Guild Wars 2

Kaybosh.5183:

Ranger, remove the second r !

But if we remove the first R! It’ll describe most of the forum threads about the class. =o

Or….EB in the middle, ABL on one side, DBL the other. No home BL and adjust the scoring accordingly. EoTM as que wait if you wish. Play what you want to help. No need for rotation ever.

1 Eternal Battlegrounds
2 Alpine Borderlands
1 Desert Borderlands.

For now at least. If the DBL is reintroduced with the same problems as before you will have 3 months of the previous 6 months, dead WvW. Bring in DBL replacing one map and see what people make of the new changes. We can’t have 3 month cycles where players leave because DBL is back and then come back when ABL is back.

If we are rotating then yes, weekly or every other week. +1.

By the word rotated in the changelog and some of anet replies on reddit I’m assuming that DBLs eventually will be rotated back into play, I’m also assuming it will happen on a quarterly basis, along with the worlds re-linkage.

Personally I’m not a fan of Alpines (and never was (and the bay sucks)) and this quarterly rotation creates for me a 3-months vacuum during which I have no border to play on. Chances are high that during this vacuum I will find something else to play and forget about gw2, just like some of the DBL-haters forgot about the game and still didn’t come back.

Thus, pros of weekly rotation:

1. Diversify stale matchups. Playing 2 weeks in a row against the same servers is boring, playing against them on different maps is not so much boring and could lead to a drastically different score.
2. Different borders means different commanders and different people. Diversity again, more people playing WvW overall.
3. A week isn’t enough to drop the game out of hate to some border type.
4. But enough to have fun on your favorite border before going back to EB.
5. No longer only 2 maps for such a huge gamemode as WvW.
6. We may finally see the real playerbases of two borders. WvW had a surge of players along with stab, balance and reward changes and before Alpines were brought back. Makes me think that the real reason of WvW downfall was just bad balance and lack of attention/bugfixes/rewards, and not DBLs.
7. Anet have maid some very nice map design changes to DBLs and having them rotated so often creates a better chance of haters giving the map another chance.

Krynn Bowlroaster.8429:

I’ve played in T1 and T6-2. The lower tiers I feel for because you guys have been allowed by ArenaNet to use WvW as a gate humping karma experience. I don’t want to hear we have small ops and focused battles. Maybe from time to time, but my experience in lower tiers showed a bunch of people who roamed from tower to tower and capped while there was no opposition in that time. Whoo fun, fun and in no way a modified PvP/Mass Combat game mode. Finally Anet is being true to the game mode. About time!!

Having played from Tier one to T5, I saw much more “gate humping karma experience” in T1 and T2, where the biggest blob rolls around capping things and the sides with the smaller blobs back cap or get rolled over. For all the talk about how this was to help the lower tiers, the most complaints I saw prior to the change in regard to fixing population balance were in the higher tiers. It seems much more like the smaller servers were sacrificed to try to fix the stacking happening in T1 and T2 and to a lesser extent in T3 and T4 than for the benefit of or to fix the lowest tiers.

If there was some intent to not reward empty play, there would be reduced points and rewards given to servers and players when their side had a numerical advantage. The linking is just a kluge to fill the maps.

The merger or world link to me is simply a quick band aid to solve the lack of population for sustain gameplay. it doesn’t solve the population imbalance issue.

in many mmos i have played, all mmo that go by the idea of setting “full” status via a very simple minded “max number” always fail to balance population. these mmo developers are mistaking that FPS, MOBA, RTS etc. servers or matchup of max players concept is applicable to a MMO context. however, reality is it is never applicable.

in fps server, we have forced balancing like what you see in spvp but you can’t apply force balancing to servers, people will QQ about it. thus, it is exactly because you can’t apply force balancing to servers, the only way to “force” balance is to control the intake.

however, the current flaw is that the intake is base on the “max players” concept which is only applicable to games that has forced balancing. anet need to get rid of that max players context by implementing a dynamic max players which analyze the highest and lowest server population’s disparity, then close off the highest server if that disparity grows. this will effectively prevent people from stacking on server while emptying the lowest server, this will also punish multiple guilds from the highest server in their attempt to stack on another top ranked server since the “highest” populated server is subjective.

LordOtto, GZ on being in T1 and enjoying it. The OP was simply saying they did not enjoy that playstyle and never attacked anyone to get their point across (which may not be shared by all, but is shared by many in lower tiers).

Continue with your ques and large nonstop zerg battles to your hearts content, but don’t attack someone because their idea of fun isn’t the same as yours.

Yeah this is an unfortunate problem with server linking. Speaking as a member of Dh, I’m glad to have been paired with FC (as I have way too many friends on it), but it is sad that both of our playstyles really got destroyed by server linking itself. People aren’t realizing that t4/3 servers didn’t necessarily want to have the pop of t1/2 servers either lol, it’s not even just the low tiers. A lot of us enjoy it, granted, but a lot of us don’t too.

Tier 4 had a very balanced, casual, active playstyle. There were zerg fights during NA/EU, some during SEA, and roaming during OCX. It wasn’t completely dead, it had a nice balance. Currently, tier 4 has almost as many kills as t1 had pre server linking. That’s certainly not what a lot of lower tiers want, but that’s not necessarily what higher tier players want either. It’s all become so incredibly blobby. I have mixed feelings on it overall myself, but just wanted to share with people imo that the problem isn’t only for lower tier servers.

After all is said and done, as usual there’s a lot more said than done. Ain’t that the way

In previous posts in other forums here I have deferred to the majority, hoping that this makes most people happy. I’ve seen posts from people saying that the minority should sit back and basically stop whining because this is the way most people want it. But consider this… Although the lower tiers contain the lower number of players I’m pretty sure that those numbers are still good decent number of people that actually bring some good money into the ANet bank account. Sure, it’s all good to cater to the majority and do what they want but at the end of all of this if GW2 loses a bunch of WvW players (and possible players period) because it remains basically ‘blob city’ what has really been the “win”?

A lot of talk has been around ‘play style’. Play style means a LOT to some people. I actually like to get into a zerg/blob once in a rare while and just pound the heck out of each other. But most of the time I really like just working with a group of people I know “digging” into keeps and towers and hopefully having some fun small scale fights here and there. It’s not all about that silly pvd people talk about. It’s really about NOT being in a situation where you are running into huge blobs all the time. I started this game on Borlis Pass in Sept. 2012 and got into WvW early the next year. I love the play style and the people, and as much as I enjoy a lot of the people I’m meeting in FA I am sorely missing the way things were. I will never get used to being steamrolled by a blob when I’m roaming.. that I don’t understand. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been with one of my groups and seen a single person maybe capping for dailies etc and left him/her alone. Then of course there are days when that person isn’t so lucky depending on the situation. But if you see what I’m saying.. it’s small scale and I like that. I’m in the minority and not wanting to dictate GW2 wide policy.. I just don’t want my play style to be taken away. People at the ‘low’ levels are there because, believe it or not, most of us like it.

I’m actually from Eredon Terrace, but I thought I’d post because I agree with you.

ET got lucky. Blackgate seems like a nice community, I’ve met nice people there, but zergfesting isn’t my style. I go to WvW expecting the small skirmishes I’ve come to love and being able to solo defend a keep from a mob of 5 or 6, awesome good times. Instead I see a couple groups of countless players stacking on top of each other, making a PvP experience impossible. Fights take place as massive jousting with the hope of not being caught by the enemy zerg when your zerg pulls away or else your zerg is consumed by the other in chaos. It doesn’t feel like PvP, it isn’t exciting, and it isn’t fun.

On top of that change is the fact that with so many players gameplay becomes less stable. I never needed to upgrade my computer for anything GW2 related and I’m using a Linux, so gameplay is already not as stable as it should be, but the game is still great and usually runs smooth. With the current setup for WvW I get one shot. I find one mob, I die, that’s it, game crashes. Literally game over.

The fun in WvW was taken away by meshing the servers like this. I don’t like it in spite of BG being a great community. I would really like to have the old set up back, where ET is against Anvil Rock and Isle of Janthir with the three trading off who owns the maps every night.

Sich.7103:

Because if ennemy control keep on your map then you are invaded… You feel attacked… Stuck in a small part of the map… Not being able to control your world…

Sich, thanks for the reply, helps when trying to ponder options.

So for you it creates a sense of purpose to have a single map to try and keep them completely out of. A last stand type location I assume?

Used to be a big time homeland defender as well but realized it was creating an unneeded sense of stress when people wouldn’t return to defend home. I get why they weren’t but still was annoying to see hours of build up work and coin wiped out by one mass ktrain rolling through the BL.

lil devils x.6071:

This does not work in a game mode where the score is kept due to it giving teams “bad map handicaps”. Not sure who all you think this makes happy due to the fact that many players will not play on EotM map or DBL, it certainly will not make them happy, because as long as there is a score kept they need to be able to play on the entire court.

This is a compromise to keep most people playing. You are a good example. When DBLs come back into rotation you are back to just EB. Rotations are going to leave some of the player base out each time it cycles. You know people that won’t play on DBL, I know people that aren’t playing on ABL. Why limit our population.

So to continue your analogy, you prefer to sit out half your play time on the bench when the game rotates?

LetoII.3782:

As long as advantages are given to the weaker servers in match, maps don’t really need to be balanced. I’d go so far as to say the winning server should have no home BL and the loser 2

I see where you are coming from, but the concept is to try and allow for close to even footing.

Daggos Skelito.2910:

So your saying I can warm up in EoTM, switch to EB next, then head to ABL for some exiting fights. AND I never have to play DBL!!!
Ohhh Im liking this concept! Yes vote

I am saying with choices absolutely you can play on multiple maps and still avoid ones that does not interest you. And if one day you want to try it out again to see if its now more interesting you have that choice without them forcing you to do or leaving the game mode.

So your saying I can warm up in EoTM, switch to EB next, then head to ABL for some exiting fights. AND I never have to play DBL!!!
Ohhh Im liking this concept! Yes vote

this has been much discussed and brought up since before HoT’s launch when news of the Desert borderland first hit the scene as there use to be a lot of players who felt choice and variety should be the preferred path. In most threads on the issue the main concern ends up being the difficulty of fairly scoring asymmetrical maps and how to address the loss of the home borderland mechanic. Lots of alternative methods were proposed by various community members but with no input from ANET during those times (likely swamped by HoT ship deadlines & then HoT fixes) we were never given any hints which solutions were remotely within the realm of possibility for that I guess non-existent WvW team.

I want to trust that ANET is aware of the situation and that maybe a potential 3rd borderland style map is currently under development but given how long new maps take to get done (more than a year?! and then almost as long to be reasonably playable) I sort of wish back last July when we started making a fuss about it, someone in charge would have started moving things in a direction where it would be apparent to players what to expect in the future. This piecemeal reactionary approach is just going to make WvW that much worse in the long run. How can we make intelligent comments on ideas without a better understand of which kinds of solutions devs are currently favoring.

A selection of smaller dynamic maps that spin up as existing become full could be one solution but now with server linking that seems unlikely. Getting rid of the Borderland mechanic entirely is another possibility but for some reason players seem highly resistant to that rather harmless concept, and that is coming from a Realm Pride enthusiast. Lots of WvWers think the EotM map makes for a poor representation of WvW playstyles but that is really more about the choice of players on the map than the map itself. It has its fun parts and frustrating parts just like all maps and with the choice to play on one of the other 3 maps instead, well it would not be the end of world for anyone.

Just feels like another one of those things we’ve been taking about here forever and never seeing much consensus on. /shrug

TallBarr.2184:

rek.1742:

ArchonWing.9480:

There’s been a lot of PvF under very thin guises and drama and stuff.

While I of all honesty would like matchup threads again, I understand if Arenanet doesn’t want to deal with the harassment issues.

if you want matchup threads there is a website aimed towards that goal exactly. Here is the link to that website if you are interested in talking with or against other servers who do WvW. http://www.gw2wvw.net/ just go to the forum page and you should be fine from there.

That site is the biggest clustergiraffe to age.

That site. It’s basically just the same players, not even that many of them, posting the same repetitive trash talk every day. Frankly hardly any of it actually has to do with the current matchup outside of “X – server ppt’d so hard last night.”

I don’t really see many threads get deleted. I see some get closed / locked, but it’s pretty understandably so in most cases.

Sure they can duel. They just have to deal with the fact, they’re going to get run over by the mob every once in awhile.

If you see read dots rolling your way, expect to be tagged.

please show me in writing, officially stating that wvw is not a place to have duels. people paid money for this game and they have every right to do what they like, that includes dueling in wvw.

How many threads do we need on this topic? One already existed before you decided to make multiple threads.

testpig.5018:

It’s not PvE in WvW.. it’s WvW with incentive. Some of the best large scale wars happen during the time of relics. Perhaps you were not playing at the time.. If a keep held a relic, your realm would focus on defending it more. Having to give up other parts of your land, in order to pull back and defend your relic keep. It was the golden age of WvW.

You mean when the game came out, there were a lot of good fights? Wonder if maybe that was because the game was still fresh and new, and not because the relics were good? Relics were an awful thing and they needed removed lol.

testpig.5018:

There is nothing wrong with NPCs in WvW.

Yes there really is, they’re not necessary. PvE should not be taking objectives – it isn’t necessary at all.

testpig.5018:

Being that a keep is already a super strong structure, it should not have the ablity to easily snipe down towers from it’s very protected safe spot. Towers are different as it’s only 1 layer of defense, and you can easily counter cata/ballie a treb that is set up in a tower.

I get it, but Trebs in general are pretty annoying. Historically, the treb is being used as it was designed to be used.

testpig.5018:

The game should not be set up so that the strong just get stronger. keep things a challenge.\

And the relics would change this??? lol.

testpig.5018:

relic were removed because floating hackers were destroying the Alters of power and reseting the relics. The current Ruins provide the same benefit that the old relics provided. Instead of solving the issue with the hackers, they just removed what the hackers were after. That doesn’t solve the problem.

Ruins are a better system, sure its also power creep because a strong server can just take people to each map and capture the ruins, but this is a GREAT place for roamers. I love fighting in the ruins personally – it has brought me more good fights than just about anywhere else in the game besides maybe north camp.

Why are we OK with having to open thousands of boxes containing more boxes and more boxes that ultimately give us more bags with more boxes?

I’m starting to worry because my wrist is starting to feel some pain despite having a very ergonomic computer setup.

Are we people OK with that?

If feels unnecessary extra stress for our hands.

ANET, can we at least have an “open all” option?

Please show us that you care about the well being of our joints…..

Ok, there is no way to make everyone happy. The vocal forum, which is a minority of actual players were able to bring the alpine back. I am happy that they are having fun, its a game and we are all paying for entertainment so good on them. A good number of actual in game players were surprised that this was even going on, be them happy or sad about the change which should be an indicator of its own.

That said there were also a lot of players that were not happy since they were enjoying the new maps. Neither set of maps are perfect and both had issues. So some people are now back to WvW and some people are now leaving WvW. ANet has said they will rotate which many have said if they do they will step back out and others back in. That still leaves us with less people in the game mode.

There are some that favor a home BL but a lot people are looking for maps they enjoy fighting on. Some people prefer more flat maps and others more varied maps. So instead of working on a rotation system, why not let people have a choice and give us 4 maps. This has been brought up in a number of threads but not one of its own.

1 EBG – Flat style
1 ABL – Flat style
1 DBL – Vertical
1 EoTM – Mix

For the people that like both, variety to choose from, for those that favor one or the other, 2 maps each. EBG/EoTM are already 3 sided maps. It wouldn’t be hard to adjust ABL and DBL to be the same. This also brings EoTM in line with regular WvW and may impact populations or more clearly define the number of people for and against the current server logic versus the Red/Blue/Green logic.

Now what this doesn’t fix is the people that need a home BL, which I don’t have a solution for. A lot people already see their map’s third as home and defend it as such. Having read the various form posts I am not sure how many this is out of the forum goers though.

In the least ANet, include this is your new polls before you spend a lot of resource dollars on a rotation. We have a lot of extremists on the forums, this is a middle ground that gives a number of options to people even as all maps evolve over time.

Now the argument was made, no I don’t want maps I will never play on, but this does not restrict maps where as a rotation will. So for the people that don’t want DBL back, this gives you options versus when DBL rotates back in and vice versa. The more times people leave, the more likely that might be the last time they leave and don’t come back. Some people have said I want 4 maps to choose from, you only have 2 right now so when a rotation occurs you will be impacted. Why can’t we have variety?

If against, why and how does this impact you more adversely then when they rotate?

Where-ever you WvW, good hunting!

Adding shapes would be ideal to adding additional colors. But until commanders are able to change their tag color without disbanding squad, all discussions here seem futile.

As an old guy with poor vision, I’d like to see the option to make the icon larger. As it is now I tab-target the commander and it really helps until someone changes the target, then I’m lost again. Also a guild only tag would be helpful.