Guild Wars 2

I’m pretty sure that Anet doesn’t actually know how many players are in the map. I’m not being facetious … I think the game has some bugs that don’t properly identify whether a player is actually there or not. There is also a suspicion that Anet temporarily dropped the player caps in order to minimize culling until they get a better fix for it, and they probably don’t want to admit that.

fishergrip.4082:

Reset was not necessary. All that is necessary is perhaps tweaking the math behind the ratings a bit to make it easier for servers to move up and down.

Well, there are other fundamental flaws with using the Glicko-2 system in the first place (examples below), but yes, adjusting the factors in the formula (the “new math”) for things like how heavy the weighting for prior match scores or how heavy the penalty for score variability would in theory make the rankings more responsive without introducing the ridiculous step function instability that a reset would have caused.

Remaining fundamental flaws:

-1. The Glicko-2 system was never meant to be used for tiered competition. It was intended to be applied to competitions where every participant plays a continuum of opponents in the general vicinity of his own rank. A tiered system locks opponents into a bracket from which they cannot escape if they are evenly matched … even though they may be better or worse than the participants in adjacent tiers.

-2. Anet’s version of the Glicko-2 system assumes that Green versus Blue, Blue versus Red, and Green versus Red are all independent matches. This is patently invalid on several levels. Two servers may, either through agreement or simple match dynamics, both end up attacking the third server a disproportionate amount of the time. Losing servers may suffer loss of morale and play much more weakly as the week goes on. Both are perfectly legitimate occurrences in a three faction match, but neither represents an independent result for two team pairings.

SniffyCube.6107:

Balking at wvw ratings because of a few vocal people on servers is a huge step back. I don’t know why you’re thanking anet because now there will be a lot of players stuck in the same grind against the same opponents who grossly outnumber them… and we never really got to see how things would work out. What’s to say the proper tier 1 servers will not rapidly move up under the “new math.” Very close minded imho.

If you actually understood how the Glick-2 rating system works you wouldn’t have posted that. Resetting everyone would have caused horrendous oscillations in the rankings that would have caused blowout after blowout for weeks.

And if you had been able to understand what Anet wrote in their announcement you’d notice that they stated that the “new math” (actually just different weighting factors in the Glicko-2 formula) was unable to make any rating improvements in the trial runs they experimented with. ANet got to see how the new system would have worked out and they didn’t like it … neither would you.

Anet wasn’t just caving to forum complaints, and at least in this case they weren’t being close minded at all. They were simply being realistic … and you aren’t.

It’s a source of revenue for ANet. That’s all you need to know to answer your question.

Ahmrill.7512:

Hillierawrs.5834:

Agreed, commanders could be great but as it is now, its nothing more but a fancy icon.

You’d need to be able to see your members, call targets and i also feel like you should be able to turn you Commander icon on or off, or set it to only Squad.

Why set it only to squad visibility? Simply because its a waste if everyone on the map follows the commander, when there could be lets say 3 zergs instead covering more ground

Totally agree!

So how many four month old threads on this topic do you plan to resurrect? I would have thought one would be sufficient but I count four so far.

covenn.7165:

Yet another observation. No or short queues last night during NA prime time on a T1 server. Personal anecdote: I have seen significantly more people in zone in the past two days than I did in the days prior by far. I wonder if the maintenance a few days ago has anything to do with this……

Somebody earlier in this thread predicted that if the problem is really due to a bug that ANet will just make it quietly go away without ever admitting it or explaining it.

EnRohbi.2187:

Rested Fox.2560:

even if ratings dont get reset the math needs to change.

my server blackgate NA for example. we are in t2. we have significant ratings over everyone else who is in t2. the other factions in t2 are decent quality…. but we beat them week in and week out.

shouldnt we move up in ranking? according to the system which apparently works now, the answer is NO

no matter what happens in t1 ( as long as it isnt a blowout) all t1 factions will remain at higher rating…. look at the scores now, the losing faction is GAINING RATING.

the average rating in t1 is somewhere around 2160

blackgate LOSES rating for a SIGNIFICANT win in tier 2.

throughout the history of matchups the only way matchups significantly changed was due to direct player involvement. players “bandwagoning” off a server that was losing was the only way the server would drop rating. now that free transfers are over NA bracket will be very stagnant after about 2 matchups. kaineng is the only wild card. they will most likely move up to t2 with us because of player transfers that happened before free transfers was over.

my prediction: in 3 months guild wars 2 will have had many tiers with the same matchups lasting for months and months.

WE WANTED ratings reset and a new math system for the change…. but we would have liked 1 day matchups for 1 week to shuffle the rankings faster.

this is an inappropriate response to player complaints. we need changes to glicko, just not too major of a change, and a reset probably would have been acceptable with 1 day matches.

scrapping the entire idea because of short term negative effects is not a good long term strategy. in 3 months when factions havent moved up or down a tier in 1-2 months youll hear of complaints of stagnation …. people will get bored, too bored to complain in forums and instead theyll simply slowly stop playing.

TL DR
should have kept the changes but made 1 day matchups for a week to help the ratings to settle faster.

If you think that any system of ratings is going to prevent stagnant matches, you’re wrong.

The fact is there’s only so many servers, and there are even less that should be matched against you.

We don’t want blowouts, nobody does.
The compromise is that, if you want balanced matches, it’s going to be against the same servers every week. I would settle in and get used to your opponents over the next few weeks, because when your server finds its home in tiers, it’s gonna be hanging around.

^this^

The scary thing is that there are people here who seem not to grasp that.

Pirhana.8935:

@Cactus i think your assuming every 5man group would get killed by the zerg, a good group should never get caught by the zerg. zergs generally are point A to B. (objectives)

Not really. I believe, however, (with history to back me up) that players looking for quick kills will join a zerg to get them. Players in a zerg will rack up kills faster than five man teams, and I guarantee that zergs looking for kills won’t give a diddly about objectives. Bank it.

Cazio.2137:

I want to like it. I join in about once a day for a bit. However, after I upgrade something like a camp fully, and then see one or two people able to take the camp as if it was never upgraded, I ask myself why I just wasted my coin. I certainly will not do it again, there is little point.

When I logged off last night my server was not doing all that well but we at least had all of the nodes on our borderlands. I log in today and we have a few camps and one tower. That is it out of all the maps. Again I ask myself. Why did I waste a couple hours in WvWvW last night? In that time I got 3 badges, wasted a little over a gold on upgrades (a lot for a leveling player), and wasted time I could have spent leveling and working on things that are more lasting.

It isn’t the winning vs losing that I have a problem with. In PvP there will always be both. What I have an issue with is that there is very little consequence for winning or losing. This makes everything that takes place in between meaningless for the most part.

For some reason I do not even level as quickly in WvWvW as I did at release. This just adds another log onto the “why am I here” fire. Couple that with very little loot for the time spent and I am left scratching my head as to why I should continue to participate.

I find WvWvW entertaining however I would compare it to a movie that I go see. It is enjoyable for a couple hours but I am not going to pay full price to go see it again. I already know the ending.

Why do you play basketball (or softball or soccer or chess or even a video game)? Is it because of the recognition? Is it because it gets you laid? Is it because you get paid for it? Most likely you play it simply because you enjoy it … because you enjoy the competition and the feeling of satisfaction of being good at it (or getting better at it).

You do know that the levels you reach inside or outside WvW are meaningless, right? You do know that the gear you collect is virtual and can’t be hung up in your closet, right? You do know that nobody outside of the game gives a rat’s kitten about any of your in-game accomplishments, right?

If you can’t identify with the play style of WvW enough to enjoy it for its own sake go find something else that works for you … but don’t pretend that any of it is more fundamentally meaningful. It isn’t.

Pirhana.8935:

So in March Anet said they are adding a WvW reward / title system.
(previous thread was moved to suggestions for some reason)( this isn’t a suggestion ANET said they were doing this)

Now I dont know how they will do the reward system, but if it is similar to the realm rank system in DAOC it could help to promote less zerging, more defending.

If the system rewards players MAINLY for killing other players and the amount of damage they did.

You will see alot of players who want to raise their rank so they will start to stray away from the zerg so they can get more credit for player kills. you might actually start to see alot of roamng 5man groups picking off people and looking for other small groups.

another thing people dont think of from DAOC was taking keeps JUST to defend and make points form enemy attackers, SO you might see groups taking towers and actually staying there to defend.

They reward system would also need not have a cap that could be obtained in a few months, refer to the DAOC realm rank system that get progressively harder where rewards eventually get few and far inbetween, so you keep building your character for years.

Now if the system follows the karma, big reward for taking undefended keeps and avoiding player kills, this system will not fix anything

Not going to hold my breath but if done correctly the reward system could make WvW alot better

You don’t have a clue what you are talking about. The large scale three-faction PvP map called Conquest in Rift is the poster child for what happens when you mix team objectives and individual objectives in PvP. It totally ruins everything for everyone by creating different motivations for being in the map. Want to know what happens when a group heads off to take an objective only to have half of them split off to capture unrelated individual kills? Map chat gets filled with angry comments between players on the same team and everybody quits because of frustration. Commanders already get frustrated when members of their group get distracted by gathering or farming mobs. At least now that sort of thing is minimized because players can do their dailies or farm for gold outside of WvW … just imagine what it will be like if players actually get significant individual rewards for non-team activities that can ONLY be found in WvW.

Besides, as Conquest proved in Rift, adding individual rewards for kills does the exact opposite of what you say. It strongly ENCOURAGES zergs because players can get kills much faster that way. How can you not see that? Why would you run with a small team looking for kills when the likelihood is that the enemy will be running around in a zerg looking for easy meat like you? The ONLY people actually pursuing map objectives will be the ones who either prefer that style of play no matter what or who already have max’d out whatever individual rewards ANet may have added. That’s exactly what happened in Conquest and that’s what will happen here unless ANet is extremely careful.

I see far more downside to the proposed changes than upside.

Too Frisky.9165:

It’s no secret that when NA players go to bed the Oceanic guilds come out and wipe the map completely in their favor and get full point ticks for about 8 hours while we sleep. Does no one else see an issue with this? It’s almost a requirement to have an Oceanic guild or two on your server if you want to actually succeed in WvW. Players who don’t even live in NA shouldn’t be able to influence the outcome of NA WvW. Just saying.

My solution? Bring WvW offline based on server time and stop point ticks during this down time. For example, ANet could disable WvW from 3 AM to 10 AM server time. This would allow Oceanic players to stay on NA servers and enjoy interaction with NA players without destroying what little balance remains in WvW. If Oceanic players want to play WvW then they can return to their own servers.

This is an incredibly ignorant idea, to the point that I think it must be a troll. Nobody could possibly have written this with serious intent.

Anzu.5702:

ElDudemeister.5108:

First we should answer why so many threads are focused on making WvW less like WvW and more like PvP.

I think you misunderstand my point. I am all for large scale combat. But the scaling is completely out of whack. More than 5:1 ratio and you have no chance as the number advantage is the only thing that matters.

Also its about the decency of not 20v1 a single player. how is that wvw skill? And it ges pretty demoralizing which is why people usually drop out by the end of the week

I think we understood your point … you misunderstand the point of WvW. You aren’t supposed to find “fair” matches on your own. You aren’t supposed to be able to scale so that you can win a 1v10 encounter. You aren’t supposed to go roaming around on your own if you aren’t willing to face whatever you might find.

You ARE supposed to join with a group when possible and do your best to strategically choose actions that will win points for your server in spite of whatever enemy you may be up against. When solo roaming or performing other actions (running supplies, scouting, creating diversions, etc) you ARE supposed to avoid conflicts you are certain to lose, and when you don’t do that you ARE supposed to die.

If you can’t deal with that, you should maybe consider that by nature and temperament you aren’t supposed to be in WvW and should instead be in sPvP … small maps with an equal number of players and fully scaled gear/stats .

Esoteric.5490:

I think ANet should just do 2 things that many games have done before: Put an infographic telling you how many players are on the map out of a maximum, e.g. 140/166 and if you are waiting in queue, tell you what your spot is, e.g. #50. Is it really so hard to tell players how many people you have on a map?

I would totally agree except that requires that:

-1. ANet knows those figures, and I honestly don’t think they do. There seems to be at least some circumstantial evidence that because of various bugs ANet doesn’t actually know how many people are in the map.

-2. the queue be first-in/first-out, and ANet has already admitted that it is not.

Esoteric.5490:

I think ANet should just do 2 things that many games have done before: Put an infographic telling you how many players are on the map out of a maximum, e.g. 140/166 and if you are waiting in queue, tell you what your spot is, e.g. #50. Is it really so hard to tell players how many people you have on a map? And, if that is too much info, is it so hard to have a literal line and each person in queue takes a number? This sort of queue system already exists, it isn’t like they’d have to do a ton of coding to let you know where you are in line anyway.

ANet said very early on that the queues were pretty much a first-in/random-out kind of situation and that they were working to fix that. To my knowledge they have never announced any kind of fix for it, though, so the logical assumption would seem to be that queue times are still random by default. That doesn’t alter the fact that having a queue in the first place doesn’t seem to match the current map populations, though, and for that I still lean toward the fail-to-release hypothesis.

covenn.7165:

Cactus.2710:

nalenb.1425:

I just jumped into WvW and then quit the game from there. I see no extra processes lingering around on my system. Granted, I am running the Mac client. I can check Windows later today.

It may require that you be in a party when you quit the game from WvW, since that’s what also seems to cause the lingering dots on the mini-map. I plan to test that out some more this evening, as well as trying GottFaust’s suggestion to use Wireshark (free open source application) to track packet activity.

Just keep in mind that even if your client is completely disconnected from the game server, it doesn’t automatically means that game server realizes it. Further more, it doesn’t mean that the code is handling it correctly across the board.

Unfortunately any amount of testing we do won’t prove that. That all has to be done on their end.

Very true, but since we can’t seem to get any action (or at least any feedback on what they might be doing, if anything) from ANet the only things we can look at are from the client side. However, if we DO see evidence of ongoing packet activity from the client side even after disconnecting from the game it would certainly point to it being a problem. Just because I don’t catch a fish doesn’t mean that there aren’t any in the lake, but if I do catch one at least I have good reason to believe that some exist.

nalenb.1425:

I just jumped into WvW and then quit the game from there. I see no extra processes lingering around on my system. Granted, I am running the Mac client. I can check Windows later today.

It may require that you be in a party when you quit the game from WvW, since that’s what also seems to cause the lingering dots on the mini-map. I plan to test that out some more this evening, as well as trying GottFaust’s suggestion to use Wireshark (free open source application) to track packet activity.

Ireniicus.2167:

All this speculation s fine but ANet could fix it all with a statement post their latest patch and moreover provide empirical evidence of queue waiting times and volumes.

To be fully descriptive, what we actually need are three things:

-1. number of people in the queue at a specific time

-2. the average number of minutes that players have been in the queue at that same point in time

-3. most importantly > the total number of players verified to actually be in the map at that specific point in time

ANet seemingly has only been looking at queues while not actually investigating whether those who are supposedly in the map are really there. At least the only comments we’ve seen from them have dealt only with queue numbers, and that won’t tell the whole story.

Humanpony.4921:

Don’t know if it has been raised yet but this observation came from the Gandaran community forum;

- When exiting the game, the GW2 process keeps running in task manager (unlike earlier patch)
- When exiting the game from WvW zone, player still ‘appears’ online in party window/guild screen
- When exiting the game from WvW zone, mini-map dot still appears at a random location in zone

Could it be that players that exit the game in WvW aren’t registered as such and still registered as online? This would create a long queue as more people are indicated in a zone than are actually there.

I think that you are quite possibly correct. Many of us here (at least if not named GottFaust) have noticed those same things and arrived at that same hypothesized conclusion. I’m not even sure that the problem is limited to WvW, though, since I often find myself in an overflow server when exiting to Lion’s Arch even at 1 AM server time.

It would seem to be a trivial thing for ANet to check but so far we have had zero feedback from them on it.

Your first point about the GW2 process still running in Task manager is especially interesting. I wonder if it would be possible for someone with programming skills to track incoming data packets from ANet’s server to see if the usual warning about getting booted for inactivity is still being sent to the local client even though it is no longer being displayed on the monitor. Wouldn’t that be a hoot if so? Wouldn’t it be even more amazing if ANet hadn’t thought to try that from their end?

covenn.7165:

GottFaust.5297:

This is entirely incorrect.

• Stubbornly refusing to let a problem continue to exist is the very essence of problem solving.

Actually I am quite correct as that is not the type of ‘stubbornness’ I was referring to. It should be quite obvious what I was referring to and I shouldn’t need to explain it to someone with your self proclaimed expertise and intelligence.

You don’t know the source code first of all. This means that the probability of your theory being 100% correct is extremely small. You also do not have the expertise with their network, hardware, and reporting tools to even begin to make any conjecture about other contributing factors.

Despite this gross lack of information available to you, you are clinging to your theory and refusing to accept other possibilities. Despite the fact that you are using anecdote yourself, you refuse to consider other anecdotal evidence that is contrary to your ‘theory’. Despite the fact that reasonable, rational, and plausible holes have been punched in your theory, you refuse to even acknowledge other possibility.

No my friend, I am not wrong about you being stubborn about this. I am also not wrong about this kind of stubbornness hampering problem solving skills. I am sure you are a competent software engineer and developer, but you would not last a month on my team here at <edited because where I work is none of your business> with that kind of close mindedness.

^this for truth^

faeral.7120:

^^

yep, it’s “Eye of the Storm” for WoW aficionados ( sans purple ).

great gametype imo. best of both worlds. can make for roller coaster matches, great comeback potential.

in order for it to be really awesome though, the Orb can’t be on a timer, it needs to spawn as soon as it has been capped & should be waiting when the match begins. the reason is to incentivize protecting the Orb without capping it to attempt to force your opponents into a bad position, which they then have options for counterplay.

Yes, it sounds exactly like Eye of the Storm from WoW. That was actually one of my favorite maps there, but jeeesh … you have to admit that it took zero creativity on Anet’s part to come up with that. It is pure copycat in every way, and if they were going to put that little thought into it they could have at least ripped off a few more from WoW instead of only giving us one.

Draygo.9473:

Development takes time, and development takes even longer in instances where balance has to be considered.

So tell me … what part of culling and queues involves balance? And why devote devs to adding fluff instead of having them fix core problems?

Let’s look on the bright side here. At least ANet is providing ESO a great template of how not to do things.

Winfernal.9208:

It would be nice!

But i don’t think it’s in the priority list.

Since it isn’t a critical bug fix, it might be.

Porky.5021:

Aggressive culling doesn’t explain anything.

Characters on the other side of the map wouldn’t be visible anyways. Culling does not affect them.

If you’re surrounded by 40 people and half are being culled the only way you would duped into thinking there is no else around would be if you stood completely still and never took a step on your toon. As soon as you move 5 feet, a number of the toons around you will be culled, and a number of others will become visible.

I’m pretty sure that Gottfaust doesn’t understand that. He also doesn’t understand that culled players would still show on the mini-map if they were there. Basically, he just doesn’t understand how any of this works.

Liquid.9672:

All we have to go on thus far is this statement from Mike Ferguson on the reasoning behind new math.

Over the last couple of months we’ve seen that when worlds experience dramatic changes in their ability to field a consistent fighting force for whatever reason, it can take quite a while for them to work their way through the ratings until they end up in a match that suits them better. In a lot of cases, some worlds took multiple matches to work their way through a single tier even after a series of blowouts. We really dont like that, so one of the goals for updating the math behind the ratings is to try and reduce how often we experience the repeated blowouts that can come from that sort of situation and get those teams through the rankings quicker.

I take this to mean they want servers to move up faster, and down faster, depending on the score differences in a single match, and in effect increase the volatility. So from what my little brain can reckon, their math changes might even exaggerate what we’re currently seeing in the projected rankings using the current formula. For the next few weeks anyways until things more or less reach equilibrium.

Yes. It’s disconcerting that any of us should understand the ramifications of these changes better than Anet does.

Porky.5021:

Also, threads like this are why it’s better for a company to come clean and admit there is a problem.

If a company stays silent, every self professed expert in the world suddenly knows “the real reason” and starts spreading rumors about the issue. People who don’t know better start accepting these posts as credible because the actual experts (the game company itself) won’t say anything.

^this^

more characters

Altie.4571:

loopi.7913:

I’ve tried and played quite a few mmo’s out there and while this game is currently my favorite for the gaming experience, it is definitely last in communication between their player base and the game designers. It’s not the amount of communication it’s the complete lack of it. I just don’t understand… This was one of the biggest selling games of 2012, Yet the amount of manpower focused on keeping the community informed is nil. Wth? Am I the only one confused by the lack of customer communicators? Is there not a small department at Anet that should be dedicated to this? Even if they are not devs, they can be the go betweens between the designers and those needing questions answered, real issues that need attention, or future update fixes. (and not moderators because they just monitor forum rabble) That to me just good business sense. Please anyone listening?

Honestly, you should just try forum search.

Because there is communication. Saying none is false and everyone knows it :-/

Anyone who has played other MMO’s will tell you that the level of communication between GW2 devs and players on issues raised by the players is horrible by comparison. Don’t believe me? Truck over to the Rift forums and see how it should be done. Rift has LOTS of issues, especially for PvP (which is why I now play GW2), but at least their devs were very quick and candid in their responses. Defending ANet’s performance on this score is pathetic.

Hammerhorn.1347:

Valiant Sword is not for EVERYONE

Well, at least you got that part right. Elitist wannabe much?

Gottfaust, when the real reason for all of this shakes out you are going to look like even more of a clown than you do now. It’s one thing to not even acknowledge the problem that so many other players experience, but to portray your theory as fact is far beneath your supposed technical credentials. Everything you have written is rank supposition, most of which doesn’t even fit the breadth of evidence at hand.

Of all the things to complain about in WvW, this has to be one of the weakest. If you know that a thief is inside that circle trying to rez somebody, by definition you know exactly where he is and can throw all sorts of damage at him. It doesn’t even have to be AoE … you can just run around inside the area spamming melee abilities knowing that he is not defending himself. I often throw down Shadow Refuge when trying to heal somebody, but the only enemies it works against are the clueless ones.

BroScientist.9875:

Anet already said they received the go-ahead to upgrade all of their server bandwidth so now all that is left is to optimize code so min spec users and min spec internet users can still handle the game with culling turned off. The game is highly successful so it makes sense they have the budget to throw money at their servers in order to handle no culling.

Yes, of course I also saw that announcement. However, somebody at ANet clearly made a decision prior to launch to cut corners and save money on bandwidth. You can’t even say that they underestimated the demand for WvW because they set map caps at a level that the bandwidth couldn’t support and implemented culling from day one. Whether or not Anet actually buys enough bandwidth to make the game play right remains to be seen. In any case, ANet doesn’t need fiber to the household to fix that, and changing to fiber doesn’t do a thing to make the game playable for low spec machines anyway. As you say, Anet needs to fix the highly non-optimized way they handle textures and visual effects for low end machines to handle the game no matter what the incoming bandwidth is.

Kyus.3812:

I disagree with this, they don’t have any obligation to reply to us at all.

They do if they want to keep customers. I ran a large business for many years and paid lots of attention to customer satisfaction factors, and not just in my own industry. By far, the single greatest source of customer dissatisfaction is being ignored. It isn’t bad performance, it isn’t bad reliability, it isn’t high cost, it isn’t slow delivery … it’s the helpless feeling that the company is not interested in your problem and can’t be bothered to talk to you about it.

Customers in that situation don’t simply get upset … they often try to penalize the company for its arrogance in any way they can. The easiest way to lose a customer for life is by ignoring them once. ANet obviously has not learned that yet, but they are well on their way.

Omne.4603:

I completely agree with the OP on this one. Arenanet may have given us months of free transfers and weeks of notice for paid transfers, but I still feel they could do more to appease me. I don’t understand why I can’t stay on my high pop server and have low queue times. This is completely unacceptable and I hope that Arenanet will correct this issue soon. Also Arenanet killed my dog.

There clearly is much more than that you don’t understand. Like the fact that GW2 server queues don’t track map populations on ANY server, or like the fact that key problems in existence since launch haven’t been fixed while fluff items have been added in the meantime, or like the fact that even messed up games like Rift are able to provide continual and timely feedback to players from devs that actually know what is going on and readily admit to problems.

There simply is no excuse … none whatsoever … for ANY company to be so totally unresponsive in terms of information. These are, after all, the OFFICIAL GW2 forums. Get a clue for yourself by checking the “Dev Tracker” forum to see how many of those responses apply to any meaningful issue in WvW. Get another clue by seeing how many of the issues there were actually solved by a dev instead of another player.

You’re asking ANet to make some sort of intelligent manual intervention when they can’t even be bothered to tell us anything? Seems like an unrealistic expectation to me.

Ballads.2509:

All i like to do is wvw. I suck at Pve and i cant even farm Cursed shore w/o breaking my gear. How can i get my legendary just WvWing? Its not fair i have to farm dungeons and do world completion in pve worlds cause i dont want to do those things because im not very good at them.
Why do i have todo hard stuff just to get one of the rarest items in game? Please, can you just hand out legionaries at the log in screen? Cause some people are not good at any aspect of the game and they deserve them, too.

That was neither a good troll post nor a good sarcasm post. The best you can hope for is that the rest of us thought you were at least trying for one or the other instead of being serious.

I don’t think you understand the dynamic here. It is not simply the availability of bandwidth that is the issue … it is the COST of that bandwidth for ANet and the COST of the support for the servers required to process it all. There are thousands of players who already have far greater bandwidth than would be necessary to run GW2 without limit … the problem is what it would take for ANet itself to service them.

It isn’t the technology that is holding back anything … it is the economics (which of course includes flawed initial decisions made by ANet on things such as the game engine itself) and the contortions required to deal with it that are causing the problems.

Thrumdi.9216:

I observed the the same thing in our BG/TC/FA match Friday night. The huge zerg guilds couldn’t get their members in, so there was much more small group skirmishing than there usually is on reset night.

It really renewed my faith in the game, though I shudder to think how it will be when queues are “fixed”.

How has it not occurred to you that if you want mostly small group action that you might want to be on a low population server instead of the high population one you are on? Those players who prefer mass battles shouldn’t have to endure continual frustration with a busted queue system so that those of us who prefer small team tactics can have our fun.

posthumecaver.6473:

One more question, the arrow charts and so, from their position it seems they are impossible to aim (they are so far behind the door, it is impossible to interact with them then see the enemy and aim to them)

Things to remember about arrow carts:

1. They are AoE and can penetrate walls and rocks. You can target the inside of a gate and roughly half of your arrows will do damage to players and siege on the other side.

2. You can target the outside lip of a wall and roughly half of your arrows will hit whatever is on the outside (within the half of the green circle that you can’t see).

3. Arrows from arrow carts fall all the way to the ground no matter the height from they originate. You can target the edge of a cliff and still hit players far below that you cannot see or otherwise reach.

4. The damage from arrow carts is independent of your own personal specs.

5. Clever siege placement can often hold off far greater numbers and make a huge contribution to your server.

And as one of the posters above stated, you don’t need to target the arrow cart as if you were actually positioned right by it. Pan your camera view as far back as you can and twist/contort your view as much as you can in order to target difficult places. If you can see a spot and it is within range, you can do damage there.

By the way, catapults placed behind gates have a similar effect. You simply aim them at the gate and the splash damage penetrates the gate as AoE to anything in close proximity on the far side.

It is often the case on my server during off peak hours that there is more defensive siege in place than there are players to man them during an attack. The lowest level player on the board becomes gold in such situations.

This is a really dumb idea. A great way to kill any game is to make sure that the people who really want to play it are unable to do so.

maloki.3527:

Kozzy.5974:

There is no new way of calculation..is only a reset to 1500 as http://mos.millenium.org/matchups shows. So its seems to be correct.
So Whiteside Ridge and Ruins of Surmia will be the top 2 servers on the new ranklist cause they are fighting against 2-2 “wvw empty” servers, so they will get the highest +rating now. But after then for a couple of weeks they will get “the old top servers” as enemies..so slowly they will go back to their old tier7-8. But till that they will lose more wvw players because of the hopeless fights against much more wvw populated servers.

Yes there will be a new way of calculating. They are adding/fixing/modifying something, which is anotehr reason for why they decided to reset it as well.

As you can read on mos:

They are also revising the math behind the ratings formula but these changes are not yet known (source).

Changing the factors in a formula that was never intended to be used in a competition with tiers isn’t going to change the fact that it was a flawed choice for WvW in the first place. You can change the gear ratio in a car all you want and it still won’t plow a field.

Oozo.7856:

Archer.1658:

Oozo.7856:

Archer.1658:

Oozo.7856:

Archer.1658:

Gab Superstar.4059:

Dear EB commander-who-died-in-Anzalias-and-didn’t-revive-when-you-are-up-by-50k-to-call-out-everything-we-did-and-siege-placement-for-your-zerg;

Enjoy getting your kitten kicked in T1.

Sincerely,
Miss Winters.

Upset much?

I wasn’t there, but it sounds like someone they killed didn’t release and used their invulnerable dead body to spy and call out seige placement. You have to admit that is kind of ridiculously lame, but I do think it is one of the things they are specifically addressing in the Feb WvW patch.

Because it changes the tide of war so much. If you know how to defend, then it wouldn’t matter. Whether the concept is “lame” or not, who cares it’s war. Want me to pat you on the back after you die? There is no mercy for the weak.

Your reply makes about zero sense. If you have siege placed at strategic locations to repel an attack but some dead player who is inside calls out the position and types of that siege it’s a problem.

And this is a game, it’s not a war. The main difference being that in a real war a dead person can’t report information back to base. But, you probably already knew that.

It’s not a problem if you know how to defend it, get over it. This is war sir, you should take it with the utmost seriousness. If you’d like I will teach you how to defend the siege?

What, with elementalists?

It’s more of a problem when you have ballista and arrow carts placed in a camp because the dead person can let the enemy know how to approach the camp to avoid getting caught in a death trap. You do realize that you are being kind of obtuse, right?

I’m pretty sure he doesn’t.

Moddo.7105:

Cactus.2710:

LOL. Wouldn’t it be hilarious if the “revised math” that ANet said they were going to implement was really nothing other than lower cap numbers on the maps?

This would kinda even out playing field then wouldn’t it. Because now T1 server that use to field 150+ in 4 maps and other ones that could only muster 80 are now even. Brilliant work Anet. And thinking people would not notice reduced cap, just because you hide numbers people can still figue it out via /team and /map chat.

To be honest, I think we’re giving Anet too much credit. I’m pretty sure that they don’t really know how many people are actually on the map at any one time. I’m being perfectly serious … all evidence points to it.

Avenge.1478:

System is working as intended, matches are mostly all even and those that arent will be rectified next week.

Please come back next week and say something stupid again.

Intigo.1653:

Offski.4897:

Wish they put as much effort into replying as they did in deleting posts etc.

I’m sure you know that the people replying are not even remotely the same as the people moderating the forums.

I’m sure you know that by “they” Offski was referring to ANet in general, not specific individuals. Oh wait … I guess that was lost on you.

Catisa.6507:

Offski.4897:

But the worst issue is the lack of any responce from Anet. At least let us know they are aware of these problems and trying to fix them.

Overall Anet’s communication with the wvw community is appalling. No doubt this thread will last all of 2 minutes before it is deleted. Wish they put as much effort into replying as they did in deleting posts etc.

This thread SHOULD be deleted, Anet has commented on the issue and there IS an offical thread on it.
Took me .00002 sec to find it too https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Queues-for-WvW-The-Official-Thread/first

Silly person. It may have only taken you 20 microseconds to find it but it has seemingly not registered with you even yet that that response was written over four months ago and promises a quick progress update that has never arrived. Try to keep up, OK?

LOL. Wouldn’t it be hilarious if the “revised math” that ANet said they were going to implement was really nothing other than lower cap numbers on the maps?

Diashame.6328:

Maybe leaving SoR which was heavily bandwagoned for a less populated one could help also.

Edit: didn’t mean original post to sound catty.

I’m pretty sure you would be correct, except it still doesn’t solve the problem that full queues don’t mean that the map is full. That’s still a major problem for high pop servers even if they are willing to tolerate the long queues.

Slayer Lord.5023:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Queues-for-WvW-The-Official-Thread

Second paragraph.

Here is that second paragraph …. which was written over four months ago:

As many of you know, it is possible for someone to queue up for a map after you and get in first. We’re trying to get that fixed as soon as possible but unfortunately we still need a bit more time to solve the problem. We will definitely keep you updated when there is any news on our progress.

Since we haven’t heard a kitten thing more from them on the problem since then, I guess Anet’s concept of “a bit more time” is different than it is for most of the rest of us.

Jackie.1829:

Vohnnyan.4058:

GottFaust.5297:

Vohnnyan.4058:

GottFaust.5297:

Mona.4576:

A new official statement would be nice!!

They’ve given you plenty of official statements. The queues are the result of a large number of people transferring to a small subset of servers. Hell, they even referenced this fact as one of the reasons they did the ranking reset.

Where can I read this official statement?

There’s a nice big one on the first page of this thread.
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Any-Tarnished-Coast-citizens-agree/first

There are also many more scattered around.

Thank you for the help, so this is why we have queues on every server with active population, even tough maps are empty compared to the last week, its because people are messing with the queue system, waiting for the travel to borderland timer to go down before re-entering the queue, and if they do press to travel, the massive duration and strain that all this causes on the servers prevents 30-40 other players from getting a pop in 1 hour, when in the previous week they had to wait 5-10 mins to enter a full map.

Somehow I am almost certain the sarcasm in this post will not be spotted.

I’m pretty sure it will be lost on GottFaust, as is pretty much everything else of relevance.

Xiao.1208:

I think op just won ‘most ridiculous thread ever’ in categories for both concept and execution…

^This

some more characters