Guild Wars 2

Mistress Collisto.1546:

Swagger.1459:

I’d suggest you go back and read the conversation so you know what you’re commenting on.

I know what I am commenting about, do you? Forcing people to play the way you wish they would play will only lead to the inevitable collapse of your way. I choose to stay on a server as we collapsed from T1 all the way to T7. WvW is and has always been more then blobbing, however in kitten the community, the players have changed in so many ways that only encourage “If you are not with us you are a waste to our server” Blobbing has destroyed so many of the game mechanics, including WvW. Easy loot, easy high, no risk, all reward, all about numbers… I would rather play a facebook game then roll around with what your proposing. That is why I choose NO and I hope many more agree with me on that. I am fine on a fairly “dead” server and I will have fun, if you want to just be another number, move to a higher tier. At least without server linking we have a choice.

Actually you don’t unfortunately, anymore than you understand what the design purpose of wvw is…

“I’m fine on a fairly “dead” server and I will have fun"…

Dead servers are not good for RvRvR, but ya know, lets keep empty maps running for you and a few of your buddies lol… But seriously, if y’all don’t like running into zergs there is always spvp and guild hall fight clubs…

Swagger.1459:

Actually you don’t unfortunately, anymore than you understand what the design purpose of wvw is…

“I’m fine on a fairly “dead” server and I will have fun"…

Dead servers are not good for RvRvR, but ya know, lets keep empty maps running for you and a few of your buddies lol… But seriously, if y’all don’t like running into zergs there is always spvp and guild hall fight clubs…

The quote on a dead server is nothing more then a generalized statement that many, probably even yourself, have used to describe any server lower then yours. The low tier servers where far from dead, only reason someone would have described them that way was those people do not play your way and you think you have a better use for them by forcing them to merge with you. Your other statement, your right, if you don’t want to RvRvR and do all those things that come with it, but instead want to fight blobs all day, you can go to EotM, I heard there is a large blob out there. Your not going to win me over, and all your doing is painting my picture for me. This will cause more losses to the game then any good coming from it. I stand with my other sub T4 servers on this. Merge the lower servers, I dont think many of us would mind to much as long as we are not blobbing all day.

I am on AR, a “dead server”. And guess what… I didn’t bother playing because whenever I go there, there is no one else on the map. I don’t play WvW to run solo killing doors and AI. Else I would be playing PvE.

Now I am joined with YB and it is a lot of fun. Whenever I go, there are people to play and interact with, as well as enemies to play against.

Sure, it feels more than before that my own contribution is diluted. Sure, my small guild group cannot completely swap a map as it could have before. And sure, there are queues…. But I have more fun by a large margin.

So I don’t think the world linking has solved all population problems, but it is a much healthier start.

Silverkey.2078:

I am on AR, a “dead server”. And guess what… I didn’t bother playing because whenever I go there, there is no one else on the map. I don’t play WvW to run solo killing doors and AI. Else I would be playing PvE.

Now I am joined with YB and it is a lot of fun. Whenever I go, there are people to play and interact with, as well as enemies to play against.

Sure, it feels more than before that my own contribution is diluted. Sure, my small guild group cannot completely swap a map as it could have before. And sure, there are queues…. But I have more fun by a large margin.

So I don’t think the world linking has solved all population problems, but it is a much healthier start.

It was always an easy thing to transfer to a higher server. However, I am glad you are having fun and I hope you voted Yes then, although I am against it, I will live with it if it is actually the will of the people being effected by it and not just those that benefit from more numbers.

Mistress Collisto.1546:

Swagger.1459:

Actually you don’t unfortunately, anymore than you understand what the design purpose of wvw is…

“I’m fine on a fairly “dead” server and I will have fun"…

Dead servers are not good for RvRvR, but ya know, lets keep empty maps running for you and a few of your buddies lol… But seriously, if y’all don’t like running into zergs there is always spvp and guild hall fight clubs…

The quote on a dead server is nothing more then a generalized statement that many, probably even yourself, have used to describe any server lower then yours. The low tier servers where far from dead, only reason someone would have described them that way was those people do not play your way and you think you have a better use for them by forcing them to merge with you. Your other statement, your right, if you don’t want to RvRvR and do all those things that come with it, but instead want to fight blobs all day, you can go to EotM, I heard there is a large blob out there. Your not going to win me over, and all your doing is painting my picture for me. This will cause more losses to the game then any good coming from it. I stand with my other sub T4 servers on this. Merge the lower servers, I dont think many of us would mind to much as long as we are not blobbing all day.

I looked at your post history and you have issues with “blobs”… Sorry, but wvw was designed to host “blobs” so you don’t get to have 4 wvw maps to host you and 20 of your buddies. If you can’t handle “blobs” then wvw is not for you…

You also want PvE zones free of megaserver… This kills off maps and players will struggle to accomplish meta events…

You want emptier maps across game modes, but this is an mmo, not a multiplayer PlayStation game for a few of your buddies…

Some comments here show some of you only care about yourselves, not the wvw community as a whole… Y’all also want the devs to keep the light on for struggling wvw maps…. Those are both pretty selfish.

Root of the problem is the WvW Gameplay Mechanics, not servers merge, design/mechanics drive player behavior. The loss in agency revenue where clients leave game is due to loopholes/mechanics unchecked, it does not matter whether it’s 100 vs 100, or 500 vs 500 from any server, you’re still confined to the zerg norm while spies still run rampant. Did you know a single player can take down a whole zerg just by logging into his friends TS? Meanwhile, new players just entering WvW still don’t know how to find a team, or how to join a squad, or how boons like might works, or how he’s standing right next to a spy in the zerg for that matter.

Oh look! A tag! Maybe that’s what I’ll follow since everyone else follows it…that must be how WvW works…after 10 minutes the squad gets wiped including him, the commander quits due to player rage/blame, the spy laughs infront of the monitor while we’re here debating about blobs & server merges…from a poll…that no one saw until today…facepalm! And the vicious cycle continues…

Swagger.1459:

I looked at your post history and you have issues with “blobs”… Sorry, but wvw was designed to host “blobs” so you don’t get to have 4 wvw maps to host you and 20 of your buddies. If you can’t handle “blobs” then wvw is not for you…

You also want PvE zones free of megaserver… This kills off maps and players will struggle to accomplish meta events…

You want emptier maps across game modes, but this is an mmo, not a multiplayer PlayStation game for a few of your buddies…

Some comments here show some of you only care about yourselves, not the wvw community as a whole… Y’all also want the devs to keep the light on for struggling wvw maps…. Those are both pretty selfish.

Your right when it comes to blobs, there is an economy in the game much as there is in real life… When you give out participation trophies to everyone and devalue your game currency you end up in an inflationary spiral… While you are correct this is an mmo, playing together is a goal, when you have to give out “free stuff” to get participation you will have undesirable effects to the market. Low risk, high reward, leads to issues. Zergging is all to popular, be it champ tains in FG, the Train that ran in Divinities, EotM, back in the day there was karma training in WvW Thur and Fridays, chest trains in SW I could go on… They sound about as much fun as a coloring book with only a blue pen.

However, your other comment about what I posted about mega servers, you should re-read. No where in any of those posts have I ever said I was against them other then the major cities minus LA. Your Realm lost an important place to mesh and come together other then just a Borderland. It was a place you could call out for help, and it was a place to build a community. Totally opposite of how you are trying to paint what I said.

Back to topic though, I’m not here to turn this personal, I know there is an entire volume on the forum for me to cherry pick through. Majority of my guild who used to WvW have stated they quit because unless they are with the zerg they are looked down at and they grew tired of mindless zerging. The few others have stated it was getting stale, same old. Not a one said it was a shortage of numbers. That is why I am speaking for myself and my guild. I can not speak for my server or the community in the game… apparently you can? Let the vote run its course, then we will decide how to go forward. I am at least glad Anet is giving us a little control when it comes to this.

Mistress Collisto.1546:

Majority of my guild who used to WvW have stated they quit because unless they are with the zerg they are looked down at and they grew tired of mindless zerging. The few others have stated it was getting stale, same old. Not a one said it was a shortage of numbers

Agree! Bump! Finally someone that shares the commanders’ dread and gets it, I’d argue that blob/zerg is a play style (currently supported by tags/squads UI), roaming is a play style (currently not supported by UI/mechanics), tactical scoring/strategy is a play style (currently not supported by UI/mechanics), but when zerging is the “only norm” (with us or against us type of mentality), and spying is seen as a play style, that’s a WvW game design/mechanics flaw, and it should not be downloaded to players.

I’ve been messaged by spies before too, some do it as revenge against toxic commanders on their own servers’ TS, some mentioned it’s due to boredom where the WvW game mechanics offered nothing more than mindless zerging…the strange thing is I agree with them from a game mechanics perspective, the game encourages toxic commanders due to frustration generated while conforming to the zerg blob norm, and if that fails, of course they’d lash out against his/her followers, and why would followers not spy back? If the game mechanics encourage toxicity instead of collaboration, then there’s major flaws in the mechanics that needs fixing.

Again, WvW mechanics drives player behavior, ANET please focus on the mechanics! It’s not about server merges nor zergs/blobs. If I told your commander I can destroy his zerg in an instant when I login to my friends’ TS account no matter what team build they use, will he/she still command when blobs are the ONLY play style? Will they even command? And would server merges even matter?

If we want a competitive wvw we need 2 way fighting to get rid of that 3rd wheel server and reballance that way. If we want more variety wvw we need to have 3 way 4 way matches for fun fights.

I think linking wvw servers together brought more life back in the game mode. If we don’t want server linking then I feel that we need to remove borderlands maps and go with 2 map system. 2 map system would make wvw feel more populated like server linking. Whats the point of barely have 40 players spread over 4 maps before linking. Map hopping karma train joke. I’m sure the current 4 map system was designed for a vibrant full population so when that population is so out of whack and lopsided it starts a downward spiral of people leaving creating another problem. If we go to a two map system we can spread the population out somewhat and try to keep things even population wise and hopefully create more server match up variation.

Night capping or off hour players could be addressed by getting rid of 24 hour servers and go with 12 hour servers am and pm servers. Have a smaller number of off hour servers and and larger number of prime time servers.

Another fun idea may be have reset each night. Have the week long match winner be determined by who wins 4 days out of seven days. That style of match up gives sporty playoffs feel to each match up. Best out of 7.

Thats just some quick thoughts I had.

That server merges are a great idea. But in EU ppl (ab)use it to create a new Power House. Sadly to see how many dedicated WvW Guild transfered to Vabbi bc desolation went full just for easy bags and making WvW broken again.
And yes server merges are one of that problems atm, bc the game mechanics don’t reflect it. So unlink server and improve mechanics first.

Tyler Bearce.3427:

The in-game mail notification should be active now.

How it works:
The mail is sent once upon WvW rankup (minimum rank 10), each time a new poll is activated. The mail includes a link to the poll website.

Excellent!

sheds a tear for his lost post, eloquent if wordy, that got eaten by the forum monster so that he may live to log in another day

Voted no because I really dislike the idea of joining high pop and low pop servers, but thinking about it now, I think that if servers could be pooled individually on whether or not they want to be part of the world linking program would be best, and then linking low pop with low pop servers, while leaving highly populated servers alone.

I purposely chose a low ranked, low populated server to avoid only being able to play the mode as part of a zerg spamming my AoEs against the enemy’s zerg. I guess that now I can play like that but it’s just not what I’m looking for.

Damash.2754:

That server merges are a great idea. But in EU ppl (ab)use it to create a new Power House. Sadly to see how many dedicated WvW Guild transfered to Vabbi bc desolation went full just for easy bags and making WvW broken again.
And yes server merges are one of that problems atm, bc the game mechanics don’t reflect it. So unlink server and improve mechanics first.

same has occurred in NA – peeps moved to BGs guest ET for the same exact reason you stated. the cost is so cheap for such an extended time. the same thing will happen again when/if re-linking occurs….

Mistress Collisto.1546:

Snip 8<

Server linking is exactly what T1 and T2 wanted, they don’t even have to dig into the old war chests to help “move” anyone…. They will all for the most part say YES. T1 commander in TS can remind his blob of 60+ to come do this poll. A person from T7 has only his/her guild and or friends list for the get out to vote campaign. This influx of players has more to do with Alpine coming back, and reward track then any server link.

Snip 8<

Please do not turn this into another EotM.

Snip 8<

ANet,

I honestly feel you’re making the wrong decision letting the majority of players decide on this poll.

You’re going to destory the WvW Ecology by catering to Players that want a Free Transfer to a more active World & the T1 and T2 World Recruiters that want to be fed more players…that Mistress Collisto points out above.

If you’ve studied natural sciences…you’ll understand that Ecology is important in sustaining a Long Term health of a system.

There are mechanisms already in place that allow for Lower Tier players to get into the Upper Tiers.

Let these mechanisms work as they were designed to…letting individual players to move up on their own.

If anything…give all Lower Tiers Free Passes to migrate upward into the Higher Tiers every time you feel that T1 – T3 need to be balanced.

If you force it…you will destroy the Ecosystem of the Lower Tiers.

The Core Base Map Mechanic (Fixed 3 Way Battle Model) is the real source of all the problems in WvW.

You need to change the Core Base Map Mechanic to a Model that CAN:

1) Reduce the direct impact of Server stacking to Match-Ups
2) Allow friends & family to play together from many different Worlds
3) Allow Off-peak capping, but let players to work out a solution themselves

I hope you’ll seriously review the proposal I’ve posted previously in this thread, or at least consider other alternatives (Core Base Map Replacement) that will address these 3 Chronic problems for the WvW Game Mode.

Please Pull the plug on this Poll where the Majority have selfish motives that do not take the Long Term health of the WvW Game Mode into consideration.

Before somebody starts a discussion about me being selfish…I admit to being selfish…for wanting a Long Term solution that seeks to protect the Long Term health & viability of the WvW Game Mode…imho…so please don’t start a discussion that will distract ANet away from what is the right thing to do…imho.

Please stop this Poll before you implement a decision that will destroy the WvW Ecosystem that has been surviving through these past years of neglect…imho.

You need to…be the Authority & Guiding Force in leading the WvW Community down the right path concerning its long term health & well-being.

Yours truly,
Diku

Possible Full Solution – Google Search – Reboot Base Map Mechanic

I do like the linking because it has made my server feel alive in WvW again.

I would like to see more balancing efforts to be made.

The idea that people are piling into the lower population servers that are linked with the T1 over populations should be addressed somehow. As long as these servers are linked, they should share a cut off for transfers.

Otherwise this linking system will ultimately lead to the very same issues that it has been expected to fix.

ANet,

After Lower Tiered Players get a Free Transfer & Upper Tier Servers get Bodies for their Zerg…

Don’t be surprised later.

When these same players will help you decide on what to do next…when you get around to asking, or players end up demanding that the following question needs to be answered:

Should ANet change the World Link Pairings?

(Player’s response – No…wait…Yes, change it when it benefits our Tier)

Then

How often should ANet change the World Link Pairings?

(Player’s response – Only when it benefits our Tier)

Then you’ll have to micromanage the whole Match-Up process carefully & diligently to keep All Players happy by keeping Match-Ups Balanced & Fair.

You won’t be able to consistently keep Match-Ups Balanced & Fair…using the Fixed 3 Way Battle Model…because Players will naturally gravitate to the Strongest of the 3…to be PART OF the team that Wins more often.

You’re setting yourself up for failure with this Given Fixed Model & by asking the Majority of Players what they want.

If you read carefully…you’ll get A LOT of posts asking about:

How will ANet manage to keep Match-Ups Balanced & Fair?

What metrics & mechanics will ANet use?

Appreciate the effort, but I can only hope that you will use this feedback to find a better solution.

Still feel that the Core Base Map Mechanic needs to be replaced with one that provides a more simple and solid foundation…

A Core Base Map Mechanic that doesn’t need all this Complex World Linking & Score Balancing mechanics.

Yours truly,
Diku

Possible Full Solution – Google Search – Reboot Base Map Mechanic

Linking needs to be reworked.

I think linking would be fine if the server linking was mainly for lower populations where you can’t get 50 people total on 4 maps. It could be determined by players each week (on the lower tiered server) before Arenanet okays it based on coverage. If a server can handle on its own and queues 4 maps on reset it should not be linked.

“World linking should remain and ArenaNet should continue to support the feature and re-evaluate match-ups.” I am unsure if that is what is meant by the yes option.

T1 – T2 plays much more blobby than T3-T7.

There needs to be a thorough discussion on OCX/SEA coverage as well. (JQ/SoS/HoD )
see http://mos.millenium.org/na/matchups/histories , http://coveragewars2.com/timezone/

I feel linking as the possibility to be a great idea but not with its current implication, so I do feel like this poll need more options in that sense. in its current form its cause matches to stagnate (tiers being 200+ away from each other in glicko rating) making it hard to enjoy wvw after fighting the same servers 5+ times in a row, as well as allow people to basicly stack servers again due to servers like ET being put with the tier 1 servers yet the ones that are now on the lower part of the totem pole are stuck at near full

since world linking, no more 10 vs 50 fight, I vote yes !

Actually I voted against the world linking. But the truth is I’m ok with world linking in general, but against the current implementation. The cancer of current solution is linking top server with lower pop server. Look at the T1 – you linked Deso with Vabbi. As long as Vabbi is low/medium pop server you just made perfect way for all bandwagonners who can transfer to the top server for curious little price. Moreover, the more people go to Vabbi, the bigger imbalance between Deso&Vabbi and the next servers, i.e. Piken and Riverside, since those servers are FULLLLL. If the servers merge was intended to balance the population, you actually did the opposite….

Yes I like the world linking because it gives more activity to the game-mode. Simple as that.

Before you think it’s great to Vote Yes to Allow ANet to implement World Linking permanently.

Ask yourself if you’re ok with the following questions:

Does ANet need to Explain How World Link Pair Ups are done?

Should ANet be Allowed to Change World Link Pair Ups without a Poll?

The WvW Community will need to depend on ANet to weekly manipulate the World Link Pair Ups to create Balanced & Fair Match-Ups – Long Term.

Do you firmly believe ANet will excel at this task?

Can you wait till the problems get fixed…if ever?

Make the right choice & don’t encourage ANet to continue building something with Short Term benefits.

Let ANet know you prefer a more Long Term Solution.

Ask for a Long Term Solution where the Core Base Design CAN:

1) Reduce the direct impact of Server stacking to Match-Ups
2) Allow friends & family to play together from many different Worlds
3) Allow Off-peak capping, but let players to work out a solution themselves

Without having to do Complex mechanisms that manipulate Match-Ups Or Scoring

Remember – Core Base design (Fixed 3 Way Battle Model) encourages Server stacking.

Players basic motivation is to be PART OF the team that wins more.

3 Way Fixed Fight (auto or manual arranged)…based on past history of WvW that I’ve observed…gets Stale & Players will take it upon themselves to fix things by Server Stacking to the Strongest in the 3…while Guilds will actively try to Game the system.

We’re going to be back in the same situation once things settle again…imho…but sadly our Lower WvW Tier Ecology will be destroyed…

Whole Communities of Lower Tier Veteran WvW Players will stop playing or convert themselves into Zombies in order to survive life while being part of the Blob Armies of a bleak future filled with Zerg vs Zerg Battles & a Mad Max Off-peak Capping World…imho

These Lower Tier Veterans that would have provided a safe place for noobs to learn, grow, and then to Migrate up into the Upper Tiers of WvW…will be lost.

How can you tell whether it was the world linking or the reward tracks or something else that has “reinvigorated” this game mode? ANet changed everything all at the same time, so it’s impossible to tell what has actually had an impact or made a difference.

While it may be true that for some players, it seems like WvW has more activity on their end, I can say that Tier 1 actually has less objective flipping than tier 8 due to the fact that small groups (read: between 2 and 6 players) can generally not get anything done before the blobs show up. This has made WvW even more stale than pre-linking. The fights has no tactics, unless you count the incredibly lame pirate-shipping. I’m immensely sad that linking has happened and, according to the poll results, will become a permanent thing. I will no longer being playing it other than for possibly dailies. My server is dead, our guilds are dead, our rallies do not, cannot, and will not happen. WvW no longer exists. We now have EotM and EotM 2 (New and improved!! Now with queues!!).

So what game are all you low-tier WvWers going to move to? I’m off to Ark: Survival Evolved.

I said yes, but, you need to adjust Population for the lower pop server, especially if it get’s mass transfers, otherwise it will just become another bandwagon server.

If that stays for as long as 4-5 weeks, it’s totally unfair to the other Servers, especially if they’re “Full”. Get your transfer system right for once.

ANet, I don’t want to give you my money anymore. It’s as simple as that.

PvE players vote yes.
WvW core players probably vote no.

Kill the game again, and I won’t be coming back.

you register to vote, they know your server…
a little bit of stats they know who plays the most wvw and who doesn’t etc.
shouldn’t really make the difference in a ‘free’ decider vote but they are learning alot more from it than reading the die hard trolls ala forum and some of the sweeping statements on here. well done anet.

Miko.4158:

you register to vote, they know your server…
a little bit of stats they know who plays the most wvw and who doesn’t etc.
shouldn’t really make the difference in a ‘free’ decider vote but they are learning alot more from it than reading the die hard trolls ala forum and some of the sweeping statements on here. well done anet.

So those that don’t like the changes, play less and don’t count as much as those that like the changes and play more. Are you familiar with the concept of an echo chamber?

sWvW anyone?

“it’s a free vote”, are you familiar with the concept of reading? after that try stats + amazing world of maths

Miko.4158:

“it’s a free vote”, are you familiar with the concept of reading? after that try stats + amazing world of maths

I’m familiar with reading, math and statistics. Not sure what your point is other than suggesting that those that like the Anet’s changes should carry more weight in Anets decisions than those that don’t.

How about we throw a little psychology into the mix, confirmation bias.

I’ve not mentioned preference (you do like to assumption over science?) I suggested weighting and data mapping because the discussion was around it being PVE influenced. I also suggested that anet don’t listen to the forum to much and self appointed ‘experts’ which could obviously cause some to feel psychologically threatened as we clippity clop across the bridge…..

Thanks for the reminder OP. Voted yes because I’d rather play in a full map than wander aimlessly in an empty one. Each to their own opinion. Enjoy.

Yes or no for world linking poll?
Okay so I voted for yes cause I think servers which were dead before aren’t anymore.

But there are serval points that aren’t covered with such a poll. It is way more complex then just yes/no.

1.) Are you happy with the current server/world/team system in wvw, if not what would you wish for?
I personally would wish a system like in gw1 with kurzick and luxon, but with 3 participants. Because in gw1 had the feeling it kinda rebalanced itself, because of queue times. Of course we would have multiple instance of the maps to choose from. Like one eternal battlegrounds for each language and maybe some more English/international maps. But this is just my opinion, I guess there are many different opinions. But I really think you should ask the community a question like that!
And then make a poll to chose a system.

2.) Do you think the server linking helped the wvw situation?
Yes, I Think it helped dead server. But I’m not a linked server so I can’t say.
2.1.) Should servers be relinked every few matches or should be the servers fused to one server?
The thing I currently don’t understand is for what the is the planned relinking? I think it just will shuffle the wvw ladder again. So maybe fuse the servers into the bigger one for ever.

Tyler Bearce.3427:

The in-game mail notification should be active now.

How it works:
The mail is sent once upon WvW rankup (minimum rank 10), each time a new poll is activated. The mail includes a link to the poll website.

that is awesome, thank you for adding it

Depraved Ambience.7942:

How can you tell whether it was the world linking or the reward tracks or something else that has “reinvigorated” this game mode? ANet changed everything all at the same time, so it’s impossible to tell what has actually had an impact or made a difference.

Yep as I said before the wording is at the very least disingenuous, world linking probably had the least effect of any of the changes on any population uptick.

I voted “yes” ONLY because I see world linking as a good way to test possible server merges. I really dislike the current implementation of world linking, especially in the case of T8 linking to T1 servers I don’t think it’s doing anyone any favors. Those lower tier servers needed to be merged a long time ago…..not get linked to some higher tier server and possibly inherit a bunch of “bandwagon” players.

I can understand the highest tiers getting transfer locked depending on their activity levels, but locking the top 12 servers? IMO you’re screwing over the servers who did things “right” to try and prop up a bunch of dead servers/tiers that should have been merged eons ago. Also hard to get people back into GW2 with news of other changes, or new people into the game when the only wvw servers they can go to are dead/low activity merger candidates.

The WVW population has definitely gone up, but I think that’s due to Alpine Borderlands+ reward tracks and stability changes NOT server linking. As a tool, server linking has great potential for testing merges….but the current implementation is a serious problem.

Suggestion: For next round of linking leave tier 1-4 alone, link tier 5-8 servers into one tier based upon activity levels/timezone coverage. Then let it run for a while and have a poll for players on those affected servers only regarding whether they want to make the links permanent as a merge, or tweak it.

I wish there was a 3rd option for improving the current linking. Our link is horrible!

To the WvW Community,

It’s not too late to reconsider & to Vote NO to Remove World Linking.

When the Majority approves World Linking to become a permanent feature.

You will also Silently Approve ANet TO:

1) Change Pairings whenever & howerver ANet deems it necessary for the sake of Population & Score Inbalances

2) Change Pairings without any further WvW Community approval, but with only 1 week notice shall be given

This is how World Linking & Pairing is currently being handled based on what I’ve observed.

World Linking is a Pandora’s Box & Genie in the Bottle…

Given the Fixed 3 Way Fight Model…will constantly require ANet to Manipulate the Population & Score Mechanics to keep Players “Balanced & Fair”.

Players Basic Motivation & Behavior constantly & persistently leads them to be PART OF the team that Wins more.

Players Stack to the Strongest of the 3.

To be “Efficient”…ANet has to be given free reign to Manipulate both Population & Score.

Balanced & Fair Match-Ups will be an illusion based on ANet’s skill & speed at Manipulating these variables.

ONCE World Linking is Approved by your Yes Vote…

The WvW Universe will change…hope you’re ready for a Long & Never Ending bumpy ride…where you’re just the passenger & ANet is the pilot in charge of your flight experience…

Honestly, you should have asked ANet for a Fight Model that put you in the Pilot’s chair & let ANet only control the Air Brakes.

See my signature below for details on this Fight Model…that is Player Driven…yet…ANet Controlled.

Peace,
Diku

p.s.
What happens when only 3 Surviving Worlds exist after everything is Merged?

Don’t forget about the impact that different Time Zones & Languages have on WvW Match-Ups while Powerful Guilds continue to game the system.

Possible Full Solution – Google Search – Reboot Base Map Mechanic

Heather.4823:

I wish there was a 3rd option for improving the current linking. Our link is horrible!

There will eventually have to be a long term solution. At least in the meantime participation has been improved so it gives them a bit of hope to move forward. It will be messy for a little bit, but the long run might work out well if the devs really invest back into wvw.

Diku.2546:

To the WvW Community,

It’s not too late to reconsider & to Vote NO to Remove World Linking.

---

When the Majority approves World Linking to become a permanent feature.

You will also Silently Approve ANet TO:

1) Change Pairings whenever & howerver ANet deems it necessary for the sake of Population & Score Inbalances

2) Change Pairings without any further WvW Community approval, but with only 1 week notice shall be given

This is how World Linking & Pairing is currently being handled based on what I’ve observed.

---

World Linking is a Pandora’s Box & Genie in the Bottle…

Given the Fixed 3 Way Fight Model…will constantly require ANet to Manipulate the Population & Score Mechanics to keep Players “Balanced & Fair”.

Players Basic Motivation & Behavior constantly & persistently leads them to be PART OF the team that Wins more.

Players Stack to the Strongest of the 3.

---

To be “Efficient”…ANet has to be given free reign to Manipulate both Population & Score.

Balanced & Fair Match-Ups will be an illusion based on ANet’s skill & speed at Manipulating these variables.

---

ONCE World Linking is Approved by your Yes Vote…

The WvW Universe will change…hope you’re ready for a Long & Never Ending bumpy ride…where you’re just the passenger & ANet is the pilot in charge of your flight experience…

Honestly, you should have asked ANet for a Fight Model that put you in the Pilot’s chair & let ANet only control the Air Brakes.

See my signature below for details on this Fight Model…that is Player Driven…yet…ANet Controlled.

Peace,
Diku

p.s.
What happens when only 3 Surviving Worlds exist after everything is Merged?

Don’t forget about the impact that different Time Zones & Languages have on WvW Match-Ups while Powerful Guilds continue to game the system.

---

Possible Full Solution – Google Search – Reboot Base Map Mechanic

Do you know, if i hadn’t voted yes allready, i would do so now, just to spitze you and your tons of assumptions.

While world linking (speaking only for EU) needs a load of adjusting, there are not only extremely good or Bad pairings. My Server got merged with a lower one. There is a load of community drama, but most commanders and players managed to make peace with the change, startend recruiting, training, helping and actually slowly began to see the benefit. One moth from now i was sceptic. Now after having Seen that there is finally life back into our maps i have to give anet credit for making this move.
I undrtstand that my guys and me were lucky and others have a much harder time. That, However does not mean that the past population distribution was better.
From where i stand it was a good change, but as there is still much to be tweaked, not a final solution. Especially in EU Tier 1 seems to be a rather strong discrepancy between partners. This However is being monitored by anet and i trust that the will intervene if things get out of Hand.

Silberfederling.9302:

This However is being monitored by anet and i trust that the will intervene if things get out of Hand.

Sorry to hear about the pain & goodness you went through your 1st World Link, but be prepared for the next change in Pairing later down the Road…where we might not have any say in the matter.

If you disagree with what I’m saying…that’s fine. Let’s disagree & not attack each other.

I hope your trust is proven correct & ANet does intervene if things get out of hand.

(I’m sure they will)

My post does assume, but do you really disagree that:

To be “Efficient”…ANet has to be given free reign to Manipulate both Population & Score.

Balanced & Fair Match-Ups will be an illusion based on ANet’s skill & speed at Manipulating these variables.

Just hope folks don’t just Vote Yes…and Not Realize that things will magically be ok…

Reminding folks that we should be ready for a Long & Never Ending bumpy ride when the Majority approves World Linking to be a permanent feature for WvW…imho

My opinion is just my own…not trying to insult you, but hopefully make you realize something about what Voting Yes will “probably” entail in the future…imho

Respect that our opinions are different…and your Vote is just as precious.

Yours truly,
Diku

1st World Link
Cute

Diku.2546:

Silberfederling.9302:

This However is being monitored by anet and i trust that the will intervene if things get out of Hand.

Sorry to hear about the pain & goodness you went through your 1st World Link, but be prepared for the next change in Pairing later down the Road…where we might not have any say in the matter.

If you disagree with what I’m saying…that’s fine. Let’s disagree & not attack each other.

I hope your trust is proven correct & ANet does intervene if things get out of hand.

(I’m sure they will)

My post does assume, but do you really disagree that:

To be “Efficient”…ANet has to be given free reign to Manipulate both Population & Score.

Balanced & Fair Match-Ups will be an illusion based on ANet’s skill & speed at Manipulating these variables.

Just hope folks don’t just Vote Yes…and Not Realize that things will magically be ok…

Reminding folks that we should be ready for a Long & Never Ending bumpy ride when the Majority approves World Linking to be a permanent feature for WvW…imho

My opinion is just my own…not trying to insult you, but hopefully make you realize something about what Voting Yes will “probably” entail in the future…imho

Respect that our opinions are different…and your Vote is just as precious.

Yours truly,
Diku

Bolded part…

Yup, and that’s why it will probably be a natural progression to a 3 sided faction war like my idea…

Maybe when that happens you and I can roam together on those PvP/PvE maps?

Then you’ll be all “Wow Swagger, this was a great idea!”… And I’ll be like “Yup, it’s pretty amazing Diku!”…

Swagger.1459:

Diku.2546:

Reminding folks that we should be ready for a Long & Never Ending bumpy ride when the Majority approves World Linking to be a permanent feature for WvW…imho

Diku

Bolded part…

Yup, and that’s why it will probably be a natural progression to a 3 sided faction war like my idea…

Maybe when that happens you and I can roam together on those PvP/PvE maps?

Then you’ll be all “Wow Swagger, this was a great idea!”… And I’ll be like “Yup, it’s pretty amazing Diku!”…

Hahaha…

I’ll pass on supporting your solution & you’ll probably pass on supporting my solution.

We do share a common theme though.

We both feel very passionately that we have a good solution to fixing the WvW Game Mode’s Long Term health & viability.

Let’s both keep trying to convince ANet.

Yours truly,
Diku

Possible Full Solution – Google Search – Reboot Base Map Mechanic

Diku.2546:

Swagger.1459:

Diku.2546:

Reminding folks that we should be ready for a Long & Never Ending bumpy ride when the Majority approves World Linking to be a permanent feature for WvW…imho

Diku

Bolded part…

Yup, and that’s why it will probably be a natural progression to a 3 sided faction war like my idea…

Maybe when that happens you and I can roam together on those PvP/PvE maps?

Then you’ll be all “Wow Swagger, this was a great idea!”… And I’ll be like “Yup, it’s pretty amazing Diku!”…

Hahaha…

I’ll pass on supporting your solution & you’ll probably pass on supporting my solution.

We do share a common theme though.

We both feel very passionately that we have a good solution to fixing the WvW Game Mode’s Long Term health & viability.

Let’s both keep trying to convince ANet.

Yours truly,
Diku

---

Possible Full Solution – Google Search – Reboot Base Map Mechanic

But it’s soooo much more fun on my faction side! You’ll see.

Yup, we are both passionate about our ideas… Now imagine if you and I combined that passion to smash all those “blob” newbies with our mighty powers! WE could ascend to the hall of faction greatness together!

And when that time comes Diku, they will give us their Ascended rings freely! In place of all the xXxDark_LordxXx noob commanders they will make us Mist War GODS! And we shall not be dark, but beautiful and terrible as the Morning and the Night! Awesome as the Sea and the Sun and the Snow upon the Mountain! Dreadful as the Storm and the Lightning! Stronger than the foundations of Tyria! All shall love us and despair!

Underworld here (T9 EU)
SIMPLE:
-I was constantly complaining that WvW was empty and dead for us.
-Now there is a lot of ppl playing it
-OFC I’m gonna vote yes to keep the pairing

After 2.5 years of empty abandoned state? After being banned 3/4 times here for complaining about it? OFC i’m gonna vote yes. I was hoping for mega servers but this method works so far so why remove it?

We can argue all day about how to make the pairing better, I’m 100% ok with that.

But u can keep your “the pairing must go” hipster non-sense to you coz I am NOT returning to the wasteland that was the low tiers WvW.

Vote yes on prop 19.
—>Paid for by the committee for the repopulation of empty gamemodes in bottom tiers Tyria

so is this the same poll from last week that i already voted no on and from my recollection it was not achieving the 75% that it required to stay if so why am i being asked and allowed to vote again and now is getting over the 75% very confusing almost like anet want to make sure it stays even though it sucks it may work for NA servers but not in EU due to single nation servers and not being able to link with other nations leaving the English speaking euro servers left getting paired with non wvw server’s like aurora glade paired with blacktide i mean come on no offense to blacktide ppl but they have almost no wvw players at all then u get French and German servers paired together into mega blob servers not really fixing the population imbalance in fact it seems to me to have made it worse

Thanks for allowing us to vote on this.