Guild Wars 2

Myth Shaia.4856:

20 years for Yakslapper title…

We can start a bet, what will be the chronological order of the following events:
- GW4 goes online
- GW2 shuts down
- Someone get the Yakslapper title (unpatched)
- The WvW-achievements get patches

Mokk.2397:

I simply don’t understand some peoples logic on this subject .The world turns .When NA is asleep others in the world are awake .

Would be absolutely no problem, if they would be awake and play. But fact is the number of players is much lower, while the number of objectives stay the same.

A prime-time player is worth 1 points score an off-time player is worth around 20 points of score.

The amount of score per player should be always the same.

Why the hell does it need 4 maps with 1 castle, 12 keeps, 24 towers and 21 camps for around 10 player per side? That’s not only to boring to play, it’s also complete nonsense from a scoring point of view.

Zeghart.9841:

And when you mention night-time players being less valued than day-time players, the opposite is happening at the moment. A night-time player is worth way more than a day-time player, since they can accomplish more with way less resistance and numbers.

Exactly, the value of a player (for it’s WvW-Score) is simply
|No of Objectives| / |No of Player|

And thats is around 1 in Prime-time and around 10-20 in Off-time (EU-Night in EU, no idea for NA)

So yes, currently (since nearly 4 years) an off-time player is 10-20 times as valuable for the outcome of a match as a prime-time player. And this is a really bad discrimination and demotivation (to play for points) for prime-time player.

DarkieDuck.9521:

Who keeps telling you stories about how SFR got so strong because of “bandwagon” guilds. Since the free transfers we got bandwagon guilds, its making us anything but strong

This (and before) http://mos.millenium.org/servers/view/9/6
was SFR before pushing by bandwagoners.

Now (with the last free transfer round) you got to more pushing than you like, I feel sorry for you.

But without any pushing you would still be only middle-field.

Mine are

1. autoloot
2. dynamic map capacity (less map for less player, more map for more player)
3. man-power balance/repopulation
4. CC reduction/better stability for all
5. gliding

What’s your priorities?

Swagger.1459:

So what does eotm do well?

High participation numbers and better reward pace.

The thing EotM does better is NOT higher participation numbers (I am in doubt that more people play EotM than WvW), BUT adaptation of map-capacity to player-demand, such that it feels like higher participation numbers.

In EotM you have 1 map per EU/NA if less than 300 like to play, and e.g. 100 if 30000 would like to play.

In WvW you have always 36/32 maps, if 300 want to play (every map feels empty) or if 30000 want (most people sit in queues).

Dynamic demand oriented number of maps is the trick.

If you wana scout and defend towers/keeps the whole WvW-team will love you, being lvl 80 or lvl 2, it will not matter. But ANet unfortunately forgot to make this a rewarding/lvling job. (But if there is an attack an you sit on a superior arrow-cart and someone else does as well, you sit in a pile of bags very fast)

Problematic is only, zerg fights with bad equiped low-level, as their death in zergs is fast and a death rallies all downed opponents that hit him.