Guild Wars 2

Jayne.9251:

This is why EU will always be > NA.

Not really. We’re not having queue problems like EU is right now. Our queue times are no more than 30 mins during prime time. I think our PvEers have less fortitude than yours, or it took them less time to figure out the time commitment for the rewards.

MaLeVoLenT.8129:

Yaks Bend building siege isn’t why they’re locked of course. If that were the case they’d be locking a lot more server other than them.

you guys are funny but im being serious

When MaL is asking why YB is getting the shaft then there is something seriously wrong that should be looked at.

As someone who has never left YB, I’m pretty happy with our current lack of a need for siege and having a solid 5-7 fights guilds running strong. But stereotypes never die haha

But to clarify on McKenna’s post, does this using player hours as the metric mean that guilds running 4-6hr raids could actually hurt their server if they make up a disproportionate amount of time zone coverage? For example, say we run a 4 hr raid at 30 people in our guild group, but for the two time zones after (OCX/EU) we have 30 total people on the entire server running that time, is there any way to account for this? I ask because we are heavily outnumbered (2:1 and even 3:1 at times) during 2/3 of active time zones, but we can’t get our population spread out if we’re always full.

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

For population balance reasons, we’ve lowered the population thresholds for a world to be considered ‘Full’. This is to keep the population disparity between high pop and low pop servers more similar.

I had a feeling some manual adjustment had been made. To be honest, YB after 11pm PST has a serious disadvantage in population. For us to be considered full at the old levels would be absolutely ridiculous.

There are a handful of devs who play with my guild who are not on the WvW team, but I would really like to see more WvW team members in WvW to see the fruits of their labor and the passionate communities built around them. To get an accurate picture of WvW, you guys gotta take advantage of your free xfers and no queues!

Xenesis.6389:

Immortal.1543:

YB will get relinked and drop and someone will come up to take their place. This system aims to end the circlejerk in the same 3 servers in every tier by making it actually possible to move up. In the old system we would have dominated each tier for 6 months before moving up which leaves nothing but disenfranchised players in the wake.

Which makes no sense since they don’t even build the links according to multiple tier, but just to the tiers the servers are in. It’s obvious actual t4 server links cannot compete in t3, t3 server links cannot compete in t2 and so on. The only time we’ve seen servers make those jumps in power is because a) they made a mistake in the link (4 headed cd monster) or b) a server was asleep, got a link and then dominated again, see bg and yb.

It also isn’t good for a population to keep yo-yoing them up and down the ranks, eventually players will look for more stable situations.

I definitely disagree. WvW is war. It’s not supposed to be 100% stable, but to make a game fun it at least needs to be balanced. Having a rotation up and back down again is much more balanced than being stuck behind a glicko wall for 6 months.

What we should really be talking about it how all the servers in NA are shooting for T2 if they can so they can be the top tier with pairings. This is why YB is winning right now, Mag and TC just stopped caring two days ago.

Either every server gets a pairing or it causes a bandwagon to T2 because players don’t want to be in the situation of YB or DB falling to the bottom again.

Your idea of basing pairings on multiple factors is something I have brought up in the past just don’t really have a good idea on how to make that work with the current situation.

Jacion.6302:

Immortal.1543:

Aurika.6751:

Tinfoil hat time. Last weekend when YB was bumped to T1, I saw more Anet tags in WvW in one night than I normally see of them in many months. In one of the earliest fights, YB had three Anet tags in a single group. Realistically though, YB with a link and DK active are strong enough to be in T1 (even if they are boring to fight). I just hope Anet is willing to make the same types of adjustments when YB loses steam.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ef_VKRBp7Vk

So to remove your tinfoil hat, those devs are in the same guild I am and play WvW because they like hanging out with their friends after work. Trust me, their influence on the game is probably less than mine haha (PS, I made it in to the tower :p)

As for the topic at hand, as someone on YB I was happy to get the adjustment because we were roflstomping everything. It wasn’t fun. At all. Regardless of whether other servers in T1 want to learn how to keep a map or not, the adjustment needed to happen or else lower tiers would lose population due to morale loss.

This newer system increases the turnover of servers due to the influence of the linked server on population. This is exactly what everyone said they wanted, so not sure what the complaints are about. YB will get relinked and drop and someone will come up to take their place. This system aims to end the circlejerk in the same 3 servers in every tier by making it actually possible to move up. In the old system we would have dominated each tier for 6 months before moving up which leaves nothing but disenfranchised players in the wake.

In my opinion, as long as servers/alliances are meta gaming this system and guilds are using the transfer system to stack servers WvW will never be able to achieve the balance it needs. As usual, thank you Anet for making this transparent for everyone and actually working to improve WvW!

Might want to check the ego at the door

What ego? That was a comment on the devs people think are conspiring against them when they don’t even work on the game itself and a general commentary on the OP and this scoring system.

Aurika.6751:

Tinfoil hat time. Last weekend when YB was bumped to T1, I saw more Anet tags in WvW in one night than I normally see of them in many months. In one of the earliest fights, YB had three Anet tags in a single group. Realistically though, YB with a link and DK active are strong enough to be in T1 (even if they are boring to fight). I just hope Anet is willing to make the same types of adjustments when YB loses steam.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ef_VKRBp7Vk

So to remove your tinfoil hat, those devs are in the same guild I am and play WvW because they like hanging out with their friends after work. Trust me, their influence on the game is probably less than mine haha (PS, I made it in to the tower :p)

As for the topic at hand, as someone on YB I was happy to get the adjustment because we were roflstomping everything. It wasn’t fun. At all. Regardless of whether other servers in T1 want to learn how to keep a map or not, the adjustment needed to happen or else lower tiers would lose population due to morale loss.

This newer system increases the turnover of servers due to the influence of the linked server on population. This is exactly what everyone said they wanted, so not sure what the complaints are about. YB will get relinked and drop and someone will come up to take their place. This system aims to end the circlejerk in the same 3 servers in every tier by making it actually possible to move up. In the old system we would have dominated each tier for 6 months before moving up which leaves nothing but disenfranchised players in the wake.

In my opinion, as long as servers/alliances are meta gaming this system and guilds are using the transfer system to stack servers WvW will never be able to achieve the balance it needs. As usual, thank you Anet for making this transparent for everyone and actually working to improve WvW!