Guild Wars 2

I thought I read somewhere that they would be checking activity levels at time slices to balance the servers in conjunction with glicko ratings. Not sure if it is accurate.

Even with the API you can track capture levels and kills/deaths by time blocks. Just having aggregate values for each server and a spread sheet is enough to find some balance. However there will always be some outliers that have production spikes at specific times that will not allow for fully balance matches.

I have no idea how they intend to combine glicko ratings or even if they intend to. For multiplayer (or multiserver) teams, I think you need to compare each team member with all opposing team members and incorporate the aggregate change into the glicko score. The problem with doing it on a server to server basis is that lower ranked servers will see huge gains and higher ranked servers will see huge losses. All glicko ratings will be pushed to the middle and IMO will essentially become meaningless since the disparity between high and low population servers is so severe. In other words, the glicko ratings will no longer accurate describe any individual server. I’m definitely interested in seeing how they are going to do this.

I do hope that this combining of different entities is the first step to alliances.

I think a while ago I requested that objective tier and yak progression (for upgrades) be provided in the WvW API. Now that the changes are out and it is clear that this mechanic is going to stay, is it possible to have these items added to the API so they can be tracked.

The time an objective has been help would also be helpful but that can be derived.

And for claims can we have the server id of the claiming guild since servers will now be coupled for matches.

mcarswell.3768:

spawn camping is boring and dumb as an attacker…never bothers me as a defender since there are 3 exits to every spawn, and 4 spawns to choose from.

Honestly, I’m for anything that raises the cost of dying. Knowing that the enemies are trolling your spawn makes you not want to die.

Interdiction is a viable strategy, especially if the map has active fights happening over objectives. Spawn camping otherwise would be fine to draw a bigger force either for entertainment or distraction.

I personally don’t think the term of spawn camping even applies in the case of wvw since everyone starts in a safe zone. No matter how big anet makes the safe zone, there will always be somebody waiting on the other side of it. No point in crying about it.

Thanks. I was going through the data and it looked like some guilds are claiming on multiple servers in the same week. I wasn’t sure if they simply had the same guild name or they were same guild.

But I should be able to assume that dedicated WvW guilds to be on one server at a time. Still the cross-repping will make it difficult to track guild server movements.

Can a guild exist on multiple servers and if they do are they able to claim objectives on multiple servers?

I’m curious how multiple server guilds operate in WvW if they do exist.

No downed rallying either. If you are downed someone has to assist to get you up. Although they should be able to do this even if they are in combat if other changes are made.

And I agree, if you die, then you need to run back from a way point which then gives your enemy some interesting interdiction options.

It definitely would allow a skilled fight group to widdle down an opponent, I’m all for it.

This weeks activity. Tarnished Coast showing increased captures and fight activity.

Here is a link to the hourly capture activity of the servers on Tier 2. Tarnished Coast is dominant in most time blocks other than Late NA and Early OCX.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/bbgxoznp0j42ra9/2016-04-09.Page_7.pdf?dl=0

gennyt.3428:

Bahahaha now it all makes sense.

What is more enlightening is that I was on BG when this thread started.

X T D.6458:

Funny enough you dont say anything good about your new server.

So I haven’t said anything positive about Yak’s Bend? Maybe you have a problem with nuance.

Naithe.4271:

problem.

I’m content to let you have the last word. Good luck!

X T D.6458:

@Torqued, you are beyond clueless and clearly bitter. Lets see you were new, wanted people to play your way, got angry because the whole server didnt rally behind you, left the server, and now your an expert. You know nothing of BG, and throw up walls of text as if your on some kind of vendetta. Funny enough you dont say anything good about your new server.

If you want to go pvd and think this is what WvW is about, and what drives server activity, go nuts, nothing is stopping you.

If you think I am bitter and angry, you are the clueless one here.

This is just a game after all. And the game is played many different ways.

Reverence.6915:

TorquedSoul.8097:

(snip cause wall of text)

Ok this is extremely off topic, whatever, I have to call you out on this one. We were rather supportive of your particular efforts to get people to play PPT. The thing is though, that you were also trying to force your perspective on the way the game it should be played onto people who didn’t want to play that way. We never stopped you from playing for the win. There’s plenty of people on BG who indeed do still try to play for the win. They are supported by the rest of us when we are online because we do try nurture these players. The problems you ran into were due to your insistence on us playing PPT while not doing anything yourself.

On BG, we show what we are made of on the maps, whether we play for the points, or we play to slaughter our enemies (usually both). When rallied up, very few servers have been able to match us, even today. We’ve been purposely dialing back our play time outside of seasons (warning each other to not play too much) because we’ve seen what happens when people play too much. It leads to burnout. We’ve lost way too many good players and commanders to burnout and it’s hurt our community each time one of these players leave.

What you’re asking for is essentially people taking time off work/study to try get a win. It’s not feasible and it’s not moral. Blackgate doesn’t play to lose. We play to have fun, however we define “fun” to be.

Well thats a bit of distortion. I was never telling anyone to take off work/school to grind. I believe that my argument was centered around being more welcoming to those PvE players that would enjoy the PPT element of the game. The response was that PvE players would hurt BG once the all powerful PPK was implemented. And suddenly even MAS was going to be fight guild and was going to get big. The leadership’s fight elitism reduced coordination with those that played the PPT end of the game. The result was reduced activity overall. Active population is BG’s problem and that was a cultural one. A culture that chased off would be WvW’ers because you had a different vision.

I made a point that the game should not be grind and that increasing active population was the solution to low activity levels. You guys have either a very short memory or a very selective one. I discouraged grinding.

If some people wrongfully interpreted my desire to win as pushing for a grindfest they should have read my entire posts where I talked about increasing active population (i.e. number of players) rather than grinding.

I do not have a win at all costs attitude, but I do however have a play to win attitude. I’m sorry if you don’t know the difference. Running around in blobs looking for blob fights wasn’t done in attempt to win, it was done because you redefined winning in your mind. It was done while you clung to the hope that Anet would shrink the map sizes to a point to make blob fights a winning strategy. Just like your rejection of PvE players was done in hopes that Anet would drastically increase the PPK value and marginalize capture activity. You were building your server community around a game that didn’t exist yet and crying every time Anet didn’t move the game in a direction that was consistent with your community goals.

If you were truly playing just for fun, you would allow yourself to fall out of tier 1. You don’t like fighting YB and JQ is disintegrating. So why does BG want to be in tier 1. Let TC in. drop down. Get out of the way. Servers that want fights only should just drop to the bottom tiers where points can be regulated and more easily manipulated. But for some reason you guys want to be at the top of the pile. Why is that? Is it more fun to be there?

Naithe.4271:

When ANet put in DBL and made the game more bunker/cheese abilities focused, PLAYERS LEFT. They didn’t stay or play more, THEY LEFT. Why would you then support that direction if the direction ANet is going is making the game die?

Frankly, it makes zero sense.

This statement pretty much backs up my argument, Finality. So thanks for that.

For some reason the denizens of BG have a problem with me describing my experience and have decided to take it personally. My comments have managed to drum up some hostility. But its not personal. Like everyone else, I’m entitled to my opinion.

Try looking at it from my perspective. I was new to WvW and wanted to learn the game and give it a try. When I did a little research and try to get excited about it, all I got from the community is “ANet broke the game. No point in playing to win.” All would hear in TS was an endless stream of hate spewed at Anet and YB coupled with the occasional we could win if we wanted to.

As a new player to the game, this really isn’t productive. There was a period where I thought I was motivating people but in the end, the only reason they were playing was to avoid falling into Tier 2. You said as much in the BG forums.

If you don’t like people airing BG’s dirty laundry, you shouldn’t heap it upon them when they show up and then assume that they will eventually see it your way. I don’t agree with what you guys are doing there. So I left. And when people ask about the state of servers, I think I am allowed to offer my opinion.

Do you ever think for a moment that the reason people leave the game is because of people like you who seek to intentionally stifle enjoyment so that you can make a case to Anet that they are doing it wrong? Maybe you and people like you are the reason that people have left Blackgate or the game in general.

I left BG because it simply wasn’t fun there. If you can no longer find enjoyment in the game, just leave it behind. Move on. I promise you when you do, that the servers will keep running and people will keep playing.

If you want to stay for the community then stay for that. But don’t make it your duty to trash everyone who is playing the game.

I don’t think everyone on BG shares this ugly perspective, but unfortunately those that lead the WvW on BG have created a culture that chills counter perspectives. It wasn’t worth the trouble trying to change anything there.

Only Blackgate cares how good Blackgate was back in the day. To new players, now is what matters. So play or get out of the way.

Ocosh.5843:

Anything drawn exclusively from the presented information is necessarily speculative.

Ocosh.5843:

Few will dispute that the Fights-PPT relationship was symbiotic. PPT guilds needed Fight guilds to protect them from zergs. Fight guilds needed PPT guilds to keep them in active tiers … And, frankly, most guilds did at least a little of both

Of course conclusions are speculative. The question is whether the speculation is supported by the data. In this case mine and yours is. I’m glad we can agree.

And what exactly was Chaba feeding?

I reran the numbers and it appears that the kills that week in obsidian sanctum were pretty low. The difference amounted to about a 0.2% difference in kills. Because of this my correlations didn’t change much. They actually got slightly better.

I’m not going to bother to update the charts as the differences are minute.

First chart
CR to Kills + Deaths new: 0.907312349 old: 0.90719207
Second chart
CR to (Kills+Deaths)/CR new: 0.754898566 old: 0.75425295

Dawdler.8521:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Yes however those with the lag with be a much smaller population. But we see people with bad pings now because they are playing out of their region or are living on some far away island. So we already experience the ‘bad’ gameplay to a small degree.

Much smaller? EU pop in US primetime perhaps, but EU primetime would be during the day/afternoon in the US, where I am guessing a sizeable amount plays, especially during weekends.

I think this would fit an EoTM style matchup instead where you can freely move between instances after joining (specify if the instance is native to EU or US, with respective players ending up in their area by default). At least then if the lag sucks you can just go try another instance.

You are probably right. Because Eu and Na times are close together it would likely have too much player overlap.

oh well.

Dawdler.8521:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Puck.9612:

TorquedSoul.8097:

The should just merge NA and EU permanently. It would help with the 24 hour coverage imbalances.

And who’s servers should they use? Who gets stuck with the lag?

Although I don’t know if it is technically feasible (probably is) but I suggested that during NA hours they use NA servers and during EU they use EU servers. This would require a short reset a couple times a day to switch back and forth.

That way the only people hurt by latency issues are people playing in off hours in their time zones. There is no perfect solution so there is always someone that is going to experience degraded gameplay.

It wouldnt change the lag. Either you would be playing as someone with 300 ping or you would playing against someone with 300 ping. Either way, you got laggy gameplay.

I am not entirely against it, but its just going to be an awfull experience.

Yes however those with the lag with be a much smaller population. But we see people with bad pings now because they are playing out of their region or are living on some far away island. So we already experience the ‘bad’ gameplay to a small degree.

Recently a bug was discovered that misreported kills and deaths in the global section of the WvW API. The API was wrongly adding Obsidian Sanctum numbers to the global kills. Details here: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/community/api/WvW-Global-kills-sum-of-map-kills/

Since some in this thread have challenged the accuracy of the data (maybe they were seeing different numbers reported elsewhere) I think I should rerun the numbers on the same data set to see if I get a similar result.

What I will do is rerun my kills and deaths on the same data set using the sum of the map array values rather than the global values. This will eliminate any problems coming from obsidian sanctum in this case.

Puck.9612:

TorquedSoul.8097:

The should just merge NA and EU permanently. It would help with the 24 hour coverage imbalances.

And who’s servers should they use? Who gets stuck with the lag?

Although I don’t know if it is technically feasible (probably is) but I suggested that during NA hours they use NA servers and during EU they use EU servers. This would require a short reset a couple times a day to switch back and forth.

That way the only people hurt by latency issues are people playing in off hours in their time zones. There is no perfect solution so there is always someone that is going to experience degraded gameplay.

The should just merge NA and EU permanently. It would help with the 24 hour coverage imbalances.

Reposted charts. Kill counts were inaccurate due to kill reporting bug.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/community/api/WvW-Global-kills-sum-of-map-kills/

Thanks. I saw the fix in the tracking issue.

No harm done, other than challenges to the accuracy of my data :P

Some one pointed out that I had an error in my charts. He assumed the error because the websites he uses showed different results.

The discrepancy was real. The difference in our calculations was what data we used. I use the global kills tally, and the websites use the sum of the maps kills

I checked the last data grab for the tier in question and it turns out the Seafarers rests map total was 34370 but the global total was above 50K.

Should these numbers be different? If so why?

I’m attaching the api snapshot that I am referring to.

baylock.1703:

I have noticed more and more that zergs chase me across half of a map whenever I’m roaming I have raven gotten few offensive whispers from enemy that I’m playing wvw wrong …… what has happened?

There are some that feel that everyone should play the game exactly the same way. And when they see a roamer running free and not on tag like god intended, they get mad and zerg the roamer down.

I even included EU T9 this week.

Pensadora.9478:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Substance E.4852:

Lobo Dela Noche.5127:

mulzi.8273:

Siska.8102:

YB is a boring opponent. Basically you have to drain their map of supplies, kill all their siege, get past all Anet’s cheese mechanics THEN you might get a fight. They’re like the guy in the drinking game bragging that he’s still sober at the end of the night. I’m all for sobriety but buddy pretty much missed the point or joined the wrong game. That’s YB, they’re in wvw to pve.

^this. In my experience, JQ and BL go after each other due to some pretty good fights. While these two are battling it out, YB is back capping, ‘stealth sieging’, PvD, etc.

Pointless to fight YB in this environment. When a BG zerg meets a JQ zerg, there is might stacking, pushing, healing, falling back, strategy, players actually hitting each other with class skills, etc. A fight with YB? YB sees another zerg they immediately drop 10+ siege on a choke point and siege hump, hoping to god the other team charges them. Only idiotic teams will ‘charge’ YB like that, zergs looking for fights will go elsewhere and leave YB to their PvD activities.

I can’t count how many times BQ has teamed up to take down YB. When 2 servers will not fight each other and gang up on the underdog what do you expect that underdog to do? YB came up with tactics to win against getting tag teamed. The only reason JQ and BG are fighting each other now is because neither of them want to be in third.

I’m pretty sure underdog’s are supposed to be small and not the obvious pick for the winner consistently. Not the “oh well that guy’s going to obviously win, just look at him” choice.

Sorry bro. Yb isn’t the underdog.

That is true. YB is so dominant at this point that BG and JQ don’t even try to win. Guilds that want to experience winning drop to tier 2. Even when they have a push week they don’t expect to win … they just want to tweak the glicko and use the week as a diagnostic test to gauge relative activity level.

Seriously, I’d strongly suggest that if a player had left a WvW-focused Blackgate guild that had a minimum participation level of a mere 2 nights a week for 2-3 hours each night, because it was too much to do, the ‘player’ should at least publish a disclosure that what is offered as knowledge about the inner workings of Blackgate or any other server has been obtained largely, if not exclusively, through the use of spreadsheets, and has little if any basis in actual experience with that server, the players on that server, or WvW for that matter.

Players who won’t play WvW for even a mere 2% of the total hours available each week, yet hold themselves out as somehow knowledgeable about all of what WvW is or should be, and of the server they don’t play on, make me think of snake oil salesmen of old: wanted everyone to believe that what they said was the truth about the curing power of the medicine, but didn’t use it themselves.

It seems you are addressing me directly with that comment … particularly the spreadsheet comment so I will offer a brief defense. But in the future if you want to address me personally, please PM me here or whisper me in game. I don’t think this is the forum these types of discussion.

The reason my play time was low on Blackgate was because I wasn’t having a good time. This was simply a matter of my compatibility with the existing culture on Blackgate.

Your suggestion that I didn’t spend ample time getting to know the community is false. I spent a considerable amount of time on the Blackgate forums trying to understand what the community goals were. When they finally told me that they (as a community) had abandon PPT style play, I apologized for pushing everyone to play PPT and then left for another server. I think I handled it properly.

As for the snake oil salesman comment, using data to reach conclusions is pretty common these days. Science, economics, and even games are modeled systems where our understanding is shaped by data. I don’t think I have to apologize for collecting and analyzing data. Anet provided the API so people could analyze it.

Changes are coming. We will soon know if BG has been making the right decisions to be successful in the long run. I imagine if Anet chooses to considerably boost PPK with an adjustment for KDR, removes siege, and then brackets the WvW playtimes to times to a couple hours around NA Prime, BG will be well positioned to be competitive again.

Substance E.4852:

Lobo Dela Noche.5127:

mulzi.8273:

Siska.8102:

YB is a boring opponent. Basically you have to drain their map of supplies, kill all their siege, get past all Anet’s cheese mechanics THEN you might get a fight. They’re like the guy in the drinking game bragging that he’s still sober at the end of the night. I’m all for sobriety but buddy pretty much missed the point or joined the wrong game. That’s YB, they’re in wvw to pve.

^this. In my experience, JQ and BL go after each other due to some pretty good fights. While these two are battling it out, YB is back capping, ‘stealth sieging’, PvD, etc.

Pointless to fight YB in this environment. When a BG zerg meets a JQ zerg, there is might stacking, pushing, healing, falling back, strategy, players actually hitting each other with class skills, etc. A fight with YB? YB sees another zerg they immediately drop 10+ siege on a choke point and siege hump, hoping to god the other team charges them. Only idiotic teams will ‘charge’ YB like that, zergs looking for fights will go elsewhere and leave YB to their PvD activities.

I can’t count how many times BQ has teamed up to take down YB. When 2 servers will not fight each other and gang up on the underdog what do you expect that underdog to do? YB came up with tactics to win against getting tag teamed. The only reason JQ and BG are fighting each other now is because neither of them want to be in third.

I’m pretty sure underdog’s are supposed to be small and not the obvious pick for the winner consistently. Not the “oh well that guy’s going to obviously win, just look at him” choice.

Sorry bro. Yb isn’t the underdog.

That is true. YB is so dominant at this point that BG and JQ don’t even try to win. Guilds that want to experience winning drop to tier 2. Even when they have a push week they don’t expect to win … they just want to tweak the glicko and use the week as a diagnostic test to gauge relative activity level.

Regarding OP:

Re: Siege: Defensive siege or counter siege are valid tactics. Those that don’t like the use of siege in defensive environments simply don’t like siege fights. Well some people do. And those that do it well can annoy the crap out of an attacker which discourages the attack … which is the point if you are defending. Make the attacker go away. Just because you want to have a melee fight doesn’t mean that no one else should be allow to use siege.

Re: Annoyance vs challenge: Having environment elements allows players to have tactics. WvW is a mixture of PvE and PvP. And yes the clever use of environment can change the direction of the battle. Terrain and Environment add a little complexity to the conflict. This is a good thing. I don’t think reducing WvW to an oversize Obsidian Sanctum map is going to make the game more interesting for most. And while these environmental challenges are not why you are there, others may enjoy using the environment to help them win a fight. It seems that some want a fight that is strictly decided by builds and group comp. But even then people are manipulating the environment through their choice of gear. Really if you want a truly fair skill based fight without any environment, everyone should have the same build and group comp, then and only then, will the more skillful warrior be known. Maybe this sounds like a silly slippery slope argument but all you are really arguing here is your preference as to where Anet should draw the line on environment impact. There is no problem with employing terrain, structures or even NPC in a fight strategy. That allows for more creative gameplay.

Re: Builds: I’m not sure what you are getting at here. But it really sounds like you are hoping for a fair fight in WvW. You will never get one. I mean, where do you want to draw the line? The RNG rewards those that spend more time playing the game and farming. Skill rewards those that spend more time engaged in fighting. Which is more important? I don’t know if that is for you to decide. Anet is happy so long as people are spending time playing the game so either works for them. The determining factor in both RNG and skill is time spent playing the game. IF you really want a fair fight, then fight should be balance by total hours spent playing the game by both groups of combatants. Which is silly. The smaller scale of sPvP allows this level of control via managing groups size, pairing, gear control, skill level (via glicko) and so one. But ultimately, a group operating with teamspeak still has a huge advantage to pugs. And short of not letting groups join as groups there is no way to correct for this. I doubt anyone wants pure sPvP pug play.

Aeowia.7214:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Aeowia.7214:

Doesn’t matter who uses these despicable game mechanics like AC’s against players, cloaking waters, chilling fog, airship, and the list is sadly very long – they are and remain wrong and a major reason for slowly killing the fun of playing WvW.

It’s not the first time we condemn these, but our voice is ignored. There are always a few supporters of anything or anyone, that’s just how humans are – but the dev team should be concerned with the long term health of the game mode and should’ve focused on those who gave life to WvW and now are gone. The last remnant will be gone soon if nothing changes: revert back to pre-stab and nerf AC (or make siege bunker wxp reduce 50-90% instead of 10%).

Yes we JQ, are also guilty, of using these unequivocally detestable game mechanics: capping empty objectives, using multiple AC’s when we outnumber the enemy (I never seen this, but maybe happened, though only 1 server does this), using cloaking waters, chilling fog, dragon banners, and many others. Being guilty doesn’t make these any less reprehensible.

The WvW players deserved a competitive environment, where skill mattered, where everyone would’ve been encouraged to improve and become better, where the winner would’ve been decided based on who played better and not who capped more on deserted maps in a dead game mode. The changes that lead there were forced upon us, WvW gradually became worse, and now it’s at an all time low.

This is the game now and we are guilty for still playing it sometimes, hoping for a miracle, until we leave too. Everytime we use these game mechanics something dies inside, because we know: by using these, we kill our beloved game mode.

Are you trying to shame Anet into creating the game you want?

Despicable game mechanics. Why not just call Anet immoral and be done with it?

Here is what I suggest for the sake of you mental health, go find another game. Walk away. Get some closure. Don’t stay here and let Anet force you to engage in despicable and immoral acts. Its not good for the soul.

You really don’t get it? This isn’t about me alone, far from it. These are the feelings we shared countless times and wasn’t boredom alone that made most of them leave. For WvW to survive these has to be understood, since these voices are no longer with us. That’s my pain, the loss of those players, not the “immorality” in itself.

Also this is likely my last post. Use it to answer the “why all they left” question. Or consider us “just a minority”. Or just continue to ignore all, doesn’t matter anymore.

All I am saying is this: If you harbor such negative feelings about the game, then maybe you should go.

Not sure why it is such a problem for you. If you are not happy, leave. I would offer this advice to everyone who felt this way, even if they are the majority.

Go do something else. Forget about Guild Wars and Anet.

I’ve never seen people so conflicted over a game.

Crazy Branden.6951:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Crazy Branden.6951:

as of right now 1:22 pm est

Fort Aspenwood-127,070
DragonBrand-166,374
Tarnished coast-164,208
so Complain about TC but they are losing atm

Thats because now that DB has said it isn’t pushing into T1, the JQ guilds/players are heading back to JQ. Mission Accomplished.

What makes you say that maybe TC is letting DB win. you never know

It’s possible.

Crazy Branden.6951:

as of right now 1:22 pm est

Fort Aspenwood-127,070
DragonBrand-166,374
Tarnished coast-164,208
so Complain about TC but they are losing atm

Thats because now that DB has said it isn’t pushing into T1, the JQ guilds/players are heading back to JQ. Mission Accomplished.

I think that comparing this thread and threads like it to “cancer forums” is inaccurate.

I have seen that forum and this doesn’t compare. This thread and threads like them discuss play style preferences more so than pure trash talk and ad hominems. These threads are no different than arguing over which class is the best or whether Deadpool could beat Batman.

Added EU T9 to the charts.

I get the feeling some of you don’t know what capture volume is. It is not the same as PPT. It is calculated like this:

Everytime an objective is captured I add points equal to the tick value, i.e. camp=5, tower=10, keep=25, SMC=35.

If a server caps the entire map in the middle of the night and no one takes it back, then they will only get the max tick value of 695 added to the capture volume.

A high capture volume requires that the servers are taking objectives from each other so capturing in a vacuum doesn’t add much.

Kungsmurfen.2861:

Lord Kuru.3685:

Considering that there must be more activity around primetime, that means there are probably huge stretches of time when the server makes 0 kills.

That’s called night. You know.. when people are asleep :p

Anyway, was jsut gonna say T9 is still missing ^^

Sorry about that. I always forget to adjust the script for EU to include 9 tiers. I will add them later and update the charts.

Activity charts for last week. Server capture volume, Kills, KDR and Killscore.

EDIT: Added EU T9 to charts.

Aeowia.7214:

Doesn’t matter who uses these despicable game mechanics like AC’s against players, cloaking waters, chilling fog, airship, and the list is sadly very long – they are and remain wrong and a major reason for slowly killing the fun of playing WvW.

It’s not the first time we condemn these, but our voice is ignored. There are always a few supporters of anything or anyone, that’s just how humans are – but the dev team should be concerned with the long term health of the game mode and should’ve focused on those who gave life to WvW and now are gone. The last remnant will be gone soon if nothing changes: revert back to pre-stab and nerf AC (or make siege bunker wxp reduce 50-90% instead of 10%).

Yes we JQ, are also guilty, of using these unequivocally detestable game mechanics: capping empty objectives, using multiple AC’s when we outnumber the enemy (I never seen this, but maybe happened, though only 1 server does this), using cloaking waters, chilling fog, dragon banners, and many others. Being guilty doesn’t make these any less reprehensible.

The WvW players deserved a competitive environment, where skill mattered, where everyone would’ve been encouraged to improve and become better, where the winner would’ve been decided based on who played better and not who capped more on deserted maps in a dead game mode. The changes that lead there were forced upon us, WvW gradually became worse, and now it’s at an all time low.

This is the game now and we are guilty for still playing it sometimes, hoping for a miracle, until we leave too. Everytime we use these game mechanics something dies inside, because we know: by using these, we kill our beloved game mode.

Are you trying to shame Anet into creating the game you want?

Despicable game mechanics. Why not just call Anet immoral and be done with it?

Here is what I suggest for the sake of you mental health, go find another game. Walk away. Get some closure. Don’t stay here and let Anet force you to engage in despicable and immoral acts. Its not good for the soul.

lil devils x.6071:

Liston.9708:

That isn’t the only time, just the most recent. It was your leet awesome guild that first used the banners to the nth degree when they were OP…….

The point was and still is, we admit these things – others don’t or say well it’s the pugs….

When your guild hasn’t even been playing GW2 for months due to the state of the game, you can’t really blame that guild. LOL Yup.. IT IS the PUGS..

Fight guilds hating on PUGs. Delicious.

The biggest problems with PUGs is that they don’t play follow the leader very well. They just kinda do whatever they want. They don’t take direction well. Its probably rooted in some deep-seated disrespect for authority or something.

The last thing GW2 needs is a bunch of players just running around doing whatever they want. It is selfish of them to do whatever want and not consider the needs of blob commanders. I think the PUGs are only hurting themselves though. They will never understand the thrill of following their glorious commander into victory. They will never know the joy of being a cog in a well oiled machine. They will never know what it is like to be better than everyone else.

But that’s PUG Life. Underachieving no-skill good fer nuthins. They should just do everyone a favor and delete their accounts.

bettadenu.5483:

TorquedSoul.8097:

I’m in Tier 1 atm so I’m not sure where your sarcasm is coming from or what is directed at. It was pretty clear to me that when JQ guilds started dropping down it was to stop a rising DB.

It has nothing to do with “Evil Overlords” and more to do with JQ trying to stay in Tier 1. There are people on BG and JQ that are heavily invested in those servers and will play the tier meta game to stay in tier 1.

You are free to dismiss this as rubbish but I think it is commonly accepted at this time that this is something that happens.

I hope DB keeps recruiting and keeps pushing.

Not a single JQ went to t2 to stop DB, stop pulling stuff out of your behind. The people that went to t2 is because their timezone in t1 was not to their satisfactory and want to find their happiness elsewhere.

sure. ok. What timezone in Tier 2 is more active than Tier 1?

morrolan.9608:

TorquedSoul.8097:

I’m in Tier 1 atm so I’m not sure where your sarcasm is coming from or what is directed at. It was pretty clear to me that when JQ guilds started dropping down it was to stop a rising DB.

It has nothing to do with “Evil Overlords” and more to do with JQ trying to stay in Tier 1. There are people on BG and JQ that are heavily invested in those servers and will play the tier meta game to stay in tier 1.

LMAO that you think people are so invested in a dead game mode that they would do this.

yes.

bettadenu.5483:

TorquedSoul.8097:

bettadenu.5483:

expandas.7051:

This comment is hilarious.

I’m smiling collecting that extra chest yo

TorquedSoul.8097:

bettadenu.5483:

TC is not stacking up to go to t1, if somehow it does go to t1 it will have a hard time because people are not ready for t1 yet.

I agree that TC is not stacking to go to Tier 1. It seems to me that the JQ guilds that transferred there were more interested in stopping DB from pushing into Tier 1 and JQ or BG from falling into Tier 2.

Once DB has imploded, those JQ guilds will be going right back up to JQ in Tier 1.

The Tier Metagame is in full force. There are players in both JQ and BG that are heavily invested in those servers and don’t want them to fall down the ranks. The paid transfers and the ability to set up multiple alt accounts creates a bit of a pay to win in this regard. Anyone willing to throw enough money at the problem can manipulate the tiers and sabotage rising servers.

The only way DB can expect to surpass TC is to start rapidly increasing their population. And that is going to cost them.

People like you need to stop thinking everything is some illuminati conspiracy.
The reason why some JQ have moved to TC is because the matchup in t1 is stale not to protect the holy siege grail that is t1 top kek.

They transferred to get better fights from DB? That is your theory. lels. Since dragonbrand’s KDR is worse than Yaks Bend and DB’s fight activity is lower than YB’s, I would say that theory is complete crap. I doubt better fights was the motivation, maybe … just maybe it was to farm DB’s bags but I think my theory makes more sense. JQ was trying to keep DB out of tier 1 and sent guilds to TC to reinforce it until DB implodes. Eventually the ‘bandwagoners’ of dragonbrand would get tired of banging their head against the tier 1 wall and just give up.

Unless the leadership on DB wants to completely played by Tier 1 leadership, they should keep recruiting hard and pushing hard to shut down this silly tier manipulation. Force JQ and BG to play to stay in Tier 1.

Eh! you got me, we are evil overlords here specifically to destroy db and their hopes and dreams.

also db’s kdr is kitten because db is kitten

I’m in Tier 1 atm so I’m not sure where your sarcasm is coming from or what is directed at. It was pretty clear to me that when JQ guilds started dropping down it was to stop a rising DB.

It has nothing to do with “Evil Overlords” and more to do with JQ trying to stay in Tier 1. There are people on BG and JQ that are heavily invested in those servers and will play the tier meta game to stay in tier 1.

You are free to dismiss this as rubbish but I think it is commonly accepted at this time that this is something that happens.

I hope DB keeps recruiting and keeps pushing.

Reaper Alim.4176:

It’s really that simple in my eyes, crying about this on the forums serves no one but the knuckle heads looking to draw out such responses, just don’t give them that satisfaction.

I enjoy a good argument so I don’t mind their attempts to troll.

bettadenu.5483:

expandas.7051:

This comment is hilarious.

I’m smiling collecting that extra chest yo

TorquedSoul.8097:

bettadenu.5483:

TC is not stacking up to go to t1, if somehow it does go to t1 it will have a hard time because people are not ready for t1 yet.

I agree that TC is not stacking to go to Tier 1. It seems to me that the JQ guilds that transferred there were more interested in stopping DB from pushing into Tier 1 and JQ or BG from falling into Tier 2.

Once DB has imploded, those JQ guilds will be going right back up to JQ in Tier 1.

The Tier Metagame is in full force. There are players in both JQ and BG that are heavily invested in those servers and don’t want them to fall down the ranks. The paid transfers and the ability to set up multiple alt accounts creates a bit of a pay to win in this regard. Anyone willing to throw enough money at the problem can manipulate the tiers and sabotage rising servers.

The only way DB can expect to surpass TC is to start rapidly increasing their population. And that is going to cost them.

People like you need to stop thinking everything is some illuminati conspiracy.
The reason why some JQ have moved to TC is because the matchup in t1 is stale not to protect the holy siege grail that is t1 top kek.

They transferred to get better fights from DB? That is your theory. lels. Since dragonbrand’s KDR is worse than Yaks Bend and DB’s fight activity is lower than YB’s, I would say that theory is complete crap. I doubt better fights was the motivation, maybe … just maybe it was to farm DB’s bags but I think my theory makes more sense. JQ was trying to keep DB out of tier 1 and sent guilds to TC to reinforce it until DB implodes. Eventually the ‘bandwagoners’ of dragonbrand would get tired of banging their head against the tier 1 wall and just give up.

Unless the leadership on DB wants to completely played by Tier 1 leadership, they should keep recruiting hard and pushing hard to shut down this silly tier manipulation. Force JQ and BG to play to stay in Tier 1.

bettadenu.5483:

TC is not stacking up to go to t1, if somehow it does go to t1 it will have a hard time because people are not ready for t1 yet.

I agree that TC is not stacking to go to Tier 1. It seems to me that the JQ guilds that transferred there were more interested in stopping DB from pushing into Tier 1 and JQ or BG from falling into Tier 2.

Once DB has imploded, those JQ guilds will be going right back up to JQ in Tier 1.

The Tier Metagame is in full force. There are players in both JQ and BG that are heavily invested in those servers and don’t want them to fall down the ranks. The paid transfers and the ability to set up multiple alt accounts creates a bit of a pay to win in this regard. Anyone willing to throw enough money at the problem can manipulate the tiers and sabotage rising servers.

The only way DB can expect to surpass TC is to start rapidly increasing their population. And that is going to cost them.

Finally, we will have real fights!

gennyt.3428:

Can we drop to T2 already and let YB nurse their ACs in peace? I’m not paying to transfer just for the hour I play per week.

I think most fight servers/guilds would be happier in tier 3 and below where the capture activity is much lower. Since the fight guilds don’t see any relationship between capture activity and fights, they shouldn’t expect see a reduction in fights due to the lack of captures. I think that is a win for everyone.

Liston.9708:

If npc kills go into the kill total and falling deaths go into the death total (which I thought they did at one time). Kills and deaths seem meaningless….

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/community/api/WvW-Kills-and-deaths/first#post6070732

Here is the answer. NPC kills do not go into the total. However players deaths as a result of an NPC is tallied in the death slot. so this slightly lowers the KDR of a server. This explains why deaths a slightly higher than kills in the tier totals.

Thanks for the quick response.

Someone brought up and interesting point on the WvW forum.

Does killing an NPC count towards the kill total in the API?

I suspect that deaths in the API include non-player kill deaths as the total deaths tend to be larger than the total kills.