glad it worked for you and your group, but many won’t bother until these things are written in stone.

Now if some of the hosts were actually open, then I’d bet maybe more might do what your group did. Only time will tell of course.

Liston.9708:

@JoshXT you could end up back with BG or against BG when the re-link occurs. Still no “rules” on how often the re-link will occur, exactly how the re-link works, and if the cost will change to transfer again. Glad it worked for you and your group, but many won’t bother until these things are written in stone.

Now if some of the hosts were actually open, then I’d bet maybe more might do what your group did. Only time will tell of course.

I doubt it though, they’re not randomizing the links, they’re linking based on population of the servers. Since Borlis Pass is linked with FA, we’ve taken a decent amount of transfers in (including my guild) that have made BP a pretty healthy server again. Same went for Eredon Terrace, they took a lot of transfers in from people who wanted to play on Blackgate, now they’re a pretty healthy server too. When the pairs change to balance the servers again, I imagine a very different pairing than what there is now minus a few servers. I think FA and BP are in a good place together, the coverage is balanced, the queues are little to none – I think it worked out very well for those two servers, but we’re very much “right in the middle” of the server listings, top of T3, right in the middle of all of the servers #6 of 12 lol.

If every server had the balance FA/BP has right now, every server would be in a good place. T1 is very out of balance. T2 is partially in balance, but still over populated (argue with me on it all you want, its true), T3 is very well balanced, T4 is a little under populated still.

well we don’t know how they will re-link. last time was simply 1+24 / 2+23 based on glicko. glicko is no longer tracked on the guests so it will have to be something different. You are probably right with pop. Indeed the hosts somewhere in the middle have a more likely chance of retaining their current links or at least linking with servers with similar pops.

if you had the choice of moving to FA or a host, would you have gone that route? It would seem a better way going into the future is to have some of the hosts open.

Either way, glad it worked for your group.

Liston.9708:

well we don’t know how they will re-link. last time was simply 1+24 / 2+23 based on glicko. glicko is no longer tracked on the guests so it will have to be something different. You are probably right with pop. Indeed the hosts somewhere in the middle have a more likely chance of retaining their current links or at least linking with servers with similar pops.

if you had the choice of moving to FA or a host, would you have gone that route? It would seem a better way going into the future is to have some of the hosts open.

Either way, glad it worked for your group.

I’m honestly happy that I only had to pay 500 gems per person in my guild instead of paying the higher cost of the higher populated servers. Plus, if FA gets stacked up for some reason (bandwagon) and then BP gets paired with someone else, that will be better for me and my guild. Last time we were on FA, it turned in to a bandwagon and all 4 maps were super queued every single night during NA prime. It got to the point where my guild HAD to transfer (like on Blackgate) if we intended to keep playing together.

So really, a server that is in Tier 3 is the best place to be in my opinion, but probably the linked server verses the host server.

XTR.9604:

I’m honestly happy that I only had to pay 500 gems per person in my guild instead of paying the higher cost of the higher populated servers

Hmmm…maybe ANet should begin to earn a decent (weekly, monthly, or quarterly) revenue stream from WvW using this Core Fight Model moving forward…never thought of it that way.

Plus, this would be a good way to remove gold from the overall GW2 economy, or to directly stimulate gem purchases.

Brilliant…just not good for the Long Term health & viability of the WvW Game Mode though…imho

There’s other ways to generate income for ANet, but I’ll only disclose it to ANet if they hired me as a game design consultant.

I would also like to see the current pairings remain, though all servers outside of BG and ET could probably use an additional linked server.

The problem is not that BG can play more, it is that other servers can’t. The best part of WvW is being able to log in at any time and have epic battles. Want to play before work? There is a three way SMC battle that needs your help. Up late and not ready for bed? The other servers are attacking your garrison, get in there. This constant WvW gameplay is long gone, and could come back with further consolidation of players.

@xtr – interesting take preferring guest over host. Some of what you say makes pretty darn good sense. Ill be interested on how you and others that made similar moves feel after re-linking as well.

I doubt BP or ET have gained much. Do not forget that they mentioned the population cap is halfed which means that the “Very High” and “High” status is much easier to reach than before but BP and ET still has not reach “Very High”.

A-net stated repeatedly that server status is determined not by population but by WVW activity. Not PVE activity, not by EOTM, but by actual WVW activity.

It is working as it was working before, and the long delay is there specifically to prevent large groups from manipulating this system as they have done so for couple of years.

The only thing they did different is set the “full server” bar a bit lower, in order to prevent the above mentioned large groups (alliances, or whatever you wanna call them)from server hopping too much during all the changes going on in WVW.

And its working.

if you and “your friends” are a part of such a group, or a part of such an alliance, that have landed us all in this mess in the 1st place, and want to leave, then good riddance to you. Don’t let the door hit you where the sun don’t shine on your way out.

In case anyone hasn’t noticed yet by all the answers and results in the latest polls etc. the vast majority of players want somewhat number fair fights, server overstacking, gaming / exploiting the transfer system. etc. goes against all that and should be eliminated ASAP and with extreme prejudice along with anyone and any group that supports it.

SkyShroud.2865:

I doubt BP or ET have gained much.

ET has.

Josh XT.6053:

Glass Hand.7306:

This ‘server FULL’ thing is a serious problem. We have some guild members who are spread across other servers that want to transfer to participate in our WVW activities. Obviously transferring to a linked partner is only a very temporary solution.

Basically this bonehead idea of locking down servers completely is crippling guilds on about half of the servers in GW2. The is horrific because guild membership and strong guilds is the most positive thing this game has going for it, and WVW’s long term health depends on it.

It needs to be fixed RIGHT NOW.

Bonehead idea? What server are you even on?

Here is the problem, people want to stack servers that are already stacked. Sure, servers like Yaks Bend are falling apart. I am sorry that I can’t feel bad for them with how hard they bandwagoned and how much siege they used to get to where they are. Eventually people get tired of it and leave.

Talk about totally missing the point of my post. The issue I have with servers being full has nothing to do with stacking servers or transferring guilds for crying out loud. It’s about transferring individuals to a guild’s home server so they can participate in WVW activities with the rest of the guild.

FULL servers as currently implemented make this pretty much impossible. It’s a bonehead idea because it does not consider any needs of players wanting to transfer for reasons other than things related to server stacking.

There needs to be a way for someone on a server apart from where the majority of their guild is to transfer to where the guild is. Right now this is not possible for half of the servers. Long term the current situation is untenable.

Next time please read the posting and make an effort to understand it before replying.

Liston.9708:

@xtr – interesting take preferring guest over host. Some of what you say makes pretty darn good sense. Ill be interested on how you and others that made similar moves feel after re-linking as well.

I’ve transferred so many times because of servers dying down, turning in to bandwagons or the fights just getting boring. Something like 16+ times I’ve transferred to a bunch of servers between my 2 accounts, some servers I’ve been on more than once or twice even haha. I’ve honestly lost count, but I know it was at least 16 times lol..

For me, being on a “guest server” means I may experience different communities and that ANet will automatically balance my server with another server (or maybe the same one) every quarter, which essentially SAVES me money from having to transfer again to be in a more balanced place once more.

Glass Hand.7306:

Talk about totally missing the point of my post. The issue I have with servers being full has nothing to do with stacking servers or transferring guilds for crying out loud. It’s about transferring individuals to a guild’s home server so they can participate in WVW activities with the rest of the guild.

FULL servers as currently implemented make this pretty much impossible. It’s a bonehead idea because it does not consider any needs of players wanting to transfer for reasons other than things related to server stacking.

There needs to be a way for someone on a server apart from where the majority of their guild is to transfer to where the guild is. Right now this is not possible for half of the servers. Long term the current situation is untenable.

Next time please read the posting and make an effort to understand it before replying.

No I fully understand what you’re saying, and I stand by my statement. Individuals even should not be transferring to over stacked servers, period. Their INTENTIONS for transferring do not matter, the server is full.

You should move your guild to a server that isn’t stacked if you want to play with other people, maybe even the guest server that is attached to your host server. It is easy to see that they’re trying to promote people moving OFF of the over stacked servers to a lower population server to balance things out. So either stay on the over stacked full server you’re on or transfer to another server.

Lets say you have a car that seats 5 people. 2 in front, 3 in back. Now you want to throw in another 5 people. Can’t really do that can ya? Maybe you can put people on peoples laps, but that is not comfortable (WvW queues) right? On those “FULL” servers, there are already 10 people in that car that seats 5. That is why they’re not letting anyone else in.

XTR.9604:

Liston.9708:

@xtr – interesting take preferring guest over host. Some of what you say makes pretty darn good sense. Ill be interested on how you and others that made similar moves feel after re-linking as well.

I’ve transferred so many times because of servers dying down, turning in to bandwagons or the fights just getting boring. Something like 16+ times I’ve transferred to a bunch of servers between my 2 accounts, some servers I’ve been on more than once or twice even haha. I’ve honestly lost count, but I know it was at least 16 times lol..

For me, being on a “guest server” means I may experience different communities and that ANet will automatically balance my server with another server (or maybe the same one) every quarter, which essentially SAVES me money from having to transfer again to be in a more balanced place once more.

totally the opposite for me. same server since head start. when the matches get bad, I play an alt (which has moved 6 times or so), work on pve check-list, or go play another game (usually rift). Eventually the blowouts (both ways) go away…

Just wondering…. Would you actually prefer a large scale pvp (10-15-20-25) with the proper ladders etc? I wonder if that is the real answer in the end for many.

morrolan.9608:

SkyShroud.2865:

I doubt BP or ET have gained much.

ET has.

Not really. They still medium population. You can even make a assumption that ET was really dead before all this and even with the transfers, it couldn’t push ET to high pop even when the pop cap was halfed, which make high pop half the requirement as well.

Liston.9708:

XTR.9604:

Liston.9708:

@xtr – interesting take preferring guest over host. Some of what you say makes pretty darn good sense. Ill be interested on how you and others that made similar moves feel after re-linking as well.

I’ve transferred so many times because of servers dying down, turning in to bandwagons or the fights just getting boring. Something like 16+ times I’ve transferred to a bunch of servers between my 2 accounts, some servers I’ve been on more than once or twice even haha. I’ve honestly lost count, but I know it was at least 16 times lol..

For me, being on a “guest server” means I may experience different communities and that ANet will automatically balance my server with another server (or maybe the same one) every quarter, which essentially SAVES me money from having to transfer again to be in a more balanced place once more.

totally the opposite for me. same server since head start. when the matches get bad, I play an alt (which has moved 6 times or so), work on pve check-list, or go play another game (usually rift). Eventually the blowouts (both ways) go away…

Just wondering…. Would you actually prefer a large scale pvp (10-15-20-25) with the proper ladders etc? I wonder if that is the real answer in the end for many.

I would rather move around to different servers than play PvE or another game, I very much enjoy GW2.

As far as larger scale PvP goes, I prefer running 5-8 people personally, or even solo roaming. I play with another group that runs 15-20 generally as well. It is fun to see the group synergy and to take on groups larger.

Many would say that since I’d prefer to play with 5 people that I should go play PvP, but I do not enjoy PvP nearly as much as WvW. The builds in PvP are far too limited and it takes away build diversity that you have in places like WvW. I will play PvP from time to time and some times I’ll get on a kick where I play PvP almost exclusively for a few days, but ultimately I always go back to WvW where I can play with better builds.

SkyShroud.2865:

morrolan.9608:

SkyShroud.2865:

I doubt BP or ET have gained much.

ET has.

Not really. They still medium population. You can even make a assumption that ET was really dead before all this and even with the transfers, it couldn’t push ET to high pop even when the pop cap was halfed, which make high pop half the requirement as well.

have any of the server statuses changed since linking? I didn’t note them – so I don’t know myself whether to trust those statuses or not….. ie…. were they frozen in time

Liston.9708:

SkyShroud.2865:

morrolan.9608:

SkyShroud.2865:

I doubt BP or ET have gained much.

ET has.

Not really. They still medium population. You can even make a assumption that ET was really dead before all this and even with the transfers, it couldn’t push ET to high pop even when the pop cap was halfed, which make high pop half the requirement as well.

have any of the server statuses changed since linking? I didn’t note them – so I don’t know myself whether to trust those statuses or not….. ie…. were they frozen in time

A lot were changed. HOD/NSP/DH wasn’t full right at the start of world link and only after awhile. Crystal Desert went from medium to high to very high. A lot of severs also went from medium to high. Ebay went from medium to high, was the only high pop server for awhile, not sure if is the effects of the half pop.

@sky – thanks. I wondered about CD, thought all 12 hosts were full after linking, and just didn’t know about the high servers.

We moved off YB back to BP to unify our guild. At the time BP and most of the bottom 12 servers were at Medium. Course we don’t care where we fight as long as the fights are good.

Tongku.5326:

….

The only thing they did different is set the “full server” bar a bit lower, ….

Not really. The bar for linked servers has been halved according to :

[–]Anet-TylerB

Linked worlds have halved population caps. So any NA world that was at least 50% full pre-link, is now FULL. If we were to unlink them, they’d no longer be FULL.

Red Daing.7804:

Tongku.5326:

….

The only thing they did different is set the “full server” bar a bit lower, ….

Not really. The bar for linked servers has been halved according to :

[–]Anet-TylerB

Linked worlds have halved population caps. So any NA world that was at least 50% full pre-link, is now FULL. If we were to unlink them, they’d no longer be FULL.

That’s a bit misleading. 50% was the threshold. Some servers were higher than that by quite a bit.

This ridiculous top 12 servers being marked full needs to end ASAP. For a player who wants competitive/serious wvw I don’t think any of the open servers are worth transferring to – we’re talking about the servers that took pride in being “small” and “casual” to the point of being dead. Adding in a bunch of bandwagon players who want to be linked with a given t1/t2 server doesn’t really improve those servers at all.

Anet, if you want people to “destack” T1 servers in particular they need viable destinations to transfer to aka t2-t4 servers that actually earned their place in the rankings. Stop trying to funnel players into 12 servers that have being on life support for eons now, merge them into a single lower tier to give the players who want more casual play somewhere to go.

(This isn’t hating on the t5-8 servers, I keep reading on the forums how most of them want to be on lower ranked very small server communities….and aren’t fond of all the transfers coming in. What I’m really trying to get across is that throwing a bunch of transfers at existing server communities that don’t want to change into competitive t4+ servers is waste of time for all involved)

XTR.9604:

Liston.9708:

@xtr – interesting take preferring guest over host. Some of what you say makes pretty darn good sense. Ill be interested on how you and others that made similar moves feel after re-linking as well.

I’ve transferred so many times because of servers dying down, turning in to bandwagons or the fights just getting boring. Something like 16+ times I’ve transferred to a bunch of servers between my 2 accounts, some servers I’ve been on more than once or twice even haha. I’ve honestly lost count, but I know it was at least 16 times lol..

For me, being on a “guest server” means I may experience different communities and that ANet will automatically balance my server with another server (or maybe the same one) every quarter, which essentially SAVES me money from having to transfer again to be in a more balanced place once more.

For server nomads that’s perfectly fine. Just like roamers there are plenty of floaters out there that arent attached to a server and plays like mercenaries.

The problem becomes when you actually found something you like and want to hold on to… only to have it torn away from you.