Guild Wars 2

azyume.6321:

I’d urge the dev who creates the pool to give as much information as possible about the topic to avoid mistakes.

This is a very valid point. It would be great when the new polls go up if there is a section or even a thread that outlines details about what the idea is and in some cases what a no or yes vote might mean.

Example, I can see some people indicating no to mixed borderlands since DBL might come around. A no response wouldn’t mean DBL wouldn’t be back but means that when the maps cycle there is only 1 type of map and the other is out. Be that ABL or DBL or any newly designed map.

Ahratan.1098:

Mixed BLs: I’d like to see all three borderlands as different. So for example red BL is desert, blue BL is alpine, and green could be ‘forest’ (a new one, use desert or EOTM for now).

Then all BLs would be unique and, since ppl tend to gravitate towards their own BL, if you are a different each week then everyone would be encouraged to try all three.

Agree here, but advocating mixed borderlands as well so if a map is not liked by some they can still play other maps while ANet is getting feedback. They could even then have a copy of a map in dev while we play an older version like ABL. Prefer that over rotation and prefer a variety of maps over both.

Thanks for the updates! Look forward to the polls.

If the cost of polling is low, I would poll this to get a feel for how many people would consider moving. I think it would be less than expected though. Since it seems you can do additional analysis, aka are recording who voted for what, you could then compare those answers to the number of people on the worlds that they are already on and that might tell you if this would help and whether or not this was whole guilds or not.

I understand the intent is to assist in the balancing, but also agree the EU model makes more sense than the NA where overly populated servers should remain in their own group. I think servers that are already stacked will remain stacked servers though since for whatever reason people stacked on them before remains. Until that environment variable that created the stacking changes people will probably not move unless forced to.

It might make more sense to try additional server roll ups first though before adding more worlds. The point about recruitment is valid, and by combining servers you are opening doors for recruitment that might not have been available before world linking. The issue of transfers needs to be addressed but that should be for a different thread.

Using NA as example here, picture world linking as something along the lines of:

Current Weekly
Tier Match Tier
T1 – Tier 1
T2 – T2
T3 – T3
T4 – T4
T5 – T4
T6 – T5
T7 – T5
T8 – T5

This assumes a relationship of server population to weekly scoring. So as servers stack or don’t they move between tiers that combine them or leave them on their own for weekly matches. Since we still have people in T1 and T8 this is assuming that something in the system is still calculating score at the individual server level as well as the combined score when servers are linked.

Not sure if its feasible but is there any way to share numbers of servers with queues today? From the different tiers this issue might vary in priority which could account for some of the responses. Based on feedback in game and on the forums I think addressing how the servers are represented when linked seems like a bigger issue and would only be magnified if more servers are rolled together. People like to rep their guild and server and when you tag them as different it can create ill will.

If the issue here is to address people that can’t get their guild on a server, the odds are they trying to get onto an already stacked server, meaning they probably won’t move to a new server since it won’t have the draw of the old one. Unless you can draw enough loose people from those stacked servers it would not resolve the core issue.

If the issue is more pure population balances then I think trying different serber linking combinations first might be more cost effective before trying the new world method.

2 cents.

Edit: post really didn’t like placing two T1 descriptions with a space between them, oh those silly kittens lol.

Cloud.7613:

I wish there was more reasons to split groups as well, but with an AoE cap and no player collision there is very few reasons not to blob up.

With that said, this game mode runs on having a big player base and linking servers helped that greatly with that.

Actually I am wondering how the 5 minute ticks will impact this. In theory this should favor the smaller groups (at least in PPT terms) since taking a larger force to a smaller target would be less effective then taking 4 other targets at the same time. That should mean more work for havocs and soloers. In theory.

Jayne.9251:

I thought it was against ToS to use automating macros in WvW?

It is, I think the verbiage is something like un-attended play is forbidden. Aka no macros that allow you to perform a beneficial act that aids you without you being present. Auto-trebbing would qualify for that.

+1 on posting here. It can be rather disheartening to see more official posts on Reddit versus the games own forums. Thanks!

Thank you. Had a number of guild mates ask what was up. Thank you for the addition. IMO there are a lot people that don’t normally use the forums that may be missing out in helping determine what direction WvW may be headed. Agree or disagree there is value in feedback. And having the note only go to people that are active in WvW, +2 from that side of it.

I admit I don’t have a group of dailies that I wouldn’t do, I am PvXer. WvW/PvP/Fractual and some PvE so there are a ton of options. That said dailies usually take about 10-15 mins to get three. Sometimes make a game out of it and wait till right before reset and do them before a new day. Probably quickest has been 2 minutes or so. If people limit which ones they do then I can see an issue but I would err on the side of that was choice that was made. I wouldn’t mind having more dailies in the bucket, I also favored when you could do more for more AP as well if you were ok with spending the time doing so.

Kraggy.4169:

As usual, this poll like all polls deceive to flatter .. knowing the % who are ‘for’ (or ‘against’) something is used by those who support that view to assert the ‘majority’ of players are of that view .. without the poll showing what percentage of the TOTAL population that the poll applies to (in this case the number of players to partake in WvW) are of this view, the claim of the ‘majority’ view is simply an unproven assertion.

Too True. It would be a good idea if we could get an actual counter of number of people polled. This wouldn’t be giving away the key metric of number of people that WvW but would help in understanding the actual percentages.

In an ideal world, would love to have an in game siege wallet where blueprints could be stored across an account. That does not exist today. So instead I would ask that the limit on the shared inventory slots be increased by another 10. Today if you WvW a player might use 10-12 inventory slots for just siege items of varying quality. Add to that the pre-existing uses and this would give player more options and improved QoL.

Appreciate the time, good gaming.

lil devils x.6071:

^scrolls back* This thread is full o people who do not want DBL back… Wonders how I am alone in thinking they do not want DBL back* lol

The part I was quoting was you are one of the few with the idea of all or nothing. A lot of people in this thread alone are ok with mixed maps that way if a map they do not like is up they have other options open to them versus out for a quarter of a year at a time.

That be it for ABL/DBL or any other new map we may or may not get. You yourself said thousands will leave game if DBL comes back in, so why not cycle maps in a controlled pattern versus all or nothing. Let’s say they give us a swamp for some reason, would you want three swamp maps up versus one for a test. And leave EoTM out of this, to get a good test you need to have it in standard WvW to get a good test. So why not have it out there with other maps that are also up. Then people can provide feedback and if they really dislike they can still have other options.

If its polled may find out that is a wrong assumption about all or nothing, but working off of postings currently I would say having multiple maps up is a better option.

An example in this case was that we applied Iron Guards and Presence of Keep to someone else claim. It applied, reduced our inventory account and then vanished after leaving and re-entering the keep though it still showed in the upgrade window.

Side note: It appeared off and on again later during exits and re-enters into keep.

X T D.6458:

zhonnika.1784:

Hopefully forever. WvW feels like WvW again, not some hard to get around/attack blah place of sandstorms and broken dreams. DBL seems like a bad dream now, and I don’t ever want to go back there. Ever. Ever. Ever.

Yea I dread the day it comes back, but if it has to, I rather it be limited to one map so we are not forced to have 3 dbls

This is why I don’t get extremists that say only 2 maps. Give people choices so that they have maps they enjoy. A rotation will just limit people, and drive some away during each rotate.

lil devils x.6071:

That only works if there is no score. Otherwise you create a situation of people getting to play what they consider a broken game mode all the time. AT least with rotation they get to play a whole game part of the time rather than part of a game the entire time. I will take the whole game if forced, but the truth is bringing back something so unliked at all is going to run people off again.

Based on all the other threads I think you are solo on this one, or at least based on people that post. I think a rotation will/is moving people away already. And based on your statements alone, when the rotation moves back to DBL we lose people. I already know people that are only queuing EBG while ABL is up, they were tired of those maps already. People new to the game were asking in server TS what was up with the map change and why the restrictions. So why not a mix so that there is variety for both sides. Don’t give me this limited game play, if that was a case they will be out of game during each quarter already. And not seeing a queue increase since the ABL was added in T3 or T2 but in fact a decrease for whatever reason. So if we had drawn in thousands, where are they? All in T1?

Ran into one this evening that wasn’t expecting. Another guild had a claim on a structure but it let our guild drop both passive and active upgrades into their claimed structure by accident. It removed the upgrades from the bank and they ticked down. The buff appeared after the upgrades completed but then after leaving and then shorterly after returning the buff was gone even though the upgrade was in place. So…either or both of these bugs?

Bug:

• Allowed upgrades to be applied even though structure was not claimed
• Triggered buff but then only after first being built

This was ABL. Anyone else see this one?

Good hunting!

General Health.9678:

TheGrimm.5624:

Ellieanna.5027:

We really are in an entitled era it seems.

Its not about entitlement, its about still having a feeling of progression even if its a false one.

That seems entirely pointless, you’re just lying to yourself.

The previous system acted the same, there was feel of progression but there really wasn’t one. What we are talking about is returning that and signifying it with something. 2 lumps of coal. People would then flash stacks of coal at each other and laugh and have fun with it.

Whispering threads have appeared in varying section of the forum. This isn’t just a WvW issue, whispering logic and options should be expanded so that people have options to block whispers from people they don’t know.

Image different check blocks: (Open to most restricted)

• Allow whisper from All
• Allow whisper from Team
• Allow whisper from Server
• Allow whisper from Guild
• Allow whisper from Friends

This would also block for example gold sellers but still allow you to receive whispers from people you know, or if you like to leave it open to all if that’s your choice. System could also still work in conjunction with blocked lists as well.

VergilDeZaniah.3295:

Tyler Bearce.3427:

The current plan is to rotate the borderlands maps each quarterly update. That said, now that we are actively polling the community, perhaps we can start exploring other options.

For instance, nothing is really stopping us from having a combination of ABL and DBL maps running simultaneously. 2 of one and 1 of the other. If we polled that, and players approved it, then there’d be no need for the rotation, and players on both sides of the issue could play on their preferred map. The downside of course, would be any perception of imbalance that may arise from one map being considered the stronger “Home” map, but we could always give the more defensible map to Red/Blue and leave the less defensible map to Green.

That’s what I personally always wanted: one borderland for each color, to have different strategies and approaches.

So, maybe a 3rd borderland with xpac2?

A 3rd type of borderland would be a good alternative, still favoring 4 3-sided maps. But would like to see a poll to see how many people favor home BLs versus 3 sided maps before anyone should do any design work. But yes 4 different maps in any case would be awesome.

Dinas Dragonbane.2978:

How are the queues looking for everybody nowadays? Seems most of the hype of both Alpine maps and wvw rewards have cooled down a bit, as I type this for FA/BP there’s no queue on a single wvw map.

T3, SBI: EBG queues. Rare queues on 1 ABL when EBG zerg jumps back and fourth.

Anyone using Gun Flame before can tell you it took a large nerf when it was patched. Now not certain if it was also because there was a bug or not or just the change but it was noticeable change.

+10 here. The squad system continues to improve, but having a different color for your sub-squad would remove another issue in joining a squad versus remaining in your party which is to tell where your sub-squad/party is.

The downside of stacking XP for a future mastery is that you then remove the purpose of the mastery which is to work towards new progression. As I said we need something in place for the in-between periods. By using a side rank up chest this system could even stay in place while the mastery process is in place as well.

Based on the other thread Tyler indicated they might be open to a mix of borderlands, so that there are options for both sides. I think this would also give them a better picture of how many players play on each map which can be used to quantify things better. Keep an eye out for a new WvW poll.

Again, don’t want anyone to be locked out of maps when they rotate so to me a mix keeps more people in play over the long run.

Shadow.3475:

Why do you want a empty map? listen to its name desert.

If you do 2/1 please let SFR home map always be Alpine.

Or simple have so all players on the server can vote with map do you want next week.

Your own point is why a rotation might have issues if the maps you prefer are cycled out for a time. Some of the mixed options that could be used would limit your downtime.

This thread shows that there are people that feel strongly about maps in general. Nothing wrong with that in a general sense since it shows that people like to WvW.

PariahX.6970:

joneirikb.7506:

+1

Want to see both maps at the same time.

More options for people to play what they want.

ditto

Agree, I don’t want to see anyone rotated out of the game mode.

Tyler Bearce.3427:

The current plan is to rotate the borderlands maps each quarterly update. That said, now that we are actively polling the community, perhaps we can start exploring other options.

For instance, nothing is really stopping us from having a combination of ABL and DBL maps running simultaneously. 2 of one and 1 of the other. If we polled that, and players approved it, then there’d be no need for the rotation, and players on both sides of the issue could play on their preferred map. The downside of course, would be any perception of imbalance that may arise from one map being considered the stronger “Home” map, but we could always give the more defensible map to Red/Blue and leave the less defensible map to Green.

Potentially a couple of polls here might be helpful here. Example one set of polls might relate to Home BL maps versus 3 equal sided maps. Others with how a mix would work. One might help define the next in a series. I still worry how many people see the game splash page and how many web hits result from it, so possibly one of those event stars in game like we see for the ESL might increase the number of people being polled.
Again, appreciate the attention to WvW.

Posting for a guild mate that’s stuck. Mighty Bearkub.6948 (General Silas).

Thanks!

Tyler Bearce.3427:

The current plan is to rotate the borderlands maps each quarterly update. That said, now that we are actively polling the community, perhaps we can start exploring other options.

For instance, nothing is really stopping us from having a combination of ABL and DBL maps running simultaneously. 2 of one and 1 of the other. If we polled that, and players approved it, then there’d be no need for the rotation, and players on both sides of the issue could play on their preferred map. The downside of course, would be any perception of imbalance that may arise from one map being considered the stronger “Home” map, but we could always give the more defensible map to Red/Blue and leave the less defensible map to Green.

Appreciate the update on the timeline and the consideration for other options outside of a rotation. Thank you.

Tarasicodissa.7084:

I’ve brought this issue up a few weeks ago but no one bothered to respond, I figued I was the only one concerned with it.
I really hate the fact that any XP I get goes into trash can. If I instead stop playing the game and play it later, I will get more and better reward because I will have new mastery tracks to fill. The game design is actively discouraging me from playing.

What I wish is that the XP is stored and used later for masteries that come out. Not for new regions/expansions obviously, only masteries associated with old content. If we spend thousands of hours doing same stuff, we shouldn’t really be forced to play it again. I don’t ask for any other form of reward, all I want is not to be forced to do that brainless-soul-draining-time-consuming-boring-as-hell CoF P1 farming.

Active players always were, still are and forever will be treated as a sack of crap… Makes me sad.

:) You are correct, this is not new. This was actually being discussed right after they announced the mastery and how it would work. People were asking then, yes but what happens when I max. At the time we didn’t know when that would be and if there would be time between completed ones and new ones. I think we can now plan for periods between, so we should target a system that can work for those in between periods. Again, its to help with the progression feeling. And by going with a leveling chest ANet can use that to address imbalances in things like gathering if the need calls for.

+1. Your best option to break LoS in ABL and EBG is to speed away or stealth. There should be more options since not all classes have that. And we need Roamers/Havoc in WvW, it shouldn’t just be about zerg on zerg fights.

Ellieanna.5027:

We really are in an entitled era it seems.

Its not about entitlement, its about still having a feeling of progression even if its a false one. You never want players to reach “The End”. GW2 is one of the few games where the game keeps going even after reaching max level. The looping level 80 created part of that never ending feeling.

Potentially at this point a good portion of the population has finished their mastery options in Tyria and/or Maguuma. What that leaves players with is XP that goes no where. New teaser events (which are fun thank you) are also giving out reward items that add significant amounts of XP to the mastery lines. Under the old system players had the sense that even though they were capped they were still progressing since the XP bar would just loop and the player was awarded with a form of currency for doing so. Now they are left with something that feels lacking. I would recommend that either spirit shards or something return to fill that gap. It could be simply a level up chest that ANet could then adjust what is inside to level out issues in game or have some random coin/loot/seasonal items inside. Something to acknowledge that the player looped a level. Players understand that additional mastery lines are planned in the future but there is probably now enough data to show that there might be time where mass amount of XP go no where so why not have a backup system in place versus create a sense the journey is over. Food for thought, good hunting!

That would be a good solution as well. +1 there.

Well if you get matched with T3 will share a hail with you and we can enjoy some havoc action. Until then, Good Hunting to you and yours!

Sich.7103:

Even with iron guard T3 camp can be flipped very easy and very fast with only 2 people… The iron guard upgrade was just here to buy little time or to help if you join fast enough before all guard are killed…
Without the iron guard you need to perma scout the camp if you want to hold it because the time the cross spawn on the map all guard are already dead ! Maybe the veteran is always alive, but not with a lot of life…

What we needed for the camp was Iron Guard for camp…. Upgrade less expensive and that you can only apply on camp.

And to be able to apply sabotage depot AND another passive upgrade (like for doly or iron guard) was a good thing…

Now they should at least apply Iron Guard on every camp soon you take it without guild upgrade… NPC are really really too weak !

^^^^ This. Depending on the build IGs were still not a sure fire way to defend but it was an option that could slow down some, why not leave it in place. I get the other changes but not this one. What numbers did ANet see that said this one needs to go?

casantis.3106:

Well, i don´t like DBL, i don´t want to play in them if they rotate with ABL. Was just an idea, but is better if DBL don´t come back.

Or Anet could create an environment where everyone has maps that interest them. Right now we have 2 maps at a time. Why? And since some maps like EB always has queues, what might help that?

As mentioned in the past and will be again in the future I like variety. That’s why I don’t get why people appose having all the maps as options. If they don’t then they are siding on Anet not rotating maps, which they have shown they will do. Which leaves people out on both sides depending on rotations. How many out at a given time is debate-able, but still some out in both cases.

Are there any plans to have guild missions that are PvP related to not tick down while players are waiting for queues to start? An alternative would be to add back into the mission timer the time that was lost while waiting for a queue or expand them to plan for some time waiting. Currently a number of mission that seem to be built for multiple games will not have enough time to complete since time was lost while waiting for a queue.

Check that the update didn’t change your settings under options. Have seen that in the past.

Agree, why was this removed?

lol, glad to see not the only one.

Good hunting in the new season!

Monitors every where please forgive us our upcoming trespasses. Fare thee well mice to be lost and keyboards to be tossed.

Sich.7103:

And people who complain about upgrade cost are really funny…. Just watch how much cost the guild upgrade now ! 1 guild upgrade can be the same price that a full upgraded keep before HoT !

The difference is that the upgrades on the old system are now included and therefore cost nothing. You are talking about passive and active upgrades via scribing which are completely different and optional. The old ones were not optional if you wanted to get to a WP and cost a person versus a guild paying for it. For scouts and defenders it was a large cost over time. Which often resulted in a lose when an enemy zerg came along and k-trained the map back to paper while people fought in EB.

Wasn’t looking for auto-upgrades before they added it and was on the side of people deciding which upgrades to trigger, that said the current iteration does work and removes some of exploits of the old system.

You can currently block upgrades by stopping the supply which was the meat of the old system outside of people choosing which ones next. Now does it remove some individual’s sense of ownership, I thought yes at first but realized that the ownership was tied to one person. The new system ties it more to a guild and thereby more people. Would I still like to see ways for individuals to help upgrade structures, yes but you can also do that through your guilds.

It also removed issues with people complaining that the wrong one was done in the wrong order, people spending their own coin just to have no one defend, and moved people to the field to fight. On top of that it, in regards to upgrades, removed a major issue the forum went round and round about which was keep trolls spending all the supply and blocking the upgrades. It also pretty much stopped the map chat back and fourth about taking supply because we need it for the upgrade. Again it removed many issues that could be exploited by people with accounts on opposing servers.

The dolyak system also works because it creates a mobile objective that creates a point of contention to fight over. The point is to have people fighting, not standing in structures doing nothing.

At this point I would call that a win over the old system. Could it using further enhancing, yes but its an improvement.

Pattern seems to be CC’d while off the ground. Seen it via jumps, knockbacks and other things that launch and then hit while in air.

Jong.5937:

FYI, they always said they would eventually rotate the borders. Popular pressure made them move fast to make this happen. They still say they intend to swap between the two borders (they have hinted it may be a 3 monthly cycle although no one really seems happy with that!).

True this. And agree they rushed this out else we wouldn’t still have the bugs that were in the maps prior to them being taken out of rotation. Unless someone thinks that the open bay WP issue was an intended feature or the the spawn trebs, or the citadel trebs, or…well lets say it was rushed yes?

MidoriMarch.8067:

TheGrimm.5624:

Allow players to choose. Don’t restrict us. Give people all maps as options at all times. People like different maps for different reasons. Keep as many as possible. Normal decay will remove players overtime. Don’t force any out that you don’t have to.

Lol.

We already chose the map. Why do u think old alpine map is back?

Do u actually think anet will replace old map over new designed map without any reason?

I dont even understand why u talk like u are the majority because majority wants the alpine not the desert.

I am not talking as the majority. I am talking from someone who likes a variety in maps. People came back, and some people left. Don’t have numbers, neither do you unless you are an ANet stats person and if so, please post. I will keep siding on the side of variety. I want ABL/DBL/EBG/EoTM and 6 more maps we potentially might have had by now. Why ANet did what they did, could comment on that but I wasn’t sitting in their meeting so I would be speculating, which doesn’t add to the fact that people were asking for new maps years ago. Do a google search yourself. Glad people got a map back they enjoy, but it also means they un-addressed the original issue. Where are the new maps?

Baldrick.8967:

No. EoTM is nothing like wvw. It has it’s own niche and should be left as it is.

Wasn’t looking to address EoTM in particular, could debate that part about it being like WvW or not, but that’s not the point. Replace EoTM with new map testing. Would this mechanic work in sharing score between a megaserver approach and our traditional 3 (/6) server approach considering uneven sides?

Balthazzarr.1349:

Shared scoring doesn’t make sense to me in any way regardless of how you look at it. EoTM as we know is a grouping of servers with anybodies guess on how many of a given server are on it. Add to that the fact that it’s really simply a place where people go to run around getting xp, karma, loot, whatever with no real investment in “WvW proper” for the most part.

Appreciate the feedback.

You actually just described WvW except our points go to our server. The purpose of this change would be to place that final link in place which is to tie into the score so that people are working towards something outside of the single match.

Balthazzarr.1349:

One further note… really if you want EoTM to be an extension of WvW then make EoTM LIKE WvW. One EoTM map per 3 servers and do NOT megaserver them. THAT would make it usable as an additional battle ground for the 3 battling servers each week. lol… oh ya, I think they call that: Eternal Battlegrounds…. :P

Wouldn’t mind seeing the map rolled in, a number on the forums goers wouldn’t. But this thread is also to address future map testing and if they use RBG method for sides.