| 9 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/mike-ferguson-on-the-current-state-of-the-world-vs-world/
Hey everyone, time for another world versus world update! Today I’ll be recapping some of the more important WvW related issues we’ve dealt with since we launched the game. First, let’s talk about queues for WvW. Here’s how they work:
As many people already know, quite a few worlds frequently have multi-hour queues to get in to WvW (particularly the Eternal Battlegrounds), but there are also worlds that have minimal or even no queues at all during prime time.
If you are playing on one of the worlds that has extremely long queue times and can move to one of the lesser populated worlds, we would recommend doing this, since spreading out the player population will not only reduce queue times, but also help provide better competition for all worlds. One reason some people experience long wait times is that we are still seeing extremely high concurrency rates, which makes queues longer on worlds that have a large number of players focused on WvW. We also discovered a bug that was allowing people to queue up and enter maps ahead of players who had been queued for much longer. Please check on our forums for an announcement when the fix has been implemented. This should fix the problem of some people staying queued for hours while other people can queue up for the same map and enter within a matter of minutes. Another thing that is fairly constant across all worlds is that Eternal Battlegrounds (the central map in WvW) is by far the most popular map for people to queue for. You may help lower your wait time by queuing up for a borderlands map first, then entering the Eternal Battlegrounds queue once you are in the borderlands.
Now let’s talk about matchmaking and match timing. During Headstart Access, we encountered a few issues that required us to take world matchmaking offline for a few days at launch. During this period, we let the matches run a bit longer, which is why some of you noticed that we had matches that lasted 2-3 days or scores would not be cleared out properly when matches were supposed to be reset. The good news is that we were able to fix those issues quickly and have been running 24 hour matches since September 1. These games have given our ranking system enough data that, starting Friday, September 14, matches will run for 7 days. We’ve changed to 7-day WvW matches instead of 14-day matches to let the ranking system get a few more points of data faster and to help people get used to playing in a longer match format. WvW match results and the initial world rankings can be found on our forums. |
|
|
9/19/12 2:39:50 AM#2
Any reason why eternal is more popular than the others?
Playing ATM: Diablo III KICKSTARTED: Camelot Unchained. (250 USD) |
|
|
9/19/12 3:28:24 AM#3
Yeah that is a piss poor update quite frankly.
ANET should be coming out and saying they are actually going to do something about x hour long queues, not saying "oh guys, you should totally move server and it will be all alright".
It was bad planning to let unrestricted access to any server from the start without having caps in place to ensure that no server would have ridiculous queues for a major game component. It is even worse to then expect people to shift server without first telling them that they are going to look to enforce caps, monitor migration, provide clear destination servers etc.
Instead we get an update telling use how to queue for maps? |
|
|
9/19/12 3:36:23 AM#4
Originally posted by bunnyhopper Enforcing server caps won't fix the que issue. The primary reason for the que issue is that WvW simply doesn't support the popularity. Until they make more maps, or make more instances of WvW, or until people quit there will be que issues
|
|
|
9/19/12 3:52:59 AM#5
Originally posted by xpiher Enforcing server caps is a must if they are contemplating the route of moving people around servers in order to spread out the population. Putting it out there that "maybe people should move" without first stating that you are going to put caps in place, prime destinations etc is just plain bad.
Yes they could make the maps contain more people, or add more maps. But what they are mentioning here is people moving server, and to make that the solution requires actual work on ANET's side, not "oh guys just spread out a bit, guys, guys".
|
|
|
9/19/12 4:46:32 AM#6
MoP releases in a few days and im sure the Queue's will be allot shorter then. But yea it's a shame WvW can't support it's popularity |
|
|
9/19/12 5:02:26 AM#7
Originally posted by bunnyhopper Its a stop gap mesure
|
|
|
9/19/12 7:20:07 AM#8
Originally posted by xpiher And? It is at best a nothing to put in an "update", at worst it is recommending people to shift servers before they have any real plan in place.
"We understand there has been long queues and we are looking to implement a solution to this problem as soon as possible". Not hard really.
So all in all, yes a pretty piss poor update in all honesty. |
|
|
9/26/12 8:08:24 AM#9
So i wonder how they will deal with the mass transfer exodus of players from crap WvWvW servers to the successful ones? Several servers have no queue's anymore, some field no more than 50 WvW players at primetime now. Currently my server "Ruins of Surmia" can't hold a single tower for more than 5 minutes, 30-50 players cannot combat an enemy with 200 man zergs. GW2 mechanics make this simply impossible. I know for a fact were not alone, the third server were combatting currently has less points than we do and we only have 30k :) |
|