De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Abbreviated server name, rank(colored) badge and guild tag. Done…
Edit: As for pets and minions, Abbreviated server and Beast.
Yup. Was picturing the same. Abbreviated names would do well. Rank could be converted to an emblem like sPvP uses.
So we end up with examples like:
S-for Symbol of rank
[S] BG [GUILD]
[S] HoD [GUILD]
Then if they wanted to allow all linked servers to have the same name:
[S] BG/HoD [GUILD]
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Due to the popularity of EBG its probably a keeper map. That and I don’t see a lot of people showing up here and saying that EBG is a terrible map, replace it. It also continues to be the only map with consistent full queues, during ABL or DBL times.
We do need mixed maps versus having some people play other things since their options are limited. I don’t think anyone wants to see players go.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
If the outcome is DBL stays then hopefully a new poll about mixed borderlands can be released with different decision criteria. Some people might have been voting no on odds that DBL would be removed. ANet has shown that these polls are guidelines but its still their game to make decisions on.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Some people like ABL, some DBL, some EBG, some EoTM, some all, some a mix. We need variety.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
wall of text above
Some of us still like to win each week FYI. In having dissimilar maps, doing so would completely toss match balance out the window. If they brought DBL back as one map, the World with it as Home BL would have an advantage. If they brought it back as all three BL’s on a rotation, then players would stack Eb or not even play. So I do not see a way in which the DBL does not hurt the mode in any potential scenario.
How are weekly matches already balanced? Simple, they aren’t. I gave this argument some merit but after reflecting it has none. For it to be balanced we would all have to have the same populations during a 24-hour cycle. We don’t, we haven’t, and no one has come up with a solution yet. On top of that EB and ABL are not balanced, so we are already out of balance. This small addition of differing BLs is a red herring and therefore moot.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Who gives a kitten when most of the people who vote are pve kittens who play WvW once a week?
Sources? Please provide the statistics that show the number of hours per game mode of each player that voted and their queue time during DBL versus ABL. As an analyst I would also ask that you provide their game revenue so that you can quantify if the decision makes sense financially since new income funds development, or please provide the number of unpaid interns that ArenaNet employs and the number of coding hours granted per week and the number of hours required per type of project.
TIA (Thanks in Advance)
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
As for a public test server, it is quite obviously never going to happen on a scale that would actually be adequate for testing real WvW. The only times they have spun up public test servers for WvW that has been a real hassle and if memory serves only from one of the two data centers. The only way WvW, and maps specifically, seem to be able to get realistic testing done involves them throwing raw changes on to live and quite literally forcing everyone to play them.
This is evident from the past when it comes to any kind of public testing they have done that is WvW related.
You hit this one on the head. You have to test changes in a production environment and have it score else people will not test and you end up with players complaining no testing was done or its tested by a small group that doesn’t reflect varying opinions.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
For having variety, functionally dissimilar maps are simply going to wreck match balancing. Again, if you don’t care about such things as winning each week, I can see why a player wouldn’t care about having balance.
Might as well remove the score….
Been giving this one some thought. Considering population imbalances, time zone imbalances, guild server hopping, having map differences is the least of the issues. Unless they mix everyone into green/blue/red we will never be balanced in the other areas so this doesn’t really create that much additional issue. I think that’s why more people are agreeing with the idea of 4 unique maps versus 3 copies of just 1 of a type.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
A variety in battlefields is needed to combat staleness. Prior to HoT IMO staleness claimed more people then other factors in the game mode, or at least as voiced by people that I encountered leaving the game. There will always be a natural decline in player base as new games are developed and released but GW2 model of pay-once to play allows people to return as they like. If people return and they hear nothing has changed though then their return might be brief as they encounter “been there done that” syndrome. Having mixed borderlands also allows infrastructure to allow for future maps as players adapt to different maps and strategies.
All that said I do hope this is also enough that ANet is also working on additional maps as we speak so even more options are open for people to play on.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
oh and btw, +1 ANet, looking forward to how this plays out. Thanks!
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Take a look at the following for a direct source:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Let-s-Talk-Scoring/page/13#post6160798
Reduced the Score Tick Timer from 15 minutes to 5 minutes
- This will guarantee that every objective is grants at least one score pulse before it can be flipped by another team.
- Objective Score will be reduce by 2/3rds since they’d be ticking 3x as often. This keeps the relative score from all sources the same.
- Reward Track points will also be ticking 3x as often, and likewise be decreased by 2/3rds.
I would also expand on this, IMO the 5 minute tick will favor servers that better utilize havocs and soloers over the larger zergs if they can spread out and take more objectives during those times versus allowing the zerg to do a full rotation around a map and mass capping in the 15 minutes.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Have to agree, non-tradeable skins do not make sense. Allow the people that want to gamble to be able to gamble and those that don’t be able to trade them with people that do. There was nothing wrong in this system and it creates items of value for the in game economy. There should be close to nothing that should be account bound that comes out of are a purchased by currency in the BLTCs.
Please reconsider this.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Would love to see numbers here on how few are still using S&R after the nerfbat. It should have been moved to a 900 range and adjusted from there. The 600 beating killed the skill.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
The limits should be the mission itself, not anything else.
This sums it up well.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
No blobs were there before. You can go back thru older forum posts and you will see over time there have been requests for options to combat the blob or zerg option.
This is actually one of the reasons that the desert borderland was made with more spread out structures to try and encourage people to spread out versus run in a zerg/blob.
The other upcoming change that might impact this is the 5 minute PPT tick. If you think about with the 5 minute timer it will benefit servers that are spreading out more that can take more objectives in a shorter time then servers that run in one mass. Will be fun to see how this plays out.
In short, no squad UI was a good change that could use additional changes but is going on the right direction, but zerging/blobing was around well before it.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
+10 here. If I have members that want to be able to run their missions off hours from others they should be able to do so. A lot of the missions are solo-able and since the missions can be trigger multiple times this makes a lot of sense. Please remove the 3 party requirement.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Random assigned points. Still trying to understand what OP is referring to. Maybe because of the points being assigned to the death blow of the beast? Killing stealing maybe?
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
+10 here. Would love to be able to do other things while waiting on a queue. I understand part of the concern was loading screens and people readying up, but if the system changed to a ready-out versus ready-up some of that might be handled.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Still a really good example of the immobilize bug in this adventure since you are jumping as much as you are.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
I think the OP still thinks the game/game-mode is fun but just wants something to work for too. Once you maxed out your ranks (which I can’t remember when that happens) what difference do they make besides making you a higher priority target?
It would be nice to get some reward for reaching certain rank to show time spent or certain reward for winning each week that is fun yet usable.
tl;dr version: ANet needs to release more WvW abilities because for some the addition to fun is advancement which is what WvW ranks and abilities are.
You hit a topic there. There should be things to spend WvW ranks on all the way to max level. Even if a diminishing returns system was used there should be a reason for people to continue to rank and use those points on.
I am not taking necessarily about power creep either. Some could make a player stronger in WvW but they all do not need to be. Also some of the existing ones could be used and increased as well just with each level requiring a magnitude more to achieve.
Not sure I am fan that a player can have all abilities since it makes everyone the same template and diversity can be fun. In an ideal world there would be more options to choose from then were available levels so that people would want to choose what makes sense for their build/group/warband.
Before hitting cap it was fun to achieve a new level since it meant potentially unlocking a new ability. Once cap was reached there was something that then felt like it was missing. I think when ANet reduced the amount of points that could be spent it was a step in the wrong direction. I get they wanted to allow newer players to not feel like they started late but it was at the expense of existing players that were already committed. I also started a year after the game had been out and it was actually more fun to play and catch people that had already been playing for longer, a game in a game per say. It didn’t feel like a disadvantage, it was more a fun challenge to work up thru the levels and make those decisions, do I go x or y ability and how does it help my game play.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
I think the only person that could answer this for you, is you. What would make you love WvW? Why do you do it now? What are you trying to achieve if not for the fun of it?
For me, fighting in/around objectives, open world pvp, siege warfare, controlling objectives, loot/rewards, score, acquiring things to help me outfit more for more WvW.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Anyway to flip the world linking and remove DBL polls? Remove DBL might impact peoples answers on world linking schedule once they know where they might be playing. Just a thought.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Well we tried for a middle group and variety, it failed.
How did Henry Ford say it, “You can have the model T in any color, as long as it’s black.”.
My paranoia level about getting any new maps has now reached new levels.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Retaining server identity is important in the long run else you have done the same thing as a forced merge in disguise. Two quick options come to mind to achieve this:
- Create a new combined server name for paired servers that show server initials together
- Have each server retain their server tag and allow the existing system that visually designates friends from foes to ID people
I understand part of the idea during the beta was to reduce the potential for people calling each other out. But lose of a server identity seems more detrimental in the long run. My server retained its designation and I believe that the server pairings is a step in the right directions, but I can understand where Blade is coming from. 2 cents.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
No. Adding them into the final track of a reward track maybe but in the same spots as ToK would be a flood and make them trash loot.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Its not the color of the landscape that made people want a new map. One of the reasons that they had grown bored was the same old same old. We lost people pre-HoT because they had been there done that. People move MMOs because they want new experiences.
Why is scouting so easy in ABL even outside its size. Because there are predictable attack paths that people would take after years of the same map. Are they at the gate, nope, cata spot, yup. Are they on cata wall, nope, switchback splash spot, yup.
We needed variety then, we still do. You need new challenges for people else they grow bored. The players are what make the fights dynamic unless the map encourages them to be predictable.
Its funny they have open world changes via living story. They could have even done something similar on the borderlands. Leave a partially burned out tower where one was and put up a new one near it. A small change like that alone would have changed the flow of combat for a period of time as people had to adjust to tactics. Have differing changes to the different ABLs over time would have made them different and therefore differing tactics.
Why do sandbox games persist as long as they do, because the world evolves and therefore changes the conflict.
Now there were other things that caused player decay as well, but the lack of map variety was one of those factors. Changing something from brown to green isn’t going to change the fact where you might try and chokepoint a zerg with your havoc, or where the driver might run the zerg thru at or where the solo hunter might wait to pick on the tail.
Anyway, good gaming to you.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Just wondering, do any of you know why dbl was designed the way it was?
As nobody here could actually know this, I will give my educated guess.
Actually, we can. I will sound biased so trying to keep this neutral. But if you want to know where they might have been influenced by, scroll back into these forums to pre-hot and look at the posts that people were placing. They didn’t gather information from polls so that means their most direct source were these forums and reddit. Can’t speak for reddit but a lot of what they did and have done recently were items from those Pre-Hot posts. Reward tracks is a good example, was a recurring issue on the forums at the time. Same with some of the other things we have seen. Will stop there though. But if you are asking this question, your answer lies there. Good hunting!
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
This thread isn’t about map design, so I will leave that alone for now. I do agree that if another map was created from scratch feedback from all players about it might help ANet. You want a map to work for a zerg and for a solo hunter. The how you get there is a big debate as well as the one about a home land advantage versus more equal balance like EBG.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
EBG “Was” the most popular map…when Alpine wasn’t around…imho
Actually take a look at the statistics of this page:
http://coveragewars2.com/death.php
TREND Shows atm:
3 Borderland Maps Kills or Deaths > EBG Kills or Deaths
Alpine BL is more Popular atm (Top Tiers, but not Bottom Tiers)…based on the above web page.
What is popular today…may not be tomorrow.
It really depends on the underlying Motivation of the Majority of Players.
Be careful how you throw facts around…even I need to be wary myself.
No that site shows EBG is still the most populated map. You have to compare it one to one since EBG is queued in most tiers so it shows the most populated. For the best numbers you would have to compare a queued map to queued map. Some people are in the borderlands since EBG is queued. In order for this information to better be used it need to capture the amount of players and players in queue.
Even then this site could mis-represent information since you could have people GvGing on a borderland which is where that occurs. Doesn’t mean the map is more popular, means more people were fighting while it could still be holding less players.
Plus ANet has those numbers on people queuing and were the ones saying EBG was their most popular map. Wouldn’t second guess that one for now.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
What’s next?
- We’ll poll the community to see if at least 75% of them would like to see the Desert Borderlands permanent removed. This won’t be next weeks poll, but likely the week after that.
- If players vote to remove DBL, then the results of this poll will be void (as we’ll only have one borderlands map.) Otherwise, we’ll move forwards with the results of this poll.
When you go to make this poll, please put an option for a keeping the desert borderlands but with a community driven revamp where we the players can bring forward the issues we have with the map, and the vote on changes to come.
I think thematically, visually the desert borderland map is amazing. I also like the various choke points for fights. In contrast things like the layout/scale, elevation and strategical value of objectives are problematic. It’s also very slow to get around.
Exactly.
Those maps need work. If Anet is not willing to do the work then just trash them now and don’t bother voting.
lol. I do see both your points, I guess the question will be what level of change sways someone on a map (and not talking just this one) that will make someone like it. And then how much effort makes sense versus just creating a new map. For example I think Anet would say to flatten DBL it would be easier to just start over versus put something in the middle of the map. So to that I see you point about a keep but will need changes, but that would need to add into the keep votes versus pull votes away.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
When you go to make this poll, please put an option for a keeping the desert borderlands but with a community driven revamp where we the players can bring forward the issues we have with the map, and the vote on changes to come.
I think thematically, visually the desert borderland map is amazing. I also like the various choke points for fights. In contrast things like the layout/scale, elevation and strategical value of objectives are problematic. It’s also very slow to get around.
If they are talking about removal, probably need to keep the poll to a YES/NO to reduce confusion. Additional polls can be added later but are moot if removal is opted. That’s what people are having issue with on current poll. Its can be interpreted in a couple of different ways with how it is worded.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Actually. No offense, but if the removal poll voids this one, does it not make sense to just end this one for now and post the other since it has defacto become official that there will be a poll? This one can be re-instated if needed afterwards. The reason I say this is if removing DBL does meet its required amounts for removal then players might opt for the next WvW priority to be a new map over scoring. Just a thought. A voided poll just has a bad feel to it.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
This one is big enough, hoping it will get a splash page ad as well as the in game mail. Thanks for the update.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
1) Let’s not cut the " Borderland GTFO" posts and let players have their say by giving them a real poll with the option to kick it to the curb on it so players can actually have their say on it instead of forcing them to leave the game over it again.
2)Plenty of people have expressed they have a problem with mixed BLS and have already said they are leaving over it… just read all the threads and posts on it, including the poll thread itself..
3)Yes there are real balance issues since whichever team that has the most players willing to go to the DBL will win since most servers have plenty of people who will not go there at all. If the same amount of players who will defend DBG and ABLs will not go to do the same for DBL on every server, of course it is going to create balance issues.
Mixed BL= broken game mode all the time
Rotating Bl = playable game mode part of the time
No DBL= playable game mode all of the time.This is how it actually works now:
You have a Group of 25 that is hoping to all maps to defend all objectives. You hop to ABLs to defend/ attack keeps all 25 go and you can do so. You hop to EBG to defend and attack keeps all 25 go and you can do so.This is how it works with mixed BL:
You have a Group of 25 that is hoping to all maps to defend all objectives. You hop to ABLs to defend/ attack keeps all 25 go. You hop to EBG to defend and attack keeps all 25 go. You hop to DBL only 7 will go. You cannot attack or defend keeps with 7. That means WvW is now a broken game mode for those who do this and many consider that unplayable.Whatever peoples feelings on the DBL or whether or not they like it, does not change this from being the actual issue that will be caused by this. This is what is going happen regardless of the poll results. In reality we are voting on whether or not many players leave the game again due to the decision by Anet to push this on them regardless of what the previous polls and petitions already said about it.
Your premise is flawed. Even before DBL and HoT you would lose people when jumping from EBG to BLs and vice versa. You would also lose people jumping from BL to BL. This is not a new concept in WvW. Its been around since the start of the game. People already had map preferences then and people had to deal with it. We still have it today with just EGB and ABL back. If you want to claim its worse that fine, but don’t fool yourself, it existed before and exists now. That’s always been the issue between home BL people versus EBG people as well as havocs versus the other two.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
I’ve come to the conclusion that the majority of non-desert haters are a very very vocal minority of the overall population. The majority of the overall population already quit because of desert, and a majority of what’s left will quit when it returns.
I see what you did, there.
Curious as to where you’re getting your “majority quit or will quit” numbers, though, as Anet has never released any sort of population numbers. Ever.
I know, it’s a small thing.
If you played before HoT and then after, you know the majority of players quit WvW… I’d estimate 70%.
I have played since a month after initial release. Sorry, but I don’t see what you do. Sure, some players left…..that’s why they linked servers. But 70%???? Well, I guess you might as well go for broke when you’re pulling numbers out of thin air.
There was already a large portion on the population that had left the game before HoT that more than likely exceeds any that left after HoT. Does anyone have those numbers outside of ANet. Not that I have seen. Think back on queue sizes on reset from 2-3 years ago to before HoT. They were wayyyyyyyy down if not gone. People had already left due to normal game attrition, new games, lack of changes to the game mod. Then you have some that just left WvW to go do other portions of the game due to above reasons and other aspects of the game changing and thereby competing with WvW time for some. Take the PvP tournaments. If you don’t think that pulls people from WvW then you probably haven’t been out to HoTM to see your server mates and other servers out there. People that enjoy the fights move back and fourth between sPvP and WvW.
The point is this isn’t a DBL/ABL thing. If player choose in upcoming polls that a new map is priority you might end up with the same situation where you have 3 maps you don’t like in play at one time. And you are also limited in your variety of battlefields to choose from. Mixed borderlands allows more flexibility and has a better chance to keep things fresh where as just 2 maps is very limited and predictable and if the BL is not a type you like, you are even more narrowed down.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Next time I see your guild across the fight I will send a /wave your way. Thank you was a fun video and agree, why did they not push?
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
No, I voted exactly the way I wanted to. I know what I chose. If I were to change my vote, it would be to a No vote because I would not mind rotation between the maps.
Fair enough, your first vote sounded like you were voting for others over what you want. If you don’t place a vote for what you yourself want then you defeat them asking. Good hunting!
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Some players actually do enjoy the desert borderlands, so stop whining about how you’d like to see it gone. I voted [Yes 1: 2 Alpine, 1 Desert] because I know many players will just want to blob Alpine, so for those of use who like both maps, it may be possible to play Desert without blob, Alpine without blob, or Alpine with blob. Maximum choice. Yes 2 would just result in Alpine with blob, 2 Deserts without blob, and maximum whine.
I appreciate your sentiment, but if you prefer DBL over ABL you should vote that way since this is also a mini-poll on people that like DBL as well. You can always go back in to change your vote. That’s why they are combining the YES votes to compare to the NO (rotation) votes.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
That was what != meant. A no vote does not mean no dbl at all which I am sure some who voted No think it does.
My bad I was reading your NO combined with the ! as emphasis on the NO bit versus != as in <>, NE or not equal.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
I like the idea of simultaneous, however IMO, I think a third distinctive BL should be created eventually, with the goal of making each BL one of the 3, randomly picked for each match up. IMO, the simplest method would be, this week all the Red BLs are ____, but I think having it completely random for each of the match ups would be even better.
The Mixed borderland options creates a way for them to have 3 different maps up at the same time. So voting that way allows that options and ways to future test new maps as they are designed versus the previous method where only a handful were in to test in advance of release.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
“with the current supply, only 22 Hot legys and 44 old legys can be crafted anymore.”
There’s more than the current supply. Looking at trades of Mystic Coin, 43,177 coins exchanged hands in the last 24 hours (as of this posting) with 13,953 left as current supply. So that’s 57k coins in the last 24 hours that was available to buy, with a similar amount arriving each day
Didn’t they also come back in the last thread on this indicate more coins are entering the supply then leaving on a daily basis. If that is the case people are just stacking them. I admit, I do the same. There is, and should be, a premium to wanting to finish a legendary right now versus pre-building the supplies for it. They were meant to take a while unless you want to pay price for expedition.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Oh and FYI coins are now more expensive that T6 blood, will Anet now do something about it.
Just add Mystic coins to the map rewards, don’t let normal players pay the price for TP flippers.
Flipping aside, I like having something of value in my daily rewards now. Seeing the mystic coins is now a pleasant surprise versus, oh look, junk. These should be more valuable then a T6 material.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
For instance, with the upcoming poll regarding Mixed Borderlands, you need to be clear with what will happen if both cases, Yes or No. Or even better, give the following choices :
- Yes I want a mix of the 2 maps every week
- No, I prefer a rotation of the 2 maps (probably every quarter)
- No, I don’t want to see the Desert Borderland again
Even that is too diffuse.
Unless you specify the exact combination, you will set up people for disappointment.
Let’s say you vote yes and assumes by far the most pleasurable and obvious choice that probably 90%+ of us would choose – 2 Alpine and 1 Desert – yet when we get it… Anet gives us 2 Desert and 1 Alpine.
Riots in the streets and 50 man queues to one border.
It seems someone at Anet listened
Yup. They have that covered.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
what xtd said – NO != no DBL….
IMHO, this poll was worded much better than previous polls. The results pie chart doesn’t differentiate the 2 yes votes however….
A NO vote actually means you will have 3 months of DBL when it comes around where as the YES vote means ABL and DBL are up with differing mixes of how many of each.
The base poll remains, all of one type of borderland with a rotation or both types are always up, hence why there are two YES options.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
How long will the poll run for?
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
The results doesn’t show which of the two simultaneous options is which.
Can that be changed?
I think they both count as yes. They are gathering two metrics and sub-dividing one. It will come down to rotating versus simultaneous maps.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
For make this changes and put it in rotation they need too much time and now we need other things for make wvw great again.
Anet shouldn’t delete it, just we dont need it now.
But the point here is if they put in a rotation then you may face 3 months of something that you feel needs further changes, versus if its live you can evaluate it and suggest changes while there are other maps up you may like, versus having to play for 3 months on something you don’t want to play on.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
You guys saying to delete and remove the desert borderland realize that:
- There is a group of players who do like it.
- Anet has spent a good amount of time developing the map.
- They were still tweaking it even as it went off rotation… it’s not going away.
So you might as well fall in line and knock off the nonsense of deleting it.
Vote for mixed borderlands when the poll comes, better to have just one desert borderland than three, you’ll still have two alpine maps to visit. Stop being selfish, this change will appease all players.
There is also an additional point here. People shouldn’t think about just now. A good number of people are interested in new maps period outside of even the ones we have including DBL. Unless a map is vetted in a live environment it will never be really tested. So why not allow a mechanism now where we can have differing home borderlands. That way when a new map is ready for production testing it can be truly tested. Limited testing will never fully test the potential of a map. Even the EoTM structure wouldn’t allow a proper test since EoTM players may very well like a new map where non-EoTM may not or vice versa. And if you just add it as purely separate test outside of scoring then most players won’t go there or will token test it best. Plus if you don’t put it up side by side you don’t get as good a metrics from people visiting the various maps to get a good read on how well they are received.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
Sorry OP but -1, these are not needed. As long as there are item drops in game there is a ready source for these, its up to the player base.
De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.