ArenaNet's Mike Ferguson has posted a graphic look at the queue sizes for Guild Wars 2 worlds in both the EU and in North America. Data was collected for each world over a four day period and shows the length of lines for each of the PvP battle zones.

We thought these charts would be useful information for people to see, as it helps illustrate why some worlds have much longer waits than others. Hopefully it will also help some people decide to leave some of those higher population worlds for one of the worlds with smaller (or no) queues, which would reduce the queue pressure on the overloaded world and help provide more manpower for the smaller world.

Some other information we gathered from this timespan:

• Almost 30% of the total players who logged into the game queued up for WvW
• About 3% of the total players who logged in and queued never got in.

Check out the North American data and the European data on the Guild Wars 2 site.

I would love to see the graph about how long they stayed in after "getting in" because gw2 currently - since headstart - loves to put you into a queue, let's you load the map, walk for 30 seconds and then "network error" back to character selection and again back in the queue....

Besides, you lose all your Guild unlocks when you switch servers, they are basically asking everyone who moves to start from scratch. This is poorly thought out and the fact that he does not mention it, says a lot.

Originally posted by Suzie_Ford

ArenaNet's Mike Ferguson has posted a graphic look at the queue sizes for Guild Wars 2 worlds in both the EU and in North America. Data was collected for each world over a four day period and shows the length of lines for each of the PvP battle zones.

We thought these charts would be useful information for people to see, as it helps illustrate why some worlds have much longer waits than others. Hopefully it will also help some people decide to leave some of those higher population worlds for one of the worlds with smaller (or no) queues, which would reduce the queue pressure on the overloaded world and help provide more manpower for the smaller world.

Some other information we gathered from this timespan:

• Almost 30% of the total players who logged into the game queued up for WvW
• About 3% of the total players who logged in and queued never got in.

Check out the North American data and the European data on the Guild Wars 2 site.

Oh so a whole wopping 3% of 30% of the population? Well guess we can classify this problem as a non-event then.

Originally posted by Tardcore

Originally posted by Suzie_Ford

ArenaNet's Mike Ferguson has posted a graphic look at the queue sizes for Guild Wars 2 worlds in both the EU and in North America. Data was collected for each world over a four day period and shows the length of lines for each of the PvP battle zones.

We thought these charts would be useful information for people to see, as it helps illustrate why some worlds have much longer waits than others. Hopefully it will also help some people decide to leave some of those higher population worlds for one of the worlds with smaller (or no) queues, which would reduce the queue pressure on the overloaded world and help provide more manpower for the smaller world.

Some other information we gathered from this timespan:

• Almost 30% of the total players who logged into the game queued up for WvW
• About 3% of the total players who logged in and queued never got in.

Check out the North American data and the European data on the Guild Wars 2 site.

Oh so a whole wopping 3% of 30% of the population? Well guess we can classify this problem as a non-event then.

True, but the I think the problem is the 27% who did queue and did get in - but had to wait hours to do so.

Originally posted by Tardcore

...

Oh so a whole wopping 3% of 30% of the population? Well guess we can classify this problem as a non-event then.

These stats say that a third of the population will bump into queue and 3% of them will quit waiting and the 27% will persist until they get in. That's a rather huge amount of the population waiting on queues.

If you also look on certain servers, I see queues up to 3 hours or more.

If a three hour wait for a third of the player population is not an issue for you, I don't know what is.

As the data shows theres servers out there without a queue time at all. Some have queues only at certain times but are free the rest. If you dont like queues, leave the server. Its really not hard to have to start over with the upgrades, even for smaller guilds. I recently moved a guild of only 6, and it hurt losing the guild stash and treasure trove, but we already have both back. 

Seems to me all the whiners and haters going on about queue times just dont want to leave a winning server. Hey geniuses, heres a tip, youre winning because you have queue times. All that interest in V8 means you have a larger representation. 

Choice is yours, do you not want queues, or do you want to be on a winning server and deal with it. You cant have it both ways, and its naive of you to think you can. Get off the server, or get over yourself.

I agree that queues suck but I just plan on spending upwards of an hour waiting to get in so I just do something else that I won't mind dropping quickly to get in and if I'm only going to be on for an hour, I don't even bother.

I'd love to see what the average queue times are per server.  If 27% of the people on a server are waiting, how long are they waiting on average?  How high is that turnover rate?  I guess I wouldn't mind being one of the 27% if I knew that on average I'd only be waiting for, say, 15 minutes vs. waiting for an hour or more.

Of course, one way for them to solve the issue is to put people in servers that aren't quite so populated.  Maybe they could have a volunteer list of people who would be willing to change servers at no charge.

Originally posted by aslan132

As the data shows theres servers out there without a queue time at all. Some have queues only at certain times but are free the rest. If you dont like queues, leave the server. Its really not hard to have to start over with the upgrades, even for smaller guilds. I recently moved a guild of only 6, and it hurt losing the guild stash and treasure trove, but we already have both back. 

 

Not to be flippant to people with queue time problems but... yeah pretty much agree with this.

People have the power to fix themselves. Yes it would be nice for ANet to wave a magic wand and open up the pop cap sizes to hundreds but then what would happen? Lagfest and people start bitching about how its unplayable. Given the alternatives I think a queue with little no to lag (that I have experienced in WvW) is not a bad deal.

Anyone remember what WAR RvR was like?

Some of you guys are misunderstanding the 30% and 3% numbers. Although 30% of the total people who log in queue for World vs World, it doesn't mean all of them are sitting in a Queue. There are often times I queue up and I instantly get into WvW (Anvil Rock). On my server I bet out of everyone who queue's up maybe 0.1% never get in as the longest queue time I've had is roughly 10 minutes.

However on say HoD of the people who queue up probably closer to 50% never get in.

As the people who claim they have quit the game because of queue's you are hilarious. You know there are free server transfers right? Get off your server that is full beyond capacity (thank overflow for this) and join a server that isn't full. The need for some people to be on full servers and complain they never get into PvP is rediculous.

Originally posted by BillMurphy
I'm just glad to see proof that I wasn't crazy that I've been able to queue up and get into BL's so easy lately. 

come on man, we know all know you were just tryin to slack on the WvW part of those reviews!

on topic. i'm on Sanctum of Rall, and have small issues with server queues. weekends can be ruff, and if any of the major guilds are doing events it can be hard to get in, but overall the queue times are generally only about 30 min or so. if anyone is WvW hungry, i'd suggest going to a server with less WvW traffic. they pair you up fairly well against other servers of the same caliber, so you aren't really missing out on anything.

Originally posted by Daddydazzle

Originally posted by BillMurphy
I'm just glad to see proof that I wasn't crazy that I've been able to queue up and get into BL's so easy lately. 

come on man, we know all know you were just tryin to slack on the WvW part of those reviews!

on topic. i'm on Sanctum of Rall, and have small issues with server queues. weekends can be ruff, and if any of the major guilds are doing events it can be hard to get in, but overall the queue times are generally only about 30 min or so. if anyone is WvW hungry, i'd suggest going to a server with less WvW traffic. they pair you up fairly well against other servers of the same caliber, so you aren't really missing out on anything.

 Sanctum of Rall, aka Scrubsville, has less issues with queues because:

(a) It is a low pop world.

(b) Most of the players are PvE oriented, not PvP.

Those two factors are the main reasons behind SoR constantly getting crushed in WvW. The only time SoR is ever sitting in 1st position is when the pairing is against two even scrubbier worlds that are worse than SoR is.

The really hilarious part is that whenever that happens, most of the PvPers on the world act like they are complete badasses, when they are anything but and only succeed when matched against inferior odds.

Leaving that world was the best decision I made early on, especially as someone actively seeking competitive play, and I haven't regreted it one bit.

Originally posted by Kost

words

you sounds really hardcore. i hope the game doesn't explode from how awesome you are! for Christmas i may get you a picture of yourself.

i'm from Isle of Janthir -- no queues. xferred to Eredon Terrace for WvW map completion (they were dominating that time) -- no queues. IOJ is on High, ET is on Medium.

I just wonder what 3% of the total players who logged in and queued means.  You people are assuming that  means 3% of the people who waited in a queue but actually that probably means 3% of all players that queued for a battleground regardless of if they had to wait or not.  It was a clever word choice by ANET but that does not mean 3% of 30%.  If you aren't following lets say 60% of people queue for battlegrounds and only 30% have a to wait in a queue, then 3% of the total amount of people that queued would be 3% of 60% not 3% of 30%(double that).  ANET did not give us the total amount of people that queued for a battleground so we don't know what that number is.

Very clever by ANET simply by switching the wording from "3% of the people who waited in a queue" to "3% of the total people who logged in a queued" ANET comes up with a number that is lower and looks better for them while being taken to mean something else by the average person that reads it.

just to show how big of a difference that is lets say 1000 people logged in and queued for a battleground.  if 30% had to wait that would be 300 people.  If 3% of those didn't make it into the battleground that would be 9 people.  However if 3% of the total amount that queued did not get in that would 30 people.  Quite a difference 9 out of a 1000 vs 30 out a 1000 that is 3 times more people that did not get in or 10% vs 3%.

edited for math.