Guild Wars 2

Dawdler.8521:

ManaCraft.5630:

Designing a serverless WvW system is a relatively simple matter.

There are 3 major issues with using EoTM style design however:

- Community based Teamspeak become impossible to manage. Thus, communities would die (or in this case, never have existed). The communities that have formed is pretty much the only reason for WvW still being a thing after 3 years.

- Guilds would not be able to organize GvGs and have to put in alot of work just to get the raid on the same map. You would pretty much kill raiding. They would never know what guilds they face either.

- Coverage would be a complete mess and pretty much ensure 1 side win every single week. One side having stacked nightcappers and its gg, no point in even playing WvW since nothing will change next week.

TL;DR if we had no servers we would have no WvW.

+1,000

Every time I read threads like these, it feels a bit like social engineering, then I feel afraid this is how it will go in HoT.

FrownyClown.8402:

#firstworldproblems

Kids in Africa don’t even know what gw2 is. Be thankful ye plebs!

Lol this is what I think of when I see that “bring the Internet to the world” Facebook/Google project.

No fair that some people are internet-free — everyone in the world must be equally miserable as everyone else!

Yeah but I’ve seen people blast others for putting down a regular piece of siege vs a superior one. While I do agree superior siege is more useful, I’m more in the camp of “oh look! someone’s making an effort to learn/place siege, I don’t care what kind it is, they’ll figure it out on their own soon enough that regular siege is only so-so for defense. I’d rather they try than not at all…”

And there are plenty of times when a regular treb works just as well as a superior one.

Best thing in that video: WvW will become the #1 priority after HoT is launched.

Hooray!

Would it ping for just one player who runs across it? Or does it require a “weight” threshold (like the difference between white and orange swords)?

Dawdler.8521:

The only way to completely “solve” this is to limit siege to build sites, much like how cannons/mortars work. Like a keep has 3 positions for arrowcarts, 2 ram positions on the door and 3 surrounding sites where you can place 3 ranged siege on each. That way the hardcap for siege is actually all the siege you can build on a border. But that would probably get boring and predictable.

Oh gosh no, please!

I only two months ago discovered brand new siege placement spots to counter the abuse of the fov camera angles. This plan would have thwarted that creativity and effort to counter

Dawdler.8521:

An easy way could be to raise costs every time you solo build siege. Like, first ram you build cost 40 sups. If you dump all those 40 sups into it, the next ram cost 80 sups. If you dump all those 80 sups into it, the next ram cost 160 sups, etc and so on. But you would have to time limit it in order to make solo play viable (say 10 min cd), which only delay the troll. Or they bring groups to troll. Maybe thats good enough, I dont know.

This would only enable those trying to drain supply from a keep so that defenses are low. This actually would delight most siege trolls who’s sole purpose is to keep supply low so a tower or keep is easier to flip.

As you said, anything that can be abused by players will be.

Zepher.7803:

how about just add the players name to the siege? just like the guild tag shows up on guild siege.

The more I hear about this the more I like it. However, I’d be concerned with map harassment of a player who say, only dropped a regular AC, or put a piece of siege in an odd spot because they were learning or they were experimenting with new placements. You know how people are — “we do it this way and this way ONLY!” -- and they freak over any changes. I’d hate to see this tool being used to harass someone.

I actually had someone on my NA account be snotty to me over me placing a treb in a newly found spot I’d discovered in EU. It’s really effective and works brilliantly versus the new fov angles. They stood there and criticized the new spot because it wasn’t the USUAL spot. It made me not log into my NA account for a month, lol. When I did, however, I found some people who weren’t closed minded and they were overjoyed with the new placements and what they could hit.

Fuzzion.2504:

If you are living in the US and have 150ms, something is wrong.

Oddly I get 60-80s (sometimes 100 in big fights) in EU.

I get over 140 on my NA account.

I live EST, lol. It’s so weird.

Ah Hunter, you must not have been around in the days of the culling.

Now THAT was lag, lol.

I think it’s an EU thing.

aspirine.6852:

Junkpile.7439:

Sounds like op have l2p issues and bad connection.

My connection is fine, better than a lot on my server. And learn to play, how do you learn not to lag again?

Everyone misses Junkpile’s sig line.

Ah, you’re right. I’ve been away from NA wvw for a while and I only know what I see works in EU.

That’s a shame. Both sides can coexist. And it’s a lot of fun for all.

Also, this thread is becoming TDLR.

Blech.

Tongku.5326:

Jayne.9251:

TheGrimm.5624:

lil devils x.6071:

Jayne.9251:

Looking at the MOS, T3 NA looks really really healthy now. GJ!

T3 NA increased populations have nothing to do with the changes however, It is due to all the GvG in T2 choosing to make T3 the new GvG tier prior to the changes in protest of a new alliance and attempt to move YB to T1. All of this was decided prior to the changes being announced, and not due to them. They will ensure that the new T3 GvG servers stay where they want them predetermining the winner every week to ensure they do not move up or drop down. The servers being taken over by the GvG guilds will now be the new GvG tier as it was in T2.

No offense to the lower tiers, but if these guilds are just looking for GvG, why not go lower like T5-T8 where there is plenty of room for fights, especially if they are not looking to score any points. As far as fixing the outcome for the week, yeah I don’t think most of the existing servers in those tiers would appreciate/accept that kind of behavior. That might make things ugly.

That’s the common misconception about GvG guilds … That that is all they do, when often if a healthy and respectful relationship is created on both sides, they become the backbone of the server and biggest contributors to ppt.

It’s when toxic relationships are created that things tend to go sour. You can’t GvG 24/7, and often members of GvG guilds become part of the pug force when not skedded to raid.

It is not a misconception. While it is true that that they have some people that run in public groups, and some of them help, most do not. I have been witnessing it for a long time now.

Most of them just take up que space and prevent BL defense. Only some help out.

In addition, they are simply not a part of community, which is a major factor. When is the last time any of you have seen a guild like Agg for example in SOS TS public WvW channels (while they were there) leading a pug raid or taking their fair turn at babysitting a map for defense ? I have seen some of the GvG guilds do it, sometimes, but most do not.

Agg used to ppt for their server until the whole animosity thing reared its head. Same with EP and those Dull Ego guys and other GvG guilds.

Then the great divide happened. Us vs Them. PPT vs GvG. Harassment in map, in whispers, on forums, etc .. And of course, through hostility out of both camps, that rift became bigger until every group was out for what IT wanted, instead of working together for a common goal.

Can bridges be rebuilt? I think so.

But the screaming has to stop.

You cannot force anyone to play the way you want them to play. You can simply respect their style of gameplay and hope for cooperation. Build respect and I wouldn’t be surprised if there wasn’t some kind of emotional attachment to the server and its resultant pride.

But you have to swallow your own first.

This is the way it’s played on most servers on EU. The GvG guilds come onto map, they occupy the enemy with big big fights, while a core group of defenders (sometimes as few as eight) claim the map and shore up the defense. And it’s remarkable to watch it in play because it’s very VERY effective. And everyone wins.

I used to be in your camp that GvG were messing WITH MAH PPT! And then I moved to EU and saw how it totally can happen without the grief and rage. The two CAN coexist.

mexay.3902:

coglin.1867:

Rewards never brought players to WvW in the firs place, so in my opinion, that debunks that theory.

My logic is players saying “why would I play WvW when I can do X instead because that has better rewards”. Yes there are people who play WvW for WvW but look how small that community is now. Look how many people are playing EotM. Those players could be in WvW fighting instead but where’s the incentive.

.

Make the rewards bigger and WvW WILL turn I to a giant k-train EoTM, with little point to it beyond following a blob. I mean just look what happened during golem week if you want a taste,

Now I know some would argue that’s already happening, but there’s so much more than that, intricacies like developing teamwork/cooperation/common strategy/thwarting enemy strategies, etc …

Bigger rewards usually is attractive to those obsessed with loot only, and very little care for server, team or others.

No thanks.

Shouldn’t have moved. My lag in EU is FAR less than on my NA account (I live NA).

It’s a bug that popped up this week. It’s been bad.

ArchonWing.9480:

Siege having people’s names on it I think could be useful. After all, the “initial owner” can repossess the siege at any moment and it’d be nice to know who did it. Plus there are definitely some names I’d trust over others in order to decide refreshing it or not.

I refresh everyone’s siege, regardless if I think it’s good placement or not. Unless its a troll, someone put the effort into building it, and I respect that effort. Plus if the siege vanishes before they get to use it, they never adjust and learn from their placement.

Also, sometimes it’s an experiment in a unusual place that results in a brand new way of looking at placement.

So yep, I refresh all siege, no matter who built it.

Jana.6831:

I think we’ve had 2 GvG guilds on our maps once, or maybe 3, and 2 were against a “public” blob but they couldn’t get themselves to work together – that was a really sad fight

Oh for this!

Typical map chat between guilds is:

Guild 1: “Guild 2 you need help over there or want to handle it?”

Guild 2: “We’re fine, can you look at west side, there’s swords over in vale.”

Guild 1: “OK will do, yell if you need help.”

Lots of communication on map, and lots of cooperation between guilds. If one guild engages a blob first, the other asks if they can join. This honestly happens, it’s lovely!

And then what typically happens is the GvG guilds trade off on responding to scout call outs on map — one will continue fighting while the other will come and help push out the bad guys. If there’s only one GvG guild on map, the map “regulars” will coordinate and fight off any incoming.

Jana.6831:

Jayne.9251:

That’s when you organize and flip stuff.

Cos if they’re keeping the enemy busy with fights, that leaves the map wide open to control.. Enemy can’t be two places at once. It’s win-win.

That’s nice in theory but in reality it’s “organized” GvG fights on usual maps during prime time and we’ve got a queue. And about 10 tags on the map, so no one really knows where to go. It’s abit more complicated actually.I think we’ve had 2 GvG guilds on our maps once, or maybe 3, and 2 were against a “public” blob but they couldn’t get themselves to work together – that was a really sad fight, which we probably just won because I was pushing (as a glassy thief) while writing to them in mapchat that they should stop pew pewing from afar.

That’s when coordination/relationship comes into play. We do this on Piken and have for a very long time. The GvG’ers tag up yellow (for guild only, and believe it or not, they rarely get pugs tagging along even if there’s no blue tag on map, people respect their space), and the public raid tags blue — or red for smaller havoc teams. Just communicate and agree on a plan that makes everyone happy. And it only takes a handful of people to flip a tower, hell I’ve gotten garri wall down solo running supply to a cata on reset many times. Take advantage of it. It DOES work.

It will NOT work if there’s “OMG THESE GUYS ARE TAKING UP SPACE ON THE MAP!” type fights. It’s a waste of energy anyhow. Just learn how to work together — cos when it does, it’s a beautiful thing.

Jana.6831:

Jayne.9251:

And, over time, if those GvG guilds are given leeway to fight, trust gets built, and my experience is they tend to respond more to call outs. But it takes time for trust to build. Work with them, and hopefully they’ll work with you, too.

Yeah in an ideal situation, but again: I’ve been on NA, I left about a year ago and came to EU, I looked at the standings from time to time and you could see which servers were pushed up or down – and I was wondering why that was – GvG- guilds rigging the matches is a perfect explanation – so I think your example might apply to EU standards but not to NA. And I’m not against GvG or anything, just “We’re going to push this and that server and make an alliance with this and that server, because we make this and that server our new GvG server” – that’s plain stupid.

It’s possible. EU plays a whole different style. I’m hopeful for NA though — things seem to be moving in the right direction.

But again, I think this is historic relationships of antagonism between the two groups. If you eliminate the “my way or the highway” attitude (on both sides) and look to see how both could work together, you’ll get more of an EU map. Not that EU is superior (well some would argue! haha) … just that they seem to be able to make this work so everyone is happy.

Jana.6831:

Jayne.9251:

That’s the common misconception about GvG guilds … That that is all they do, when often if a healthy and respectful relationship is created on both sides, they become the backbone of the server and biggest contributors to ppt.

It’s when toxic relationships are created that things tend to go sour. You can’t GvG 24/7, and often members of GvG guilds become part of the pug force when not skedded to raid.

Probably, but if they even fix matches (and go lengths to do so), then I don’t think they care about their servers at all.
We’ve had some guilds which were also into GvG who did great on our servers, but they weren’t fighting just to get their GvGs, they were fighting for the fights.

That’s when you organize and flip stuff.

Cos if they’re keeping the enemy busy with fights, that leaves the map wide open to control.. Enemy can’t be two places at once. It’s win-win.

And, over time, if those GvG guilds are given leeway to fight, trust gets built, and my experience is they tend to respond more to call outs. But it takes time for trust to build. Work with them, and hopefully they’ll work with you, too.

There’s so much toxicity of us vs them in regards to regular ppt-ers and GvG guilds — when in reality both can coexist on map and fundamentally help each other to reach their goals — one to fight, the other to control the map. Just coordinate on your server to have a mix of GvG with ppters on any given map and you’ll find it works beautifully.

It might help if you rephrased your request.

Honestly, I read the OP and thought “since when did we all collectively decide it’s ok to talk to others like that?”

TheGrimm.5624:

lil devils x.6071:

Jayne.9251:

Looking at the MOS, T3 NA looks really really healthy now. GJ!

T3 NA increased populations have nothing to do with the changes however, It is due to all the GvG in T2 choosing to make T3 the new GvG tier prior to the changes in protest of a new alliance and attempt to move YB to T1. All of this was decided prior to the changes being announced, and not due to them. They will ensure that the new T3 GvG servers stay where they want them predetermining the winner every week to ensure they do not move up or drop down. The servers being taken over by the GvG guilds will now be the new GvG tier as it was in T2.

No offense to the lower tiers, but if these guilds are just looking for GvG, why not go lower like T5-T8 where there is plenty of room for fights, especially if they are not looking to score any points. As far as fixing the outcome for the week, yeah I don’t think most of the existing servers in those tiers would appreciate/accept that kind of behavior. That might make things ugly.

That’s the common misconception about GvG guilds … That that is all they do, when often if a healthy and respectful relationship is created on both sides, they become the backbone of the server and biggest contributors to ppt.

It’s when toxic relationships are created that things tend to go sour. You can’t GvG 24/7, and often members of GvG guilds become part of the pug force when not skedded to raid.

Lord Kuru.3685:

Jayne.9251:

Lord Kuru.3685:

If you’re on a server with a really big guild group (or blob that listens), you can maybe do some tests:

• Minions: everyone brings their necros. Make sure map cap has not been reached. Then everyone pop out all their minions: see if you get capped.

.

Oddly we have done that on Piken. We had a necro minion-only blob run .. it was glorious. And we got a full map blob in.

Were you uncapped before popping the minions and immediately capped after?

It was a server event. The agreed meeting time, some got left out because of queues. We had a full 80 blob — or at least close to that, I honestly didn’t count heads, I probably should have.

Lord Kuru.3685:

If you’re on a server with a really big guild group (or blob that listens), you can maybe do some tests:

• Minions: everyone brings their necros. Make sure map cap has not been reached. Then everyone pop out all their minions: see if you get capped.

.

Oddly we have done that on Piken. We had a necro minion-only blob run .. it was glorious. And we got a full map blob in.

Lord Kuru.3685:

Jayne.9251:

Lord Kuru.3685:

And if siege is part of the cap, siege trolls will run wild (not that they don’t already).

Well exactly. Which makes any claim that siege takes up player spots silly.

Not really…

A siege might take up the equivalent of 1/10 of a player, in which case 100 troll siege would reduce your player population: not visibly on a quick inspection perhaps, but it would affect your server. For example if the cap were 80 players (or the equivalent, including siege), you’d lose 12% of your population.

That’s inherently untrue

I’ve witnessed it fighting big blob servers like Vizunah (in its prime) and SFR/Deso. Those servers were/are siege obsessed and still get full map blobs on to play. (They reported being siege capped, yet still had the full blobs out, etc…)

Stop fueling silly rumours. Bonk.

Johje Holan.4607:

I’d swear I’ve seen somewhere else that an Anet person said plainly that all servers have the same map cap. But its still annoying.

Yes, Habib talked about it during beta release.

Then the big ol’ WvW meanies chased him away.

He was such a nice man. Sniff.

As per the OP, they cannot definitively state each team gets X players per map because of variables like Necro and Ranger pets. Anet has admitted in the past that those minions DO take up a smaller fraction of a player spot (I believe 1/8th was cited), so there’s no way they can definitively say each team gets X players because of that variable. They don’t have hard numbers on how many rangers and necros are on map.

This does NOT include mini pets, btw However, mini pets factor into lag since it takes resources to render the animation for those mini-pets and contributes to game play. Those playing WvW, if you’re out in the zerg in particular, you’re doing your teammates a service if you stow them.

Looking at the MOS, T3 NA looks really really healthy now. GJ!

Lord Kuru.3685:

And if siege is part of the cap, siege trolls will run wild (not that they don’t already).

Well exactly. Which makes any claim that siege takes up player spots silly.

fishball.7204:

Maguuma has more GvG guilds than that in NA and that’s 1 server.

Well that’s a little silly then if they want to GvG. I would hope they all spread out on all T3 servers so they have a chance to fight each other each week and not stack on one server.

The movement is good. Nobody should ever want to be in Tier One. Tier One is a trap. Everyone should be gravitating to the middle where there’s fresh matches each week and new challenges. And the players themselves have the chance to make that happen.

NiloyBardhan.9170:

I have asked this in the other thread but still unanswered. If a FULL server implodes i.e. guilds/players transfers off in masses within a short period of time, how long will it take to reflect the lesser coverage?

Believe the dev said something about weekly assessments, but can’t remember where….

Zetsumei.4975:

Trading post flipping been slow lately?

Lol this took me, embarrassingly, long to figure out what you meant.

No, I don’t have Rams up for sale

Just a bit of let’s see how creative GW2 players can be kinda deal…..

Here’s my submission (I may do more!)

Season One. SFR guy can’t figure out why it isn’t working at NE tower.

Memory: Priceless.

Ok you scrubs. Listen up.

Since Anet seems to not understand the idea of a non-invasive WvW event, let us create our own.

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to build a ram, solo, in the weirdest place you can find in WvW. And it can be more than one ram!

Think 20-rams at a tower gate. Think a ram at the top of a mountain peak. Think a ram, er, next to an actual ram out grazing in the field. Anything funny + ram = perfect.

The options are only limited by your imagination!

So go out valiant WvWer! Find the oddest, funniest, weirdest spot, take a screen shot, and post it here.

Community votes on best spot/pix.

Prize is WvW fame.

FOREVER!

Xox

Darling.

I think you’re:

Move to an open server sadly is your only choice.

Gudradain.3892:

For #3, I know the theorical maximum is 1 week but if you held a keep for a few days and still don’t have a waypoint in it, there is a serious problem.

Or you’re facing a server that uses 18 golems to take hills — fails, then repeats that five more times until people go to bed

And does that all week.

Well the good news with the release of HoT there will likely be a mass influx of new players. So those medium and high servers should start seeing fresh forces.

However, fair warning, be patient with them — or you’ll drive them away. Remember it’s new for them, and ultimately your job to show them why you love WvW so much.

I’d suggest servers start organizing training clinics like siege placement/buffs/zerg commands/scouting/havoc. Make it as easy as possible for new people to assimilate, and perhaps you’ll keep that newly found healthy population and build a true army.

I remember the ol’ days when Lord Kuru was a white knight

He thinks it should be free, which has proved in the past to be disastrous to the free server.

Some think siege takes up player space, too, lol.

The post these guys cite about the pets that Devs commented on years ago had to do with necro and ranger pets taking up a fraction of player space on map.

Minis do not take space. But they do help reducing lag if you stow them in WvW. And helping to reduce the lag helps your team, and I imagine as a team player you’d want to do your part to contribute.

Maxima.9861:

Jayne.9251:

They are giving players an option to fix this now. If the players refuse to fix it themselves, then the only thing they can do is start squeezing a bit more and making it a more attractive idea to go down to a medium server — and the only way they can do this is via map cap controls.

Jayne, there’s NO WAY every server will be equal, nor should they ever be! People like different things. There is no “Goldilocks Zone” where it’ll be one size fits all. What we had was working and was giving player a chance to choose. Your concept of WvW is what, 30 man map pops??? No TY! Most of us would be onto the next game if that ever happened.

Where on earth did I say anything about being equal and fair? I think you’re misreading what I’ve written, lol.

The fact is, the No.1 complaint on these forums for the past THREE years has been population imbalance. A demand for WvW population accountability and a measure to control it. If you don’t know that, then you haven’t read the forums much in the past three years.

Anet has finally given that to the players, since they were unwilling to move or transfer and try to balance out the servers more instead of stacking like lemmings on one server — and then complaining about lack of variety, lol.

Honest to god, folks need to let go of the idea that they MUST have the blue ribbon or they’re nothing. EU has managed this — well there are some like that on SFR — I’d hope for the same for NA, since it’s been the biggest complaint for three years.

As for map cap, I suggested 60 (like they experimented with a couple months back) to increase queues and maybe nudge some in the right direction to self-fixing this piteous NA problem. But hey, 30 cap would likely make that go faster! So I’m all for it!

Even if people do move, it will never be “fair” and “Goldilocks” … but it will rely more on player skill and not numbers, and I think most people playing WvW would prefer that to the mindless blob.

And if I was a guild, my perfect gaming environment would be one where I’m constantly challenged each week by new teams, so we could improve collectively, instead of the same stale matches, week after week. Stale = bored = players quit.

Vicao.5068:

You can, I transfered last week to Jade Quary.
You have to keep trying to get the server at “Very High”

Umm …

Lol.

Samuel Loretan.8601:

Those changes are now live.

Ahka.6705:

Jayne.9251:

Looks like only one more week and they should be knocking out someone in T1. So two weeks to get back into T1 from transfer time. Not bad.

Seems that opens to the doors to tons of possibilities.

The evolution won’t be as high next week. You essentially compete against your last weeks performance. It’ll take a few weeks of crushing T2 before we see a change in T1, unless the new algorithms make a difference.

Even so, after more than a year of stale locked matches, it’s indicative that change IS possible.

It’s just up to the playerbase. Anet has opened the door.

I just want you guys to enjoy the kind of movement we see in EU. It makes the game so much more enjoyable.

Shiren.9532:

At this point it’s a waiting game to see if the matchfixers that got stranded in T2 will be able to push into T1 and if the ship they jumped will be able to stay in T1.

Looks like only one more week and they should be knocking out someone in T1. So two weeks to get back into T1 from transfer time. Not bad.

Seems that opens to the doors to tons of possibilities.

Nachyochez.9758:

More general advice to keep from being ganked:
#Don’t AFK in the middle of the road.
#Don’t AFK on top of a node, on a Ruin, or outside a supply camp.
#Don’t AFK. By this, I also mean sorting inventory, tweaking builds, changing dyes, etc. If you aren’t actively moving, you’re a target.

These are the PERFECT disguises for stealth traps tho

Or Moa.

I love watching thieves react to being moa’d. Makes my day

I used to only roll healers in MMOs.

Then I tried GW2’s mesmer — haven’t looked back since. (Not even remotely a healer, but GW2 isn’t remotely similar mechanically to other games out there, too).

PariahX.6970:

Jayne.9251:

Stage One: Change population to reflect active WvW players.

Stage Two: Wait for people to self-move and spread out.

If Stage Two fails: Reduce map cap on all maps to 60 per server permanently — or until the population regulates itself and spreads out.

Sounds good to me, I am always in favor of lower WvW map caps

It’s even better if you throw Stage OnePointFive in there by giving all accounts one free world transfer to help those sitting on the fence or unwilling to purchase a gem transfer to make better choices and spread things out a bit more evenly.

I think that’s a fantastic idea. More incentive.

lil devils x.6071:

Jayne.9251:

Stage One: Change population to reflect active WvW players.

Stage Two: Wait for people to self-move and spread out.

If Stage Two fails: Reduce map cap on all maps to 60 per server permanently — or until the population regulates itself and spreads out.

Stage 3: watch people abandon wvw to play games where they can play Massively multiplayer together. QQ.

Massively multiplayer means massively multiplayer.. It is already much less than most games I have played allow to play at once.

People have been complaining nonstop about the NA problem with population issues. It’s been a topic on the front page of this forum for at least two years. In fact, I’d wager it’s been the No.1 complaint for years now.

They are giving players an option to fix this now. If the players refuse to fix it themselves, then the only thing they can do is start squeezing a bit more and making it a more attractive idea to go down to a medium server — and the only way they can do this is via map cap controls.

But they are giving everyone a chance now to fix it. Something makes me think that players won’t take the initiative though, and more steps will need to be taken.

Shame, because the players themselves have done this.

Stage One: Change population to reflect active WvW players.

Stage Two: Wait for people to self-move and spread out.

If Stage Two fails: Reduce map cap on all maps to 60 per server permanently — or until the population regulates itself and spreads out.

Trinnitty.8256:

I don’t think its gonna affect much in terms of game play. Its still gonna be the same coverage was we have now. You can have stats on how many people play wvw but the real stat is how many people play wvw off prime time. Many servers can que up prime time hours. We need to see how many players who are logged in wvw at any given time to help balance population.

If they reduce the map cap ….

lil devils x.6071:

Jayne.9251:

lil devils x.6071:

x indigo x.6981:

lil devils x.6071:

butch.8136:

lil devils x.6071:

illenos.5134:

x indigo x.6981:

Please don’t get discouraged .. THIS IS AN AMAZING CHANGE TO WVW! and all the true wvw players who has vision know it! .. You have my support here from TC.

“All the true wvw players”…well I guess I’m not trve enough to understand this change. For me it seems to be as half thought out as the golem rush event but I guess time will show us how and if it will change anything.

“Time” is a problem though during the time that people cannot play with friends or are logging into ghost town servers, we will be losing more players that " would have been" that will leave the game. The issue is this causes more problems than it solves unless the end goal was to have less players playing wvwv all together in the end.

Instead of telling your friends to come play with you , you will have to find a game you can actually play together now instead. For me to play with my Lil sis, we will have to play a different game instead.

Go to an open server to play with your sis.
Fixed your problem and maybe a bit more balance in the population of servers.

And what about my guild, my brother, my husband? I am supposed to abandon my guild and the rest of my family to play with my sis? We could probably make a server full just by us alone.. We pin multiple maps at once and run multiple time zones, and I am actually a leader in multiple guilds. Like I said, we are probably the largest wvw guild on JQ,… Did you read the sig? LOL

Balance isn’t going to be solved by this LOL.

ummm what exactly are you complaining about ? Your sis can’t get in cause now all of a sudden JQ is full ? Hasn’t JQ been full for like FOREVER ? :/

In the previous system, it would open in the evenings for brief times and people would get in slowly she had just been working during that time and waiting for a day off to do so.

Why/when did she transfer off in the first place?

She was never able to get on to JQ. Invited my sister and her Husband to come play with me, they buy the game then cannot. They haven’t been playing at all until they can get into JQ.

Then maybe you should consider what the poster above said — if your family can fill an entire server itself, maybe move them all down a few tiers. Being #1 no longer matters in regards to server pride, etc … it’s just a number because of stacking — you could feesibly go down to a medium pop server and make a massive difference — and then have REAL server/family pride.