Guild Wars 2

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….

I think this is something I can check over on the API Board. I will go ask and post back here.

BlazeQ.1095:

If so just pull the band-aid off so we can all move on to other interests.

You can’t move on to other interest until they pull the band-aid off?

You are always free to pursue other interests. You are not a GW2 hostage.

I find people threatening to leave unless Anet does x,y, or z to be quite comical. A better threat would be to stay and whine on the forums all day. Although that hasn’t been all that effective from what people are saying about anets tendency to ignore the community.

Jayne.9251:

TorquedSoul.8097:

I was talking about the reset flushes for which I can correct for. I am attaching a chart to illustrate the current problem.

How exactly do you correct it without manually doing so?

TorquedSoul.8097:

This is easy to correct for so the data in the charts can assumed to accurate .

This is where I have a problem with your stats analysis: Having to correct the API feed means the data is not pure. Therefore, it’s not accurate.

You can absolutely make educated guesses, but definitively? Nope.

I think I explained this to you before. I grab api data every 5 minutes throughout the week. I have around 2000 api snapshots by the end of the week. All I need to do to correct for these reset flushes is add the total value after the flush to the total value before the flush. Its not really that complicated. All servers on all tiers on all regions have the same reset times so they are all happening at the same time. So all I need to do is find the files that that I need to grab from in one tier, and then have a simple script to extract the data from those files.

There is no “educated guess” here. I am taking numbers directly from the API data.

Jayne.9251:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Jayne.9251:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/community/api/New-Endpoint-v2-wvw-matches/first#post5588283

I am aware of the old problems with kills. Up until two weeks ago the kill data was erratic. That problem no longer exists.

The only problem that currently exists is global reset flushes that I can easily correct for by adding up two totals.

Would you like to see a chart?

Even you acknowledge there’s bugs.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/community/api/NA-WvW-Kills-Deaths-are-flushed-at-EU-reset/first#post6054424

It’s not accurate.

I was talking about the reset flushes for which I can correct for. I am attaching a chart to illustrate the current problem. The kill evolution is smooth but then has a value reset during the NA and EU resets. This is easy to correct for so the data in the charts can assumed to accurate unless you are saying that the data from Anet is erroneous in which case, believe what you want.

Jayne.9251:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/community/api/New-Endpoint-v2-wvw-matches/first#post5588283

I am aware of the old problems with kills. Up until two weeks ago the kill data was erratic. That problem no longer exists.

The only problem that currently exists is global reset flushes that I can easily correct for by adding up two totals.

Would you like to see a chart?

Here is last weeks data if you are interested.

Added a Killscore chart. This killscore provides a combination of activity and KDR by multiplying the # of kills with the KDR.

Some commanders don’t like pugs that aren’t in teamspeak. They will often intentionally way point to ditch those that are not in TS.

Thanks for the very eloquent response Virtute. While I do have the urge to respond to all of your points, most of the issues you brought up have been brought up before in this thread. And on most I think we can agree to disagree as no further progress will be made on either side of the argument.

There are, however, a couple points that I would like to address although they may not be directly related to the topic at hand but do impact the interpretation of the arguments.

You start by saying this:

Virtute.8251:

I think it would be enlightening, and could reveal what I suspect: That you’ve just illustrated a thinking processes that, when applied as above to WvW, can produce the current dissonance between ArenaNet and players, and between players who are trying to have fun in a system that is often working against them while it’s also keeping them interested enough to continue trying.

It is common for those that are dissatisfied with the game to assert their position and opinion as the normal or global position. Essentially that you are the voice of the people who Anet has abused by taking their money and then ignoring their request to fix the game.

This perceived dissonance between Anet and the players is not a global phenomenon. Clearly there are those that are not happy and they tend to be the most vocal because those that are satisfied with the game actually spend their time playing it. This in itself creates the illusion of a landslide of negative opinion on the forums. I am a player also, and while I can’t say that there is nothing about the game I would change, all in all I like the game the game that Anet has made. And I am for the most part happy with the current state of WvW and its designed mix of PvP and PvE as well as the scoring that primarily centered around capture activity and not Kill/Fight activity. I would guess by the recent design choices by Anet that this type of design is supported by a more silent (less vocal on the forums) majority of the games players.

I understand that there are different views and opinions and that none is necessarily wrong or false. They are opinions and preferences after all and all are subjective. The closest we can get to objectivity is data. I admit that the interpretation of data can be a very subjective exercise, but the data itself is the only form of objectivity available. As we approach each individual motivation the interpretation gets more subjective, by definition. Objectivity is by necessity tied to data. Rejecting data as you do here is essentially rejecting objective reality. And while my and as you assert Anets, interpretation of this data can be somewhat subjective, it is a subjectivity supported by objective data.

On the other hand, those that reject the data as meaningless tend to possess opinions that are not supported by that data. These same people present their opinions as the global position and as clear common sense. What they often do not do is provide any tangible supporting evidence to such claims. Instead they frequently appeal to their own authority as a speaker of the people. Which leads to the outright rejection of the viability of other arguments which is at best egocentric and at worse narcissistic.

You close your comments by addressing WvW in the way that you and those that share your opinion want to experience it, through the filter of sPvP.

Virtute.8251:

It’s the same reason that sPvP matches are time limited. We grow into disrespecting the RvR mechanics of WvW because it is similar to sPvP in the wrong ways, omits key rules of sPvP that help make matches competitive, and significant parts of the design work directly against other equally significant pieces of the whole experience.

It has nothing to do with misunderstanding something that you’re somehow able to shine light on. That goes the other way, in this case. You’re on land we’ve already traveled.

I think that Anet has been quite clear in describing WvW as a mixture of PvE and PvP. The end result of this is that the normalize structure of sPvP will be lost. You argue that Anet needs to fix WvW by turning it into something it was never intended to be. The implication you make is that since the design doesn’t meet your criteria for well designed PvP that WvW is somehow broken. You project on to WvW something that it wasn’t designed to be and when you can’t get those pieces to line up, you say it is wrong.

Your last statement, that I am on “land we’ve already traveled” is also flawed in that it rejects a new player’s opportunity to experience the thing that you experienced. And that you said in another thread was fun for a while. What you are claiming here is that because you have already had your fun with this game mode and have exhausted your utility for it, that Anet should change the game mode for you and others that share your view, the view shared by the “old guard” of WvW and new hardcore PvP players. The belief that somehow forcing this conversion of the game mode is good for everyone is again egocentric and bordering on narcissism.

I think that Anet has the data to make sound decisions. I don’t think that the data collected is creating a dissonance. Anet wants to maintain a diverse and integrated community. I think WvW was their attempt at fusing the PvE and the PvP communities together. It has its warts, but overall they have managed to enable the creation of a robust community. They understand that everyone has different play styles and preferences and tries to accommodate them all.

However, I doubt that Anet will accommodate those that reject the value (or even insult) of the game play preferences of others. Such personalities tend to be more destructive to the larger community. There are many that spend time criticizing the WvW PvE/PPT players, but I doubt that those people are winning points with Anet. More likely the aggressive and vocal minority is likely to be marginalized for the benefit of the larger community.

All rumors of WvW activity are lies. The game mode is dead.

micheal.8793:

Ruru.1302:

TorquedSoul.8097:

X T D.6458:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Reverence.6915:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Reverence.6915:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Reverence.6915:

At this point, I’d rather get 2v1’d again to get action on the maps. BG seems dead because there’s no action, which causes people to log out, cause we’d rather do anything else other than karma training (I tag up for fights, fights end, half my group logs off). Groups from YB and JQ are just karma training empty borderlands thinking they’re hot stuff, complaining about us zerging them down with 10-15 man groups calling them “blobs”, all the while bunkering in keep lords rooms with siege.

Good joke.

If you want BG to play again, bring us fights without siege. Most of us won’t even care if we’re vastly outnumbered.

@Torqued: You seem bitter that BG won’t respond to your requests to push PPT. Guess what buddy, we’re not here to play for you. We’re here to play for us. If you want to play PPT, tag up and do it. Don’t expect someone else, who has no desire to want to play for PPT, to play that way.

Regardless of your perception of my attitude, the fact is that Blackgate is actively driving away PPT players and putting themselves at a disadvantage. Blackgate will never beat Yak’s Bend until they are willing to become like Yak’s Bend.

No amount of server politics will stop the unwashed hoards of Yak’s Bend.

You don’t know how PPT works, regardless of all those number crunching stuff you do (good work on those btw, they’re interesting to look at, despite not having any real relevance in the current WvW climate).

Why don’t you explain to me how PPT works? I’m always open to learning something new. What is my data missing that is so important? Server politics?

PPT isn’t a function (right now) of organisation and skill, but rather, of time and numbers. The more numbers you have on at any given time means that you’ll naturally get more PPT.

If you log in at any time outside of NA prime on BG you’ll notice this. Our small groups are backcapping as fast as they can, but due to lack of numbers, our PPT suffers. We lack numbers because people aren’t willing to put the time into WvW right now due to the lack of incentives to win and the lack of rewards while playing.

But then, I don’t think anyone on BG ever saw you put more hours in-game to help out our weaker time slots.

Maybe if Blackgate didn’t have such a sour attitude towards pugs and pve players they would have MORE people to put in those hours and there would be no grind. But alas, Blackgate is a “skilled fight” server and have chased away all those no skill pvd players.

Your inability to get the coverage speaks volumes about your server culture.

I really don’t understand your posts Torqued, it just seems bitter, and like your mad at BG because we play for fun..and we don’t devout all our time towards something we find meaningless, unrewarding, and not fun…

You are entitled to your opinion, or in this case, confusion. Don’t confuse my engagement in a larger argument as bitterness towards BG. I left BG because I didn’t like the culture the old guard created. As a person that is interested in playing the game that Anet created, sitting on BG and listening to the whining about how Anet ruined everything was getting tiring.

If you are confused, its because you don’t understand that others can enjoy things that you don’t. In this case, I enjoy games when I’m trying to win them. I don’t enjoy listening to stories of the glory days and how we could win if we wanted to. Put up or shut up. I don’t care about how awesome Blackgate was … I want to play the game.

BG’s toxic attitude towards PvD, siege humping “cancerous” game play is evidence that you don’t approve of others that enjoy different things. BG is bitter that Anet has ignored them and not provided them a “skill-based” WvW. which is about as idiotic a request that I could imagine.

Large scale warfare is not about fair fights. Its about coordination, communication, community, resources, alliances, “coverage”, morale, inspiration and RAW NUMBERS. You don’t have to believe me, but I would direct you to a history book. Warfare has always been a numbers game. And as the scope of the conflict grows the possibility of a fair fight dissolves and guerrilla tactics take over.

The servers that make the rational choices within the current game mechanics will push up and those that don’t will fall.

You’re the embodiment of all that is wrong with WvW and your opinion is objectively disgusting.

True, I cringed at reading that post.

Wow, gangs all here.

So what part made you cringe? Where I say “I want to play the game” or the part about rational choices?

OK. Let me wrap this thread up.

First, let me say that the only outstanding issue that was bugging me (regardless of the myriad of variables you are all tossing about) is the relationship that population has on capture rates and fighting activity. Unfortunately, I am not able to effectively normalize for population because map population is not provided in the API, at least not the last time I looked. The only solution that I could use was checking the cap/fight relationship by population category. Maybe this is insufficient but at the moment it is the extent of my ability to normalize to the population. There is a suspicion that Anet calculates its server population by activity which could make this a circular argument, but I’m going to do it anyway.

So here are the Capture to Fight correlation for different population levels.
Very High: 0.65 (5 servers)
High: 0.62 (14 servers)
Medium: 0.91 (32 servers)

I assume that all activity globally is basically a function of population. By checking the correlation of Cap to Fight activity within the popuation categories I try to remove the population as a factor. This means that regardless of population category that Capture activity and Fight Activity are still related. That is, within a population category as the capture activity increases the fight activity increases (or vice versa.) The question in the thread title was “Does capture activity drive fight activity?” Or is fighting a function of capture activity?

So what is being contested is whether this trend proves my assertion. It does not prove my assertion. However it is supporting data for that model. Just so you know, statistics doesn’t prove anything on a mathematical level, all it can do is support theories. The arguments I am getting suggest that the data is insufficient. Possibly.

Given that I have (to the best of my ability) normalized to population, there are a few cases that could describe what is occurring. These cases would be varying degrees of three basic behaviors: Capture w/o fighting, Capture w/ fighting, and Fighting w/o capturing. The motivations for the actors engaging in any of these three activities is irrelevant.

Case 1: People are fighting while engaging in capturing/defending exclusively. This would assume that everyone was conforming to the model and that no killing would occur outside of capturing. Not likely to be the case as variation in the data and outliers would easily debunk this.

Case 2: Fighting and capture activity are independent of each other. People who fight, fight. People how cap, cap. Both groups just happen to do so in a correlated fashion. Since I have removed population from the equation there must be some other factor that leads to these two activities being related. Its up to someone else to find this one.

Case 3: The hybrid case, and my position. The majority of fights occur during capture activity. However there are players who focus on fights w/o engaging in caps and player engaging in capture activity while avoiding fights. However, the overall trend is that capture activity and fights are occurring together. With population removed as a factor this case is strongly supported by the correlation.

My personal experience leads me to believe that fighting generally happens when someone looks to attack an objective and someone comes to defend it.

Are there cases where blobs go looking for each other, yes. But generally groups are running about capturing things and defending things and fights break out.

Why does this happen? Because objectives are tied to the score via PPT. Does this mean if we removed objectives from the scoring that fights wouldn’t happen? Of course not. But they would not happen the way they happen now. The environment would shift from an open world strategic environment to a tactical gladiatorial environment as Anet shifts the score weight from objectives to kills.

@Chaba: Sorry, you do keep bringing up the outliers as evidence that the trend does not support my conclusion. I mean, you even did it in your last post where you said you don’t do it. You are free to believe whatever you want to believe. But you are correct, that my trend doesn’t definitively and deductively prove my assertion that capture activity drives fights. Nor was it intended to. It was provided as supporting evidence to the claim.

@Stand the Wall: The data that I use is collected from the API. I collect the data at 5 minute intervals throughout the week. At the end of the week I collate the data and run reports. You are free to dismiss my data as inaccurate. Most people suffer from confirmation bias and reject or ignore information that doesn’t fit their current view. As far as whether the data take into account server behavior or backcapping, I don’t see how that is relevant to the discussion. I am looking at global qualities. Suggesting that I must consider the motivation of each server or each individual actor defeats the purpose of looking at trend. There is a correlation between capture activity and fight activity. If you don’t agree with my explanation, you can concoct your own. Maybe you believe the relationship exists because you ate salad last week. You can believe whatever you want.

@Aezyr: As I explained above to StW, I was looking at global qualities. The relationship exists globally. When and where are irrelevant. I understand that there is much blob fighting on EBG, I also understand that during that blob fighting things are being captured. Whenever you have larger groups fighting over objectives more people will get killed. So the proportion of killing to capture will go up (and we see this in the upper tiers in general) as the size of the group fighting over the objective increases. And as a result the correlation does weaken as you can see with the higher population servers having a weaker correlation.

@AbeLincoln: What’s crazy is that for all that inexplicable behavior and madness, there is a visible trend and relationship. There will always be exceptions, but if you believe that people somehow defy analysis you are probably being more manipulated than I am right now. If you don’t believe that systems can impact behavior go research sociology and economics. The structure of systems can and does impact the behaviors of people in aggregate within them. I understand that it is compelling to believe that somehow you are totally free and transcend all forms of control, but you don’t … and neither do I.

I am confident that all that I posted here will be viewed as insufficient by those that reject my position. And that is fine. If I learned one thing from debating politics is that once a person is entrenched in there position, the debate is no longer about persuading them, they are just a vehicle to present the information to others. Feel free to claim yourself victorious after I abandon the thread.

I don’t believe that my data is always perfect. I do make mistakes and if anyone would like me to provide the raw data I collect so they can confirm my results, I will do so. I am always happy to share with other data nerds so PM me if you want the raw API data. I will even provide the data sorted by tier to make it easier on you. But after that, you are on your own. I would like to see what others can squeeze out of the API.

Chaba.5410:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Chaba.5410:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Chaba.5410:

TorquedSoul.8097:

In my experience, those that reject data and assert that the truth is unknowable usually have arguments for which they little or no data to support. If you wish to counter my argument, use something other than your gut.

I don’t need my gut to see that your analysis is inconsistent with your own data. You identified a trend. That isn’t in question. Your conclusion for that trend though is not supported by your data. Any good theory requires explanation for the exceptions. Your conclusion basically presumes that if a server were to increase their capture activity, they would increase their fight activity. YOUR DATA DOESN’T SUPPORT THAT. You cited SoS as an example of a server with high capture activity relative to fight activity. You also listed servers with high fight activity compared to lower capture activity. If “capture activity drives fight activity”, those cases would not exist.

Do you know what a trend is? You seemed to be a bit confused.

Like the trend of higher populated and better coveraged servers having both higher fight and capture activity?

How does that invalidate the relationship that I present?

/sigh

I keep talking about conclusions for trends and you keep talking about trends themselves. Tell us again how SoS could increase their fight activity if only they were to increase their capture activity.

And you keep going on about outliers as if they invalidate a trend.

You seem to be confused about whether the relationship between fighting and capture activity is independent of population.

Chaba.5410:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Chaba.5410:

TorquedSoul.8097:

In my experience, those that reject data and assert that the truth is unknowable usually have arguments for which they little or no data to support. If you wish to counter my argument, use something other than your gut.

I don’t need my gut to see that your analysis is inconsistent with your own data. You identified a trend. That isn’t in question. Your conclusion for that trend though is not supported by your data. Any good theory requires explanation for the exceptions. Your conclusion basically presumes that if a server were to increase their capture activity, they would increase their fight activity. YOUR DATA DOESN’T SUPPORT THAT. You cited SoS as an example of a server with high capture activity relative to fight activity. You also listed servers with high fight activity compared to lower capture activity. If “capture activity drives fight activity”, those cases would not exist.

Do you know what a trend is? You seemed to be a bit confused.

Like the trend of higher populated and better coveraged servers having both higher fight and capture activity?

How does that invalidate the relationship that I present?

Chaba.5410:

TorquedSoul.8097:

In my experience, those that reject data and assert that the truth is unknowable usually have arguments for which they little or no data to support. If you wish to counter my argument, use something other than your gut.

I don’t need my gut to see that your analysis is inconsistent with your own data. You identified a trend. That isn’t in question. Your conclusion for that trend though is not supported by your data. Any good theory requires explanation for the exceptions. Your conclusion basically presumes that if a server were to increase their capture activity, they would increase their fight activity. YOUR DATA DOESN’T SUPPORT THAT. You cited SoS as an example of a server with high capture activity relative to fight activity. You also listed servers with high fight activity compared to lower capture activity. If “capture activity drives fight activity”, those cases would not exist.

Do you know what a trend is? You seemed to be a bit confused.

X T D.6458:

TorquedSoul.8097:

X T D.6458:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Reverence.6915:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Reverence.6915:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Reverence.6915:

At this point, I’d rather get 2v1’d again to get action on the maps. BG seems dead because there’s no action, which causes people to log out, cause we’d rather do anything else other than karma training (I tag up for fights, fights end, half my group logs off). Groups from YB and JQ are just karma training empty borderlands thinking they’re hot stuff, complaining about us zerging them down with 10-15 man groups calling them “blobs”, all the while bunkering in keep lords rooms with siege.

Good joke.

If you want BG to play again, bring us fights without siege. Most of us won’t even care if we’re vastly outnumbered.

@Torqued: You seem bitter that BG won’t respond to your requests to push PPT. Guess what buddy, we’re not here to play for you. We’re here to play for us. If you want to play PPT, tag up and do it. Don’t expect someone else, who has no desire to want to play for PPT, to play that way.

Regardless of your perception of my attitude, the fact is that Blackgate is actively driving away PPT players and putting themselves at a disadvantage. Blackgate will never beat Yak’s Bend until they are willing to become like Yak’s Bend.

No amount of server politics will stop the unwashed hoards of Yak’s Bend.

You don’t know how PPT works, regardless of all those number crunching stuff you do (good work on those btw, they’re interesting to look at, despite not having any real relevance in the current WvW climate).

Why don’t you explain to me how PPT works? I’m always open to learning something new. What is my data missing that is so important? Server politics?

PPT isn’t a function (right now) of organisation and skill, but rather, of time and numbers. The more numbers you have on at any given time means that you’ll naturally get more PPT.

If you log in at any time outside of NA prime on BG you’ll notice this. Our small groups are backcapping as fast as they can, but due to lack of numbers, our PPT suffers. We lack numbers because people aren’t willing to put the time into WvW right now due to the lack of incentives to win and the lack of rewards while playing.

But then, I don’t think anyone on BG ever saw you put more hours in-game to help out our weaker time slots.

Maybe if Blackgate didn’t have such a sour attitude towards pugs and pve players they would have MORE people to put in those hours and there would be no grind. But alas, Blackgate is a “skilled fight” server and have chased away all those no skill pvd players.

Your inability to get the coverage speaks volumes about your server culture.

I really don’t understand your posts Torqued, it just seems bitter, and like your mad at BG because we play for fun..and we don’t devout all our time towards something we find meaningless, unrewarding, and not fun…

You are entitled to your opinion, or in this case, confusion. Don’t confuse my engagement in a larger argument as bitterness towards BG. I left BG because I didn’t like the culture the old guard created. As a person that is interested in playing the game that Anet created, sitting on BG and listening to the whining about how Anet ruined everything was getting tiring.

If you are confused, its because you don’t understand that others can enjoy things that you don’t. In this case, I enjoy games when I’m trying to win them. I don’t enjoy listening to stories of the glory days and how we could win if we wanted to. Put up or shut up. I don’t care about how awesome Blackgate was … I want to play the game.

BG’s toxic attitude towards PvD, siege humping “cancerous” game play is evidence that you don’t approve of others that enjoy different things. BG is bitter that Anet has ignored them and not provided them a “skill-based” WvW. which is about as idiotic a request that I could imagine.

Large scale warfare is not about fair fights. Its about coordination, communication, community, resources, alliances, “coverage”, morale, inspiration and RAW NUMBERS. You don’t have to believe me, but I would direct you to a history book. Warfare has always been a numbers game. And as the scope of the conflict grows the possibility of a fair fight dissolves and guerrilla tactics take over.

The servers that make the rational choices within the current game mechanics will push up and those that don’t will fall.

k have fun, thanks for leaving though, one less toxic player

lolz

Stand The Wall.6987:

every quoted name in bold is a link.

You linked my post. Link yours since it is something that YOU said that you wanted addressed. Or just come right out and say it here. I’m not afraid of a debate. That should be obvious by now.

X T D.6458:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Reverence.6915:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Reverence.6915:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Reverence.6915:

At this point, I’d rather get 2v1’d again to get action on the maps. BG seems dead because there’s no action, which causes people to log out, cause we’d rather do anything else other than karma training (I tag up for fights, fights end, half my group logs off). Groups from YB and JQ are just karma training empty borderlands thinking they’re hot stuff, complaining about us zerging them down with 10-15 man groups calling them “blobs”, all the while bunkering in keep lords rooms with siege.

Good joke.

If you want BG to play again, bring us fights without siege. Most of us won’t even care if we’re vastly outnumbered.

@Torqued: You seem bitter that BG won’t respond to your requests to push PPT. Guess what buddy, we’re not here to play for you. We’re here to play for us. If you want to play PPT, tag up and do it. Don’t expect someone else, who has no desire to want to play for PPT, to play that way.

Regardless of your perception of my attitude, the fact is that Blackgate is actively driving away PPT players and putting themselves at a disadvantage. Blackgate will never beat Yak’s Bend until they are willing to become like Yak’s Bend.

No amount of server politics will stop the unwashed hoards of Yak’s Bend.

You don’t know how PPT works, regardless of all those number crunching stuff you do (good work on those btw, they’re interesting to look at, despite not having any real relevance in the current WvW climate).

Why don’t you explain to me how PPT works? I’m always open to learning something new. What is my data missing that is so important? Server politics?

PPT isn’t a function (right now) of organisation and skill, but rather, of time and numbers. The more numbers you have on at any given time means that you’ll naturally get more PPT.

If you log in at any time outside of NA prime on BG you’ll notice this. Our small groups are backcapping as fast as they can, but due to lack of numbers, our PPT suffers. We lack numbers because people aren’t willing to put the time into WvW right now due to the lack of incentives to win and the lack of rewards while playing.

But then, I don’t think anyone on BG ever saw you put more hours in-game to help out our weaker time slots.

Maybe if Blackgate didn’t have such a sour attitude towards pugs and pve players they would have MORE people to put in those hours and there would be no grind. But alas, Blackgate is a “skilled fight” server and have chased away all those no skill pvd players.

Your inability to get the coverage speaks volumes about your server culture.

I really don’t understand your posts Torqued, it just seems bitter, and like your mad at BG because we play for fun..and we don’t devout all our time towards something we find meaningless, unrewarding, and not fun…

You are entitled to your opinion, or in this case, confusion. Don’t confuse my engagement in a larger argument as bitterness towards BG. I left BG because I didn’t like the culture the old guard created. As a person that is interested in playing the game that Anet created, sitting on BG and listening to the whining about how Anet ruined everything was getting tiring.

If you are confused, its because you don’t understand that others can enjoy things that you don’t. In this case, I enjoy games when I’m trying to win them. I don’t enjoy listening to stories of the glory days and how we could win if we wanted to. Put up or shut up. I don’t care about how awesome Blackgate was … I want to play the game.

BG’s toxic attitude towards PvD, siege humping “cancerous” game play is evidence that you don’t approve of others that enjoy different things. BG is bitter that Anet has ignored them and not provided them a “skill-based” WvW. which is about as idiotic a request that I could imagine.

Large scale warfare is not about fair fights. Its about coordination, communication, community, resources, alliances, “coverage”, morale, inspiration and RAW NUMBERS. You don’t have to believe me, but I would direct you to a history book. Warfare has always been a numbers game. And as the scope of the conflict grows the possibility of a fair fight dissolves and guerrilla tactics take over.

The servers that make the rational choices within the current game mechanics will push up and those that don’t will fall.

Chaba.5410:

TorquedSoul.8097:

I’ve attached a couple charts (correlation shown at the end of the title). The first shows that as capture activity increases on a server the amount of killing and dying by that server also increases. But some could just write this off as a consequence of increasing population. And since Anet doesn’t give hard numbers on population you could entertain that notion.

The second chart shows that the rate of killing and dying is increasing with the increase capture volume. This means the proportion of killing and death increases with the capture activity of the server. Again you could claim that there are more people involved in fights at higher population so more people die.

…

There are always some notable exceptions to these trends. For instance, Far Shiverpeaks and Seafarer’s Rest both have far more fight activity than would be expected for their capture volume. And Sea of Sorrows looks like they don’t care for fights at all.

So basically you are making a singular and simple conclusion even though your own data has some exceptions which you are unable to explain with your theory. Worse, you completely write off one idea even though it is a perfect explanation for those exceptions AND the loss/gain of population explains why capture and fights activity increases/decreases over time. Remember in a previous post you mentioned that capture activity in a tier is “calibrated” by the third server? That’s population effect.

People drive both capture and fight activity. It is people choice of what they want to spend their time doing in-game.

Yes I saw your comment about my “exceptions.” Exceptions don’t define the trend. And no model is ever perfect so exceptions are expected and never considered to invalidate an overall trend. They are interesting look at to see why they break the trend but they never invalidate analysis. Statistics account for outliers just for this reason. Suggesting that such exceptions do break models would invalidate pretty much all of scientific reasoning. All systems have noise which is the result of entities in the system not completely conforming the model. Models are imperfect but are useful in understand general behaviors, as I do in this case.

You can cling to the exceptions if you want but it doesn’t change the fact that trend supports my position.

As far as my ability to explain why a 6% (3 out of 50) of servers might break the trend in a significant way, it is not to hard. Clearly for whatever reason some have more fights than expected and the that one lone server has far fewer. Why they choose to that is their business. But it doesn’t invalidate the trend.

In my experience, those that reject data and assert that the truth is unknowable usually have arguments for which they little or no data to support. If you wish to counter my argument, use something other than your gut.

As for your last comment about people driving and fight and capture activity, well yeah. Sure. there is no game without actors. But the factors that drive people’s behavior in a game are the mechanics of the game. The game creates situations for conflict. In this case, capture activity.

And yes, people can choose what to do in game. They choose from a menu of options the game developers give them. In this case the vast majority of servers (of people), 94% choose to follow the trend that suggest that capture activity creates conflict.

Stand The Wall.6987:

TorquedSoul.8097:

here let me refresh your short memory.
i would still like to hear your reponse in that thread.

Ok. Refresh. Is there suppose to be a link there? I will happily respond to whatever you are going on about. But you need to provide a link.

Or should I respond to my own post?

Reverence.6915:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Reverence.6915:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Reverence.6915:

At this point, I’d rather get 2v1’d again to get action on the maps. BG seems dead because there’s no action, which causes people to log out, cause we’d rather do anything else other than karma training (I tag up for fights, fights end, half my group logs off). Groups from YB and JQ are just karma training empty borderlands thinking they’re hot stuff, complaining about us zerging them down with 10-15 man groups calling them “blobs”, all the while bunkering in keep lords rooms with siege.

Good joke.

If you want BG to play again, bring us fights without siege. Most of us won’t even care if we’re vastly outnumbered.

@Torqued: You seem bitter that BG won’t respond to your requests to push PPT. Guess what buddy, we’re not here to play for you. We’re here to play for us. If you want to play PPT, tag up and do it. Don’t expect someone else, who has no desire to want to play for PPT, to play that way.

Regardless of your perception of my attitude, the fact is that Blackgate is actively driving away PPT players and putting themselves at a disadvantage. Blackgate will never beat Yak’s Bend until they are willing to become like Yak’s Bend.

No amount of server politics will stop the unwashed hoards of Yak’s Bend.

You don’t know how PPT works, regardless of all those number crunching stuff you do (good work on those btw, they’re interesting to look at, despite not having any real relevance in the current WvW climate).

Why don’t you explain to me how PPT works? I’m always open to learning something new. What is my data missing that is so important? Server politics?

PPT isn’t a function (right now) of organisation and skill, but rather, of time and numbers. The more numbers you have on at any given time means that you’ll naturally get more PPT.

If you log in at any time outside of NA prime on BG you’ll notice this. Our small groups are backcapping as fast as they can, but due to lack of numbers, our PPT suffers. We lack numbers because people aren’t willing to put the time into WvW right now due to the lack of incentives to win and the lack of rewards while playing.

But then, I don’t think anyone on BG ever saw you put more hours in-game to help out our weaker time slots.

Maybe if Blackgate didn’t have such a sour attitude towards pugs and pve players they would have MORE people to put in those hours and there would be no grind. But alas, Blackgate is a “skilled fight” server and have chased away all those no skill pvd players.

Your inability to get the coverage speaks volumes about your server culture.

X T D.6458:

Funny thing is, if BG or JQ started “playing the game” and “using the tools” anet provided the same way yb does, yb would be crying all over the forums.

And you know this how?

Stand The Wall.6987:

im not sure if this is was inspired from my post or not, but if it is then wow lol. gg.

I don’t know what you are talking about so probably not. I posted this to show the importance of capture activity in WvW. No doubt that some may have an opposing view.

X T D.6458:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Reverence.6915:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Reverence.6915:

At this point, I’d rather get 2v1’d again to get action on the maps. BG seems dead because there’s no action, which causes people to log out, cause we’d rather do anything else other than karma training (I tag up for fights, fights end, half my group logs off). Groups from YB and JQ are just karma training empty borderlands thinking they’re hot stuff, complaining about us zerging them down with 10-15 man groups calling them “blobs”, all the while bunkering in keep lords rooms with siege.

Good joke.

If you want BG to play again, bring us fights without siege. Most of us won’t even care if we’re vastly outnumbered.

@Torqued: You seem bitter that BG won’t respond to your requests to push PPT. Guess what buddy, we’re not here to play for you. We’re here to play for us. If you want to play PPT, tag up and do it. Don’t expect someone else, who has no desire to want to play for PPT, to play that way.

Regardless of your perception of my attitude, the fact is that Blackgate is actively driving away PPT players and putting themselves at a disadvantage. Blackgate will never beat Yak’s Bend until they are willing to become like Yak’s Bend.

No amount of server politics will stop the unwashed hoards of Yak’s Bend.

You don’t know how PPT works, regardless of all those number crunching stuff you do (good work on those btw, they’re interesting to look at, despite not having any real relevance in the current WvW climate).

Why don’t you explain to me how PPT works? I’m always open to learning something new. What is my data missing that is so important? Server politics?

To put it simply, PPT is basically just a tool for winning a matchup or rise/avoid dropping tiers, that’s pretty much all it does. When neither of these is a concern, PPT becomes irrelevant, easy right.

Right, when you don’t care about winning then information about capture activity doesn’t matter. Not sure what your point is. But if you want to make vacuous arguments, be my guest.

Whats important is that BG could win if they wanted to. Got it. Just wait for season 4 … then we will all see.

X T D.6458:

Swagger.1459:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Swagger.1459:

WvW is dying, that’s what is happening to every server.

Global capture volume went up last week 1.4%.

WvW as a whole.

So that means basically more people are capturing stuff, and PvD is somehow a measure of health for WvW now?

Its a measure of capture activity.

If you are a PPT player then its a measure of health. If you are a fight guild then its a measure of cancerous growth.

Spin it how you like.

Aeowia.7214:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Reverence.6915:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Reverence.6915:

At this point, I’d rather get 2v1’d again to get action on the maps. BG seems dead because there’s no action, which causes people to log out, cause we’d rather do anything else other than karma training (I tag up for fights, fights end, half my group logs off). Groups from YB and JQ are just karma training empty borderlands thinking they’re hot stuff, complaining about us zerging them down with 10-15 man groups calling them “blobs”, all the while bunkering in keep lords rooms with siege.

Good joke.

If you want BG to play again, bring us fights without siege. Most of us won’t even care if we’re vastly outnumbered.

@Torqued: You seem bitter that BG won’t respond to your requests to push PPT. Guess what buddy, we’re not here to play for you. We’re here to play for us. If you want to play PPT, tag up and do it. Don’t expect someone else, who has no desire to want to play for PPT, to play that way.

Regardless of your perception of my attitude, the fact is that Blackgate is actively driving away PPT players and putting themselves at a disadvantage. Blackgate will never beat Yak’s Bend until they are willing to become like Yak’s Bend.

No amount of server politics will stop the unwashed hoards of Yak’s Bend.

You don’t know how PPT works, regardless of all those number crunching stuff you do (good work on those btw, they’re interesting to look at, despite not having any real relevance in the current WvW climate).

Why don’t you explain to me how PPT works? I’m always open to learning something new. What is my data missing that is so important? Server politics?

How PPT works? Let’s see… you need a bunch of players willing to capture empty objectives. If they can log out when there’s opposition and return later when the other server(s) are outmanned, even better, which is about 50% or more of the time for both JQ and BG lately.

What if the other servers start doing the same, JQ mostly? No worries, just add a bit of “defensive” siege humping and done.

It’s all about which server has more players who can be ready to log on 24/7 exactly during “dead time zones” and stomach that capping business.

Specific names were avoided, but it’s well known who are the culprits for this horrible PPT-ing in an already long time dead game mode.

Don’t even start me with words like “win” or “losing”… What to win or lose? That awesome match-up? It’s that hard to win the marathon when you are the only one running?! In this case it is, not hard, but unpleasant at least, just try PPT-ing like this. Though I wouldn’t tell anyone that “I won” such a “contest”…

As Boreal pointed out, there are other servers (and players) interested in running that marathon. There are servers pushing up. Maybe once the remaining PPT/PvE/cancerous players leave BG and JQ, they will fall. I think they should all go to Dragonbrand and help them push past the JQ reinforced TC.

Reverence.6915:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Reverence.6915:

At this point, I’d rather get 2v1’d again to get action on the maps. BG seems dead because there’s no action, which causes people to log out, cause we’d rather do anything else other than karma training (I tag up for fights, fights end, half my group logs off). Groups from YB and JQ are just karma training empty borderlands thinking they’re hot stuff, complaining about us zerging them down with 10-15 man groups calling them “blobs”, all the while bunkering in keep lords rooms with siege.

Good joke.

If you want BG to play again, bring us fights without siege. Most of us won’t even care if we’re vastly outnumbered.

@Torqued: You seem bitter that BG won’t respond to your requests to push PPT. Guess what buddy, we’re not here to play for you. We’re here to play for us. If you want to play PPT, tag up and do it. Don’t expect someone else, who has no desire to want to play for PPT, to play that way.

Regardless of your perception of my attitude, the fact is that Blackgate is actively driving away PPT players and putting themselves at a disadvantage. Blackgate will never beat Yak’s Bend until they are willing to become like Yak’s Bend.

No amount of server politics will stop the unwashed hoards of Yak’s Bend.

You don’t know how PPT works, regardless of all those number crunching stuff you do (good work on those btw, they’re interesting to look at, despite not having any real relevance in the current WvW climate).

Why don’t you explain to me how PPT works? I’m always open to learning something new. What is my data missing that is so important? Server politics?

Gideon.6742:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Total kill volume this week was 636021.

Attached two charts, kills by server and KDR by server.

Those numbers can’t be accurate.

Why not?

Swagger.1459:

WvW is dying, that’s what is happening to every server.

Global capture volume went up last week 1.4%.

Reverence.6915:

At this point, I’d rather get 2v1’d again to get action on the maps. BG seems dead because there’s no action, which causes people to log out, cause we’d rather do anything else other than karma training (I tag up for fights, fights end, half my group logs off). Groups from YB and JQ are just karma training empty borderlands thinking they’re hot stuff, complaining about us zerging them down with 10-15 man groups calling them “blobs”, all the while bunkering in keep lords rooms with siege.

Good joke.

If you want BG to play again, bring us fights without siege. Most of us won’t even care if we’re vastly outnumbered.

@Torqued: You seem bitter that BG won’t respond to your requests to push PPT. Guess what buddy, we’re not here to play for you. We’re here to play for us. If you want to play PPT, tag up and do it. Don’t expect someone else, who has no desire to want to play for PPT, to play that way.

Regardless of your perception of my attitude, the fact is that Blackgate is actively driving away PPT players and putting themselves at a disadvantage. Blackgate will never beat Yak’s Bend until they are willing to become like Yak’s Bend.

No amount of server politics will stop the unwashed hoards of Yak’s Bend.

gennyt.3428:

TorquedSoul.8097:

gennyt.3428:

TorquedSoul.8097:

gennyt.3428:

Tyr.1965:

I haven’t played since before the expansion came out so I just logged in to see my home server, Blackgate, losing by a mile when the opposite used to be true. And we’re losing to Yak’s Bend? WTF LOL! Did I wake up in the Twilight Zone or what? Where’s Beastgate?!

• YB got guilds from T1 that lumped into an already PPT heavy culture
• People who aren’t happy playing against that are playing other games

I wouldn’t be surprised if the Blackgate culture didn’t drive PPT oriented guilds to Yak’s Bend. Which is why there is no longer anyone on BG to pull the PPT load.

Probably a combination of arrogance and elitism that killed BG. They will fall, and then they will blame Anet.

Mm maybe. I avoid the sever politics because well, I don’t care so much. Servers need balance, BG not having PPT groups is one thing but YB having virtually only PPT players is unhealthy as well because it creates a stalemate of nothingness due to bunker+PvD=EasyPPT. In a game where the winner gets diddly squat, this a bad news. Players will continue to not care.

Its a myth that YB only has PPT guilds. A myth propagated mostly by BG. The reason YB’s KDR tends to be low is because they are more welcoming of pugs than BG is. BG is so obsessed with KDR and PPK that they literally chase off pugs.

Played on and against both. I have to disagree. Other servers have observed the the same thing about YB. It is what it is.

Sounds like sour grapes. I imagine most of the servers that YB has steamrolled on its way up have anything kind to say about them. YB successfully uses the tools provided by Anet to win. Others are so bitter about it as to refer to an entire group of people as kitten.

Kirito.2195:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Kirito.2195:

Alright if we wanna be PPT carebears it’s 3rd by only 5k points on a monday… The worlds not ending.

Are you suggesting that BG will push for a win? lol.

tf are you talking about, mention PPT and yb tryhards go nuts lmao.

I’m on BG.

lmperdigao.2567:

BG and any old T1 servers have been in the PPT mentality before, but after 3 years, not anymore. BG focus on fights now, not in PPT. More bags are better rewards than two extra chests at the end of the week and fights are more more fun than humping a cannon in SMC for hours.

I guess they will be making way for the new Tier 1 servers. The old Tier 1 servers will still be able to have their good fights in Tier 2 and 3.

gennyt.3428:

TorquedSoul.8097:

gennyt.3428:

Tyr.1965:

I haven’t played since before the expansion came out so I just logged in to see my home server, Blackgate, losing by a mile when the opposite used to be true. And we’re losing to Yak’s Bend? WTF LOL! Did I wake up in the Twilight Zone or what? Where’s Beastgate?!

• YB got guilds from T1 that lumped into an already PPT heavy culture
• People who aren’t happy playing against that are playing other games

I wouldn’t be surprised if the Blackgate culture didn’t drive PPT oriented guilds to Yak’s Bend. Which is why there is no longer anyone on BG to pull the PPT load.

Probably a combination of arrogance and elitism that killed BG. They will fall, and then they will blame Anet.

Mm maybe. I avoid the sever politics because well, I don’t care so much. Servers need balance, BG not having PPT groups is one thing but YB having virtually only PPT players is unhealthy as well because it creates a stalemate of nothingness due to bunker+PvD=EasyPPT. In a game where the winner gets diddly squat, this a bad news. Players will continue to not care.

Its a myth that YB only has PPT guilds. A myth propagated mostly by BG. The reason YB’s KDR tends to be low is because they are more welcoming of pugs than BG is. BG is so obsessed with KDR and PPK that they literally chase off pugs.

Jayne.9251:

I preferred your original post saying the data was bad.

meh, typos. Short of objective ownership being misreported, my data is sound.

morrolan.9608:

Dusty Moon.4382:

This is just ridiculous. Now whole guild, from JQ, have left that server and gone to TC to push TC to T1 and let JQ drop. This is just fair weather type of WvW but the usual for these people who like to manipulate glicko. This basically says, to me, that glicko needs to be scrapped.

Which guild went to TC?

Noein.7635:

IMO BG is actually in more trouble than JQ. Unless JQ’s massive sea leaves, JQ will remain in t1. JQ’s issue is far easier to recruit for than BG’s issue.

You’re right that BG currently looks to be in a worse spot. However JQ does not have a massive SEA any more, most have left.

Looks like JQ’s SEA went to YB judging by YB’s activity in SEA.

Kirito.2195:

Alright if we wanna be PPT carebears it’s 3rd by only 5k points on a monday… The worlds not ending.

Are you suggesting that BG will push for a win? lol.

Jayne.9251:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Jayne.9251:

Swagger.1459:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Jayne.9251:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Jayne.9251:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Jana.6831:

I think you’re underestimating EU players. We’re not just cattle to fill a time zone =)

Who thinks you are cattle? I think you are projecting. Maybe you simply don’t like North American players and project these negative views on to them to hide your contempt.

Either way, Anet will do what Anet will do. I doubt a lone dissenting voice from the EU will stop that.

Regardless, It is fun to watch all the different WvW factions voice their opinion in a quasi-reasonable fashion in an attempt cloak their real motivations.

She’s not alone. While I don’t speak for all of EU, if they wanted to play on NA, they would have by now. EU WVW is nowhere near as messed up as NA. There’s a (cultural) reason for that.

What cultural reasons would that be?

If you spent some time, say a year, playing EU, this would be starkly evident. It’s hard to quantify.

Honestly, this pairing idea feels more like we all got the same toys for Christmas, only NA broke theirs and now want to come break ours. :p

How exactly does NA break their toy? I’ve only been playing WvW for about six months. So fill me in so that I can better understand why EU players would be so adamant about not playing with NA players.

EU is in a similar boat and just as “broken” as NA. Your charts clearly show that.

Certain players are in denial to this and only look at the health of their server, not wvw as a whole.

Well except for the fact that it’s common knowledge that api for EU is broken and not accurate. Charts with incorrect stats are still incorrect.

What is broken in the EU API?

Ppk, pop demographics. There’s a bug in the EU api.

population demographics? I didn’t know that population information was available in WvW. Kills and Deaths are still flakey but nearly fixed.

I don’t use much kill data because its been broken, however everything else seems to be working fine. I have an error in my score estimations and some of my activity calculations, but overall the data is not bad.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/i3ijphtw01xps4k/2016-03-12_2-1.report.pdf?dl=0

Jayne.9251:

Swagger.1459:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Jayne.9251:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Jayne.9251:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Jana.6831:

I think you’re underestimating EU players. We’re not just cattle to fill a time zone =)

Who thinks you are cattle? I think you are projecting. Maybe you simply don’t like North American players and project these negative views on to them to hide your contempt.

Either way, Anet will do what Anet will do. I doubt a lone dissenting voice from the EU will stop that.

Regardless, It is fun to watch all the different WvW factions voice their opinion in a quasi-reasonable fashion in an attempt cloak their real motivations.

She’s not alone. While I don’t speak for all of EU, if they wanted to play on NA, they would have by now. EU WVW is nowhere near as messed up as NA. There’s a (cultural) reason for that.

What cultural reasons would that be?

If you spent some time, say a year, playing EU, this would be starkly evident. It’s hard to quantify.

Honestly, this pairing idea feels more like we all got the same toys for Christmas, only NA broke theirs and now want to come break ours. :p

How exactly does NA break their toy? I’ve only been playing WvW for about six months. So fill me in so that I can better understand why EU players would be so adamant about not playing with NA players.

EU is in a similar boat and just as “broken” as NA. Your charts clearly show that.

Certain players are in denial to this and only look at the health of their server, not wvw as a whole.

Well except for the fact that it’s common knowledge that api for EU is broken and not accurate. Charts with incorrect stats are still incorrect.

What is broken in the EU API?

morrolan.9608:

TorquedSoul.8097:

morrolan.9608:

TorquedSoul.8097:

If you have and aspirations to rally them, don’t bother. Transfer to a lower tier server and start pushing up.

I would say save your money and wait to see what the overhaul will do given it may move to an alliance system.

That is a concern BUT since it isn’t clear when or even if such a change will happen, its not worth waiting around when I could be potentially meeting people with a similar approach to the game. After all, any alliance formed from Blackgate isn’t likely to be to my liking.

In that case I’d say give up the game until the overhaul. The mode currently isn’t worth it.

I disagree.

gennyt.3428:

Tyr.1965:

I haven’t played since before the expansion came out so I just logged in to see my home server, Blackgate, losing by a mile when the opposite used to be true. And we’re losing to Yak’s Bend? WTF LOL! Did I wake up in the Twilight Zone or what? Where’s Beastgate?!

• YB got guilds from T1 that lumped into an already PPT heavy culture
• People who aren’t happy playing against that are playing other games

I wouldn’t be surprised if the Blackgate culture didn’t drive PPT oriented guilds to Yak’s Bend. Which is why there is no longer anyone on BG to pull the PPT load.

Probably a combination of arrogance and elitism that killed BG. They will fall, and then they will blame Anet.

What could you say about the server community to encourage people to go there?

morrolan.9608:

TorquedSoul.8097:

If you have and aspirations to rally them, don’t bother. Transfer to a lower tier server and start pushing up.

I would say save your money and wait to see what the overhaul will do given it may move to an alliance system.

That is a concern BUT since it isn’t clear when or even if such a change will happen, its not worth waiting around when I could be potentially meeting people with a similar approach to the game. After all, any alliance formed from Blackgate isn’t likely to be to my liking.

If you have and aspirations to rally them, don’t bother. Transfer to a lower tier server and start pushing up.

garland.5193:

gennyt.3428:

Those are extinct.

How so?

New meta, blob vs blob.

Tyr.1965:

I haven’t played since before the expansion came out so I just logged in to see my home server, Blackgate, losing by a mile when the opposite used to be true. And we’re losing to Yak’s Bend? WTF LOL! Did I wake up in the Twilight Zone or what? Where’s Beastgate?!

They spend a lot of time reminiscing about the good ole days and not much time trying to actually win. I’m currently looking for a new server. That one is circling the drain.

Jayne.9251:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Jayne.9251:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Jana.6831:

I think you’re underestimating EU players. We’re not just cattle to fill a time zone =)

Who thinks you are cattle? I think you are projecting. Maybe you simply don’t like North American players and project these negative views on to them to hide your contempt.

Either way, Anet will do what Anet will do. I doubt a lone dissenting voice from the EU will stop that.

Regardless, It is fun to watch all the different WvW factions voice their opinion in a quasi-reasonable fashion in an attempt cloak their real motivations.

She’s not alone. While I don’t speak for all of EU, if they wanted to play on NA, they would have by now. EU WVW is nowhere near as messed up as NA. There’s a (cultural) reason for that.

What cultural reasons would that be?

If you spent some time, say a year, playing EU, this would be starkly evident. It’s hard to quantify.

Honestly, this pairing idea feels more like we all got the same toys for Christmas, only NA broke theirs and now want to come break ours. :p

How exactly does NA break their toy? I’ve only been playing WvW for about six months. So fill me in so that I can better understand why EU players would be so adamant about not playing with NA players.

Stand The Wall.6987:

Dawdler.8521:

The correct answer to that is:

What about it? What are you even talking about? Why would they even get a voice?

That capture activity goes hand in hand with fights is a given fact. Because thats what the WvW gameplay mode is. If you only focus on fights or the server is “fight guild” heavy, it drops like a stone in the rankings. Its only the capture activity of pugs that allow a server to climb. Which is what gives the fights to everyone.

im talking about a group of people that dont care for ppt the way it is now. thought that was obvious. my bad. why? i think youre underestimating the amount of people that would rather just play the game the way they enjoy it, which is small team skirmishes. instead of running across the map, only to be zerged down or worse not find anyone.

capture activity promotes fights. to say they are the sole cause of them is ridiculous. often enough capture points are completely uncontested. ever play a game with a deathmatch mode? its a proven fact that people play them for deathmatch.

WvW deathmatch? Just post the weekly kdr for all servers and declare I winner. I don’t see why we need to destroy wvw to give you what you want. Some of us still like the game that anet created.

Jayne.9251:

TorquedSoul.8097:

Jana.6831:

I think you’re underestimating EU players. We’re not just cattle to fill a time zone =)

Who thinks you are cattle? I think you are projecting. Maybe you simply don’t like North American players and project these negative views on to them to hide your contempt.

Either way, Anet will do what Anet will do. I doubt a lone dissenting voice from the EU will stop that.

Regardless, It is fun to watch all the different WvW factions voice their opinion in a quasi-reasonable fashion in an attempt cloak their real motivations.

She’s not alone. While I don’t speak for all of EU, if they wanted to play on NA, they would have by now. EU WVW is nowhere near as messed up as NA. There’s a (cultural) reason for that.

What cultural reasons would that be?

Jana.6831:

I think you’re underestimating EU players. We’re not just cattle to fill a time zone =)

Who thinks you are cattle? I think you are projecting. Maybe you simply don’t like North American players and project these negative views on to them to hide your contempt.

Either way, Anet will do what Anet will do. I doubt a lone dissenting voice from the EU will stop that.

Regardless, It is fun to watch all the different WvW factions voice their opinion in a quasi-reasonable fashion in an attempt cloak their real motivations.

Jana.6831:

Yeah and I guess most EU players think like me; we don’t care about 24/7 coverage, that’s an NA fetish – so we wouldn’t take all kind of hurdles to play on but simply leave – and there goes your dream of EU coverage.

I think you are overstating the impact. But you are entitled to your opinion.