Guild Wars 2

can someone explain why guest servers that are linked with a “full” server are not locked for transfer? it makes no sense, not only do they get a server to handhold them but people can transfer there freely, thank you for the answer

The reason is that linked servers have less players so everyone transfering there is balancing up the WvW.

I can’t wait for the musical chairs to stop and then big surprise for the server hoppers when Anet says "we’re undoing linking, where you are now is now your home server. All full servers will remain “full” and not open to transfer."

Then linking can be declared successful at redistributing the population!

:)

SugarCayne.3098:

I can’t wait for the musical chairs to stop and then big surprise for the server hoppers when Anet says "we’re undoing linking, where you are now is now your home server. All full servers will remain “full” and not open to transfer."

Then linking can be declared successful at redistributing the population!

:)

It will be a sweet day.

The QQ: OPEN MAG/JQ/BG/ALL SERVERS BECAUSE I HAVE TO PLAY WITH MY BROTHERS LONG LOST UNCLES NEPHEW’S SISTERS HUSBAND!!! It isn’t fair!!

Think they do it when PoF drops?

Strider Pj.2193:

SugarCayne.3098:

I can’t wait for the musical chairs to stop and then big surprise for the server hoppers when Anet says "we’re undoing linking, where you are now is now your home server. All full servers will remain “full” and not open to transfer."

Then linking can be declared successful at redistributing the population!

:)

It will be a sweet day.

The QQ: OPEN MAG/JQ/BG/ALL SERVERS BECAUSE I HAVE TO PLAY WITH MY BROTHERS LONG LOST UNCLES NEPHEW’S SISTERS HUSBAND!!! It isn’t fair!!

Think they do it when PoF drops?

I’m pretty sure ANet will open up BG Mag and JQ, for the gem sales. The integrity of the game mode has been compromised long time ago.

Reaper Alim.4176:

Strider Pj.2193:

SugarCayne.3098:

I can’t wait for the musical chairs to stop and then big surprise for the server hoppers when Anet says "we’re undoing linking, where you are now is now your home server. All full servers will remain “full” and not open to transfer."

Then linking can be declared successful at redistributing the population!

:)

It will be a sweet day.

The QQ: OPEN MAG/JQ/BG/ALL SERVERS BECAUSE I HAVE TO PLAY WITH MY BROTHERS LONG LOST UNCLES NEPHEW’S SISTERS HUSBAND!!! It isn’t fair!!

Think they do it when PoF drops?

I’m pretty sure ANet will open up BG Mag and JQ, for the gem sales. The integrity of the game mode has been compromised long time ago.

I agree on the gem sales, but I disagree on them opening BG. I don’t see BG opening any time soon. If they do, PM me… I’ll owe you gold.

FogLeg.9354:

The reason is that linked servers have less players so everyone transfering there is balancing up the WvW.

How does it have less players when its “full” aka you cant transfer there

TalleFjanten.7159:

can someone explain why guest servers that are linked with a “full” server are not locked for transfer? it makes no sense, not only do they get a server to handhold them but people can transfer there freely, thank you for the answer

“handhold”? lol, seriously do you think that just because a server has been considered small enough to support another server that it’s behind handheld? Frankly it’s the other way around. Your server is a host and has links because it can’t sustain itself either. Otherwise you would not have a linked server.

We can argue with ANet about this without being nasty to the very people that we try to have fun with in the game.. right?

FogLeg.9354:

The reason is that linked servers have less players so everyone transfering there is balancing up the WvW.

If it was making a “balance” then relinking would never be necessary. Actually it’s easier now for the bandwagoning guilds to bandwagon more than they used to because a lot of the linked servers are pretty cheap to transfer to. The imbalance continues to happen by the time each relink is ready to happen, which is why we wind up being linked with different hosts from time to time.

Nobody in this game transfers anywhere to help create a balance of any sort other than to either be with friends, or to try to find the fights they seem to want (which are on every server now), or to simply get more apparent wins that really don’t get you anything more than roaming does already, since server wins really mean nothing. Just my opinion of course.

Strider Pj.2193:

It will be a sweet day.

The QQ: OPEN MAG/JQ/BG/ALL SERVERS BECAUSE I HAVE TO PLAY WITH MY BROTHERS LONG LOST UNCLES NEPHEW’S SISTERS HUSBAND!!! It isn’t fair!!

Think they do it when PoF drops?

lol. It is surely an act of compassion every time it happens. How can we have a war when there is just so much compassion going around?

Here’s hoping my sister-in-law’s husband’s uncle and his step-son make it through the next time BG opens. Request has been sent.

Balthazzarr.1349:

TalleFjanten.7159:

can someone explain why guest servers that are linked with a “full” server are not locked for transfer? it makes no sense, not only do they get a server to handhold them but people can transfer there freely, thank you for the answer

“handhold”? lol, seriously do you think that just because a server has been considered small enough to support another server that it’s behind handheld? Frankly it’s the other way around. Your server is a host and has links because it can’t sustain itself either. Otherwise you would not have a linked server.

We can argue with ANet about this without being nasty to the very people that we try to have fun with in the game.. right?

In EU servers that got high population and is in t1 gets links, servers that otherwise are full status. People are transfering to guest servers that are linked with full servers to steamroll their opponents.

Yes linking was a good idea but with the introduction of rewards its not really neccesary anymore because most servers got players. If they trully want a better enviroment for everyone they should just redo the entire gamemode and close servers that are considered “empty” . Theres no reason to keep empty servers up other then allow people to play with “full” servers.

Yes roflstomping enemies is fun, but what about the ones getting roflstomped all the time? linking solved nothing.

TalleFjanten.7159:

Balthazzarr.1349:

TalleFjanten.7159:

can someone explain why guest servers that are linked with a “full” server are not locked for transfer? it makes no sense, not only do they get a server to handhold them but people can transfer there freely, thank you for the answer

“handhold”? lol, seriously do you think that just because a server has been considered small enough to support another server that it’s behind handheld? Frankly it’s the other way around. Your server is a host and has links because it can’t sustain itself either. Otherwise you would not have a linked server.

We can argue with ANet about this without being nasty to the very people that we try to have fun with in the game.. right?

In EU servers that got high population and is in t1 gets links, servers that otherwise are full status. People are transfering to guest servers that are linked with full servers to steamroll their opponents.

Yes linking was a good idea but with the introduction of rewards its not really neccesary anymore because most servers got players. If they trully want a better enviroment for everyone they should just redo the entire gamemode and close servers that are considered “empty” . Theres no reason to keep empty servers up other then allow people to play with “full” servers.

Yes roflstomping enemies is fun, but what about the ones getting roflstomped all the time? linking solved nothing.

The server getting roflstomped by these people. Will just not show up to play. I see it happening on my server. In broken match ups. Most players on my server will just not play leaving the match up even more broken for us. Eventually these people will follow suit do the same in order to not keep getting curb stomped by beyond full servers. In GW2 the saying if you can’t beat’em join’em is a favorite of what’s left of most of the WvW players.

Lets look at SoS, it seems most of these people have already started to bandwagon SoS. ANet is more then likely perfectly fine with this. As it brings them more money in the form of gem sales. Thus this is why it’s my belief that ANet will open up BG, MAG, and JQ again. Because there is a demand for curb-stomping others in lopsided WvW match ups. And ANet has the supply and the need of money. I am almost %100 sure we’ll see BG, JQ, and MAG open up for PoF expansion. Money talks B S walks.

Reaper Alim.4176:

TalleFjanten.7159:

Balthazzarr.1349:

TalleFjanten.7159:

can someone explain why guest servers that are linked with a “full” server are not locked for transfer? it makes no sense, not only do they get a server to handhold them but people can transfer there freely, thank you for the answer

“handhold”? lol, seriously do you think that just because a server has been considered small enough to support another server that it’s behind handheld? Frankly it’s the other way around. Your server is a host and has links because it can’t sustain itself either. Otherwise you would not have a linked server.

We can argue with ANet about this without being nasty to the very people that we try to have fun with in the game.. right?

In EU servers that got high population and is in t1 gets links, servers that otherwise are full status. People are transfering to guest servers that are linked with full servers to steamroll their opponents.

Yes linking was a good idea but with the introduction of rewards its not really neccesary anymore because most servers got players. If they trully want a better enviroment for everyone they should just redo the entire gamemode and close servers that are considered “empty” . Theres no reason to keep empty servers up other then allow people to play with “full” servers.

Yes roflstomping enemies is fun, but what about the ones getting roflstomped all the time? linking solved nothing.

The server getting roflstomped by these people. Will just not show up to play. I see it happening on my server. In broken match ups. Most players on my server will just not play leaving the match up even more broken for us. Eventually these people will follow suit do the same in order to not keep getting curb stomped by beyond full servers. In GW2 the saying if you can’t beat’em join’em is a favorite of what’s left of most of the WvW players.

Lets look at SoS, it seems most of these people have already started to bandwagon SoS. ANet is more then likely perfectly fine with this. As it brings them more money in the form of gem sales. Thus this is why it’s my belief that ANet will open up BG, MAG, and JQ again. Because there is a demand for curb-stomping others in lopsided WvW match ups. And ANet has the supply and the need of money. I am almost %100 sure we’ll see BG, JQ, and MAG open up for PoF expansion. Money talks B S walks.

JQ and MAG might open. I don’t see them opening BG.

SoS may have people transfer in, but not sure based on the other posts why they would do that to lose their T-1 matchup, though they are competing well with YB.

I just don’t see BG opening soon. It’ll be sometime after the expansion. Likely more than 2 months from the expat start.

Strider Pj.2193:

SugarCayne.3098:

I can’t wait for the musical chairs to stop and then big surprise for the server hoppers when Anet says "we’re undoing linking, where you are now is now your home server. All full servers will remain “full” and not open to transfer."

Then linking can be declared successful at redistributing the population!

:)

It will be a sweet day.

The QQ: OPEN MAG/JQ/BG/ALL SERVERS BECAUSE I HAVE TO PLAY WITH MY BROTHERS LONG LOST UNCLES NEPHEW’S SISTERS HUSBAND!!! It isn’t fair!!

Think they do it when PoF drops?

Yes.

With three days warning, over a weekend.

Base on the current design of WvW, locking guest servers will be considered both logically absurd and ethically questionable.

Logically absurd because it is obvious that anet want people to transfer to guest servers then slowly balance it up over a long span of time, maybe 10 years later. Would locking guest servers allow that? Of course not. Likewise, talking about balancing is to allow guest servers chance to grow to become competitive and locking does nothing like that.

Ethically questionable because why should guest server be punished for being linked with a host server? They are linked there not because it is their choice, it is not within their control so why are you punishing them?