Guild Wars 2

PvE Raid
We are looking for…
Wen 8pm (GMT+8)
- Druid
- DPS or Chrono or CPS

Sun 3pm (GMT+8)
- Chrono
- Druid

NA Team
- Still forming, just apply.

Raid Form
https://goo.gl/xlRn97

WvW
SEA Team
Scheduled runs on
- Tuesday 9pm to 12am (GMT+8)
- Friday 10pm to 12am (GMT+8)
- Saturday 9pm to 12am (GMT+8)

We are looking for
- Regular WvWers
- Guardian
- Herald
- Reaper
- Tempest
- Berserker

Requirements
- Ts3
- Geared up to our builds, we will check

What we offer
- Sponsorship to transfer regulars

NA Team
We are looking for NA driver for our NA wvw. Honestly, we do not have any and we interested to form a NA WvW team. We do not need the NA drivers to be very experienced but we do need the NA driver to have both competitive nature and leadership, a nature that drive him to become better both as a commander and as a player, leadership to empower others.

WvW Intro Video @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzHwe516XlY

Officer Vacancies
Despite being a large guild, generally people hate being an officer as our officers have things they must do (like organising events and managing things). Individuals who have free time, responsible and common sense looking to do some officer level things, we have a lot of openings.

The game needs guild contents

hope is not as buggy as the launch of hot

i believe same as hot since the game expansions r sell as part, it will be weird if different parts have different hp

it happens, at times….
not gonna expect nice replies 24/7
but so far majority of the times are ok

Like other mentioned, megaserver so….

Your other other option is to create a niche guild that recruit realistic fashion players and hopefully they all will show up in your megaserver due to same guild.

BeepBoopBop.5403:

SkyShroud.2865:

BeepBoopBop.5403:

STIHL.2489:

I actually like some of the ideas I have seen about getting rid of servers and making WvW a more Guild/alliance style game. I think that would fix a large part of the problem we are having with server issues and population balance.

Continuing this thread in that direction will just get the thread closed. Has been suggested many times, its not happening. Still need a realistic solution to the hibernators though.

What different does it make when you too are just merely revitalising an idea that already suggested?

Go ahead and link me threads. If they haven’t closed, and the problem has clearly not been solved, then do I have to explain how it’s different?

Let me quote what you are wrote.

“Has been suggested many times, its not happening.”

Everything here too are suggested before and not recently, dated as far back as 2 to 3 years ago. In between now and then, the suggestions were echoed here and there thus suggested many times. Base on what you said, therefore it is not happening. So again, how is it different?

BeepBoopBop.5403:

STIHL.2489:

I actually like some of the ideas I have seen about getting rid of servers and making WvW a more Guild/alliance style game. I think that would fix a large part of the problem we are having with server issues and population balance.

Continuing this thread in that direction will just get the thread closed. Has been suggested many times, its not happening. Still need a realistic solution to the hibernators though.

What different does it make when you too are just merely revitalising an idea that already suggested?

I don’t think anet remember they have different defense value for each armor type.

Strider Pj.2193:

SkyShroud.2865:

this is part of the suggested system after blowing it up in my other thread

The beauty of making servers non-mandatory come in many forms

• Newcomers will be given absolute freedom to seek for the guilds to be part of before deciding to jump into WvW instead of being threw into random server they chosen with zero understanding of their decision.
• Guilds will have bigger pool of players to recruit from instead of being limited to specific server’s pool
• WvW populations will be more accurately measured exactly due to removal of non-wvw active accounts, this without doubt will lead to better balancing data
• Sudden spike in populations due to unpredictable human activities will no longer have unpredictable impact to population balancing thus again leading to better balancing
• Returning players are given a chance to choose a new server for FREE, this in itself is a compensation, it is like a 1800 gems voucher.

Please don’t bring that in here. Your thread was closed because it ran its course. The mods noted they would not delete servers.

Still, you revitalise part of the ideals like how others in the thread were revitalising part of it , however anet devs already said, it is pointless since none of us have full perspectives of the issues.

this is part of the suggested system after blowing it up in my other thread

The beauty of making servers non-mandatory come in many forms

• Newcomers will be given absolute freedom to seek for the guilds to be part of before deciding to jump into WvW instead of being threw into random server they chosen with zero understanding of their decision.
• Guilds will have bigger pool of players to recruit from instead of being limited to specific server’s pool
• WvW populations will be more accurately measured exactly due to removal of non-wvw active accounts, this without doubt will lead to better balancing data
• Sudden spike in populations due to unpredictable human activities will no longer have unpredictable impact to population balancing thus again leading to better balancing
• Returning players are given a chance to choose a new server for FREE, this in itself is a compensation, it is like a 1800 gems voucher.
• Flow of populations are likely to become more fair thus filling up servers more evenly

Still, I believe blowing it all up is still better.

So, we will be earning two type of currencies at a time or you can only choose to earn one currency at a time?

BeepBoopBop.5403:

Blockhead Magee.3092:

Everyone should just transfer to Blackgate and sit in monster queues and then wonder why there is nobody to fight.

I’m not saying that is where the OP wants to go, but its the way the population is shifting.

It actually is where I want to go. The population happens to be shifting this way, but I just want to play with my friends lol…

I’d be OK lifting all server transfer limits and letting the population naturally balance out through higher queue times. I would rather face possible 100 man queues (been there done that for a few months, was like only on reset night…) than just never being able to transfer to Blackgate.

Did you know I once play a pvp mmorpg, the community got kittened off by how the bad the balance is managed so they decided to mostly transfer to the same fraction. Naturally, that one fraction destroyed everyone else. A month or two later, the management shut the game down.

ooo

what did you do to have 13k hp gone just because you atk one single person?
i dun believe retaliation can hit up to 13k just because you hit a single person

Spartacus.3192:

I have a couple of questions about sigil of absorption. It removes a boon on interrupt and i know the order of boon removal.

My questions are say my target only has one boon and its 5 stacks of might with 10 sec duration.

1. Do i steal the full 5 stacks for 10 sec?
2. Do i steal just 1 stack for a preset number of seconds?
3. Does my personal boon duration have any impact on the duration of the boon i steal?
4. Is it something completely different than above?

Thanks for any replies.

1. Yes, boon is boon, it disregard the number of stacks.
3. No, you steal for what it is without any addition on top of it.

Reaper Alim.4176:

Firebaall.5127:

So let me get this right….

You guys are complaining about how some players are running their personally funded, privately accessed chat server?

Unreal.

I suppose they are bulling you too now? Honestly, the degree of entitlement is astronomical at being offended for being “excluded” from a privately run chat server because you are too paranoid or stuffed up to follow their rules for access.

At this point, I’d be shocked if they didn’t blacklist and block those complaining.

I know right. You just can’t make this stuff up. LMFAO. I mean they are paying to allow players to have a community. And then you get these type of players said stuff like ‘how dare you make me follow the rules of your server.’ I can’t stop laughing at this.

Huh? I thought this is a common behavior among many gw2ers. It happen so frequently.

Zeeck.9025:

Over the past couple of weeks I’ve been getting more and more in to WvW and have been enjoying myself for the most part, but one thing that I keep seeing pop up every so often is the active hate against players who join as ranger or thief and more then a few want to kick them out of the main group just for playing one of the classes.

I honestly don’t understand why, I mean does it really matter what class someone plays as long as they follow what the commander says and stick to the objectives?

What exactly are the “issues”?

Let put it in a perspective that I hope that you can relate for you.

Let say you doing a raid and the raid team advertise for DPS but you come in as a druid, they will kick you.

Now, in WvW, they don’t advertise what classes they want but it doesn’t mean there isn’t any of such thing, there is such thing as classes they want. In group fight, ranger and thief are simply not wanted. As for why, is the same reason as a raid, in wvw there is some class that plays well in a team and some don’t, just that simple.

It is a return of pirateship meta, the boonstrip is real, is not joking! Your stab won’t even last!

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?

Merging is permanent combination of servers elsewhere linking is temporary combination of servers. If linking isn’t helping, why would you even think merging will do anything?

Blow it up can work if and only if the new system is designed to direct instead of being directed. In other words, currently the system is easily exploitable due its fundamental simple design concept.

Yes, relinking is bad but that is something that people consistently ignoring. Whenever we have relink, there will always be a few servers that will be badly linked, it will happen without fail. So, I still prefer to blow it all up.

You won’t benefit from high refresh rate if your fps is not as high.
Refresh rate is related to FPS.

1070 can support 1080p easily as for wanting your FPS to hit 144, you will need a super computer level cpu since cpu is the bottleneck for this game.

Check this https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

Get at least 4 cores and above.

So there are 3 new stats for Pof, can anyone confirm?

I only know Grieving is confirmed one of the stats

What are the other two? Marshal?

it is still partially broken? i don’t know, it is really hard to tell

Jumpin Lumpix.6108:

SkyShroud.2865:

Jumpin Lumpix.6108:

QuantumCat.9051:

I think you misunderstood the Commander. The Blackgate TS has an auto-verify function that allows you to instantly join, but it requires you to be Rank 50 to do so. That cuts down on spies. You can still verify under Rank 50, but you’ll need to chat with a TS Admin to do so. Not worth getting into the whole TS vs. Discord debate; TS is the chat tool of choice for BG.

It also requires you to give out your api key, and people who speculate heavily on tp might not want people viewing there account info or any other info for that matter (even though it’s read only).

I have yet to hear of any logical argument t as to why keeping players out of TS using any method prevents spying.

Api key to verify your on blackgate, you can have another account on that you use for the api key and ur main acct is on another server.

Being rank 50 in wvw – ez just rank up to lvl 50 on ur bg acct and then ur in TS

Also you can just not be in TS and just look at the map to see where 99% of all players are, no TS required.

So having restrictions on TS doesn’t really prevent spying at all, and I wonder how many legit BG players have been barred from joining TS because of this. I bet it’s way more then potential spies it’s stopped.

This also causes exclusion of new players since most commanders want TS and kick u from squad if your not in it, so again it excludes anyone under rank 50 making new players probably not want to play at all.

This is an awful system and whoever thought of it should change it.

I am sure it he said “cuts down” and not “prevent”. Prevent is 100% while cutdown is to make life slightly harder for the spy. Sure, you can get around the system by making your main transfer there and then auth it then transfer out. Still, that would means the spy would have to spend gems to do that, if he willing to go through all that, good for him. To put it in layman term, it is called deterrence.

API allow you to choose the information you want to share. TP permission is separated from server permission so your argument is not true. Furthermore, if you are so bothered about privacy, then as he mentioned, you can contact an admin and do a real time verification.

Your argument to me makes me rolling my eyes. Base on your argument, we should not have police since having police doesn’t really prevent crime. =)

Well this is all true what you have written except for the fact that I talked to 2 admins who completely refused to manually verify me even though I was standing in front of them, so you can see how stubborn and troll like these admins are. And yes I do not want to give out any aspect of my api key for my own reasons.

Also psychologically someone who is attempting to spy cares about wvw very much, enough to go out of their way to spy. So hitting rank 50 or buying an alt account would be trivial given how much motivation they would have to spy since they are so involved with the gamemode. So really these restrictions could easily be overcome by someone who wants to spy but can easily dissuade new players who are just trying to participate or figure out what wvw is.

Seems like it cuts down on new players being able to participate rather then preventing highly motivated spies who are dedicated to the game mode and are wvw vets.

In that case, that is the issue with you and the admins thus you should bring that up in BG forums or create a hooha on the team chat, it is not of our concern.

You will only need one firebrand, one spellcaster, rest scourge to form a basic 5, and then 50 full blob to go around destroying people. Firebrand just to be multiple small stab machine, spellcaster for op elite dome, 10 spellcasters sure can cover a big area. Scourge just doing their nonsense and everyone rip. No need ele, the new ele spec is not special enough for wvw i think. Condi rev is great now but scourge is a massive tune up in boonstripping which is greater than the condi rev and the new spec for rev is not special too. Scourge can cast barrier, strip, do dmg. Dafaq we need ele and rev for anyway?!

Jumpin Lumpix.6108:

QuantumCat.9051:

I think you misunderstood the Commander. The Blackgate TS has an auto-verify function that allows you to instantly join, but it requires you to be Rank 50 to do so. That cuts down on spies. You can still verify under Rank 50, but you’ll need to chat with a TS Admin to do so. Not worth getting into the whole TS vs. Discord debate; TS is the chat tool of choice for BG.

It also requires you to give out your api key, and people who speculate heavily on tp might not want people viewing there account info or any other info for that matter (even though it’s read only).

I have yet to hear of any logical argument t as to why keeping players out of TS using any method prevents spying.

Api key to verify your on blackgate, you can have another account on that you use for the api key and ur main acct is on another server.

Being rank 50 in wvw – ez just rank up to lvl 50 on ur bg acct and then ur in TS

Also you can just not be in TS and just look at the map to see where 99% of all players are, no TS required.

So having restrictions on TS doesn’t really prevent spying at all, and I wonder how many legit BG players have been barred from joining TS because of this. I bet it’s way more then potential spies it’s stopped.

This also causes exclusion of new players since most commanders want TS and kick u from squad if your not in it, so again it excludes anyone under rank 50 making new players probably not want to play at all.

This is an awful system and whoever thought of it should change it.

I am sure it he said “cuts down” and not “prevent”. Prevent is 100% while cutdown is to make life slightly harder for the spy. Sure, you can get around the system by making your main transfer there and then auth it then transfer out. Still, that would means the spy would have to spend gems to do that, if he willing to go through all that, good for him. To put it in layman term, it is called deterrence.

API allow you to choose the information you want to share. TP permission is separated from server permission so your argument is not true. Furthermore, if you are so bothered about privacy, then as he mentioned, you can contact an admin and do a real time verification.

Your argument to me makes me rolling my eyes. Base on your argument, we should not have police since having police doesn’t really prevent crime. =)

New meta will be warrior running into blob and open elite then scourge will follow in to do their kitten. Then, the rest just smash their cc follow by dps and everyone rip.

In my link, ebg is always packed. If we try to squeeze in there, only half or less get inside so we end up going around wacking things in BL then only to have the ebg blob lead by a guild group come rolling over us with it. It is not like the whole blob come immediately but eventually their full blob turns up. Still, there are fights and I like that, even though we are at the outnumbered end as time passes. However, I also know there are some servers that don’t even have population during that timing, I dislike knowing that because if it can happen to them then it will happen to anyone at some point of time.

I want servers to have populations, I want players to be in control, I don’t want devs to decide our future. I only believe devs’ responsibility is to create a system that will direct population balance on a global level, not to intervene our progress.

Blow it up, implement a brand new system, give us back our control, let us decide our future.

The issue with not linking servers is that…..

Servers that don’t have the coverage or commanders will end up dead again. We have that many people because we have commanders, commanders bring out populations.

Problem with linking is that the data representation isn’t accurate in itself. There are a lot of factors for it but we can all agree that devs are incapable of determining which servers are suitable to link with each other just by data alone. I mean, devs are just devs, they are not data analyst.

So we can’t unlink because we will lose all the benefits we gain from it aka consolidated populations, coverage and commanders.

Merging is not much different from linking, link in essence is a soft merger. You can’t open servers either without destroying balance further due to stacking and disparity in base populations. What left is to delete and reduce the numbers of servers drastically and implement a brand new system that can handle the disparity between servers better in both logical and fair manner.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, guys.

I hope more people be willing to speak up how bad linking is.
I also hope more people will accept the idea of blowing up servers for the greater good.

For HOD matchup, the skirmish #69 and onwards, the PPT is bugged with NSP gaining 100+ more per tick than actual. It happened before.

Edit:
I believe it happens from skirmish #68 onwards but we only notice it at #69 when NSP is leading the score while having both lesser PPT and PPK.

I believe devs goal is to get servers full asap so new populations will flow to the bottom servers. Sound great on paper but this method has been tried over and over in pvp mmorpg and always don’t have the desirable result.s

Adamarc.7463:

SkyShroud.2865:

Jayne.9251:

If you’re playing off hours and you can’t get into map because of a permanent queue, you’re gonna move

And if they’re stacked on all three servers equally, then it’s much better than what exists now. (One server ktraining an empty map — and technically one server COULD ktrain an entire map if the opposing teams don’t have the bodies/skill to counter 20).

It’s a good step forward.

Why would that be much better? Have you forgotten something called one up one down? The one that go up and the one that go down will be either ktrained or ktraining others.

Actually that’s a strength of this proposal. If you try to ktrain a map a significant proportion of your ktrain will be stuck in a queue until at least one enemy has sufficient numbers to defend.

That why people will stack up even further.

In wvw we have pugs, pugs fill up part of the space, then we also have guilds.

It is very important to understand that we do not have 24 ocx or sea or eu guilds to go around 24 NA servers.

This design will encourage people to stack more because they know that only by stacking, the chance they will get into a map will increase significantly. They do not have to worry about opponent not having enemies because they all know everybody stacked in specific tier. When guilds and people start to stack, it will eliminate match up varieties which people wanted, it also make one up one down approach questionable. It will slowly revert back to the old days of T1 and T2, the difference from then will be having the other tier completely dead in off hours.

Grim West.3194:

SkyShroud.2865:

Grim West.3194:

A WvW guild of max size 50 or even 100 hundred is plenty. Any size larger than that is just another potential exploit for the players to destroy balance.

Guilds over a hundred in size are not efficient, unless you divide them up into subgroups. That’s fine for pve, but for WvW it’s an exploit, and it destroys competitive balance. Alliances between guilds are much more efficient.

Which is why I say this isn’t pvp oriented mmorpg. You are superimposing a specific game design part into part of gw2 design. You are fundamentally changing the designs without a single care how much impact it will cause to numerous guilds. It is thoughtless and not only that, it will never implemented because of how it change the game fundamentally.

Yeah, you hyperbole a lot and refuse to look at the bigger picture. Now I see why people think your ideas are junk.

The WvW guild idea is just a tool to allow the ANET devs to rebalance the servers. There are very very few guilds that actually field over 100 regular WvW players, or even 50, and you know it. Any guild over that size fielding that many players is part of the balance problem, and again, you know it. Time for you to admit that you are part of the problem.
.

But finally, it doesn’t matter. ANET will never fix this issue. THEY DON’T CARE.

ANET only cares about suckering more people into giving them even more transfer money for the latest server of the week.

Hyperbole? Not able to see bigger picture? You know, you are the one asking me to re-read when I already know what you are talking about but you behaving in this condescending way that you think I am not. You refuse to accept the fact that you are changing the fundamental design of the game, affecting numerous guilds, forcing the way these guilds functions especially they already doing that for 5 whole years.

Btw, half of the people posting here didn’t even read the first three posts anyway from the fact they are posting things that already clarified in the first three posts show that.

Jayne.9251:

If you’re playing off hours and you can’t get into map because of a permanent queue, you’re gonna move

And if they’re stacked on all three servers equally, then it’s much better than what exists now. (One server ktraining an empty map — and technically one server COULD ktrain an entire map if the opposing teams don’t have the bodies/skill to counter 20).

It’s a good step forward.

Why would that be much better? Have you forgotten something called one up one down? The one that go up and the one that go down will be either ktrained or ktraining others.

You claim it will encourage off hours to spread, have you forgotten that off hours stacked before the existence of linking exactly because of the activity level?

The dynamic map cap isn’t gonna stop people from stacking because clearly cap grows equally which is the point of dynamic cap. If cap do grow equally, off hours can all stack on 3 main servers since we all know the cap itself will raise equally.

Grim West.3194:

A WvW guild of max size 50 or even 100 hundred is plenty. Any size larger than that is just another potential exploit for the players to destroy balance.

Guilds over a hundred in size are not efficient, unless you divide them up into subgroups. That’s fine for pve, but for WvW it’s an exploit, and it destroys competitive balance. Alliances between guilds are much more efficient.

Which is why I say this isn’t pvp oriented mmorpg. You are superimposing a specific game design part into part of gw2 design. You are fundamentally changing the designs without a single care how much impact it will cause to numerous guilds. It is thoughtless and not only that, it will never implemented because of how it change the game fundamentally.

You do get what I am saying but you decided it isn’t important. You advocate for splitting guilds up, not that much different from destroying guilds, that even worse than my suggestion of redistribute populations as a whole because at least my redistribution allow guilds the freedom to be together.

You told me to re-read it so I gave you a thorough explanations. Here, I need you to read it carefully because you already miss the points.

As for attack, I am not referring to you, well, if you have been in this thread since the start, you will know who I am referring to.

Grim West.3194:

SkyShroud. Not sure where you think I am asking for a PvP mmorpg, since I never alluded to that. The post you are probably referirng to was in response to the one above, by Jayne.

Perhaps you should spend more time reading other peoples posts and less time typing.

My suggestions are only about balancing the servers with minimal changes to existing mechanics and systems. Keeping it simple is what the devs are more likely to do rather than costly coding and restructuring.

But it really doesn’t matter what we suggest. The devs have no intention of fixing the server balance issues that have existed since launch.

Grim West.3194:

I was editing my post so it got out of order.

It’s about balancing servers. Reread until you get it.

Your suggestion involve explicitly declaring a guild as a specific type and limit that guild to a specific size. In PvP mmorpg, a guild cap is around 100 and naturally, people are of the same server. Here, you are suggesting something of even lesser which is 50. Then, follow by a condition that you can only rep wvw guild of same server.

These two conditions alone exclude many guilds out there that do wvw. Your suggestion is not thoughtful enough despite the wall of texts you have made.

Why isn’t thoughtful because your balance is base on guilds, specific type of guilds and that naturally exclude a lot of guilds. We have many type of guilds that do wvw here and every guild have their own environment made possible due specific reasons. Now, you put your limit at 50, I will even give you a generous 100, it will still exclude tons of guilds out there. Base on this limitation, you are telling these guilds (that exceed 100) to make choice to cut it down to 50 or 100 or be split up by the system.

As for rep, you are using rep as a way to identify main wvw guild and can only rep if same server as that guild specified. You seem to have forgotten that in this game we have more than WvW guild, we also have PvX guilds that actually do wvw. You are excluding all of those guilds out and you are telling them you PvE/PvP people who joined after the allocation you cannot rep those guilds. Also, PvX guild easily exceed 100 people.

I am quite surprised that people who attack my ideas (despite not reading it) as disrespecting and splitting guilds up and kept quiet completely about your suggestion when you literally made suggestions that will make all the works that these guilds have put in all disappear like smoke.

Now, I will give yet another scenario.

Let say EBG is fully queued by all sides, pugs doing their usual thing in ebg.

This particular guild started to raid, it is their raid time. 20 entered BL, good compositions and all, no map queues thanks to some enemy roamers already in.

They hit a keep, got into inner. The scout call out enemy in inner. EBG responded. Your limitation resulted in at around 30+ cap. 30 guys (at best) out of 70 ported in. Realistically speak, way less than 30 will port in because roamers across other maps might too responded.

Now, since is pug tag, when they do port, they just put up a wp. The problem is this, how much of their original compositions are retained in this pug blob when they port in?

Can this 30+ of gibberish compositions handle that 20 organised zerg?

Even if they do manage to retain their keep due to sieges, can they clear out that 20 organised zerg running around the keep? I don’t know, I think the 30+ gibberish zerg will be farmed.

I will give you another scenario base on your limitation.

Let say initial everyone in ebg, capping it out at 70.
AA went BB’s BL with 20. Then, the BL enter a queue base on your condition.
They manage to break into keep lord by the time scout notice, the scout call out to prep for ewp.

BB responded, port into the BL with his 70, thanks to your queue, the 70 manage to get in, likewise AA get in their other 50.

Now the tricky part, AA got 50 at spawn, they need to run there to the keep. The scout pull the ewp, BB send in his 70 and immediate smash the 20. The 50 still running there.

Per map and across all maps are very different.

If base by per map, it reduce strategic play like blob from ebg moving off to borderland to hit defenseless keep. In more details, strategic play let say both sides have 80 total across maps. Base on your limitation, you can only squeeze in 20 on borderland, you can’t put 40 in borderland and 40 defending ebg, 40 surely is enough to defend ebg with sieges.

Bug again, please check.

Map instance ip address is 64.25.38.85:0

PS: Did prisoner speed reduced? It was running pretty slow, used to need swiftness to keep up.

Why housing? This isn’t open-world survival game. You already have home instance, I will find it more reasonable if you asking for feature to allow you to decorate your home instance.

They should remove that suppressed message for commander at the same time too.

If server update go according to how I theorized it to be, then, the refreshing itself isn’t the main thing you are looking out for. Rather, it is the time it takes for individual objects, in this case, players to be considered as part or not part of the populations.

How long does it take for the object to be reflected in the population and how long does it take for that same object to be subtracted from the population if inactive. Then, how much time needed for this compounding of objects to reflect in the populations.

From observation, 2 to 3 weeks after relink, most servers will open again.
Seeing that expansion is coming, realistically might take more than a month due to many returning players.

Chaba.5410:

SkyShroud.2865:

There is no voice whisper feature.
There is no nested channel feature.
There is no individual text channel.
Permissions wise is not as extensive as ts3.

The only two good things about discord are the web interface and free.

Discord feels very much like having teamchat outside of the game, a glorified shoutbox, and for that it is wonderful. It allows for rather immediate ad-hoc communication in ways that you cannot use TS3 or a forum for.

One reason I feel that it doesn’t get adopted though is related to how much Discord is designed more for a single team than as a platform for hosting multiple teams; hence why it still lacks CComs.

The other reason is related to how free/easy it is to set up your own Discord server. Discord so far doesn’t give much of a reason why, say a guild, wouldn’t just set up their own Discord versus using a server community Discord.

If Discord were to implement a CComs function and nested channels with some sort of auto-creation of a text channel for voice channels I think we’d see wider migration to it from TS3.

Yes, I am responding in perspective of a server usage, afterall, ts3 is mainly a server-wide choice than a guild choice. Discord works well for a guild, not so for a server.