Guild Wars 2

Arantheal.7396:

SkyShroud.2865:

Arantheal.7396:

-snip-

Trolololol. I am suggesting a equal sudden death for everyone and rebirth together. You are suggesting a natural death for everyone. Well, both are death. I do agree that servers need to be cut down in numbers. Just too many servers, not enough indians.

If that is what you’ve gathered from my post(s), you haven’t gathered anything.
In my last post I mentioned that the threat of possible extinction for a server – just as it exists for regular guilds – could improve the server-experience and bonding process for new (and maybe even already existing) players of that community and forge them together more closely. While the deletion of irrelevant servers would certainly improve the gameplay for everyone else, I did not advocate for it to actually happen. If such an event would occur, it would be a disastrous one, and possibly discourage many people from such a server to continue playing wvw or gw2 at all.
Yes, pulling the life-support would thin out the irrelevant servers out there, but since my original proposal would allow all servers to grow from the same population-pool, this issue will most likely be offset over time.
I merely came up with this option after your question about linking or not in my proposal, and I responded that I don’t have heavy opinion on linking, so it may as well can stay in place for the time being.
In fact, the populationcap can stay in place as well. Every 3 months it would be reduced anyways as inactive accounts get unplugged from them, and therefore just cause smaller servers to catch up over time. Therefore a population-cap wouldn’t be an issue anymore (as you try to make it out to be) since every server has the chance to reach it eventually.

You and I do advocate for very different solutions.
I want to preserve the current wvw communities and their identity.
You don’t.

No idea if norbe tells the truth about your intentions, but he is certainly correct in his accusation of you using a disingenuous argumentation-style. Do us all a favor and quit the constant misrepresentations.
tyvm.

Nah, I gathered it as it is. I wasn’t the one that ask you about your opinions on linking, you already lost track of the conversation between yourself and others.

Furthermore, the natural death isn’t preserving a server community. Server community is way bigger than a guild of even 500 man. Implementing natural death in system perspective means you have to setup a criteria as guideline for it, that guideline will most likely exterminate the remnants even if they oppose it. It isn’t any much different mine. You are just selectively destroying server and I am choosing equal death to all in the spirit of fairness.

Also, even without natural death, as mentioned in my other posts (if you really did read them). You reducing the threshold again is selectively attacking server communities, in this case the top populated communities. To spread the populations, you have to take from somewhere, you cannot achieve populations balance in a reasonable short period of time without that. Likewise, to spread populations, you have to acknowledge the fact that there is not enough off hours guild to spread across 24 servers and likewise the coverage.

Anyway, you are selectively harming servers while I am being fair to all servers.

As for the ad hominem attack, if I were to say I am tired of getting smashed over by blobs over and over again, my server continuously go full thus recruitment increasely difficult, even full still not able to match other servers’ numbers, I with my pride refuse to stack on T1 and finally my guild is one of the very very few guilds in off hours capable of sustaining in a non-off hour presence server, would you believe that? It is my words against others, it is a pointless discussion, ad hominem attacks are just a pure waste of time.

There is nothing disingenuous about in my argument, if people continuously intending to move the topic off the point, I have to call them out for it. To sway topic off point itself is a fallacy.

Btw, did I question your intention when made your proposal? I only do question people’s intention if they continuously intending to sway the topic off point.

For others who don’t know what is ad hominem attacks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVFK8sVdJNg

Without quantity, there is no quality. Unless there are people to work with, to improve with, then only quality will flourish from there. However, if there isn’t any people to work with, to improve with, quality is non-existence.

We will always need quantity before quality.
Also, another thing is that the amount of good players is also proportional to the quantity of the server. The more people you have, the more good players are in there. It is never possible achieve 100% good players.

Arantheal.7396:

I don’t have a strong opinion on linking either way.
While it obviously diminishes server-identity, it also prevents dull match-ups where one server steamrolls both of the others to the point of constant spawncamping.
I’d say, let it be for now.
On the long run, you could do the following:

- Give servers time to profit from these new fertile grounds, and then remove linking when they all have a decently active environment.
And once that’s done:
- Introduce a “purgatory” period. Servers that A ) get steamrolled 3(or any other number of) times in succession and B ) have very low activity will be purged from the server-list permanently. Former players of this server get free transfers.

Some communities are simply not able to survive in a competitive environment. And playing against them often is no fun for the stronger server, either. So the weakest servers should be able to be removed to improve the state of the game. And since they would logically have a really low population-count, they could band together and transport their community intact to another server, where they will merge over time with the present culture…

You see this happening to regular guilds as well. They form, erode, split, disband, die a slow death and disappear eventually. The struggle to prevent this is part of what glues guild-players together. Allowing this to happen on server scale might actually improve the situation for the weaker servers.
As of now, they just stagnate for eternity, so they would still drag down the wvw-experience for everyone involved, if linking wouldn’t prevent this. I say: turn off the life support, and allow servers to die like regular guilds as well. Some things must be put to rest to allow new ones to rise.

And especially for the latter, I’d do the following:
Allow mega-guilds (250+ players) to contact A-net and ask an Admin for permission to open a new server and be placed on it immediately. Once a Server and its name gets purged, an Admin could follow through and introduce this new guild server to replace it…

Trolololol. I am suggesting a equal sudden death for everyone and rebirth together. You are suggesting a natural death for everyone. Well, both are death. I do agree that servers need to be cut down in numbers. Just too many servers, not enough indians.

Norbe.7630:

….

Is this post targeting me?

Now you are doing ad hominem attack on me and not only that, you attack my nation too. You really want to be banned from forums, right?

If you want to attack my credibility, I can easily attack your’s and I mean it, it is really easy to attack your’s.

I have post histories of up to 5 years and anyone (of too much free time on their hand) can track back my posts year after year about me mentioning the same thing, population imbalance.

FYI, you won’t be the last one doing personal attacks on me anyway. I have plenty of people doing that, almost daily, behind my back or whatever. People find it really easy to blame me, a leader of large guild, for their servers dying or their guilds dying or simply to demean us to boost their own image or whatever, is really toxic.

Arantheal.7396:

@ skyshroud
the goal is NOT to balance all servers population-wise.
imbalance is part of the game, and result of bandwagoning / server-success. And imbalance is needed to provoke competition: “There are new hights to reach! lets try harder!”. All is fair and square in war and love.

the goal of this change is to equalize all servers in terms of chances.
there is no hidden population-cap anymore, since all draw from the same pool of players, and therefore have equal chances to compete and shift the balance between them. So you remove the “ice” as you coined it, but on the same time keep the communities / server-identities alive. Therefore I believe that this change would satisfy both sides of the fence, resulting in A-net to actually implement it, and therefore improve the game for all of us.

Yes, as mention in the long wall of text, I too mentioned about giving servers fighting chance. However, the fixed threshold is not gonna provide servers fighting chance. The long wall of text, while intimating and tiring to read, is a near complete solution aim to tackle great majority of the issues.

Still, by purging players out, you are touching the communities. It is something inevitable. At the same time, as mentioned in the wall of text, even applying the non-mandatory and dynamic threshold will not help the imbalance issue much because of how the algorithm works alongside with stacked coverage, it just means that there will be server becoming full because of their imbalance coverage. Finally, to give servers fighting chances is to also include limiting the growth of specific servers and we all know that some servers vastly bigger than some servers, this tend to lock these servers for long period thus guilds in those servers will eventually feel the stress of not able to replace or expand which can lead to negative emotions of wanting to quit.

@Arantheal.7396

Basically, is gist of it is to make servers non-mandatory right? Then periodically purge inactive so that it will the inactive will not cause a sudden spike of populations which in return unbalance it and at the same time, make use of the returning players to help to balance the wvw populations. You then addon trial period to allow them to test the wvw environment.

Well, the non-mandatory server is part of this proposal but as mentioned in long texts, implementing this on current system will not have a maximum effect. Firstly, the threshold is fixed, they can choose a already populated server to stack on, ignoring the emptier servers. Secondly, the reward patch already driven most of those non-wvwers into the wvw, that is one major loss of opportunity to balance the populations.

Deaeira.2651:

SkyShroud.2865:

Deaeira.2651:

SkyShroud.2865:

That is wrong. My argument assume not everyone is honest in their opinions. Just because one phrase their opinions in certain manner doesn’t means they mean it that way. It is quite easy to make use of sympathy as arguments to convince people, it is also quite easy to turn it into strawman argument. It is way easier to just say don’t delete my server I like it instead of explaining the real reasons behind it. What I am doing here is to identify their honest reasons and convince their reasons are not an issue in the new system.

Without further knowledge about a player, I must either give all of them the benefit of the doubt and assume honesty or I must distrust all of them equally. Since you want to be taken as honest, please extend the courtesy to all others. Since you are versed in philosophy and its fallacies, you surely know about the Categorical Imperative.

As you already said, without further knowledge but what if I do have some other encounter of mentioned players? Afterall, it seems to me that you are standing up for a few instead of every poster as I respond differently to every poster.

I appreciate that you know about categorical imperative but that isn’t how you use it. What is the “maxim” for this case, everyone’s and mine?

I will highlight the maxime from your quote: not everyone is honest in their opinions. If this is the general principle, the question is: why should I assume you yourself are honest when you claim unnamed others are not? If you want to be given the benefit of doubt, you need to give it to others yourself. Furthermore you generalize from the particular case: you use your unnamed dishonest persons to disregard everyone else of the same opinion.

Whoa whoa, stop right there. Since when did I disregard everyone else of the same opinion? That is your perspective, I even did mentioned I responded to everyone differently. Likewise, in your perspective, does “not everyone is honest in their opinions” means every single one? It seems to me that way? /shrug

A principle must be truthful, apparently you trying to draw a black & white here, poor attempt to start a strawman argument.

Deaeira.2651:

SkyShroud.2865:

Deaeira.2651:

SkyShroud.2865:

Edit:
As for your server community, as already mentioned, if your server community is as united as you make it out to be, they can always arrange to move to a specific server. For big fat servers like the ones in T1, it may be impossible but for smaller servers, it is very possible. However, as mentioned, I do think that guilds will end up using this chance to explore.

I am from Vabbi (and have always been). We have lived, amongst other things, through a year of constant bottom rank #27 in the league (about 3 years ago), being 15 people on all maps during primetime (shortly before links) and nine months of being a mercenary server. When the hype is gone, we will probably end up back there. Still, a good core of 30 people refused to leave the server and will most likely stay, no matter what. You are overstepping your bounds by telling me to do as you please.

Just to be clear: I strongly reject this proposal.

Those are strong words. I would like to make it really clear that if one reject any proposals to populations balance and all of these proposals will definitely will not leave any communities untouched, please do not complain or rant about population imbalance, please do not QQ about blobs running over the zerg, please do not rage quit wvw just because you are outnumbered. Oh, do note that there will be people in your server or community not as easily contented as you, you will lose them.

You are again subject to the logical fallacy of faulty generalization: I reject your proposal, not any proposal. You know enough about these fallacies when they are applied against you, please also take care that you are not trapped by them yourself.

And you are doing an ad hominem attack on me. /Shrug
Also, this isn’t a logical fallacy either. All the proposals to date touch the servers or communities in one way or another. That is the nature of balancing, to balance something you have to disrupt something.

Anyway, I find your opinions contradictory with your post histories. It seems to me that you are not here to constructively list out the flaws of my proposals but rather attempting to attack me as a person, ignoring most of what I have wrote.

Conner.4702:

This doesn’t solve population imbalance at all in the long term. You don’t solve population imbalance by balancing prime time, you need to balance non prime time, which can not be done with this idea.

Take 4 decks of cards.
1 remain full
1 take out all black
1 take out all clubs and face cards
1 take out all clubs and diamonds.
Now shuffle them and make 4 new stacks and see how balanced the stacks are. They won’t be and that is the problem WvW with the current NA, EU separation has.

You can’t balance a 24/7 battlefield when the pool you are getting your people from isn’t 24/7 as well.

I did left out the implementation part off the first few posts. I will try squeeze up a summary and include it in it.

Anyway, the implementation part is critical in balancing coverage, this is base on the human behavior of wanting to join WvW asap when something new happen. That is to say devs can take advantage of this behavior and choose a suitable timing where most and least of prime time and off hours time are on, implement it. The players will flow in and slowly fill up the different servers, guided by the dynamic capping. If players have specific servers they want to join, they have to wait for other players to fill up other servers. First come first serve approach isn’t foolproof but it will balance majority of it.

An additional safety net can be added by monitoring and tagging players by play timing, this can be done a few months before the new system. Then, modify the dynamic capping to support dynamic threshold by timings. Though this will not prevent new or returning players from screwing up, it can still lesser the imbalance problem. It can also coupled with the transfer incentive of a full server, to encourage players based in a stacked timezone to move off to a less stacked timezone.

I think is lag, he die way too far from the place he was downed.

Deaeira.2651:

SkyShroud.2865:

That is wrong. My argument assume not everyone is honest in their opinions. Just because one phrase their opinions in certain manner doesn’t means they mean it that way. It is quite easy to make use of sympathy as arguments to convince people, it is also quite easy to turn it into strawman argument. It is way easier to just say don’t delete my server I like it instead of explaining the real reasons behind it. What I am doing here is to identify their honest reasons and convince their reasons are not an issue in the new system.

Without further knowledge about a player, I must either give all of them the benefit of the doubt and assume honesty or I must distrust all of them equally. Since you want to be taken as honest, please extend the courtesy to all others. Since you are versed in philosophy and its fallacies, you surely know about the Categorical Imperative.

As you already said, without further knowledge but what if I do have some other encounter of mentioned players? Afterall, it seems to me that you are standing up for a few instead of every poster as I respond differently to every poster.

I appreciate that you know about categorical imperative but that isn’t how you use it. What is the “maxim” for this case, everyone’s and mine?

Deaeira.2651:

SkyShroud.2865:

Edit:
As for your server community, as already mentioned, if your server community is as united as you make it out to be, they can always arrange to move to a specific server. For big fat servers like the ones in T1, it may be impossible but for smaller servers, it is very possible. However, as mentioned, I do think that guilds will end up using this chance to explore.

I am from Vabbi (and have always been). We have lived, amongst other things, through a year of constant bottom rank #27 in the league (about 3 years ago), being 15 people on all maps during primetime (shortly before links) and nine months of being a mercenary server. When the hype is gone, we will probably end up back there. Still, a good core of 30 people refused to leave the server and will most likely stay, no matter what. You are overstepping your bounds by telling me to do as you please.

Just to be clear: I strongly reject this proposal.

Those are strong words. I would like to make it really clear that if one reject any proposals to populations balance and all of these proposals will definitely will not leave any communities untouched, please do not complain or rant about population imbalance, please do not QQ about blobs running over the zerg, please do not rage quit wvw just because you are outnumbered. Oh, do note that there will be people in your server or community not as easily contented as you, you will lose them.

Norbe.7630:

you have my sympathy Sky…..
if your guild is not treated by your server very well that must be frustrating…..
i guess your guild doesn’t have a place to call home yet

i remembered one quote on a final fantasy character

“If this world seeks my destruction… It goes with me…”
-Genesis

heres the poem he recited, i hope that can help you make up your mind, its called loveless
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6BpXEBw66Y

…i offer thee this silent sacrifice.

whether you are loved or not loved by your server, always take care of your guild, they are your ingame family

It is funny how you were complaining about trollish behavior on another post and yet here you are doing the same, it speaks volume.

Deaeira.2651:

SkyShroud.2865:

I am not sure about most players. As you can already see in the thread, a lot of people oppose greatly about deleting servers and remaking them (without trying to understand the logic anyway). Even though we do not know how many are still around with that strong sense of server identity, they are still around, at least there are quite a number of vocal minority around. We do not know if they using it as a convenient excuse or what, it is there.

While I don’t have that sense of server identity because I put guild over server, I still do play WvW for what it is but if you megalized it, it isn’t the same WvW anymore.

I identify with the people I know and like to play with, if they are in my guild or not. Would my guild move to a different server, I would be heavily torn. It is not hard to imagine that these feelings are quite common. Yet you disregard it by writing “We do not know if they using it as a convenient excuse or what[…]”. During this discussion, you have pointed to ad hominem attacks against you. Nevertheless, your whole argumentation assumes that people share your guild over server identity feelings and ignores all others. It might be really helpful if you acknowledged that server communities hold people together with the similar strength as guilds do, even more the smaller a server is.

That is wrong. My argument assume not everyone is honest in their opinions. Just because one phrase their opinions in certain manner doesn’t means they mean it that way. It is quite easy to make use of sympathy as arguments to convince people, it is also quite easy to turn it into strawman argument. It is way easier to just say don’t delete my server I like it instead of explaining the real reasons behind it. What I am doing here is to identify their honest reasons and convince their reasons are not an issue in the new system.

Edit:
As for your server community, as already mentioned, if your server community is as united as you make it out to be, they can always arrange to move to a specific server. For big fat servers like the ones in T1, it may be impossible but for smaller servers, it is very possible. However, as mentioned, I do think that guilds will end up using this chance to explore.

NonstickRon.8641:

SkyShroud.2865:

1. What timezones are you playing in?
It is important because wvw is 24/7

2. How many people do you have?
It is important because some servers are close to full while some timezones are very outmanned in some servers.

3. Roaming or Zerg?
It is important to decide the future of your playstyle. To roam means you not planning to grow huge. To zerg means you planning to recruit to reach that numbers which means you need a server where you can have easier time to recruit.

We’re predominantly EST. We’re not “a WvW guild” but are currently pinging the membership to see how many are interested in WvW and if they’d be willing to move in an effort to come together on a server. It may only end up being a couple people. We’re still info gathering, like I said, perhaps we’ll have a WvW arm in the future so we want to plan ahead for that with at least a server to tell people to join if they ask where they should go. I’ve personally been just jumping into wvw solo and playing chase the commander tag when I can, and roaming when I can’t.

Thanks for all the information, this has been very informative.

You are looking for servers that use discord, this alone narrow down a lot of servers.
You are also looking at EST so you can strike off the servers that are too packed during those timezones, servers usually from the top two tiers.

I guess the most important part still is the playstyle your guild is looking for. If you are looking for a zerg playstyle, I do suggest you to go to a guest server as many host servers are crowded and a crowded servers don’t naturally means a good place for recruitment and likewise since your guild is like a PvX guild, you may have players joining you from other servers in future so guest servers that are most likely open for a long time will fit your guild better. Of course, I would suggest you to avoid the smallest guest server and pick the bigger ones.

Should post that in bug forum

It was mentioned that the guild runs late NA aka PST so not gonna put in other guilds in but down the list I see two guilds that run primarily SEA time, unlikely to see them during NA monday to friday . It gives me the impression that the creator runs out of names for the last two slots so they just squeeze them in.

It was also mentioned that it was meant for new or returning players but the list lack servers and the point of contacts (some youtubes don’t have those). Furthermore, it also lack timezones, I am sure not all of them are PST.

It seems to me like the typical youtube’s “my top 10 songs” while getting attentions for their own channel, in this case for their own server and guild.

Ubi.4136:

IT WON’T WORK.

They would have to remove server transfers after the deletion…or the bandwagon will happen again.
Transfers cost money/generate revenue.

Anet will not do anything that eliminates a source of revenue.

As mentioned, stacking is the result of players exploiting the gap between actual wvw populations and the fixed limit threshold. The dynamic threshold control that gap dynamically unlike the fixed threshold, thus stacking is not possible.

As mentioned, the thread is not about anet earning or not earning money, it is about designing a sustainable system.

1. What timezones are you playing in?
It is important because wvw is 24/7

2. How many people do you have?
It is important because some servers are close to full while some timezones are very outmanned in some servers.

3. Roaming or Zerg?
It is important to decide the future of your playstyle. To roam means you not planning to grow huge. To zerg means you planning to recruit to reach that numbers which means you need a server where you can have easier time to recruit.

Well, actually I think WvW will shrink when Pof comes since most will go do Pof contents. Then, a month later, the WvW will go back to its usual numbers.

Anyway, OP has no basis for his prediction that populations will be boosted for WvW.

Mysteriax.6049:

SkyShroud.2865:

Linking depends on concept of stable activity to predict the future activity. Such unpredictable burst of population is outside the scope of the predictability.

Bursts in population are in the scope of predictability, as certain spikes have been recorded and their effect on populations also recorded. Remember when the new WvW rewards came out? All maps were queued for weeks, until populations slowly died down. You can argue it was due to the nature of the rewards, but I believe queues and inability to play frustrated people and lead to decline.

This upcoming beta weekend will also show you another example of a population spike.

As a system based on server linking, Tier 5 can be phased in and phased out every two months. If it’s as horrible as you make it out to be, it can be tried, tested and phased out as many other changes to WvW have and will be.

Might I add: It’s obvious ArenaNet’s infastructure is not designed to handle 3 map blobs going at it. We’re getting extreme lag in Tier 4 during peak hours in a matchup with your server, HoD. Spreading out populations further will also improve the lag issue currently affecting players.

That is so wrong. To predict something is to setup a countermeasure for it. What’s the countermeasure for the reward patch? There is no countermeasure, it is not within the scope of predictability. This isn’t as simple as saying you can predict means it is predictable, there must be concrete logics or scientific reasons behind predictions, not just guts feelings, it is all about the details.

Let just say to put tier 5, what servers to go tier 5, how sure you are that the servers will have boost in populations and maintain balance? There is no basis for this kind of prediction. Anet devs are not the 6 gods, they cannot predict what is unpredictable. Linking that depends heavily on stable track records will be helpless against this kind of situation, that is the limit of the design

STIHL.2489:

Well I can’t, and to be honest, I have no urge to respond to everyone, to be blunt, I am just going to flat out ignore anyone that opens with something like “’I’m casual, you need to L2P noob1!1!!!” or some such similar nonsense.

If you thought that would endear me to what you have to say, you are very mistaken.

IndigoSundown.5419:

OP, while you may self-identify as casual, there is little agreement among all who so identify. Some think of the word as meaning preference for easy content; others for limited time spent playing; still others for solo-only play. There may be as many understandings of what “casual” means as there are people using the term.

“Casual” is a mindset, or more aptly put, an approach on how someone plays the game. In simple terms, “casual” defines their motive and drive, as opposed to being serious about the game, or hardcore. Truth is, being “Casual” is irrespective of skill or time played. As how many hours someone invests into a game or how skilled they are at playing a game, have no bearing the mindset they have or how they approach the game.

In short, a “Casual” is not looking for a something serious that they have to work at or treat like a job, they are looking to escape into a fantasy world as someone might take a casual stroll in the woods to escape the daily grind of life.

Thank you. It is really rare to find people on this community to know the key differences.

It as you have said, casual or semi-casual/hardcore or hardcore are mainly the differences in mindset. A lot of people used “time” as a gauge, that might be relative in the past because in the past there are mostly only semi-hardcore or hardcore games. However, game evolved, likewise, our understanding also evolved. “Time” isn’t a relative unit of measurement anymore. Likewise skill as a gauge, but that isn’t accurate either because there are simply people who have the talents to be good at something while putting in lesser efforts.

If people do put in a bit of effort, they will find articles of people from gaming industry talking about the differences of casuals, core and hardcore.

It will not help matchups balance. The returning players are subjective to the base populations and not existing wvw populations. That is to say, a server with low wvw populations now has the possibility to become huge if the server has huge returning base populations. This is something that is unpredictable though the unbalance can be prevented but prevention is not available in the current system.

Linking depends on concept of stable activity to predict the future activity. Such unpredictable burst of population is outside the scope of the predictability.

Yea, it was merged and I complained about it with the forums team, it was then clarified and apologized for it.

I also remembered OP’d topic is about ranks requirement. Not too sure how that topic sway towards another topic. I can only conclude so-called discussions involve a lot of logical fallacies to allow topic to switch from one to another. Then again, I can’t call a fallacy a discussion.

Strawman argument.

The quotes you have made are nothing but pips argument that demand ranks pip to be equalised. However, in anet case, they increase pip gain on a base value basis which means ranks pip still remains. Likewise, there is nothing in the quote that talks about tickets.

Furthermore, these pips arguments were made before announcement of legendary armor. Now, a lot of wvers have interest in those legendary stats as it benefits a gameplay that require frequent changes of stats.

Fallacy isn’t a argument, is a poor attempt to start a non-intellect conflict.

It gets boring to steam roll people over and over again due to populations difference.
It is more engaging to feel the frustration and rage of the loses at similar populations.

Decide your choice well.

Jumpin Lumpix.6108:

So now that they have upped the amount of pips we all get, and they upped the weekly ticket cap to almost double the previous cap (which might I add was an excellent decision) where are all the people who were vehemently opposed to any changes to the pips and/or ticket changes?

I don’t see how this change, which was proposed awhile back, and was vehemently opposed by so many was such a bad idea? I don’t see anyone complaining about it now, and I don’t understand why so many were so resistant to this change which really helped a lot of people out, and made getting rewards in wvw more realistic.

I only remember people complaining mostly about people who are demanding the rank requirement for T3 to be reduced, because that armor is a prestige. As for pips, wvwers generally don’t care since it just rewards and rewards isn’t why wvwers play wvw.

I also find it hard to comprehend why casuals care so much about rewards in a casual game where gear grind isn’t a thing at all. That behavior strike me as more materialistic than any gear grind games’ community.

Just remove the cap, the time to grind tickets already far exceed the time to grind legendary in pve. Very little reason to timegate it since unlike pve raid where you can finish all four wings in 2hrs (if pro) or 4hrs (if average good), in wvw you have to grind many times more hours.

Timegate is meant for non-grindy contents, not for grindy contents.

Feanor.2358:

crunchyraisin.6054:

3.) Raiding does not take more effort, time, or coordination than other game modes.

Yes it does, in regards to the special rewards. You can grind the WvW armor by following a tag and pressing ‘1’. It’s a very real possibility. Yes, not all the WvW players do that and yes, it is not much fun. But you can do it. You can do virtually the same in PvP. No tag, but you get the idea. You can’t do the same with the raid armor. Yes, the fights are scripted, but no, it doesn’t make them trivial.

That said, I’m fine with the current situation. It’s perfectly fine for the other game modes to have their own ways of attaining the same functionality as long as the raid armor remain exclusive in some way. Unique skins are a perfectly valid way to do that. By the way, the Mistforged Triumphant serves the same purpose for WvW, although it doesn’t technically require more skill. The amount of dedication needed, however, is respectable.

I think is realistic for wvw to get legendary as compared to pve. In wvw, you swap way more gears than you ever swap in one’s entire life in pve. Pve is really all about skins (and for some is boosting rights).

I believe they wanted more dmg for far shot but too bad, you can place it near. They have to rework how the cata works if they really want more damage for far shot.

They should reduce range to 150 and add destroy projectile effect.

To me, it is more of a bad planning.
In the beginning, people already questioned why is boon and conditions not in numeric value like ferocity. Now, they talk about streamlining and standandizing it, then why not make it so in the beginning? Why ignore what people questioned? Why only do it 2 years later when the changes can be done in the first year?

Look at the introductions of the utility, they suddenly thought is a good idea to categorize the type to specific type of conversion. Why didn’t they do that in the beginning? Are the contents all made for the sake of adding something without considerations to balance?

They are updating it to balance it with upcoming expansion. It just like what happened during hot. Sad.

RIP. It was fun.

Because wvw pop status use a fixed threshold which is itself full of flaws for 24 hours pvp content.

I haven’t finish diamond and mithril yet….sad….reduced reward, this is unfair!

It did be nice so I can do away with guild forums which nowadays the casual gw2 won’t go.

The issue won’t go away unless people ready to accept drastic changes.

saeleth.3915:

Being someone who hasn’t raided previously in GW2, I’d like to get into it. But honestly the vibe I have gotten across the board has been that its pretty much out of the question unless you are lucky enough to find a “training” group. I looked in LFG and it was pretty much only wanting exp players.

Am I missing that much if I don’t get to experience raiding?

I thought someone posted a really good answer on this?

It isn’t raid itself that is unfriendly, many players are often unfriendly. Gw2 design attempt to hide or minimize this via the carebear approach and forced cooperation via shared rewards and social system but raids do not have any of those. Players will naturally choose the experienced to finish it asap, majority are not gonna be that kind to run or even help out in training raid. They can and will be mean. That is a harsh reality. That is human.

Best is to just find a guild that has a training raid in a timing where you can join.

Carighan.6758:

Blockhead Magee.3092:

If all the people complaining about other people in raids would team up, they could do the raids.

Yeah true. Although many players don’t want to be social enough to worry about things such as “starting a guild” or “recruiting like-minded players” or “getting to know players”.

Even though it is, ultimately, the whole reason this genre exists. If not for the social aspects, other games provide far better gameplay for each specific element GW2 has. Its upside is that it provides a lot of different gameplay elements (something for everyone, basically) in a social context.

But that diversity is what make the social in this game really questionable. It become a question of passerby vs acquaintance vs friend vs using-each-other.

Well, basically we decided to be atheist so screw gods. Who need them when we can seek out eternal alchemy.

After a month…

I thought it was intended because borderland…most people stays in ebg thus respond time faster.

Sovereign.1093:

we all protoss now

LOLOLOLOL. I was saying that to my guildies.

So excess healing has some use eh.

mistsim.2748:

SkyShroud.2865:

grifflyman.8102:

Junkpile.7439:

Blobs nowadays are like two guilds + pugs. God i miss EotM. Totally randoms zergs. No TS or other cheats, no lame meta builds and fun map mechanics. EotM were place where individual player skill did shine.

Yea I can agree with this. The biggest balance issue I see in WvW is the servers that run guild groups vs. the servers that don’t. 90% of the time you won’t stand a chance anymore because the meta is way too effective in an organized group for most random groups to counter.

Nonsense. Most pugs don’t use meta or any builds that make sense, they use random put together gears and traits which have little to no use in wvw perspective thus got owned.

this would greatly depend on the server, Mr. Henge of Denravi. servers that are more competitive have fewer randomly geared scrubs.

You mean stacked servers where majority are in wvw guilds? Those are not exactly pugs you know?

grifflyman.8102:

Junkpile.7439:

Blobs nowadays are like two guilds + pugs. God i miss EotM. Totally randoms zergs. No TS or other cheats, no lame meta builds and fun map mechanics. EotM were place where individual player skill did shine.

Yea I can agree with this. The biggest balance issue I see in WvW is the servers that run guild groups vs. the servers that don’t. 90% of the time you won’t stand a chance anymore because the meta is way too effective in an organized group for most random groups to counter.

Nonsense. Most pugs don’t use meta or any builds that make sense, they use random put together gears and traits which have little to no use in wvw perspective thus got owned.

Powercreep + people have gotten better. It is no longer 2013 where there are tons of noobs for you to kitten apart. Well, I still can recall when people asked what is blast.

Nappy.6218:

Pretty simple question, just looking for opinions if WvW is currently in a good state for a returning player. I played from release up until the expansion release. On JQ (T1 at the time, not sure atm) so population wasn’t a problem for me. Always played WvW exclusively.

Just want opinions if it’s worth coming back to. Obviously like many I saw the new XPac and wanted to give it a go again if it’s still enjoyable.

Let see.

Since then….

• JQ’s SEA has dispersed. Don’t be mistaken, there are still SEA but not as huge.
• Matchup populations increased due to the linking but populations imbalance still exist.
• Population calculation is now base on play hours.
• We also have something called skirmish score where 24 hours are divided into 12 slices and having the highest warscore will win that slice, main purpose is to equalize night capping scoring.
• WvW rewards improved, wvw unique skins and legendary backpiece
• We have squads UI and many more tag colros
• Team chat is now cross map chat
• WvW skills’ requirements reduced
• Added shield generator
• Added a new wvw borderland map

As for worth it or not, I can’t say, I am not you.

Single thread performance varies according to its architecture which is something technical, isn’t a branding thingy.

I would suggest you reading up reviews on single core performance before making decisions.

All contents need to have a reason.

Anet has repeatedly mention they will avoid the gear grind aspect of mmorpg. That literally eliminate a lot of reasons that raid and dungeons usually are used for.

You should change your topic to linux

As for support on linux, I haven’t try it myself but you can install dx9 on linux, maybe it will work. Otherwise, I doubt anet will add opengl since the market segment is small for that.

Edit: just run game via wine

Shaogin.2679:

SkyShroud.2865:

Shaogin.2679:

SkyShroud.2865:

Shaogin.2679:

SkyShroud.2865:

WOW isn’t the first game to have raids, mounts, trinity. #justsaying

#justsaying to who? No one here is saying otherwise.

Ermm? Your topic and much of the thread contents are all heavily implying that wow is the originator of all. Otherwise, why would you use wow as reference?

Even if that wasn’t your intention but the fact that you started it out that way already made your intentions moot.

If you actually read, you’d see that neither me nor anyone else in this thread has made such a claim.

Implying
indicate the truth or existence of (something) by suggestion rather than explicit reference.

Is fine if wow is the ever mmo you ever played, is really fine.
But it isn’t fine to assume others make suggestions just because of wow, wow isn’t the only mmo nor the first to do those things. Likewise, not everyone here plays wow or enjoy playing it anyway. The topic and content in nature are full of ignorance, painfully insulting to gaming in general.

Not sure what thread you’re reading, but again, I never implied (if that makes you feel better) that WoW was the originator of anything. If you actually read this thread you would see that no one else was posting such implications either.

Huh, what? On your first post, you already said all of those things are in game despite wow haters. You even made poor attempts to clarify that it doesn’t made it a wow clone. Your topic title is also wow. A lot of “wow” references. Pretty much imply wow is everything you know. Just wow.

SkyShroud.2865:

SkyShroud.2865:

Shaogin.2679:

SkyShroud.2865:

Shaogin.2679:

SkyShroud.2865:

WOW isn’t the first game to have raids, mounts, trinity. #justsaying

#justsaying to who? No one here is saying otherwise.

Ermm? Your topic and much of the thread contents are all heavily implying that wow is the originator of all. Otherwise, why would you use wow as reference?

Even if that wasn’t your intention but the fact that you started it out that way already made your intentions moot.

If you actually read, you’d see that neither me nor anyone else in this thread has made such a claim.

Implying
indicate the truth or existence of (something) by suggestion rather than explicit reference.

Is fine if wow is the ever mmo you ever played, is really fine.
But it isn’t fine to assume others make suggestions just because of wow, wow isn’t the only mmo to do those things. Likewise, not everyone here plays wow or enjoy playing it anyway. The topic and content in nature is full of ignorance.

Their comment still stands actually… there’s only been like 1 or two people whose posts imply that WoW is the originator of all. A lot of the posts that make reference to it are satire, and as such make no implication. And a large portion of the posts are people pointing out that games borrow from each other all the time, in fact all of the features people associate as being “taken from WoW” originated in games other than WoW and that WoW actually borrowed them.

Is really just he or her, I am not targeting others.

Shaogin.2679:

SkyShroud.2865:

Shaogin.2679:

SkyShroud.2865:

WOW isn’t the first game to have raids, mounts, trinity. #justsaying

#justsaying to who? No one here is saying otherwise.

Ermm? Your topic and much of the thread contents are all heavily implying that wow is the originator of all. Otherwise, why would you use wow as reference?

Even if that wasn’t your intention but the fact that you started it out that way already made your intentions moot.

If you actually read, you’d see that neither me nor anyone else in this thread has made such a claim.

Implying
indicate the truth or existence of (something) by suggestion rather than explicit reference.

Is fine if wow is the ever mmo you ever played, is really fine.
But it isn’t fine to assume others make suggestions just because of wow, wow isn’t the only mmo nor the first to do those things. Likewise, not everyone here plays wow or enjoy playing it anyway. The topic and content in nature are full of ignorance, painfully insulting to gaming in general.

Shaogin.2679:

SkyShroud.2865:

WOW isn’t the first game to have raids, mounts, trinity. #justsaying

#justsaying to who? No one here is saying otherwise.

Ermm? Your topic and much of the thread contents are all heavily implying that wow is the originator of all. Otherwise, why would you use wow as reference?

Even if that wasn’t your intention but the fact that you started it out that way already made your intentions moot.