Guild Wars 2

Tags should have never been increased to 300g, but anet was trying to make a money sink for wvw, even though wvw never makes as much gold as pve. Then they introduced the apple mentor tag for pve but you didn’t have to pay gold for it, just get the mastery. Fair?

The first hurdle for commanders is forking up that gold.
The donate idea is a good one though, doubt it would ever be implemented as people could use it to do trades.

Oh yes because when you kill the commander all of a sudden their zerg ports out and you don’t get bags from them. You can’t control how people play the game, pin sniping will always be around, deal with it instead of coming in here and complaining, anet is obviously not going to do anything about it.

Or he’s a smart pug that chooses to target the enemy leader instead of just pressing 1 in the lemming zerg. The commander is on the field like everyone else, they’re fair game, they have to take steps to protect themselves from damage. They’re not the only ones that get focused in a fight either, there use to be gank groups that targeted the range groups in zergs. You don’t hear eles or necros coming in here complaining about it, they have to suck it up, position themselves better and use what they have for survival, the same goes for a commander.

So because exotics is fine we shouldn’t have better access to ascended?

Yeah exotic is fine as the baseline gear, but that’s no excuse as to why it’s not made more readily available instead of random 1 out of 1000’s of loot boxes, nevermind another game mode that doesn’t use it gives away a full set for playing it.

It’s pvp why wouldn’t you want to be wearing the best stuff to fight in? That stats however minuscule makes a difference in smaller fights, obviously not in a zerg where everything is covered by greater number of players.

http://mos.millenium.org/na
http://mos.millenium.org/eu

It’s already going to change to 5 4 3, BG didn’t like it.

You bunch of ingrates.
They wanted to give you mobile cannons and you didn’t want it.
They wanted to give you repair hammers and you didn’t want it.
They gave you scoring changes all you do is argue over numbers 3 2 1 2 1 1 5 4 3 100 99 98.
They proposed more worlds to dying wvw and you said no.
Then people wanted mercenary worlds which is the same but you can’t agree on it because identity crisis.
Anet proposes 1 dbl 2 alp, you say no, vote says yes, anet checks on scrapping dbl, you say no, anet checks for 1 dbl 2 alp again, you say yes.
Then cry about veterans not playing for 2 years didn’t get a fair vote, you need bunch of ranks and a bunch of wvw hours to vote, you cry the vote was rigged cause pve players care about a wvw map.
Then you cry about the empty red borderland when the other two borderlands are also empty, while ebg is over queued every night.
You cry for population balance, they lower the threshold to keep bigger worlds from getting bigger, you cry about it to players from 20+ dead servers, we’re gonna die if we don’t open up!
They gave you golem week and you cried about a minor golem buff exploit.
They gave you some new commander tag colors and you cry about every other color not available.
They gave you reward tracks and you complain about not getting a legendary backpack.
They put gift of battle in the track and you complain about not getting a years notice before so you can buy it with free badges.
They took away crafting stations and you cry about not being able to skip a loading screen.
They gave you you a “big giant sized” guild hall with a “small dinky” arena to do your gvg’s and you cry about it.
They reorganized the wvw upgrades into your guild halls and you complain about the minor cost of spending months in pve.
They gave you fun to use banners and you complain about it being op.
They gave you extra upgrades to scout for you and all you do is complain about small groups.
Big fancy airships to make the big castle in the middle of ebg feel more epic you cry about it killing you every 15 mins.
They put a big fat cannon in the middle of dbl to promote fights every 3 hours, you cry about lag so they take it away, and then you cry about it being empty and no bloodlust.
They gave you new elite specs to freshen up classes after 3 years of getting old and boring, and you cry about imbalance pfft like that didn’t exist before.
They gave you boons to counter the increased damage but you complained no one was dying, so they fixed it after months and months and months of hard testing, and then you complain about dying to conditions.
They made conditions good so you don’t feel limp in zerg fights and now you complain about spreading it.

Pfft.

Sophia Aeon.6385:

Guys, I see very few of you understood the meaning of my question which was more rhetorical, and which was designed to Arena Net rather than WVW players. I note also that even fewer have carefully read my explanation as Piken Square had no reason to be put in the same bracket with our servers.

That was one question and the second one was pretty simple: Why Arena Net, does not remove the restriction, to build more sieges per unit area?
But apparently, not everyone knows that there is one. Someone one suggests constructing 4 AC’s behind the door, or better 8. Good luck with that guys.
Because you should already know that you can not put more than 5 arrow carts (or any sieges) within a radius of 900 and that actually was exactly my question addressed to Arena Net devs. Why defenders have such limitation while attackers have not a similar limitation?

There’s up and downs of glicko system, there’s a variance built in to make matches more randomized which could either throw you up a tier or down a tier. The alternative is little variance, glicko walls form, and you’re stuck in the same matchup for months and players come in here to complain about boring matchups. It also takes time for servers to adjust to their real rating, Piken will be jumping to 4th after this week and there’s less chance of you meeting them again next week.

As for build restrictions, everyone is under those restrictions. What you’re trying to do is compare immobile siege like arrow carts to mobile siege like golems. Golems do have the same build area restrictions, but once they’re built the restriction comes off because they become mobile like a player, there is no player collision therefore no space restrictions around them.

There is more than enough space to build siege in proper places to hold off attacks, it comes down to presieging, and organization of your players. Golem zerg rushes do not happen very often, they are restricted by cost, supply, drivers, mobility, and probably happens less than 5% of the time in a matchup. We’ve had 4 years to observe this, it’s not going to escalate to 40 or 60 unless they’re reading this thread and want to pull that joke on your server now.

What happens if you allow stacking of siege and you’re facing regular zergs or less? all of a sudden all gates become murder areas that no one will want to attack anymore, it will all turn into long range sieging. Can’t imagine having a server like Yaks Bend sieging up a garrison with no area restrictions, thank god there’s a map limit to siege.

Golem zergs are not used that often anyways because of the supply required, the manpower to operate them, the portals required and mobility, etc. Why didn’t scouts trail them and see where they were heading? Your force decided to split between garri and hills after the bay flip. No emergency waypoints for any keeps?

Taking garri last was a risk to them, going water gate should have been suicide with the cannons, mortar, acs there, se gate would have needed acs by the supply hut, sw is murder valley with acs. Hills should have done some damage to them with the inner cannons which can hit the north outer gate. You don’t need 40 acs to counter them, just a few well placed ones that the alphas couldn’t even reach anyways.

Why are you guys writing books over this? Stealth is a mechanic that the thief class was built entirely around, they have multiple skills and traits for it, mesmers less so, but it isn’t like rangers where it was just slapped on one skill on one weapon.

This is why you will not see major changes to stealth because it would break the thief class, unless they do a redesign for the class which they won’t. At best they will hand out a reveal to a random you win the lotto class once a year.

End of story.

20-30 players is enough to mount a proper defense for 20 golems, unless your players were running around like chickens without a head. Use the cannons and mortars when you can, some outer ones are in good position to hit the inner gates, you can even use the north inner garri cannons to hit into lords room. Condition bombs will also help melt them. Use reflects.

That many golems is not a regular occurrence to worry about it, some commander was probably just desperate to break your t3 keeps and they had a zerg to help with it. If they come with 40 or 60 golems that’s their problem, major gold down the drain, just sit back and laugh at how bad they are having to bring that much to break your keeps.

Dawdler.8521:

BlaqueFyre.5678:

Jeknar.6184:

BlaqueFyre.5678:

The funniest thing is Scrappers and Druids get better mobility while in Stealth more so than Thief (thief just maintains some of their mobility in stealth, because a lot of their mobility is tied to the same resource as their stealth).

Druid, yeah. Scrapper? Absolutely not… Scrapper cannot keep up with Druid/Thief in mobility.

Uhm a Scrapper activating Stealth Gyro gains Superspeed… which wait for it…. increases mobility while stealth…. Queue minds blowing…. anywhere in my original post sty that Scrapper had more overall mobility than Druid and Thief? Nope I don’t think I did, I solely stated that their mobility increases with stealth on those two classes…

You have never played Scrapper I see.

You only gain superspeed when destroying a gyro if final salvo is traited. The stealth gyro is no different. Few actually trait that because they use power hammer builds. Mass momentum hammer trait conflict with rapid regen, which you want if you want to get good use of final salvo. So most will pick adaptive armor instead and thus never achieve superspeed on gyro death.

So you are completely incorrect. Scrapper has no speed boost on stealth whatsoever.

Queuing mind blown!

Players go to EBG because you can get into the action faster, since everything is closer and there’s that big castle in the middle which attracts fights like flies to honey.

Making the borderlands worth more points isn’t going to bring back small scale havoc groups because ppt isn’t the problem there, it’s the junk the expansion forced into the game is what holds back those groups, stuff like emergency waypoints, watch tower, guild cata increased cost etc are things that made small groups useless.

Besides as others have mentioned, if the blobs are already on EBG, that leaves more room to get small stuff done on the borderlands, trying to take their keeps is what gets their attention.

Lastly, there aren’t that many that want to command, hence why most times you only see one tag around on a map and why you see one blob running around, unless it’s prime time and multiple guilds are running.

If you feel the need to change the best wvw map (voted on by the players that choose it over the other maps almost every kitten night with queues), in order to make other maps look attractive to play on, then there’s problems on those maps you should be making suggestions on and not trying to break EBG.

People say roaming is boring, when you go roaming and 3 out of 4 classes you meet are thieves and mesmers, yeah well gee I wonder why when you have to constantly fight stealth and condition these days. Just wait till you fight them in packs, oh what joy you will experience.

A lot of roamers want an advantage in a fight, none bigger than stealth to start with, and none bigger to give others the slip. For some reason players without stealth are asked to do more against those classes with stealth, use stealth trap! learn to play! run away! aoe moar! one shot them back! Every build seems to be a gimmick, power teef blowing you up in 2 shots? gimmick! ghost condition blow you up teef? gimmick! ghost trapper teef? gimmick, evade for dayz teef? gimmick!

They gave every class stun breakers to counter stun, they gave every class condition clears to counter conditions, why did they not give a reveal skill for every class for stealth if they were designing stealth with little restriction in the first place? Why are rangers engineers, more recently revenants and warriors the only ones?

Anyone ever seen an anet player roaming? they’re usually running in zergs, think they would know the day in day out pains of playing against stealth? No, so no point asking for redesigns cause Anet won’t bother. Balance in this game sucks, QQ.

Stealth design is broken, always has been broken, always will be broken in this game.

Some other games put cc under diminishing returns so that you’re not continually taken out of control of your character while you go from 100 to 0. Anet only like to apply diminishing returns to loot, think you can figure out where their priorities are with the game.

Stand The Wall.6987:

CHAOS IS FUN.

Sure until you’re standing still for 20s trying to fire off that aoe chaos.

How about we leave siege alone, they couldn’t even implement deployable cannons properly. Siege is fine the way it is for offense and defense, they need to focus on other things to infuse some fun into wvw. Not siege ladders to help break the game, not counters to those ladders to have yet more crap to add to upgrades, not mobile siege so people can save on blueprints and too kitten lazy build new siege and break supply balance.

Please and thank you.

Not really any point to permanent merges if you can still move around. You’re just going to force a bunch of players onto servers they may or may not like and trigger more movement.

Also links are not every other week, you’re not playing with new players every other week unless it’s new transfers into a server. Links are every 2 months.

X T D.6458:

Jeknar.6184:

X T D.6458:

-Shorten the ramp sections on the top floor so trebs cannot hit towers safely from the top.

SMC would lose it’s strategic value with that change. I’m all for stopping the SMC/OL treb wars, but the outer towers are suposed to be threatened by the castle.

You can still treb those towers from the ground level. The point of this change would be to stop safe trebbing from the top levels that cannot be countered, especially when outnumbered. This essentially throws those towers into an endless loop of backcapping and can make it pointless to upgrade them.

I think the main purpose of SMC and the EB map layout is to encourage fighting. The problem with SMC in its current state, is that it is too defensible and creates too much of an imbalance leaving little opportunities for smaller groups to take part in attacking it. Since SMC offers not just a strategic advantage, but also more points now when upgraded, it should require more effort to defend and upgrade. A server should have to commit aggressively to it and prioritize. Currently it is too easy to cap, blob up, and sit on siege, leaving little counterplay.

That’s why you have to take smc often and break it’s upgrading and kill the defensive siege, kill the yaks going to it or take enemy camps to slow it’s progress. This is also where the 2v1 is mostly seen, not 2 sides fighting together, but forcing both to work on breaking it, thus promoting the biggest fighting area in the game.

You can kill 3rd floor trebs in the outer ring anyways, just a matter of players not being lazy about it and waiting to cap with a zerg, walls are usually down somewhere, not exactly hard to get in that ring and 1 ac can clear a platform.

Smc is fine the way it is to me, only thing I’d like for them to do is go through the entire castle and make sure there aren’t any extra glitches that’s causing lag.

Red area could use a redesign since they have 2 towers and a keep that can get hit by smc, 1 tower in the middle of nowhere, red is usually the “losing” side so why are they at the biggest disadvantage? If anything green and red should have been swapped.

I often wonder if many of the strategic areas they placed in alpine and ebg if they were all actually planned or accidents, there are a ton of good places to place siege to break things and also counter siege, many of the supply huts are good places for trebs. How did they even manage to mess up desert in that regards.

Korgov.7645:

The symbols do stand out for more than they are worth. They are also not dynamic – that is showing if the tactivators are on cooldown or even assigned on the objective. And they don’t hint what type of tactivators they are. There’s a lot room to improve leading me think the feature got released prematurely.

Just click on the objective to see what tactivators are there and which are on cooldown, how much instant information do you guys want to see flooding the screen?

Swamurabi.7890:

Actually, it’s everyone’s problem.

Actually no it isn’t. It’s that person’s problem not willing to adapt and be a better commander if that’s what they want to do. Pin sniping will exist no matter how many abilities they remove to deal with it. No different than trying to go roam with a blob spec, how long will does one last with that? are they not willing to switch to a roam spec in order to make it a better experience?

The same goes for commanding, build your commander toon for better survivability and use some tactics in trying to deter pin sniping, there’s like a dozen suggestions in here already.

If that commander gives up because they can’t deal with it, that’s their servers problem if they came to rely on him, although personally that’s not a commander I would care to follow anyways.

Some of the other stuff you listed are issues we have no control over, it’s up to anet to fix those whenever.

In the end it’s a game, no one cares about rules of war, red is dead, or colored dot is dead if that’s your preference.

Justine.6351:

They just need to make anyone with a commander tag invulnerable. Shouldn’t cause any problems.

what happens when everyone tags up….?

Swamurabi.7890:

This is what the problem is.

Say you’re on a server that’s outnumbered. Your server has only one tag on the map.
The other server is used to playing the pin snipe meta.
The two sides meet, your outnumbered commander is pin sniped every time then ragequits.
No other commander tags up.
Your server starts losing players to other maps and is now outmanned.
The other server is free to PvD the map for the next three and a half hours of their raid.
The other side PvD’s the map, comes on to the forum and complains that there is nobody to fight.

That’s not really other servers problems, the commander needs to suck it up and maybe build their stats better, especially if you’re going to pug command.

This isn’t 1800’s Europe where the etiquette was not to target officers because it caused chaos.

“Now we come to the matter of the specific targeting of officers during engagements. You must know that in civilized warfare, officers in the field must not be accorded inappropriate levels of hostile attention. Imagine the chaos that would follow from leaderless armies having at each other. There must be gentlemen in command to lead and, where necessary, restrain their men. "

“Restrain them from, say, targeting civilians. Women, children and such.”

“That’s a separate issue.”

“No. I consider them linked. And as long as your soldiers attack civilians I will order the shooting of officers at every engagement. And my men are excellent marksmen.”

So obviously the solution is to stop destroying the civilian houses at the EBG red keep, and your commanders won’t get pin sniped!

What would be the point of siege?
What would be the point of walls?

You’re not… trying to make the illegal jump from outer to inner garrison walls a legit thing everywhere are you?

A commander…
Running on front of the pack.
More obvious when they run their zerg around like a snake.
Usually a guardian.
Sometimes has ghost tonic on.
The zerg falls to pieces when you moa them, you can take note of their rank and looks after the first fight.

Most fight guilds counter this with…
If you’re running a guild group have a second commander ready.
Don’t make it so obvious by running way ahead of everyone else.
Multiple ghost tonic users.
Coordinate your front line to look the same as you.
Spec out to be a real tank, you don’t need to be doing damage when you have a zerg behind you doing that.
Go stealth right before engaging to break enemy targeting, don’t be the first tab target out of stealth.
When doing warmup movements in front of enemy have another front line lead it.

Still pretty easy to track a commander after some observation.

I do not mind the idea of merc servers, small enough that alliances can park themselves in. In a way it’s something the devs wanted to try with adding more smaller worlds to even out population links better, to which I believe most of the players on these forums rejected.

As mentioned above by Dawdler you don’t know the outcome of the next week, you need to determine which server to attach the mercs to every week, and there’s really no way to predict which server would need the mercs until a match starts or unless you just attach them to the losing servers.

While BG is the “top” server they don’t always win every week, a losing server this week might roll down and be a winning server next week, they wouldn’t exactly need the help then. You might even have servers who are losing early just give up so they can get the mercs attached to them the week after.

More recent discussions on allowing players to “guest” on servers instead for shorter periods. https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Server-Linking-Calling-For-2nd-poll/first#post6464344 Filtering players to losing servers for 24hr time periods could be more helpful. Any type of merc action should probably be on a very short duration.

Turn down your gamma you’ll get night time instead of slightly shady XD

My comment wasn’t directed to you Dawdler but the OP.
Skirmishes did a lot to dial down the overnight runaway points and I think it was the right direction to go with that. They still have the option to implement the hot time zone bonuses if you want to push them for that.

I’m not really for it because I don’t like the thinking of players that want to limit points outside of their play time, because their own server has less players and therefore cannot compete to earn those points but they want to make sure everyone in those zones get slapped with a penalty.

Sure maybe the time zones with the most players could be earning more points, but really those time zones will also still come down to whomever has the most online and taking stuff. Is there even any servers that get 4 map queues? if not servers will still have imbalance of population and coverage, just not as noticeable in prime time.

WvW is a 24/7 game, should 4 hours be worth more than 20 hours of the day? At the end of the day, who cares? it’s just points and that’s not even the real problem of wvw these days, trying to make additional changes to the points system is not going to fix wvw.

Glass Hand.7306:

Exactly. We need more servers with more evenly balanced populations. The current stacking meme needs to be blown up.

But then they lower the server population threshold and people freak out about it. There are players who don’t give a hoot about balance, they just want to be on top with the biggest rolling server.

You don’t even need to set the guesting to a week, as I mentioned wow does it for 30mins, also the old guesting for gw2 was set for 24 hours I believe, which sounds reasonable.

The limitations I would set is:
1. Guesting for 24 hours.
2. You cannot guest to a server in your home server matchup, so if you’re on BG you cannot guest to Mag or TC currently, but all the other tiers are fine.
3. Limited to paid accounts not free accounts.
4. Set a maximum amount of guest to a server of say 500 for the day.
5. Could even consider setting the limitation to the server that’s currently losing the matchup, which would bring it down to 3 possible servers to guest on every day.

Swagger.1459:

Y’all are not getting another poll on this subject… A developer clearly stated that participation has increased since linking and reward tracks were introduced. Time to get over it and move on.

When did they state that? at the beginning of links or recently?

Don’t really see linking any different than having a bunch of new guilds transfer in to your server, or even a bandwagon, every two months. They stay for a few months then move on. Pretty much every server has it’s own kitten holes you have to ignore with or without links.

While many view that as bad, if they were to break links now you would see a lot of dead servers at this point, and maybe even players moving up again to get to more populated servers making them even more dead.

I’m not for or against links, it doesn’t solve the real population issues but at least it has given servers more players to play with and against. The other issues like small group stuff and roaming are problems I believe created with HoT along with the “revamp” of the combat system, traits, elite specs, new stat sets, conditions.

But bring on the re-poll.

Why is your playtime worth more than someone else that isn’t in you time zone?

Tiny Doom.4380:

heydurian.6459:

moreover anet should focus on" guild "
why this game call guild wars

As I’m sure most people reading these forums are very well aware, the “Guild” in the name “Guild Wars” has absolutely nothing to do with player guilds:

https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/The_Guild_Wars

I often wonder if Anet regret coming up with that name for their MMO. It has caused nothing but confusion ever since the first game was announced.

At first, these were economic organizations, a means for merchants to meet, disseminate goods, and set prices. However, the guilds grew beyond the bounds of mere trade. Soon there were guilds geared toward warfare, religion, magical ability, and even social concerns—in short, any purpose that would bring together a group of people.

It’s called guild wars because of the conflicts between those “guilds”, not really any different than player “guilds”, which have mostly been formed with the same purposes but most of the conflict comes through warfare. Story wise both npc and players guilds would be the same thing, but player guilds are not written in the story other than your character in the living story now building their own “guild”.

While yes the name isn’t about guilds fighting in wvw, it still would have been nice to have support for them in there other than guild upgrades they repackaged into the guild hall.

The guild wars, conflicts between guilds, the one area (ok two if you want to count spvp) where that actually happens for players, is ignored.

BlaqueFyre.5678:

Blah blah blah blah I like broken game

Cool story.

Meh happened to me months ago, no one cared and it won’t change. Was down before I could react, basically only an auto skill would have saved me. Wasn’t even full zerk either.
Good luck with the balance crusade, I don’t see anet giving two figs about it.

Please glicko boost SBI they sound like they’re tier 1 ready!

alairus.4521:

I made this post because I want to help the community since all ppl do is complain.

Kinda funny, you do realize the eso, eotm, factions, world vs globe, and a dozen other fix wvw ideas have been discussed in these forums over the years. Not always “complaining” in here.

P.S How long do you think it will take them to design and complete a brand new map? What happens to the old maps which are favorites to some players?

As of right now, No.

They’ve destroyed the fluid beauty of combat in this game with the last expansion, it’s auto boon vs auto condi wars now, can’t imagine how much more rekt’d it’ll get if they decide to introduce yet more elite specs/weapons/skills. They’re unwilling to make combat and balance a priority for the health of the game.

They’re obviously more focused on making pve and spvp better, so why would I bother paying them for not putting in as much care in the area I care the most about in wvw. Can’t even be bothered to do simple promotion for wvw to get new blood in there.

Repackaging guild stuff into a massive forced pve grind with the expansion still has a sour taste to me, makes you wonder what else would they repackage as such? I have a good feeling they’ll repackage wvw into that expansion, well my friend keeps telling me that anyways.

It’s been over a year and they still haven’t delivered everything that was suppose to come with the last expansion.

Only way I would consider the expansion is if it has some mind blowing wvw stuff in it, and would only look at that after release, not before, to see what they actually do (the guild wvw repackage was a surprise to me).

So are you guys trying to help anet get less players in wvw?
Cool.

So what happens they take out f2p accounts and some clown still pulls the emergency waypoint for no reason?

They already lock tactics to guild only pulls if you want, you all expect them to make up some complicated system of who can and who can’t pull the tactics next? F2p can’t touch it, lets have a running ban list of trolls who can’t touch it, make sure you only give access to that list to guild leaders, make sure those guild leaders have a level 40 guild, make sure they have a minimum 100 people in the guild, only pullable when there’s 50 people within a 50yard radius, the puller has to have 1000 hours of wvw and 1000 wvw ranks.

Hey how about they deal with it like they did with the supply troll issue, make the tactics automated, they only activate when 50 players are within the outer walls.

andrew.3401:

If Anet is keen to keep WvW going, then I think they should do more to broadly encourage PvE players to try WvW (not just those seeking Gifts for Legendary weapons). Currently, there is so much open world content in PvE, that I suspect many newer PvE players are unaware of the competitive play experience.

That’s what I been saying, not enough promotion from anet for wvw other than the screwups, meanwhile look at what spvp has gotten in that department over the past 2 years.

They’ve lost some big guilds that had a presence, they’ve gained some guilds but I don’t know if it was enough to fill in the gaps. Not sure I would say a massive amount of their population never wanted to be in tier 1, they’ve been there for like 3 years now, think those players would have left long ago. But I’m sure there’s players tired of being the 3rd or 4th wheel of tier 1 by now.

From someone on YB.

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

WvW is a 3 team gamemode, rather than a 2 team gamemode, is so that worlds could team up and try to take down the dominate world.

This isn’t something we incentivized very much before 2,1,1 but having 2v1s in WvW was intended behavior and when it works correctly can lead to more balanced matches.

Yup… too bad more players don’t see it that way.

OriOri.8724:

I still don’t think that 2, 1, 1 was here long enough to see how it truly affected the gameplay. It was here for 3 weeks, during which the whole time people were whining because WvW players, despite continuously asking for changes, hate any change to the mode somehow.

We had 3, 2, 1 since september last year. ANet, you guys gave that ~4 months before deciding to change it, yet you gave 2, 1, 1 less than 1. How can you draw good comparisons from that?

Not to mention it was done during the holidays and wintersday which would pull players out of wvw. So some players came in here freaking out how 211 made populations drop during that time, or how a 2v1 on the bigger server is somehow worse than 2v1 on the weaker servers.

I think it should get more time for players to figure out how to work with the system, but there’s obviously players in here that only care to dominate and don’t give a kitten about balance to the system.

People need to stop freaking out about scoring changes, it’s temporary, they can be changed, they’re testing out what works. If you can’t accept them testing stuff then don’t come in here asking for changes.

But yeah whatever, keep on trucking BG.

atheria.2837:

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

For population balance reasons, we’ve lowered the population thresholds for a world to be considered ‘Full’. This is to keep the population disparity between high pop and low pop servers more similar.

You can’t possibly be counting ONLY people who are playing WvW and you should be by now.

YB against six servers? Anet isn’t playing its own game so it can’t possibly see the inequities in any time zone or server.

This is just plain ridiculous to lock YB when we are nowhere near ‘full’ in reality.

Let us know when you count the WvW populations only, that’s when your ‘metrics’ and algorithms will finally make some sense.

Right now, they do not.

And yet
Dragonbrand +Anvil Rock, Borlis Pass = 11 points
Stormbluff Isle +Sanctum of Rall, Eredon Terrace = 13 points
Yak’s Bend = 12 points

In the most balanced matchup so far. Maybe people need to stop freaking out so early on how many servers they’re up against, they all obviously don’t have the same population hence why they need to be linked to others.

I’m surprised YB was one of those locked, but maybe they have more wvw players than people realize.

They also count population by wvw activity not entire server population since like august 2015, what qualifies as wvw activity whether it’s 1 hour or 10 hours per week well who knows but anet.

morrolan.9608:

1. How are TC, YB and JQ meant to match BG and Mag?
2. The population caps were too low anyway to properly cater for the size of the maps and the map caps themselves now its going to be worse.
3. Players in off hours on NA servers are only enough to really fit on 1 tier, its going to spread those populations out so they become much more sporadic.

The three servers you mentioned were tier 1 sized before, the only server than has not come down to tier 2-1.5 size is BG, and their accidental opening by dropping below the old threshold didn’t help. Also it has yet to be seen how many moved to Mag over their cheap link ET, we’ll see next week and if they are over the threshold then it’s wait and watch time on the ticking time bomb bandwagon.

What other solution do you expect them to pull out? Like I said those 3 servers have been open and still haven’t recruited enough catch BG, do you want them to leave it to be a constant arms race with BG?

You can’t bring 22 servers up to BG or Mag’s population levels, it has to be the other way around.

Don’t see a problem with this, the threshold needed to be lowered a long time ago. Most servers have been open for a while and they’ve had a chance to recruit, even BG opened for a week to restock their zergs.

People come in here to complain every time a server is closed and yet don’t bother to recruit when it’s open. Learn the lesson already.

Nuzt.7894:

It’s not any better, but if they used 3, 2, 1 that would mean they might have to acknowledge that the player base actually knows what their talking about. This way they can use 5, 4, 3 and say it was their idea, when they get a bad review they can say they came up with the idea of how to fix the problem and thus are paying attention to WvW.

It’s the enormous Anet Ego they can’t put aside for the betterment of the game and playerbase.

How exactly is that confirming the player base knows what they’re talking about when anet the one that set it to 321 to begin with. 211 and 543 were the more popular numbers thrown around back in the skirmish feedback thread, they’re trying it out, not trying to save their egos.

For all we know the complainers about 211 are a bunch of players who like to play for second, or players for 321 are the ones dominating matches and just likes feeding off the weaker servers. Which would not exactly be the best group of “knowing what they talking about” to listen to.

Wonder why there isn’t a poll for the different sets to get a general idea of what players prefer. Either way, we’ve had 321, it’s good to try out 211 and 543 just to see how it affects players, although as mentioned 543 isn’t much different than 321, just bigger numbers.

CrimeMaker.8612:

honestly me and my guild are giving this game till Revelations come out and till then if anet doesnt do anything about class balance in WvW then Revelations it is

Game looks interesting, castle sieges, open world pvp, arena, battlegrounds, aerial combat, lil something for everyone… But probably end up like another Aion.