Q:
T8 is dead. 5 ppl on all maps for entire week..
CAN ANET PLS DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS ? Or do they not care at all ??? Alot have quit already and expansion just came out..
DOES ANET EVEN VISIT T8 TO CHECK OUT WHATS HAPPENING ?
I guess anet doesnt care about WvW
This is not world vs world anymore its like 1 big arena of 5vs5 maybe a 1vs1 big dueling map while all other 3 maps are empty.
(edited by Blade Of Gandara.6738)
Server merges would be the straightforward solution. Atm there’s too many servers for the current WvW population.
But I’ve read a few posts from people in lower tiers with low population that like it there, and are completely against merges.
So what about you transfering to a higher tier?
Anet want that you buy gem to move to T1 / T2 or T3.
They should make transfers to the bottom tier, tier 8 NA and tier 9 EU, completely free permanently for starters. They should also make the lowest ranked server the default pick for new players permanently, though new players should be allowed to choose from other available options if they wish. This’ll automatically net the bottom ranked server the “idc I just wanna play” crowd and any other stricken too much by indecisiveness.
Merges are terrible, it’s been discussed to death. It’s a temporary solution on the best of days, it just pushes the problem back until next year. It also destroys loved and valid playstyles that people choose for themselves, to help the few of those who are in bronze who don’t want to be there (and they are the minority, most of my friends are bronze leaguers and I was in t6-7 for the better part of 2 years straight).
They also need to more fundamentally address the map design and how it seems to actively steer people away from each other by being so large and having so many objectives. Fewer objectives on a smaller map = more people running into each other accidentally. This would be a smart way to make the game use the population it has more efficiently without even needing to actually increase the population.
Megaserver red, blue and green…
To answer your question, no they doesnt care.. look at the disaster in wvw.
Merging (i.e., deleting) servers would have too much the “stink of death” attached to it. It would not resonate well across the industry or within the gaming community. Because, frankly, there is no way to hide the fact that deleting servers – or having no full servers – is a sign that the game is on the decline.
I’m sure that they were hoping that they would need to ADD servers, with the release of their fifty dollar expansion — but that obviously is not going to happen.
How do you explain to your investors that you are closing servers after the release of an expensive to produce expansion?
If by T8, you mean DR and ET, then yes, the servers are reasonably quiet. But don’t forget that 1 out of the 3 servers (FC atm) in T8 isn’t dead, so people shouldn’t be so quick to brand entire tiers dead.
Edit: Even DR and ET do still have some people playing, and can give some decent fights on reset/ during the weekend, so claiming that there are 5 people on a map the entire week is misleading and factually incorrect.
(edited by Clemy.8290)
Megaservers (or alliances/factions) done right has been the solution ever since megaserver was introduced to PvE. They just need to be careful to do this correctly so that people still feel they are part of their WvW community and are contributing to the war.
Merging (i.e., deleting) servers would have too much the “stink of death” attached to it. It would not resonate well across the industry or within the gaming community. Because, frankly, there is no way to hide the fact that deleting servers – or having no full servers – is a sign that the game is on the decline.
I’m sure that they were hoping that they would need to ADD servers, with the release of their fifty dollar expansion — but that obviously is not going to happen.
How do you explain to your investors that you are closing servers after the release of an expensive to produce expansion?
You don’t “close” servers you add “WarWorlds”. 9 new warworlds to condense your WvW population into. Don’t call it merging call it a new feature.
^ working on a marketing degree, eh? Haha.
But hey, if you condensed the lowest tier servers into an alliance, it’d make up a populated opponent for other servers! Just don’t tell the servers about it in advance, hah.
Just a thought for discussion.
Replace what would have been players in an empty map with respective npcs (until it reaches the player cap of that map), that is organized and constantly fight to capture and hold key strategic areas, in a perpetual conflict that would (without intervention) result in a balance equilibrium or equal points to each team. When a player does log on, they will randomly replace an npc. If enough players log on, then all the npcs will be replaced. Depending on the numbers of npcs remaining on map, their roles may change as well. Imagine the forever epic feel of logging on a map to find fights always happening!
Now a privileged player (one with commander tag or some other ability or prerequisite) could influence npcs and give them instructions and focus. So in theory, even if only one human player plays on a server in tier 8, for a few hours a day, could make a difference to their server if they make good decisions to manage the npcs.
In another scenario, imagine a lesser populated server paired off against a larger populated one. It may give a cunning player a fighting chance if the player could instruct the npcs to attempt to capture points all over the map forcing the larger group to commit players to defend.
Just a thought for discussion.
Replace what would have been players in an empty map with respective npcs (until it reaches the player cap of that map), that is organized and constantly fight to capture and hold key strategic areas, in a perpetual conflict that would (without intervention) result in a balance equilibrium or equal points to each team. When a player does log on, they will randomly replace an npc. If enough players log on, then all the npcs will be replaced. Depending on the numbers of npcs remaining on map, their roles may change as well. Imagine the forever epic feel of logging on a map to find fights always happening!
Now a privileged player (one with commander tag or some other ability or prerequisite) could influence npcs and give them instructions and focus. So in theory, even if only one human player plays on a server in tier 8, for a few hours a day, could make a difference to their server if they make good decisions to manage the npcs.
In another scenario, imagine a lesser populated server paired off against a larger populated one. It may give a cunning player a fighting chance if the player could instruct the npcs to attempt to capture points all over the map forcing the larger group to commit players to defend.
That sounds like a curious idea. Would need some work (NPC balance when poor players login vs good players logging in would be an issue), but could be something. This is something I envision in EotM rather than borderlands, though.
Don’t call it merging call it a new feature.
+1
Lol,
I expect we’ll see such spin, once the exodus becomes undeniable….
Just a thought for discussion.
Replace what would have been players in an empty map with respective npcs (until it reaches the player cap of that map), that is organized and constantly fight to capture and hold key strategic areas, in a perpetual conflict that would (without intervention) result in a balance equilibrium or equal points to each team. When a player does log on, they will randomly replace an npc. If enough players log on, then all the npcs will be replaced. Depending on the numbers of npcs remaining on map, their roles may change as well. Imagine the forever epic feel of logging on a map to find fights always happening!
Now a privileged player (one with commander tag or some other ability or prerequisite) could influence npcs and give them instructions and focus. So in theory, even if only one human player plays on a server in tier 8, for a few hours a day, could make a difference to their server if they make good decisions to manage the npcs.
In another scenario, imagine a lesser populated server paired off against a larger populated one. It may give a cunning player a fighting chance if the player could instruct the npcs to attempt to capture points all over the map forcing the larger group to commit players to defend.
That sounds good on paper in terms of maintaining constant activity and could even be made quite simple e.g. basically have siegerazer events that trigger automatically without needing 5 players around him. The siegerazer event will attack the nearest keep and supporting camps/towers, NPCs follow nearest commander etc. But I don’t know if that would be good for the game mode as a whole.
People are already complaining about auto upgrades. Imagine the QQ if something like this ever gets introduced. You’d basically be turning it into a siege warfare simulation with zero player input required.
Just a thought for discussion.
Replace what would have been players in an empty map with respective npcs (until it reaches the player cap of that map), that is organized and constantly fight to capture and hold key strategic areas, in a perpetual conflict that would (without intervention) result in a balance equilibrium or equal points to each team. When a player does log on, they will randomly replace an npc. If enough players log on, then all the npcs will be replaced. Depending on the numbers of npcs remaining on map, their roles may change as well. Imagine the forever epic feel of logging on a map to find fights always happening!
Now a privileged player (one with commander tag or some other ability or prerequisite) could influence npcs and give them instructions and focus. So in theory, even if only one human player plays on a server in tier 8, for a few hours a day, could make a difference to their server if they make good decisions to manage the npcs.
In another scenario, imagine a lesser populated server paired off against a larger populated one. It may give a cunning player a fighting chance if the player could instruct the npcs to attempt to capture points all over the map forcing the larger group to commit players to defend.
The last thing WvW needs is more PvE. Well, second to last: the last thing we need is Anet trying to “improve” the game mode.
That sounds like a curious idea. Would need some work (NPC balance when poor players login vs good players logging in would be an issue), but could be something. This is something I envision in EotM rather than borderlands, though.
Poorly skilled players will learn as long as the game remains engaging, rather than stop trying because the obstacles to enjoy the game mode is insurmountable.
That sounds good on paper in terms of maintaining constant activity and could even be made quite simple e.g. basically have siegerazer events that trigger automatically without needing 5 players around him. The siegerazer event will attack the nearest keep and supporting camps/towers, NPCs follow nearest commander etc. But I don’t know if that would be good for the game mode as a whole.
It can be chaotic and disorganized at first, but with instructions from a human player become much more organized. It’s important that it is immersive.
People are already complaining about auto upgrades. Imagine the QQ if something like this ever gets introduced. You’d basically be turning it into a siege warfare simulation with zero player input required.
Autoupgrades may be an attempt to fix server coverage issues and timezone imbalances, prevalent in mid to lower tier servers. Those that feel this impedes their wvw experience may be roamers, whom now have a higher resource obstacle to influence. A war simulation (nicely termed) reduces the obstacle for all sides, and rewarding thought over simply numbers, that can only be trumped by a larger organized team.
The last thing WvW needs is more PvE. Well, second to last: the last thing we need is Anet trying to “improve” the game mode.
It will be the same wvw game at higher tiers when the map is fully populated.
Wvw isnt pvp. Npcs may not be an ideal replacement, but it still captures the feel of an massive conflict, maintaining some level of immersion. A very different experience to pve.
DO NOT EVER MAKE SERVERS MERGE OR BRING AN “ALLIANCE” SYSTEM INTO THIS GAME.
Seriously guys, smarten up. Those that fight for zero reason go to EOTM, those that fight for their server do WvW. You already have your bullkitten Alliance game mode, stop messing with mine.
Just a thought for discussion.
Replace what would have been players in an empty map with respective npcs (until it reaches the player cap of that map), that is organized and constantly fight to capture and hold key strategic areas, in a perpetual conflict that would (without intervention) result in a balance equilibrium or equal points to each team. When a player does log on, they will randomly replace an npc. If enough players log on, then all the npcs will be replaced. Depending on the numbers of npcs remaining on map, their roles may change as well. Imagine the forever epic feel of logging on a map to find fights always happening!
Now a privileged player (one with commander tag or some other ability or prerequisite) could influence npcs and give them instructions and focus. So in theory, even if only one human player plays on a server in tier 8, for a few hours a day, could make a difference to their server if they make good decisions to manage the npcs.
In another scenario, imagine a lesser populated server paired off against a larger populated one. It may give a cunning player a fighting chance if the player could instruct the npcs to attempt to capture points all over the map forcing the larger group to commit players to defend.
I love that someone is seriously proposing this idea after I made a satirical thread about it….
I love that someone is seriously proposing this idea after I made a satirical thread about it….
See how desperate we became…
Well i don´t like a megaserver concept. But after a long time a cleanup and server “Merge” won´t be a bad thing. This must not mean a population decrease. We don´t know the numbers of active players. This will define the number of tiers. Even less tiers on stronger servers might be possible (but its not good to pack to much).
What i would do is merge EU and NA. Create a full set of maybe 10 Tiers with new server names (if there are more people make more tiers).
Then launch them and give each player a free move to one of the servers. Also let a guild leader take the guild with him. After some time (anounced day X) distribute all remaining players to the new servers (unse active and inactive in the distripution for a better spread). Totally mix EU and NA. New server have no country or timezone names. You get a more homogeneous load now.
Shure the players have to get a new server identity. But it will lead to much more action, new people meeting and activity more 24/7 distributed.
Somtimes there is just the point where you have to mix the cards new.
(edited by Wolfric.9380)
There is a solution, but Anet wont ever do it because all the bandwagoners will complain.
Kick everyone from every server and then control the rate at which players can then join a server.
To prevent guilds from losing members, guilds can apply to a server, and when spaces are open they can all be let in. But they will not be guaranteed that server and be offered another to prevent all guild applying to the same server.
Anet want that you buy gem to move to T1 / T2 or T3.
no offense but why buy gems? its not the servers that make WvW fun..
my server can put queue on every map, yet i havent logged in for 2 weeks now.
Tried so hard to enjoy my self, i just cant WvW has changed in a way to make it no more fun and then i didnt even mention the horrible borderlands yet.
people are quitting left and right proof is obvious out there if u look at EU servers
previous T1 / T2 servers dropping down the list like idiots..
the joy for me was to down grade other servers HARD work, and this was pretty much what my server enjoy also.
down grading something now is pointless we didnt care for PPT we just loved to downgrade stuff.
WvW is done for me i wont login untill stuff get changed and put human touch back into this automated game mode..
might aswell send out siege razers from spawn then u have perfect automated WvW no humans have to even look at it anymore..
dont transfer guys if u dont enjoy WvW on w/e server dont expect to find fun in kitten T3 server either.
Server mergers are probably inevitable. Too many people got tired of Anet ignoring WvW, and they’ve left.
However, in addition to that, bringing back Alpine borderland would be an excellent start for encouraging players to come back.
It would make me more active, for example. Atm, I’m only playing EB, and other games.
(edited by hedix.1986)
T6/7 EU here.
Before HoT: During reset on prime prob. a queue of 5 on BL or EBG, but not often. Homeland kinda populated, EBG less populated, the other 2 BL empty except for some small guilds doing some raids with approx. 10-15 players during prime. Homeland was the main focus, our server tried to defend and keep it, EBG was optional. For the other 2 BL’s we had just not enough players, but when playing against even weaker servers, we tried to capture there at least bay etc.
After HoT: Homeland almost empty all night and day, EBG about 20-30 players on prime. Lost >50% of our wvw-players – if not more. Outside prime you will see noone on homeland and prob. 5 players on EBG.
gg ANet.
I never liked the 80vs80s80-like fights in higher tiers, that’s why I – and most other players here – stayed on the lower populated servers. But now? When taking back our homeland, we rarely see any enemies nor do we have to fight. We crawl around this kitten map and do PvD all the time. Noone defends, because it’s totally useless with automatic upgrades. You just do a little and boring endless karmatrain around the maps.
This is not wvw. This is not even a good way to kill time. It’s just flogging a dead horse.
T8 EU and theres no BL defence. Usually a fistfull roaming and sometimes a group of about 10 takes a turn geting towers and keeps without resistance.
Most are in EB now.
Server merges would be the straightforward solution. Atm there’s too many servers for the current WvW population.
But I’ve read a few posts from people in lower tiers with low population that like it there, and are completely against merges.
So what about you transfering to a higher tier?
I agree.
What I’ve seen for a long, long time is people from lower tiers pushing for a “solution” when they already have viable options. A. Recruit guilds to their server. B. Transfer up.
People need to stop asking for population solutions that affect the upper tiers. We are where we want to be.
Not affiliated with ArenaNet or NCSOFT. No support is provided.
All assets, page layout, visual style belong to ArenaNet and are used solely to replicate the original design and preserve the original look and feel.
Contact /u/e-scrape-artist on reddit if you encounter a bug.