Guild Wars 2

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

Hey guys, since I’m seeing this topic pop up a lot, I wanted to step in and clear up some misconceptions.

1. Nearly every player that voted, plays WvW at least somewhat regularly.

2. Whether they play 1 hour a week, or dozens of hours a week, the breakdown between people who voted ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ remains very constant around the 65/35 split.

3. The in-game poll notification mail is only sent to players who are actively playing WvW. They must be at least rank 10, and have ranked up while the poll was running.

So this means:
1) Past and present WvW players over a certain rank were not notified via email. If players were unable to log into the game this week for whatever reason ( for example: the hospital I have been at most of the time has GW2 blocked) they do not know the poll is happening at all.

2)There is no restriction on the poll itself to limit voting of non WvW players or multiple accounts.

3) WvW rank 10 would never be high enough to impact multiple accounts. Rank 1000 would be a much more appropriate measure.

shrek.1046:

lil devils x.6071:

shrek.1046:

lil devils x.6071:

shrek.1046:

Trajan.4953:

Vova.2640:

Cerby.1069:

Vova.2640:

Hopefully never…

You know you could at least make an effort to provide something ontopic that adds something of value to the conversation. Anet needs a pit they can dump all these wasteful postings. I mean you took a min to read the thread, take a minute to respond next time. I know the crybaby meta is strong, but its time to man up.

The empty DBL maps spoke quite well for themselves…

Simply because the “Old Guard” refused to learn it, the same guys that complained endlessly about the old Alpine Map.

I want the DBL back but in a rotation so you “comfort zone” guys still have that safe little place.

I don’t seen why mixed: 1 DBL and 2 ABL doesn’t provide that. And rotation has the severe drawback that players will probably leave the game for the duration that DBL is there.

1) Players do not just all play on one map when they play due to strategic play. They hop maps and use all maps as “one battlefield.” You have to be able to keep all keeps paper on all maps to be able to force your opponents hand as to which targets they choose to save and which ones they have to let go making them have to make hard choices to control the battlefield. You hop from map to map taking out their keeps and controlling the battlefield.

2) In addition, every week whoever’s home BL is the DBL, you are going to have people refusing to play or quit the game due to those that Only play “Home BL Defense”. There are players that is all they actually do every week is defend, scout, recap and upgrade their Home BL. They are the ones that were most vocal about not playing at all if the DBL came back.

So you would rather DBL is the only BL for 3 months?

No I would rather them fix the DBl before putting it back in live game so hopefully no one will leave.
Rotation = Working game part of the time
Mixed BL= Broken game all of the time.

With the rotation, they only have to leave the game for 3 months at a time instead of not come back at all.

I highly doubt many people will leave the game because DBL is 1 BL in a mixed situation.

I am sure the ones who said they will are going to. Then of course the one’s who want to play with those players will follow.

Sarrs.4831:

lil devils x.6071:

Hmm.. I received notice for both. Just everyone I know that I talked about Beta with all said it was so awful they didn’t want to see anymore and were quite vocal about it being bad…

I know for a fact some messaged devs about it…

the plural of ‘anecdote’ is not ‘data’

Anecdote = witness testimony. Submissible in a court of law so I would think appropriate for a gaming forum.

Graphs that were posted by members of this forum on this forum months ago showing population of DBL and population of ABL = data.

Crise.9401:

lil devils x.6071:

With the rotation, they only have to leave the game for 3 months at a time instead of not come back at all.

You are assuming that none of those people are willing to compromise… I think it is a safer bet to count on the fact that majority of the DBL hating minority will be satisfied with mixed borderlands (I would say the previous, no void, poll on the subject is at least some indication to that effect).

Even if that is not the case, having a three month rotation does not guarantee they will in fact return… staying away from the game for three months every three months makes it in my opinion far more likely that they will not come back, because they find new games whereas with mixed borderlands they will have the option to keep playing on the map they love so much without a need to leave in the first place if they can be reasonable and accept a compromise.

No, I am specifically talking about the ones who already said they will leave, and have already left before. I am not actually assuming anything. Multiple guilds have already left before and are going to leave again. Some have already posted that on these forums. I am not making any assumptions, just going by what actually already happened and has been stated by players they are leaving again when it happens again.

Many guilds in this game play Many games together. Guilds go from game to game and play the ones they enjoy most more than the others. My first big guild ( over 2000 members now) was formed on campus at UT Austin. We play here on multiple servers /guilds here and have a section on our forums just for GW2.. Sadly, much of the talk hasn’t been positive for a while and numbers on here have been declining for quite some time. Many smaller guilds just hop from game to game together as well, but yea, it is more about being able to play a game everyone enjoys than what game that actually is. It is fun when we take rivalries from one game to another.

Xenesis.6389:

lil devils x.6071:

The reason why many did not show up for Beta 2 was they were saying it was awful and they would not play on it at all at the time. It was actually abandoned during beta. That should have been a red flag right there. You don’t go ahead and send it live if that happens, and they did.

They said they cannot fix the topography problems at all in the live game so it will just stay broke.

What they did was sent emails out to newly invited players, but failed to notify the players from the first beta that they were still active in it, so many figured they weren’t invited.

I received an email about the first test, but never received one for the second test, I had to wait until it went live to see if I was able to login, and then I let the rest of my guild know, in which most of them decided it was just too late and didn’t want to bother.

They even had to post on the next day to remind players it was open for testing, cause I guess not enough showed up, well gee if you don’t let people know they’re still in they won’t bother and stay with regular wvw. So yeah I’d imagine it was awful if not enough even showed up to fill one borderland.

Hmm.. I received notice for both. Just everyone I know that I talked about Beta with all said it was so awful they didn’t want to see anymore and were quite vocal about it being bad…

I know for a fact some messaged devs about it…

shrek.1046:

lil devils x.6071:

shrek.1046:

Trajan.4953:

Vova.2640:

Cerby.1069:

Vova.2640:

Hopefully never…

You know you could at least make an effort to provide something ontopic that adds something of value to the conversation. Anet needs a pit they can dump all these wasteful postings. I mean you took a min to read the thread, take a minute to respond next time. I know the crybaby meta is strong, but its time to man up.

The empty DBL maps spoke quite well for themselves…

Simply because the “Old Guard” refused to learn it, the same guys that complained endlessly about the old Alpine Map.

I want the DBL back but in a rotation so you “comfort zone” guys still have that safe little place.

I don’t seen why mixed: 1 DBL and 2 ABL doesn’t provide that. And rotation has the severe drawback that players will probably leave the game for the duration that DBL is there.

1) Players do not just all play on one map when they play due to strategic play. They hop maps and use all maps as “one battlefield.” You have to be able to keep all keeps paper on all maps to be able to force your opponents hand as to which targets they choose to save and which ones they have to let go making them have to make hard choices to control the battlefield. You hop from map to map taking out their keeps and controlling the battlefield.

2) In addition, every week whoever’s home BL is the DBL, you are going to have people refusing to play or quit the game due to those that Only play “Home BL Defense”. There are players that is all they actually do every week is defend, scout, recap and upgrade their Home BL. They are the ones that were most vocal about not playing at all if the DBL came back.

So you would rather DBL is the only BL for 3 months?

No I would rather them fix the DBl before putting it back in live game so hopefully no one will leave.
Rotation = Working game part of the time
Mixed BL= Broken game all of the time.

With the rotation, they only have to leave the game for 3 months at a time instead of not come back at all.

shrek.1046:

Trajan.4953:

Vova.2640:

Cerby.1069:

Vova.2640:

Hopefully never…

You know you could at least make an effort to provide something ontopic that adds something of value to the conversation. Anet needs a pit they can dump all these wasteful postings. I mean you took a min to read the thread, take a minute to respond next time. I know the crybaby meta is strong, but its time to man up.

The empty DBL maps spoke quite well for themselves…

Simply because the “Old Guard” refused to learn it, the same guys that complained endlessly about the old Alpine Map.

I want the DBL back but in a rotation so you “comfort zone” guys still have that safe little place.

I don’t seen why mixed: 1 DBL and 2 ABL doesn’t provide that. And rotation has the severe drawback that players will probably leave the game for the duration that DBL is there.

1) Players do not just all play on one map when they play due to strategic play. They hop maps and use all maps as “one battlefield.” You have to be able to keep all keeps paper on all maps to be able to force your opponents hand as to which targets they choose to save and which ones they have to let go making them have to make hard choices to control the battlefield. You hop from map to map taking out their keeps and controlling the battlefield.

2) In addition, every week whoever’s home BL is the DBL, you are going to have people refusing to play or quit the game due to those that Only play “Home BL Defense”. There are players that is all they actually do every week is defend, scout, recap and upgrade their Home BL. They are the ones that were most vocal about not playing at all if the DBL came back.

Cecilia.5179:

lil devils x.6071:

Cecilia.5179:

lil devils x.6071:

Cecilia.5179:

Xenesis.6389:

Except his option gives players a choice of where they move, yours does not unless you deal with messy transfers after.
That’s as simple as I can put it, good luck with your campaign.

But it does? It is really start somewhere then move vs start nowhere then move

Some players wont need to have a WvW server at all. They never play WvW. By keeping the current servers as PvE servers, this only affects players who actually want to play WvW. When they go to play WvW, they will select their server then, those who never play WvW would not even have a reason or even be bothered by WvW changes. It would be unnoticeable to them. They won’t select a WvW server at all, nor will they be part of a WvW population count.

That is already the case. I don’t disagree with you since we’re basically on the same page, I’m just pointing out that servers already solely exist for WvW, and they wouldn’t be counted in a new system as active population, but they would still need to be evenly distributed. Externally selecting servers will mean that some servers will never receive a competitive population (ie Eredon Terrace) due to first a forgettable name, and then because individuals see a low population. I can see your system working if people put in requests to play WvW, and then they evenly distribute servers in the way that maps place you with friends and guildmates first so that every server has similar populations. However, this requires a lot more micromanaging than people talking and choosing which place to go to, and it has a far greater chance to cause errors. I will still say letting the players reunite on their own terms while watching server movement is the best way to go resource-wise while still effectively reducing the ratio of lopsided matchups.

If you removed players from servers all together, they would ALL need to choose a new WvW server. What I suggested was only active WvW players have a WvW server at all. Player choice is vital however, NO random placement. I do not know a single guild that would continue to play the game at all if they were randomly placed. i know mine would not. Players need to have control over where they play, who they play with. You do realize there are TON of players on this game that will not play it if forced to be on the same server with someone they have no desire to be on a server with don’t you?

Let’s see.. without using names but they know who they are.. Guy who had wife leave him for other guy on game and that guy is now living in his house? Guy beat the crap out of wife and she left him and she moved servers to hopefully never have to see him in game. Guy who gave girl place to live she moved in and sold everything he owned then left him without even leaving a note? Girl who was stalked by guy until she called police and got a restraining order? You think they will keep playing if stuck on the same server? You are dealing with actual people here, with lives and human interactions. You cannot just mindlessly place them like NPC’s.

If this happened to the WvW guild I’m in, I would ask “Where are we going, boss?” and maybe give some suggestions. Then, my boss would pick a server, and all of our dedicated members would go there. If a guild is split apart and has the free ability to transfer, they will get back together if they want to get back together.

That scenario you give is very specific and equally possible if they both unknowingly choose the same server. What I’m saying is place everybody on new servers evenly, then people have a one week window to rally to their guild commander at no cost to themselves. Arenanet needs to simply take some time processing transfers to prevent severe bandwagoning.
You seem to want the same thing, but instead of starting on a server, nobody starts on a server, which means some servers will never gain population.

I think you misunderstand what I am saying:

• The current servers are only PvE servers, and have no affect on WvW. Everyone starts just where they are at right now, this does not change. You still keep this server even after you choose a WvW server. ( This preserves current communities)

• Additional WvW servers are created just for WvW. To play WvW you have to pick a WvW server in addition to your PvE server. WvW players will have 2 servers, A PvE server and A WvW server. Non WvW players never pick a new server since they dont play WvW and nothing changes in the game for them at all. Their populations stay the same and people can still guest as they currently do for PvE events. (This allows to shuffle WvW servers)

• The number of WvW servers that are created is determined by current WvW population numbers. There will only be enough WvW servers created to match the number of WvW players that are actively playing WvW. They can create more or less WvW servers every 3 months or so depending on population. (This reduces excess servers)

• Every 3 months or so all WvW servers are reset and everyone has to choose a new WvW server. They can create more or less servers at that time depending on how many players play WvW. ( this maintains WvW population and stops stale matchups)

• In the server selection menu for WvW servers, it will show the current server population and the population cap so every guild will know if their guild will fit on that server ahead of time. This way you do not have a 300 person guild try to fit on a server that only has room for 50 and get split. ( This ensures players do not get split)

• If you are inactive in WvW for 2 weeks you are no longer considered part of a WvW server and have to reselect a WvW server when you try to play WvW. This stops blackouts that allow for over stacking. ( this stops overstacking)

• Every server will be populated due to population caps on those servers and no way to overstack them.

• Give players 1 free transfer every 3 months to ensure they chose a server they are happy with. They can still transfer again after that if they are unhappy, but pay for it as they currently do now. ( Players have control over where they play and can still move if unhappy. Keeping players happy is keeping them playing the game.)

No one should be “placed” anywhere by anyone else. They should have a say in the matter.

Xenesis.6389:

lil devils x.6071:

ANY map made for WvW should not be put into the live game until it was properly finished in Beta and tested and corrected until it was made ready for the live game. If they allowed players to provide feedback and used that feedback to correct the issues with the map before they make it live, they would not have had this problem in the first place. The goal was to not have this one or any other go live until the players voted that it was ready. That never happened, and now they can’t do much of what needs to be done due to it being in the live game and not beta.

Problem with separate beta testing is not many are going to actively download a separate client to test it, players are lazy, that’s why they even had to do focus testing for a couple days. Barely anyone showed up for the second beta test of the map, which in part was Anet’s fault in not notifying players properly, but players are not interested in testing in a separate area.

Fact of the matter is you will find more bugs in a shorter period of time in the live environment than you would with months of beta testing. That’s why they did a lot of live testing for the expansion, they don’t exactly have WoW’s numbers to do a separate beta test for everything.

And as mentioned above, Alpines had it’s problems that have been fixed over time (and still does but not really game breaking). Orbs were a major hacking problem that had to be taken out, eventually the lake was turned into the ruins to bring back the bloodlust buff from orbs. Latest problem was the siege in citadel which they have addressed.

A lot of dbl problems can be fixed if players go in and play, and report anything that seems broken, or write up anything that could be made better, instead of I DON’T LIKE IT SO JUST DELETE IT AND START OVER!.

For something like north towers not being useful, we’re going to have to rely on Anet to come up with something for them, there’s been like a dozen ideas thrown around, hopefully one seems reasonable.

The reason why many did not show up for Beta 2 was they were saying it was awful and they would not play on it at all at the time. It was actually abandoned during beta. That should have been a red flag right there. You don’t go ahead and send it live if that happens, and they did.

They said they cannot fix the topography problems at all in the live game so it will just stay broke.

Johje Holan.4607:

lil devils x.6071:

Xenesis.6389:

So uh for the people saying they wanted a new map but don’t want dbl.

What happens if we vote for a new map, they make it, and you don’t like it, gonna ask them to delete that too?

ANY map made for WvW should not be put into the live game until it was properly finished in Beta and tested and corrected until it was made ready for the live game. If they allowed players to provide feedback and used that feedback to correct the issues with the map before they make it live, they would not have had this problem in the first place. The goal was to not have this one or any other go live until the players voted that it was ready. That never happened, and now they can’t do much of what needs to be done due to it being in the live game and not beta.

If they’re going to ask us they need to do it in Alpha. Once it gets to Beta its too late to make significant changes.

Put out a draft of the map then we can see the popup walls, the stealth sand, the center mechanism, the maze like structure, the ugly giant keeps and say, “No, no, no, no and no.” Before any programming starts. Saves them a lot of work and everyone a lot of grief.

I wish. That would have saved everyone so much grief and so many people would still be here right now if they had… with the guild upgrade system as well.. that was a huge mess as well. I agree completely. Was only begging them to send it back to beta because they said they could not fix what needed to be fixed at all due to it being in live game. If they dont fix the topography and the keeps, there are going to be many more leave as they get fed up with it the more they try. They have to realize they can’t just leave stuff broke and expect it to work at some point I hope. " Somewhat playable" should not have been the end goal here.

Cecilia.5179:

lil devils x.6071:

Cecilia.5179:

Xenesis.6389:

Except his option gives players a choice of where they move, yours does not unless you deal with messy transfers after.
That’s as simple as I can put it, good luck with your campaign.

But it does? It is really start somewhere then move vs start nowhere then move

Some players wont need to have a WvW server at all. They never play WvW. By keeping the current servers as PvE servers, this only affects players who actually want to play WvW. When they go to play WvW, they will select their server then, those who never play WvW would not even have a reason or even be bothered by WvW changes. It would be unnoticeable to them. They won’t select a WvW server at all, nor will they be part of a WvW population count.

That is already the case. I don’t disagree with you since we’re basically on the same page, I’m just pointing out that servers already solely exist for WvW, and they wouldn’t be counted in a new system as active population, but they would still need to be evenly distributed. Externally selecting servers will mean that some servers will never receive a competitive population (ie Eredon Terrace) due to first a forgettable name, and then because individuals see a low population. I can see your system working if people put in requests to play WvW, and then they evenly distribute servers in the way that maps place you with friends and guildmates first so that every server has similar populations. However, this requires a lot more micromanaging than people talking and choosing which place to go to, and it has a far greater chance to cause errors. I will still say letting the players reunite on their own terms while watching server movement is the best way to go resource-wise while still effectively reducing the ratio of lopsided matchups.

If you removed players from servers all together, they would ALL need to choose a new WvW server. What I suggested was only active WvW players have a WvW server at all. Player choice is vital however, NO random placement. I do not know a single guild that would continue to play the game at all if they were randomly placed. i know mine would not. Players need to have control over where they play, who they play with. You do realize there are TON of players on this game that will not play it if forced to be on the same server with someone they have no desire to be on a server with don’t you?

Let’s see.. without using names but they know who they are.. Guy who had wife leave him for other guy on game and that guy is now living in his house? Guy beat the crap out of wife and she left him and she moved servers to hopefully never have to see him in game. Guy who gave girl place to live she moved in and sold everything he owned then left him without even leaving a note? Girl who was stalked by guy until she called police and got a restraining order? You think they will keep playing if stuck on the same server? You are dealing with actual people here, with lives and human interactions. You cannot just mindlessly place them like NPC’s.

EDIT: In addition, servers actually do exist outside of WvW. MANY still guest server for events due to some servers being much better for PvE than others.It does still matter which server you are on in PvE to determine who is on the server with you.

Teon.5168:

lil devils x.6071:

Teon.5168:

lil devils x.6071:

Teon.5168:

Why should you care? You’re not going to be playing the one dbl that is out there when there are 2 abls and EB that you can play.

I play on all maps in the game because oh yer I don’t just stay on one map when I play. You pull players from one map to the other by targeting key objectives and forcing them to choose which they keep. You do this by utilizing all maps in play and make sure you prevent all teams from upgrading their structures on all maps. You force their hand by making them make hard choices to which keep they choose to defend and which they allow to go by ensuring they have to lose something important for every decision they make.

That is how you play WvW…

LOL. Thanks for the simplistic tutorial that I didn’t need.

But, I thought that you guys weren’t going to play dbl if it was still going to be in game?
Or has that changed, now?

Like I said, many will leave. I never left, I was the one who talked them into coming back last time. There will be some who remain for a while.. Time will tell how long that while is.

Yup. It remains to be seen how many actually will leave.

Even if it is 1/4 to 1/2 that left last time, it will be bad. The bigger issue is as soon as another game comes out, those holding on because they haven’t found anything else to play yet will leave all at once and then.. *crickets+ due to low player satisfaction levels.

That is what happens in all MMORPGs though when every update doesn’t : increase population numbers, increase player satisfaction and increase game longevity.

Updates are not supposed to make players leave, they are supposed to bring more players to the game and keep the players they have at the same time. If they had focused on making great maps instead of ones that made players rage, everyone would have been cheering rather than bickering about “well it is not that broke and I hope they fix ____”, “It is atrocious and completely unplayable” or “if they did _ it would not be as bad.”

That is a sure sign it was not a great map..
" better than nothing" =\= “Best large scale PvP game on the market”

Teon.5168:

lil devils x.6071:

Teon.5168:

Why should you care? You’re not going to be playing the one dbl that is out there when there are 2 abls and EB that you can play.

I play on all maps in the game because oh yer I don’t just stay on one map when I play. You pull players from one map to the other by targeting key objectives and forcing them to choose which they keep. You do this by utilizing all maps in play and make sure you prevent all teams from upgrading their structures on all maps. You force their hand by making them make hard choices to which keep they choose to defend and which they allow to go by ensuring they have to lose something important for every decision they make.

That is how you play WvW…

LOL. Thanks for the simplistic tutorial that I didn’t need.

But, I thought that you guys weren’t going to play dbl if it was still going to be in game?
Or has that changed, now?

Like I said, many will leave. I never left, I was the one who talked them into coming back last time. There will be some who remain for a while.. Time will tell how long that while is.

Teon.5168:

Why should you care? You’re not going to be playing the one dbl that is out there when there are 2 abls and EB that you can play.

I play on all maps in the game because oh yer I don’t just stay on one map when I play. You pull players from one map to the other by targeting key objectives and forcing them to choose which they keep. You do this by utilizing all maps in play and make sure you prevent all teams from upgrading their structures on all maps. You force their hand by making them make hard choices to which keep they choose to defend and which they allow to go by ensuring they have to lose something important for every decision they make.

That is how you play WvW…

I mean sure, I could run around mindlessly goofing off , but why would I I do that on this game when there are better games for running around mindlessly on? This game was supposed to be one to play for strategic WvW…

Dawdler.8521:

lil devils x.6071:

Xenesis.6389:

So uh for the people saying they wanted a new map but don’t want dbl.

What happens if we vote for a new map, they make it, and you don’t like it, gonna ask them to delete that too?

ANY map made for WvW should not be put into the live game until it was properly finished in Beta and tested and corrected until it was made ready for the live game. If they allowed players to provide feedback and used that feedback to correct the issues with the map before they make it live, they would not have had this problem in the first place. The goal was to not have this one or any other go live until the players voted that it was ready. That never happened, and now they can’t do much of what needs to be done due to it being in the live game and not beta.

Completely ignoring the fact that Alpine was introduced with bugged orbs that was removed and later had a quarter of the map deleted in order to make the ruins. WvW maps have changed in the live game since game release. It’s really just a matter of reaction time and quick changes, not keeping completely silent for nearly half a year while the community hold its breath and just about suffocate to death.

It took them how long to fix spawn trebson ABL? The concern here is they said they could not fix what needs to be fixed if it is in the live game . This means it will never be fixed :s

Cecilia.5179:

Xenesis.6389:

Except his option gives players a choice of where they move, yours does not unless you deal with messy transfers after.
That’s as simple as I can put it, good luck with your campaign.

But it does? It is really start somewhere then move vs start nowhere then move

Some players wont need to have a WvW server at all. They never play WvW. By keeping the current servers as PvE servers, this only affects players who actually want to play WvW. When they go to play WvW, they will select their server then, those who never play WvW would not even have a reason or even be bothered by WvW changes. It would be unnoticeable to them. They won’t select a WvW server at all, nor will they be part of a WvW population count.

Teon.5168:

lil devils x.6071:

Crise.9401:

Loosmaster.8263:

We’re talking about the map structure itself.

There isn’t going to be any intrusive work done… if I recall correctly their methodology for DBL was to make low cost changes with big impact. This was justified by “because it is a live game”.

I’d wager that if we want a larger overhaul, which takes more than a trivial amount of dev time, it will not happen before bulk of the priority changes we voted are well underway, released or close to being released. Even then if they stick to their mantra it would not happen unless there was a poll and it was voted for. Structural overhaul of the map certainly qualifies as a major change.

So, until such a time the kind of changes we will likely see are the sort of stuff we have already seen or already know about.

THAT was why players wanted it to go back to Beta. The topography had to be made playable for all classes in all zones and that isn’t going to happen if it stays in the live game. Now it isn’t going to go back to beta because that was never an option to actually make the map playable for a PvP zone for all classes…

Give it a rest. The poll is now closed. DBL will be part of the live game along with ABL.
End of story.

Why would anyone give it a rest? It took them how many years to work on spawn trebs for ABL? If the map is broken, the more you should hear about it, not less.

END of story is: Dur Hur let’s put a map in the live game in a PvP mode that all classes cannot even use their skills on and not be able to fix it now because it is in the live game and pretend it works..

Xenesis.6389:

So uh for the people saying they wanted a new map but don’t want dbl.

What happens if we vote for a new map, they make it, and you don’t like it, gonna ask them to delete that too?

ANY map made for WvW should not be put into the live game until it was properly finished in Beta and tested and corrected until it was made ready for the live game. If they allowed players to provide feedback and used that feedback to correct the issues with the map before they make it live, they would not have had this problem in the first place. The goal was to not have this one or any other go live until the players voted that it was ready. That never happened, and now they can’t do much of what needs to be done due to it being in the live game and not beta.

Cecilia.5179:

Xenesis.6389:

lil devils x.6071:

The only way you are going to destack servers now is to make new WvW servers . You can do this while preserving the current servers as PvE servers and make players choose an additional server to play WvW that is based on WvW population and show the cap and the current population as players choose the servers to ensure their guild can fit on the server they are selecting.

Large guilds and alliances will be forced to move to empty servers to be able to fit at all. If a player doesn’t log into WvW for more than 2 weeks they are dropped from WvW population and have to reselect their WvW server when they log in to block blackouts that allow for server stacking. Make everyone reselect WvW server every 3 months and it will keep it fresh.

I like this idea much more than a reset that randomly throws everyone around and then letting them transfer again.

It’s a good alternative to disconnect the original servers from wvw, and try to place players in a more even fashion onto new servers or factions if they wanted to do that. They wouldn’t even need to run this permanently at first, if they wanted they could do it as a week event once a month to see how it works out, like a cough tournament.

Let players sign up a week ahead for a side, and then make sure the system keeps it even, set signup caps until all 3 sides meet it then raise it again until the cut off time, so set it to 100 and when 100 have signed up on all 3 sides, raise it to 200 and so on. Or as you say show the numbers and caps so large guilds can pick emptier servers to place their guild in.

There is almost the exact same way to reset WvW. However, this way does completely remove the idea of being loyal to one server for people who like that. I agree that arenanet should carefully manage the process of transferring to shut down any large bandwagoning patterns and make an effort to keep all 4 matchups relatively even.

The current Server communities have Teamspeak servers and websites that were paid for in advance and much time and money invested in their servers, It think it would be wrong to them to just disregard that entirely. By allowing them to keep their current servers as PvE servers, they can keep their communities in tact and still have a “home base” to play from. Creating separate WvW servers allows WvW servers to be reset as needed AND allows for the current server community structures and bonds to remain in tact.

Crise.9401:

Loosmaster.8263:

We’re talking about the map structure itself.

There isn’t going to be any intrusive work done… if I recall correctly their methodology for DBL was to make low cost changes with big impact. This was justified by “because it is a live game”.

I’d wager that if we want a larger overhaul, which takes more than a trivial amount of dev time, it will not happen before bulk of the priority changes we voted are well underway, released or close to being released. Even then if they stick to their mantra it would not happen unless there was a poll and it was voted for. Structural overhaul of the map certainly qualifies as a major change.

So, until such a time the kind of changes we will likely see are the sort of stuff we have already seen or already know about.

THAT was why players wanted it to go back to Beta. The topography had to be made playable for all classes in all zones and that isn’t going to happen if it stays in the live game. Now it isn’t going to go back to beta because that was never an option to actually make the map playable for a PvP zone for all classes…

gebrechen.5643:

lil devils x.6071:

I disagree

Sure you disagree. Your guild has seen more servers then most people have seen their family in the last years.

What Anet could do is making transfers to small servers cheaper, while making them much more expensive to full servers. Meanwhile they have to decrease the map caps for every server to create queues which force players which want to wvw to look elsewhere.

Will players stop playing? Of course, no one likes queues.
Will someone miss those players? I don’t think so.

The smart ones will sooner or later transfer to servers without queues and the servers will be much more balanced.

After that you still can increase the maps again and link servers and at the same time close every server for transfer until a re-linking is necessary.

Funny stuff there. Care to inform me what servers KILL has moved to over the past year? [KILL] Has only been on 2 servers, ever.. JQ and MAG that is it. [KILL] was a native JQ guild. So not sure what you are going on about LOL

We moved to MAG (T3) when everyone else was moving to TC, YB, BG and DB.. not to a stacked server at all. We chose an underdog instead.

You don’t seem to understand that will not destack the most stacked servers. No one is going to be moving accounts off of them is the issue. What happens in other games when top servers get locked is players just sell their accounts to other players when they no longer want to play and the accounts increase in value, but the population on those servers doesn’t actually decrease. They are WAYY overstacked and are not going to destack anytime soon. Players on the stacked servers already have accounts on the other servers as well, so they never need to transfer to play elsewhere. Did you miss the mad dash to buy alt accounts on every server players wanted to play on when they went on sale for $10? Players on locked servers already did that…

The only way you are going to destack servers now is to make new WvW servers . You can do this while preserving the current servers as PvE servers and make players choose an additional server to play WvW that is based on WvW population and show the cap and the current population as players choose the servers to ensure their guild can fit on the server they are selecting. Large guilds and alliances will be forced to move to empty servers to be able to fit at all. If a player doesn’t log into WvW for more than 2 weeks they are dropped from WvW population and have to reselect their WvW server when they log in to block blackouts that allow for server stacking. Make everyone reselect WvW server every 3 months and it will keep it fresh.

Just locking the top servers isn;t going to solve the problem in the short or long term..

Ardhiel.8531:

lil devils x.6071:

TheGrimm.5624:

lil devils x.6071:

A proper poll would have been one that was email invite only to WvW players past and present over a certain rank.

You and I agree on some things:

• Players that support the game should have fun
• That we need new maps
• We want as many people as possible
• We want to retain as many people as possible
• That people will quit if forced into a map they don’t like

Now where we don’t agree:

• People that have never encountered a map should have a vote – your concept of past people weighing in on a map that they didn’t try I disagree with
• That a map should favor zerg over all other, I want maps that encourage play for all sizes of groups
• X-Y-Z access fights, you are interested in flat, I am interested in multi-dimension fights
• That people will stay if given options on maps and mix dbs are ok since they offer choice
• That prioritizing people that left over people that have been here all along is the better target audience
• That one servers opinion is more valid then anothers
• That there is only one right answer, compromise is ok
• That pop was gained due to ABL, to me it gained after other changes but then dropped after ABL, but that was what I saw without having access to numbers that ANet has

We both want players in the game-mode, but disagree on what caused a decrease versus other factors.

Why would you think I disagree with those? I said a map should start focused on the player experience straight out of spawn, 3 seconds hit an objective, why do you want to fight over that objective? ( have to have a good reason to want to fight over objectives, both personal and for the team) How does that objective increase game play of each class in the game? How does each classes skills work to their benefit in that zone? What strategic value does that objective have to other objectives? Can the objective be attacked from multiple directions in numerous ways to increase strategic options? Is there enough space to fight in the area for all types of combat? 3 seconds.. next objective.. rinse and repeat. That is not focusing a map for just a zerg, that is focusing a map on PvP combat for every class in the game regardless of amount of people in the battle. It focuses on the player experience. The skin should be the afterthought and keeping players engaged in nonstop PvP action the entire time they are on the map regardless of class or group size should be the focus.

I offered a compromise, I asked them to take it back to Beta and allow players to test it and give feedback, make corrections then release the map live again once the players vote that it is ready to be live. It is not compromising to try and put a map into the game that people have shown that some classes skills cannot use all their skills in important areas due to the topography and keep design. Players not being able to use their skills on a map in a PvP zone is really unacceptable for a live map. The issues with the vertical and space provided in zones also created issues with classes being able to be utilized equally and that should never be an issue in a PvP zone.

One servers opinion is not any more important than another, I wasn’t even aware any server was all of the same opinion, or that people even had the ability to speak/ vote for an entire server. People vary greatly even on the same server. What is important is that every update increase the game population, increase player happiness and increase game longevity. If it isn’t doing that, something is wrong.

Population was gained due to ABL, did you not see the activity graphs someone posted here? It was pretty obvious looking at those numbers.. There is a player who keeps posting those on here every so often. I regretfully do not recall their player name right now to go search for it, but anyone who does can post a link. In addition, there were numerous threads here thanking Anet for their return as well as entire guilds stating they returned for that reason.

They are not prioritizing people that left over people that stay, they are prioritizing all players equally. All paid for the game just the same, all deserve to be heard the same. I don’t think they should prioritize anyone over another with the exception of requiring a specific WvW rank to vote on WvW only due to players who do not know about WvW should not really be making the decisions for a game mode they do not know enough about. Treating all players equally who actually have played the game mode sufficiently enough to understand it’s pros and cons is the best way to ensure the game modes longevity. The Beta invites to WvW players went out in Email, so can the polls.

There was also a lot of screens posted od this forum with empty ABLs during prime time So i quess you just ignore them beacause they do not fit to your vision After first week of ABL, on my server, they are as empty as DBLs were. I literally never saw q for all maps, so if you would bring back DBL and 2 ALB then 1 ALB and 1 DBL would be empty and hollow. So nothing will change.
Exepct one thing – people who dont like flat and boring ABL would have chance to play on thier favorite map Everybody wins
And for all those who say that DBL is too complicated and hard to navigate – nothing in DBL was as annyoing as way out from World Citadel in ALB.

I was not using random screens, I was using the data charts showing the actual numbers. ABL is not even flat, EBG is. DBL still had zones where some classes could not even use their skills AFTER they remodeled it. FYI, I do not know anyone who wanted to not have new maps, they just wanted maps designed for PvP instead of the mess they were presented with. They just wanted to wait on ABL WHILE Anet worked on making a good map instead. DBL was not ready for live game.

A map should start focused on the player experience straight out of spawn, 3 seconds hit an objective, why do you want to fight over that objective? ( have to have a good reason to want to fight over objectives, both personal and for the team) How does that objective increase game play of each class in the game? How does each classes skills work to their benefit in that zone? What strategic value does that objective have to other objectives? Can the objective be attacked from multiple directions in numerous ways to increase strategic options? Is there enough space to fight in the area for all types of combat? 3 seconds.. next objective.. rinse and repeat. The DBL was the opposite of that. The game play and player experience was an after thought when it is the skin that should be the afterthought.

Trajan.4953:

The map got fixed, I’m assuming you already had it boycotted by then.

What a shame.

Nope I played the map, part of ti is fixed, now they really need to work on the keeps..

THOUGH: That still doesn’t make a it a good map. That still just makes it a broken map that was made somewhat playable,. not a map designed from the ground up to keep players in PvP action. It doesn’t make it a good map designed specifically for nonstop PvP action.

Kicking people from servers is REALLY bad, they have websites that are paid for in advance, teamspeak server that are paid for in advance and much invested in those communities. They should keep those in tact as much as possible. You can achieve the same thing by keeping current Servers as PvE servers and those remain in tact, then add New WvW servers players choose in addition to their PvE server when they want to play WvW. The number of WvW servers that are created is WvW population dependent, the current population and cap should be viable when players select a server so they know if they can fit their guild onto the server ahead of time. if you do not log in to WvW for 2 weeks you are dropped from WvW server population count and you have to choose a WvW server when you return. They then can shuffle the WvW servers every 3 months or so making everyone choose a new WvW server to keep it fresh.

Not a fan of walls, they need to do more to bring players together, not keep them apart.

Trajan.4953:

Who are you, or any of you, that can decide what a person or a guild wants to do?
Bandwagons happen because some people, albeit more casual people, just want to log in on their own time and see some action.

Your ideals of how everyone should play are simply that, yours.

In an ideal world, in a relatively “sandbox” situation like WvW the way around this is to grab a tier with like-minded individuals and set some ground rules. Been there and done that with the T3 “Fights Tier” and we were bandwagoned anyway. Folks are always going to go to the party, it is just a reality and, frankly, not your place to say different.

I don’t think anyone really has a problem with players wanting to be able to choose where they play as you suggested, however, there has to be some sort of limit to how many people are on a server or at some point you may only have 2 servers left in game with people on them and not even enough for a match.

Wanting to have better balanced matches means not having one server with 5k players, ques 24/7, vs server with 500 players vs server with 100 players. That is just not even worth logging in for .. really.

Trajan.4953:

I don’t really understand why you can’t make your tag whatever color you want. The color scheme is a server decision and should not be predetermined. I’ve been on a server where the color dictates the role of the commander but 4 is simply not enough to encompass all the roles that are available.

Yes, they are supposed to be coming out with more colors sometime.. But you know, everyone is going to fight over having the pink tag once they do.

Trajan.4953:

Vova.2640:

Cerby.1069:

Vova.2640:

Hopefully never…

You know you could at least make an effort to provide something ontopic that adds something of value to the conversation. Anet needs a pit they can dump all these wasteful postings. I mean you took a min to read the thread, take a minute to respond next time. I know the crybaby meta is strong, but its time to man up.

The empty DBL maps spoke quite well for themselves…

Simply because the “Old Guard” refused to learn it, the same guys that complained endlessly about the old Alpine Map.

I want the DBL back but in a rotation so you “comfort zone” guys still have that safe little place.

Seriously, a mix up is good for the game, the re-vamped DBL is not only playable but allows for the same open field fights that everyone loves. Embrace a bit of change.

Not all classes can even use their skills in some of the important areas due to the topography and keep design. For it to be playable, all classes need to be able to use their skills on all of the map in a PvP game mode. Change is great, when it is good change. " Old guard" learned the map and found it was broken and lacking. Asking for a map designed for Nonstop challenging, strategic, fun PvP action the entire time you are on it is not the same as not wanting change.

Players asked them to take the broken PvE gimmicky bouncy mess back and bring them an actual PvP map designed for player experience and PVP action instead. That is definitely wanting change, just in the right direction. Being okay with them just making a broken map somewhat playable, is not the same as wanting them to design a good map from the ground up that focuses on player experience of all classes and all combat styles bringing players together in nonstop PvP action the entire time they are on it. BIG difference.

Honestly, that sounds .. boring since you remove much of the strategic value of the map. to control a map you force the opponents hand. To keep SMC, for example you may have to sacrifice your keep. You should be able to draw offensive and defensive fights and be able to reverse those potions on the battlefield. Of course the hours fighting in lords room is great, the problem is that you just dumbed it down a bit and reduce the intensity of having to choose between the objectives being hit and the number of ways it can be hit.

TheGrimm.5624:

lil devils x.6071:

Mhmm.. see if you will be singing that song when CU comes out. I mean if PvD is your thang more powa to ya.

Sure the game carries on .. LOTS of games carry on with low population.

CU will be about an ever changing environment, if you can’t handle that in GW2, you are in for a very bad time in CU. I recommend practicing now.

I know exactly what CU is about.. Ever changing environment isn’t the problem. Only a bad PvP environment where all classes are not even playable is.

TheGrimm.5624:

lil devils x.6071:

A proper poll would have been one that was email invite only to WvW players past and present over a certain rank.

You and I agree on some things:

• Players that support the game should have fun
• That we need new maps
• We want as many people as possible
• We want to retain as many people as possible
• That people will quit if forced into a map they don’t like

Now where we don’t agree:

• People that have never encountered a map should have a vote – your concept of past people weighing in on a map that they didn’t try I disagree with
• That a map should favor zerg over all other, I want maps that encourage play for all sizes of groups
• X-Y-Z access fights, you are interested in flat, I am interested in multi-dimension fights
• That people will stay if given options on maps and mix dbs are ok since they offer choice
• That prioritizing people that left over people that have been here all along is the better target audience
• That one servers opinion is more valid then anothers
• That there is only one right answer, compromise is ok
• That pop was gained due to ABL, to me it gained after other changes but then dropped after ABL, but that was what I saw without having access to numbers that ANet has

We both want players in the game-mode, but disagree on what caused a decrease versus other factors.

Why would you think I disagree with those? I said a map should start focused on the player experience straight out of spawn, 3 seconds hit an objective, why do you want to fight over that objective? ( have to have a good reason to want to fight over objectives, both personal and for the team) How does that objective increase game play of each class in the game? How does each classes skills work to their benefit in that zone? What strategic value does that objective have to other objectives? Can the objective be attacked from multiple directions in numerous ways to increase strategic options? Is there enough space to fight in the area for all types of combat? 3 seconds.. next objective.. rinse and repeat. That is not focusing a map for just a zerg, that is focusing a map on PvP combat for every class in the game regardless of amount of people in the battle. It focuses on the player experience. The skin should be the afterthought and keeping players engaged in nonstop PvP action the entire time they are on the map regardless of class or group size should be the focus.

I offered a compromise, I asked them to take it back to Beta and allow players to test it and give feedback, make corrections then release the map live again once the players vote that it is ready to be live. It is not compromising to try and put a map into the game that people have shown that some classes skills cannot use all their skills in important areas due to the topography and keep design. Players not being able to use their skills on a map in a PvP zone is really unacceptable for a live map. The issues with the vertical and space provided in zones also created issues with classes being able to be utilized equally and that should never be an issue in a PvP zone.

One servers opinion is not any more important than another, I wasn’t even aware any server was all of the same opinion, or that people even had the ability to speak/ vote for an entire server. People vary greatly even on the same server. What is important is that every update increase the game population, increase player happiness and increase game longevity. If it isn’t doing that, something is wrong.

Population was gained due to ABL, did you not see the activity graphs someone posted here? It was pretty obvious looking at those numbers.. There is a player who keeps posting those on here every so often. I regretfully do not recall their player name right now to go search for it, but anyone who does can post a link. In addition, there were numerous threads here thanking Anet for their return as well as entire guilds stating they returned for that reason.

They are not prioritizing people that left over people that stay, they are prioritizing all players equally. All paid for the game just the same, all deserve to be heard the same. I don’t think they should prioritize anyone over another with the exception of requiring a specific WvW rank to vote on WvW only due to players who do not know about WvW should not really be making the decisions for a game mode they do not know enough about. Treating all players equally who actually have played the game mode sufficiently enough to understand it’s pros and cons is the best way to ensure the game modes longevity. The Beta invites to WvW players went out in Email, so can the polls.

Liston.9708:

Clearly Lil Dev knows is so in tune with what the mass majority of people want he/she should create and sell his/her own game.

Or

only bothers to talk with his/her like minded friends and overstates everything …. Not going to bother with this anymore…..

Why TY Liston for offering me the $30m to get started on my own game, but it is going to take more than that because I want to build a game that is player driven and much more immersive than one like this. In my game, I want the books in the in game libraries to be written by players, the statues in town to be of the players with the best skills and achievements, for the wanted posters to be of the players with the most kills and every item in the game to be craftable, customizable, tradable, dropable, salvageable and useful and the game to not be filled with mindless repetition. That takes a MUCH bigger budget :P

Xenesis.6389:

lil devils x.6071:

They did redo glicko.. problem is T4 just cannot compete with T3 servers.

I only recall them increasing the variance number, but no soft reset or anything to actual ratings.

But yeah T4 wouldn’t be able to compete with T3, which is why they could use a little transfer help, or take the T8 servers off T1 and give it to T4.

It is going to take more than merging to help T4. Anything short of making everyone choose new WvW servers will not solve the already overstacked problem. The game mode is much overdue for a reshuffle. It is far too migrated already for anything else to really put a dent in the problem.

Xenesis.6389:

Or stop linking BG and TC with servers, keep them locked from transfers.

Lower the server hard caps.

Open free transfers to the “medium” servers, if people want to bandwagon let them do it downwards. The only way you’re going to tempt players to move is with free transfers.

Then relink.

Lastly fix glicko so T4 isn’t stuck by itself.

They did redo glicko.. problem is T4 just cannot compete with T3 servers. This isn’t going to change unless they reshuffle WvW servers and make everyone choose again.

Johje Holan.4607:

lil devils x.6071:

I disagree, they should give one free transfer every 3 months and leave transfer costs the same. Instead, create new WvW servers every 3 months, show population caps and current server populations on the server selection menu so people know what they are getting themselves into ahead of time. Everyone chooses a new WvW server to play on every 3 months and then it will destack all servers, stop stale matchups and give every server a fighting chance again while maintaining the current server communities as “PvE servers” leaving their communities intact that coordinate where they go every 3 months. ( Current servers = PvE servers WvW servers= Amount created is determined by WvW population every 3 months and you choose a new one every 3 months to keep it fresh.)

That won’t work either.

• People will form “alliances” and stack certain servers at the beginning of every 3 month period. Just like they did at the beginning of the game.
• People from large servers like BG will stack onto one server. And then complain when they can’t get all their people on it because it has a smaller cap.
• You can’t divide servers simply by numbers and expect it to be balanced.
  • You can’t tell what time of day the player plays.
  • You can’t tell how much they play. Some play 5 days a week. Some only on reset or the weekend.
  • Some only come in rarely. Or for their dailies.

We and Anet need to accept the fact that nothing they do will prevent players from stacking. And nothing they do will balance populations across 24/7 gameplay.

Yes they can " stack servers" to a certain point, but the population cap will stop overstacking. If their alliance is too big, they simply wont fit on the server. THAT is why it is important that they show server population and cap in server selection screen. The alliance would be forced to go to the emptiest world or split to fit their guilds onto servers. It changes every 3 months, so the imbalance will not go on for years, it can be corrected every 3 months. In addition, giving players one free transfer every 3 months allows for them to move once easily if they are unhappy with their server. Players DO leave and come back, when they come back they will not automatically be on a WvW server, they will be on a PvE server and have to reselect a WvW server. In fact if they do not log into WvW for more than 2 weeks they can be dropped from the WvW population and have to reselect a WvW server when they return. AS long as players know this in advance when they make their choice, it isn’t a problem.

Anet knows what time a day people play and I actually suggested that be taken into consideration as well a few months back.

AS far as dailies go, they need to remove them from WvW and that solves that issue.

Teon.5168:

lil devils x.6071:

One thing is for sure, they will have a lot less people to worry about causing imbalance in the not so distant future so most servers should be open at that point.

As I posted a few days back to another of your crying compadres, you guys obviously grossly overestimated those that hated the dbls. So you’re most likely also grossly overestimating the numbers that will leave.

I have no doubt that the game will carry on for several more years, with or without you.

Hopefully the rest of us that are still here will continue to see good communication and positive changes continuing in wvw from Anet. Frankly, I am looking forward to it.

Mhmm.. see if you will be singing that song when CU comes out. I mean if PvD is your thang more powa to ya.

Sure the game carries on .. LOTS of games carry on with low population.

Teon.5168:

lil devils x.6071:

Teon.5168:

As has been posted by others in these forums before……‘there is no reasoning with you on this subject’…..

I will put it as simply as I can……

You lost. Dbls is coming back. Learn to deal with it.

And, as hard as it is to imagine for you……it is JUST a game.

THAT is what I don’t think you understand, you see the way players will deal with is they will not play this game anymore.. at all. Keeping in mind that it is just a game is exactly it, they just won’t be playing this game anymore. The goal was to take DBL back to beta and let them fix it from the beginning. The very first time it was brought up, that was the suggestion. They didn’t " get" it so now the game will lose the players who won’t play with it in the game, then they will lose the players who want to play with those players then they will lose the players that want to play with them.We actually had to beg people to come back to the game already, that isn’t going to happen the next time. THAT was all I was trying to stop. I have offered several options to not make players leave at all and have the DBL in the live game when it is made playable for all classes. If anyone thinks " winning" means the game massively loses population, I would hate to see what losing means. This is just a no win situation.

Funny how you seem to think that you have such a huge impact on the game and its playerbase.

You might want to re-evaluate that.

It has nothing to do with me.. I was just ASKING people.. might try that some time. This was what people were discussing every where I went.. So many had left, I asked them what it would take to bring them back to the game, that is what they said.. Multiple guilds came back due to this however, that isn’t going to change things next time. You fail to realize that it isn’t even about what I want. Much of what I want in a game is irrelevant since most people dont even play full loot here. I just bothered to find out what it would take to bring them back by asking people.

All I want is for the people I enjoy playing this game with and against ( yes rivals as well as allies) to be able to play a game that everyone enjoys and not have everyone on different games again. This used to be the game we all could play together.

Teon.5168:

As has been posted by others in these forums before……‘there is no reasoning with you on this subject’…..

I will put it as simply as I can……

You lost. Dbls is coming back. Learn to deal with it.

And, as hard as it is to imagine for you……it is JUST a game.

THAT is what I don’t think you understand, you see the way players will deal with is they will not play this game anymore.. at all. Keeping in mind that it is just a game is exactly it, they just won’t be playing this game anymore. The goal was to take DBL back to beta and let them fix it from the beginning. The very first time it was brought up, that was the suggestion. They didn’t " get" it so now the game will lose the players who won’t play with it in the game, then they will lose the players who want to play with those players then they will lose the players that want to play with them.We actually had to beg people to come back to the game already, that isn’t going to happen the next time.

THAT was all I was trying to stop. I have offered several options to not make players leave at all and have the DBL in the live game when it is made playable for all classes. If anyone thinks " winning" means the game massively loses population, I would hate to see what losing means. This is just a no win situation. It isn’t a “win” for anyone if players leave over it.

" Getting" it means trying to offer a solution that increases game population, increases player satisfaction and increases game longevity. These options do none of the above.

I " get " it perfectly clear, they are going to run off much of the population from the game mode and then try to blame it on something else in the end.. When it happens don’t ask why, you know why.. People will only flock to other games due to the decisions made here. You should understand that it is only a game, and developers are supposed to make their game better than other games so that people want to play it more than they want to play other games. Doing things like this does not accomplish that at all.

Coulda shoulda woulda been the best Large scale PvP game on the market.. Oh well like I said CU is around the corner..

Teon.5168:

lil devils x.6071:

shrek.1046:

lil devils x.6071:

There is a HUGE difference when you only send out emails Only to WvW players Over a certain WvW rank than to allow anyone to vote as many times as they have accounts.

This is just being elitist.

No, having players vote as many times as they have accounts is being elitist. Only those who have more accounts get more say than those who do not.

That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

It makes perfect sense. If you are elite enough to have 20 accounts, you get 20 votes. If you are not, you do not.

Liston.9708:

ThomasC.1056:

Sarrs.4831:

So basically

The people who disagree with you are going to massive efforts to buy votes, and use extra accounts to make extra votes to make themselves seem bigger

And the people who agree with you are tired and apathetic and couldn’t be bothered expending the effort to vote in the poll.

…Huh?

For more “…Huh?” effect, just wonder whether this whole topic and conversation would happen should the results be inverted.

that is possible of course, but I believe the root of the discussion is based on the fact the “delete dbl crowd” is no where near the # of people some thought. some of them are now looking for excuses / reasons for the vote instead of admitting there just wasn’t that overwhelming majority as they thought…

UGH, you are not even " getting it" the " crowd" is the same. The problem is the “delete the DBL crowd” wanted new WvW maps instead of the DBL. That option isn’t being given. EVERY SINGLE PERSON I KNOW THAT WANTED ABL WANTED NEW MAPS, JUST DIDN’T WANT DBL That number remains the same, they are not being given that choice at all.

Instead they have Anet saying " if you don’t keep our crummy map we will not make you any more maps" on the other you have people saying" if you don’t get your crummy map out of here and bring us a good map we are not going to play your game anymore." The reason I don’t feel this poll matters is it is a no win situation.

If you vote to get rid of the DBL, you get no new maps and they still aren’t taking the DBL back to beta to fix it right. No new maps = People still leave the game.

If you vote to keep the DBL, you get stuck with a map that many consider unplayable at all and who knows if the new map they make will be any better. It isn’t like they have given anyone reason to believe it would be better yet. So then the game mode is considered by many to be unplayable anyhow and that still means = People still leave the game.

If the option to " Take DBL to beta until the players vote that it is ready for live game" ( as my previous thread stated) that would have been a solution that kept all players in the game and making no one leave. It is a lose/ lose situation. The amount of people haven’t changed at all, the issue is Anet decided to take away the one thing they wanted as an option. Those asking for Alpine back were asking for it just to wait on temporarily while they made a new WvW map, they were told that wasn’t happening at all.

Jayne.9251:

Only solution to counter bandwaggoning is to make xfer fees exhorbitantly high ($50 a pop) and lock servers after relinking. And then relink frequently.

I suspect next relink will see stand alone servers in NA like they did with EU.

I disagree, they should give one free transfer every 3 months and leave transfer costs the same. Instead, create new WvW servers every 3 months, show population caps and current server populations on the server selection menu so people know what they are getting themselves into ahead of time. Everyone chooses a new WvW server to play on every 3 months and then it will destack all servers, stop stale matchups and give every server a fighting chance again while maintaining the current server communities as “PvE servers” leaving their communities intact that coordinate where they go every 3 months. ( Current servers = PvE servers WvW servers= Amount created is determined by WvW population every 3 months and you choose a new one every 3 months to keep it fresh.)

Teon.5168:

Aeolus.3615:

@Crise.9401, that is why i would prefer a 3 way faction system, or start first with 2 factions, and add more smaller and larger maps with diferent populatin cap sizes, being desert map the biggest one, no more copy pasta maps, the servers sytem having several servers changing over time, isnt a pleasent solution to observer nor play, looks like a forced solution to try to hide what what WvW system lacks….saddly Anet decisions will always gringe my gears, on the way they dont fix stuff and hide with more unpleasent mechanics, no wonder they had to start stacking servers after 3-4 years…..

but nevertheless…

C’mon lets try dbl after the linking to see if it better, as much i like the map to an extent , i do agree that map could be way much better…. i doubt it since since linking system just statcks active population and dont balance the time those srvers have more players on, will always be be servers karma training each other deppendign their active zone, linking is broken as kitten for many reasons….

Yea, now that the whole dbls thing is going to be put to rest after this poll closes, I am looking forward to Anet concentrating their efforts on improving the linking/pair ups system, as well as continuing to tweak and improve dbls. They had done some tweaks to dbls before they were removed, and they were positive changes…..I hope that continues. And yes, the linking/pairings need to be tweaked…….hopefully they find a positive way to address that, as well.

One thing is for sure, they will have a lot less people to worry about causing imbalance in the not so distant future so most servers should be open at that point.

Not only should you be able to change color ( as squads are color coded for their purpose and actually NEED to change colors according to their purpose to allow everyone to know what they are doing) they also need for you to be able to tag down without leaving squad as well.

Often tags are color coded due to what they are doing, though this may vary by server some use this system:

Red= scout
Blue= Map pin/ Pugmander
Yellow = guild raid
Purple = Mesmer/ Dual pin/ Backline Command

So if you are having a guild raid then then take over as map pin, you have to leave squad to do so. If you want to hide your pin because of pin watching, you can’t do that either. ( which is stupid)

Instead of allowing guilds to be split when they try to transfer to servers, it would be beneficial to guilds and servers to be able to see their current population of each server and the population cap in the server selection menu. This would help large guilds know in advance whether or not they will even fit on a server, and allow servers who are lacking population to be able to see how many players they need to recruit. Numerous games currently allow players to see the server population prior to selecting that server and this would be extremely beneficial for WvW players to be able to do the same.

For those who want low pop servers, they could see exactly how low pop they are, for those that want high pop servers, they could find a good fit for them. This would help resolve quite a few of the issues created by the current selection options. Some new players come into the game and are recommended terribly low populated servers and then think the game is dead when they wanted to have massive amounts of people to play with. This would take much of the dissatisfaction out of it for players that select a server and then find out it is not what they were expecting at all.

shrek.1046:

lil devils x.6071:

There is a HUGE difference when you only send out emails Only to WvW players Over a certain WvW rank than to allow anyone to vote as many times as they have accounts.

This is just being elitist.

No, having players vote as many times as they have accounts is being elitist. Only those who have more accounts get more say than those who do not.

Teon.5168:

lil devils x.6071:

There is nothing I can do to convince players to come back/stay anymore because Anet chooses to run players off instead of try to increase them with terrible decisions that continually make players leave .. over and over and over..

I was told it isn’t worth my time to try and .. I believe them.

If that is truly the case, then why do you continue to post here on the very subject “that isn’t worth your time”?

I am replying to being quoted. It takes much less effort to reply than it does to go on line chat/FB/Skype/ TS/ Vent and bother telling people there is a poll.

roamzero.9486:

I think this could be addressed with more interesting world linking, to dispel the notion that a servers like BG are forever the top of t1. Like link T1 with T8 but also link T2 with T3. Imagine something like Mag/FA going against BG/AR

World linking itself is going to run off players from the game though, and will decrease population long term. When worlds are linked and unlinked, guilds are broken up that will need to have people transfer off of the linked servers to be able to play with their guild. Players get stuck playing with people they transferred off of another server to avoid playing with and not being able to play where they want to play. In the end it is going to lose players long term and not do anything to actually bring more players into the game. This leads to long term population reduction.

My solution there would be no " BG" in WvW at all, as all of BG would not fit into any of the newly created WvW servers. Getting new WvW servers every 3 months ensures the matchups will mix it up and no one server would be able to dominate as they currently do. They would have a server capacity that should list the exact number of players needed before a server is listed as full so guilds will know ahead of time whether or not they can fit their guild onto the WvW server before choosing that one. This will help prevent guilds being split. Currently guilds are not being told how many players can fit on the server or when they are full or not full and all that does is cause problems, not prevent them.

Locking servers = players leave the game until the server they want to play on unlocks. The end. It doesn’t accomplish what you think it does, unless your actual goal is to reduce game population and longevity, there is no point in trying to force players to play where they are unhappy.

A better solution is to keep all current servers as PvE servers and have players pick a new WvW server in addition to their PvE server every 3 months so the population can be controlled for WvW much easier and be kept updated and fresh matches which still preserving the current server communities websites, structure and resources. The number of WvW servers is dependent on population and they can increase the number of WvW servers or decrease them depending on how many people play WvW every 3 months.

Crise.9401:

About wote stacking… and emails in-game vs actual emails.

There is quite literally no meaningful difference… an account has to have an email associated with it, that afaik has to be unique and free emails are trivial to create. The only difference between this and an email invite poll is that the latter you would have to have pre-existing accounts to vote multiple times for whereas for this one you do not.

The best defense against actual meaningful vote stacking these polls have is the presumed number of votes… ie. even if one person bothers to create dummy accounts to vote say 20 times that is quite likely not going to change the result in a drastic way unless the community is already in a 49/51 situation or in this case 74/26 (which we are not in).

The poll is meaningful, although not exactly scientific… if what some people ellude here, ie. that majority of the “no” votes is from casual PvE players (which very well might be true) then I doubt these casual players have enough interest in WvW to have the incentive to have multiple accounts for it let alone create ones to stack votes in their favour. If there is vote stacking happening, then it is likely to happen on the loosing side assuming the assertions made in this topic about the winning side is true.

There is a HUGE difference when you only send out emails Only to WvW players Over a certain WvW rank than to allow anyone to vote as many times as they have accounts. Yes, players have made accounts on all servers but no way had time to level all those accounts in WvW. If the emails are only sent to WvW players over a certain rank, you are only getting WvW player input. In addition, actual emails vs in game emails, if a player isn’t playing the game right now for whatever reason this week, they would still be notified. For example, at the Hospital here GW2 was blocked so there was no way to access the game to find that out and this week there are actually many people travelling currently on vacation with their families.

They are not creating the accounts to vote, they already created the accounts when they went on sale for $10 way back when. WvW players made a mad dash to make accounts on all the servers they wanted to play on during that time. Most of those accounts just sit there a while. Sure they have been able to level a few of them in WvW, but not all they bought By limiting to only players over a certain rank you block much of those from the process. Why would the losing side stack votes when most gave up already when Anet said they would not make new maps.. You see, the " losing side" only wanted Alpine back temporarily so they had somewhere to wait while they made a good map instead. Anet made that clear it is not happening, so those players are not going to vote in the poll.Why bother? They are just going to leave instead.

We already had to beg and plead for players to come back as it was, this was the last chance for ANet to make it right, so oh well, not worth the effort if they don’t want to keep them playing. Part of the problem was there as a misunderstanding I think, players never wanted to not have new maps, they just didn’t want to have bad maps.

I don’t know anyone who asked for Alpine back that didn’t want new maps, they just didn’t want that map. They only wanted Alpine back to have something that was playable they could play on while they waited for that to happen. Anet didn’t seem to " get" that apparently.

In addition, there were solutions offered that would not have run anyone off from the game, but they chose to ignore that and push this instead. If they are only going to choose things that get rid of players, why bother? Changing AC damage ran players off, adding more grind to play WvW ran people off, combat changes ran players off, taking away everything Guilds worked for ( HOT guild upgrade changes, aka: Small guild nuke) ran players off, imbalanced match ups ran players off, locking servers ran players off, Force players to keep bad map instead of make a good one ran players off.. It is just one in the series of things that in the end when you look around and ask where everyone went, you know why.

They don’t need to say " oh that new game came out so everyone is playing that…"

Truth is people are just desperately looking for ANYTHING else to play because of the way Anet chose to handle WvW. It isn’t that a new game stole players it was this game ran them off in droves due to decisions being made.

The worst part about this is on one side you have Anet saying " if you don’t keep our crummy map we will not make you any more maps" on the other you have people saying" if you don’t get your crummy map out of here and bring us a good map we are not going to play your game anymore." The reason I don’t feel this poll matters is it is a no win situation.

If you vote to get rid of the DBL, you get no new maps and they still aren’t taking the DBL back to beta to fix it right. No new maps = People still leave the game.

If you vote to keep the DBL, you get stuck with a map that many consider unplayable at all and who knows if the new map they make will be any better. It isn’t like they have given anyone reason to believe it would be better yet. So then the game mode is considered by many to be unplayable anyhow and that still means = People still leave the game.

If the option to " Take DBL to beta until the players vote that it is playable" ( as my previous thread stated) that would have been a solution that kept all players in the game and making no one leave. But actually trying to keep players from leaving doesn’t seem to be the point here considering how it was done. Oh well too late now, what is done is done and CU is supposed to be released sometime soon I guess.

Like I suggested before you can:
1) preserve current server communities &
2) solve WvW population and stale matchup issues

This is easily done by keeping current servers as PvE servers. Create Additional WvW servers that people join to play WvW in addition to the PvE server. The number of WvW servers created depends on WvW population. They can create less WvW servers as population decreases and more as population increases. New WvW servers are created /start over every 3 months and players have to choose another WvW server to go to. Current Server communities can all agree to go to the same server, keep their websites ect. Players should get one free transfer ever 3 months just in case the server they chose doesn’t work out for them.

This would allow them to mix it up every 3 months, only have the number of servers open to match the current population and destack current servers in the process. It also allows family and friends to play together and guarantees that if a server gains or loses population, it will only stay that way for 3 months before it can be corrected again.