Guild Wars 2

DevonCarver.5370:

I’d say there is a pretty strong sentiment against the idea of collapsing all of WvW into 3 colors, rather than the current world set up. Which I agree with. I think world pride and association is an important part of the way that WvW works currently.

Here’s a possible version of shorter matchups that wouldn’t necessarily sacrifice the long term fight of a WvW matchup currently and wouldn’t involve merging everyone into one of three teams.

Matches last 8 hours, there are 21 matches in a week with the same 3 worlds, the winner of the week is the world that wins the most matches over the course of that time.

This solves some of the problems we see currently, namely the issues that can arise as matches get out of hand towards the end of the week. However, it would still give worlds with better coverage a leg up on their opponents. It also loses the feeling that you’ve had a long term battle for victory.

I’m curious what you all think of that? Does it retain the feeling of victory in WvW right now and solve problems or does it just introduce more issues without solving any core concerns?

I would still prefer the time-slices version ( proposal 4 in https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Nerf-the-domination-of-Coverage/3462970 and https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Night-protection-1/3281118 and some following).

I think it has 2 advantages:

1) Matches are longer 7 times 8 hours = 56h so it matters to keep things, build them up, defend them.

2) If night/day/evening match are counting to the same match-win you still get the “average”-performance of the server, even if the server profiles are very different in their time-distribution. Average-performance means you, e.g. as a server with good night, mediocre day and bad evening may match on average with a server that has bad night mediocre day and good evening, making evening and night very boring and one sided.

I would prefer three-rankings instead of this averaging, such that you face different servers in the different time-slices and each is in that time-slice as good as you are. E.g. as good nigh-server you face good night-servers in the night, as bad evening server you face bad evening servers in the evening and as mediocre day server you face mediocre day servers.

Afterwards you can combine the time-sliced ratings into a (4th) total glicko if you like. But do use the time-sliced ratings for matchmaking.

Rather sooner than later there is not enough WvW-population for 51 server.
Currently probably 6 NA and maybe 9 EU would be already enough.
And with the 2nd league we will probably see such a concentration process.

I think it’s time for a reorganisation. The “only 3 sides” of EotM have shown that it’s a good thing from match balance point of view, and the adaptive overflow maps are good from a coverage point of view, however in it’s current form it destroys two other important things:
– identification
– interest for matchoutcome.

But how about merging all worlds into 3 NA (2-3 english, 0-1 spanish) and 3 EU (1 german, 1 french, 1 english/others) server (overflow maps easily provide the capacity for PvE, maybe several permant and addressable copies per server, and even inside PvE, manpower intensive things like teq/mario/worm become better doable 24/7 this way) .

This would give each server enough manpower to play several different WvW-matches with with good coverage on different playtimes and durations:
– the 24/7 match as it is now
– a weekend match (Fr 18:00 till So 23:00)
– for EU a primetime match, i.e. every day 18:00-24:00 (7 times 6h), not shure what the adequate equivalent for NA would be (one for NA prime AND one for oceanic prime?)
– EotM 3h matches
– always obsidian

So on weekend prime there would be 3 different WvW-matches each server is involved in. Weekend outside prime and prime under the week there would be 2 matches and there is always the 24/7 as it is now. ANd there is always a 3h EotM as now and of course obsidian.

Matches can have different number of maps per match (e.g. the primetime match could consist of the 3 borderlands 2 times EB and EotM (all count for scoring).

This way matches can be MUCH better adapted to coverage of avalaible players (as now in EotM) AND you still retain competition and identification with a world.

I would prefer all finally dead are immediately ported to spawn. This is (only) one of the reasons, why I prefer this. (others are attrition war, perm-stealth thieves reviving mesmers that failed to make it to the gate )

A player gets assigned to the color, his/her server has in WvW, e.g. all Blackgate player get green this week.

WvW-color is assigned as described here: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/When-does-the-worlds-change-colors/3467650

It’s to easy currently. I would prefer if WP-blocking would be changed:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Why-is-SM-waypoint-contested-all-the-time/1810315

Oh, did you saw this: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Dolyak-Express-Jan-24-2014/3608513

Q: Will we see further steps to let the total war score scale more with “player activity” and less with pure “coverage in the off hours”?
Devon: That is something we are actively working on. The strides we’ve made in AI in Edge of the Mists are part of a long term plan to start addressing this. Our long term goal is to make it so that WvW is determined mostly by when players are online, not coverage. WvW is at its best when there are a lot of players online and we want that to be the most valuable time in WvW.

I am curious what will happen there and when! Best of course would be if this would be ready for the next league. Such that the ranking adaptations need from the score-change can adapt based on the league matches. And the outcome of the league will be much more open, if it is based on a different scoring!

Terok.7315:

No aoe better stacking.

Less AoE (damage as well as heal) less sense in stacking.

Roe.3679:

If all skills were single target, wouldn’t it benefit larger numbers even more? I thought the argument was the AOE cap needed to be removed for better WvW, not eliminated completely.

Both are probably better for fights. But extending it to more than 5 is not possible due to performance reasons ANet said (-> skill lags).

As it is currently the blob is an defensive method against AoE.
If you are blobbing with 1-5 you are hit 100% of times by AoE. if you blob with 40 you are hit only 12.5% of the time. So blobbing reduces the damage you take from AoE by 87.5%.

This defensive reason for blobs would be invalidated, if AoE would be rare and not the main method of attacking.

Fasyx.9347:

Yeah. Remove AoE from the game – PAINTRAINMETA FTW! GG!

Mealy does to much AoE as well! Swing a sword/hammer/ and hit 1 enemy not 5 with most skills.

Reborn.2934:

wvw ( pvpve game ) and pve without aoe will force the game to rewritten from the start .

i think this will never happened

Should be rather easy to set the AoE-limit to 1.

So technical reasons are not worth a debate.

But will WvW be better without AoE?

I don’t think, so, I only think some classes/waepons have to much AoE, given that others have much less. Resulting into AoE skills dealing in total around 4 times as much damage as single target skills. making a class like ranger quite useless in WvW.

Heezdedjim.8902:

Are the colors actually rotated “randomly,” or is there still some sort of “weight” factored in for the ranking of each server when deciding the colors?

It’s based on ranking and random roll, see https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/When-does-the-worlds-change-colors/3467650

And yes, your rating difference to the other two T1 server made it very unlikely till impossible for you to get something else than red.

Ask in your guild maybe you can find a bunch of people that have to complete “this map” as well. With a party of 5 a map is done from 0 to 100 in about 1 hour, and it’s even more fun trash-talking in TS while doing it. We once set up to a fixed date to do a map per week.

Basharic.1654:

Heezdedjim.8902:

As one wise SoR commander has said: “PPT is how we get good fights, guys.”

This.

Mag is renowned for really wanting fights but when we don’t mind our PPT we get stuck with nothing to do but Ktrain for most of the week. So we push the PPT a lil more than we’d like to get the hell away from Tier 3.

But higher tiers aren’t related to better opponents/fights, higher tiers only mean: more (quite often worser) opponents all around the time.

The only really good – unfortunately rarely occurring – is of course: Good fights to get good points.

lordkrall.7241:

Lets say 100 players answered the survey. That would mean 68 didn’t want a new season. But that is 68 out of MILLIONS of potential players, so it is really rather small part of the actual playerbase.

Of course it would also mean only 32 out of millions potential player want a new season. Not really a good justification to make one.

Nothing against a season with special WvW/EotM-Achievements, that’s on the positive side. But this uncompetitive competition with special prices for better placement in a tournament only leads to further imbalances that harm WvW more than it helps anyone.

Make matches competitive, before starting a competition.

Probably you could make it with 1 Spanish-speaking server in NA, but do you have 7 German-speaking and 5 French speaking servers in NA?

If server are merged it’s probably better to do it like described here:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/The-New-CDI-Topics/3638672

The first league generated an enormous concentration process of players onto the server that where expected to win the league.

NA-WvW still suffers from that.
EU-WvW seem to just recover from that.

This time it seems to be even worser. Only one winner per ladder (NA/EU) instead of three, and even more attractive winner-rewards. Also queue’s lost their regulating effect, if you don’t fit WvW, you can farm achievements in EotM without any queue.

Is it really your goal to enforce a further concentration process?
Admittedly in the short run this generates a high gem income.

But I guess it finally kills any balance nd competetiveness in WvW.

The first ones are already moving: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Dear-Anet-possible-merge-for-old-WvW-Maps/3626620

Reborn.2934:

fab.3298:

What guilds did you lose?

sorry , but i don’t want name who leaved us , but i can say that most of them was aurora glade players from the start of the game

Looks like ANet money making strategy of announcing a new tournament already works. SFR will be overstacked again, bad times for us

Till end of march only 3 servers will be left with WvW-population
Elona with most germans, Vizunah with most french, SFr with most of the others.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/The-New-CDI-Topics/3638672
will be partly done by player paying for it. Afterwards, ANet can merge the remains for free

I still did not got my favoured

Elona-Kodash-Riverside

I want since 2 month

Now the chance are worser than ever, only 0.054848%

But it can still happen!!!!

a league = EU
another league = NA

And concerning your second question: No it does not, but did ANet ever demonstrated understanding for that question?

Reverence.6915:

What I want to see is EoTM being an overflow map and actually acting like overflow – as in, if WvW isn’t queued, then EoTM isn’t accessible.

Bad idea, low wvw-pop server cannot play EotM if you do it that way.

The “only 3 sides” of EotM is a good thing from match balance point of view, and the adaptive overflow maps are good from a coverage point of view, however in it’s current form it destroys two other important things:
- identification
- interest for matchoutcome.

But how about merging all worlds into 3 NA (2-3 english, 0-1 spanish) and 3 EU (1 german, 1 french, 1 english/others) server (overflow maps easily provide the capacity for PvE, maybe 2-3 permant and addressable copies per server, manpower intesive things like teq/mario/worm become better doable 24/7 this way) .

This would give each server enough manpower to play different WvW-matches with with good coverage on different playtimes and durations:
- the 24/7 match as it is now
- a weekend match (Fr 18:00 till So 23:00)
- for EU a primetime match, i.e. every day 18:00-24:00 (7 times 6h), not shure what the adequate equivalent for NA would be (one for NA prime AND one for oceanic prime?)
- EotM 3h matches
- always obsidian

Matches can have different number of maps per match (e.g. the primetime match could consist of the 3 borderlands 2 times EB and EotM (all count for scoring).

This way matches can be MUCH better adapted to coverage of avalaible players (as now in EotM) AND you still retain competition and identification with a world.

Vroum.2906:

The announcement state they are keeping the gold/silver/bronze league so you’d have to split this into three distinct tournaments.

It does not, and it would not make sense with swiss-tournament.
7 rounds in swiss tournament are enough to separate over 50 participants, it would be total nonsense for 6-9

nirvana.8245:

The truth is that WvW is the most profitable way to farm now. Thats an issue for core WvW players. We don’t want it to be the case because it attracts the wrong kind of players with the wrong kind of attitudes.

If it attracts them on the opponent side it helps you to earn even more, even easier.

Killing large karma train with an organized guild is probably the most profitable thing you can do. Only problem: The karma-train gets smaller and smaller very fast with every wipe.

Dee Jay.2460:

Yes, but not until the Points-per-tick system is revised.

A league would be the perfect place to try a new scoring system

- more suspense in the league, if you do not know the outcome beforehand
- rebalancing to a new scoring would sort out very fast in a swiss-tournament.

And if they didn’t considered it so far, some are so easy to implement they likely would be able to still implement it till planned leagues start

I guess they will implement the “Danish” variant, i.e. repetition allowed, everything else will be to complicated for 3-sided matches.

I also guess they will use the same point system as in league 1.

I also fear they use the current scoring system, even if much better ones have been proposed and some variance and suspense (you cannot easily predict the winner before match start as we all can with the current match scoring) would make a league much better.

I did not used any logic, I only told you which one ANet implemented (and I guess ANet likes anyone that spends 35$, sounds like a reasonable logic of them to me).
In the 2nd league you probably get red sometimes

Meglobob.8620:

No.

As I like competition.

Easy correction to generate my vote

Server-stacking and coverage war is non-sense, and has nothing to do with competition. ANet only makes another competition to earn some money from more transfers. Now that queues resulting from overstacking are no longer a problem, really everyone should go to the same server.

MyGWAccount.7325:

You shouldn’t look at the colour of a server being something that is tied down to raitings.

But color IS determined by rating and random-roll. See https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/When-does-the-worlds-change-colors/3467650 for the details.

MyGWAccount.7325:

Right now wvw is so stale over the past few months that any change so simple should be embraced and put into practice.

I’ve 0 understanding about T1 complains about staleness. If you all transfer to T1, you are in T1, you you want something else, transfer to somewhere else

In chess-tournaments which are made according to swiss-tournament “without pairing them twice” means You meet every opponent MOSTLY ONCE in the tournament.

However this is much easier in chess as there are only 2 opponents per match, and you have many more participants, and still only need 5-7 rounds to make the result quite decisive.

I guess for WvW “without pairing them twice” is either dropped (probably better) or is likely be implemented as: A match with the same three server is not repeated.

World transfer are the only thing ANet earns gems on WvW. So yes, they like to encourage world-transfers, even if this means stacking to imbalance.

On the other side: Achievements you can reach on nearly any worlds. More rewards for achievements does not mean more rewards for winning.

In general: Another league without a change in neither scoring system nor match-time is self-censored

But a league with experiments in different match-times and/or different scoring would be cool!

BG cannot be red (to much rating difference, you cannot roll down). It will likely stay blue, but there is a small chance getting green.

But currently red has a tick around 50. Should be to difficult to get anything you need. Ask your commander in voice-chat, and most likely he will help.

Offair.2563:

Bug/exploit fixes

That would be a really brand new innovation in WvW

tom.7468:

My ascended from a year ago is still viable in wvw now full ascended and its viable and i dont think it will change anytime soon. zerk wars ftw

Where did you got ascended armor and weapons a year ago?

1) A much stronger binding between guilds and towers/keeps in WvW:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/If-you-could-change-the-scoring-mechanic/3552163
combined with a different scoring, that punishes Karma-trains and nerfs the domination of coverage.

2) Guild Alliance vs Guild Alliance vs Guild Alliance instead of World vs World vs World, so you are free to choose whom you want in your team.

3) No item spiral in WvW. Upgrade stats of Exo to corresponding Asc while in WvW.

4) Add a plausible movement checker to the server that teleports (with dead if in fight) all implausible movement back to spawn (no more flying, no more below ground, no more teleport, no more glitch through doors/walls, …)

5) Make future leagues with different and varying match-durations/play time. E.g.:
a weekend-league combined with a weekday-league, a time-sliced league with a NA-prime-match, an Oceanic-prime-match, an EU-prime-match

6) No possibility to rally in WvW. On total dead immediate port to spawn. (Attrition war becomes possible, no longer the winner wins unharmed. No more need to guard dead Mesmer waiting for a perma-stealthed thief).

7) Change the WP-block in keeps/SN: the teleport is blocked permanent (without “port-window”) whenever a visible and not dead enemy is inside outer walls area (inside inner walls of course as well). As soon there is not one visible enemy left port opens immediately. https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Why-is-SM-waypoint-contested-all-the-time/1810315

Alternative for 1): Nerf the domination of coverage: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Nerf-the-domination-of-Coverage

Alternative for 2): Compute transfer costs based on WvW Glicko-rating instead of the completely meaningless overall population. https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Free-transfers-to-small-pop-servers/2126651

In general: More variation, e.g. in match-duration and alternative scoring such that match-outcome becomes less predictable and boring.

Julie Yann.5379:

Dayra.7405:

Julie Yann.5379:

Dayra.7405:

But the best and easiest solution:

Upgrade exotic-stats to ascended-stats while in WvW.

I mean every lvl 1 is upgrade in WvW to lvl 80, why isn’t equipment?

If they do that I want a refund on my Ascended gear. I spent a fortune making my WvW set and if they are going to negate the hours upon hours of mindless grinding I went through to get it I need something in return.

You have a return: You can use it where you earned it: in PvE

It’s my WvW set, next to worthless in PvE. My full exotic zerk set is more efficient than my WvW ascended set so there is no way I will be using it in PvE.

Your current ascended will be second choice on a second choice character-class soon anyway.

Or do you think there will be no skill-adaptaions in the future, that rebalance classes.
So your current class may need different stats, or your whole character will become superfluous.

Ascended is just to much effort for WvW, where you have to react to skill changes fast, currently player suffer to much from pay-to-win in WvW.

Julie Yann.5379:

Dayra.7405:

But the best and easiest solution:

Upgrade exotic-stats to ascended-stats while in WvW.

I mean every lvl 1 is upgrade in WvW to lvl 80, why isn’t equipment?

If they do that I want a refund on my Ascended gear. I spent a fortune making my WvW set and if they are going to negate the hours upon hours of mindless grinding I went through to get it I need something in return.

You have a return: You can use it where you earned it: in PvE

But the best and easiest solution:

Upgrade exotic-stats to the corresponding ascended-stats while in WvW.
Then you need only ascended stuff for items that have no correspondence in exotic.

I mean every lvl 1 is upgraded in WvW to lvl 80, why isn’t equipment?

Werkuh.2579:

And how long do you think will an Veteran last against a 60+ blob? How long do you think an automatic cannon will fire when 60 people spike it? I’d say less than a quarter second for the Veteran, maybe 5 seconds for the cannon.

The only NPC’s that helps are NPC’s on all placed and currently unmanned defensive siege. I even fear it makes defense unbeatable, if well placed.

Would definitely add some nice strategic options and would make karma-trains impossible.

Alliance vs Alliance vs Alliance instead of WvWvW would solve a lot problem.
(where a Alliance is a group of guilds under the leadership of one guild)

Balance, no problem, you can avoid wtj’s to join in and you can set a max-limit of players/guilds for an alliance.

Grief-play? no problem, the guild the grief player is in can kick him (or the alliance leader can kick the guild).

Coverage? Less a problem if you choose the members of your alliance wise.

Excluded? No! Join a different alliance or make your own.

And for all that do not want this competitive effort: Make a WvW/EotM match where you randomly join in (your side is fixed for the match duration on first join).

There is a better way. I mean grief play is only antisocial it isn’t cheating. It should not involve ANet, but ANet should give player an in game way to punish antisocial behavior.

Give players way to get rid of grief-player or other unwanted behavior!

Current WvW is like a guild, where you cannot kick people that do not behave.

Give the people a way to build the team they want!!

Even additional 20-30 laurels would be in reach of a WvW-only player.

Basharic.1654:

Eh it’s WvW, it’s open world pvp, the control you want there still comes in the guild groups.

And why is this a reason that the people cannot decide which of the 5000 people are in their team? I mean you can decide who is in your guild (even if this is much less relevant), but you cannot decide which guilds and maybe also single player want to build a team to play together. Only if there is a possibility of sanctions (kick from guild/alliance), social control can animate people to good behavior.

Basharic.1654:

Why do you ask? Because show me a way to reward defense and I can show you garbage players who will exploit it.

The problem from the beginning is:

No player has any influence on who is in his team.

You have to accept trolls, you have to accept leachers, you have to accept karma-train-blober, you have to accept small-skill-roamer, you have to even accept hacker and …., because your only way to refuse playing with them is to leave the game yourself.

And this is the same in WvW as it is in EotM.

Allow people to build alliance of Guilds (meta-guilds) that form WvW and EotM teams for a challenge and make overflow random teams for the rest.

Nick.6972:

It’s unlikely to happen though.

I stopped expecting much anymore as well, but maybe https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/ESO-Alliance-War-vs-GW2-WorldvsWorld helps

Nick.6972:

Why not merge all servers into 3 different colors like in EOTM? that would fix population issues.

Competition is not really a strong point of EotM. It’s more the better Karma-train and the escape from imbalanced competition which makes EotM popular.

I think there is space for a competitive game mode, it only needs better design.

Where do you think are EotM matches are run?

Probably on the servers where WvW matches are run, and
probably they preferred to run them together with less populated WvW-Matches.

Result: When it comes to a heavy battle in an EotM match running together with your WvW-match the server becomes to busy to serve you.

Qaelyn.7612:

Was even worse when I just rechecked it.

—

Jade Quarry +595
Blackgate +50
Sanctum of Rall +50

—

This is insane. Does Arenanet realize what they’ve done? I really hope they will speak up on this.

What’s your point? I mean it was always clear that matches are decided by coverage, i.e. at point in time where the fewest are playing. When BG won this coverage war it was a good thing, now that they loose it you call it insane?

NA T1 was always 1 of the 3 server is superior in 1 timezone and 2nd in another. BG liked that when SoR blocked JQ’s superiority in JQ’s second timezone, now that JQ dominates two of the 3 mayor timezones it’s bad? No, it’s not worser than before, it’s just a different perspective on the same problem namely that coverage decides the matches not fights.
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Nerf-the-domination-of-Coverage

I also predicted that the coverage problems are “solved” when EotM is released.
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Night-protection-1/3291369
And indeed they are! The looser of the coverage wars probably never had as much in in WvW than they have now in EotM.

teg.1340:

I hate anti player siege like ACs. IMO Anet should just remove that crap entirely. Siege should be solely for destroying walls and doors. Instead Anet should add other options for defending, e.g. loopholes, trenches and stuff like that. FIGHT LIKE A REAL MAN!

A real man fights via “loopholes, trenches and stuff like that”?

If AC are vanished, walls become finally useless as well. So drop walls and doors as well