Showing Posts For ShiningMassXAcc.4735:
My understanding of this has been:
Any and all of of your characters had their remaining bonus chests and them summed into pooled account chests. The number of chests your server got from winning was also adding to this. This number of chests is displayed across all characters and decreases across all characters when a chest is claimed (thus now account based).
From what I can tell
1. I received 3 bonus chests
2. Some friends on my server got noneconclusion: you must fight in the WvW of that week to get them. But they are available to the whole server
Would be nice if we knew to what extent “you must fight in WvW” to get them. At least I know where to look in the UI, thanks.
I’m convinced whoever in is charge of wvw and it’s development just chooses to do the exact opposite of what we ask for.
For those too lazy to find the huge wvw patch notes (lol):
…
World rank bonus chests will now be awarded to all players on a server based on the results of WvW matches. Three chests will be awarded for 1^st^ place, two chests for 2^nd^ place, and one chest for 3^rd^ place.
World rank bonus chests are now account bound.….
World rank boxes for EVERYONE on a server? Obviously too hard to work out who had actually worked for the reward so a blanket reward for all the pve’rs that never even stepped into wvw.
….
Especially this (^). This really should have been tied to the WvWvW achievement track that is supposed to come out when leagues do. Have a WvWvW sub-achievement track per-week that will give these out, and this rolls up into the ‘service to your server during league’ WvWvW achievements that they have mentioned. … Or have a ‘weekly’ for WvWvW that gets factored similarly of the ‘monthly’ for PvE/PvP, etc etc. This really makes it look like what you said … too hard, so just blanket.
I expect we’ll get another re-surge of golem rushing with more on the market at lower prices from PvEers.
If i’m not absolutly wrong here, this part of the patch WILL NOT reward pure PvE Players. These bonus chests are the same chests you get for a WvW rank up. You will still need to rank up in WvW to get these, one bonus per rank up until there is none left.
Hmm, so instead, they’ll just collects tens if not hundreds of these overtime that they will never cash in on. I guess that is a little better …
Although, the bonus chests were per character and these are server win chests are account based … not sure how those will play.
(edited by ShiningMassXAcc.4735)
Has anyone seen/heard of Anet devs working on dynamic adjustment of your performance? Sure, I have the ability to set exact player culling amounts as well as graphics level. But I don’t really want to have to quickly change it when going from task to task (or seeing a huge zerg on the horizon etc). I should be able to seamlessly go from high detail environment to performance based rendered based on situation. I don’t see a reason that the client couldn’t detect that your fps went from 60 to 12, and then could dynamically lower your graphics setting to restore some fps until playable. When you leave that encounter, it could then restore it. I know for a fact that other software in the market does scaling similar to this, in particular, often for graphics. Of course, this would be an option you could enable/disable.
Thoughts?
I’m convinced whoever in is charge of wvw and it’s development just chooses to do the exact opposite of what we ask for.
For those too lazy to find the huge wvw patch notes (lol):
…
World rank bonus chests will now be awarded to all players on a server based on the results of WvW matches. Three chests will be awarded for 1^st^ place, two chests for 2^nd^ place, and one chest for 3^rd^ place.
World rank bonus chests are now account bound.….
World rank boxes for EVERYONE on a server? Obviously too hard to work out who had actually worked for the reward so a blanket reward for all the pve’rs that never even stepped into wvw.
….
Especially this (^). This really should have been tied to the WvWvW achievement track that is supposed to come out when leagues do. Have a WvWvW sub-achievement track per-week that will give these out, and this rolls up into the ‘service to your server during league’ WvWvW achievements that they have mentioned. … Or have a ‘weekly’ for WvWvW that gets factored similarly of the ‘monthly’ for PvE/PvP, etc etc. This really makes it look like what you said … too hard, so just blanket.
I expect we’ll get another re-surge of golem rushing with more on the market at lower prices from PvEers.
(edited by ShiningMassXAcc.4735)
Now that you can view your daily, monthly, and ‘permanent’ achievement points, would be interesting to see this reflected in a leaderboard.
This is a good watch on the idea of the ‘skinner box’. You may find it relevant here.
Awesome fights in YBBL [TB], [GOTL], [Crit], and other DB guilds I did not mention!
Super fun times, made this depressing matchup “fun” for a few hours.
Yak here – seriously a big thanks to [GLOB]. I’m usually solo capping stray camps in YBBL while picking the occasional duel, sometimes hopping to other BLs. [GLOB] is perhaps the only guild I’ve seen actually try to engage in fights/defend points (my apologies if there are others) and it’s been fun to help/be helped. Props to you!
By the end of Sunday (or earlier), appears majority of YB has ‘given up’ PPT this week and just following commanders to WXP train in Kain EB or Kain BL (and DB BL when they can). Too many times this weekend I would log and see that YB holds 2 keeps … both in Kain BL and a couple camps in our BL Give it maybe 30 minutes and then we’ll hold 2 keeps in our BL, then DB’s … Not that surprising of an outcome for yaks considering defending any point seems nigh impossible. Solution has turned into literally 90% of our players blob in one map, cap a keep or two and move on.
While I understand the situation and have joined on a couple trains myself, I really hope we don’t see too much of this trend/meta continue in future matchups.
Good work man I love supply mastery myself cheap and supper epic. Isn’t what you get refunded how much you spend ? So if you are spending more you get more back? I have been refunded 2 supply for using one before because my ticks are 2 supply. So if you put points in the build mastery you can get 10 refunded at once right?
Side note if you could check it out for me does build mastery work on supply traps?
I really only had enough data points to be concrete for 10 supply going to 0 supply. I did mention that, yes, I have gotten supply back from spending very little (in fact getting more supply than I started). The most data points I had for less than 10 supply put into a hammer motion were for 2 and 3 supply (not a big surprise from the 10 supply data). I saw much lower give back rates there. I have not seen any data on spend 2 get 2 implying spend 10 get 10, rather the data that I provided.
If i had to make a ‘complete guess’ with essentially no data, the 7.5, 12.5, 12.5, 7.5 percent give back rates are perhaps actually scaled by the amount of siege used during a hammer motion. For example, if you are spending only 1 supply, these rates would be 1/10th that of 10 supply to 0.75%, 1.25%, 1.25%, 0.75% However, this would punish people that have partial amounts of supply left (which means you are likely in a group), so I don’t think this is the implementation. There may also be other variables in the equation here that I’m not accounting for, perhaps looking at your max supply when you last took supply as opposed to your current supply, whether the supply spent was gained supply, etc etc.
I will do some very minimal trap testing when I remember – probably just to confirm whether or not you can even get supply back.
(edited by ShiningMassXAcc.4735)
So I had started this thread Supply Mastery Questions some time ago and didn’t get super concrete responses. Probably due to the general lack of interest in the trait line, but regardless I sunk some points and did science.
Have a chance to recover spent supply when spending supply (several points here)
- You do only get supply back when your supply hits 0 due to expending on siege/repairs.
- The numbers I saw were roughly the following for expending 10 supply down to 0
- 60% of the time got 0 supply back
- 7.5% of the time got 1 supply back
- 12.5% of the time got 2 supply back
- 12.5% of the time got 3 supply back
- 7.5% of the time got 4 supply back
- This averages out to, conveniently, 1 supply back per 10 spent. This is random, but theoretically much better than than the +1 supply trait per trait point spent, especially since it creates supply.
- Community mentioned that they got 6 supply back – I have not seen this
- For less than 10 supply, I do occasionally get supply back. The rate seems much lower, but I don’t have enough data that I can confirm conclusively (or by how much it is lowered). I also did not track whether this lesser supply amount was due to already extra gained supply or leftover from partially building a piece :/
Some extra notes
- People were worried about repair/siege mastery conflicting with this. Since it is not per ‘hammer’ but when you hit 0, this doesn’t appear an issue. However, since I was watching my supply pretty closely, I did notice several bugs with supply/seige mastery not using the max supply it could based on a per hammer basis.
- I did look at this as a ‘target’ of the supply aspect as well. Walls and Oil were the only things I really had enough data points in and they roughly follow the same pattern, so I don’t think it matters for the target of expenditure (and yes I was building oil to get some data points).
- I would expect return numbers for 15 supply to be similar (I don’t have many data points, but it looks that way). However, if this was true, this would mean that you would create less supply overall with 15 capacity as opposed to 10 for a fixed supply source. In this case, if you are really pressed for supply, someone with supply mastery but no +5 buff or Supply Capacity trait should do the building.
- I could not find this work done – if this has already been reddit’ed for science, my apologies
Small shout out to DK on Yaks Bend for unknowingly letting me build all the siege he routinely drops in garry
That’s why people on the wvw part are saying to make this account wide. Even then it will be impossible to get them.
The achievements are already account wide like all other achievements It’s WXP that is not account wide that you might be thinking of (which is different from sPVP).
- Gain improved swiftness when picking up supply
I assume this is 50% from other dev post, but would like confirmation
How long does this last?Lasts about 5 seconds and it’s not 50% but 33%. It only says 50% on the buff, but the speed is the same as Swiftness, which sucks if you have access to that anyway.
Even if it was 5 seconds at 50%, if you have swiftness anyway this will save you less than 1 second on where you are going. In general, it seems like the speed boost related ones are pretty minimal.
The supply return one is sounding pretty reasonable. Looking forward to if someone can do a more concrete study.
Thanks all
Hey all,
Haven’t been able to find much detail on this outside of what is on the wiki (http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/WXP), nor in game. The skill descriptions, while generally not super specific, seem to be a little more lacking than usual. Can people that have put points into this line comment on the following. I have few points as is and don’t want to ‘waste’ them …
- Pick up supply faster
I assume this becomes instant now or still 1/4 second, or what?
- Gain swiftness after spending all your supply
I assume this is normal swiftness? How much swiftness?
If you have buff to 15 supply and you can only put an even amount (ie 14), do you still get swiftness?
- Gain improved swiftness when picking up supply
I assume this is 50% from other dev post, but would like confirmation
How long does this last?
- Have a chance to recover spent supply when spending supply
Do you have to fully spend all supply like for swiftness above, or does this also suffer from the off-by-one issue?
Any anecdotal evidence on how often this happens and how much supply you get back? Example 20% of the time you get 2 back and 1% of the time you get a full 10 back, etc etc?
-Deployed siege sites are invulnerable for a short duration
How long is this? For some reason I remember seeing 3 seconds somewhere, but now I’m not sure.
Thanks
(edited by ShiningMassXAcc.4735)
Ya, very nice. I might swap to this over mos. I really like the live ‘focus’ concept.
Further on this sort of topic as you mentioned MOS. MOS has another page for history and medals. Medals are currently only based on tier 1 matches. I think it would be cool to build up a ‘personality’ of a server based on some of these stats plus your focus concept. Some possible calculations you could make would be
- Aggregate focus for a match, over-time for all matches versus a particular server, and/or over-time for all matches when ‘favored’, ‘underdog’, or middle tier
- Look at placement when under ‘focus’. Does server X persevere or bend under the pressure?
- Look at server placement regardless of tier. Maybe server X always gets 2nd, regardless of rank in tier. Do they only rise to the level of their competitors when they should be winning, or do they focus on ‘underdog’ notoriously which allows them to get 2nd?
- etc
Just some thoughts since you seem to be looking at different ways of analyzing server play style – would be really cool to take that concept even farther than just a live reading.
They could make the ranks account bound but point allocation soul bound.
This would certainly be a step (and is more on task with OP topic then my slightly accidental diversion into account skills)
Why are world ranks not account bound? I’m almost more surprised that sPvP is account bound but WvW isn’t, because in WvW your profession’s role is more homogenized due to the massive scale of objectives and siege weaponry, whereas in sPvP your profession is very important.
In other words, you can be almost equally effective in WvW as an experienced level 80 Necromancer or a newbie level 80 Mesmer, as long as you are a veteran WvW player. Whereas in sPvP, just because you are a veteran sPvP player does not mean you are going to be good on a newbie level 80 Mesmer if you’ve never touched the profession before.
Anyway, rambling aside, just make WvW account bound. You’ll encourage people to mix it up and not get burned out.
I really liked this description.
However, I can also see the interpretation the other way around. If WVW is as you say “due to the massive scale of objectives and siege weaponry [class matters less]”, then being able to pick different skill tracks on different characters is what would result in ‘mixing it up and not getting burned out’. Where in s/tpvp, class is the only thing you can change. If it was account bound, you would play wvw fundamentally the same on all your chars? That I don’t know.
Being an alt-aholic myself, I would like account bound because I don’t play enough to reach that “mixing it up” point with traits. Probably takes 40+ points to really make a difference in how you play, to get deep into a particular trait line? And even at that point, are people really going to make differentiating build decisions? Perhaps a supply oriented build (taking repair/build/supply masteries) versus a seige build (AC/Ballista/Seige damage) versus a guards build (off/def/mercanaries)? If anyone has actually done this on 3+ toons, I’d be very interested to hear what their experience was – find themselves playing the class they like the most anyways or perhaps they play the toon with the wxp skills they like the most?
Overall, I can see where this particular argument could go either way – but I’d like account too
It is not as simple as having both, it is something that is within the code and the interaction of multiple different elements of the game. So it might look like an easy thing on the outside – under the hood there is a lot of programming magic going on.
So if you need to have a bankspace to protect yourself from – well – yourself, you have to use the “individual guild” route.
This seems to be confirmation that, yes, make a “individual guild” if you are really nervous. As a stats/telemetry geek, I’d love to see GW2 guild creation stats for the coming weeks/months to see how many people are actually concerned about this enough to act on it.
*haven’t stated yet, but overall really pleased with this wallet ty
This is never a good idea in elections. They never give you a rolling count while balloting is in process.
Exit polling is a common practice in (at least US) politics at this point, which normally gives an accurate representation. Election results are often ‘known’ before the actual voting or at least only part of the way through the voting.
Reality aside, I sort of expected to be able to see rolling counts (or %s) in game from ANET, to help spur on people to farm more for their candidate if it is looking like a close race or otherwise. I was actually surprised by the amount of forum discussion on the election, and would have expected this sort of voting feedback to the player base to only spur it on
(edited by ShiningMassXAcc.4735)
I feel this was intentionally vague from anet. Not doing spvp much myself (more following the forums than anything), I’m a bit surprised the “adding new map types” part wasn’t stressed or at least had more details to it. Based on these forums, if you had a poll for what you want most from this list of things, I think it would be very onesided towards new map types/modes. As such, I’m a bit nervous that anet’s statement didn’t more pointedly address that.
If memory serves, the last poll that was done had ‘make a functioning solo queue’ come in 1rst place with a commanding lead. I think ‘adding new game types’ was 2nd or 3rd, can’t quite remember.
Ah yes I do remember that now, queues and teammaking certainly as well. I still say the same thing for queues and team making as I do for map/mode types – if they really had a fix people would be happy about coming, should have made it more obvious.
I feel this was intentionally vague from anet. Not doing spvp much myself (more following the forums than anything), I’m a bit surprised the “adding new map types” part wasn’t stressed or at least had more details to it. Based on these forums, if you had a poll for what you want most from this list of things, I think it would be very onesided towards new map types/modes. As such, I’m a bit nervous that anet’s statement didn’t more pointedly address that.
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Challenge_Mission are back °-°
O I really hope so
Lots of mixed reviews but my experience after finishing 30 minutes ago for my first run
- Heard about kiel bugging out at jp part from guildie so I stayed on the ground, had no buggy issues
- Pugged with 4 other randoms
- Party wipe 4 times at Frizz
- Party wipe once at mai because 1 guy killed horrik 3 times and he didn’t respawn (so mai couldn’t be made vulernable)
Overall, I thought it was by far the best executed dungeon you guys have put out. I was able to fully pug this first time with some perseverance. Others have mentioned, but I really liked that
a) You could get downed from mobs. The mob groups were much more about what I imagine an ‘spvp’ 5v5 against bots to be like (hammer war with kds, grenediar for aoes,etc).
b) Boss fights were way more about strategy than anything else. Bring stability for mid-boss and condi-dropping for mai and you are good. Was much more about party communication and chatting to make sure everyone is on the same page.
Definitely should have started running this sooner
I agree that there should be AR on it after it is upgraded, but I disagree that there needs to be more Blooming Passiflora nodes and/or increased drop rate from the normal nodes. Way I see it, is the Bloomimg nodes are on par with the Ori nodes in the area. The passion flowers prior to this patch were a lot harder to get, as there were no Blooming nodes to get them from. I believe this patch fixed that and it is acceptable now as is.
Edit: Plus there is now more reason to return to Southsun even after this event is over.
Did not know there was confirmation on blooming nodes staying around after the event is over. Good! Now I don’t have to feel like hunting for 3 every day this month.
Agreed May actually consider trying for the ascended version of the karka backpiece considering you need 100 flowers and you can get 3 guarenteed per day (for a month).
I’d like to bring up 2 slightly different topics that haven’t been mentioned much before, if i scan correctly.
I think one of the best ways you could back up your decision here is to give us some telemetry. You should know things like
- how many guilds are ‘active’ (players consistently log in)
- average number of active players per guild
- % of active players in active guild over X size
- average influence gain per day of an active guild
With these numbers, I expect we’d see a large variety. But at the least you could say, XX% of guilds that represent XX% of active player base will unlock this content in XX days. My suspicion is that as a company you actually have no idea about these numbers.
Normally, your content does a good job of dealing with this player variety. The best example right now is probably to compare this to fractals. Players with different involvement can experience this content at different levels:
- Player can treat like a normal dungeon – do level 1-9 for normal dungeon rewards and drops
- Player can repeat 1-9 and 10 to build up single infused gear specifically to be better at dungeon, the rewards increase according
- Player can take fractals very seriously and go 20+ etc, with this getting increasingly challenging
Regardless of how involved a player chooses to be, they had the ability to figure out if they liked it: ie there was no requirement for fractal level 1. The way guild missions is structured, it’s like you have required to trade in 250 tokens from every other dungeon to enter level 1. No matter how you back up your goals of having long lasting content and overtime unlockable content, when you release a patch, a portion of the content should be immediately available or you’ll get QQ. Cartwright mentions adding more down the road: make that content the large end game content and some of the content you are releasing now, available now.
There seems to be a lot of QQ on guild size and ability to unlock/participate in this content. Anet has historically been good about telemetry – it should have been really easy for them to look up things like
- number of active guilds determined by average last logon per account (or other heuristic)
- % of (active) guilds with Art of War 5 unlocked
- average (active) guild size
- average influence gain per day of guilds
There has been pure speculation on “most people join a huge guild” versus “most people play in close knit small guild of friends” versus “people move frequently from abandoned guilds”. I hope that these numbers were looked into before making this decision – and they could further dispel some of the conversation here by sharing those numbers. They have shared other data like profession creation numbers and crafting disciplines adopted – I think this would be cool to see as well as back up their decision.
In general (not a catch all), I seem to see that servers try to hold their whole BL (all 3 keeps) instead of having 1 keep in all 3 BLs (which happened more around release).
- This may be because it is a lot easier to organize, as I think the average player queues for their own BL first. I would have hoped that eventually there would be enough communication to get a critical mass of people going n some of the other BLs in order to hold some ground, but this is happening less (especially in lower tier). Guilds are a cruicial part of this and if your server doesn’t have a big guild presence, this is hard.
- This may also be due to the removal of orbs, as there is much less incentive to hold a keep on an enemy BL so that you could theoretically place an orb there.
This change (again, that is my perception, not guaranteed catch all) doesn’t seem to have been for the benefit of WVWVW. Once EB is full, you run around in your own BL chasing supply camp cappers or fight a very uphill battle in another BL. Again, on lower tier servers, it’s much harder to organize this (perhaps outside of prime-time). This change has greatly limited ‘the front lines’ and I think has, in general, reduced action taking place.
I’d like to see
- Discussion on whether you think this is the case? I’m from Yak’s and we’ve made appearances in Tier 3-6. Perhaps I’m only on at certain times or in the right matches, but this is the trend I’ve seen.
- If this is this case, solutions? I know orbs have their problems, and the player base is split with a love/hate relationship for them. Are there other good ways to keep a constant front on all maps, so as to encourage more participation?
Yea, I was in a group that figured this out the hard way. We were on 3/3 of our run with the swamp fractal. Spent about 1 hour trying to do it and for some reason (noobage or otherwise) it just never came together. Went back to lobby and couldn’t continue. Don’t know how many of us will being doing fractals again soon.
Potion effects end prematurely, at least in comparison to food effects, in particular when zoning or upon logout/login, they are gone.
As food does not have this behavior, I would have expected the same behavior with potions.
I’ve gotten hodgins bugged in Path 1 at 2nd scepter pieces and Detha bugged at mortar building, as desribed above, multiple times as well. Just hit another instance of Path 1 today, with the total probably being ~5-6 abandoned dungeon runs out of a total of ~28 attempts (based on my full set armor progress). Hopefully from your telemetry, you have a better idea of success rate here at certain points. It’s getting pretty discouraging, especially since it’s harder to find party with FOTM now.
Things I remember:
Depending on the party, we would run past certain mobs, but I’ve had bugged runs for both cases (kill all enemies and run through maximum mobs). This doesn’t seem to be a deciding factor.
Occasionally, killing Hodgins or Detha and bringing to relevant location seems to work, less than 1/4 of the time though (Think I’ve had 2 successful resets this way). This may have to do with who NPC is following or latched onto. If we knew who the NPC was supposed to follow (as mentioned by a post above) ie the leader, closest party member, etc, this might help. Hodgins in particular seems to flit about a lot, especially when bugged.
I’m not certain, but I think the non-party leader has picked up the 1st scepter piece each time I’ve been bugged. This seems an unlikely cause and likely not remembered correctly.
I wouldn’t mind this and perhaps make dyes account unlocked instead of per character.
Based on some of the sPVP stuff we’ve gotten out of anet (https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/structured-pvp-iceberg/), I wouldn’t be surprised if something like this comes about. Would be very easy, at the least, to convert the wvwv achievements tracks into an overall title that replaces your character string in wvwvw.
At the least, maybe have something like Star of Transference (http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Star_of_Transference) that you can make in mystic forge to move things like karma or skills points that you have spent lots of time on main and want to transfer some help onto your alt (even if not at 1:1 ratio like Star of Transference).
I’m curious what skills people believe need split and whether they are too weak/strong in pve/pvp? Nearly everyone on this thread has been using hypothetical situations of a skill. Until there is an actual skill that needs this, it will most certainly remain unimplemented. Regardless of whether arena net did this before or not in gw1, it makes the game more confusing which is something they don’t want.
That said, I think this game was designed specifically to not require the splitting of skills. In particular, certain elements in PVE and PVP should be the same.
One example in particular I can think of is the Pve/Pvp split of ritualist spirits. The spirits took too long to summon and wouldn’t move in gw1, so they were underplayed in pve. So for pve they added a pve only skill to move them and they made cast times shorter. In GW2, every (or nearly every) class has a ‘summon’ of some point. ALL of these summons can either move (minions, ranger spirits with traits, etc) or they can be picked up (engineer turrets, warrior banners).
A second example is how they redid damage mitigation. In GW1 elite areas enemies hit harder and faster, but rarely had other mechanics. As such, set niche builds could be used many places as the same kind of mitigation could be used most places. This was very different from gw2 pvp where interrupts, slows, conditions and positioning matter much more. The goal of GW2 was to remove the more reaction time based interrupts and makes condition etc more useful in pve. Adding dodging was one of their steps here as well. For an example GW1 skill, look at fevered dreams mesmer elite, that essentially is 4x as good in PVE (twice the duration and half the cooldown) because conditions aren’t as viable in PVE.
That said, some of the biggest complaints today are around thief invisibility and mesmer clones. This may arise from these two mechanics having varying effectiveness in PVP vs PVE. When invisibility is used in PVE, against you or you using yourself, it does not seem quite as effective as it is in PVP (rendering issues aside). It will be interesting to see how they come to terms with this.
My thoughts
A fix to make this more obvious along with general party making interface could help improve the overall social aspects of the game.
During prime time, populations are balanced. There is not much you can do to “make up for it” during prime time unless you totally outclass your opponents in organization and skill.
Sweeping the map when your team is popcapped and the other two teams are running at 20% capacity requires no organization and no skill, yet counts for more because that’s generally about 16 hours of the day.
I mostly agree with this and the original analysis. This could be complete with actual numbers in wvwvw. Having no queue wait could indicate 80% capacity or 20% capacity, knowing that data would back you up more. It can probably be guessed from how long the no queue wait has been around. I could bet that less than 3 hours of no queue wait in a dip could still mean 80% capacity. 80% against 100% spread out over the map should (could?) still be relatively even. Or at the least, I would think 80% versus 100% could prevent full capping.
Looking at server’s that dominated but were in lower brackets (Eredon Terrace, Crystal Desert), they had near 100% capacity, especially compared to their competition (notably Isle of Janthir, Gate of Madness, etc). Even looking at lower tier domination (Yak’s over Darkhaven/Anvils), you see large differences in the shape of their queue waits. It will be interesting to see how they build the next matchups and whether they take this into account. The queue depths were likely influenced by the lopsidedness of the points, so they may not use it as much as we’d expect.
I think it should be ‘easy’ to bracket servers into groups: 24/7, peak hours, and under capacity. Whether or not they would like to do this long term will be seen. Incentives to move, at least to the grossly underpopulated servers, I think is likely. Once servers get balanced out and even the ‘worst’ server still has the characteristic 4 peaks of queue waits, I think we can expect better matches (each team gets at least 100k). 100k points to 150k, seems to at least indicate a front line that isn’t your doorstep (both teams have stuff to defend and attack). This is still only week one and they had little insight into this data, so it’s not surprising this happened. If they do matchups based on this, I would expect this week to be much much better. Balancing out server populations will allow more server permutations in the future, while now they are relatively restricted.
My biggest hope is that people don’t think wvw has large fundamental problems that can’t be fixed. This still seems like a pretty simple problem and they’ll handle it just fine.