Guild Wars 2

Vote for Simultaneous Borderlands please!! MAKE WVW GREAT AGAIN!

oh wow requires 75%. was thinking simple majority on this one….

Grant Gertz.7524:

A message from the WvW Team,
The next WvW Poll is up!
https://feedback.guildwars2.com
Please share your thoughts and feedback on the poll in this thread!

Why does simultaneous require 75%? Thinking about it logically there was never a vote for rotating borderlands in the first place. It is foolishness that will see WvW decline for 3 months if you keep it at rotating. The devs must try and understand the player base better.

Unfortunately DBL will be part of WvW, especially since it was not voted out in the last poll. Voting for Simultaneous implementation is ironically the best way to avoid it…If we get a 3 month rotation, then ALL the borderlands will be replaced with dbl. With simultaneous it will be limited to 1 map and we can still keep alpine.

I think the people who do not vote cuz they do not have opinion should count as they do not care.
so if the vote ends like
2 alp 1 dbl 70%
3 dbl 3 alp 25%
do not care 5%
then people happy with results would be
2alp 1 dbl 75%
3 dbl 3alp 30%.
So in this case 2 alp 1 dbl is obviously more favorable. At least the percentage should be accounted somehow because it makes the option that requires higher percentage (this time 2alp 1 dbl) harder to acquire even though they have no opinion. f/e: If 25% vote that they do not care which option, and 5% vote for 3dbl 3 alp and the rest 70% vote for 2 alp 1 dbl, it would mean 2 alp 1 dbl CANT happen.

So reasonable decision is to account it somehow.

Cindas.6149:

I do not want Simultaneous Borderlands, I do not want Rotating borderlands, I do not want Desert Borderlands with my eggs and ham.

We’ve had the vote on the DBL a significant number of the player base voted to keep it in. It does not help matters to keep harping on it.

Also DBL was designed for NA meta running multiple guild groups around map during primetime etc, EU meta has been for past year just running 1 blob in at least 5 highest tiers to match each others numbers.

As Anet devs mostly play on NA servers (and NA has higher pop overall than EU considering it covers 3 continents), if this vote ends up towards 3 months of craplike Desert bl, id like to have separate vote for EU server system, or at least you can dig up some statistics about how many EU players voted for 2 alp + 1 dbl and post them here. Because NA shouldnt be able to decide for EU WvW where playstyle differs .

DBL is going to happen eventually whether we like it or not, ANet has already decided it. It’s like playing rock, paper, scissors with someone and saying “re-do” every time you lose.

What I do not understand is that why can 25% of the people decide for 75%.
Why cant it just be 50% vote. I mean this vote could be just reversed that it requires 75% to have 3 months of alpine and 3 months of dbl considering the other option won in the last poll.

This is what one could call 75% dictatorship and 25% democracy :/

Is there anyway to implement it like the Eternal Battlegrounds or Edge of the Mists?

The Desert Borderland is an amazing map, but Alpine seems superior for having an even matching invoking glicko ratings. Either way I really hope we can see the map again, it would be really fun to just have it for a WvW roaming map, with no server scores being affected.

Threather.9354:

What I do not understand is that why can 25% of the people decide for 75%.
Why cant it just be 50% vote. I mean this vote could be just reversed that it requires 75% to have 3 months of alpine and 3 months of dbl considering the other option won in the last poll.

This is what one could call 75% dictatorship and 25% democracy :/

Well look at it this way.

If the vote was 50%, and it won 51/49, would it be fair for 51% of the population to decide for the other 49%? At that point it would be either/or, and you’d end up with half of the population not getting what they want.

Instead, three-quarters of the population (a supermajority) need to agree that this is what they want. This is pretty standard practice for major decisions – For example, a 67% supermajority is required for changes to the US constitution. Also, congress can override a veto from the president by 67% vote.

orenwolf.1953:

Instead, three-quarters of the population (a supermajority) need to agree that this is what they want. This is pretty standard practice for major decisions – For example, a 67% supermajority is required for changes to the US constitution. Also, congress can override a veto from the president by 67% vote.

67% super majority is justifiable, 75% is significantly higher and makes it far easier to abuse the poll as we have seen once in these polls.

Even ignoring arguments that they should respect 67% or 50% splits in favor of Simultaneous, Simultaneous is holding steady above the supermajority it needs. Very glad that we got this result.

I wonder when precisely the results of this poll will be implemented, one way or the other.

honestly… i’d like to see a third borderland designed… and then each side would have it’s own unique borderland.

then, each week’s matchup would feel different, even if you’re stuck fighting the same two opponents for 6 weeks in a row, because you’d at least be on a different home borderland from week to week based on what colour your server is assigned.

and to answer your Q… yes. i AM still jaded over the endless TC vs JQ vs BG matchups before the WvW changes…

PS: please also add more towers to the borderlands… in my opinion, there should be at least twice as many towers as keeps per borderland (maintaining the home team advantage of course), because towers are a much smaller objective than a keep.

It seems odd that there would be 2 alpine and 1 desert border though.

Maybe have a version of alpine that is a different coloring /pattern but the same map layout? Call it jungle (rainforest) / swamp (wetland) or something and make the all the snow into lush greenery / foggy swampland : something that can be achieved with different ambient lightning and a simple texture swap

What happened is last time this poll came up 2 alpine and 1 desert won the most votes.

What strikes me is the people who like alpine should want the simultaneous borderlands. This way they will always have 2 alpines to play on. Otherwise they would have to have 3 months of no alpine. This way they can make a choice to only play alpine.

The people who like desert seem to be in favor of variety and are open to having both at once.

I’d be curious to see which color becomes Desert. I’d hope for Red because it’s usually the most populated. Nobody plays on Green.

So far it’s 79% in favor of simultaneous, my worry is it drops to 73-74% and we have tyrant of the minority.

This is really a vote for whether I’ll keep playing GW2 or not. 3 months of DBL == not playing GW2.

I don’t understand why this needs to be a 75% majority. The UK just decided their future in the EU based on a 52% majority…

We were told before that if this 2/1 thing happens it is possible we will get a new 3rd map.

Hope they revamp desert before it makes any comeback.

Have they said anything about which color will get the DBL? Or will that rotate/be random? If the color getting DBL is going to rotate, then I would like to know how often they plan on rotating it…

Judging by the rotation option they are suggesting rotating each QUARTER. Which is a ridiculously long time. It should rotate every 2-4 weeks or something, I think this is partly why much more people are voting for simultaneous BLs in this poll. Because the alternative option is having to play/wait a whole 3 months (of alpine or desert) before getting a chance to play the other BL, which is ridiculous.

I enjoy variety, but I also enjoy balance. Coming from a server that almost consistently plays Red, I can’t imagine having my home BL consistently being DBL.

Both options are kitten. If one home border is the desert border it means that one server will have a very kittenty 3 months and their rank can even be effected by it.

If we have desert borders for 3 whole kitten months is just gonna make people stop playing during those 3 months and many might drop and not come back when alpine is back again.

I still can not for the love of god understand why it is not obvious that the alpine border is working as intended? Why do we have to be forced to go through this whole thing again where pop drops and why do you even think wvw will survive this? It have been tried already.

Desert border is not what the majority want. Your voting was so wrongly made, and you should just have put up vote either desert or alpine. Period.

Desert border fits in EotM. It can easy be implemented as some sort of middle thingy. Or move it to PvE. It is gorgeous, but wvw is not about gorgeous it is about tactics, which desert border do not offer. Towers are useless, totally useless because they are not connected. and no one gives a kitten if they loose it, they can just cap it back. There is no danger if they are taken. Just a few min of point loss.

If we are forced to play with the desert border, then at least make it a weekly change. This way i can at least comfort my self it is over when the week have passed or i can just ignore wvw that week.

Leaa.2943:

Both options are kitten. If one home border is the desert border it means that one server will have a very kittenty 3 months and their rank can even be effected by it.

If we have desert borders for 3 whole kitten months is just gonna make people stop playing during those 3 months and many might drop and not come back when alpine is back again.

I still can not for the love of god understand why it is not obvious that the alpine border is working as intended? Why do we have to be forced to go through this whole thing again where pop drops and why do you even think wvw will survive this? It have been tried already.

Desert border is not what the majority want. Your voting was so wrongly made, and you should just have put up vote either desert or alpine. Period.

Why 1 or the other? That would not be smart and simultaneous provides the options for both anyway. The previous poll was fine. As for population dropping, vote for the simultaneous option that was everyone gets what they want.

Cindas.6149:

I do not want Simultaneous Borderlands, I do not want Rotating borderlands, I do not want Desert Borderlands with my eggs and ham.

You are either late to the party or don’t know when to give up, no offense. That poll was last week and you (as in the people who hate the map, enough to get rid of it) lost.

Leaa.2943:

Both options are kitten. If one home border is the desert border it means that one server will have a very kittenty 3 months and their rank can even be effected by it.

That is then the choice that server is free to make, or not make… it is ultimately up to the players to decide what they do with this map once it is in. These polls are merely about if and how it were to be in, the if part having been concluded already, so the map will be in and now it is just about the how.

This bears repeating here as well…

If we were to stick to rotation as a strategy, as unlikely as that seems looking at the results right now, the most frequent interval maps will be switched in the foreseeable future will be once per quarter.

This was clarified with the previous (now voided) poll on rotation vs mixed borderlands. The reasons given being that switching map is manual process that always requires a new build, for the time being, and is disruptive of normal match flow as such.

If the community once again decides to stick to a rotation strategy it was stated that then they would be interested in automatic map switching eventually, but that this would likely not happen until bulk of the changes we prioritized already would have already been implemented or are well on their way.

Personally, I think that if handled correctly map asymmetry will not lead to imbalance… on the contrary if they do it really well (ie. weighting the maps based on server population and activity) it can even become one more tool in their kitten nal to offset imbalances in factors that are harder for them to control otherwise. In short asymmetry doesn’t automatically mean imbalanced, it can also function as a balancing tool.

I want to be able to use my 1000 Badges of Honor that i was saving to get my my Gift of Battle.

Also rotating borderlands.

How about no desert borderland at all ???
I’m not voting, my choice is not represented. Great polls as usual.

Bigsexy.8302:

How about no desert borderland at all ???
I’m not voting, my choice is not represented. Great polls as usual.

That poll was last week.

Fatal.1347:

I think the people who do not vote cuz they do not have opinion should count as they do not care.
so if the vote ends like
2 alp 1 dbl 70%
3 dbl 3 alp 25%
do not care 5%
then people happy with results would be
2alp 1 dbl 75%
3 dbl 3alp 30%.
So in this case 2 alp 1 dbl is obviously more favorable. At least the percentage should be accounted somehow because it makes the option that requires higher percentage (this time 2alp 1 dbl) harder to acquire even though they have no opinion. f/e: If 25% vote that they do not care which option, and 5% vote for 3dbl 3 alp and the rest 70% vote for 2 alp 1 dbl, it would mean 2 alp 1 dbl CANT happen.

So reasonable decision is to account it somehow.

Even if the “I don’t care” score is displayed, they’ll eventually remove it for the final calculations and the outcome, so you don’t have to worry about this

Bigsexy.8302:

How about no desert borderland at all ???
I’m not voting, my choice is not represented. Great polls as usual.

That one was last week, and 65% players wanted to keep DBL so you’ll have to cope with it. Anyway, should simultaneous maps win, you’ll be able to avoid DBL.

Bigsexy.8302:

How about no desert borderland at all ???
I’m not voting, my choice is not represented. Great polls as usual.

Your choice had its own poll last week or so… and it didn’t even get a majority let alone the required supermajority of 75% that is the status quo for major game changes (as is with this poll).

At this point, not voting at all is only going to reinforce the current situation this present poll is at (that is the current majority opinion). Of course you are free to do as you wish, but it isn’t going to matter anymore… since it is no longer a matter of if, just when and how.

So no matter how much you despise the desert borderlands the logical choice would be to vote which situation would you rather live with because it will be one or the other this time… the only reason not to vote at all would be if you intend to leave WvW or the game because of this.

If mixed borderlands fail to win with something like 74% and all the people that voted yes to desert border just assumed this would be how it was implemented if they voted to keep it I will laugh.

Laugh real hard.

Because this is what we kittening told you would happen if you voted to keep desert.

But hey if mixed borders win then fine. I dont mind. It’s 79% at the moment so at least that’s a decent indication.

Dawdler.8521:

If mixed borderlands fail to win with something like 74% and all the people that voted yes to desert border just assumed this would be how it was implemented if they voted to keep it I will laugh.

Why throw a percentage out of thin air there… when all you have to support that is a little more than a feeling. There is a chance you are onto something, but why make it out to be something more than it actually is, when in reality you have no way to know for sure whatsoever.

morrolan.9608:

Leaa.2943:

Both options are kitten. If one home border is the desert border it means that one server will have a very kittenty 3 months and their rank can even be effected by it.

If we have desert borders for 3 whole kitten months is just gonna make people stop playing during those 3 months and many might drop and not come back when alpine is back again.

I still can not for the love of god understand why it is not obvious that the alpine border is working as intended? Why do we have to be forced to go through this whole thing again where pop drops and why do you even think wvw will survive this? It have been tried already.

Desert border is not what the majority want. Your voting was so wrongly made, and you should just have put up vote either desert or alpine. Period.

Why 1 or the other? That would not be smart and simultaneous provides the options for both anyway. The previous poll was fine. As for population dropping, vote for the simultaneous option that was everyone gets what they want.

Because it is a punishment to get the desert border and the server that has to play it for 3 months will have a empty border, whilst those with alpine wont.
This has nothing to do with rewardtracks, we already showed very clearly when DB came out that we do not like the map because it offers no tactics, it is only a empty huge map with towers and keeps that have no synergy and noone could care less if they loose anything. Not to mention we have no waypoints to use except for two in the north IF we own rampart.

When DB came out the veterans of wvw piled up on EB. They did this for a reason, they hated the DB map. People said, oh well tough luck, the new players will take over, but as we knew they wouldn’t because to be very frank here, they do not have the knowledge and noone wants to follow a commander that know nothing about what he is doing and wiping his group over and over or turning the map in to a pvd train. That is not wvw to anyone. So the border went empty. And the ques to EB was huge. Because veterans that did not leave the game went there, and the other players that was suppose to build up the new wvw, went to EB because there is were the fights were, and this is also were the reward track will even be a disadvantage to those that have the DB map. If the tracks was what brought it back ,then players goes were the rewards are.

So again DB maps will hurt wvw once again. But this time i don’t think it will survive. It barely did the last time. And 3 months is a looooong time in WvW. Rememeber golem week? Was ONE week, and that is the second thing in wvw history that hurt it badly. Now 3 months…..

Leaa.2943:

Because it is a punishment to get the desert border and the server that has to play it for 3 months will have a empty border, whilst those with alpine wont.

I have no intention of getting more into the argument of whether it is a punishment or not, however, I would like to point out one key mistake here. While they have no way to frequently switch maps, as in shuffle the order of them in the actual game, presumably.

This does not mean that one out of three serves is stuck with DBL when the rest “enjoy” ABL. Why, because while the maps themselves are static the color association between maps or maps and servers doesn’t have to be tied to a three month cycle.

Crise.9401:

Dawdler.8521:

If mixed borderlands fail to win with something like 74% and all the people that voted yes to desert border just assumed this would be how it was implemented if they voted to keep it I will laugh.

Why throw a percentage out of thin air there… when all you have to support that is a little more than a feeling. There is a chance you are onto something, but why make it out to be something more than it actually is, when in reality you have no way to know for sure whatsoever.

What, you want me to say 70% instead? Cause thats what happened the last time we did this vote. But that vote also had 4 options or so, this one should be far more decisive. Uh… well if you dont call 70% decisive. Which Anet didnt anymore than they would call 74% decisive in this new vote. 75% or more supermajority wins, remember? The 74% number should not be all that surprising to be mentioned if you really think about it.

Its not so much a feeling as it is a fear.

I voted no to keeping desert border due to the reason I want to have no part in destroying WvW just for the same reason I have to vote yes to mixed borderlands now.

Still… The schadenfreude of mixed getting 70-74% would amuse me immensly.

I still can not for the love of god understand why it is not obvious that the alpine border is working as intended?

If “working as intended” means queues on EBG and occasionally the weakest BL (usually Red, but varies depending on the RNG), with ops only really being run on the BL of the server with the lowest score then yeah, you’re right.

Whoever has the highest score has seen their BL stay totally T3 except the southern towers and camps nearly the entire week. You can immediately reduce it to only 3 maps, EBG and 2 BL, because usually nobody has the numbers to compete with the top of a tier.

I’m not sure having an uncontested BL is “working as intended.”

Dawdler.8521:

Still… The schadenfreude of mixed getting 70-74% would amuse me immensly.

True that, to tell the truth I misinterpreted your original post so sorry for that and thanks for clarifying what you meant.

I was going to come on here and rage with a lot of kittens in my post, but instead I chilled…

Anet, there is no reason this poll should have a 75% supermajority requirement to make it 2ABL and 1DBL. Its clearly what most people want. And its not like we’ve had a year of rotating BL’s that would justify classifying this as a change from that.

Simultaneous BL’s is what the devs themselves have said they want. Prime Minister Cameron learned his lesson too late – if you want a particular result, don’t put it up for a vote when you don’t even need to. In Anets case, if you want a particular result, don’t make it a 75% supermajority when you don’t need to.

Speaking of Brexit, we now have the term Regrexit for people who regret their vote to leave the EU. What term do we need for people who voted to keep the Desert BL last time even though they hate it, but they voted to keep it thinking there would be a sensible poll about simultaneous BL’s? If I had thought there would be a 75% requirement in this poll I would’ve voted to get rid of DBL in the last poll. How about Regresert.

That’s a tough call. Rotating works, but 2/1 would be interesting. Unfortunately, 2/1 means if there’s a problem that needs fixing, everyone gets kicked for an unspecified amount of time.

what kind of poll is this??
is like asking someone “what do you want to eat? i got you!” and then saying “i dont like that, lets go to my favorite place since im paying” -_-

im glab we are above 75% though :D
https://feedback.guildwars2.com/en/results

Johje Holan.4607:

Anet, there is no reason this poll should have a 75% supermajority requirement to make it 2ABL and 1DBL. Its clearly what most people want.

This assertion is self-contradictory. If most people want it, then it should have no trouble achieving the supermajority put forward. Which it has.

Sarrs.4831:

Johje Holan.4607:

Anet, there is no reason this poll should have a 75% supermajority requirement to make it 2ABL and 1DBL. Its clearly what most people want.

This assertion is self-contradictory. If most people want it, then it should have no trouble achieving the supermajority put forward. Which it has.

Its not contradictory. Most does not mean >75%.

If most of the people vote for simultaneous borders but only get to 73% then the vote fails and we are stuck with a result that a large majority did not want.

And it has not achieved it yet, the vote is not over. If it does end with over 75% then Anet got lucky. There is no reason to leave the fate of WvW to getting lucky.

Where is the option with 2 DBL and one Alpine?

Calendra.9074:

Where is the option with 2 DBL and one Alpine?

Last time they had the poll 2 alpine and 1 desert won.

DBLEXIT confirmed

Fatal.1347:

I think the people who do not vote cuz they do not have opinion should count as they do not care.
so if the vote ends like
2 alp 1 dbl 70%
3 dbl 3 alp 25%
do not care 5%
then people happy with results would be
2alp 1 dbl 75%
3 dbl 3alp 30%.
So in this case 2 alp 1 dbl is obviously more favorable. At least the percentage should be accounted somehow because it makes the option that requires higher percentage (this time 2alp 1 dbl) harder to acquire even though they have no opinion. f/e: If 25% vote that they do not care which option, and 5% vote for 3dbl 3 alp and the rest 70% vote for 2 alp 1 dbl, it would mean 2 alp 1 dbl CANT happen.

So reasonable decision is to account it somehow.

Actually I am afraid that some people are going back into the poll after voting and saying don’t count my vote just to see the current results and not realizing they just changed their vote.

I don’t like either of these options. Why couldn’t it be a simple

“Do you want to have simultaneous borderlands?”
or
“Do you want to rotate the borderlands?”

I don’t like having 2 ABL and 1 DBL, and I also hate the thought of having 3 months of ABL at a time. The two options I listed are enough to know whether the community wants simultaneous borderlands or not. And then after that you should have held another poll to get the details.

If rotating won then you should have had a new poll with a timeline (rotate every 1, 2, 3 months). And if simultaneous had won you should have had a new poll with whether we wanted 1 DBL and 2 ABL, 2 DBL and 1 ABL or 1 of each and you guys start working on a third BL map. But as it is this was a bad poll. I don’t want 2 ABL as I hate those maps, but seeing as how that is likely to win at this point, it means that I will never get 2DBL and 1 ABL which is what I would prefer

Johje Holan.4607:

Sarrs.4831:

Johje Holan.4607:

Anet, there is no reason this poll should have a 75% supermajority requirement to make it 2ABL and 1DBL. Its clearly what most people want.

This assertion is self-contradictory. If most people want it, then it should have no trouble achieving the supermajority put forward. Which it has.

Its not contradictory. Most does not mean >75%.

If most of the people vote for simultaneous borders but only get to 73% then the vote fails and we are stuck with a result that a large majority did not want.

And it has not achieved it yet, the vote is not over. If it does end with over 75% then Anet got lucky. There is no reason to leave the fate of WvW to getting lucky.

Most doesn’t mean 75% of course. But ANet obviously wanted to choose a number as a bench mark. Could have been 60% 65% etc.. but they chose 75%. Trying to say that it doesn’t mean anymore than 73% is irrelevant since the chosen target was 75%… simple… not even debatable.. simply the number they chose.. get it??

Balthazzarr.1349:

Johje Holan.4607:

Sarrs.4831:

Johje Holan.4607:

Anet, there is no reason this poll should have a 75% supermajority requirement to make it 2ABL and 1DBL. Its clearly what most people want.

This assertion is self-contradictory. If most people want it, then it should have no trouble achieving the supermajority put forward. Which it has.

Its not contradictory. Most does not mean >75%.

If most of the people vote for simultaneous borders but only get to 73% then the vote fails and we are stuck with a result that a large majority did not want.

And it has not achieved it yet, the vote is not over. If it does end with over 75% then Anet got lucky. There is no reason to leave the fate of WvW to getting lucky.

Most doesn’t mean 75% of course. But ANet obviously wanted to choose a number as a bench mark. Could have been 60% 65% etc.. but they chose 75%. Trying to say that it doesn’t mean anymore than 73% is irrelevant since the chosen target was 75%… simple… not even debatable.. simply the number they chose.. get it??

No I don’t get what you’re trying to say. Probably because you don’t get what I’m trying to say.

Obviously Anet chose 75%. I believe that is a bad choice by Anet considering that:

1. Anet dev stated that they voted for simultaneous BLs and hoped that would win.
2. Given the results of the previous poll, most (i.e. a majority but not necessarily 75%) players want simultaneous BLs.

By setting the bar so high (75%) Anet risks getting a result that:

1. Most of the players disagree with.
2. Anet devs themselves disagree with.

Why risk that?

My response to Sarrs is to point out that their statement below is completely false. And if that’s the way Anet is thinking then they need to change their minds for the future of polling.

Sarrs.4831:

If most people want it, then it should have no trouble achieving the supermajority put forward.

OriOri.8724:

I don’t like either of these options. Why couldn’t it be a simple

“Do you want to have simultaneous borderlands?”
or
“Do you want to rotate the borderlands?”

I don’t like having 2 ABL and 1 DBL, and I also hate the thought of having 3 months of ABL at a time. The two options I listed are enough to know whether the community wants simultaneous borderlands or not. And then after that you should have held another poll to get the details.

If rotating won then you should have had a new poll with a timeline (rotate every 1, 2, 3 months). And if simultaneous had won you should have had a new poll with whether we wanted 1 DBL and 2 ABL, 2 DBL and 1 ABL or 1 of each and you guys start working on a third BL map. But as it is this was a bad poll. I don’t want 2 ABL as I hate those maps, but seeing as how that is likely to win at this point, it means that I will never get 2DBL and 1 ABL which is what I would prefer

I think they did this since the other poll showed the favored mix in it already. The mini-acid test here will be if simultaneous passes and is implemented, how do queues compare to what they are now and how is the overall population impacted.

All polls are a “risk”. You set the parameters and hope for the best. It’s the nature of things. Hopefully this one will continue the way it is and all this debate will be moot… and I will get to enjoy at least one DBL to wreak havoc on…. and they still need to flatten out the center of it!