Guild Wars 2

Mags spawn camps because they’re afraid of fighting you 1v1.

Eval.2371:

Junkpile.7439:

Anet should give loyalty rewards.

This. Make WvW legendary armor tied to server loyalty. Make transferring sacrifice your progress.

That actually might work for bandwaggoners.

We used to have an executive who would have a few drinks, log into the work system from home, wreak havoc, while everyone would manically and quietly run behind doing cleanup.

Your post reminds me of that a bit.

Here’s the thing: Just because she’s the red name making the posts, doesn’t mean it was her decision.

Don’t shoot the messenger. Ad hominem attacks don’t work.

Attack the issue.

And the issue is that this decision seems to be not rooted in actual game realities.

reddie.5861:

little bit offensive but, only kittens from eu play on NA and only kittens from NA play on EU.

u wanna fight? play ur timezone enjoy fights, u wanna PvE in WvW map? go be a kitten or just dont WvW at all if u dont wanna fight for stuff..
yes i couldnt give a rats kitten about PPT in WvW

Not true. I play EU during EU prime.

Jim Hunter.6821:

Xenesis.6389:

Swagger.1459:

I bet next summer will we get a huge wvw update called “GW2 Factions”!

Offered via the next expansion.

And to join a faction you will be required to do PvE map completion and grind out about 10,000 of their newest currency that doesn’t go in your wallet.

Because that will solve bandwaggoning.

Lol Deso.

Swamurabi.7890:

At this point I think I might be happier if I watched election returns instead of playing WvW or writing on the forums.

Dude. Florida,

I raise you that and add unique server armour and weapons.

I’m totally putting you in charge of social media Jeknar.

Bamby.

She’s fierce.

Jim Hunter.6821:

Heimlich.3065:

Xillllix.3485:

We are interested beyond belief, but your proposition is not even a half measure, it’s a cheap fix that would lead to terrible results. It’s only good on paper and not in practice, which is what about 66% of the people in this thread have been saying. Why do you need us to tell you that? It has nothing to do with our interest.

What’s most bizarre is that they asked us the same thing back in May and people didn’t like the idea then either.

I have to suspect somebody inside ANet really thinks this proposal is just the ultimate solution to every WvW problem and brings it up regularly.

And when people didn’t wildly support it anet opened up BG as a big kitten you to the player base.

The thing is Puck, the players have always had the control.

Time for us all to pull up our socks and sort this mess out.

I’ll craft the viral campaign if you (and others) help implement it.

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

Thanks for the feedback everyone! It still seems like there is a general lack of interest in the idea, so we’ll pass on it again.

throws confetti

shagwell.1349:

“We moved for fights”. That’s why most guilds stacki in already full timezones. Biggest lie on gw2.
If you move for a fight your transfer target are heavily underpopulated servers, not tier 1 or tier 2, but at least you are honest about "Alot of us who transferred alot didn’t give a crap about the state of wvw "

Which is why any changes to WvW should not be based on guild feedback.

EoTM incoming!

RodOfDeath.5247:

Scampy.9506:

-slips on floor-

…omg, what did I just slip on? Is that…oh jeez, who got salt all over the forums…

Salt is used for traction…

0/10 bud

Ok, I love you a little bit for this.

RodOfDeath.5247:

Chaba.5410:

RodOfDeath.5247:

Well OP, you whined and cried enough. BG is open.

On the plus side, JQ and BG guilds are saved! Viva!

Yes, but who will save you Chaba my dear furry friend

I’m pretty certain she shaves her legs. Shush you.

Jim Hunter.6821:

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

Blackgate and Jade Quarry both opened because they were below the population cap. Blackgate currently has a smaller population than Jade Quarry and some of the combined linked worlds populations (combined linked worlds population example being Crystal Desert + Darkhaven + Devona’s Rest combined has a higher population than Blackgate). With all that being said, we do keep track of the transfers that happen. Since we have been seeing an increase in transfer behavior with the past 2 world links, we are discussing whether we want to change how we calculate WvW world populations or if we want to lower the WvW population caps.

So because BG has less players than 3 servers combined it’s time to open them up again!?
You’re kittening joking right?

Winner winner, chicken dinner!

Chinchilla.1785:

Jim Hunter.6821:

So why even bother with the bullkitten thread about adding more servers to better balance WvW if you’re going to open BG again?

It was probably the massive SEA timezone exodus to WR (or whatever EU server) finally clicked. Not necessarily ANET.

What? They went to WSR? Oh snap, bet they’re not happy about the FSP unlinking, lol.

apharma.3741:

Jayne.9251:

The thread is actually meant to lend perspective for comments.

I honestly thought it was so you could hunt down the forum regulars to kill tbh.

Oh hey! There’s an idea

The thread is actually meant to lend perspective for comments.

Yes.

I wonder how many guilds have moved to T1 and died?

Jeknar.6184:

ArenaNet golden child got what it wanted once again… It would only be more ironic if Jade Quarry stayed full while Blackgate opened.

Oh that’s atrocious……

Reaper Alim.4176:

Jayne.9251:

Norbe.7630:

de-stacking doesn’t need incentives
stacking needs penalty

Interesting.

So the stacked server would get a handicap? Like for X amount of players over the competitions population you get -10K x X, at reset?

Nah how about the stacked server players receive attributes nerfs depending on how stacked they are compared to their rival servers?

That sadly wouldn’t be enough. People will be walking lootbags if they still have double the numbers. Herd mentality.

You have to penalize the server rating, make it an uphill fight every week, before people will clue in and spread out. If you’re down 100k every reset, that’s going to affect week-end score and T1 shiny status.

Norbe.7630:

de-stacking doesn’t need incentives
stacking needs penalty

Interesting.

So the stacked server would get a handicap? Like for X amount of players over the competitions population you get -10K x X, at reset?

Reverence.6915:

BG’s been locked for months though. We’re basically running on diehard defenders and the occasional fairweather pug

Well that’s not exactly true.

Just curious.

Me?

Once. Three years ago.

It’s really quite interesting to see how some folks cannot connect concepts/issues beyond their own servers.

And they say server pride is dead. Pshaw I say. :p

They already have it. It’s called EoTM.

But I suppose that’s the direction of the whole alliance push at its heart.

X T D.6458:

DeeSystm.1256:

Top tier wvw has always been a farce to those below it. You really think people care you guys are suffering burnout? Everyone has suffered it because of these two servers for a long time now. Taste the medicine.

Staying in a higher tier requires staying competitive, a lot more so then in lower tiers because the need for coverage and population is greatly increased. Every server has the same issues trying to fill coverage gaps, trying to replace players that leave, stop playing, etc. There is just a constant need to take care of these issues in higher tiers. The last thing wvw needs is more burnout and less people playing, regardless of what tier or server. Nobody is forced to come up here, those that do have their own reasons usually because they want a more active competitive environment, but again it requires constant work in order to maintain that level of competitiveness.

I think the point is: heaven forbid one of the T1s drops and actually makes the game competitive. Macro, not micro.

Liston.9708:

will question how others DID get back to their home (which was the same)……

Well that’s because of the ajust BG thread indicating behind the scenes favours (blah) and non-response from Anet.

Very disappointed about that.

Jim Hunter.6821:

Liston.9708:

Chaba.5410:

I think this thread exemplifies the challenge Anet has with regards to getting guilds that want new members to move to smaller servers.

Agreed – we only see it every single week….. And every single week the answer is move or whither – the guild’s choice….

and most guilds would rather whither than move. Which is why adding a bunch of small servers and no incentive to move would be a waste of time.

Bingo.

ToffiKeks.6385:

Okay that something need to change is obvious and i like this idea, but what if we do it the other way around.

For me one Question is: Do we want an equal population on every server? Or have X server with high pop, Y server with medium pop and Z server with low pop (so everyone has a matchup size he likes).

Then: Why not just close/clear every server and open only so many servers, that this goal is reached. I mean you have some approximation of the player base. And when the max cap of the server is reached, it will just switch to “full” on a hardcap. So one server has 120% is not possible, because 100% switches to full (for different matchup sizes, the cap is different and is shown on world transfer).

They tried to do that but people wanted to see instant results, rather than realizing it would take time, through attrition.

Then a bunch of T1 folks came on the forum yelling at Anet to open up their servers, and Anet caved and gave them a window to stack again, instead of sticking to their guns.

Less than a week later we had threads from people complaining about population imbalance.

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

World Linking would still exist in the new world system. For example, maybe the current world links for EU would be the same but now Kodash, Jade Sea, and Seafarer’s Rest are now linked with a new empty world (we would probably have done different links but just to give everyone an idea).

Why not test this out on NA, which seems to have greater support as issues in NA are not the same in EU. Revert EU back to the old system, and see which format players migrate to?

This would provide you with a safety net if one system becomes obviously preferred over the other. Plus it gives you greater variables with which to test.

The only real issue I can see is for servers like FC, who have clearly defined server attachment (which I think is awesome).

So reducing server identity even further …

Might as well call it EoTM.

And we all know how popular that is with WvW veterans.

Stop this please. You have something good here. Eliminating identity/community will eliminate attachment to the game. Period.

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

We wouldn’t force players to move worlds but stacked worlds would have a high chance of never opening for transfers again since we would be lowering the population player cap on all worlds. So for example in NA worlds like Blackgate and Jade Quarry would stay “Full” and wouldn’t be open for transfers unless player started to transfer off.

Why don’t you just do that now with existing servers?

Also, would you consider doing this in NA only, and reverting EU back to the old system of what it was before linking?

If it’s both NA and EU, then no thanks. As someone already said, this will be a short term fix and we will have the same situation as we have now —- only more fragmented.

I don’t know why people want to blow anything up. It will offer a very short term fix, then be back to status quo. And alienate game loyalists in the process.

Until someone comes up with a solution for bandwaggoning, there is no variation on a theme that will work.

And you don’t need to blow up existing communities to gain parity. Simply evict accounts on overpopulated servers by seniority. Problem solved.

Leaa.2943:

MaLeVoLenT.8129:

You have server pride within a name and not the physical individuals of the community. You place too much concentration on the actual name and not whom you’re playing with. A server is nothing more than a house and while it’s good to have pride in the upkeep of your house you should have more pride in your family and friends.

How does server-links stop you from playing with your community versus the other system? If you do not like mass numbers than you can still move to a lower tier to avoid the blobs. How does your group size reflect your server pride. WvW isn’t who has the biggest blob it’s who has the most coverage. This has never changed whether it’s the “old” system or the “new”.

I do not like Server-links. But I do not wish to go back to the old.

This is not true for me. I play on a EU server that still have the same players they always had. The same community, the same guilds the same players i knows for many years. It have not changed for us at all. But the linking system where one of the servers linked are populated with all the worst trolls in EU, were the language is so bad 24/7 that you feel sick and block nearly the whole linked server, and they all being banned on the TS of our comunity. That was a challenge. But we managed to get through even that. We got unlinked and got old linked server back who we have no issues with, nor did we have with any other link.

So yes links are not working as intended. And server pride is still a thing, and we still play with the same people. You might not, and your normal server might not, i don’t know. But mine is.

Well said.

Swamurabi.7890:

1U1D will start out as a 1v1v1, then the next week it will start as a 1v1v1, which will become a 1v1v0 before the weekend is over, and finally end up as a 1v0v0.

1U1D will be the death of WvW

It’s weird how often I find my self nodding my head on your posts. You must play EU.

Chinchilla.1785:

Jayne.9251:

Chinchilla.1785:

I am not saying your memories are invalid, but you should make the best of the limited time left in this game; all things end, so try to have fun with the game play before it does!

And this is why I say folks aren’t looking at things longterm. You’ve already buried the game and are picking at its carrion.

Meanwhile, there’s still people deeply invested in seeing it run a long time. Because of the community they’ve grown.

Your solution is short term. As is all the battlegroup and alliance junk.

I am telling you the “long term” solution for this: adapt. ANET cannot fix this aspect unless they magically overhaul the game play, and send out an aggressive ad campaign. Given their WvW team is about 2 people at a time; it is on you, the remnants of past glory, to push yourselves to play or

Lol you’re telling me, are you?

Goodness.

And I’m telling you the same: adapt.

I’d be very eager to know the percentage of organized guilds in WvW. I’d suggest it’s around 35%, maybe less. That number fluctuates, of course, because WvW guilds have never been the most stable — or longterm. There are, of course, exceptions.

So Anet should cater to 35%?

You can write all the walls of text you want, and randomly bold sentences.

A poll can determine majority view. Until then, knock yourself out.

Better still, make all these guild-centric changes to NA only and reset EU back to the solo server status and see which model is more populated a year from now. At least EU could accommodate both sets of playstyle — organized guilds and smaller groups.

lol there’s gonna be an awful lot of increased forum activity if they do the one up one down from NA players. Simply because of the cliff-like population disparities.

Don’t you guys remember the swiss tournament? So much complaining.

Chinchilla.1785:

I am not saying your memories are invalid, but you should make the best of the limited time left in this game; all things end, so try to have fun with the game play before it does!

And this is why I say folks aren’t looking at things longterm. You’ve already buried the game and are picking at its carrion.

Meanwhile, there’s still people deeply invested in seeing it run a long time. Because of the community they’ve grown.

Your solution is short term. As is all the battlegroup and alliance junk.

Jana.6831:

Chinchilla.1785:

If you are not going to create the chance yourself or put the effort in, then do the next best thing. Form a guild together, play together, and re-establish a new community that you can have an attachment.

Try to understand it: To us our server is our guild. No matter which guild comes or leaves. On Gunnars I was really allowed to run with any closed guild raid – because I was part of them although I haven’t been in their guilds. There are people who hold a server together and who are in big guilds, but mostly it is the solo players who do that. You think it’s all simply solved by pressing everything into one guild, but we’re friends with all guilds, no matter their style (PPT, havoc, GvG, roaming) – and that is the community of a server.
There are lots of people like me, Diku and Jayne and they are important to all servers.

ETA: Come to think of it: GH’s best commander was a “solo roamer” (with 60 people following him) for a very long time.

This.

Times 1,000.

RyuDragnier.9476:

Jayne.9251:

Those who are dismissing server pride aren’t looking at longterm. You buy the game because it entertains. You stay because of the community.

Of whom you find a small close knit group you end up playing with in a guild, who end up hopping servers and you follow them because you only enjoy playing it with them. Server pride has never existed…it has always been guild pride. You take pride in playing with your guild.

While I do enjoy my own company, I’m in a guild alone. I prefer it that way. A lot of people do.

And it’s with those people that communities are born and help with the longevity of a game because people are emotionally invested.

Server pride has always existed. Look at people flipping out on here not even a month ago:

Jski.6180:

Jayne.9251:

I love how invested people are after four years.

I’d also like to point out that investment is to the server.

Well ya that what wvw is for an investment to your world. Shame that it was changed on a whim like this.

Jeknar.6184:

Jayne.9251:

Those who are dismissing server pride aren’t looking at longterm. You buy the game because it entertains. You stay because of the community.

If people really stayed in certain game because of the community, things like FPS or MOBA (who have extremely toxic communities) would have died long ago.

People stay in the game because they still have fun playing it. Not because of it’s community.

Totally disagree with you. I look at games like EQ2 that are still chugging along WITH a paid monthly sub after ten plus years. It’s because SONY nurtured and cultivated the emotional attachment to the game through community. Heck, that attachment even survived when SOE sold it.

Those who are dismissing server pride aren’t looking at longterm. You buy the game because it entertains. You stay because of the community.

Malediktus.3740:

Jayne.9251:

I guess I’m the only one who’s happy with it. The less attention they pay to EU the better chance we can quietly revert back to the way it was pre-linking.

Then the NA kids can have all the shiny new “fixes” and EU can carry on as before.

I dont want that we go back to before server linking, I want Anet to go a step further and merge servers instead of linking.

I think if you did a poll of EU only players you’d find the majority would be happy if we just reverted to the way things were. EU was already competitive before the links. Even the lower tiers had blobs during prime.

I guess I’m the only one who’s happy with it. The less attention they pay to EU the better chance we can quietly revert back to the way it was pre-linking.

Then the NA kids can have all the shiny new “fixes” and EU can carry on as before.

Jeknar.6184:

Good thing they are happy. I seens to me that the unlinked servers are going to fall tho. The geman duo (Abaddon’s Mouth and Dzagonur) is winning by a landslide

Don’t think too many in EU care about that to be honest.