Guild Wars 2

I don’t want conjecture or “player tests” I want actual Official Responses.

and I would like everyone to plead in this post for the dev’s to answer.

Can we please have the actual numbers regarding WvW Server capacity limits.

What is the ACTUAL maximum allowed number of players per server?.
Does it change depending on the 3 servers in a matchup?
Does it change during the night/day?

Thanks

I am really unsure as to why keeping these numbers secret is a “thing”?

Surely there must be some reason, but it is lost on me.

World map chat will be interesting?

“everyone type hi in map chat”

Then we will start counting.

Because they are shared across all three servers.

in all honesty, I thought Mike released the numbers months ago and it was something like 180/3

Map chat is for your server. Soo when you have a Que, just multiply by three.

ARGH!, ok well 2 outta 3 ain’t bad. Thanks

bob.8632:

I am really unsure as to why keeping these numbers secret is a “thing”?

Surely there must be some reason, but it is lost on me.

This is why …

http://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/196tgh/jeuxonlineinfo_made_an_interview_with_mike/

The very first Q&A. It’s still a bit vague, as Mike’s reply still doesn’t completely explain exactly why he wants to avoid “creating a situation where the discussion around WvW becomes focused on what the limit is set at”. But there you have it.

Liquid.9672:

bob.8632:

I am really unsure as to why keeping these numbers secret is a “thing”?

Surely there must be some reason, but it is lost on me.

This is why …

http://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/196tgh/jeuxonlineinfo_made_an_interview_with_mike/

The very first Q&A. It’s still a bit vague, as Mike’s reply still doesn’t completely explain exactly why he wants to avoid “creating a situation where the discussion around WvW becomes focused on what the limit is set at”. But there you have it.

Oh cool, thank you for the info…Although it begs the question:

Are we getting close to the point where not answering the question is creating more focus on the limit since they are guarding it so close?

Doesn’t matter what the limit is. Just lower it.

So have we ever determined if one server can cause a Que for the others ? As in, the limit is 300 one server could have 200 leaving the other two with only 100 to split between them ?

Nuzt.7894:

So have we ever determined if one server can cause a Que for the others ? As in, the limit is 300 one server could have 200 leaving the other two with only 100 to split between them ?

Each server has its own queue and its own limit and it is the same limit for every server. If every server is queued, then everyone has the same number of people on the map. So no, one server cannot cause a queue for another.

My guess is that the limit is not necessarily a player limit, but a resource limit kept to maximize player slots while keeping it even for all servers, and also taking into account the possibility of mini pets, minions, animal companions, siege. It’d be interesting to know if the player limit scales depending on resources used, but letting that be public knowledge could encourage players to use tons of minions, mini pets, and place tons of useless siege just to cap the other servers’ player count.

As an example, suppose each server had 50 people, all necros, running minions, all had mini pets out. My guess is that if they all started building siege, the siege cap would hit them sooner rather than later, and if it didn’t, you’d start to see skill lag sooner rather than later. Some classes cannot put out any minions or other objects which could hog resources, and A.net probably knows average resources used, and tried to balance the resources used with the player cap.

Of course, maybe it isn’t even. Maybe if you have 1,000 pieces of siege and tons of minions, you get less player slots than the other two servers. Doubtful, but who knows.

Just put 20 people from each server in 1 map, that is the only way to stop skill lag.

Conspiracy theory time!!

1. It’s broke and doesn’t work right but anet won’t admit it
2. It is esay to manipulate and anet doesn’t want people to know how
3. Anet changes it from match to match to reduce server load and or allow higher population servers more people

4. Anet changes the number to manipulate the outcome of a match

60 players is not correct. That is way too low.

Xavi.6591:

60 players is not correct. That is way too low.

You think there are more than about 180-200 people per map?

Hexin.5603:

Because they are shared across all three servers.

in all honesty, I thought Mike released the numbers months ago and it was something like 180/3

Re-posting.

I can’t remember if it was Mike who mentioned it many moons ago or someone else. But almost certain it was Mike.

No definitive answers on how the mechanics work to queue, or how that works in comparison to other servers in match. For example, is outmanned/outnumbered based on 1/2 … 1/3 or 1/4 of the opponents pop, is based compared versus the highest pop server only?

Pretty sure we did a test with this half a year ago when orbs got kicked out. And this came up also when we, the community were asking about siege caps (how many pieces, how its determined when we can cannot place proximity) All apart of the saem time period these discussions were previously talked about. We did get a number … i jsut can’t remember if it was ‘official on forums’ or in-game from a dev.

I feel like Mike F posted it somewhere though long ago. Was it 133 per map ?

======
It’s 166 people per side per map max. 2000 in total in the entire WvW land.
======

Come on Devon. You have to be laughing, I know this information has been posted long ago somewhere and there was an indirect response but it was affirming more than ‘x’ We are not winning the race to find the source though.

Keep looking folks its somewhere. Our old GL knew it, alongside other internal information. Zerg the www and find it

I’m pretty sure we got siege numbers before just not people

If only snowden worked for anet

Hexin.5603:

======
It’s 166 people per side per map max. 2000 in total in the entire WvW land.
======

Come on Devon. You have to be laughing, I know this information has been posted long ago somewhere and there was an indirect response but it was affirming more than ‘x’ We are not winning the race to find the source though.

That was what was originally promised, but after testing they lowered it to about 100 or less. (per world per map) at launch.

DevonCarver.5370:

While we won’t give exact numbers

Why!? You have all this data and you seem to refuse to use it to BENEFIT the game.

Valik Shin.9027:

Conspiracy theory time!!

1. It’s broke and doesn’t work right but anet won’t admit it
2. It is esay to manipulate and anet doesn’t want people to know how
3. Anet changes it from match to match to reduce server load and or allow higher population servers more people

4. Anet changes the number to manipulate the outcome of a match

I would say all 4 are likely….

Xcom.1926:

Xavi.6591:

60 players is not correct. That is way too low.

You think there are more than about 180-200 people per map?

Being as I have personally sat in a pile of 70+ people, yes.

Blix.8021:

Xcom.1926:

Xavi.6591:

60 players is not correct. That is way too low.

You think there are more than about 180-200 people per map?

Being as I have personally sat in a pile of 70+ people, yes.

I will tell you one thing for sure, it is not higher than 100 player per world per map. A safe bet is 80 players per world per map. But in my opinion it is 60. Usually the zergs I follow have about 40-50 people on a map.

Well folks come on now – reset is looming, leagues are pending – what match up has the man power to test in a coordinated effort?
Do we have any fellow DragonBrand players and SoS? We could arrange a thursday night test when your prime picks up.

Xcom.1926:

Blix.8021:

Xcom.1926:

Xavi.6591:

60 players is not correct. That is way too low.

You think there are more than about 180-200 people per map?

Being as I have personally sat in a pile of 70+ people, yes.

I will tell you one thing for sure, it is not higher than 100 player per world per map. A safe bet is 80 players per world per map. But in my opinion it is 60. Usually the zergs I follow have about 40-50 people on a map.

That’s a cool story about the zergs you personally follow. Has no relevance to anything, but thanks for sharing.

Blix.8021:

Xcom.1926:

Blix.8021:

Xcom.1926:

Xavi.6591:

60 players is not correct. That is way too low.

You think there are more than about 180-200 people per map?

Being as I have personally sat in a pile of 70+ people, yes.

I will tell you one thing for sure, it is not higher than 100 player per world per map. A safe bet is 80 players per world per map. But in my opinion it is 60. Usually the zergs I follow have about 40-50 people on a map.

That’s a cool story about the zergs you personally follow. Has no relevance to anything, but thanks for sharing.

It does have relevance especially since you stated the number of people you usually see. Thanks for sharing your info also.

As I said, the number is basically between 60-100 per world per map. Nothing more, nothing less. We won’t ever get the exact number, but that is the range.

Any tier 1 player will tell you emphatically that the cap is much more than 60. Any commander even in lower tiers can gather a zerg, /supplyinfo and get way more than 60. Stop saying the number 60. It just makes anything else you say look stupid.

Let’s broaden that … 60-133 … Until we can prove wrong or narrow that…

Let’s see if any server can get more than 60 people on a map and start from there. – Primetime will be filled with players who do not answer, so its not ideal, but if at anytime someone can get more than 60 – why not report it back here?

Just do a supply info with more than 60 and load it here. I believe its much higher closer to 133.

Blix.8021:

Any tier 1 player will tell you emphatically that the cap is much more than 60. Any commander even in lower tiers can gather a zerg, /supplyinfo and get way more than 60. Stop saying the number 60. It just makes anything else you say look stupid.

It is between 60-100 players per server per map. One is a low estimate, one is a high estimate. It doesn’t have to be 60, but I provided a range where it could lie. I hope that made it simple enough for you to understand.

You seem to get upset easily, there is nothing to get upset out. People are guessing here, nothing to get insecure about.

Supply info on a zerg, or coordinate a supply info with 2 zergs on map. Do not randomly add anything extra for roamers possibly on map. Just facts, lets start with solid facts. I’m sure we could break the 100 mark.

Hexin.5603:

Let’s broaden that … 60-133 … Until we can prove wrong or narrow that..

That sounds good to me.

Xcom.1926:

Xavi.6591:

60 players is not correct. That is way too low.

You think there are more than about 180-200 people per map?

At times … yes.

But it is hard to say, I mean when you see a blob of red coming at you, its natural to believe there’s 5-6 hundred in the blob

I find it kittened that Anet will not say the actual number. Though I know the reason as people will start using math and find out that of ~3 million that bought the game only like only about 0,7% is able to play WvW … Amount of people in the zones is about 100. At launch it was 133 I think, but number has been lowered by quite a lot.

100-133 a server a map /fact

Borderlands have lower cap than EB.

I have counted (1by1) a few zergs reaching up to 95 players in size. Take a few afkers and roamers and you’ll atleast have 100+.

Zumos.2056:

Amount of people in the zones is about 100. At launch it was 133 I think, but number has been lowered by quite a lot.

People in my guild were saying they lowered it after they removed the culling. An assumption, but that is all we have to go by.

The number is definitely not static and has been adjusted over time.

MiLkZz.4789:

Borderlands have lower cap than EB.

Interesting, that is news to me.

Lol … kitten umption – this filter … in any event, tonight can some commanders if on or running – can maybe just ask and do a quick check when your queued. I’m sure the number will be up there, Even if 2 commanders only get 61 total – we can at least up the bottom level. (I would assume we should be able to get to 80 for people paying attention) and can be done on a regroup / merch sell period.

Nuzt.7894:

So have we ever determined if one server can cause a Que for the others ? As in, the limit is 300 one server could have 200 leaving the other two with only 100 to split between them ?

Funny thing is i was in queue for Etermal Battleground while listening to Commander in TS when he said we have outnumbered buff.
Happened today SFR/Piken/Elona
I am on Piken

I have /supplyinfo 63 people in a bl and 71 in eb.

Old 66 per bl per side and 80 per eb Is what I like to pretend is the correct answer.

Anything over 80 is just silly.

I’ve seen zergs very close to 90, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen one break 90.

I think that might be the cap or maybe like 95-100. It’s not much higher than that. I’ve come into a completely empty map with two other guild groups and we had 86 people total and it was queued after that. And I see supplyinfos over 80 while pugmanding on the reg.

If there are two commanders on the map – just whisper / check at the same time … we might break 90

I’m surprised a server or large guild hasn’t organized together to see the capacity. Just have everyone from a guild enter til queue then count.

Traxien Cion.9261:

I’ve seen zergs very close to 90, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen one break 90.

I think that might be the cap or maybe like 95-100. It’s not much higher than that. I’ve come into a completely empty map with two other guild groups and we had 86 people total and it was queued after that. And I see supplyinfos over 80 while pugmanding on the reg.

In a BL or EBG? EBG has a much higher cap than the BLs. Fairly certain the BL cap is 80 and the EB cap is 120.

isn’t saying you wont give us the numbers like saying, you don’t want us to know how to balance the fight ? we can’t tell our server we need 50 more people to balance this fight ?

sorry, due to the lack of transparency, it makes me feel like matches can be rigged from the server side.

The BL limit was in beta 150, then 70, went up to 80 , shifted to 100 and then when down back to 80.

WvW should be played at the weekend for 3 or 4 days (start friday night, ending monday night), giving players something to look forward to week in week out, while allowing us to the rest of the game content the rest of the week.

Zepher.7803:

ARGH!, ok well 2 outta 3 ain’t bad. Thanks

Indeed 2 outta 3 isn’t bad at all given that those that following the WvW forums already knew that the cap question was getting a no.

azizul.8469:

WvW should be played at the weekend for 3 or 4 days (start friday night, ending monday night), giving players something to look forward to week in week out, while allowing us to the rest of the game content the rest of the week.

Not a bad idea, except thanks to my job, my “weekend” is Tuesday-Wednesday. I’d be sad if I only could do minimal participation because I didn’t have the correct days off.

Well i’ve been in several karma trains before on TC and today we hit 88 people at one point. The borderland did have a queue, however I know there were several others not in the zerg. So I can safely say we had at least 95+ on that map.