Guild Wars 2

The main problem in WvW has been the WvW population of each server, not total population. That is the #1 issue here so tossing around ideas such as match up systems or buffs, which has no direct effect upon population, will not work. Current match systems are showing winning server losing points, losing servers gaining points, winning server winning points over weak servers, and losing servers losing a lot of points for being outmanned. Everything will start clicking in place when we can start a serious conversation about the unbalance in WvW population of each servers. No more talk about restriction of play for players because that’s all hogwash. The true restriction is from not addressing being outmanned because who would want to play in an environment where you’d die over and over or lose everything you own to a blob 3x yours. I hate to be frank about it but I was at E3 and let me tell you ESO is just around the corner, 2014. A single tower fight had 200 people and no skill lag. However it does seem like it’s going to be a subscription game so I wouldn’t mind GW2 going subscription based. I will gladly pay but please just make things better through serious fixes. I got GW2 for it’s WvW and community in the first place.

xTiMeBoMBx.2863:

I hate to be frank about it but I was at E3 and let me tell you ESO is just around the corner, 2014. A single tower fight had 200 people and no skill lag.

If you’re going to bring that up it’s probably best to be completely honest and understand that not a lot of home players are going to have the server infrastructure of E3.

This game would probably be the biggest bomb since WHO if it went subscription based. There’s enough content in this game to keep even the more casual among us busy for about a week.

I somewhat agree with you that server population is an issue, but it’s not as cut and dry like you’re claiming. Yes, they should cut the bottom servers and merge them as right now ET and FC simply don’t have the player base to compete with the next higher one on the chain. It has been this way for 6 months.

The problem is coverage. I’ve seen FC smoke all of the competition that comes across it until midnight rolls around and people go to bed and that’s when the enemy takes all 4 BL’s and pretend their top dog when they couldn’t manage to fight their way out of a wet paper bag during ‘prime time’.

The coverage issue needs to be resolved some way to keep the game balanced. But even if it were, this game is going to continue to bleed players when absolutely nothing changes. WvW was boring after a month for me. My whole guild has up and quit and only 3 of us are left (we joined another guild on the server).

Balance is one thing, but the game itself is just boring. Something needs to change to breath new life into it because just fixing balance issues or adding some novelty skill crap isn’t going to be enough to keep the game going for another 6 months.

Just make it a matchmaking system like all other forms of PvP in gaming. It’s the only way to solve the population issues, just suck it up and do it already Anet. Then Guilds can actually have map wide GvGs and the pugs will still be able to casually log on and kill something once in a while. Maybe even make the macthes shorter and more of a situation where its 1v1, one team on offense and the other on defense.

Parktou.4263:

Just make it a matchmaking system like all other forms of PvP in gaming. It’s the only way to solve the population issues, just suck it up and do it already Anet. Then Guilds can actually have map wide GvGs and the pugs will still be able to casually log on and kill something once in a while. Maybe even make the matches shorter and more of a situation where its 1v1, one team on offense and the other on defense.

^this^ is so obvious that it staggers me that ANet hasn’t realized it yet and done something about it. I’m not saying it wasn’t a worthy try to formulate matches around servers … but it didn’t work, doesn’t work, and never will work. It’s just crazy to think otherwise.

Turn the PPT off during night hours, or night relative to that server’s hours. Pretty much if your running overnight and taking over all borderlands and capping everything.. you’ll get all the general xp/gold/karma etc… it’s just the PPT won’t tick..

problem solved.

If I understand your post correctly, you would be willing to pay a monthly sub in order for ANET to have the cash to work on improving the game. Is that near what your point is?

Please be aware that games that are FTP and have a cash store are VERY profitable. Why do you think games like DDO and LOTRO dropped their monthly subs and started using a cash store?

Pandora’s box has been opened in the gaming world. The time for MMORPGs charging a monthly fee (other than WOW) are over. New online games may charge for a short time to help recoup costs of development, but they will eventually go FTP and open a cash shop too.

Don’t worry my friend, ANET is not hurting for gold and coppers by not charging us $15 a month.

WvW is tainted by too many player types trying to find their preferred game type in the wrong venue.

Casuals want the freedom to play leisurely.
Hardcores want to showcase their skill and be challenged.
Guilds want to structure open field skill battles.

There are plenty of other ways to find player types and groups, but these three high light the most important point. WvW is not the be all venue for everything pvp. It is a game type that changes tempo and flavor often.

I wish that Anet made the arena type play more accessible for the players that want this type of play. They could have created a venue from the start that gave players the open field battles they wanted along with a place for the GvG events to take place.

I do not begrudge players trying to find their own version of fun within the parameters of the game, but it seems silly to me that they show up at the hockey rink expecting to play golf and decide to complain about it.

WvW is most likely always going to be a 24 hour world wide battle area. There might be changes to how the game is scored and how important the features are; but it is unlikely you are going to suddenly find yourself in a game that has balanced competition around the clock.

Custom Arena is where you will find that.

As an aside note; any attempts to lock out players from one time zone to another or to provide balance by locking out or shutting off available game mechanics will not work in the long run. All that will achieve is the server during their peak time will game the game or worse they log in during the peak time to play and log out to play something else while the downtime occurs.

A 24 hour pvp game can’t be controlled that way unless you region lock the servers. I doubt anyone wants that, least of all Anet.

chefdiablo.6791:

WvW is tainted by too many player types trying to find their preferred game type in the wrong venue.

Casuals want the freedom to play leisurely.
Hardcores want to showcase their skill and be challenged.
Guilds want to structure open field skill battles.

…

I do not begrudge players trying to find their own version of fun within the parameters of the game, but it seems silly to me that they show up at the hockey rink expecting to play golf and decide to complain about it.

The question is which group is in the wrong venue. All three groups can fit in WvW just fine. After all, what would a zerg want with a jumping puzzle? Towers are fun for a few players to fight over, but not so much for a WvW guild. Keeps are more their speed. Why are gathering nodes and PvE events everywhere? The complaining I see is from players who don’t (or won’t) accept that.

To be honest, the thing ANET needs to do is the thing they have already tried and we the playerbase went batkitten crazy over it so they had to back off. They need to lower the WvW map populations and there is no way around it. Keep going in the direction they were heading after the free transfer shut down in January. It will solve so many problems at once that it is unreal to me that they just did practically the opposite by uping server population caps recently. This would force some of the mega servers to spread out more and make it so when you are outnumbered on some hours of the day on some maps it doesn’t feel like a complete waste of time to play.

The difference 20 vs 40 can make is huge compared to 20 vs 80. This would also be great for skill lag issues and other problems that often get brought up here. But instead we get players freaking out because they cannot have those epic huge 100v100v100 battles they were promised before beta. I would rather much have 40v40v40 and actually feel like my actions had an effect on the outcome than the faceroll button mashing we get to do now in big zerg fights hoping skill 6 might actually fire in time to save your life if anything is actually ever able to hit you. o.O

I hate queues too and given where I play and the fact that I will never be transferring for personal reasons, I will have to suffer through major queues if map caps were to be lowered but for the sake of the game and healthy competition across servers for the long term this really needs to happen and very soon. Please, please lower WvW map population caps by a lot . . . like a 1/3 or more and maybe do some discounted server transfer tickets or another way to earn them in game besides straight up gems. The population needs to spread back out so we can get a little balance. There is always going to be time zone imbalances but they wont hurt nearly as much this way and instead help to drive some better healthy rivalries across the matchmaking system when we get servers a lot closer together in total WvW populations.

I agree there is an easy EASY fix for population. Open free transfers for two weeks. Lower the queue limit on each map to say 60. Done. Watch all the guilds with large groups 1.) Break into smaller 30 man groups to accommodate. 2.) Transfer to servers with a lower population.

I think the main thing this game is missing which it seems like people aren’t mentioning here is any meaningful progression. There’s really no incentive to play. Add some WvW cosmetic armor even, make it based on a rank, scale ranking with the amount of people you play with, (the more people around you in a fight, the slower it is to rank) give something players can work towards that won’t effect balance at all. Or make it effect balance, I wouldn’t mind having some WvW skills actually worth a kitten .

I would say coverage is the primary issue, not necessarily population, and that is the issue that needs to be addressed in some manner. To me with a PPT system then there needs to be a premium on the PPT earned on maps that are actually competitive. If you own 100% of a map where the opposing sides are both outmanned then that should not be worth nearly as much PPT as owning 40% of a map where all 3 sides have about equal man power.

I also agree the varying desires of different groups is a problem as well. To me ANet’s vision for WvW is the focus on siege warfare, not the open field combat. But the maps aren’t really suited for siege warfare. They are too flat & easy to traverse as a large group. There needs to be a lot more environmental interactions that effect groups ability to move around the map. Like bridges that can be built/destroyed or areas that can be made impassible from rock slides or tunnels that can be opened up, etc…

And while the GvG events that have sprung up are fun & interesting, they really need their own system. My suggestion being sPvP or custom arenas with bigger maps & higher player counts and a leaderboard system to accompany it. I would hope by now ANet understands it is something we want and hopefully something they are working on.

Gamadorn.2659:

I agree there is an easy EASY fix for population. Open free transfers for two weeks. Lower the queue limit on each map to say 60. Done. Watch all the guilds with large groups 1.) Break into smaller 30 man groups to accommodate. 2.) Transfer to servers with a lower population.

^This^

The current way ANet is administrating WvW seems to only benefit the Gem Shop in terms of server-stacking and discouraging WvW play all together so that you want to buy more dragon coffers.

We’ve already seen the difference between the top three tiers alone. SoS got zerged by TC, and SoR still smashed TC even while their largest guild went on “vacation” to another server.

If the development team honestly thinks that this is how it’s meant to be, then I’ll start saving for a ESO subscription.

They need to make a new eternal battleground type map. This would spread out populations for tier 1 and 2 servers and give all players new experiences.

Personally, Im tired of the same ole script in all the BGs. Almost everyone knows the best siege locations for both offense and defense. It’s time to get some new strategies.

I’ve said this so many times but no one listens. There need to be a tangible reward for wvw that is based on points scored in relationship with how many players a server fields in wvw compared to the other 2 servers

I wonder if one could “fractal” the EB map and divide it into 4 sections and each section has 5 possible maps. RNG each section and you’ll have 2880 possible combinations. Design would somewhat bland at the connections. It’d be interesting to see the possible strategies involved.

Has anyone even ever seen an Anet developer say that they are aware of this issue? I have not and one thing I have noticed with big issues like this, when Anet says nothing, it usually means they know about it but disagree and will not do anything to change it.

Gamadorn.2659:

I agree there is an easy EASY fix for population. Open free transfers for two weeks. Lower the queue limit on each map to say 60. Done. Watch all the guilds with large groups 1.) Break into smaller 30 man groups to accommodate. 2.) Transfer to servers with a lower population.

But moving to a bad server might also kill your guild. You need to have other guilds to fight and have some organisation to take care of the pugs. That’s why the Augury Rock-Piken Square-Baruch Bay matchup was so good and we almost had it locked completely before these random matchups.

Also there are no actual numbers on the WvW population and Queue times. It would help a lot of ANet would release those.

xTiMeBoMBx.2863:

The main problem in WvW has been the WvW population of each server, not total population. That is the #1 issue here so tossing around ideas such as match up systems or buffs, which has no direct effect upon population, will not work. Current match systems are showing winning server losing points, losing servers gaining points, winning server winning points over weak servers, and losing servers losing a lot of points for being outmanned. Everything will start clicking in place when we can start a serious conversation about the unbalance in WvW population of each servers. No more talk about restriction of play for players because that’s all hogwash. The true restriction is from not addressing being outmanned because who would want to play in an environment where you’d die over and over or lose everything you own to a blob 3x yours. I hate to be frank about it but I was at E3 and let me tell you ESO is just around the corner, 2014. A single tower fight had 200 people and no skill lag. However it does seem like it’s going to be a subscription game so I wouldn’t mind GW2 going subscription based. I will gladly pay but please just make things better through serious fixes. I got GW2 for it’s WvW and community in the first place.

… your problem is that winning servers can gain points or lose points and losing servers can gain points or lose points? If the problem is that you think no one will play in a situation where they keep dying, then I guess no one will ever play ‘cause someone has to die if someone else is to kill someone. Also I think saying things like “who would want to play” is cute when the game comes out but when the game is almost a year old and we’re still playing it, I think the answer is “me”. The population balance between servers close in ranking isn’t big and unless the matches are really out of whack, every player that week will find times when they outnumber someone or are outnumbered by someone. Heck, probably every minute, there’s someone on every server in a situation where they outnumber and someone who is outnumbered.

nirvana.8245:

Has anyone even ever seen an Anet developer say that they are aware of this issue? I have not and one thing I have noticed with big issues like this, when Anet says nothing, it usually means they know about it but disagree and will not do anything to change it.

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/devon-carver-on-the-future-of-world-vs-world/

Caliban.3176:

Gamadorn.2659:

I agree there is an easy EASY fix for population. Open free transfers for two weeks. Lower the queue limit on each map to say 60. Done. Watch all the guilds with large groups 1.) Break into smaller 30 man groups to accommodate. 2.) Transfer to servers with a lower population.

But moving to a bad server might also kill your guild. You need to have other guilds to fight and have some organisation to take care of the pugs. That’s why the Augury Rock-Piken Square-Baruch Bay matchup was so good and we almost had it locked completely before these random matchups.

Also there are no actual numbers on the WvW population and Queue times. It would help a lot of ANet would release those.

Sounds like an EU thing? In NA, even the bottom tier servers have a fair few guilds.

nirvana.8245:

Caliban.3176:

Gamadorn.2659:

I agree there is an easy EASY fix for population. Open free transfers for two weeks. Lower the queue limit on each map to say 60. Done. Watch all the guilds with large groups 1.) Break into smaller 30 man groups to accommodate. 2.) Transfer to servers with a lower population.

But moving to a bad server might also kill your guild. You need to have other guilds to fight and have some organisation to take care of the pugs. That’s why the Augury Rock-Piken Square-Baruch Bay matchup was so good and we almost had it locked completely before these random matchups.

Also there are no actual numbers on the WvW population and Queue times. It would help a lot of ANet would release those.

Sounds like an EU thing? In NA, even the bottom tier servers have a fair few guilds.

Not all guilds are the same… Sometimes a guild is just a bunch of letters on a person’s nameplate.

Caliban.3176:

nirvana.8245:

Caliban.3176:

Gamadorn.2659:

I agree there is an easy EASY fix for population. Open free transfers for two weeks. Lower the queue limit on each map to say 60. Done. Watch all the guilds with large groups 1.) Break into smaller 30 man groups to accommodate. 2.) Transfer to servers with a lower population.

But moving to a bad server might also kill your guild. You need to have other guilds to fight and have some organisation to take care of the pugs. That’s why the Augury Rock-Piken Square-Baruch Bay matchup was so good and we almost had it locked completely before these random matchups.

Also there are no actual numbers on the WvW population and Queue times. It would help a lot of ANet would release those.

Sounds like an EU thing? In NA, even the bottom tier servers have a fair few guilds.

Not all guilds are the same… Sometimes a guild is just a bunch of letters on a person’s nameplate.

Yeah, like mine. But I assure you there are organized guilds running around (together) on low tier NA

nirvana.8245:

Has anyone even ever seen an Anet developer say that they are aware of this issue? I have not and one thing I have noticed with big issues like this, when Anet says nothing, it usually means they know about it but disagree and will not do anything to change it.

There was a huge debate in the first months of the game about “night-capping”, and Anet’s response was basically “deal with it”. So, it looks like any handicapping system based on coverage and that affects actual game play (for example, with buffs) is out.

Changing the way scoring works might still be a possibility though, as it wouldn’t directly affect the actual PvP’ing.

And as for WvW gear progression or anything that gives shineys you can’t get in PvE? Probably out of the question. The reason we have to spend laurels and badges for WvW Ascendeds is to not “devalue” the PvE gear acquisition track (those were the WvW dev’s exact words).

So PvE must be satisfied first, and WvW has to accommodate itself to that. And not to complain, but merely to state a fact, all the more the reason to look at ESO where WvW is the primary endgame around which everything else revolves.

xTiMeBoMBx.2863:

I hate to be frank about it but I was at E3 and let me tell you ESO is just around the corner, 2014. A single tower fight had 200 people and no skill lag.

No, 2014 (and it isn’t planned to launch early in 2014) is not right around the corner. People have this strange illusion about TESO as if it had launched and demonstrated anything at all in a real environment. Ever wonder why they hyped their game with a cinematic and then deferred the release by over a year?

Vena.8436:

No, 2014 (and it isn’t planned to launch early in 2014) is not right around the corner. People have this strange illusion about TESO as if it had launched and demonstrated anything at all in a real environment. Ever wonder why they hyped their game with a cinematic and then deferred the release by over a year?

Then there is no reason why GW2 cannot have it’s kitten in order long before the launch of that game.

I admit that I never played DaoC or Warhammer, but this is the largest PvP format I’ve ever played in. The base of it, is solid and has some excellent mechanics.

Tower design and siege all seem relatively balanced (arrow cart mastery has thrown a few wrenches into the works) and everyone agrees when the numbers are ~ even; that there is a good time to be had by all.

Even better news, there are a myriad of ways that ANet can choose to tackle these problems via design changes and tweaking buffs/debuffs. They don’t have to resort to any of the ham-handed suggestions like punishing different timezones (the world doesn’t revolve around anyone) or necessarily tweaking player caps (though I think that one is worth exploring).

The first, which will make a lot of people happy, are new and redesigned maps. Terrain/geography, and the design of the towers/keeps can be made in such a way that defending “native” land gets easier (can be done with fewer numbers) as the enemy pushes in and inversely.
A good example is EBG, where red has some terrain advantages that does not make things easy for green and blue.

The other, is another buff to Outmanned. Now, I like the changes made. I think getting rid of armor damage was a fantastic step in the right direction. I think they should add scalability to it. Not so much as a buff in personal stats, because all that will do is encourage people to just go after camps and nothing else.
I think a buff to the amount of supply that is needed for siege would be a HUGE equalizer.

You ever take a keep with 5 people? build a ram, knock the door down, go back for supply, go to inner…
What if that ram could be built with 20 supply?

That would not only give the outmanned attackers an advantage, but it would force the occupiers to actually devote resources to defending their holdings. Such mechanics would drastically alter the math when one server has significantly more people to field.

Gamadorn.2659:

I agree there is an easy EASY fix for population. Open free transfers for two weeks. Lower the queue limit on each map to say 60. Done. Watch all the guilds with large groups 1.) Break into smaller 30 man groups to accommodate. 2.) Transfer to servers with a lower population.

no

kaineng

ad infinitum

people will not do this on their own. yes, i too know its what everyone wants. but people think they want to be winning more than they think they want to have mostly even fights, and that mentality gravitates toward our current situation of stacking 1-3 servers and leaving 10+ as ghost towns in comparison.

a week of free transfers was tried. where are et, fc, hod, vabbi, fow? still at the bottom. fc had people take a vacation for a week and go back. in eu, people stacked piken because anet failed in their execution for servers that needed transfers.

insanemaniac.2456:

Gamadorn.2659:

I agree there is an easy EASY fix for population. Open free transfers for two weeks. Lower the queue limit on each map to say 60. Done. Watch all the guilds with large groups 1.) Break into smaller 30 man groups to accommodate. 2.) Transfer to servers with a lower population.

no

kaineng

ad infinitum

people will not do this on their own. yes, i too know its what everyone wants. but people think they want to be winning more than they think they want to have mostly even fights, and that mentality gravitates toward our current situation of stacking 1-3 servers and leaving 10+ as ghost towns in comparison.

a week of free transfers was tried. where are et, fc, hod, vabbi, fow? still at the bottom. fc had people take a vacation for a week and go back. in eu, people stacked piken because anet failed in their execution for servers that needed transfers.

Majority of the people who transferred were not WvW specific. We moved to ET during this time and took about 25 people, half got in and the other half had to pay.

Free transfers mostly result in 1) PvE’rs moving and 2) few select stacked servers.

styx.7294:

… your problem is that winning servers can gain points or lose points and losing servers can gain points or lose points? If the problem is that you think no one will play in a situation where they keep dying, then I guess no one will ever play ‘cause someone has to die if someone else is to kill someone. Also I think saying things like “who would want to play” is cute when the game comes out but when the game is almost a year old and we’re still playing it, I think the answer is “me”. The population balance between servers close in ranking isn’t big and unless the matches are really out of whack, every player that week will find times when they outnumber someone or are outnumbered by someone. Heck, probably every minute, there’s someone on every server in a situation where they outnumber and someone who is outnumbered.

Why should winning servers suffer losing points and why should losing server gain points? You lost all credibility when you acknowledge such system is acceptable. If you haven’t noticed a lot of people have left the game or left the WvW scene altogether then you aren’t really looking. I had 45 people on my friend’s list that I have played with ever since closed beta+ the 3 day early access beta. They all quit and now has been gone for 4 months. Right there that’s 45 people that “would not play” this game and I’m 100% sure I’m not the only one with a bunch of friends who quit. The current system is creating much more blowout matches than the last system. It’s matching servers with much more WvW population with low ones. And I’m talking about WvW population so I hope you don’t blend in total server population because they’re 2 different things. The queue system is all out of whack since it is based on total server population because ANet is incapable of measuring just the WvW population of each servers. That’s our problem but maybe you’re too much of a fan too see it. Why don’t you ask yourself "why haven’t all of the “fixes” ANet made to the WvW game worked?" It’s because none of those “fixes” addressed the population balance. Any buffs would only tip the scale to one side rather than balance as seen in the destructive power of AC buff. Stop beating around the bush with all of these band aids and start striking at the core which is a path to WvW population balance.

Gamadorn.2659:

I agree there is an easy EASY fix for population. Open free transfers for two weeks. Lower the queue limit on each map to say 60. Done. Watch all the guilds with large groups 1.) Break into smaller 30 man groups to accommodate. 2.) Transfer to servers with a lower population.

LolgodpleaseNO.

Destroying communities is not what i call “Even out population”.

AndrewSX.3794:

Gamadorn.2659:

I agree there is an easy EASY fix for population. Open free transfers for two weeks. Lower the queue limit on each map to say 60. Done. Watch all the guilds with large groups 1.) Break into smaller 30 man groups to accommodate. 2.) Transfer to servers with a lower population.

LolgodpleaseNO.

Destroying communities is not what i call “Even out population”.

Yeah no more free xfer because more people will flood top tiers for easy loots from zerg balling.

IMO, most servers that can fill all 4 maps (outside of reset night) typically don’t really have much in the way of a community.

That being said, 60 is too low; and doesn’t address the situations where you have 10-12 people akitten the citadel almost all weekend long.

Simple fix, anti-zerg trap. Trap triggers and damage increases in proportion to the number of people in a 2000 unit range.

How would you like to lay one of these in EBG, on the main road to the supply camp, and then walk away. Then 3 min later, 20 bags at your feet!

That, more than anything, will discourage mega-zergs and the desire to go to T1 and fight in massive mega-zergs.

It would shake things up, that is for sure.

>"serious talk"
>Touting the virtues of an mmo that doesn’t even have a set release date yet

Yeah ok buddy

Vena.8436:

xTiMeBoMBx.2863:

I hate to be frank about it but I was at E3 and let me tell you ESO is just around the corner, 2014. A single tower fight had 200 people and no skill lag.

No, 2014 (and it isn’t planned to launch early in 2014) is not right around the corner. People have this strange illusion about TESO as if it had launched and demonstrated anything at all in a real environment. Ever wonder why they hyped their game with a cinematic and then deferred the release by over a year?

That is because now they need to make a console version where as before it was to be just for pc. This usually mean you can use your controller to play on pc as well. At least that was what they said at E3.

xTiMeBoMBx.2863:

That is because now they need to make a console version where as before it was to be just for pc. This usually mean you can use your controller to play on pc as well. At least that was what they said at E3.

What they said, and what is reality are different things.

Nothing prevent(s)ed them from releasing a finished PC product. This “we must include consoles and so are deferring our product” is a neat way of saying “we need more time, here’s an excuse”. The console architecture is so completely different from your standard computer that they will have to re-write much of their own game code to function on consoles. I don’t know what inspired them to do this to themselves…

Rule 1: Always be skeptical of a product when its advertised with pre-rendered movies.

Truth being told the true problem in WvW lies within the game design itself.

-Winning World Vs World requires people to be willing to play WvWvW or servers to stabilize their population by adding new players to their numbers.

^ This won’t happen cause those who love wvw are the only one doing it, over all wvw turn more boring every week as match ups either get kittened up or stay in capsules that will rarely change where Server A will always win and server B and C will fight for second place OR server B will fight A while outnumbered while server C is not present at all.

Problem 1 lies within the fact that this game fails at attracting and keeping it’s population. Way too many players come online once a day to do their daily and then log out. The game itself offers no progression other than showing off a legendary item which might be enough for some but for many isn’t worth the kittened grind.

Problem 2 lies within the fact that the updates applied to the game are pve oriented, horrible while at that but pve oriented mostly. One new siege mastery doesn’t cut it, specially since you can’t reset your skills to obtain em.

Problem 3 lies within design, any game in the history of gaming will make 1 point buy 1 skill not 25 points then 50 then 75 for something like 1 more supply. Also the way points are obtained are determined mainly by luck and server standing, if you play while your server is pvding kitten you rank up like a mad man, if you play through strong field fights chances are you won’t get kitten cause everyone is dying so much they now give 0 Wexp.

Problem 4 lies within rewards, WvW offer no real rewards. Badges? C’mon I can craft that kitten gear cheaper and with far less effort than by grinding badges. Oh also for about the same cost. Or I can go do dungeons get the same gear with better skins…Ascended gear? Faster through fractals and daily farming alone. You spend 1 hour and over 50 silver in repairs taking Storm Mist castle. Your reward? 7.x silver 700 wexp and a huge debt as people will come back to reclaim it asap. You loose a lot and gain nothing. On this point also comes the Zerg, why is everyone in a zerg? Cause in other to do anything you must. You can take and defend a tower with 5 people BUT if I do that I’m loosing the 1.90 silver I would get from capping that other tower and since defending only rewards if you kill the enemy or repair “EVERY 3 MINS” you loose more than you gain by say letting them take it then retaking it or simply rolling with a zerg.

Next problem be server lag: You finally got into a good fight, time to spam 1 hope you live and tag enough kitten to get some loot bags baby. No skills required, no tactics other than arrow carts and balistas baby.

Next problem lies within tactics: Everyone will do the same thing. Put some balistas in a circle around lords room, bunch of arrow carts in the walls, while the other team aoes over and over and over again. You will see the same siege repeating itself to no end.

Class balance: They seem to be trying to fix this by making it worse each patch. So I decide to roam, I’m say a warrior oh look my hp suddenly went down 45% aww a thief just downed before I could even touch him…how cute…OH look an elementalist…aww he saw I was too much for him and ran away! Oh look a guardian better whack him and get whack for a loooong time with no real winner so both will go on our own ways. There is no real reason to fight 1 v 1 cause the outcome of the fight unless one side is horrible or lagging is already decided.

Again server lag, can’t really play wvw without skill lag and serious server lag thus leading to an overall unsatisfying experience.

GvG: Guilds have no reason to play together. Been said enough no reason to add more into this.

Commander for gold: Yup, got to Borlis lion’s arch or any map, you will see like 20 commanders. None of them ever touched wvw they just got commander for the lol after a truck load of citadel of flames farming. Then go WvW I say 2 to 4 of our commanders are worth something, the rest, kids who had enough cash to buy it and just want to show it off. Yes A net I understand you love money sinks, I understand it reduces gold for gems and increase gems for gold but seriously. This was the stupidest idea I ever seen.

Could add more but yeah.

AndrewSX.3794:

Gamadorn.2659:

I agree there is an easy EASY fix for population. Open free transfers for two weeks. Lower the queue limit on each map to say 60. Done. Watch all the guilds with large groups 1.) Break into smaller 30 man groups to accommodate. 2.) Transfer to servers with a lower population.

LolgodpleaseNO.

Destroying communities is not what i call “Even out population”.

The WvW communities seems to be a fairly small % of the playerbase and the tight ones could easily relocate to a bottom tier without seeing much effect. Some communities might be shook up a bit but I think you could keep the core intact with a little effort. These communities are already being hurt by the super stacking going on now as guilds jump worlds and leave the old one to wither in the sun so lets at least fix the problem to keep it from continuing.

I am still disappointed in ANET for not providing us with solid community building tools before launch so a lot of the pain of stacking in the first couple of months could have been avoided but to be honest, this game was released 6 months too soon based on just the guesting and culling issues alone. If they had that stuff in order to begin with maybe we would have know what the caps needed to be before all the mega stacks happened and been able to prevent it.

The WvW map caps are somewhat dynamic and I think they might have been raised recently (maybe when they raised the world population caps last month) which is for sure the wrong way to go about things given how crazy large of murder balls SoR can put together these days. I think we may have already seen borderland population caps as low as 60 per side a couple of times so that is not an unreasonable target to start with. Meta shake ups are not a bad thing. We’ve had several months of the zergtasic now lets see how things play out differently in a reduced format.

Imnotwinninghavetonerfotherseeverplzthx.