Showing Posts For Dayra.7405:

Remove Rezing of dead players

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

I can buy more storage expanders?

in Guild Wars 2 Discussion

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

No idea when it happend, but

Thanks ANet for the 2 new bank-tabs

Check this: March 22 Release Notes

Uh, how could I have missed noticing the most important update since HoT for so long

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

I can buy more storage expanders?

in Guild Wars 2 Discussion

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

No idea when it happend, but

Thanks ANet for the 2 new bank-tabs

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

Remove EoTM or limit its use

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

I would say: Integrate WvW and EotM

But now the big question is: how is this best done?

Clearly both have their advantages and disadvantages!

How can we get the best of both, and even more difficult: What is the best of both?

They already tried this, it was called “HoT” and it failed miserably considering thousands of players left the game over it. The mechanics implemented in HoT were already tested in EotM with different skins..

That’s not what I meant. Maps and map-mechanics can and should be different and there is no need to integrate them, just let them exist in parallel such that player can play with what they like most. When I talk about the gamemode I mean things like 4h vs 168h matches, fixed number of maps vs dynamic number of maps, ….

Auto-upgrades were not tested in EotM, EotM has no upgrades. The auto-upgrades are ANets answer to two massive player-complaints in the forum:

  • Grief-play resulting from many player having accounts on several server
  • Many complains about the gold-sink of paying upgrades

Just give less rewards to EotM.

This already happend! The BoH-chests you got in EotM were gone with HoT.

And while it may not be the only reason people are not playing WvW, it is a reason why at least some people are not playing WvW anymore.

The reason while I play much less (1-2h per month instead of 10-20 per week) WvW than I did once are:

  • it got stale after some years
  • coverage-wars makes scoring and with it winning or loosing meaningless
  • outside prime-time WvW has less fights than EotM as the jumping between 4 empty maps let you face the enemy only very rarely.
Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

Remove EoTM or limit its use

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

I would say: Integrate WvW and EotM

But now the big question is: how is this best done?

Clearly both have their advantages and disadvantages!

How can we get the best of both, and even more difficult: What is the best of both?

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

why so much hate towards roamers???

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

Every Zerg-player knows the following:

There is a big zerg-fight, you die, after a while waiting, you get some steel chest beside your body, but your friends get pushed away from your body, you port back to WP and when you get out you run into a bunch of so called roamer, that farm you and your friends and hinder you to grab your steel chest.

After some repetitions you hate them

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

how to reduce loading screen times?

in Guild Wars 2 Discussion

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

Yeah, did not saw what the stupid censoring made with my tip

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

how to reduce loading screen times?

in Guild Wars 2 Discussion

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

Buy a_SSD and put GW2 on it, it’s a disk problem.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

Did Anet secretly fix population?

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

Because I seriously doubt someone would go "hm, why am I on Sea of Sorrows today when I was on Yaks Bend yesterday?

Hm, this would not be very silent, except maybe if done with f2p’s that cannot post in the forum

How would they secretely “fix” population issues? Murder people in their sleep?

At least this would be silent but more (still not very) likely is: You discoverd ANets secret plan to repopulate WvW, they licensed the go-player software from Alphabet, and trained it to run Pug-Bots, already populating server in imbalanced matches, currently they are training it to be pug-commander, it already works well for PvD-train commander

The beta-test in April will be: Player defend objectives against attacking Pug-Bot trains
and in june the hope to have finished training of the neuronal-net such that we can beta-test open-field battles between guilds and pug-bot blobs

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

Remove EoTM or limit its use

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

EoM works better than WvW, not because has many more player, but because it only has as many maps as are needed to fit the players.

Lol ya were no one actually fights one another.

This is a pre-justice not supported by reality anymore. And even if it would be true, it can easily be changed: Attack them

Arbitrary team match ups and scoreboards that reset every couple of hours are trash and we can see that they are trash because people stopped using the map as a serious fighting area where they cared if their color won or lost within the first month.

Yeah it should be improved, and thats why I said in https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/4-Step-Rescue-Plan-for-WvW

  • make scoring such that it can be credited to servers, even if several of them play on the same side on the same map
  • export the scoring via API such that pages like http://mos.millenium.org can use them to score the server.

If people take your pvp mode and use it primarily to farm for pve rewards, it is a failure of a mode.

This is also pre-justice not supported by reality. For PvE rewards you play PvE, it has much better rewards. EotM rewards got nerfed last summer (less rewards) and with HoT (no more champ-chests on conquest).

Do you really believe that anyone playing EotM for PvE-rewards would play WvW? So should your pre-justice be true, no one from EotM would go to WvW.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

Remove EoTM or limit its use

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

I don’t know how to explain the situation to players blindly defending EotM. But I will try once more…

WvW makes sense only if there is enough players to fight in all 3 servers, in most times, in every map. Without enemies its boring and even those who log in to check it will leave soon. All the players in EotM are potential WvW players who have not only left their own server empty but have also ruined the WvW for other 2 servers because they chose to not fight opponents and instead join mindless karma train in huge blob in amap that has no other purpose except to endlessly farm stuff.

What you EotM-lovers misunderstand is the cause and effect. You claim people go to EotM because WvW is boring, meaning boring and empty WvW is the cause and so many players in EotM is the effect. Which is completely wrong. People go to EotM because it offers same rewards for much less work, and so having easy way to avoid any real WvW is the cause. Empty and boring WvW is the effect of having EotM because players in EotM are not in WvW.

Game provides 2 very similar game systems that have same rewards but one requires you to fight many skillful enemies who are very tough to kill and often kill you first. While the other system only asks for simple tag-following, providing same rewards in much faster rate, and without any fair of ever bumping into those pesky enemy players. Yes, many players will choose the easy way. Yes, they will like it very much. Of course they will jump out and shout loudly at everyone asking to nerf their unfair rewards. It still must be nerfed. Every game must constantly cut off farming spots with way too good reward/effort/time rate and EotM is just one big fat farming spot. Its popularity is not the reason to keep it in the game, but good indication of just how much damage it does to the game.

I agree with you that one is superfluous. I do not agree with you that EotM is superfluous.

WvW will not be able to fill its 36 (EU) + 32 (NA) Maps with or without EotM-player.
So yes there aren’t enough players for WvW anymore, but my conclusion is give up WvW it’s time has passed by. Do not touch the only halfway working game mode, where you can find enemies to fight due to it’s superior design, namely the dynamic number of maps. EoM works better than WvW, not because has many more player, but because it only has as many maps as are needed to fit the players.

But yes, BL’s and EB are more suitable for several player: Add them to EotM mode.
And yes, the random-team assignment is a mess for cooperative play: Add a map-instance choice, such that player can easily join the map-instances where their server or guild plays.

Summary: Improve the better working game-mode (EotM) such that anyone can live with it, do not shut it down for an attempt (doomed to fail anyway) to reanimate a dead game mode (WvW).

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

EotM vs 'Real' WvW

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

To the people that say we could close all the other forms of WvW and just do EotM.

You know, we could. And it would be the Stuff of Legend.

Every WvW Fight Guild, and anyone and everyone who is just looking to kill, will suddenly arrive in EotM, ready to slaughter indiscriminately anyone not of their team, taking I would imagine heightened levels of glee to crush under their boot any Quasi-PvE player, Up-tick, or Anyone Looking to K-Train. The bodies would litter the fields like rivers across the map.

All the Bunker and Turtle players would Siege up the Fortifications to insane levels, the likes that people that only played EotM have never seen, nor could even fathom could exist.

8 Tiers of some some of the hardest hardcore core WvW players will suddenly move to EotM, filled with vitriol and embitterment, looking to make sure that every up-level, or quasi-pve player pays a dear price for their lost beloved ‘real’ WvW experience.

The hate and salt would be so thick we would be able to repair walls with it.

Oh I would vote for that change, just to see pure pandemonium that would cause.

To me this sounds more like a promises, than a threat.

Go go, this can be done, even before wvw is shutdown

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

EotM vs 'Real' WvW

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

Close it and make those players play WvW

Simple,as that

Even simpler: Close WvW,

  • there are much fewer that will miss it
  • Much less complains on the forum
  • much less things to fix to mke it playable
Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

EotM vs 'Real' WvW

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

I think you should more clearly seperate things that are different to discuss this topic adequately! As long as they are all mixed up discussion is very difficult.

  1. Map: EotM-Map vs Old BL vs New BL vs EB
  2. Mode: 4h matches with demand driven Map-Capacity vs 168h matches with fixed number of maps and 27 open teams vs 3 random teams
  3. Usage: Original Intent vs Current Usage vs WvW

Most comments are about usage, but usage is not really in ANets hand, it’s the player that decide IF they use it (or not) and HOW they use it. ANet has only influence on Map and Mode. Of course some aspekts of Map and Mode favour or hinder specific usages, and that is a really interesting topic, but it is completeloy useless to discuss if you like or not like the current usage and if it is the original intend or not.

So to have a useful discussion focus on aspekts of map and mode and how do you think they help or hinder your favoured playstyle.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

Thanks Anet, for allowing server stacking

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

I am very sorry that you got outblobbed out of all 4 maps and had to retreat to the forums, but it seems like they will be coming here to PPT too.

+1

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

EotM is awesome

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

My point was it was empty and not played like you think it is played.

I don’t care how it is played (team balance was always horrible in EotM and karma-train bores me to dead), but how it could be played, if auto-assigment to a map-instance is replaced by player can make an informed choice about the map-instance to join and merged with WvW.

Edit: I think there is a big difference between EU and US EotM and we can’t compare each other.

I am EU, too, on your blue opponent of this week to be precise, but as said in
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Will-the-return-of-Alpine-BL-bring-you-back

No, the map is quite irrelevant.

I want competitive matches that involve fights for victory, neither just a pvd-race nor fights for nothing (scrims).

I wasn’t in WvW nor in EotM for a while.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

EotM is awesome

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

NA-T1 seems to be very different from the rest of WvW. WvW was dead long before HoT. I stopped taking it serious (still used it to play a bit GvG from time to time) during season 2. To me it just appears as the dead of WvW that was obvious to most server long before HoT, reached NA-T1 when HoT came out.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

EotM is awesome

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

If the WvW players like what they did they tell them, if they do not they tell them and they remove those elements from the testing grounds.

Hm. If you ask 10 WvW-player what they want you get 15 incompatible opinions, including such stupid – but very popular 3 years ago – requests like new BLs with longer walk-ways. If you use EotM as the test-ground for 4hour matches with dynamic number of maps, then it’s time that this makes it into WvW. The voting is quite clear: EotM is played, WvW is dead.

During the last match-up we went into EotM several times during prime time. We found each time only 1 map that was played by at least 2 sides (we were red). After wiping the opposite zergs one or two times the enemy logged out.
All other maps were played by only one colour.

Would be much better if you could tell your favoured opponents to join you on a specific map-instance, wouldn’t it??

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

EotM is awesome

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Your-top-5-priorities-for-WvW-Overhaul
has 750 replies that’s not even enough to fill 1 server, not talking about 51 and I am very confident that a lot of the prio’s would surely kill any WvW remainings

the voting about old-new BLs had 350 replies, thats not even enought to fill the maps for 1 hour.

You also forget: the population decrease of WVW over the long period of no change and all the forum posts about the staleness of WvW.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

EotM is awesome

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

If the WvW players like what they did they tell them, if they do not they tell them and they remove those elements from the testing grounds.

Hm. If you ask 10 WvW-player what they want you get 15 incompatible opinions, including such stupid – but very popular 3 years ago – requests like new BLs with longer walk-ways. If you use EotM as the test-ground for 4hour matches with dynamic number of maps, then it’s time that this makes it into WvW. The voting is quite clear: EotM is played, WvW is dead.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

Thanks Anet, for allowing server stacking

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

you created such a mess its not even

What? They actually set population limits too low when they changed the calculation months ago.

But obviously they silently relaxed it to stop the forum-cry’s about full-server, or do you see any full server anymore? But anyway, as it was likely a moving average, it was never able to hinder over stacking transfers, that happen within a day.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

EotM is awesome

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

Fixed number of maps is an inherent design-mistake of WvW.

Fix that and WvW would feel alive, do not fix it and it stays dead.

Do you really want EotM as test ground for WvW? I think it would be horrible to let EotM people test and accept/reject what should go into WvW

The Ktrain will Die on ALL MAPS if you base the score more on PPK than PPT,

No, it doesn’t care about scoring. It will die if you remove rewards (Karma) from capturing as it’s the Ktrain and not the PPTtrain

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

EotM is awesome

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

EotM is just Where nubs go to KTrain to level their Toons…

This statement makes clear that you talk about a completely different thing I do.
You talk about how people use a map/game-mode, and I totally agree with you
that it is very good that people can choose between a “leveling-mode” and a “fighting-mode” and that it is a very bad idea (resulting in a very salt map-chat) to throw them together onto one map.

Whereas I talk about the mechanics of a game mode

  • 4hour matches vs 168hour matches.
  • always 36 (32 in NA) maps vs demand oriented number of map

This isn’t a perfect match in any case it is just a convention how to use which game mode.

If there would be only WvW, we would be back to the old pre-EotM convention: Karma-Train on EB, guild-fights on the BLs

If there would be only EotM-mode with a choice between EotM-map and BL-Map we would have karma-train on EotM map, guild-fights on the BL-map within EotM-mode.

If would would get eotm-mode with player choosable instances of different map types (eotm-map, Old BLs, new BLs, EB) both can coexist without disturbing each other.

And server-merge isn’t a solution that leads anywhere. I was never in NA, but in EU you can merge all 27 server into 3 without being able to fill all 4 maps of the match in off-time. While just merging the 27 server into 18 would produce queues in primetime, simply because on every EU-server there are 20-times as many player playing 19:00-22:00 (UTC) than there are player playing 3:00-5:00 (UTC).

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

EotM is awesome

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

Ok I’ll spell it out…. …
They know eotm started the problems that killed wvw

No, Eotm did not started the problems that lead to the dead of WvW. These problems are inherent to WvW, EotM only provided an alternative, which is now more successful than WvW, even if EotM has it’s own flaws.

Inherent problems of WvW:

  • 24/7 coverage war. No one plays 24/7, and even worser player-distribution is very uneven over the 24 hours of the day (or the time-zones of the world if you are a fan of this stupid “your night is someones day” statement), resulting in queue for 2 hours and a handful of people hopping over empty maps for 22 hours.
  • PvD scores better than fights (for an objective)

Inherent problem of both EotM and WvW

  • imbalance of manpower over the teams
  • there is no stacking penalty, which leads to “the map-blob rules”

Inherent problem of EotM

  • You are thrown into a random team
  • Scoring is without any meaning

I still think that https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/4-Step-Rescue-Plan-for-WvW is a good way to solve most of these problems for both game modes.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

Share your April Fools patch notes

in Guild Wars 2 Discussion

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

WvW

  • Added a new WEXP-Mastery “Siege Dis/Enabler” with 1’000’000’000 levels, the Dis/Enabler with the higher mastery wins, i.e. finally disables or enables the siege.
  • To give coverage the importance in WvW it should have in our oppinion, WvW matches have been changed from 24/7 to 24/364. For a smooth transition the current match runs till 31.12.2016.
Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

EA to acquire NCsoft for $3.92 Billion

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

Finally, we will have real fights!

yes, saw the new release notes:

World vs. World

  • Added the new Siege Reactivator trick, which reactivates siege equipment that has been disabled via the Siege Disabler trick.
  • Added the Super Siege Disabler trick, which prevents reactivation via the Siege Reactivator trick.

Revenant

  • Coalescence of Ruin: Increased damage, range, number of targets, and area of effect while in WvW.

Thief

  • Stealth no longer ends when you attack.
  • Steal now transfers ownership of a random weapon from your opponent to you.
Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

Finally! Fortran support!

in Guild Wars 2 Discussion

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

“Mystic Forge

  • Added toilet-flushing sound effect on use of the Mystic Forge."

This one is even better

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

Will the return of Alpine BL bring you back?

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

No, the map is quite irrelevant.

I want competitive matches that involve fights for victory, neither just a pvd-race nor fights for nothing (scrims).

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

The beauty of current scoring system

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

Hope dies last right? :P

Mine (with respect to this topic) is dead, so WvW make it slightly longer than my hope.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

The beauty of current scoring system

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

We know this since nearly 4 years, and some of us complained against it for several years, but the few that do it, cry very loud to defend their decisive role in scoring and ANet gives a sh**.

So: If you are interested in scoring, you are in the wrong game.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

4-Step Rescue Plan for WvW

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

You can basicly reduce the 4 steps into 1: megaserver it!

You could, but that would give you much less information how it would look and feel. Basically “mega-server it” describes only step 4, but without the improvements made by Steps 1-3 I would not like it.

Concerning the “Don’t touch my Server”, I didn’t, Server remain untouched in these 4 steps. The map-instance browser allows you to play together. If that isn’t sufficient a flag for squads “Server XYZ only” could further accelerate that player from single servers play together, if that still isn’t enough for you: If a server has a majority on a map, he can claim this a server-only map. This isn’t really a problem from the scoring point of view, as possession of objectives isn’t scored, but actions are. The main difference is that you may face different enemies on different maps. And if your server hasn’t the manpower to fill a map – while the enemie server on this map do have it – another server can be invited to play on this map as well. And if you do not have the manpower to play 4 maps, simply do not claim 4 maps.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

4-Step Rescue Plan for WvW

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

I’m confused, the title says ‘WvW’, but you are talking about PVE map.

No I was talking about preparing the EotM- game-mode to be able to take over the WvW-maps in an – in my view – acceptable way.

Btw EotM has PvP enabled, so it’s up to you if you (try) to play PvE on it or if you force PvP on it.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

4-Step Rescue Plan for WvW

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

  1. Change the EotM Side-Assignment from WvW-Color to Equalize the sum of the WvW-Population (as measured for Server transfer costs) => EotM sides should have nearly equal WvW-Population
  2. Add a queue to EotM maps and make a map-instance browser for EotM, which shows for each Map-instance: Free-places(or atleast a flag > 20 free places)/queue-size, % of players from your WvW-server, number of players from your guild, commander from your WvW-server on the map, and for EU % of players from your side with the same server-language and add the server to the name visible in EotM => you can choose on which instance you want to go and are NOT assign by software to a map
  3. Change the scoring from Kills & PPT to WEXP and upgrades: Whenever a player of your server get the WEXP as score, but only once per event (not once per player that get it) whenever you upgrade an objective you get score, export that per server and per side (also for EotM) in the API.
  4. Add all WvW-Maps (old BLs, new BLs, EB) to EotM.

Advantages I expect:

  • It’s fast, I think each step should not need more that 1-2 person-month, so if ANet adds 2 developers we have a step per month.
  • The people on the different servers can play together
  • Guilds can play together
  • Score is much more meaningfull than today and it can be determined per server.
  • Maps are much better filled than today, so you have someone to fight whenever you want to play.
Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

WvW without PPT? How would you do it?

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

What makes content hard?

in Guild Wars 2 Discussion

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

Respawn time, the faster the minons come back the harder you have to work.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

dynamic map capacity

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

I know you’ve played WvW for a long time so I know you’re not being purposefully naive — but say Guild X and Guild Y want a map to themselves. They don’t want any other players on it. And they want that map exclusively 24/7. They will camp on the map and occupy the spot just so they can get their own bigger, more exclusive guild arena. The mechanics will be abused (I’m looking at youuuu Maguuuumaaa! )

We are very speculative here as no one knows HOW ANet will do dynamic map capacity, SHOULD they do dynamic map capacity.

But lets assume 3-sided WvW with alliance and lets assume alliance are scored separately and your campers belong to the same alliance.

I would say: let them sit in spawn, it’s their alliance that get’s no score due to them. Advantage over today would be: let them block their instance of this map, and play on another instance of the same map, which isn’t possible today where every maps exist only once.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

dynamic map capacity

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

You did not read my first post?

Player to map assignment should NOT be via mega-server as in PvE, but via a map browser where the player chooses the map INSTANCE he wants.

So players that are unguilded are SOL? Even if they played a really important role to the WvW scene prior?

Alliance corresponds to todays server, not to todays guilds. So no, as no one can be without server today, or yes, people not on a server (in an alliance) could not go to wvw, should that become possible.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

dynamic map capacity

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

Still doesn’t answer the question.
So you’re saying you can play the map you want, but you have to

Yeah like today in WvW, much better than today in EotM.

What if you wait in queue and the map is deemed “frozen” by the time you get on?

Weird situation, all queue for one map while the others are empty
I would say thats more a question for map design than about map-capacity as maps are only frozen, if the remaining capacity fits all people that want to play. and the question would be: Why does the company insist on many maps no one likes, while the map(s) people like are rare?

How can you guarantee you play with the same people you want to play with?

Is there a gurantee today?

Who’s to say a guild or group decides to game the maps and just afks until the players they want get on?

I’ve seen this in todays WvW, yes, but where do you see the relation to dynamic map capacity?

Why should any one group have priority over another? We all paid for the game.

Because it makes sense to bring alliances together. Remember that we talk about a setting where each map exist likely in several copies. Less prio on one instance likely mean more prio on another.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

dynamic map capacity

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

As https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Your-top-5-priorities-for-WvW-Overhaul/6031916 asked me:

Mine are

  1. dynamic map capacity (less map for less player, more map for more player)

Just curious .. with this kind of “overflow” method, how would you guarantee you got onto the same map as guildies every time you played, or players you regularly WvW with who weren’t necessarily guilded?

Dynamic map capacity can mean a lot, especially it can be either done in current wvw or in an eotm-like new wvw, so here some simple ideas and an answer.
But other ways to get dynamic map capacity as possible as well. An important feature is probably that it is the system that decides how many maps exist, depending on how many users are playing (want to play), but it’s the user (and not a mega-server) who decides where he want to play.

dynamic map capacity in the current WvW

Lets for simplicity of the examples assume that each map fits 100 player per side (but you could reduce map-capacity for silver and bronze, such that they are still able to get all maps in prime-time):

If 2 of the 3 sides have less than 300 player in the match randomly freeze a map
If 2 of the 3 sides have less than 200 player in the match randomly freeze another map
If 2 of the 3 sides have less than 100 player in the match randomly freeze a third map
The last map stays open, but you can say if 2 of the 3 sides have less than 30 player in the match freeze the keeps.

Frozen means: lord, walls and gates of the objective become invulnerable and the tick-value of this objective is 0. Upgrades stop, supply is disabled and siege inside can neither be placed nor used. Not sure if doors and WPs should be locked or not.

If 2 of the 3 sides have queue on all open maps, unfreeze a randomly choosen map.

dynamic map capacity in a 3-sided WvW with alliances

I guess this is the scenario targeted by the question.
The answer is simple: by having a map-browser that shows which maps exist with all the infos currently available per WvW-map and how many people of your guild are on a map and how many % of your sides people belong to your alliance and by having a queue per map, where people of the largest alliance on this map have priority.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

WvW achievements without Season

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

As WvW-rewards are currently under investiation, maybe it’s time to reanimate this proposal I would still like very much.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

Proposal for a new competive WvW

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

Turning WvW into EotM 2 is an awful idea.

It’s not my intention to turn WvW into EotM 2. I don’t like the endless EotM PvD-train.
In fact one of the reason of this proposals is: I want less PvD in WvW and I especially hate that WvW-matches are decided by PvD (aka night/day/offtime-capping).

I want full maps, because full maps are currently the only state where all teams are balanced, i.e. have the same man-power.

I am neither zerg-fan nor do I believe that the map-blob is an effective form of winning a match. Also in EU-gold not everyone is in the mono-blob, some servers more, some less, but beside the public zergs you also find a lot guild-raids (5-25, most often 10-15), disturb-groups of 2-5 and solo dueller.

There are many players still in the lower tiers who could have transferred and chose not to. For many this is because they prefer smaller group game play.

So would a BL-20 or EB-30 (maximum number of players on the map is 20/30) map be your choice?

Let us think why EotM is as EotM is and why WvW is (or was) like WvW is (was).

Different interests of the players. Players go to EotM/WvW for many different reasons:

  • karma-train fans, they found their paradise in EotM
  • WvW-competition fan, they lost their paradise and are dying out in GW2.
  • GvG fans, they have no paradise, in EotM the map-design and the difficulty of bringing people to the same map hinders them, in WvW limited opponents (we want to fight this guild but never matched against their server) and at least in the past the “you don’t do anything for the server”-blame.
  • small-scale fighter

If these would be just mixed together in EotM without any choice the result would be bad, I totally agree with you.

But I think when you can choose which map you go conventions can be established.

  • karama-trains choose the EotM map
  • guild groups the old borderlands

Additionally the system allows competitive 4 hours matches as often as you like and find opponents.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

Proposal for a new competive WvW

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

I still think that this is the most promising idea to get both:
- availability of WvW with filled maps 24/7
- competitive matches in WvW-mode.

Competition of course cannot be 24/7, no one was ever able to fill maps 24/7 so matches were always decided at times with the fewest players. And with the today player numbers 24/7 competition is completely meaninless.

Maybe for EU:
- assign all german to one side
- assign all french + spanish to a second side
- fill-up the matches generated by german+french/spanish player with EU (english) players as third side
- make EUvsEUvsEU matches, when more EU-player want to play than fit as third side in the national matches.
- Extend the WvW-API for EotM, such that the results matter more as they become visible to the outside.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

Want the old maps back?[186 Signs]

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

What I would like most is a rotation:

  • 1 week EB+EotM map for WvW (no BLs)
  • 1 week old BLs only (no EB)
  • 1 week new BLs only (no EB)

Most server aren’t able to fill 4 maps anymore, only 2-3 maps would be better.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

Wrong Answer again Anet RIP WvW

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

Population (or more precisely player-hours, I still play WvW from time to time, but instead of 20+ hours per weak, I play maybe 1-2 hours a week as I do not care about winning anymore. If this is not only me, but many player, then it has the same effect as loosing 90% of the players.) was declining long before new BLs.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

Wrong Answer again Anet RIP WvW

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

population imbalance (and emptiness of most maps most of the time) is what killed WvW, not the BL. The new BLs just had the problem, that to few people for the smaller old BL maps are much to few people for larger new maps.

The thing we urgently need in my view is map-capacity fits player-numbers, neither to much map such that WvW degenerates to a PvE(D)-race nor to few map such that you sit in queue when you want to play.

If their balance work solve this WvW-problem, WvW get a change to restart, if not all they do is useless.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

Just another solution to PPT

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

Like both suggestions by Chinchilla.1785 and Xenesis.6389

In fact, I do not care which suggestion would be taken, as long as any would be used to improve the bad PPT we have since 3.5 years.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

Just another solution to PPT

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

That’s why I counted the minutes the each person spend of the map.
Only if you spend 15 min on the maps, you count as 15pm (=0.25ph), if you jump there just before the tick you may be 1pm or not even that.

And 15ph per tick are 60 people spend there the whole 15min, not only 15.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

Just another solution to PPT

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

ANet counts for every map how many player-minutes (pm) the people of all sides spend there. A tick has 15 minutes, a person staying on a map for the whole tick has 15pm, 4 people staying there for the whole tick have 60pm = 1ph (player-hour)

A map only contributes score to PPT for a tick, if it had at least 15ph player attendance during the tick

E.g. 15ph can be reached by people distributed per side 60:0:0 or 30:30:0 or 20:20:20 or any other combination that reaches or exceeds a total sum of 60 player spending the whole tick on the map.

Advantages:
- You can fully play. Conquer everything, run your karama-train, pvd, whatever you like.
- No manipulation possible, any team can include each map by havign 60 people there
- No score, if there aren’t people.
- Stops runaway scores when only a handful people playing.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

(edited by Dayra.7405)

Nerf Daycapping

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

How are you defining a prime time or off time player on a game that runs 24 hours.

Isn’t that obvious from my post?

  • prime-time has many player, e.g. more than 200 per side
  • off-time has few player, e.g. less than 200 per side
Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!

WvW Population parity in 2 weeks!

in WvW

Posted by: Dayra.7405

Dayra.7405

All at 0 is parity, isn’t_it? Will be reached soon, so special action to reach it needed.

Ceterum censeo SFR esse delendam!