Fricken.3819

Lucky you, I have been on servers where they spawn camped people for hours and hours and have been spawn camped for hours and hours. Things aren't getting to t3 now because defending stuff is worthless, and tiering up things doesn't matter because you can PPK more points than PPT. Servers "paper" stuff just to get the fight... not to defend to get the points.

> Desert BL with an expansion that forced players into PVE to grind to get best in slot wvw gear with no reward tracks, tickets etc. was a bad choice. and a bl that forced more people to take things with barricades and glitches that allow jumping into wing keeps, pve event that lagged all off wvw and made all walls go to 50%, so many things that wvw community said don't do then ask us if we wanted it and everyone voted no then they added it back Most of the time this is because BLOB guilds that queue a map alone can't be bothered, and bad pugs that can't defend, when that blob guild should be sending people over to help, but are mindless derps that can't do anything without their tag or even play the game mode without their guild. When you are linked to a host server.. you are that server... they normally have more guilds population and "pull" so you must obey /s. They queue out maps good or not and may bring your KDR to .2 I would move away from them but in 2 months may end right back up with them, so what's the point? Mag is prob. the last server community NA, like them or hate them. They could use a few tags and guilds for the BL, but they play the cloud because it works against bad guilds and keeps them playing where they want to be. They do go to bl's, if the farm is there. They don't have a guild carrying them or pug tag bringing the wagon over. and that's after most of their guilds left to other servers or went to EU.They are not roamers, they are a server of players that responds to fights. roaming to me is 2-5 people havoc groups. roaming is not 1v1... go to OS for that. if you get outnumbered bad luck try again it's a open map game. They would need a whole new game mode for this... but I would like it, just don't see Anet ever adding another mode.

It's going to turn out badly! Simply for the fact that the game mode should be based around a large open community of equal players like Worlds, not a guilds. If not then I'd rather just have an EOTM color scheme and no guild tags flown at all. For tiers, there should be just 3 designed around population and play style as PPT / Fight / Roaming. The world populations need to be raised way up again as it was at launch. There should be more freedom of movement as the Worlds should be free or extremely low cost for transfers. The game mode needs to be freed from all these constraints and manipulation of the developers. We can all see these world population labels, locks, and links, are bogus and the injustice of it all enrages the players. 3 tiers is a bad Idea... who chooses to follow the PPT/Fight/ Roaming in 1 tier each... giving more tiers than now allows there to be mixing of the types of play where T1 is blob fight and ghost town between that with 100 roamers each map defending things and tier 7 or lowest tier a guild of 15 be would be big and roamers of 5 each map defend objectives. Mid tiers would be guilds of 30, roamers 15 a map etc maybe map caps for each tier would help with this?. yep... blob guild could bandwagon a low tier server but people playing would have to deal with heavy q? could work.I would also like an EOTM style on current maps at this point, Guilds are the last remaining community. Server tiers are just a way to get the style of play you enjoy and if you build a community around guilds, roamers, on a server, even better.

Yes, I was there for that time, but I was also there when everyone left wvw because of Red BL being the only bl with bad mechs. etc. yes 7 tiers may be too much, but linking (beta) is not better than the old system, and waiting on alliances is a dead meme. Cutting everyone one down to even 5-6 servers would be healthier for the mode than linking is for the game until the "next big thing they won't finish" comes out. And why do you think that deleting some servers and force those players into other servers are better than linking ? You'd completely ruin any last semblance of the "server culture/community" that way, and kill off the last ones. You'd force even more people to play somewhere else and thus give them even less control over where they play with who. The server communities was pretty much dying from the start, and keep dying. Especially the MegaServer was a strong blow to the whole server-community, and at the point where they introduced linking I'd have to completely agree that server-community wasn't a large enough thing to warrant much consideration. It isn't perfect, not by a far shot, but it's better than merging servers and forcing people to get stuck with each others permanently if they want to or not. The move towards alliance is the best shot they have, simply because guilds are the last bastion of community in the game, after MegaServer destroyed the server-community. For more varied play styles, I DO NOT want that locked to tiers, I don't want to have to transfer each time I want to play something different in WvW. I'd rather they split it off to own maps, or even EotM style maps independent off the match-up, that focus on specific play styles. Like a small scale/roaming map for example. Some people like playing multiple ways and sizes, and some have friends or guilds they play some ways with, and other ways with others or alone etc. At this point I'd rather have a linking system that at least can put me in a blob match for 2 months, and then roaming-lands the next. Rather than being stuck in one forever. It's going to turn out badly! Simply for the fact that the game mode should be based around a large open community of equal players like Worlds, not a guilds. If not then I'd rather just have an EOTM color scheme and no guild tags flown at all. For tiers, there should be just 3 designed around population and play style as PPT / Fight / Roaming. The world populations need to be raised way up again as it was at launch. There should be more freedom of movement as the Worlds should be free or extremely low cost for transfers. The game mode needs to be freed from all these constraints and manipulation of the developers. We can all see these world population labels, locks, and links, are bogus and the injustice of it all enrages the players. You want wvw to be focused around server-communities, and then say we should be free to transfer around, and basically bunch all servers more or less together into as few servers as possible. And then split up the different type of gameplay ? I must admit I find your suggestions very conflicting, like you're trying to first mash all the servers together, and then rip them appart again, and in the meantime make sure to rip appart the last bit of server-community. Personally I see guilds as the last bastion of community in this game, as MegaServers and bandwagon/server-transferring has watered our or just ran over what little was left of the old server communities. I honestly don't see much left to salvage there, and neither do I see new communities build up around a system of frequent moving in/out (even without linking). So the only thing left where I see communities build are guilds. Guilds are also one of the few things in the game where you can control who you want to play with, by invite/kick or just join/leave the guild with people you like. If you're going to try to build a community, you need a way to actually build it the way you want it, including a way to deny people that would be disrruptive for that community. Guild does that, Servers doesn't (just ask any server that been bandwagoned). Regarding splitting play styles to specific tiers, that would be an even more band-aid solution than linking. Suddenly a server get designated as "roaming" and a bunch of the loyal players that stuck on the server through thick and thin, that might prefer a more zerg gameplay, might just give up and feel they they've been betrayed by the system. It would go very much against ANet's philosophy of "play as you like". Similarly trying to cram all this into 3 tiers, would certainly overcrowd the game, and I really can't imagine how you want a "roaming" tier, if you're going to cram like 3 servers into 1 for it ? Roaming with 20 players ? And also by opening for more transferring through free or cheaper transferring you'll just encourage the final blow to what little server communities remain (and also the deathblow to any remote chance for competition and population balance in the game mode), as should be pretty obvious at this point of the game that humans are going to use that in all the wrong ways to screw up balance/population/communities, all for personal gain/pride. About splitting playstyles: I do agree that we should have ways to play different play styles, but I don't agree that we have to move servers to do so, or split communities to do so. You argue that everyone should be able to play what they like, and that they should focus on server communities, but then your suggestion seems designed to destroy just those aspects. As I've suggested before (in this thread and elsewhere), I'd rather see them making own maps for different play styles, so we could have a own "roaming map", a own "fighting map" etc (ebg already work quite well as the ppt/zerg map). This could either be added to the existing map selection, or added as an extra map through a EotM system and removed from ppt (alternatively). That way people could look up the play styles they wanted without having to leave their communities, ability to play with their guilds, and without having to transfer back and forth constantly. A "roaming" map could for example have no building larger than towers, and only a few of them, lots of small objectives, lots of small roads that would be cumbersome to walk with 6+ players, add in signals that automatically show large consentrations of players on the map etc.To think that if at some point 20 roamers on a map kill the "roaming style" is false because roamers will spread themselves out then consolidate against larger groups, I am not giving hard lines on what each of Gold, silver, and Bronze should be, but allowing space for people to choose is better than 2-month Shakeups that only add fuel to breaking communities apart, I've seen more BIG guilds die on servers because of bad linking because no one wants to play, than people that were left back on SOR that should have been offering a free transfer and that tier killed off. Yes, those communities would have been killed off but the people "few" that were left could have kept the "SOR" community together ( if they wanted) on another server they work well with but not be transplanted every two months. Your ideas are good, but I want them to do something until the "the ded meme" alliances come out. We know adding tiers is not that hard as shown in the EU. and if it's a fail then put it back after the 2 months. no coding needed, no new systems, no resource except for giving everyone a free transfer. It's a temporary change while waiting for a long term solution which is what I thought links would be when they added them. From Links we got good systems IMO like 1up 1 down, Skirmishes, and PPK. but linking IMO doe's nothing for wvw in a positive way.

None of this happens now? We left SoR because we wanted a better experience... it was the people's choice to stay there. when we moved to DH then, it was great... until linking and the bandwagon started even harder because people are forced into playing with communities they don't want or for an easy ride of the best link.

I agree with you saying, "a bunch of foundational problems that will continue to exist", but linking does not fix the issue it was set to be used for. I was on SoR at the time of linking back then. and we moved to DH then because we did not want to be in T1 with BG. Yes, communities were dying but linking only exacerbated the problem. No communities won't SPROUT back up, but the ones left may get to grow or stick around and healthy competition may happen from time to time.

Just make my Ventari Rev. work like Scourge shades and make my day. give it a 6 skill make f skill place tome and utility skills work around you 360 range without placement plz and thank you.

Just wait for alliances like everyone else. Alliances = DED MEME lol

People leaving the server means they left to a community or server that gave them what they wanted, the server population should have shown that it needed to be open, but that's nothing to do with links. if the server dies and you don't like the play, move. Anet shouldn't force people to your server because you failed as a community to force bandwagon for just 2 months till they leave again.

Skill? if you want to call it that, lol and in ny opinion with transfers and linking tournaments should not happen because the population will never be on a level field. When there were Gold, Silver and Bronze tiers, being the top of each meant something more than being the blob with overpopulation in T1. So even if you were the bronze tier winner in a tournament, you were the winner of your low pop. tier not because your skill was less. Population and coverage do not equal more skill it equals bandwagon mostly and that's okay if you want to be in 200 man queue on reset, I prefer10 man even if maps are empty a few hours a day.

Wouldn't it be nice for you to choose when you want to shuffle the cards? That's what transferring is for, some people don't like being put with communities with anywhere near the same goals. Linking is a forced transfer that does not matter because people transfer and bandwagon anyway. My biggest issue with links is the tier disparity in matches and linking only creates more bandwagon to the "new STRONG linking". even if it was 6-7 tiers would be better for the mode than 4 wins to be first or 4 loses to last.

Simple fact is that monolothic servers is a temporary solution to a constant problem. Yeah you could probably make 8 tiers with perfect balanced player numbers if you just dumped players anywhere you wanted. And in 2 months the servers will be unbalanced again. Then they have to delete a tier... but where to put everyone? Oh I know - together with other low pop servers. So the solution to the problem you created by reverting links, is to create links. No, not really, because it would not be smaller communities being put with full servers every 2 months and have no choice in the matter. I don't want the tiers to be balanced. If 3 servers are in T1 it's because of the population, not skill anyway. why try and have balanced tiers (not possible in any system yet they have given). the bottom tier is promoted as care bear tier, off-hour ppt and roaming and it gets increasingly more hardcore as you go up. Want a different experience... move to a server to get that. Adding more tiers is just a means of shifting the tier disparity. So if you win it takes more than 3 weeks bottom to top. Honestly let a server be dead and people want to transfer to a dead server, it's their choice to, if they want to be in lag fest T1, it's their choice. Trying to balance as you said a "monolithic servers" is a bad idea, so give people more space to play how they want. Yes, a "BG" style server will be number 1... but does first mean anything in wvw right now? No. Also what is the perfect population for wvw? because I sure as hell don't want T1 numbers with alliances or old SoR numbers before links but some people want that kind of play.

That would be because of the Glicko system, not tiers. I would love to keep 1 up 1 down. and T7 should be slow ... it's the bottom tier. if you want more action move to a higher tier, make a guild, and if the population gets bad enough, Anet should add and delete tiers as needed and offer transfer to people in that tier.

Yes, I was there for that time, but I was also there when everyone left wvw because of Red BL being the only bl with bad mechs. etc. yes 7 tiers may be too much, but linking (beta) is not better than the old system, and waiting on alliances is a dead meme. Cutting everyone one down to even 5-6 servers would be healthier for the mode than linking is for the game until the "next big thing they won't finish" comes out.

Honestly, I wish they would just unlinked servers again, Make 7 tiers over the old 8. Make new names for the servers and let people have one free transfer. My biggest problem with links is the loss of server communities, and before you say, "oh my community is great" it's not what they once were, (EU and NA) and linking has stressed and killed many servers. Links make bandwagoning to full servers possible, they make friction between host and link (teammates not by choice). Links only grow because of a bandwagon of the host, then dead after relinking. Give servers identity again, maybe reduce the tiers from 8 to 7 on NA ( EU IDK), which would help with the disparity between tiers of winning, meaning going up or down one tier and being wrecked, going down one tier and smashing the match would be less. yes, there would be bandwagon but it is already happening. Communities could choose where they want to be unlike now where 2 months you could be T1 and 2 months t4 as a link or with a bad link. At least the people that want to be in 100+ man queues in T1 would be there, and people in tiers 7 could roam and ppt their hearts out and middle tiers could be fight focused and less blob oriented. Keep the 1 up 1 down system, but kill the linking.And before you say "what if I am still in a tier I don't want to be and server I want is full?" Join a server that is very high and help get them to the top. "what if my guild is on a full server?" then if you are that important to them, have them move to a very high server and start something new and move up tiers quickly. And before you say, but "when I play the server is empty even in T1" this is probably because you play at a time of low activity for your server and the mega blob guild or pug tag is not on.1) Start and group, squad, or roam until your blob shows up.2) Find a server/ guild that is active when you play.3) move to EU or NA for the time that's better suited for you.There are many guilds on servers that play at "off prime time hours". Don't complain that it is slow off of "prime time." build something in your timezone and help your server or join a community in that time slotYes, I know many of you may not agree with my opinion and that is okay since we aren't getting anything for WvW for a while it seems, what would it hurt to try this?Edit; Maybe giving map caps depending on each tier would help in the curve of the bandwagon of lower tiers? just a thought