Guild Wars 2

Demonas.1083:

You guys still recruit? Im intersted in a WvW guild.

Hi there Demonas, yes we are always recruiting, especially for non NA timezones to bolster our numbers throughout the day. I will give your name to an officer so they can contact you.

Each mastery track that buffs individual siege weapons already increases its damage and buffs its conditions in some way, not to mention a whole other track that increases siege damage altogether. This seems very unneeded.

no thanks, siege damage needs to be nerfed not increased

Sadrien.3470:

TexZero.7910:

Damage reduction stacks multiplicative, not additive btw.

No, writ of the great dwarf is additive. With 2.8k armor, tempest protection, and writ of the great dwarf (WotGF) you will take literally 20 power damage on large crits.

cough..mussel soup…

Just happened again for me lol, this time was rezzing someone on a pve map got rooted and unable to dodge after that person was rezzed.

Its been happening several times tonight, extremely annoying

Are you talking about a bug with the condition? Or an actual bug with player movement, because yea its quite annoying and has been going on for awhile, usually dodging or some movement skill helps fix it, but it is still very inconvenient.

Much better, more balanced. Now cc’s can properly counter stability, and stability can properly counter cc’s without being instantly stripped. The previous change, and the way stability was used originally were two extremes which encouraged very unbalanced gameplay. I especially like that this time you actually focused on toning down some cc skills as well. What bothered me about the previous change to stability, is that there was no change made to how cc’s worked or to the amount of ccs in the game, this basically encouraged people to just spam cc’s as much as possible.

I was doing Auric Basin Meta Event Today, while at the eastern section I picked up the bomb while in combat, had to heal up because I got knocked out of the air, clicked the button to go back to my normal skills, and for some reason my astral force bar disappeared and I couldnt access my celestial avatar skills. This might be some bug with transforms.

My glyph of unity elite skill was also set to its celestial avatar version, and did not go back to normal.

I wouldnt mind if they took the root off this skill, but it was a little to strong, they did buff the damage of the 3 and 4 skill to compensate. CoR is very difficult to use on uneven surfaces, the damage is a little high, but its not always usable. Most of the time a rev using a hammer is just auto attacking.

forum bug

/15 quaggans

Daemonne.5018:

LoneWolfSpectre.6412:

wyther.8372:

I have now logged over 13 hours trying to get into WvW and still a no go for me. Granted that is not straight time, but i can only play at certain times and I will NOT enter borderlands as they are pathetic attempts at WvW maps (great if they were PvE though).

I hope you all have a great time and this isn’t a whine thread at all. I am glad ANET is trying something and we are (forcible) guests on your alls tier so I expected to wait a long time, but this has gone past ridiculous. Have fun and fight well. I am not going to be trying anymore to get in. Best wishes to both conjoined servers!!!

I should also mention, I got down to single digits two times:

First time: #3 in queue…5 seconds later 10 in queue, 1 minute later 34 in queue, within 5 minutes back to 73 in queue (after waiting 4 hours)

Second time: #7 in queue about 20 seconds later went to 24, within 3 minutes went back up to 53 in queue.

Gilkin

Hey brother

I’m sorry you’ve been facing hardcore queue times. EBG is just one of those maps primetime. But the DBL are huge fun Especially with the changes they made and all the new players on em. I really hopeyou an give them an opportunity. You can run with me and my guild at any time. message me in game and ill be glad to get you in and show you how fantastic and fun it could be.

-Mr. Bear

Gilkin, Moses the Bear has a great guild to run with. I made it on the first night (or was it the second, I think I was the ONLY ET to make it in on Reset night though) and connected up with them. I had fun even though I am not partial to the Blob gaming that Anet has tossed me into (no Bears group was not the blob group)
Hook up with them.

Dae- ET TFOR

Reset night was a little rough because of the change, we hope to be able to play with more ET over time, its been fun so far, and we very much appreciate the small team play you folks have brought which is something BG has been short on for a long time.

Dhemize.8649:

Straegen.2938:

If a server cannot get along when they are handily beating the two other servers in the tier, nothing is going to fix it.

It sounds pretty bad to have a PR thread tbh.

Instead of being bitter because your server YB actually believed its own hype and thought pvdooring empty maps and running away from everyone all day somehow made you good players, and now that you actually have competition and cant handle it. Maybe you should worry more about yourself and try to reach out to those on AR that were linked to you and you know actually try to create a good environment based on communication and coordination instead of a hive mind dictatorship.

Just a thought

The bridges into fire keep lords room helps a lot yes, but thats not exactly all there is, you have to break through outer, then inner. Dbl keeps are to encouraging for ppl to bunker up and not have to push out because of the layout, whereas on alpine the opened up space and strategic value of other structures like towers made it more important for people to actually move and do stuff instead of just standing around.

Possibly the biggest essential problem with the dbl is the lack of strategic value with the placement of the structures. That alone can be the biggest factor in driving player activity. This is what alpine bl and EB are great for. Its not that those maps are exciting on their own, its that the layout drives player activity because pretty much everything has value to defend and attack.

Sviel.7493:

I liked it before and like it better now, though something needs to come along to replace the value that was added by barricades. The south towers just aren’t worth the trouble right now.

X T D.6458:

Its a lot better now, but it still has an annoying layout. I still hate trying to attack keeps because atm there is just to much advantage for defenders. However when I am defending I find it a lot easier then on alpine. Keep layout designs regarding defending/attacking, as well as the other additions still need to be adjusted imo.

Can you elaborate a bit on how defenders have too much advantage on DBL but you find defending easier on ABL? I don’t know how to reconcile those two statements.

Think you read it wrong, I find it easier to defend now, as opposed to on alpine. Because of all the defensive buffs that were added with hot, guild upgrades, auras, siege buffs, tactivators, hardended gates, lord scaling, etc etc. The keep layout on the dbl makes it frustrating to attack combined with all the defensive buffs, not enough open space, to much cramped space. What I prefer is a more balanced approach when it comes to attacking and defending, neither should have to much advantage over the other.

FogLeg.9354:

X T D.6458:

Gliding has no place in wvw, what possible purpose would it serve. The map would have to be redesigned with no fly zones everywhere to prevent flying into or out of structures, so that leaves very little room. They would have to disable gliding in combat so people cant just fly away constantly, otherwise it would just ruin fighting completely and take away any strategic value terrain has. Ranged weapons would have an obvious advantage to hit anyone flying. Not everyone has HoT, so would they be locked out from gliding, what about different gliding tiers like in masteries would they apply, what about glider skins for non hot owners. None of this needs to tie up developer time and resources for wvw, better spent elsewhere. Basically gliding would be completely useless in wvw, and would really only be usable in spawn.

wow, you really are full of negativity

• Gliding has no place in wvw, what possible purpose would it serve.

It’s fun.

• The map would have to be redesigned with no fly zones everywhere to prevent flying into or out of structures, so that leaves very little room.

Plenty of room even when no-fly zones are protecting structures.

• They would have to disable gliding in combat so people cant just fly away constantly, otherwise it would just ruin fighting completely and take away any strategic value terrain has.

Yep. That is fine.

• Ranged weapons would have an obvious advantage to hit anyone flying.

If you are afraid being hit while flying, don’t glide, use your feet.

• Not everyone has HoT, so would they be locked out from gliding, what about different gliding tiers like in masteries would they apply, what about glider skins for non hot owners.

Since it is only to make moving around the map more fun, none of this matters. It will not affect combat, or score. Non-HoT people will simply have to walk faster.

• None of this needs to tie up developer time and resources for wvw, better spent elsewhere.

I am sure DBL maps were designed with gliding in mind already so there isn’t much to redesign.

• Basically gliding would be completely useless in wvw, and would really only be usable in spawn.

It would make WvW more fun, more interesting and bring smile on your face. Really, that’s the best a game can achieve.

Nothing negative about thinking logically and practically.

We are currently looking for more OCX/SEA players to bolster our numbers across all timezones

I know that changing the effect of the upgrade is a long process but maybe it would be worth it for the more problematic ones like cloaking waters? Instead of just nerfing everything to hell and making it not even worth working on as an upgrade.

What if instead of stealth, the fountains provide like a defensive boon like protection or stability, or you could have one that provide offensive boons like fury, might, or swiftness.

Aezyr.5304:

X T D.6458:

Aezyr.5304:

X T D.6458:

Just focusing on stability vs cc’s, I think it is actually more balanced now in terms of functionality. The availability of cc/stab is another issue that’s left to work on. In the past you could basically stack stability to get a permanent duration and run through all cc’s, that was one extreme because there was no counter for cc’s. When they changed stability to have stacks, it went to another extreme because there was no balance with the amount of cc’s that could be applied, so stability could be instantly stripped and sometimes useless, this lead to pirate shipping. Now with the internal cool down that prevents all stacks from being instantly stripped, it is a lot more balanced. Now stability can counter cc’s, and cc’s can counter stability, so it works out a lot better. They also changed the target limit on certain cc skills like static field, so while cc’s are still strong, certain sources have been brought more in line, without being made useless.

Old stability was hardcapped to 10 seconds.

The way it functioned, made it possible to be rotated, essentially allowing it to be permanently maintained

That is a big difference to “boon stacking”. It requires coordination (squad/group setup, stab 1, stab 2) and works only with voice coms properly.

My point is, it was possible, and it was a common thing. The stab changes presented the biggest problem for organized groups that were very hesitant to move away from that hammer train meta. My biggest problem with the original stab changes was that there was no balance with cc’s sources/mechanics/amount in game, I saw it pretty much as a nerf of stability that encouraged people to just spam cc’s at range. Now I think its more balanced in terms of functionality.

Fun is mandatory
The age of BlackDon has begun bwahaha

Its a lot better now, but it still has an annoying layout. I still hate trying to attack keeps because atm there is just to much advantage for defenders. However when I am defending I find it a lot easier then on alpine. Keep layout designs regarding defending/attacking, as well as the other additions still need to be adjusted imo.

kitten.7492:

To be honest, big nerves on the fighting tactics (those being mentioned above) would be very bad for the smaller zerg because those tactics give the possibility to fight larger groups without being screwed right at the beginning (this is especially related to the chilling fog). About the cloaking water: a limitation of the cloaking to a certain amount of people would be great.

It can be useful yes, but atm with the siege buffs, defense buffs like hardened gates, lord scaling, combined with tactivator effects like emergency wp, chilling fog and the rest it can be extremely frustrating for attackers. While it can be helpful at times for a small group, it can also be used by a large group. The problem is that there has been a huge imbalance since HoT in favor of defense, and steadily we are moving more towards a balanced approach. What we don’t need is mechanics that encourage large groups to bunker up, build a ton of siege, and pull levers, its not fun, wvw should encourage fighting. Tactivator effects should help, but not be the dominant factor in the outcome of an engagement.

I love how it censors out your name lol

jamesdolla.3954:

It should act like a veil. 6 seconds of stealth TOPS. people are wping to their spawn with this crap blind siding people making ebg straight cancer.

Oh wow that needs to be fixed, it should have a range effect like auras, where if you leave SM’s borders the stealth effect automatically wears off

Gliding has no place in wvw, what possible purpose would it serve. The map would have to be redesigned with no fly zones everywhere to prevent flying into or out of structures, so that leaves very little room. They would have to disable gliding in combat so people cant just fly away constantly, otherwise it would just ruin fighting completely and take away any strategic value terrain has. Ranged weapons would have an obvious advantage to hit anyone flying. Not everyone has HoT, so would they be locked out from gliding, what about different gliding tiers like in masteries would they apply, what about glider skins for non hot owners. None of this needs to tie up developer time and resources for wvw, better spent elsewhere. Basically gliding would be completely useless in wvw, and would really only be usable in spawn.

Aezyr.5304:

X T D.6458:

Just focusing on stability vs cc’s, I think it is actually more balanced now in terms of functionality. The availability of cc/stab is another issue that’s left to work on. In the past you could basically stack stability to get a permanent duration and run through all cc’s, that was one extreme because there was no counter for cc’s. When they changed stability to have stacks, it went to another extreme because there was no balance with the amount of cc’s that could be applied, so stability could be instantly stripped and sometimes useless, this lead to pirate shipping. Now with the internal cool down that prevents all stacks from being instantly stripped, it is a lot more balanced. Now stability can counter cc’s, and cc’s can counter stability, so it works out a lot better. They also changed the target limit on certain cc skills like static field, so while cc’s are still strong, certain sources have been brought more in line, without being made useless.

Old stability was hardcapped to 10 seconds.

The way it functioned, made it possible to be rotated, essentially allowing it to be permanently maintained

Tyler Bearce.3427:

Nerfs are coming for a number of the problematic guild upgrades like cloaking waters, chilling fog and airship defense.

For cloaking waters, the stealth duration is getting reduced dramatically. We recognize that it’s possible that any amount of stealth is too strong, but changing a number is something we can do quickly and safely. Whereas changing the upgrade to do something entirely different requires significantly more time, both in terms of general development (design/implementation/testing) and also in large part because it would require updated text, which in turn needs to go through our long editing and localization process. As for removing the upgrade entirely, that also isn’t really an option, due to how it’s intertwined with the Scribing and Guild Halls systems.

Thanks for the update Tyler, will the stealth fountain update also include a cool down or will it stay usable continuously?

dzeRnumbrd.6129:

We’re supposed to changing WvW to make fights the priority.

JQ was attacking Stonemist castle with a reasonable sized zerg and there was a suitable sized BG zerg for us to fight (bigger than JQs zerg but not entirely unreasonable).

JQ couldn’t engage with BG for a fight because the airships and fog.

It’s just an orb remodelled.

Chuck the whole Tactivators idea in the bin.

I spent a few hours in EB last night, which is something I rarely do, mostly play in borderlands, so I dont often get to see stuff like airship and stealth fountains used. I was pretty shocked to see that there is no cooldown on its use, you can basically just walk through a fountain at any time and get a ton of stealth, that is just ridiculously over the top. I can understand how incredibly frustrating it must have been for you to have to keep dealing with that.

Just focusing on stability vs cc’s, I think it is actually more balanced now in terms of functionality. The availability of cc/stab is another issue that’s left to work on. In the past you could basically stack stability to get a permanent duration and run through all cc’s, that was one extreme because there was no counter for cc’s. When they changed stability to have stacks, it went to another extreme because there was no balance with the amount of cc’s that could be applied, so stability could be instantly stripped and sometimes useless, this lead to pirate shipping. Now with the internal cool down that prevents all stacks from being instantly stripped, it is a lot more balanced. Now stability can counter cc’s, and cc’s can counter stability, so it works out a lot better. They also changed the target limit on certain cc skills like static field, so while cc’s are still strong, certain sources have been brought more in line, without being made useless.

I dont think the pairings themselves are the only reason for the scores…

-People coming back to the game
-More emphasis on winning with glicko/ratings changes

zengara.8301:

I heard some one on team speak say that night capping was not a thing anymore and servers who mainly (only) focus on night capping are already losing a lot of tiers, true or false???

Second, why are people mad that there is a que, doesnt it mean that the population is healthy, and that they just have to wait like 10 minutes to join a filled out WvW map?

(better than joining like 60 people while opponent getting ravaged with only 30 or other way around, like I can really not see the benefit of having a low que, or no que, it only unbalance the map in every way, or am I missing something huge, beside this somewhat……short stretched point of view?)

With the recent linking of servers, there are more players on each server and map, so there is less of a chance right now that you will be able to simply ktrain an empty map. You are more likely now to face opposition. This combined with the glicko reset and change in the way rating is determined, whereby winning and losing have a greater effect now then before the change, have given encouragement to servers that dont normally pay to much attention to scores and PPT to be more focused on winning. Also there have been more players who have come back to the game.

In regards to queues, it is not something new, might be weird for some people now to see queues, but it has always been part of the game. Queues can frustrate people for a variety of reasons, but they can also be seen as healthy for wvw, because it shows activity. It can be problematic for guilds because it can cause a breakdown in coordination as it can confine one guild to a map and prevent them from floating to another to help out another group. It can also keep people from being able to play with their guilds hurting team comp and strategy. Queues have caused guilds and players to leave servers, when it becomes a daily problem, and a barrier to play. Perceptions of queues will really vary more on the individual.

Since they are tied to guild upgrades, it would be really difficult to simply remove. Either changing the effects or outright nerfs seems to be the only options.

Liston.9708:

X T D.6458:

Liston.9708:

I wonder if after a set period of time 2 weeks / 4 weeks / etc the linking was removed. At that point the guests could move for free to their respective host limiting the stacking of any 1 server.
1) It would provide a path for those that do like the zergs to continue with that playstyle.
2) It also provides for the return of small scale that some really prefer.
3) It allows the guest to escape the host where there is culture clash.
4) It restores an identity to the guest server that simply no longer exists.
I admit I don’t know what happens after, but the linking didn’t resolve population balance anyway IMHO.

edit: added 4

Well there is population balance, then there is coverage imbalance. Population balance is easier to work on, basically combine as many people as technically possible on a server, as it the case with server linking, its essentially a soft version of a server merge except with linking it allows servers to remain and be rotated periodically. This was actually a smarter move then simply removing some servers altogether because it leaves them room to use servers should the need arise, if they had removed them, they lose that. Coverage issues would require a little more work, now that each server has more people, what is needed is a rework of the scoring system.

No argument here on coverage and scoring. Was the population balance really resolved by the linking or did people come back because of the other patch changes which were pretty darn good? We only got to see 3-4 days without the link, but I know BG, JQ and YB had many more peeps playing tues, wed, thurs after the patch.

Its hard to say, in a technical sense, the chance for better balance is there because each server has been paired up with another similar type server. Now if it was a tier 1 server getting linked with a t3 server, yea that wouldn’t work, but since all three tier 1 servers were linked with all three t8 servers it is theoretically a more balanced approach. Having said that, whether or not it produces a balanced effect is up to players themselves.

Say for example each server has 1000 people-

Server A-300 login
Server B-500 login
Server C-100 Login

The base numbers are all the same, however the effect is different because as stated it is always dependent on player involvement.

Tyler said that with the cooldown increase that came with the patch, they can start looking at balancing the effects.

Im still curious about some things.

-How will the linked servers be affected in terms of scores, ratings, rewards if there is another season?

-How long will servers stay locked, and are these servers locked for new players as well

-How long does the beta test last

Liston.9708:

I wonder if after a set period of time 2 weeks / 4 weeks / etc the linking was removed. At that point the guests could move for free to their respective host limiting the stacking of any 1 server.
1) It would provide a path for those that do like the zergs to continue with that playstyle.
2) It also provides for the return of small scale that some really prefer.
3) It allows the guest to escape the host where there is culture clash.
4) It restores an identity to the guest server that simply no longer exists.
I admit I don’t know what happens after, but the linking didn’t resolve population balance anyway IMHO.

edit: added 4

Well there is population balance, then there is coverage imbalance. Population balance is easier to work on, basically combine as many people as technically possible on a server, as it the case with server linking, its essentially a soft version of a server merge except with linking it allows servers to remain and be rotated periodically. This was actually a smarter move then simply removing some servers altogether because it leaves them room to use servers should the need arise, if they had removed them, they lose that. Coverage issues would require a little more work, now that each server has more people, what is needed is a rework of the scoring system.

I am not against this concept per se. However, hypothetically whats to stop an enemy commander/zerg from targeting those from lower tiers servers because you could be under the assumption that those players are not used to big fights and therefore easier to pick off. Everyone having the same server tag, gives a little anonymity. Its kind of like targeting those with certain guild tags or higher ranks, I would bet there are quite a few high ranked people who would rather be able to choose what rank they can display so they would not get focused. Now of course these are not the only factors, and what I stated is only hypothetical, I’m not bashing on those from lower tiers lol.

sionnach.5391:

Chiming in from Kaineng!

Pros:

- Chance to meet some new friends in T2 we would otherwise never run across.

- Chance to try out other playstyles; it’s always fun to have a change of pace.

- A percentage of our server do enjoy large scale fights/tactics but haven’t transferred up or set up an alt because of attachment to their server/friends. So this is a fun opportunity for those players.

- Population. Non-primetime players are happy to have allies on maps (esp. borderlands) at all times of day.

Cons:

-Increased difficulty for guilds to coordinate and float to other maps if needed because there is a greater chance of hitting a queue.

Yes, this was a problem over the weekend. Hopefully the queues ease up but if weekend borderlands queues are typical in T1-2, it does hurt our inter-server coordination and guild runs in WvW.

X T D.6458:

Some people from lower tiers do not like being forced into being absorbed by higher tiers. This has led to a loss of server community, server pride, and loss of a particular style of game play and having to accept something they are not interested in.

In a nutshell these are the cons for my server. It’s all about playstyle and server identity – we’ve lost both. I’d love to try out linking between lower tiers, and the top two tiers left as is.

And preferably sooner rather than later, as this current structure has a chance to seriously damage the cohesive communities we have built on the low tiers if it goes on for too long. Please do something to bring back server identity at the very least, to help us keep our morale up.

Thanks for this thread!
Nanesh, Owl Legion

It will be an adjustment no doubt, but hopefully overtime, it will become easier for groups to find it easier to engage in their preferred play style. I have to stay it was nice seeing action everywhere. In terms of server identity, I think it will just have to be a tradeoff, might frustrate some, but it might be good for wvw overall because it means for action and people on maps. So we will see what adjustments and improvements will be made. But there is definitely an excitement in the air, this has really shaken things up, and wvw needed something like this even if it has been/will be a little bumpy at first while we adjust.

Colarov.9068:

Has anyone tried guild missions yet? From what I saw yesterday, they would be near impossible now in wvw

It might be a little difficult during a busy timezone, to just hop into a map like before to do a mission. It would probably be a better idea to pop missions off during a normal guild raid.

Sorry to hear about whats going on in your server, I am also curious about what data they used to matchup servers.

Weli.4568:

All the cons we are talking about were normal at the first WvW season or has everyone forgotten that. That’s why EotM was brought out, so people could play sort of WvW while waiting in Q to real WvW.
Border spreadsheets anyone? That was normal too. Guilds telling where theyll run for their raid day.
Yea no, I don’t see issues with this. Only issue would be if anet changes the pairings weekly. Then it would become almost impossible to co-ordinate properly

Keep in mind seasons were a temporary event. Server linking is to be a permanent feature with periodic server rotations.

troi.2638:

X T D.6458:

Subgroups in squads to ensure proper party comps for boon distribution. For example if you are a commander you will want 1 or 2 frontline guardians in your subgroup for the aoe stab. Keep in mind to spread out as needed depending on how many you have.

So it always works like that? 100%?

Assuming you have 5 in the subgroup and they are in range of each other yes, their party members in the subgroup will have top priority for boons that are used.

FogLeg.9354:

I am getting slightly annoyed about all the people whining about queues. You do not HAVE to go EB every time, for god’s sake learn to play on BL maps too. And secondly, many servers still have lower population, transfer into these and make matches more balanced.

The large queue is created by players all gathering up into few top servers. It is not Anet fault and is not telling anything about world linking. If you, as a player, choose to go into most populated server, you have picked to play with queue. Accept it or pick smaller server.

People should be able to play on whatever map they choose. My guild raids pretty much exclusively on borderlands, because we cannot fit our group in EB during our active raid time, even before this feature was introduced. People go to higher tiers because they want a more active population, just like they would have went to lower tiers because they wanted less blobbing and more small group play.

There is a set amount of playable maps, and a set population cap per map, per server, therefore the more people you try to combine on each side, the greater chance there will be for queues. Queues do have an effect on player behavior, this cannot be ignored.

Joneirikb, I would like to hear about that idea. What if they reduced the map population slightly per map and introduced another map perhaps with a different theme.

You would have to contact support and file a ticket to request a refund. You might want to wait a bit and see how the server linking works out, maybe it will get easier for smaller groups to operate.

I have been getting crazy lag spikes recently too, and its gamewide, though I think its more due to my isp.

Subgroups in squads to ensure proper party comps for boon distribution. For example if you are a commander you will want 1 or 2 frontline guardians in your subgroup for the aoe stab. Keep in mind to spread out as needed depending on how many you have.

I mentioned in map chat today that the age of BlackDon has begun lol.

Hey guys, I have requested this thread be locked, please check out this new thread, thanks everyone who posted their thoughts.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Pro-s-and-Con-s-of-Server-Linking/first#post6116856

Hey all, now that the initial shock is starting to wear off, cooler heads can start to prevail and we can engage in a more civil dialogue about this recent change to WvW by listing what we see as good and/or bad about server linking, and add our suggestions, solutions and other ideas, because after all it is in beta testing and pointing out issues is what we should be doing.

Now I know many of us, myself included as evident by the beginning of my other post, were very frustrated because after all this is a very big change. I take blame for that post taking on a negative tone, and devolving into a back and forth, leaving little room for any constructive purpose.

While we may sometimes have a different approach we do all share the same desire of course, to get people interested in wvw, and to keep people playing wvw. And to help anet make wvw a better gamemode for all of us. So lets please keep this constructive. Please refrain from personal attacks, and please avoid endless back and forths.

Now after reading many posts regarding this issue both pro and con. I feel that this can be a good system, but it definitely needs tweaking, but thats ok, this is why it is in testing. So lets go over some of the Pro’s and Con’s. And please list your’s, any concerns, suggestions, solutions, and ideas you have.

-More activity on maps, always good. However also makes it harder for smaller groups to operate.

-Combining the population of two worlds onto a set amount of maps without a way of expanding the map population cap (because of technical reasons) can create more queues as a result. The amount of queues can vary of course, but the chance to hit a queue is greatly increased.

-Increased difficulty for guilds to coordinate and float to other maps if needed because there is a greater chance of hitting a queue.

-Some people from lower tiers do not like being forced into being absorbed by higher tiers. This has led to a loss of server community, server pride, and loss of a particular style of game play and having to accept something they are not interested in.
In the past, players had a choice of where to move, because each server and tier had a more distinct style of game play. Higher tiers were seen as more blobby, lower tiers were seen as more focused on small groups, and middle tiers were seen as a mix of the two.