Guild Wars 2

Chauncey….. Chauncey von snuffles III is that you?

Shinigami.5932:

How can they base the prices on realm ranking when current ranks are out of wack from all the free migrations and the near future has empty slates.

PS: Wvwvw is not the only concern for transfering.

The realms will sort themselves out in 2 weeks due to rating reset on friday, which will allow the wvw focus transfers to rapidly move to their correct places in the tables.

Name me one other thing in the game that you can not take part of due to what server you belong to:

Fractals, cross server, guesting
Dungeons, cross server, guesting
Open World, guesting

WvW 500 places for your server. If I’m on a T1 server I can run pve with anyone else in the EU but I would be subject to a que for wvw, thats why wvw ranking is > total population. sure these things change but so do server pops.

Heru.5427:

Since our play revolves around moving together, not being able to see half your group at times is quite detrimental to our teamplay. I can imagine that PuG groups of 30+ find this update beneficial though, since they don’t stay on top of their teammates, nor move around particularly much in cohesion, but rather play as a number of solo players working towards a common goal.

For reference, we run around 30 players in WvW most of the time.

exactly this.

if you care about running any kind of tactics and not just balling up and spamming buttons running about the place its not a good fix.

Centrix,

the truth is ques are screwed there is no accurate order to it. yes you can reque and get lucky, but I requed for 2 hours last night and finally got in. as more peple realise that requeing is a possibility to bump your place it doesn’t deal with the fact there is still 2 hours worth of people queing it just constantly rearranges that que.

Metixo.5086:

In case you had not noticed, server population is rather quantifiable as well. Some servers will have a lot of WvW players others wont. With your suggestion servers with a good morning or night force would draw the short straw as they get to higher tiers and get increased transfer costs and at the same time they will lack the players to make prime time play enjoyable.

if they move up the rankings and don’t have a prime time force they will simply stop midway they won’t be able to compete and thats where they will stay in an average population with an average transfer cost, this will make them an attractive place to move to for prime time guilds away from ques in higher servers so it would help a server like that. they also have an offpeak community on that server and if they do well in wvw and progress the servers ranking then I can’t see why that should differ for a server that progresses better during prime time it should be equal.

Miyu.8137:

The price is based on overall number of players on each server. All those players HAVE TO BE TAKEN as potencial WvW players. Nobody knows how many players will join WvW.

If, for example, Underworld players decide to play WvW, there will be long queue on every map, apparently even longer then on Piken Square.

They had 2 options. Either make the price according WvW activity, which can change day to day with players taste to play WvW, or according server population. I believe they chose the right one.

Oh dear god not this again!
WvW RANKING!

wvw ranking is a quantifiable measure to price transfers by that will better spread the population and start to increase wvw population on servers wtihout any. if you are a serious wvw player you would want the servers to be more closely matched across the board to create a more dynamicly changing strucure. if making moving to the lower tiers significantly cheaper and those on higher tiers to be incredibly outpriced it will better manage the influx of players via transfers than the current system.

1. [FR]Vizunah Square Very High 1800
2. Desolation Very High 1800
3. Seafarer’s Rest Very High 1800
4. [DE]Elona Reach Very High 1800
5. [DE]Kodash High 1000
6. [ES]Baruch Bay Very High 1800
7. [FR]Jade Sea High 1000
8. [FR]Augury Rock High 1000
9. Piken Square Medium 500
10.[DE]Riverside Very High 1800
11.Gandara Very High 1800
12.Aurora Glade Very High 1800

if you had to move your wvw guild to a top tier server or from a top tier server to another one, which would you choose from this list. I’d imagine the 500 gem costing amongst all those 1000-1800 would be quite attractive…… if you look at the costings for the lower tiers you’ll notice some of those are more than transferring to piken square as well. its not about gem cost, its about attractiveness and how it pigeon holes transferees into the wrong places.

If you’d like we could always transfer 12 wvw guilds fielding between them at least 250-300 players a night to your server which would blot out half of your allocated wvw places. but we would never do that because we know how that completely screws everyone over.

Ross Biddle.2367:

waeren.9743:

There was quite a bit of reports on how this system was worse when it was tested in DEC. ANet implemented it anyway after silently removing the discussion about it.

I read along most of that thread as it updated. There were lots of negative comments, but far far far more positive ones.

just a heads up there were two threads based on feedback of that system. I counted them all their was about 20% positive feedback on dec culling 80% negative across both threads. so it was a majority negative feedback.

last night qued at 6:30, 1.5 hours later I reque for 15 then again again again. POP 9:30 screw that.

Isaac.6041:

Reann.9480:

Metixo.5086:

If you are not happy with your current server, and you want less WvW queues you just might have to transfer, and since the free transfers are closed you’ll have to pay the price for it.

Yes, let us organize the community of a T8 server, work our kitten off to get it to T3-4 while nobody wants to help us reach that goal and then transfer out when people bandwagon the server at T3 when they are no longer needed let alone wanted. That sounds fair, doesn’t it?

I bet you make food, set the table and get ready to eat and when uninvited guests come and sit in the table and start eating you just start all over again, huh?

The servers belong to ArenaNet and they opened up all the servers to players worldwide. You may have been on the server a little longer but that doesn’t mean you have exclusive rights to world vs world.

Get the picture. It’s whoever queues up first that gets to play first. Or whoever stays inside world vs world the longest keeps their spot in world vs world. ArenaNet already has a system to boot inactive/idle WvW players.

Players/guilds in there you don’t recognize or don’t like? Deal with it. Every server has those problems.

The other servers that have ques have a high gem price to stop more people coming onto the freaking SERVER! PS has a 500 gem costing and has the same ques, thats the black and white issue.

Its just going to drive more and more peple into ques! thats the problem. we’re kitten off because our community is now completely kittened, but the real problem is anyone else transferring is making the problem infinitely worst and on the other side the servers that need wvw players such as black tide aren’t getting them.

Ilesyt.7084:

Dude you haven’t even seen how many people UW can bring out…
When they get an event going they’ll outman you everywhere >_>
And you want people to go these servers even more ?
Besides, Blacktide needs to get their kitten together, they DO have a lot of people but they’re PvE’rs and they need to bring them into WvW more.

UW was an example of a server recruiting for WvW with a large population. obviously the lower tiers are in desperate need. black tide is also a good example in desperate need of gamers 500 gems more than Piken square that doesn’t want anymore gamers.

In terms of fielding numbers, everynight every borderland qued for 1 hour + thats our current situation.

Metixo.5086:

Reann, I am not saying it is your fault people flooded your server. But if you want less queues the easy way is transferring to another server, raging on the forums will not make others go away.

And to use your analogy it is more like a cafeteria, where you have your set table, and one day when you go to get food someone else sits down there with his group of friends. You can ask him to leave but if he refuses you can either sit down together with him and his friends or find yourself a new table.

Its like a cafeteria in the way that when they take your seat you go to get another seat to enjoy your food except there aren’t any seats and their are more people piling in, and then they take you food off you and you realsie your slowly being shuvved to the door and your outside not being able to enjoy your bagel and ridiculously puffy muffin.

People in this thread don’t seem to realise its not screwing over individuals its screwed over 100’s of gamers, HoB, VII, BOON, KA, RG, TUP, TNTD, GG and numerous others. who were running 20-30 people on average every night in wvw, now running 10 people with 10-15 in ques. its not individuals its a whole server and a community of gamers that have known each other in numerous other games and choose to co exist in one place because of this.

There is no doubt now that some of us will have to move, no its not our fault, yes the late transfer prices didn’t help, but what this is about is transfers only EVER effect WvW they do not effect any other element of the game at all. Server pop also fluctuates over time as do WvW rankings, but wvw rankings are what needs to encourage server growth down the tiers not total population.

Isaac.6041:

Khrums.3765:

Isaac.6041:

There is nothing valid in the original post.

ArenaNet gave many days of warning about the paid server transfers and existing players and guilds had ample time to prepare for it.

Active players and guilds that wanted to transfer have already done so to avoid the fees.

ArenaNet already told us the transfer fees would be based on server populations.

Sounds like someone is unhappy to pay the fees to transfer off their server. Well you should have listened to ArenaNet’s announcements.

You completely don’t get it, Piken Square is medium population with high cap of wvw and we not going anywhere just suffer long queues because flooded by many players who transfer here, low price is making this problem not solved and can attract much more and more.

That is one side of coin, second is high populated servers but with low population on WvW cant do any think and cant count on new WvW players as price is high and potential reinforcements will chose to play less but land on server placed higher in rankings.

So both way is completely not fair

No you don’t get it.

If you are so concerned with long queues, why didn’t you transfer out of there when the transfers were still free? You had your chance to transfer out. Now you must stay there or pay the fee.

ArenaNet can now make money off players that don’t appreciate the long queues and are willing to pay the transfer fee. It’s a very profitable situation for them.

Because many of the guilds involved formed a wvw community of gamers that had played together for long periods of time. we tried to make it clear of the ques but the effects have been dramatically worst POST transfer.

this is due to the server being a MEDIUM POP meaning after server transfers for wvw our server is in T3 EU and is cheaper to transfer too due to the medium pop than some T4-6 servers who have less wvw population. so the way tehy implemented the costing has driven more players to our server and will continue to do so which has destroyed a community. this isn’t 1 or 2 guilds its effected its a network of guilds that like to run together. We’ve gone out of our way to protect the community but its just been completely let down by the delay on transfers and now by the system being tired to server total population and not reflecting WvW ranking.

GrandmaFunk.3052:

Dawdler.8521:

For it to be fair, guilds should be able to “guest” (play mercenaries) on other servers WvW zones that have low WvW queue times and populations.

This is a HORRIBLE idea and is very far from fair. We’ve already had problems with guilds dropping into lower tiers for a week or two, solely for the purpose of inflating the ranking of potential opponents, ensuring they face weaker servers in the following weeks.

I think he was making a point at how the current system supports pve gamers allowing them flexibility. whilst screwing over WvW servers that have disportionate populations to server size.

Catisa.6507:

Kyus.3812:

we’re not talking about using wvw population we’re talking about using realm ranking to quantify gem cost

its not about stopping them making money its about using a scaling for server transfers that actually benefits communities instead of screwing ares up.

wvw is quantifiable by server ranking , transfers only effect WVW they have no effect on any other part of the game ZERO effect!

Did you not even bother to read the post above yours? It explains the pitfall of your argument quite well.
A server has a max number of users it can handle, regardless of whether they WvW or not. This is fact.
Let’s use imaginary numbers to make this easier, I’ll keep the small so its easy to work with an understand, I know the numbers are not realistic.
Server Cap = 1000 players
Server A has 850 players on it currently
It’s population is 700 PvE and 150 WvW
Server A is currently locked into tier 8 because of its low WvW playing population but is still highly populated overall.
Guild X from another server decided to transfer its 300 member WvW centric guild to Server A and prove how kitten awesome they are be raising Server A ranking up and because its very cheap to transfer to a low ranked server.
——————————
After transfers:
Server A population is 1100 players. Server A crashes, repeatedly, it simply cannot handle the load. Server A WvW population is now 450 strong that cannot do anything because the server keeps failing because your system overloaded it.

thats a nice story but its totally unrelated to the problem at hand.

WvW has a fixed server population on its maps of 500 players split across the other maps.

The server we are playing on is a medium pop server in tier 3 wvw.
We currently have a disproportionate wvw population to pve population.
because of this we are higher up the WvW rankings than a server of our size should allow.
due to our rising ranking we have attracted far too many transfers which we have taken every possible measure to counter. This means we have 1000 wvw players trying to get into 500 spaces every evening leading to massive ques.

However because of our disproportionate wvw population our server has a lower gem cost than wvw servers that need the players further down the tiers. The total world population is completely irrelevant to WvW whilst T1 may reflect it better when you get to the lower tiers you can get High-Full servers such as underowld on the eu, which has a low wvw population. They need players.

if a guild from our server wants to transfer to Underworld we pay double the gem cost to transfer. If a wvw guild wants to move from tier 1 they will see Underworld 1000 gems in T4-5 (forgotten) and Piken Square Tier 3 500 gems. So the new system basically has ended our server community.

PVE has no factor on server population it doesn’t matter at all.. the only thing being screwed up here is a wvw community and frankly it sucks! and as to flooding to over capacity that still happens to T1 servers and that is handled by overflow. the wvw maps are capped end of the shard they are on handles a finite number of players so no it doesn’t crash or get worse as the overflow in pve will kick in.

Kelo.4370:

Then what do you suggest, we go back to fighting against a massive perma-invisible army that only renders after you are all dead? How is that even remotely better? At least as it stands now both sides can see who they are fighting. Again, seeing your enemy is more important than seeing your allies.

we’re still getting that with this system. just at the expense of losing our allies and enemies at random.

previously we could always see a few people running in so we treated every fight like its 80 back off and let more and more of them become visible. also having high surivability and invunerability and stability across the mark. we’re essentially gearing to fight culling and it does work.

I guess some people like this but when we have to see our allies constantly and not have people dissapear its going to be detrimental to our playstyle. if people are happy seeing some people from both sides at random then fair enough be positive for the new system everyone is entitled to their opinion. mine is purely from a small- med wvw group perspective and i find it utterly broken for this playstyle which is a playstyle that I find worth promoting over larger groups of 60+ guilds or zergs.

anyway I’ve said my bit I’m positive it won’t change and we’ll just work with it and adjust our leading style to counter certain elements of it. just hoping the next changes are focused at enhancing the playstyle of smaller gorups.

we’re not talking about using wvw population we’re talking about using realm ranking to quantify gem cost

its not about stopping them making money its about using a scaling for server transfers that actually benefits communities instead of screwing ares up.

wvw is quantifiable by server ranking , transfers only effect WVW they have no effect on any other part of the game ZERO effect!

Kelo.4370:

Harbinger.9645:

Considering that Anet has said they don’t like zerging and are looking for ways to reduce it, it seems silly that culling is now hurting smaller groups instead of the zergs. Hopefully Anet can find a mutually beneficial solution, at lest until they make zerging obsolete (if that’s even possible).

I don’t see what the problem is, when you are in a smaller group fighting other smaller groups there is no culling at all. There is only culling when you come up against a 40+ player zerg ball, and at that point you are all going to normally get steamrolled anyway.

hardly

40+ is standard for wvw groups, coming up against 60-80 is the challenge unless there is a guild group with extra numbers.

a dedicated wvw guild either wants to face like for like guilds or ridiculous numbers. 20 man guilds that can beat zergs are key to not trivialising wvw. if arena net supports that format then it will allow friendlies who flock together into large zergs an easier path into organised wvw but due to the lack of small group support and design it leads to zergs which are detrimental to quality wvw.

well I’ll say my final piece on the matter.

I’m currently listening into my guilds TS sicneI’m que’d and reading the guild chat.

its full of : we can’t see you, people are dissapearing.
where were you all.

its a guilds opinion that its damaging playing as a team.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/January-WvW-culling-loading-changes/page/4#post1303220

this post was going on before this was implemented on this page I’ve linked the feedback threads from december, there is one positive one for dec culling and one negative one. the negative one has countless more replies that are a lot more numerous in how negative they are.

Jiiub.7135:

why? we got auto targets for a reason, it will target no matter if you see the enemy or not.. most of the time :P

I… I think I’m cluster bombing you… oh no thats just 1 guy .. oh there you are behind us… where is my warband??? oh I’m dead

:-D

Kelo.4370:

None of you here must play in Tier 1 or even Tier 2? The culling system now is vastly better than anything they have had period. When my team of 40+ is fighting against another team of 60+ I can give a kitten about seeing my own team, we all know where we are and the commander tag is visible even when culled so we know where to be even if our entire zerg is culled. What is important is that no longer am I fighting against a giant army of nothing but now I can actually see a good portion if not all of the enemy players which is soo incredibly important in any sort of PvP situation that nothing else should ever come before it.

This culling system is amazing and WvW is playable again. I look forward to the day when it can be removed completely but as it stands now this current system is 1000x better than the crap we had before. Now we can actually strategy and move troops in the field instead of just swing and nothing and pray that you get numbers.

we’re playing with 15-25 people so when we lose site of our members mid fight it counts, we also fight 60+ numbers but we need to know where everyone is movement and coordination count for something. our downing team needs to know where the regroup is, commander icon or not you need to see your allies. in regards to enemies under the new system, 60 people are instantly appearing on top of us, previously we could see 10 coming, now nothing. we even have members reporting seeing 3 people per fight under the new system when there are about 80 people present.

our opponents borderlands are full ares are full this isn’t a T1 to T3 difference this is the fact that this is rubbish and another implementation that promotes just mashing together as many players as possible and smashing into each other with little care.

Jiiub.7135:

if its that bad in 15-25 imagine what it is for us we run in 50-60 vs 60-70

we’re the small group that are targeting you or trying too :p

Culling is now awful as reported in december.

If you like it I’d imagine you are an incredibly small group. anyone trying to coordinate with 15 peopl against larger enemy forces must have experienced how utterly terrible it is in its current form.

there was a post the other day where I tallied up all the responses on dec culling and it was completely and utterly hated by the community. I didn’t even get to finish counting all the negative feedback there was so much in the more positive thread there wasn’t no where near as many posts.

it needs to be reverted back until its better.

The server transfer fees need to be adjusted to reflect server position in wvw not server population.

the culling is terrible for 15-25 man guild groups as people in your field of view randomly appear and disappear exactly as they did in December and large forces come out of culling slower than they use to.

The Holy Eldar.3624:

Kyus.3812:

MMO’s are about communities, in PVE you can part and go anywhere you like do cross server dungeons and fractals as well. In WvW its about your server community and that is it. the new transfers absolutely trash our current server that we have been on since launch.

This. Arenanet said they care about communities alot… Or not? Gem prices should be higher for higher tier servers, because that’s where bandwagoneers flock to.

agreed it also means when considering transfers because of the state of how higher tiers end up good servers for transfers like underworld cost dedicated gamers more gems.

Server Transfers only have an effect onWvW they have ZERO ZERO effect on PVE,

I’m going to be typing kitten a lot now to get this across.

Piken Square is totally and utterly Kittened its kittened by Kittens transferring because they can’t be kitten to put in any kitten effort.

our wvw population is vastly out of control, the ques are ridiculous during prime time for a medium population yet the gem price says come to us come to our server please and screw over the situation even more.

MMO’s are about communities, in PVE you can part and go anywhere you like do cross server dungeons and fractals as well. In WvW its about your server community and that is it. the new transfers absolutely trash our current server that we have been on since launch.

Whilst the methodology of assigning gem price to total population seems like a logical one there are going to be servers that get screwed over, so not just piken but servers like underworld as well that want more wvw guilds but aren’t getting them because of the price.

I hope this makes some of this clearer.

Ragnar.4257:

I play warrior, thief and elementalist in WvW, warrior most of the time now. I can’t think that I’ve ever lost a 1v1 with a thief while on my warrior. Sometimes they escape, and sometimes I have to back off, but never lost. And the reason is simply that I used to play thief alot and I know its strengths and weaknesses, unlike alot of the posters spreading mis-information in this thread. I’m not trying to brag, I’m really not particularly good at PvP, I’ve just taken the time to learn how other classes work. There are so many people on this forum claiming that you can’t be damaged in stealth, or that you can perma-stealth, or that daggerstorm is an absurdly powerful elite. Using daggerstom in a 1v1 or any melee situation is the surest and fastest way to get yourself killed as a thief. When I see a thief start daggerstorm while I’m on my warrior, I smile inside, ‘cos I’ve as good as won at that point. Most don’t even seem to be aware that the Revealed debuff exists.

Thief’s stealth is supposed to be limited by the Revealed debuff, and the only problem with the class is that rendering issues are making a joke of Revealed. The only “nerf” needed is either to fix the rendering issue, or increase the uptime of Revealed slightly (maybe from 3 seconds to 5 or 6) so that it can do its job properly.

They’re definitely not a weak class, and if played well can be amazing, but equally they have plenty of counters if people would only learn them. If you’re roaming and you encounter a thief, they’ll most likely stealth at about 800-1000 range. Wait 2 seconds, throw up a block/invul, let them waste their steal/CnD, use any single immobilize/knockdown, and congrats, you’ve just beaten about 90% of the thieves in WvW. And if they’re in the 10% of good players who really know how to play, why shouldn’t they be able to beat you just because they’re thief?

excellent post!

thieves have a few things to tweek as you say but the level to which people claim they are overpowered is just pure misinformation.

teg.1340:

(aoe is no counter to stealth because it does not break stealth).

thief pops on me hits me and restealths, cluster bom cluster bomb wait. oh there he is downed. its incredibly effective, as are channels, clones, pets and melee weapons which cleave.

saying that as I said a few posts up thieves need reveal debuff on every stealth reveal for 3 seconds.

Spacchiuso.5230:

Kormona.7156:

Stealth finishing is something i hope get removed.

While stealth the thief can take damage, knockback ecc… we don’t have access to stability while finishing… and what do u think for example for the Invulnerable Engi stomp with Elixir S?

I can’t see the problem with res stomps if you can stability stomp or quickness stomp.

if you are worried about being stomped in one of these various ways I’d suggest you address the issue of you being downed in the first place.

aimed at kormona backing up Spacchiuso

Majik.8521:

1. coming out of stealth should give revealed debuff no matter what, not just if you damage from stealth.

2. remove being able to stealth from C&D on my pet. my pet is suppose to be there to help me not the enemy and the pet can’t try to dodge it.

I agree whole heartedly with 1 there should be a revealed debuff on all reveals from stealth and this goes for mesmers too.

number 2 I beleive should be countered by your number 1 suggestion, a lengthy 2-3 second reveal debuff should help with those pesky stealth thieves.

I wonder how much of this thread could be countered by people not rolling with no vitality and toughness. I’ll agree thieves are strong but so are most of the other professions in the right hands. I’d class ele’s as currently the most capable of the classes.

I don’t play dagger dagger its a lame spec and very easily countered but you can’t go into wvw with a glass cannon, no CC, no sun break(panic button) skill, and no aoe on one of your two weapons and utilities and expect to come out on top.

My counter to thieves at the moment is to just stand still and kill them in 2-3 hits whilst thye try and spike past my toughness and vitality, if their health disintegrates you know they’re a GC and you can out dps them with toughness vit gear on. If they aren’t GC then they are a good thief and its time to start dodging, cc, and using your tricks. if you lose to them as multiple level 80’s in a group you have to look hard at your current builds and playstyle and think about what its lacking.

add orbs of power back in as open world controlled objectives to encourage more combat outside of siege range. arrow carts are boring.

less walls less gates more smush!

when the ranking system is brought in their should be proportionate rewards based on the number of people that have contributed to the death of an opponent. It should be evened out away from damage though to encourage support builds.

I also like the new definition of a zerg as 30 people, 20-30 people is guild vs guild territory. fair enough you can get a zerg of 30 people by the definition that they are running aimlessly and collecting up to just bash against a common objective but the game does so much to penalise guild wvw groups as it is that their shouldn’t be any witch hunt implementations to further hamper them as frankly your servers wvw guilds are your anti zerg utility.

Centrix.4065:

Yesterday between 6 and 10pm CET I have reconnected a few times and queued only for 10-20 minutes every time.

I suppose it depends where you are queing for and who is in the zone, speaking from the perspective as a whole this week and not just one evening, our guild is finding the queing to be consisantly in line with what I outlined previously. I have no idea of the situation in EB as we never run their. reported from multiple members on different nights with no change on reques.

frankly whatever the length of que, we have them, they suck and even though we have a medium server status our WvW as the thread is titled is full during prime time EU 6-11 gmt midweek.

Centrix.4065:

Queues are never 3 hours long… If you’ve been in the queue for over 15 minutes you should requeue. Chances are you’ll get in 2-5 minutes later.

in the evenings around 6:30-7 you can expect a 45 minute que post 7 its about 1 hour. this is not a que bug this is how long the borderland ques are at present. around 8 o clock yesterday a guildie tried to que but was waiting for 1.5 hours with no pop.

The nature of Piken squares wvw focus means you don’t have people dropping out of wvw part way through the evening in any kind of large numbers. you get HoB tup Boon and one other in a borderland and the members will be consistantly in their all evening.

CHIPS.6018:

Revives can be interrupted. I don’t feel ressing allies in combat is “overpowered” at all.

because it plays into the hands of rolling around in one giant zerg ball where you will have people to constantly res fully downed players. we are refferring to ressurection from fully downed not assisting players in rallying. If you prevent it in combat you can still res out of it to recoup your losses if you wipe the opposition but they can’t continually res during combat if they out number you. sometimes as a guild we can continually wipe players over and over again but there are so many we physically cna’t kill them all so when we wipe half the other half are ress’d then the other half are being res’d whilst we wipe the other half. good for bags but a bit ridiculous in terms of promoting zerging as a tactic.

OP is quite right with no ressing in combat it would solve a lot of issues, whilst maintaining a fun experience. a group roaming together don’t want to have to wait for solo respawners constantly but at the same time blobbing up 60 people so 50 of you can fight and the other 10 res everyone as soon as they fall during combat is just playing to the zergs favor. guild groups need to be thrown a bone with wvw design.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Original-culling-behavior-has-been-restored/page/3#post1269257

census of culling thread from after the trial

Pro for the return of origional 14
Negative wanting dec culling back 45

bit harder to call some of the opinions in this thread as loads of people wer ejust complaining about culling in general and a lot more talking about lag over culling.

so yes in the after thread there were more votes for the revision away from the trial system, but there was dramatically less people in total voting that way and a smaller percentage of the total results.

Draygo.9473:

Kyus.3812:

Yaro.3251:

Kyus.3812:

for anyone who wants to see some of the highlighted issues and the general consensus

Just want to make it clear, when I was saying “general consensus was…” I meant “…among my teammates”, not the bigger picture.

no probs Yaro the link wasn’t aimed at you at all I’d been looking for the original thread for a while and finally found it. I can appreciate to a wvw team with a certain setupt you may have found it improved but I wanted to get the original thread back in as I remember many thinking it was unpopular.

---

anyway what I was about to post is the census of the first 3 pages of the linked thread. there were a few neutral opinions and non commital responces that were left out.

First 3 pages census on Dec Culling
Negative: 88
Positive: 13

Check the thread announcing that culling ended. Its completely different.

thats because the rest of us were all playing wvw again because we could see our warband. I will do a census of that post but its only 4 pages long and drew half of the attention of the first post.

the only thing I’ll draw attention to is the utter hatred for the culling system in the thread I linked and the casual fondness for it now that its gone in the other post. People really really hated the dec culling in the post whilst it was up and some people disliked it not being implemented in the other one. There was a clear more extreme opinion one way in the first post.

Yaro.3251:

Kyus.3812:

for anyone who wants to see some of the highlighted issues and the general consensus

Just want to make it clear, when I was saying “general consensus was…” I meant “…among my teammates”, not the bigger picture.

no probs Yaro the link wasn’t aimed at you at all I’d been looking for the original thread for a while and finally found it. I can appreciate to a wvw team with a certain setupt you may have found it improved but I wanted to get the original thread back in as I remember many thinking it was unpopular.

anyway what I was about to post is the census of the first 3 pages of the linked thread. there were a few neutral opinions and non commital responces that were left out.

First 3 pages census on Dec Culling
Negative: 88
Positive: 13

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/New-Culling-Trial-Ended/page/2

This is the original thread + comments during the trial. for anyone who wants to see some of the highlighted issues and the general consensus during the trial this is probably the best source. I’d say that it suggests it was largely unfavorable but I’m willing to see the new improved system if Anet think it will help address the issue.

toughness vitality are king in wvw! even on a burst character. I’d bare that in mindwhen making a decision. I play a thief but have a mesmer amongst a few other alts.

I’m eager to play a ranger after seeing a guildy play his and absolutely decimate people.

ele’s probably are the most escapable class at the moment even more so than thieves. but as people have said unless your level 80 i wouldn’t worry to much about wvw I’d make the leveling process your priority.

RoyHarmon.5398:

Kyus.3812:

… when you are fighting vastly outnumbered… does get you killed.

This isn’t so much a culling issue in most cases.

There is a threshold of players that will be sent to your screen at present based on the total number of users on a screen but this will be changed to represent two seperate pools of players one for friendlies and one for enemies.

when you fight 60-70 people with 20 ish then those 60-70 are going to be culled down no matter what under either system, but under the current one we very rarely lose sight of our warband leader.

when we were playing in the december culling trial under similar loads, we would still not see all of the enemy players but our warband leader and half the warband would be dissapearing at regular intervals. They switched it off and we went back to having a reliably visible warband under extreme loads again. The december trial also seemed to be more dramatic in chosing who was and wasn’t loaded and dropped visible players very quickly causing friendlies and players to blink in and out of shot.

I respect the efforts to make changes but if it is like the previous system it will have a disastrous effect on organised guild groups.

RoyHarmon.5398:

Kyus.3812:

I’m very bemused, wasn’t the feedback about the December trial, how much everyone hated it.

Invisible enemies, we can deal with, invisible guild mates is a much bigger problem! Guild members can not be culled.

the current system isn’t ideal but it allows us to coordinate with ally’s creating individual culling pools on either side isn’t going to help against the larger groups of enemies anyway and its going to leave us not being able to see our allies.

I’d like to point out the relatively low chance of my allies joining the fight with the intent to kill me. Or abusing the system.

Not being able to see your warband leader and main assist during a fight gets you killed. when you are fighting vastly outnumbered they will be culled regardless and the new system won’t change that, the problem it will bring if it is the same as the system we trialed in december is leaving you with your main assist/warband leader dissapearing off your screen when you are trying to follow their movement, which does get you killed.

I’m very bemused, wasn’t the feedback about the December trial, how much everyone hated it.

Invisible enemies, we can deal with, invisible guild mates is a much bigger problem! Guild members can not be culled.

the current system isn’t ideal but it allows us to coordinate with ally’s creating individual culling pools on either side isn’t going to help against the larger groups of enemies anyway and its going to leave us not being able to see our allies.

Good luck pax from HoB.
the brainless guilds who keep rolling here with such a clear message that WvW is Full!! its unbelievable anyway a bump from me to keep this post prominent.

Ok so taking on some of your points, massing isn’t the only tactic and frankly against a good guild its a poor one.

I know some guildies have poor performance personally my game runs seamlessly on my system in whatever load, which only leaves culling which is a known issue.

back on topic though, first of all if you are going to do WvW and get a lot back out of it you have to commit a fair bit to it, there are parts of it where you can go in get your feet wet and then go back to pve but WvW requires you to scrap how you play other parts of the game and look at wvw in a dedicated fashion and this goes from gear, builds, weapon choice, playstyle, and ultimately being a member of a wvw guild.

What I get out of it on a personal note is the unpredicatable combat, unlike structured pvp you can’t prepare for certain situations, and its not a level playing field. There is a good chance you will be outnumbered particularly solo roaming. Defeating odds stacked against you is a big draw for me and any build I play will be focused on fighting multiple enemies at once, not 1v1.

On the large scale (guild ) scale, its definitely zerg stomping with organisation and tactics. There are a ton of viable warband builds and tactics that you can employ in gw2, and they require time spent with your guild mates to learn and implement. the guild I am a part of have improved a lot over recent months as our server has moved up the teirs and part of that has involved learning to take on bigger numbers. so we’ve dumped out most of our gear other than power toughness and vitality and spec’d to survive mass damage and dump out consistant aoe. This with improving our movement has led to us being able to take on large numbers.

Its not the kind of thing you can get out of structured and pve frankly is a nice past time but once you’ve played a few pve games and move onto pvp you realise that you have been living a lie and pve becomes a lot more trivial than it used to look. saying that its a lot of commitment, for people that only play a couple of hours a day. I’ve barely touched on all of the dungeon content and fractals because of it, but when you trounce 6 guys who are trying to gang up on you and sit around their corpses because they didn’t prepare and didn’t work together it feels pretty kitten brilliant!

covenn.7165:

Calae.1738:

Large zergs of players should be easily countered by seige equipment.

Trebuchet and catapult fire should flaten players and send them back to Lion’s Arch in a box. Arrow carts should have multiple utilities like immobilize, cripple, chill and pelt players into swiss cheese. Balistae fire should pierce through players in a line or deal explosive AoE knockback. Zerg mass ressurections should be severly limited; 1 player max and should be interruptable by damage.

There is already too big of a reliance on siege equipment in this game. It isn’t fun sitting still on a piece of siege spamming a button or two because it isn’t very dynamic game play.

Most people want to be fluid, mobile, dynamic, and engaged in combat.

this description should be the top of the bill for Arena Net in future WvW improvements, the actions needs to be swift, and depend on good movement by the realm. Movement should be the number 1 factor in determining victory or defeat in wvw.

Dynnen.6405:

Kyus.3812:

From an organised small group perspective we actually find the aoe cap of 5 gives us an advantage and makes wvw a better working model than in other games. By capping it at 5 you give yourself a quantifiable number to balance around a maximum damage for that skill. by not capping it you end up having several very powerful aoe abilities that rule the lakes (Warhammer online).

In terms of 60+ zergs running around firing off aoe, imagine the ammount of death they will bring without an aoe cap of 5 they would be able to instantly kill anyone with that much overlapping aoe. a 60 + zerg can obviously already bring this kind of fiery death but the zerg nature makes them uncoordinate to stag that aoe so you will often find the cap of 5 helping you more than you’d think with inferior numbers.

There are some very good guilds out there that beat 60+ with small groups of about 15-20 day in day out and they do it by adjusting to the design of wvw not playing what they want and wearing what gear they want.

distance between defence points and siege range i agree with the OP siege should be an open field solution that draws open field fights to its location not a sit behind the walls and spam 1 eventuality. this is a bigger problem in EB over the borderlands though where you get a bit more room.

culling is pants we’ve learnt to allow for it somewhat now, but yup also right its pants.

If a 30 player zerg runs into another 30 player zerg, both groups can output high amounts of aoe. This will make large field engagements more fluid because one group can’t just run in all ‘durrrrrrrrrrrrp’ style. If they did this they would be punished for it because of the aoe output of the other zerg. The damage of both groups is equal and therefor forces the zergs to think about how to attack each other and maneuver.

We have done quite a bit of damage to large groups of players, but that wasn’t because we were able to reliably attack the zerg. We would chop off smaller chunks of the zerg into more manageable bites.

when it comes to fighting large groups we’re getting to the stage of wiping the more mindless zergs of 60-80 with 15-20 people. its a lot of fun, but better when the opposition has a guild group in there to worry about. the current build of the games biggest issue in support zergs other than culling is the res mechanic (not rallying). the ability to res quickly on mass often leads us having to kill zergs repeatedly in the same fight until they are all dead. I think our best effor was this sunday where we wiped what must have been an entire servers pop in one borderland with under 20 people in one prolonged push. the current mechanics allow it but the res mechanic from fully downed hinders us and other small groups a lot.