Guild Wars 2

To be honest, the Guild Initiative office would be a good place for all those nodes. And cats.

I’m still trying to get my head around 6 ears. Or maybe that should be 6 ears around my head. So confused.

That’s a mistake. If players are going to make a report, they already have a good idea of which option they’re looking for. So long as they’re unambiguous, you’re fine.

Not including those options in there means problems don’t get reported at all.
Firstly because if players have to go to the effort of opening up the website and submitting a ticket, they’re not going to bother most of the time – unless it’s serious, e.g. they’ve lost gold.
Secondly because even if they do submit a ticket, there’s too many chances to miss, or misspell, important information and thus nothing happens.
In some cases the in-game report is more reliable simply because it has access to information the players don’t – the proliferation of obscene guild names in WvW has happened precisely because the ticket-based reporting system doesn’t work.

Better rewards are needed yes, but not for the server’s placement. Individual players have very little control over that.

Rewards like those should be given based on the player’s contribution to the total. Ideally it should be easier to get better rewards on under-populated servers.

Jayne.9251:

Ben K.6238:

The downside is we’d need to get our own voice comms server. But I can arrange that.

And create a greater gulf/insulation between guilds and the rest of the population.

Next up: You can’t play with us unless you have <insert FOTM here>

Most guilds are playing in their own channels or on a separate server already; the difference is academic. The guilds that want to integrate with their server do. The ones that don’t want to, don’t.

Logothx.5628:

I am a little horrified that Yb are having their glicko manually adjusted and not earning their place in tier 1…

“Not earning their place”? They’re winning it. What are you on about?

If you don’t want to use team chat, use map chat. If you don’t want to see team chat, turn it off.

There’s no sense at all in reverting team chat to its prior state of being a redundant clone of map chat.

Chaba.5410:

Yes, it was a post to gauge interest. See my emboldened part.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Hypothetically-Speaking-New-Worlds/first#post6173458

“The ultimate goal of this hypothetical plan would be two-fold:
1) Give players/guilds that are too big for their ‘Full’ status world an opportunity to move to new worlds, enabling them to grow more easily again.
2) Achieve a larger number of smaller worlds that we can link together to achieve more balanced numbers for each team.”

I’m disappointed that post didn’t get more consideration personally. I’d have been fine with taking my guild and a couple allies to a smaller server, so we could continue to play together without being stuck in one tier for a long period of time.

The advantage of doing this would be that the smallest servers wouldn’t necessarily be folded into T1/2 every time, meaning they’d be perfect destinations for those who like some variety but don’t want to bandwagon.

The downside is we’d need to get our own voice comms server. But I can arrange that.

PU condi mes is weak to all kinds of things, including every other meta mesmer build. On a condi build, chaos just seems like a wasted trait line.

Unless you can solo towers, camps would be the best option

morrolan.9608:

Nope easiest way is for 2 and 3 to 2v1 1.

That’s the easiest way for 2 to get the points. It doesn’t give 3 anything, so they’re just going to hit 2 instead because it’s a softer target.

I’d actually prefer a slightly different linking system where you have the standard servers, but padded out with alliances instead of other servers.

I don’t particularly care which server I’m playing on anymore, there’s just a group of about 30-40 regulars I’d prefer to be linked with. In some regards it’d be great to switch to a small linked server for that, except for the tendency to be linked to the same tier every time.

But that wouldn’t solve anything for the regular servers so it’s not worth the effort at this stage.

Didn’t even try them, didn’t see any effect. So it’s a null vote for me

Won’t make a difference because the easiest way to get those two points is still focus the weakest server.

Obsidian Sanctum seems to be consistently empty these days

On thinking about it, it might be deceptively simple.

If the server with the points lead didn’t win the skirmish, both other servers get a bonus point. That means even if you’re doomed to come last, helping #2 beat #1 is still going to get you twice the points. And it makes catching up quicker, but if you do catch up the tables are turned.

On rewards, those could be fairly simple too. If you participate in a skirmish, you get a bonus chest for every point your server got. And the reward for winning a week is multiplied by the number of skirmishes you participated in (up to a reasonable limit).

The final piece of the puzzle could be individual and guild leaderboards. Each week, for the categories of large group fights, small group fights, PPT, offensive siege and defensive siege – however you could measure the different ways people play – a server’s top rated individuals and guilds are given a substantial reward. Obviously, it’s a lot easier to get those rewards if you’re playing on a server lacking in that category.

Actually it’s been just under 2 years.

Haven’t missed much. And let’s be honest, there was no real competition since a month after launch.

1-up 1-down is going to be an even bigger disaster most weeks. Try something with a bit of latency, e.g. you have to win/lose 2 weeks in a row to guarantee a tier move.

Kylden Ar.3724:

Jeknar.6184:

I think 2nd and 3rd place points must be the same to incentive attacking the team on the top and not both lower servers fighting each other for 2nd while 1st runs away with the victory.

Very much this. The whole point of a 3 way war (from game theory) is that whomever is top dog at a moment becomes the target for the other 2.

I don’t really agree on this; to use Tier 3 as an example, if the goal is to win, it makes more sense for SBI and SoS to push each other into 3rd when they can, to DB’s benefit. If you had a situation where it doesn’t matter who comes 2nd or 3rd, may as well go for the easy points and karma train DB.

The existing system can therefore give you closer matches when you have two strong servers and one weaker, whereas 2/1/1 would not.
I don’t think it’d have the desired effect with one strong server and two weaker, either; at some point the two weaker are going to fight amongst each other because only one gets the two points. And there’s no tactical play that’s going to get the weakest server into 1st place when both other servers don’t want that to happen – so it’s back to playing for second.

To get a situation where two weaker servers are encouraged to focus on the stronger server, you need a reward available to both weaker servers, and it needs to be substantially better than the alternative.

Would using last week’s player activity as a rating be better for matchups?

Partly because of drops like this, and mostly because the good drops aren’t that good either, I concluded I’ll only buy keys at 25 gems or less. So that’s only happened when they’re giving them away for free, because apparently 90% off is not a thing.

But that’s all they’re worth to me, so I haven’t paid for a single key yet.

Torsailr.8456:

His armies never invaded Maguuma or Kryta or anywhere, its like there was an invisible wall in Silverwastes that he couldn’t pass except for a few minions at a time.

They did invade the western Maguuma – none of that land was originally under Mordremoth’s control. Their expansion was halted at the Silverwastes.

Hexinx.1872:

504 total points throughout the week

252 points for first place finishes awarded
168 points for second place finishes awarded
84 points for third place finishes awarded

252 is the maximum victory point score a server can accumulate across 1 week, provided they win every 2 hour skirmish

The impact of servers fighting for those points awarded in prime time will be more valuable then ever.

The impact a server has on winning off peak hour match ups is more valuable than ever.

The same issues we have will still exist (little can be done on floating populations across 24 hour periods by Anet, as you will always affect players playing during those time periods). You can think of 252 as a ‘perfect’ week. In reality though, we should see some varied results especially from servers who have populations spread out across the various timezones.

I think this is a very good summary. The score list at the top also shows this is going to have an effect on how glicko works, because that distribution is what a blowout will look like.
Being able to win will be important any time of the day, but being able to win by colossal margins will not grant any further benefit.

The other thing we might see is an increased level of co-ordination around the 2-hour mark. It makes sense to time attacks for when you can make them count.

I always thought Air keep was city-like already. Needs some merchants selling odds and ends though.

Leaa.2943:

I still ask were all those voters are, because i never see them on a dbl map. And i have accounts in both EU and NA and every server that have dbl are struggling to get people on it. So were are you voters? You have your chance to really shine now and pick up dbl and make new tactics, tag up and run your thing and enjoy your map. But i never see you, i only see the outnumbered buff on each server i check.
So were are you?

The outmanned icon should have given it away. We’re on the other servers.

Calista.1975:

Not with all the exploits and hacks going on no amount of “practice” is going to over come that kitten when mes can one hit kill a tanky build…

Ok.

Mes can not one hit kill anything, least of all a tanky build. You have to sit still and eat an entire burst to get dropped fast, and that’s only if you’re running pure glass cannon.

From launch weekend itself, I have surprisingly few – I have about 190 from the betas and only 8 over the first week.

But here’s a scene we don’t see anymore.

And below it, my favourite comedy shot – it wasn’t just clipping problems that charr used to suffer from (or maybe the Three Legions Court bar used to be a stripper bar…)
This one is an early beta shot.

The game isn’t awesome and the people are rubbish. Particularly Twigz, he’s the definition of leaf litter

Dawdler.8521:

Zenith.6403:

Your settings are correct. Only downed and sentry-marked enemies are shown.

In scouting situation you can see enemies, but your team won’t. You have to type what you see on chat every time like “5 enemies running up the slope next to Woodhaven” instead of having the game report their positions automatically.

This kind of change would dramatically increase value of scouting and make it actually rewarding.

I still fail to see the point with all the automation. Sentries, scouting blimps, emergency waypoints, hell even the blimp barrage in SM, etc and so on… its all pointless fluff that has taken away the involvement of playing the game, seeing things with your own eyes and doing stuff with your own hands.

I dont like it dangnabbit!

The main advantage is that the people who do see enemy positions, at present, either don’t say anything or can’t count. So, dots would be helpful in that regard, but there is a problem: why should enemies be marked by line-of-sight to people who are AFK, not paying attention, and so on?

My view is that if scouting was important, people would be doing it properly. Now I can see merit in adding a trick, that you actually have to target enemies with, to light them up for a few seconds like a sentry, because 1) it requires you to be actively involved, and 2) it also tells them someone is watching.

It’s the most trivial of things but:

- Four charr footprints, not just back feet

And something more important:

- Ability to use personal story allies in underpopulated group events (e.g. Silverwastes, Dragon’s Stand)

It’s a game. Lighten up.

And if you want to see ANet’s tag on SBI/HoD garrison you don’t need anyone to flip it. That can be arranged pretty easily without.

Map completion rewards return (just not as a requirement for the legendary)
Linked servers given different shade for assets they cap

Hexinx.1872:

phantom you just scratch an itch I’ve always hoped they would implement (but never will)

Hall of Heroes – much based around death match, with a few capture the flag style rounds mixed in, very much like gw1’s system. Multiple team based maps (up to 1v1v1v1 – i always thought that last map should have been a 4 way not a threeway), like it was narrowing the field down as you get closer to the glory. (*anyway this won’t happen because its a new game mode, and there is not enough resources)

I don’t see why it can’t happen – if like the post you were referring to it’s embedded in the WvW game mode and contributes to war score. Doesn’t even have to be on the same map; it can be another map in WvW that effectively acts like the HoH from GW1, teams from one server fighting teams from other servers, progressing through the maps until they get the right to challenge for the HoH itself.

I’ve felt the WvW setting could do with different activities for a while, and to me this seems like a perfect one to add. Different from PvP, can’t really work as an ‘esport’ in its own right, but can make WvW that little bit deeper.

I’m going to go with no. Deployable cannons would make ballistas obsolete aside from supply cost, and in groups they’ll be far too powerful. I can’t see a good outcome here even in a test.

We did have the 1-up 1-down system during one of the tournaments. The result was every single match in the mid-tier was broken. It is not a better system.

You won’t see ANet tags much because they don’t represent them in WvW. (It’s a gank magnet.)

You don’t get an “instant 40 stacks” of burning. You get 3. Stop standing in them.

I think that about sums it up – I’m ok with the idea of repairing defensive siege, just not with it making offensive siege invincible. Siege shootouts are what make defending against larger numbers possible, and if you can’t effectively do that we’re going to be restricted to attrition and choke points.

I’m on the fence with this one – can see some major potential downsides but it does depend on implementation. If this weren’t a trial, I wouldn’t want to risk it. But I can’t see it breaking the game too much over a trial period so I’m willing to see how it pans out.

Only one I’ve seen run an impressive group in outnumbered fights over the last two months is Woe – I’ve only seen Kill during SEA hours personally, and on those occasions they were worse than Mag’s randoms.
I suspect FA can offer better but haven’t played them for ages.

Sazukikrah.5036:

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

Hello everyone,

Many of you have been inquiring as to why we made the decision to remove the crafting stations in WvW. We made this decision because we have been seeing an increase in queue times with world linking. Upon observation we found there have been players taking up space in the maps who are only crafting and not participating with their teams. However, we’ve been listening to your feedback today and we wanted to let you know that we will be adding a banker to each team starting area in EB, Alpine and Desert. Thank you for the continued feedback!

But banking wasn’t the point; people actually used the crafting stations -____-

WvW players actually used the crafting stations too.

I can see the reason for dropping them from the borderlands, but surely they could be added to EotM or even Obsidian Sanctum?

OriOri.8724:

I don’t want 2 ABL as I hate those maps, but seeing as how that is likely to win at this point, it means that I will never get 2DBL and 1 ABL which is what I would prefer

You wouldn’t get it anyway; we had that option on the poll a few weeks back and it got less than 10%. With the poll going the way it is, though, it’s quite possible we’ll see a third borderland map next year.

Until this game mode can support a competitive environment, it’s best to avoid tournaments. Playing WvW competitively sucks at the moment and has since launch.

This is going to be really unpopular.

Best way to solve population problems is to find a solution in which players will choose to spread out. That means the benefits of doing so must outweigh the benefits of bandwagoning, which isn’t going to be achieved long-term by reshuffling the deck.

You can vote once per account.

You can change your vote, but entering the same vote again does nothing but show the current numbers. (I’m not much of a fan of this system, as it’s causing the “don’t count my vote” option to be the only thing that increases over the week.)

It was world linking, and that didn’t last long.

ABL is dead again. Funny, I predicted that too.

Korgov.7645:

Baldrick.8967:

Korgov.7645:

Ben K.6238:

Wait, do people actually care about how many points the server gets for their kills? I thought it was all about loot bags.
Give players a reason to care about the score and then they’ll think about PPK, but for now the difference between 2 nothings and 3 nothings is still nothing.

Sad but true.

It is a real pity warscore breakdown is nowhere to be found. Server rankings, leaderboards for players and guilds, and on-screen floating texts when you gain/lose points are also missing. Still after 4 years into the game!

With those in place WvW players could have a chance to understand how the matchup evolves and what their contribution is.

Leaderboards for players and guilds? How would that work exactly? How would you measure player contribution? Is that scout that just saved SM worth less than the spam merchant press 1 for loot in the middle of the blob?

For starters the leaderboards could be a counter for warscore gained by finishers during the matchup. Thats enough to get players interested.

Scout contribution is too diverse to compute.

Scout contribution could be based on defense events, but the problem with that is anyone sitting in SM all day just putting a bit of supply into repairs every 5 minutes suddenly ends up on top of the leaderboard.

I think tracking finishers is easy and caters more towards roamers and small groups who actually get the opportunity to use them in a fight.

Contribution to holding assets, on the other hand, is pretty complicated and should probably be a separate leaderboard (or two, for individuals and guilds).

Pretty much that – they put the poll up to shut the ‘delete DBL’ muppets up permanently.

Wait, do people actually care about how many points the server gets for their kills? I thought it was all about loot bags.
Give players a reason to care about the score and then they’ll think about PPK, but for now the difference between 2 nothings and 3 nothings is still nothing.

Got members of my guild in Perth and Singapore… you don’t want to know what the ping from there to Europe is like. Texas is already borderline.