Guild Wars 2

Rationally speaking, why would anyone pay 1.8k gems to go to a linked server when you can pay 1k to a unlink server that is higher populated than a link server? It is indeed bandwagon worthy.

Indeed, responsible guilds will know of such risk and if they do invite players from other servers, they should have told them of such risk as well before extending invites to them. Irresponsible guilds which just want to quickly expand their roster without telling them such risk should handle their own consequences.

Obviously is way higher than it was. Previously we have half the servers full, now we have 4 servers full. The way they determine the population cap has changed greatly and need to be clarified. Also, YB on high cap, that is so bandwagon worthy.

Oh? So you are saying that mag, hod, sos and sbi have higher population than YB? That’s why they are T3/4 on last link, that’s why they are T3/4/5 before link? Genius….

How is it determined?

Seeing that YB is now “High” and other servers obviously has lesser population than YB is now “Very High”

It might be late but there are indeed two different meanings of sandbox.

In the older days, openworld indeed was referred to as sandbox. At the same time, there also a thing called sandbox mode for city building games.

As MMO evolved, the sandbox mode that exist for city building games are being bought over to MMO. So, nowadays, most up-to-date gamers usually refer sandbox as allowing players to leave persistent changes to the world, things like building and terraforming and so on. Likewise, open-world as open-world instead of using the old sandbox term.

True enough but at that time, the idea wasn’t to balance population. The idea was to boost the lowest 3 servers of that division to win the tourny. People transfer for the tourny, not for population balance but to win.

Now, if we really want to balance the population, then we have to do it right, not the lowest of the division but lowest of all the servers. Then, monitor and make necessary changes on weekly basis.

Edit: Another thing is that it is already decided to use world linking, so all other ideas kinda threw out and had to work on solutions that can work with linking.

lil devils x.6071:

sniped

It doesn’t change the fact that the so-called home server is nothing but a skeleton of its old self. At the same time, people already moved on to the new wvw server of their choice and in that new wvw server, is a new community, not the same as the old servers. Those old servers will eventually become a relic of the past, people will know that. Just because you have that server there for namesake will not change that. Also, you seems to have forgotten that PvE has megaserver.

Another thing is that, it is either you are still thinking that pve population is counted to the server status or something else. If is not the latter, then no, the server status now did not factor in current pve players but rather players who actively do wvw. As for how they define active, that only anet can answer.

You seems to have taken for granted that what were offered in the past will continue to grow with time, along with gem/gold inflation. However, is that really the case? Are there really more golds offered than the past? Also, the amount of golds require to transfer will only increase, due to gem/gold inflation. The amount of golds that can be sent to individuals will continue be locked at a maximum of 500g per week. Likewise, this apply to guild bank as well. The raising gold/gem inflation and current wealth transfer restriction will make concept like sponsoring guilds become harder and harder.

Indeed, large communities have more potentials. That much I know which is why I make a large guild compare to a small or medium one. However, large communities now can be form not only via stacking a server but also by combining two or more small to medium communities into one via server linking. Now the question is how the players can turn that into their advantage instead of seeing it as a problem.

As for the guest servers’ issue of not able to keep up and adapt to the change. I think it is a community issue than the linking issue. To me, it is more like their guilds are incapable of holding on to their members and despite the potential advantage like bigger pool of people to recruit (from the host server), they still couldn’t make it. Also, this issue will continue to persist along with them, even if you merge the servers or create a brand new set of servers since it is more of a leadership issue than a server issue.

lil devils x.6071:

SkyShroud.2865:

Incentive to destack a server is really easy to achieve, just a matter if anet want or not. Simply by locking the 6 largest servers and give the bottom 6 lowest server complete free transfer while opening the rest of the servers with 500 or 1k gem transfer cost. Then check the population by weekly basis and adjust accordingly. You can achieve a very simple way to destack. The word “free” itself is powerful enough.

Why would " free" make people leave their server when they already have lower tier servers offering them gold to transfer on top of their transfer fees and they still don’t want to move? ( In addition to the fact many players already have multiple accounts on other severs)

You actually have it backwards. There is not enough population for all the servers left in NA. What needs to happen instead is to have less WvW servers. The only fair way to do this I think is for us to have PvE servers and WvW servers so we do not destroy communities.

What you have to understand is players move off servers because they are unhappy there. When they become unhappy with the server they are on, they have 2 choices, they can transfer or they can quit. If the only open servers only offer what already makes them unhappy ( sub par gameplay), they just leave instead. In the end, you will have ALL low pop servers due to players leaving all together due to unhappiness and the game will die. Players do not keep playing a game if it is making them unhappy.

Locking servers does not make players play where they are unhappy, they just leave instead.

Because golds are finite and being free itself isn’t, being free itself is a strong incentive to get people to move, either they move because…

• They want to regroup the scattered guild members
• They are looking for a new home
• They want to get out of full server
• They happen to join guilds on those servers
• And more

Then, when you combine with the linking and relinking process, even if you move to a supposedly low populated server, doesn’t necessary means you will end up with bad matches. So, it is not a bad trade for guilds or players that want to do it. What’s more, they are 6 free lowest servers to choose from, if not happy with that one, go another on the next week.

Also, linking is already decided so we will work with what we have now, arguing about merging is pointless. Even if you continue to argue about merging, the incentive to move people downward is still applicable, is just halving the number of servers from 6 to 3.

I have read about that your idea of turning existing wvw servers into pve, then getting people to choose a new wvw server. However, isn’t that itself being deluded? All that ever does is just giving the people a illusion that their server still exist but people know, they know their servers have been converted to PvE. It really is nothing more than a indirect way of deleting servers and creating new ones. You will still end up with issue of people complaining about communities and new servers being full due to the balancing rules set up for it.

Incentive to destack a server is really easy to achieve, just a matter if anet want or not. Simply by locking the 6 largest servers and give the bottom 6 lowest server complete free transfer while opening the rest of the servers with 500 or 1k gem transfer cost. Then check the population by weekly basis and adjust accordingly. You can achieve a very simple way to destack. The word “free” itself is powerful enough.

Underworld isn’t full so there isn’t much restriction on incoming players, I believe the problem is something else.

Point 2 is common in traditional game but as you can already see, players don’t like to be faulted for something they are not actively involved with, even if they are part of the system.

To me, everything you asked are acceptable.

Interesting idea but hard to pull off unless a free transfer is given to everyone.

@Seera.5916

It is tiring when replying to you since you have been using a few types of informal fallacies since your last third posts (count from this post).

For example, while I admit that I can never prove (from my last 2nd posts from one) if changing the reset time can benefit a greater amount of people, you continue to push that point while not providing any evidence that there will be similar subset being inconvenient by the change. This is a type of fallacy. Not only that, you continue to misrepresent my statements.

Also, I noticed your have been asking the same thing since your last 2nd post (from this post) and I end up replying the same thing while rephrasing it (since the previous can’t get to you, I change to attacking your claims) with some new additional statements (since you wanted more reasons), not because my previous answer cannot answer your 2nd last questions but because you have been selectively reading the posts.

Once again, (I retyping this), to put it really simple, the purpose of the thread is a feedback to change the timing to fit as much people as possible, people of different gaming timing. As if it is worth changing, it isn’t up to you or me to decide as only anet has the data to make that decisions.

PS: I am done replying this thread.

@Seera.5916:

You have been repeating the same, like I have, you have no way to prove that it is inconvenience for the current group of subset of players as none of such players have come out and say, " don’t change it please, i can only do biweekly". This is base on using your argument as basis.

Like I have said to you previously, no people on this very forums except people working for anet has access to the records, records that can literally provide a solid proof. Asking for proof, is really, absurd. I can ask for the same thing from you and you won’t be able to prove a single thing. If you insist to have more reasons to change, fine, I will repeat what others have already mentioned.

A few people not belonging to that subset has expressed that they don’t mind having the reset timing changed as there are benefits pertaining to the majority like more people are likely to come on during the weekend which means smaller guilds, if they want to, can create a makeup missions. Of course, some nitpicking people will say they can just find another guild to do missions with which wasn’t the point, the point is people will have greater number of choices who to do missions with.

Likewise, other also have said that people will have a new choice to do missions biweekly on the weekend (both saturday and sunday biweekly) instead of the current weekly.

Furthermore, on the point that you said guilds that like to do it right on reset, the timing change will be even more convenient to them since the current reset timing is either midnight for NA or monday (a work day) in other part of the world which is strictly speaking, inconvenient for most.

@Seera.5916

That solid evidence is not obtainable, only anet is has what it takes to analyse the online activities of the players. Furthermore, as a counter argument, there isn’t anyone who claimed himself/herself that the reset will be a inconvenient to him as he’s belong to that 2-days period. Any further debate using “evidence” is pointless as, again, it can only be supported by analysing the records which can only be done by anet.

@Illconceived Was Na.9781
The debate on “effort” is, to me, pointless which is why I didn’t put much focus on that and more onto trying to explain the purpose of changing the reset. Only anet can tell us how much effort it is to change a reset timing. What you say and what I say cannot be backed up by anything worth believing. Rather, what we are doing are nothing more than logical assumption.

As for the worth, please refer to the conversations I had with Seera.5916.

Also, you seems to be fixtuared on thinking it is a personal / guild issue which again I highlighted, it isn’t. Well, if you insist, I can’t stop you.

Overall, to put it really simple, the whole thread is a feedback to change the timing to fit as much people as possible, people of different gaming timing. Telling me to do something like convincing people, realistically speaking, I think is futile as solid evidence require to do so is not obtainable by any outsider means, which means no average person can obtain it and even if obtained by some means, the credibility can be doubted. So, further argument is really pointless.

To me, the current events is targeting AP hunters than casual gamers.

Seera.5916:

SkyShroud.2865:

TexZero.7910:

SkyShroud.2865:

TexZero.7910:

SkyShroud.2865:

TexZero.7910:

you know you can do guild missions whenever right ?

Like whenever you want….

Try doing a guild challenge solo then?

Is your guild really that underwhelming that no one can go “Hey guy’s i’d like to run X mission, we only need 5 people”

I’m gonna ignore you, you have been making irrelevant posts and now making assumptions.

Actually it was quite relevant, what was irrelevant was you trying to make a snide comment about running missions solo.

You can now run missions whenever, without cost. There’s no time at which if a player is online they cannot run missions. Therefore the concept of reset is a joke used to gate people to once a week. You have 7 days to find 1hr a week to complete the missions. If you or the people in your guild can’t do this than the mission timer isn’t the problem.

In that case I have misunderstood that you actually understood the subject. Again, it is about individuals who can’t play 7 days per week, about individuals who can only play at weekends, about individuals who can only play bi-weekly. People who have a lot of time constraints.

The timer technically, has no issue. I 100% agree with you. But can it not be reverted to the old timing so less people will be left out?

Also, you still assuming that I have issue which throughout the thread, I’ve said it isn’t mine issue but doesn’t mean it should be overlooked.

But here’s the thing, other people have different days they work and different days and times that they can guarantee being able to play. Why should the people who only have availability on the weekend be the only group ANet considers when deciding whether or not to change a reset time? What proof do you have that your minority of players who can only play on Saturday and Sunday outnumber the other combinations out there?

And why has no one in this boat come to the forums and posted their displeasure with it (and I’m talking about since the change, not players’ worries before the change happened)? I’ve also not seen anything in any chats in the game either. Why has no one come forward in this thread to agree with you? Shouldn’t that tell you that maybe this problem you see isn’t as big of a deal as you think and that maybe ANet needs to put their resources towards things that more people who are actually affected by the problem are actually posting about. Like the precursor armor clipping issue with Charr tails and Asura feet. Like account bound BLTC weapon skins obtained via the scraps and tickets that come from the horrible RNG BLTC chests. Like Gifts of Battle switching from being obtained via Badges of Honor and the WvW reward track and the fact that they did not effectively communicate this change beforehand.

What combinations are you referring to? You mean like people who work night shift, day shift, 2 days 1 rest shift and so on? Let’s put it this in other way. Does changing the timing affect current people’s accessibility negatively? Does it affect your accessibility? Does it affect anyone’s accessibility here who are disagreeing it negatively? If no one can prove to me that changing the timing can affect the current people’s accessibility negatively, then how can you tell me to accept that reverting the time is a bad thing to do? At most, I can only leave it “agree to disagree” but to accept that it is bad thing to do, is different story.

There certainly is some displeasure but it isn’t that big as it is the minority, instead of complaining, decided to move on.

Yes, I can agree to you about the resources part, coming from the business perspective. However, it doesn’t mean the issue should be buried and not highlighted. Otherwise, it will be just like the years old bug, for example, AC merge path, buried and forgotten it as bugs, then people doing it publicly like a norm.

TexZero.7910:

SkyShroud.2865:

TexZero.7910:

SkyShroud.2865:

TexZero.7910:

you know you can do guild missions whenever right ?

Like whenever you want….

Try doing a guild challenge solo then?

Is your guild really that underwhelming that no one can go “Hey guy’s i’d like to run X mission, we only need 5 people”

I’m gonna ignore you, you have been making irrelevant posts and now making assumptions.

Actually it was quite relevant, what was irrelevant was you trying to make a snide comment about running missions solo.

You can now run missions whenever, without cost. There’s no time at which if a player is online they cannot run missions. Therefore the concept of reset is a joke used to gate people to once a week. You have 7 days to find 1hr a week to complete the missions. If you or the people in your guild can’t do this than the mission timer isn’t the problem.

In that case I have misunderstood that you actually understood the subject. Again, it is about individuals who can’t play 7 days per week, about individuals who can only play at weekends, about individuals who can only play bi-weekly. People who have a lot of time constraints.

The timer technically, has no issue. I 100% agree with you. But can it not be reverted to the old timing so less people will be left out?

Also, you still assuming that I have issue which throughout the thread, I’ve said it isn’t mine issue but doesn’t mean it should be overlooked.

TexZero.7910:

SkyShroud.2865:

TexZero.7910:

you know you can do guild missions whenever right ?

Like whenever you want….

Try doing a guild challenge solo then?

Is your guild really that underwhelming that no one can go “Hey guy’s i’d like to run X mission, we only need 5 people”

I’m gonna ignore you, you have been making irrelevant posts and now making assumptions.

Bellatrixa.3546:

SkyShroud.2865:

=_=

You know, I weren’t the one that explicitly mentioned about OP having a rep rule, I also wasn’t the one that assuming the problem is with the OP’s guild like you were implying. I also weren’t the one that state not to reiterate the points already given. You were the one.

You are OP and your rep requirement was pertinent given what I was responding to regarding joining other guilds for missions, and that was the sole reason I brought it up. If you don’t want people to associate your guild with rep requirements or know what they are, maybe you should tell your main recruiter, who I see daily, to remove the “90%rep 10% bank/TTS” from their recruit message.

None of that has to do with what I’m saying though. I get English isn’t your first language but I’m really having problems trying to follow your argument now. You say that there are people who are affected by reset being on a Monday morning due to their playing times being restricted to weekends, because they might miss missions one week and then not be able to get credit for that week but under the old system they would be able to catch up the next Saturday. A minority maybe but there are some people (none of whom have spoken out in the last 8 months or in this thread). Others have pointed out that this will always be the case no matter when reset is, therefore it’s pointless to change the time of mission resets when there have been no major complaints over the last 8 months and those who were affected by the change have adapted. People have said that those affected could run with other guilds for missions if they can’t make the times that missions are for them currently, and it’s not the game’s fault that people have real life obligations. In my eyes, you’re claiming that the problem is bigger than it actually is and want everyone to be disrupted again over a problem that barely exists.

I understand your examples perfectly well hence why I said not to reiterate what you’re trying to say because I get it – I don’t appreciate being talked down to or patronised which is what you’re doing to myself and others in this thread so I’m going to leave you to it.

You think I am being condescending and you feel like being patronized. However, I am feeling that from you instead. When you mentioned about my guild when I did not even once mentioned about it as part of the main subject, when the way you imply my guild and suggest negative things, you have already begin to behave in condescending manner. Furthermore, your one block reply continues to behave as such. I don’t know, it feels like pot calling kettle black.

Lastly, is not I don’t understand your reasoning, but as above, the way you made replies is offending.

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

SkyShroud.2865:

It just means you need to read the scenario again, they understand the scenario but citing it isn’t good enough reasons to change the timing. For you, you don’t get the scenario, so, please re-read.

On the contrary, it sounds as if you are responding as if you haven’t accepted the feedback written above:

• Any change requires that its benefits outweigh the costs. In that case, this includes ANet testing & implementing the change, explaining the change to the community, and the community adapting to it.
• The burden on explaining the benefits is on those proposing the change.

The feedback above is:

• The benefits apply to a tiny fraction of players; the costs apply to a somewhat larger fraction.
• The benefits to that tiny fraction are marginal.

Or in other words: you haven’t convinced anyone that this is worth doing.

If you want, you can keep arguing that critics aren’t reading your proposal or explanation carefully. Or you can accept that folks understand the idea and yet remain skeptical.

If it’s the former, there’s nothing really to discuss: you don’t agree with the critics; the critics don’t agree with you and that’s not going to change.

If the latter, consider going back to the drawing board: what is the goal here? Could it be something that you can accomplish without involving ANet, e.g. by joining a different guild (for g-mish) or convincing the current guild that it’s worth changing their current schedule? If that’s not possible, what other ways are there to resolve the issue? Or alternatively, instead of offering a solution, start with the issue: what is really at stake? Forum people are often creative in offering suggestions if you phrased this as a question rather than an answer.

I totally understand the reasons given why it isn’t worth the efforts, again, totally. It was based on the majority and business perspective but I am looking at the minority perspective.

When the points were stated and if people disagree and consider minority as not worth it, there isn’t really much to argue about other then “effort” and “worth”. “Effort” to change and “worth” of the minority.

When I do mentioned that people are reading it incorrectly, I mean it but I also acknowledge people who are reading correct and citing that their reasons to disagree. When there are individuals who are reading incorrectly, I have to correct them so they can stay on the topic and not branch off to irrelevant discussions. Also, some could even relate to guilds which was never mentioned (/shrugs) when the main subject has always been individuals who have serious time constraints.

penelopehannibal.8947:

Ok, so we’ve established your guild isn’t a 100% Rep Guild. My question still stands – what’s stopping you from joining another guild specifically for Guild Missions if you can barely make time for Guild Missions with your current guild? There are plenty of large® guilds out there, and some with weekends designated as Guild Mission day.

Or – can’t you talk to your guildies to see if you can either change the day Guild Missions are done, or have more than one day? Not all my guildies can make our designated GM day (Wednesday) so to be flexible, I gave all guildies the permission to start their own guild missions whenever they want.

It still sounds like a guild issue to me, 100% rep or not.

It just means you need to read the scenario again, they understand the scenario but citing it isn’t good enough reasons to change the timing. For you, you don’t get the scenario, so, please re-read.

Bellatrixa.3546:

SkyShroud.2865:

The point is already mentioned but you disagree with the points. What to do.

No, I just disagree there’s a serious problem that requires everyone to be kittened off again with mission reset times being changed after 8 months of it being how it is now and everyone adapting to the new schedule. No need to act condescending because people are disagreeing with you.

=_=

You know, I weren’t the one that explicitly mentioned about OP having a rep rule, I also wasn’t the one that assuming the problem is with the OP’s guild like you were implying. I also weren’t the one that state not to reiterate the points already given. You were the one.

Bellatrixa.3546:

SkyShroud.2865:

Raid reset one hour earlier than GM, it isn’t the same, just the same day.

Wiki says otherwise. The Black Lion Key is an hour after Raid/Mission reset according to what I read there.

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Guild_mission gave a different timing for GM. I try backtracking the timing and yes, the GM wiki page is wrong.

Bellatrixa.3546:

Personally I don’t give a hoot if you have a rep req guild or not or your reasons behind it, but if you say you don’t have anyone in your guild affected by this (and if you did, you could make rep exceptions for those who can’t make missions with you), then I’m failing to see what all the hue and cry is about. And no, I don’t need you to reiterate your points again, I just fail to see why things need to be changed again when it’s been 8 months and people have adapted to the new times without any major complaints. There’s always going to be people who miss out on things because of when they can get on; people who can only play for 2 hours who miss out on Teq/TT – do you want those bosses to spawn every hour so everyone can have a crack at them? As I said, I can tell your heart’s in the right place but if the people who would be affected by this aren’t speaking out, I don’t see why you should speak for them in absentia.

The point is already mentioned but you disagree with the points. What to do.

Bellatrixa.3546:

So raid reset should stay the same and guild mission reset changes? No thanks, easier to keep both on the same reset schedule so there’s less confusion. Your heart’s in the right place but I’ve not heard any complaints in game about the current mission reset and the lack of people backing you up in this thread after 22 hours doesn’t help your case. If people have an issue with their schedules not working with their guild’s scheduled missions, it’s up to them to discuss that with their guild to see if they can be held at a time suitable for them.

You bring up the thread before this change happened: people had concerns and then adjusted. Most of the complaints I saw in that thread were about the missions of the week it was changed, not that the new reset time would spoil guild missions for them in the long term. Yes, a couple of people said they had issues but I’ve not seen them post in this thread or a great outcry over guild mission reset being an issue. My guess is people who were affected have adjusted.

Also, I wouldn’t say that HoT development was over seeing as we’ve not had LS3 drop yet, unless you know something I don’t?

Raid reset one hour earlier than GM, it isn’t the same, just the same day.

It is true, the concerns isn’t big and the people who raised the concerns were actually leaders or officers who run guild missions, trying to look out for their members. It was a genuine concern for the well-being of the players.

I don’t think LS3 is part of HOT development, LS3 is a separate project, isn’kitten

Bellatrixa.3546:

penelopehannibal.8947:

You can be in up to five guilds. If your current guild can’t wait for the weekend and for you to join them on Guild Missions, why not try finding another guild? One of the larger ones, for example, where you’re more likely to land with weekend players?

OP has a rep req guild so doesn’t want their players to be able to to do that.

You have jumped into conclusion, I do not have members who are concerned about that. I’m just simply recalled about it when I saw the raid release. Furthermore, that is baseless accusation, we are reasonable and flexible but we have limit to prevent individuals taking advantage of the guild.

penelopehannibal.8947:

SkyShroud.2865:

TexZero.7910:

you know you can do guild missions whenever right ?

Like whenever you want….

Try doing a guild challenge solo then?

You can be in up to five guilds. If your current guild can’t wait for the weekend and for you to join them on Guild Missions, why not try finding another guild? One of the larger ones, for example, where you’re more likely to land with weekend players?

That isn’t the concern of the topic. The concern is players who have limited playing days. His point is actually off-topic.

Seera.5916:

SkyShroud.2865:

Seera.5916:

SkyShroud.2865:

It is simple, we can always do a game wide poll to determine if reset timing should be revert back the old.

For me simple, I am fighting for the people who have constraint due to their hell working shift.

Honestly speaking, I don’t see how the current reset timing is benefiting anyone currently.

Some people work nights. Daily reset really hurts them. Should it be adjust to the mornings to cater to them?

Because as soon as it get changed or the announcement comes, there will be people saying “Don’t like, doesn’t work for me. Don’t change it, it’s perfect for my schedule as it is now.”

What puts your group of people ahead of those in who gets the final say in when resets occur?

The reason of “the time is inconvenient or problematic for a group of people” is not a good reason to change the timing of anything. Because there will always be a group of people the time is inconvenient for or problematic for.

Adjust to cater to them? No. You seems to have a whole idea completely wrong. You even once posted in that announcement thread and you should have seen the concerns that were raised.

The old reset timing is already catered to them. The time change is to cater for the HOT development, sacrificing the group of minorities. Now that the HOT development is over with the final release of wing 3, the reset timing should be reverted to cater the minority like how it was.

So you believe those affected by the current reset time are a minority and you still want ANet to change the game to cater to them?

My daily reset question was to show you how ridiculous it is to change the reset times based on a group of players availability. Seeing as how no one in your supposed group of players hurt by the reset time have come forward, it seems to me the concerns raised prior to Tue change were not as kittenome thought it would be.

To clarify, I use the word minority to reflect your point of view base on your previous posts. To me, it doesn’t matter it is the minority or not the miniority, the idea is to make it more convenience to more people. Are you saying that changing the timing now, it is gonna affect a lot more people? If not, I don’t really see why are you so against it other then being “troublesome”.

Come forward to say, of course, how many people actually visited the forums? You think 90% of the gw2 players visit forums? The concerns are already raised in the past, it is recorded in black and white.

TexZero.7910:

you know you can do guild missions whenever right ?

Like whenever you want….

Try doing a guild challenge solo then?

Seera.5916:

SkyShroud.2865:

It is simple, we can always do a game wide poll to determine if reset timing should be revert back the old.

For me simple, I am fighting for the people who have constraint due to their hell working shift.

Honestly speaking, I don’t see how the current reset timing is benefiting anyone currently.

Some people work nights. Daily reset really hurts them. Should it be adjust to the mornings to cater to them?

Because as soon as it get changed or the announcement comes, there will be people saying “Don’t like, doesn’t work for me. Don’t change it, it’s perfect for my schedule as it is now.”

What puts your group of people ahead of those in who gets the final say in when resets occur?

The reason of “the time is inconvenient or problematic for a group of people” is not a good reason to change the timing of anything. Because there will always be a group of people the time is inconvenient for or problematic for.

Adjust to cater to them? No. You seems to have a whole idea completely wrong. You even once posted in that announcement thread and you should have seen the concerns that were raised.

The old reset timing is already catered to them. The time change is to cater for the HOT development, sacrificing the group of minorities. Now that the HOT development is over with the final release of wing 3, the reset timing should be reverted to cater the minority like how it was.

Ayrilana.1396:

SkyShroud.2865:

Ayrilana.1396:

Where the reset is doesn’t matter. If you can only do it on X day, you’ll still be able to do it on X day regardless of when the reset is set.

If I always do GM’s 30 minutes after daily reset on Monday’s, changing the reset from Monday to Saturday will have zero impact. The only impact a change could have is during the initial week.

You dont get it do you?

Lets give you a clearly example

M T W T F S S

Currently reset is on 08:30 UTC Monday, so they have Monday to the next monday to do it

Now, if you a person that can only play on weekend which is Saturday and Sunday in this reset timing. If that person for some reason cannot play on that weekend, he will lose that week’s guild missions rewards.

But if you put the reset on the old reset timing which is 00:00 UTC Sunday, that person even if he can’t play that week, he still have until the saturday of next week to do it.

So, it has impact to specific individuals who have serious time constraints.

Then they do it during the week…

If they couldn’t play during the weekend, whether or not the reset was during the weekend wouldn’t matter.

I can only play during the week. If for some reason that I cannot play during the week under your proposed change, I miss out on guild missions.

Please read carefully again, maybe I should break it down for you.
Individual A – Weekend

• Can only play on weekends aka saturday and sunday
• For some circumstance like additional work, school schedules or social life, they might no be able to play on certain weekends which means they will not be online for the whole week.

Individual B – Week shift

• One week on, one week off. In other words, can play for the entire week and not play the entire week next and the cycle will repeat that way.

This isn’t a hypothetical example. I ask you, do you really only play on the weekdays?

Regardless, let you just you really only play on the weekdays. What is the probability that “Individual C – Weekday” will not be online for 5 days straight compare to “Individual A – Weekend” not online for 2 days straight.

It is simple, we can always do a game wide poll to determine if reset timing should be revert back the old.

For me simple, I am fighting for the people who have constraint due to their hell working shift.

Honestly speaking, I don’t see how the current reset timing is benefiting anyone currently.

Ayrilana.1396:

Where the reset is doesn’t matter. If you can only do it on X day, you’ll still be able to do it on X day regardless of when the reset is set.

If I always do GM’s 30 minutes after daily reset on Monday’s, changing the reset from Monday to Saturday will have zero impact. The only impact a change could have is during the initial week.

You dont get it do you?

Lets give you a clearly example

M T W T F S S

Currently reset is on 08:30 UTC Monday, so they have Monday to the next monday to do it

Now, if you a person that can only play on weekend which is Saturday and Sunday in this reset timing. If that person for some reason cannot play on that weekend, he will lose that week’s guild missions rewards.

But if you put the reset on the old reset timing which is 00:00 UTC Sunday, that person even if he can’t play that week, he still have until the saturday of next week to do it.

So, it has impact to specific individuals who have serious time constraints.

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

SkyShroud.2865:

Given that the GM timing was changed previously to accommodate HOT developments.

The timing of reset for guild missions was changed for a variety of reasons.

SkyShroud.2865:

Given that now the final wing of raid is released…
Should we not revert the GM timing back to how it was?

No.

Status quo should only change when there’s a substantive reason to do so. “Returning things to way they were” isn’t a benefit commensurate with the costs (even if it’s just a ‘text change’, it still has to be tested and explained and the community has to change their current habits).

Put another way, don’t worry about why it used to be that way — instead, explain why you think it’s better for the game to change the timing now.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Guild-Mission-Reset-Time-Changed/first

It was mentioned there though I am unsure what it means by hosting raid but the development part is pretty clear.

As for why, it is simple. Previously, Reset timing is in the middle of the weekend. Previously, there were a lot of complain about the changes, simply because people will lose out in the changes.

There are people who in real life, that work on the whole week and rest the entire next week. For such individuals, technically, they will lose one week worth of guild missions. Likewise, there are people who plays in weekend and might for some reason not able to play on one weekend due to works or school, these people too will end up losing a week worth.

By putting the reset back inbetween the weekend, these people will not lose out because if they do miss out on one weekend, they still have the next weekend to get it.

Then you need to re-read again, I didn’t disagree with the “high”. I even said this, “That’s good to hear”.

The thing I disagree is someone mentioned that the raise from high to very high by claiming population cap was deliberately reduced.

Given that the GM timing was changed previously to accommodate HOT developments.
Given that now the final wing of raid is released

Should we not revert the GM timing back to how it was?

DeWolfe.2174:

SkyShroud.2865:

shrek.1046:

SkyShroud.2865:

shrek.1046:

SkyShroud.2865:

morrolan.9608:

SkyShroud.2865:

Your eyes must have stamp, JQ was very high during last week, I also never once seen JQ drop to high.

Thats very high after they lowered the cap with the linkages. The week before the linkage JQ slipped to high.

That’s good to hear but now they are very high last week which means they must have a lot of dormant populations.

Also, I doubt they dropped the cap since the cap seems universal than individual server, because there were a lot of medium servers last week. Some of which were high before the link and now medium.

They stated they lowered the cap JQ was at high under normal cap then very high last week under lowered cap.

Source?

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/World-Linking-Beta/first#post6113231

DeWolfe.2174:

Skyshroud, now that you’ve been thoroughly enlightened by others, are you willing to say that your beliefs were mistaken?

This thread is still about locking the worlds without any notification. Guilds are now fragmented and broken as they were transferring across many Worlds. That is not good at all for the game. Dev’s need to open the Worlds again for one week. This time say there’s a time limit! Many felt they had until the next linking since there’s little chance of any NA World can ever hit “Full” again outside of BG and TC.

btw… where’s Tyler with his “Follow your heart” with a wink as he said on Reddit in replying to the TC stacking after the leak?

Vague quoting, let me quote a proper one.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/4jrliv/game_update_notes_may_17_2016/d39l3do

In the following quote, it was already mentioned, population is halved across board. So, stop coming up with the nonsense that the population is reduced to make it look like JQ was originally “High” and become “Very High” due to it. I even mentioned before that previous “High” server are now “Medium”, your nonsense of population cap is reduced is contradictory to those servers that went from “High” to “Medium”.

Furthermore, this halved cap itself is sufficient to explain why so many servers, including those that were “Medium” becoming full.

Again, JQ has a large dormant population, accurately speaking, a large casual populations.

I’m just going to /laugh and post this for you…..
This was Wednesday April 20th a little after 10am EST. That is two day’s prior to any changes that took place for the linking. And, without question, the Population Algorithm was not accurately reading our true drop in population from the mass exodus the week prior due to it having a delay.

And so? You gonna keep using that vague statement that was made to answer post-linking population status while ignoring the fact that there was a newer and more concise statement made about the population status, to support your claim that last week status was deliberately set to have lower cap? Even when both statements have no evidence that it have relation to the last week’s server status? Really?

Given that the servers are full
Given that there are individuals who started playing this game because their friends asked them but happen to be in full servers
Given that there are individuals started this game with zero understanding of what they are choosing for
Given that there are individuals started this game with an idea of what guilds they want to join but those guilds are in a full server

I again ask that mandatory server choosing that occur at the start of every new players to be removed completely. So that these players can choose servers at a later date for the above mentioned reason.

shrek.1046:

SkyShroud.2865:

shrek.1046:

SkyShroud.2865:

morrolan.9608:

SkyShroud.2865:

Your eyes must have stamp, JQ was very high during last week, I also never once seen JQ drop to high.

Thats very high after they lowered the cap with the linkages. The week before the linkage JQ slipped to high.

That’s good to hear but now they are very high last week which means they must have a lot of dormant populations.

Also, I doubt they dropped the cap since the cap seems universal than individual server, because there were a lot of medium servers last week. Some of which were high before the link and now medium.

They stated they lowered the cap JQ was at high under normal cap then very high last week under lowered cap.

Source?

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/World-Linking-Beta/first#post6113231

DeWolfe.2174:

Skyshroud, now that you’ve been thoroughly enlightened by others, are you willing to say that your beliefs were mistaken?

This thread is still about locking the worlds without any notification. Guilds are now fragmented and broken as they were transferring across many Worlds. That is not good at all for the game. Dev’s need to open the Worlds again for one week. This time say there’s a time limit! Many felt they had until the next linking since there’s little chance of any NA World can ever hit “Full” again outside of BG and TC.

btw… where’s Tyler with his “Follow your heart” with a wink as he said on Reddit in replying to the TC stacking after the leak?

Vague quoting, let me quote a proper one.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/4jrliv/game_update_notes_may_17_2016/d39l3do

In the following quote, it was already mentioned, population is halved across board. So, stop coming up with the nonsense that the population is reduced to make it look like JQ was originally “High” and become “Very High” due to it. I even mentioned before that previous “High” server are now “Medium”, your nonsense of population cap is reduced is contradictory to those servers that went from “High” to “Medium”.

Furthermore, this halved cap itself is sufficient to explain why so many servers, including those that were “Medium” becoming full.

Again, JQ has a large dormant population, accurately speaking, a large casual populations.

Absurdo.8309:

Windu The Forbidden One.6045:

Banzairush.4962:

Absolutely no. Raids are supposed to be hard not watered down. There are fractals and dungeons for you. It would be a shame to see half the players wearing raid only skins.

He clearly said he was fine with lesser rewards. I would even be fine with no rewards at all. Honestly, what could possibly be wrong with a story mode version as long as the rewards are still exclusive to the people who beat the raid normally?

I’m not asking for the same rewards for less effort, nor am I asking to make it a soloable, I just want to keep up with the story.

Almost all the story is available through a competed raid instance. Also seems like a huge waste of resources, because players generally don’t repeat story modes.

That same argument can be applied for the raid itself. Only a small percentage of the population regularly does raid.

Windu The Forbidden One.6045:

I would like a story mode in raids. Being a lot easier, but doesn’t give the same rewards, just so people who aren’t into hardcore content can still keep up with the story.

I support this idea. It is good for players who just want to keep themselves updated to the lore, the reward can be severally nerfed to the point of maybe just a rare or two which doesn’t matter since is for the sake of the lore.

If you are complaining about tactivators, they can expand the permissions list to include specific guilds instead of a simple permissions list like to everyone or to the owner guild.

shrek.1046:

SkyShroud.2865:

morrolan.9608:

SkyShroud.2865:

Your eyes must have stamp, JQ was very high during last week, I also never once seen JQ drop to high.

Thats very high after they lowered the cap with the linkages. The week before the linkage JQ slipped to high.

That’s good to hear but now they are very high last week which means they must have a lot of dormant populations.

Also, I doubt they dropped the cap since the cap seems universal than individual server, because there were a lot of medium servers last week. Some of which were high before the link and now medium.

They stated they lowered the cap JQ was at high under normal cap then very high last week under lowered cap.

Source?

What is the real difference between wvw and pvp beyond servers?
The builds are different. The playstyles are different. The approach is different. The focus is different.

Are pvp builds just as effective for world vs world?
Mostly for roaming.

Do you start at level 80 on pvp and if not is it something you can level in?
Yes, in pvp lobby, you have almsot everything unlocked, but pvp is not wvw.

Is it usually every man for himself or can you do well as a support build to help teammates?
It depends on the servers, the environment and if you are running with a guild.
Guilds will have more team focused builds while pugging with a pugmander will more likely be selfish builds. Though, you still have to see if the people pugging are from guilds that focus on team focused builds. So, it can be subjective depends on the crowd.

What are fun and viable builds you might recommend for an elementalist?
Usually ele play as staff, because staff rules. The other popular build will be dagger auramancer that runs with frontline.

And what kind of rewards do you earn?
Rewards tracks, badges of honor, proof of heroics, sometimes ascended from leveling wvw, sometimes precursor from guards.

morrolan.9608:

SkyShroud.2865:

Your eyes must have stamp, JQ was very high during last week, I also never once seen JQ drop to high.

Thats very high after they lowered the cap with the linkages. The week before the linkage JQ slipped to high.

That’s good to hear but now they are very high last week which means they must have a lot of dormant populations.

Also, I doubt they dropped the cap since the cap seems universal than individual server, because there were a lot of medium servers last week. Some of which were high before the link and now medium.

Your eyes must have stamp, JQ was very high during last week, I also never once seen JQ drop to high.

Just because your NA imploded doesn’t mean you do not have timezone that is stacked.

T1 and T2 need to be destacked, anet should design the system to be more flexible to lock specific tiers while keeping other tiers relative cheap as incentive to transfer down.

T3 and T4 have people transferring to them from T1 and T2, no doubt about that but closing off like that cut off all possibilities to destack.

Again and again, anet way of doing things have been inflexible and too textbook like.

Xenesis.6389:

It’s obvious they were manually locking the top 12 servers, they shouldn’t have been opened in the first place to keep funneling players to the bottom 12.

Nope, base on dev’s word, the population cap was halved for all servers which is why servers were full, so i assume the same apply here.

i dont mind they keep the “full” and “very high” servers full, but why keep the “high” and “medium” servers full as well?

i still have ppl not transferred over and we thought it will open till relink, sad.

Xenesis.6389:

Servers had been open for a week now, how long did you all honestly think it would be open for? Should have moved right away, not wait a bloody week.

i expect it to open till the next relink which is until next week.

furthermore, the argument still stands
why are previously medium server “full” now, why are they trying to punish those servers despite having much lower population compare to the BG/TC and other previously “very high” server?

i think anet idea of balancing population is to kill those “medium” servers so they can link them up with 4 together while leaving the “full” and “very high” untouched

edit: if anet think ppl gonna transfer to KN, AR and DR because it is 500 gems, nope, that’s not gonna happen because there aren’t much major guilds there.

Trajan.4953:

OK OP I’ve read your post a couple of times but I’m really not sure what you are asking and looking at the responses nobody else understands either.

A WvW guild is whatever they want to be. Expectations are moot as nobody gets to be the judge. People are going to play the way they want and that is the beauty of this game mode, trying to sort them into some quantifiable box is useless.

Moot? Not really.

If you see a guild calling themselves a havoc or fight group blobbing around with 50 people, can they still be called as such? Is it really still moot?

SpellOfIniquity.1780:

Not really answering the question of the OP, but I expect WvW fight guilds to be tight. As in they’re effective at moving as a ball when needed and have good sustained presence. Most guilds I see only have the advantage of knowing each other well when versus PUG zergs. They’re only very slightly more co-ordinated. A good fight guild should be highly co-ordinated and capable of making zergs twice their size to feel intimidated.

I’ve seen it done a number of times but not nearly as much as I’d expect. One of the more memorable times I saw this was when [Woe] was holding off two full zergs because they were all so hard to kill and stayed so tightly together. It was a perfect phalanx and that’s how I believe a good fight guild should be but most of them are minute men. They come in guns blazing, take out half the zerg then run away.

that’s good, that’s your expectations of a fight guild.