Guild Wars 2

Love all of these ideas. Have proposed #2 myself… There used to be a buff like this, but I wanted to see something more impactful/noticeable when it’s NOT there.

TheNecrosanct.4028:

XTR.9604:

The gift of battle reward track forces PvE players who want legendaries to be in WvW for a period of time to FARM the thing.

I had to go spend hours upon hours in PvE land trying to get my gift of exploration and I am a WvW player who hates to do PvE. PvE players should be forced to play my game mode just like I am forced to play theirs if they want legendaries like I did. I think ANet put the gift of battle perfectly in line with how much of a pain it is to do PvE for WvW players like myself.

With petty people like you running around in WvW, who in their right mind would even want to go there? Wishing your own discomfort on others is just a sign that you’re not over it. And think about this: disgruntled PvE players in WvW can do a lot more damage than disgruntled WvW players in PvE. I’m not one of them, but if you’ve kept up to date on this discussion, you know there are plenty out there thinking about it, and probably plenty also doing it. But enjoy your WvW, if you even still do in its current state.

WvWers tend to have a low tolerance for people who want things given to them.

Threatening to be disruptive and “do a lot more damage” is against the ToS and likely will lose you not only your legendary, but your entire account. Because we have had years of trolls in WvW, most are exceptionally good at documenting with videos and logs, so god love the one who tries.

If you just stand there, you’ll just get ganked. Go participate, you might find you actually enjoy it.

Those on the defensive end, stack shield generators around that vulnerable spot facing SM/Ogres and use it to thwart them.

Stack ACs over top and use the generators to shield your operators while they nuke down those catas.

Lastly, if you still own Ogres: Place catas facing that wall up on cliff and take them out. Ballis work too. A treb top of Veloka on cliff will hit that spot too at 100% power, if aimed properly.

A treb placed between the charr’s paws will hit top of Anz cliff/Anz gate and is really hard for the enemy to counter.

For attackers: Most servers are lazy about covering watergates in pretty much all keeps on EB.

Eh it divides the good mesmsers from the great ones. I am firmly in the former category, and working towards the latter.

If you can avoid being killed in 5 minutes (the show buff expires after 5 mins), you go back to being regular inviso-mesmer, after that the enemy gets apathetic and gives up. I’ve done it a couple of times, but not consistently — so it gives me something to work towards.

defrule.7236:

Where are you Bamby?

Working Glad to see you’re doing your part to keep our rep!

The main issue I have with folks proposing faction or wipes of servers is I look at their posting history and then

Which makes me think feel they aren’t invested in WvW itself as a game mode, but more for the idea of change.

Either that, or social engineering. We seem to encounter measured pushes of these ideas, then they die down, then push again. It feels too constructed.

It actually makes me grateful for the polls, because then at least you get a somewhat accurate measure and it’s not just a couple of loud voices.

cranos.5913:

Jayne.9251:

But that’s just the thing. I never follow the blue Dorito. I scout. And that independence that helps my team fits me. I like that my call outs get responded to. That people trust me. That we are part of a team, with many different functions besides blobbing.

Lemme tell you how this is happening. Build up participation by doing a few camps or smth then afk for hours on end capping a ruin every 10min-ish.

I rarely join squads either. Not in it for the loot.

Najten.2418:

Jayne.9251:

But that’s just the thing. I never follow the blue Dorito. I scout. And that independence that helps my team fits me. I like that my call outs get responded to. That people trust me. That we are part of a team, with many different functions besides blobbing.

And you enjoy doing that, and should continue to do that, but I don’t. I don’t enjoy WvW a fraction as much as I used to, and therefore I don’t want to do it more than I absolutely have to. To me it doesn’t matter if I’m in a strike team, or solo roaming, or following the dorito.. it’s just not fun to me any more.

Then don’t get a legendary if it’s no fun for you. It doesn’t really affect your gameplay if you have one or not. The choice is yours.

Love this idea. Just lock all servers during the unlinking phase to let the new native population resettle.

This actually made my day. We have a pretty great community at its core.

But that’s just the thing. I never follow the blue Dorito. I scout. And that independence that helps my team fits me. I like that my call outs get responded to. That people trust me. That we are part of a team, with many different functions besides blobbing.

OriOri.8724:

Jayne.9251:

OriOri.8724:

Jayne.9251:

Dear me. This thread makes me appreciate WvWers. Some of the comments are just unbelievable, coming from adults.

You think the WvW players are being any more mature than the PvE players? You must have been reading a different thread. The WvW players were the ones spouting off such gems as

“I had to suffer so its only right that you have to suffer too”

not the PvE players

No I think the point was that legendaries shouldn’t be something given away like candy. If you want it, you need to master both game modes. It makes getting one extra valuable because you put in the work, whether it’s in pve that wvwers hate but follow the rules, or in wvw, that pve players flatly refuse to do.

You’re not seeing the dichotomy?

The bottom line is you have a choice. Put in the work and get the shiny, or just don’t get one. It really doesn’t have that much impact on your game play by not having one.

I agree that Legendaries should require effort to craft yourself, I don’t think I ever said otherwise. But this change was the wrong way to go about doing that. For one, why does ANet expect me to be content with having to put in an extra 7+ hours of WvW specific play for each legendary I want to craft compared to the people who crafted them before this change and could buy all of their GoB? Why am I expected to be content with being required to do extra for the same reward? Why does ANet think that the people who were saving up their badges instead of buying GoB right away to save inventory space (because with all the bags and junk we get inventory space is a premium for most players, a lot can’t justify wasting a space to hold a GoB indefinitely while they gather the rest of the materials to craft the legendary) will be content with their work now being negated? They put in the work at the time to earn a GoB. They did and you can’t deny that. So why was it taken away from them?

Yes. Crafting legendaries should require you to participate in all game modes and it should not be easy. But this was a particularly poor way to force that to happen

Why does Anet require WvWers to go into pve and complete content/grind pve for theirs?

WvW isn’t a punishment. It’s actually quite fun if you spend more than an hour in it. It’s teamwork and strategy unlike any dungeon you’ll crawl. My best guess is this is Anets way of trying to get people to try all content.

Prior to this game I hated hated hated anything pvp. But I never really truly tried it. Dipped my toe in, got jumped, and went yep, it’s just what everyone else says it is. Gankfest. But I just had an opinion, without truly testing it for myself, based on 10 minutes of play and what everyone else says about pvp.

Anet forcing the OCD in me to get map completion forced me to hang out in WvW for a couple of days while I got my POIs. Couple that with a welcoming map commander who helped me to get them, then I felt obliged to stick around and pitch in for the team.

But WvW is different. You have a whole map as your team. It’s not you alone (unless you want it to be you alone).

Now I cannot think of any game mode I love more — simply because other players are unpredictable; it keeps the game fresh, and forces you to think. And there’s something utterly gratifying when you stake your first enemy after faceplanting (learning) so many times before. It leads to wanting to learn/hone your class further and then eventually handle 2v1s with little to no effort. And that invests you into your character further.

Boo no! Keep those buggy quaggans out!

Buggers would randomly nuke things, owned or not.

Cecilia.5179:

Suggestion: send the poll to people in game after they have been in WvW for 1 hour.

Um they already kind of do that. Do you not play?

Najten.2418:

Sakara Prime.5370:

If all you gripping wvw’er played half as much as you say you do….you would have the GoB by now.

Jayne.9251:

Dear me. This thread makes me appreciate WvWers. Some of the comments are just unbelievable, coming from adults.

The rest of Sakara Prime.5370’s post.. I rest my case.

Have never seen them post on WvW forum. I think she/he’s all yours

OriOri.8724:

Jayne.9251:

Dear me. This thread makes me appreciate WvWers. Some of the comments are just unbelievable, coming from adults.

You think the WvW players are being any more mature than the PvE players? You must have been reading a different thread. The WvW players were the ones spouting off such gems as

“I had to suffer so its only right that you have to suffer too”

not the PvE players

No I think the point was that legendaries shouldn’t be something given away like candy. If you want it, you need to master both game modes. It makes getting one extra valuable because you put in the work, whether it’s in pve that wvwers hate but follow the rules, or in wvw, that pve players flatly refuse to do.

You’re not seeing the dichotomy?

The bottom line is you have a choice. Put in the work and get the shiny, or just don’t get one. It really doesn’t have that much impact on your game play by not having one.

shrek.1046:

Jayne.9251:

shrek.1046:

Jayne.9251:

shrek.1046:

Yes its too big, no it doesn’t need 4 maps. It would be better to have 2-3 tri pointed maps. And some proposals for changing WvW hinge on being more flexible and only increasing the number of maps as the population requires it.

Nope. They tried that with HoT maps and everyone hated it and begged to have home WPs restored. What you’re talking about is EoTM setup.

What? They didn’t do anything of the sort with HOT maps. And no I’m not talking about a EOTM setup there are more ways to do it than just the EOTM system.

Then you never played dbl after hot because it was the tri-setup. WPs were in south towers, then moved to east/west keeps, and only usable by the enemy.

It was universally disliked.

Yes I did play it but thats not a tri pointed setup like EB at all.

How is it not like EB? There was a keep near enemy spawn that only the enemy could use the WP. The map favoured one team over another based on dissection from spawn, into thirds.

And it was not liked/enjoyed.

Only solution to counter bandwaggoning is to make xfer fees exhorbitantly high ($50 a pop) and lock servers after relinking. And then relink frequently.

I suspect next relink will see stand alone servers in NA like they did with EU.

Dear me. This thread makes me appreciate WvWers. Some of the comments are just unbelievable, coming from adults.

shrek.1046:

Jayne.9251:

shrek.1046:

Yes its too big, no it doesn’t need 4 maps. It would be better to have 2-3 tri pointed maps. And some proposals for changing WvW hinge on being more flexible and only increasing the number of maps as the population requires it.

Nope. They tried that with HoT maps and everyone hated it and begged to have home WPs restored. What you’re talking about is EoTM setup.

What? They didn’t do anything of the sort with HOT maps. And no I’m not talking about a EOTM setup there are more ways to do it than just the EOTM system.

Then you never played dbl after hot because it was the tri-setup. WPs were in south towers, then moved to east/west keeps, and only usable by the enemy.

It was universally disliked.

My bet next relinking, they’ll treat NA like they did EU, with some stand alone servers.

Aeolus.3615:

Jayne.9251:

Gudradain.3892:

Jayne.9251:

shrek.1046:

Yes its too big, no it doesn’t need 4 maps. It would be better to have 2-3 tri pointed maps. And some proposals for changing WvW hinge on being more flexible and only increasing the number of maps as the population requires it.

Nope. They tried that with HoT maps and everyone hated it and begged to have home WPs restored. What you’re talking about is EoTM setup.

EotM is not the only system that could have a dynamic number of map. For example, maps could be closing in off hours and reopen in primetime.

Yeah I don’t have the energy to have this same argument again. The dynamic map idea is bad. It punishes those not in a big guild. Most servers defense teams are solo and small guilds. Rip those apart and you’ll have zero defense teams. Zero defense teams = pve champ train maps.

But that is what WvW already is

Maybe in NA. Not so much in EU.

Gudradain.3892:

Jayne.9251:

shrek.1046:

Yes its too big, no it doesn’t need 4 maps. It would be better to have 2-3 tri pointed maps. And some proposals for changing WvW hinge on being more flexible and only increasing the number of maps as the population requires it.

Nope. They tried that with HoT maps and everyone hated it and begged to have home WPs restored. What you’re talking about is EoTM setup.

EotM is not the only system that could have a dynamic number of map. For example, maps could be closing in off hours and reopen in primetime.

Yeah I don’t have the energy to have this same argument again. The dynamic map idea is bad. It punishes those not in a big guild. Most servers defense teams are solo and small guilds. Rip those apart and you’ll have zero defense teams. Zero defense teams = pve champ train maps.

shrek.1046:

Yes its too big, no it doesn’t need 4 maps. It would be better to have 2-3 tri pointed maps. And some proposals for changing WvW hinge on being more flexible and only increasing the number of maps as the population requires it.

Nope. They tried that with HoT maps and everyone hated it and begged to have home WPs restored. What you’re talking about is EoTM setup.

Cecilia.5179:

Jayne.9251:

Cecilia.5179:

Jayne.9251:

Until they resolve bandwaggoning, there is no “fix” for uneven matches. All the OPs suggestion would do is delay the inevitable and cause mass chaos in the process.

The best fix for bandwagoning is to disperse the overcongested top tier severs that double what the current population cap is. So long as population isn’t exploited again, bandwagoning will never be as bad as it currently is.

DeceiverX.8361:

The biggest problem about opening up matchmaking to players, especially if free or cheap, is that it creates incentive to stack more. But then if you drive up prices, it makes it harder for smaller groups to even begin trying to assemble.

A wipe would only work by randomly allocating every player as an individual to a random server, but this would obviously destroy guilds and many sub-communities, which would also drop participation from WvW in general.

The only way to fix the problem is to link servers very frequently to a point where the only reliable allies are your server-mates (to increase server loyalty/community cohesion), and to allocate servers into mixed pools to balance the matches as best as possible, based on player data such as activity per time (AKA coverage), total combatants, number of fights, number of structure flips and their corresponding times, etc., even if this means doing something like having five low-tier servers allied together on one side versus two from T2 versus one from T1.

Without this kind of system, stagnation and stacking and/or the massive destruction of WvW and its communities is guaranteed.

Limiting WvW to one set of maps would drastically increase queues, and having 12 identical maps in one matchup is redundant. Splitting up every guild and community isn’t important when you can arrange with friends to pick a server you like the sound of. Wiping out the existence of the existing tiers, if only until top guilds form alliances, will make matches more competitive. Even if guild alliances exist, it comes down to player interaction and politics, which is more interesting than a giant of cluster of people stuck on the same server forever.

Once the population is “dispersed” how will you prevent people from switching servers?

Why shouldn’t people switch servers? People shouldn’t be trapped on the server they move to. The only things that need to be done is to keep the populations at a reasonable cap, so that bg or tc 2.0 doesn’t happen and put a timegate on how often somebody can transfer. The movement of people will be a major part of what prevents stagnation.

I think you’re missing the point.

Cecilia.5179:

Jayne.9251:

Until they resolve bandwaggoning, there is no “fix” for uneven matches. All the OPs suggestion would do is delay the inevitable and cause mass chaos in the process.

The best fix for bandwagoning is to disperse the overcongested top tier severs that double what the current population cap is. So long as population isn’t exploited again, bandwagoning will never be as bad as it currently is.

DeceiverX.8361:

The biggest problem about opening up matchmaking to players, especially if free or cheap, is that it creates incentive to stack more. But then if you drive up prices, it makes it harder for smaller groups to even begin trying to assemble.

A wipe would only work by randomly allocating every player as an individual to a random server, but this would obviously destroy guilds and many sub-communities, which would also drop participation from WvW in general.

The only way to fix the problem is to link servers very frequently to a point where the only reliable allies are your server-mates (to increase server loyalty/community cohesion), and to allocate servers into mixed pools to balance the matches as best as possible, based on player data such as activity per time (AKA coverage), total combatants, number of fights, number of structure flips and their corresponding times, etc., even if this means doing something like having five low-tier servers allied together on one side versus two from T2 versus one from T1.

Without this kind of system, stagnation and stacking and/or the massive destruction of WvW and its communities is guaranteed.

Limiting WvW to one set of maps would drastically increase queues, and having 12 identical maps in one matchup is redundant. Splitting up every guild and community isn’t important when you can arrange with friends to pick a server you like the sound of. Wiping out the existence of the existing tiers, if only until top guilds form alliances, will make matches more competitive. Even if guild alliances exist, it comes down to player interaction and politics, which is more interesting than a giant of cluster of people stuck on the same server forever.

Once the population is “dispersed” how will you prevent people from switching servers?

Until they resolve bandwaggoning, there is no “fix” for uneven matches. All the OPs suggestion would do is delay the inevitable and cause mass chaos in the process.

Firmicute.3876:

So, yeah, I am sorry that I dont wanna be the "lie-down-get-shanked-easily-victim for you when I am forced to slog through the bog of eternal stench

Then don’t be that guy.

Every single person who’s played WvW has easily done 1,000 faceplants (sometimes unintentionally, by falling off cliffs). Don’t sweat being stabbed or ganked. Get back up and go find the guy who did it and stake them into the ground

PVE is a different skillset than WvW. And WvW is a different skillset than PVE. It expands your game and challenges you to become good at both.

And it’s true what others have said in this thread. While PVE is used to an almost instant response to outrage on the forums, those of us here have never ever suggested disrupting PVE when frustrations arose. You’re punishing other players, not Anet, by doing that.

Dawdler.8521:

You cant “stop” them any more than you can stop real spies. If someone truly want to get into what in GW2 is a wide open organisation, they will. A real spy would have an account on your server and for all intents and purposes be a normal player.

Anet could do some simple things to avoid it being too annoying, like having default guild only tactivation but that’s just not going to happen.

Well you CAN stop them, simply by making activators guild only (which players can do now). But nobody seems to want to do this. Short term guild only would nix a lot of this.

Loosmaster.8263:

floude.5291:

Ok here are the data we got: WWW was in a bad position before DBL, With DBL it went down the hill, Now after some improvements people came back but still there are problems with it.
‘Not WWW players’ stands there because there is no restriction for people who can troll the poll or mindlesly/ignorantly vote. If you are trying to enhance something, you need to do that with people who specialized on the thing; othervise you do a selection problem which is most of the time the predator of the study.

Nice statement you got there but still not very decent, the people who read WWW forums may be the guys who like or interested in www however there can be other players who don’t really care about forums (which are not really taken seriously even from developers; check their usage of reddit) and pretty active at www. The best way is to implement an in game module to make the representative sample vote and take decisions on what they play.

Lastly, yea becoming psychologist require self analysis; when i look back and think about what I say, I still feel convinced about my statement. It does not mean you are right if you got the majority (which is created falsely/inadequately); it only gives you to power to pursue others to listen to you, i’ll see you after you’ll face with empty borderlands.

Prior to the polls, the forum was all we had for communication. It was our screaming and foot stomping tantrums that brought you this level of communication…

Please no.

I’d say the polls are a great way to make sure those foot stompers aren’t rewarded by pitching a fit.

RodOfDeath.5247:

Only roamers are welcome to the Underground Tavern for drinks.

Kindly run along pug.

Lol awesome

They did do #1. Just want to make sure it stays

If DBL has the following:

1. Keep home map WPs, that must be earned through upgrades, in East and West keeps. Any team can get them, providing they put in the upgrade work.
2. Adjust towers surrounding those keeps (and Garrison) on DBL so that they have the ability to be used as a point of attack (ie. trebs can hit the keeps from towers — and keeps can hit the towers).
3. Keep gimmicks out of the centre map, please oh please. Having a contested WP in centre — a single building or squared-out holding space, that any team can get the WP would be fine enough. No gimmicks, just simple. Heck, bring back the bloodlust points instead of the WP, those were fine too.

It doesn’t matter that the DBL map is bigger if the above is in place. In fact it gives a certain advantage defensively to the lowest-ranked server in the tier.

Use of 2 alpine, 1 dbl + eb I think would satisfy most — where dbl goes to the lowest ranked server (motivation to stay with that map and reduce ppt to keep it, or motivation to ppt to get a different map, depending on your preference).

After radio silence for so many years, I’m quite encouraged by all the willingness to get feedback. It establishes a registered (democratic) history and squashes the “if I yell loud enough I’ll get my way” crowd that has wreaked havoc in so many MMOs.

I’m a fan.

zinkz.7045:

Jayne.9251:

I live EST NA. I have zero issues playing EU.

Or maybe you simply don’t notice the issues, because like many WvW players you aren’t good enough at the game…

That’s TOTALLY it!

:)

Dawdler.8521:

Jayne.9251:

I live EST NA. I have zero issues playing EU.

Now whether EU WANTS to play NA is an entirely different matter,

You are one person.

This would be about entire servers having 300-500ms ping 24/7.

Yeah I suppose if we were ALL doing it, it’d bottleneck and then I’d notice a difference.

I live EST NA. I have zero issues playing EU.

Now whether EU WANTS to play NA is an entirely different matter,

DeWolfe.2174:

Jayne.9251:

KhainPride.3987:

In all fairness, we should have gotten a warning.

Please just make the status as it was before and give us a period of when the servers will be locked up.

Thank you

As heard in Orr: EVERYONE COME!

Why would they announce it when players in gw2 have been known to A: stack servers and B: game the system.

The whole purpose of the linking is the opposite desire.

No, it’s just your constant rant against the wishes of the players. Anet will lose big if they go against what the players naturally want to do. Which is primarily play where they want to play.

Or conversely your constant rant that ignores everyone not in T1.

Anet is trying to save the game mode and encourage destacking, so EVERY server can enjoy gameplay/challenge.

I’m not sure why you’re so against that.

KhainPride.3987:

In all fairness, we should have gotten a warning.

Please just make the status as it was before and give us a period of when the servers will be locked up.

Thank you

As heard in Orr: EVERYONE COME!

Why would they announce it when players in gw2 have been known to A: stack servers and B: game the system.

The whole purpose of the linking is the opposite desire.

judge.8754:

Sooo, originally we were medium populated on Gunnars Hold. After the “merge with fow” we were “full”. Couple of days ago i think we got from full to medium again. Now we seem to be full again.

Yet most of the days we don’t even have ANY queues!
Even when we have a queue at prime time on 1 map, it’s back to no queues in 1 or 2 hours tops.

How does this even work?

We are coming up to a relinking time.

Servers that were the hosts were full to encourage migration to lower linked servers.

Data of population was likely being evaluated for a week for new pairings, so servers were unlocked for a bit to get accurate measure.

Links have been decided. Locked up again.

Defenders can use the shield generators, too.

Any time you give the player the option to have real-world actions affecting another player in game, it will be abused.

If it was as simple as getting it reversed by a GM, why don’t we just have them in game? The reality is that your suggestion would create a drain on resources that Anet doesn’t have, or they’d have GMs in game.

In the first year of wvw, some folks on a certain server discovered that if (not sure the exact threshold) 30 people all reported a certain player with in game function all at once, that player would be banned and had to spend the next three days, minimum, getting it revoked through GM/customer service. That was three days this one guy couldn’t play. And it was done repeatedly to the same guy until Anet fixed the issue.

Bottom line … Some WvWers like to game the system. Your idea would only enable them, and encourage others.

Alpine brought the guilds back. That’s what’s changed.

Learn to work with them and you’ll have a blast. They always always want scouts.

Believe it’s RNG with some fancy math, like glicko.

So you could feesibly get relinked with the same server multiple times. Or have it vary massively each linking.

yocto.2783:

hophopcool.7618:

if you read my post you would notice that we should not have to block these people ANET should be banning or muting them for abusing everyone

A person can find what you’re saying “abusive” in the same way your using the word. Then you advocate yourself being banned or muted for “abusing EVERYONE”.

Your “abuse” is subjective. Everyone CANNOT be you. Block them and the problem is solved. You saying it’s been going on for 4 months implies you don’t want to ignore them, you want to other people to play the way you want or obey you. There is no justification for others to do what you want or else!

Some children don’t have thick skins. They ought to learn to have thick skins at some point because that’s required to be an adult and be around strangers.

Also reporting people is lame waste because it takes developers and community time away from creating to do needless mediocre bureaucracy.

I have a massively thick hide after working in an industry that requires it as standard dress code.

I’d say conversely, while some folks are a little hypersensitive, people could always, y’know, stop being jerks, too

And it’s been my experience that jerks know when they’re being jerks.

Results URL for those who want to check in:

https://feedback.guildwars2.com/en/results

Trial accounts have to level up to what? 60? in order to get into WvW?

That’s a lot of time/money/effort if your free account keeps getting banned.

The problem is having definitive proof that someone is spying (ie. they say so in map chat, or you can document every time they log in, they troll, etc.), you can’t just ban someone because so-and-so says he/she is spying.

However, if every time you JUST got that toon levelled up to 60 and got banned, I suspect this would go a ways to preventing this kind of behaviour. Eventually the “spy” is going to run out of funds if they’re craft-levelling, or get fed up with the time needed to level up.

Then again, they could just learn to be quieter about it and less blatant.

lil devils x.6071:

Tyler Bearce.3427:

We are looking at ways to improve transfer experience. It’s a complicated problem.

Our current preferred solution, which we’ll likely poll players on, is as follows:

• If you think of the periods between world links being changed as seasons, then we’d lock all transfers for the first half of the season, and allow normal transferring in the second half.
• So assuming we continue to update world links once every 3 months, the first 6 weeks would be locked for all worlds and the second set of 6 weeks would allow normal transfering (costs scaling based on population size.) Then we’d relink worlds and lock transfers for another 6 weeks.

I have to agree with Puck here, This is a very terrible very bad plan. Players need to be able to play the game with friends and family. It is MORE important to players to play the game with people they enjoy rather than play a specific game. If they cannot play your game with their friends and family they will play someone else’s game that allows them to.

Every time you unmerge worlds, you will be splitting guilds, friends and family, locking them where they are at only ensures they no longer play your game at all and move to a game that will allow them to play together. Playing with those you enjoy playing with> what game that is.

It should never be taken for granted that players do not have to play your game, you are supposed to make them WANT to play your game. You do not do that by trying to prevent them from playing the game with those they enjoy playing it with.

Or.. You could all collectively move to an open server en masse and continue to play with the people you value most.

No. Report rude players.

But you do nothing but give them what they want with threads like these.

hophopcool.7618:

Jayne.9251:

Dear me. Stop asking Anet to play parent. We have so many not willing to take responsibility for their own affairs and expect Anet to police it — server population disparity is one example.

You’re an adult, (I hope), hit ignore. Problem solved,

the problem is not actually solved. they will just continue to abuse and be toxic towards new members and people that have not got them blocked.

Then periodically announce in map chat that Xxx is a troll and to enjoy wvw just put them on ignore.

Frankly after you put them on ignore, it’s not your problem if others react.

Dear me. Stop asking Anet to play parent. We have so many not willing to take responsibility for their own affairs and expect Anet to police it — server population disparity is one example.

You’re an adult, (I hope), hit ignore. Problem solved,

zinkz.7045:

Jayne.9251:

If one pairing gets too top-heavy, they can simply unlink and relink to a lower population.

Which fails miserably if you are only going to relink every 3 months.

Eh they said they would look at the rotation time in an upcoming poll. I guess we’ll have to see.