Name:
Pass:

Tequatl Rising update on 17 September

Tequatl the Sunless

More content goodness is coming your way on 17 September and it’s called Tequatl Rising. The update will include the LFG tool too which is great news.

Details have been filtered into the official wiki and include:

Tequatl Rising

  • The event has a 15:00 minute time limit.
  • Tequatl has new combat mechanics
    • Now has a Scales effect that summons the Bone Wall and makes Tequatl invulnerable until the wall is destroyed. Turrets have a skills to remove stacks of the Scales effect.
    • Stomps the ground, sending out a tidal wave that knocks players back and can hit multiple times. Players can jump over and doge through the wave, similar to the fight with King Toad.
    • Tequat’s Fingers will continously be summoned on the field, requiring players to take them out to avoid being constantly knocked around.
    • Spews poison fields across the area. These pulse every second, inflicting damage and poison. Turrets can be used to remove the poison fields.
    • Summons vines that pull players under the bog if they get too close. They will take continuous damage and must swim to the surface to get back to the fight.
  • Tequatl changes combat phase at every 25% health to a secondary phase. On a secondary phase, an event starts where players must defend three batteries arranged around a cannon.
    • If any of the four areas falls, the event fails.
    • If the event succeeds, Tequatl gets shot by a laser and the players can damage him while he is stunned.
    • The batteries and cannon will be attacked by waves of Risen, including champion Risen. The enemies scaled up to 69 and in large numbers.
  • If the event fails, Tequatl will send a giant tidal wave that will wipe out players unless they use the launch pads to avoid. Risen Rotmouths will appear in the area until Tequatl returns.
  • Launch pads reminiscent of Lightning Pull move players to and between the cannon and batteries.
  • New reward system
    • Intermediate foes during the event will not drop any loot
    • Completing the event will give a reward, potentially including unique ascended weapon skins
    • Like Scarlet’s Minions Invade!, Tequatl will provide rewards every 25% health (every phase) in addition to a Bonus Chest for defeating him.

LFG Tool

  • Categories for different in-game activities, including Living World things, dungeons and fractals at different levels and WvW maps
  • Each category will show you a list of parties looking for group from the whole region
  • Only parties with a compatible size with your own party will be displayed (e.g. if you are two players in a group, you will only see parties with 3 or less players)


You can register an account to comment or fill in the forms below to comment.
  • Rob Van Der Sloot

    Well, Tequatl is here, and they once again didn’t test it properly. When they showed a preview of the fight, people already raised their hands because there were an unfeasible number of players taking part in the fight, and barely making a scratch on his health. The devs then proceeded to cheat twice, just to get him to the next phase. Yeah, big red flag there.

    And that’s exactly the problem we have now. One server (Blackgate) managed to bring him down with hundreds of organized players, many of which were on Team Speak. Is that a reasonable requirement for a world boss? Is it okay to have like 50 or 60 players on Aurora Glade waste 15 minutes fighting him, only to bring him down top about 80% health, and then fly off?

    The problem here is that Tequatl’s health doesn’t scale properly based on the players fighting him. If you have around 50 players, they should have a fair chance of beating him. Otherwise, why bother to spawn Tequatl at all? But that isn’t the case right now. If you haven’t got everyone in the instance fighting him, and knowing what they are doing, with max DPS, then you might as well not bother.

    I foresee an incoming nerf. It’s a shame that they always test these things on Live. Get a new Test Krewe Anet!

  • Agreed on poor testing regarding the Tequatl fight. How a completely random bunch of players is supposed to pull off that kind of coordination currently required is somewhat beyond me – especially with the very poor performance of the average player – most just waited dead at its feet, crying for a rez. Expecting tweaks, not gonna bother meantime.

    As for the rest of the somewhat improved bosses: Haven’t managed to do them all yet, but seen good as well as bad examples. Golem for instance is more fun and rewarding, while Maw now requires 3 minutes of auto-attacking instead of 30 seconds for the same rewards – duh.

  • The golem/fire elemental is the only one I tried, and it was more fun now. More stuff to avoid, more circles to run out of… and the HP seemed to go down at a decent rate.

  • Tried 3 times last night trying to kill Teq, never manage to bring its health down to 80% despite attempt by commanders to co-ordinate. Like others have said this is mission impossible with a random zerg.

  • In your opinion, is it because PUGs stay dead waiting for rez, because PUGs die too easily, or because of some other coordination problem? I haven’t tried it, so it’s hard to imagine where the problem is, and whether more practice could fix the problem.

    Players not using the WPs and waiting for a rez, for example, they could learn to change that bad habit. There’s a WP close-by as I recall. Attacks that are hard to dodge can be learned via practice. Spreading around, PUGs can do that too as evidenced in the Scarlet invasions.

    So it’s not clear to me yet if people just need to play better, or if there’s a genuine scaling problem. If ANet’s team can beat it during testing with a smaller team size, that’s nice, but these guys have quite a bit more play experience and coordination than the average PUG.

  • you also need to keep in mind that when there are around 80 players in one event (the number is just an example) the scaling will simply go wild and health turns in to godlike proportions, it’s just that after 20 players or so, scaling makes the boss way to powerful.
    it’s bin like this from practically the beginning, a small team, no matter how wanky the coordination is, can take down the boss much easier then a 20+ player zerg.

  • QUOTE

    In your opinion, is it because PUGs stay dead waiting for rez, because PUGs die too easily, or because of some other coordination problem? I haven't tried it, so it's hard to imagine where the problem is, and whether more practice could fix the problem.
    
    Players not using the WPs and waiting for a rez, for example, they could learn to change that bad habit. There's a WP close-by as I recall. 

    Yes, there’s a WP close by. But the closest WP is a long way off… Like the temple events, the closest WP is locked off.

  • Rob Van Der Sloot

    It can take roughly a minute to run back to the event after respawning…. and the event lasts only 15 minutes. You can see how that might be a problem. I get the impression that you really need a huge amount of players who all know what they are doing, and it would be a miracle if we can get all that organized on our server. Last time I tried it, we had roughly 60 players, and they weren’t lying flat on their backs. Everyone was making an honest effort, and we hardly got him down to 80% health. That just doesn’t seem reasonable.

  • Well, wanted to try again tonight. Unfortunately I can’t even log-in since the update about 3 hours ago. Attempts to log in will receive the authentication email almost half an hour later, clicking that only receive a message about the site not being accessible. No news at all concerning this on the official network, face book or twitter, though on Facebook I can see quite a few people are in the same boat as I am. Come-on, ANET, where are your communications people ? At least tell us what has gone wrong.

  • Rob Van Der Sloot

    Aurora Glade has started doing several Tequatl runs lately. If anyone still wants to beat the dragon, best to head over to Auroraglade.eu and see when the next dragon assault is planned. It’s certainly not impossible, but it is not something you’ll pull off with a random group of strangers. It requires a huge organized effort. The combined effort of several guilds, all on Team Speak or some other form of voice communication.

  • QUOTE

    It's certainly not impossible, but it is not something you'll pull off with a random group of strangers. It requires a huge organized effort. The combined effort of several guilds, all on Team Speak or some other form of voice communication.

    And there lays the problem, at least in my opinion. One point so well advertised regarding open world content has always been how you can just get together with random strangers without the need to form teams, class combinations and so on. Hell, every class has been built around being self-sufficient rather than team-synergy (8×8 skill system of GW1). Open-world content works just like that, you have absolutely no control about who will be present and till now you also had no need for it.

    Now, suddenly there is organization similar to raid-content required. Needless to say that with actual raid content usually comes the option to control its participants. Just here that option is missing. This is not a complaint about difficulty, this is a complaint about getting into a random overflow with random people. I haven’t seen my home server map since the update hit live, there are queues longer than I have actual playtime a day – not that I would want to spend it camping in the queue on a map I don’t want to be in the first place (other than for the actual Tequatl encounter).

    To me, this contents requirements are a complete contradiction to the open-world / overflow system. The fight as it is now should be instanced to allow control of its participants. If that’s not the case, it needs to be lowered in difficulty to compensate for the random factor of slackers wasting player-space on each map. As it is now, it completely fails in regards to the overflow system as well as it would fail with too few participants (once the novelty wears off).

    If future world boss encounters will follow this poor example, I can’t say that I’m looking forward to them.

  • Satenia,

    1) I don’t see a problem in a small % of open-world content requiring organization

    2) I’m willing to bet that much of the organization can be done with PUGs. In fact, servers that succeed regularly do it with people who are new to the fight. If people know how to move around, or follow commanders, both being skills that PUGs can do pretty well in WvW and via guides like Dulfy… then people don’t really need Teamspeak-level coordination aside maybe (maybe) commanders. Even then, where you need to be and when is pretty obvious once you know the pattern. In fact, having been in a successful fight, I’d say that teamspeak is essential only to give noobs their basic fight info. It’s also used to help them dodge waves, but that they can learn on their own… I was doing it without teamspeak on my second fight and I was pretty reliable at it. And knowing how to spread your troops during the “protect the cannons” event… that you can figure out based on how much damage they are taking. People learned to spread during Scarlet invasions, they can learn to spread during cannon events.

    What I would like is for content like this to scale better with servers, so lower-pop servers don’t feel like they need to migrate to large-pop servers to get their achievements. I am not convinced that better organization would be sufficient, I think the event also requires a fairly large attendance.

  • most commanders are rushing retards, they don’t even bother asking someone’s build and just spit out commands without even the basic knowledge of leadership.
    when i play my necro i am both offense and defense, commanding me to attack with minions is a really bad idea because the only minions i use are for ether healing or diversion, the unity skills are wells.

    saying that ppl should follow a commander is a really bad idea, it’s like pointing the way to a pit of fire and say you’ll survive it…

  • I’ll go ahead and disagree with your assessment, Sorudo.

    In regular PvE, most of what a commander does is give people on the map a common target. Yes, those can seem like rushing retards, but they don’t really have to do much else to serve common interests.

    In WvW, you can easily spot good commanders from bad ones. Even the bad ones I have seen aren’t rushing retards. They might not take into account everyone’s builds, but they certainly will say when to use support skills and when to use offensive buffs etc. So playing a hybrid build like you do, Sorudo, you would know when to switch to offence or defence.

    In the Teq fight, commanders do give a lot of info (to who wants it) about preferred builds, and how to move around and where to. Again, they also tell when to use support skills.

    But if your experience is only regular PvE, I can see why you might think that they are just rushing fools.

  • running around calling targets they attack rather then targets that are the bigger problem isn’t my idea of strategy, they rush and only think about their own targets.
    then again, GW2 isn’t what i call a strategic game, more a zerg fest game with an occasional interesting battle.

  • QUOTE

    1) I don't see a problem in a small % of open-world content requiring organization
    

    The small % doesn’t change the fact that the content itself fails for high as well as low population situations. As mentioned before, high population means overflow (where organization is very limited due to its random nature and inability to prepare beforehand) and low population means no amount of strategy can make you win.

    On my home-server, the main map is camped 24/7 with no chance to get in without pure luck or endless hours wasted camping the queue. Low population servers simply cannot rally enough players. Players form temporary guilds to lessen the random overflow problem.

    As such, the current implementation is flawed and every future content redesigned in this fashion is automatically doomed to suffer the same problems.

    2) I'm willing to bet that much of the organization can be done with PUGs. In fact, servers that succeed regularly do it with people who are new to the fight. If people know how to move around, or follow commanders, both being skills that PUGs can do pretty well in WvW and via guides like Dulfy... then people don't really need Teamspeak-level coordination aside maybe (maybe) commanders. Even then, where you need to be and when is pretty obvious once you know the pattern. In fact, having been in a successful fight, I'd say that teamspeak is essential only to give noobs their basic fight info. It's also used to help them dodge waves, but that they can learn on their own... I was doing it without teamspeak on my second fight and I was pretty reliable at it. And knowing how to spread your troops during the "protect the cannons" event... that you can figure out based on how much damage they are taking. People learned to spread during Scarlet invasions, they can learn to spread during cannon events.
    

    Organization and learning-curve is pretty much irrelevant for both overflow as well as low population server as explained above. This is not a matter of reading guides, it’s simply that the open-world / overflow system cannot handle raid-like content properly.

    What I would like is for content like this to scale better with servers, so lower-pop servers don't feel like they need to migrate to large-pop servers to get their achievements. I am not convinced that better organization would be sufficient, I think the event also requires a fairly large attendance.

    This much I agree with. Though with the way they got scaling to work these days (or rather not…), it would simply result in an overall nerf. Something I think is very much required until they figured out a better implementation.

  • QUOTE

    (...)

    Quite the pessimist view.

    The reality is that event scaling and allowing events to happen in overflows can help fix those problems you speak of. Already ANet has done quite a bit of progress on this, first by actually implementing these features, and frankly the Scarlet event was much better than the Karka one, so they have improved their algorithms. I agree there is still a lot of room for improvement, but to say “every future content redesigned in this fashion is automatically doomed to suffer the same problems” is uncalled for imo.

    Scaling isn’t easy to do right in large part because it’s also hard to factor in coordination, learning, commander skill, etc. Only ANet is doing scaling, which means there’s a lot they need to figure out on their own. They can’t rely on the success or failure of other games because nobody else is doing it.

    To make things worse, people tend to assume the problem is implementation, when the problem could be players. Lower-population servers will take longer to get organized. So the event might be scaled right for lower number of people, but if the lower-population don’t see it that way and think the dragon can’t be beat with fewer people, they end up migrating to high-population servers. This only re-enforces the (potentially false) belief that the event is scaled wrong because people motivated enough to learn the fight are also those motivated enough to migrate and wait in line. That causes an exodus of talent, meaning the lower-populations servers don’t get a fair chance. If migration was not allowed, maybe some lower-population servers would have killed Teq by now. I admit it’s a convoluted explanation, but if you think about it, it might actually be what is causing the failure of lower-population servers, not scaling errors.

  • The difference between the Scarlet and Tequatl encounter is that the former rewarded you for failure, while the later doesn’t.

    The Scarlet Invasion gave constant loot progressing throughout its encounter, once people grinded through their achievements, it went as far as to fail the event on purpose just to get more rewards than by winning (champ loot bags vs scarlet reward). The loot orgy might have blinded most people over the fact that those latecomers who actually tried to get the scarlet-kill achievement done had no reliable way left for them to do so – again due to the fact that the open world / overflow system gives you no reliable way to get organized in low / high population situations. How could you possibly pick a “kill scarlet” map over all the farmed ones? You couldn’t (reliably).

    This is exactly the same situation as with Tequatl now, just that it’s more obvious because the rain of loot bags is suddenly no longer there and you’d actually have to win. As such, my view is neither pessimistic nor uncalled for, it’s a simple observation of the current open world / overflow implementation failing. What exactly do you think will happen on the next encounter if the system it is based on isn’t changed? Either they hand the loot out on the silver platter (loot on both failure or success, aka Scarlet) or they effectively lock out a large bunch of players from getting it at all (Tequatl). There is no middle ground here.

    Lastly, on implementation vs players:
    As I currently have no way to play on my home-server, I did the next reasonable thing and started guesting (having only 2 attempts at servers a day is another matter…). Picked a med-population server just to be sure.

    Actually, they had a very nice organization going. I joined the map about 30 minutes prior to spawn, at which point they had already been going for some time. There was a TS available, 3 commanders leading individual groups, player assigned to turrets, defense, etc. There was talk about armor, skill and weapon usage. As far as I could tell, everyone was putting a whole lot of effort into the event.

    As it turned out, we got Tequatl to about 60% (better than any random overflow), nowhere near a success, yet I feel that it wasn’t cause people didn’t know what they were doing, in the end there just wasn’t enough firepower/numbers.

    With all the above preparation, I feel that Tequatl should have been killed 10 times over. We’re not talking WoW heroic raiding here, we’re talking open world content with random factor in a game where any kind of combination is supposed to win. Something is definitely not right here and it’s not the participants.

  • QUOTE

    With all the above preparation, I feel that Tequatl should have been killed 10 times over. We're not talking WoW heroic raiding here, we're talking open world content with random factor in a game where any kind of combination is supposed to win. Something is definitely not right here and it's not the participants.

    That’s the biggest problem I have with this. However good you are, however organized, if you don’t have the people you fail. Period.

  • QUOTE

    There is no middle ground here.

    There is always a middle ground. The middle ground is to give less loot on failure, make success the more profitable option but failure still profitable enough to be worth the try.

    Something is definitely not right here and it's not the participants.

    Fully agreed. The event should scale a lot better to lower populations.

    How many people were you, roughly?

  • QUOTE

    There is always a middle ground. The middle ground is to give less loot on failure, make success the more profitable option but failure still profitable enough to be worth the try.

    Well, that would still mean awarding loot upon failure, which I think is somewhat cheap and too easy to abuse (as we’ve seen with the scarlet invasions).

    The problem with the current overflow system is that you basically have maps anywhere from well-organized home-servers down to completely chaotic last-minute overflows. Scaling aside (that is a separate matter of course), how do you balance the content when the majority of players cannot (reliably) pick on which of those maps they will be playing?

    Fully agreed. The event should scale a lot better to lower populations.
    
    How many people were you, roughly?

    Didn’t really manage a headcount, but the map wasn’t full as people were still heading off to LA to spam for more people, but it was quite the crowd, 60ish or so I’d say.

    With the introduction of world boss timers (not just Tequatl) they are simply punishing lower populations that have to put far more effort into any event already as it is. This struck me as I went off to do Shatterer on that same server later on, it was suddenly important to watch adds, crystals, etc., stuff that simply disappears within a second on an overpopulated server. Yet we almost failed the event (was like 1-something minute left) because there weren’t enough numbers doing raw dps… how is that balanced? :rolleyes:

  • Here you complain about balance issues with events like this.

    Then, other MMORPGs would just be like “lol bring more people next time” or “instance everything lol”

    ANet introduced events scaling. They still need to improve it. But that’s a huge improvement over games that don’t even bother with that.

  • IMO scaling is completely useless when it doesn’t do it’s job, i used a lvl 35 character on southsun cove and i am supposed to be scaled for lvl 80…..nope, not even close.
    i used a lvl 80 character in a lvl 65-75 area and i was quite weak, when i entered a lvl 78 area i could do things blindfolded.
    scaling seriously needs to be scaled correctly, it’s ether making you to powerful or to weak.

    also, event scaling is broken beyond believe, i play with 3 others against a champion and it’s quite balanced but when it’s 20+ players the champion becomes quite immortal.
    they first need to fix both level and event scaling before they even think about adding such monsters, i find a fixed system allot more important then yet another enemy we can kill every 2-3 hours.

  • Actually, level scaling works pretty well for my across 8 professions. I don’t know what you’re talking about. Some foes are a bit easier or harder than expected, maybe, but nothing like what I saw in WoW.

    And I don’t understand the logic of “if it’s not perfect, don’t do it”. Even the imperfect system we have is a vast improvement over not having it.

  • Rob Van Der Sloot

    All I know is, I’ve lead a team of about 60 random players in one of the overflows. We got the perfect defense achievement, but only got Tequatl down to 50% health, and then we lost. I do not think there’s anything we possibly could have done different to win that fight. Everyone knew what they were doing, but we just didn’t have enough players and not enough DPS. It’s frustrating to lose to matters beyond your own control.

    I think what they first need to fix, is the overflow system. We need to be able to choose which overflow we are in, so we are able to organize. And then they should fix the fight, so lower amounts of players can still make it. I really dislike the DPS oriented design that the game has been steadily heading towards.

  • Afkers who don’t return can make or break the event in and of themselves.

    What I’d like to see is some kind of proactive kick system to deal with these specific situations (above and beyond the standard inactive kick system). A minimum of when the fish heads disappear, EVERYONE in the turrets gets kicked from the machine. This will get any afkers not back out and enable people active to take over.

    Ideally, about 15 min (they could make it random, realistically) before Teq spawns, drop all afkers (i.e. pick a level of inactivity that makes sense) in the zone to character select, allowing active people to fill the place more efficiently.

    I’d almost like to see anet develop a functional cross-server event. As opposed to servers competing in WvW, develop (within a region) events where multiple servers cooperate to take down a foe (call it a WwW-type thing). But this is less practical than just dealing with inactive people clogging the servers. Obviously there’s the potential where one server messing up can ruin it for a bunch that are doing it perfectly… and coordinating being fairly difficult. But it would be an interesting thing to do if they could make it work.

  • events only scale to active players, any AFKer isn’t counted towards the scaling.
    or at least, if a have to take the word of Anet seriously.

  • Rob Van Der Sloot

    QUOTE

    events only scale to active players, any AFKer isn't counted towards the scaling.
    or at least, if a have to take the word of Anet seriously.

    Do we really know that for a fact?

    Regardless though, it seems clear that the event doesn’t scale properly for lower amounts of players. And then there’s also the problem of the turrets being vital to your success. So if there are afk people on them, you can’t change to a different overflow (because we can’t select them manually) and you can’t kick them off the turrets (which will cause you to fail the event). There’s a lot of elements here that the players have no control over. I think roughly 30+ players making a serious organized effort, should have a chance of winning this event. Requiring the overflow to have the maximum number of players that it can possibly contain, in order to win the event, is beyond absurd. And I know some people will claim that it doesn’t require that many players, but I’ve seen even full districts fail this event.

  • Whether it scales to afkers or not is irrelevant. That the afkers take the place of active people that would be able to aid in the battle is.

  • QUOTE

    Whether it scales to afkers or not is irrelevant.  That the afkers take the place of active people that would be able to aid in the battle is.

    Afk’ers is definitely a problem. Mind you, if you do afk, you get kicked out. The game does not tolerate afk’ing an event, I am not sure how long it takes before you get kicked. Plus, I don’t know if you could actually afk a dragon and still get something. Killed, most likely.

    I think we can all agree that the scaling should take that into account.

  • Currently, you get 0 XP, 0 gold, and 0 drop if a monster dies near you, unless you participated in the kill. That is, you have to hit it not just once, but enough to be above threshold. I’ve noticed the same with events, where I would get a kill and still not qualify for bronze. I’ve done champ farm long enough to know that even a solid skill use (like thief unload) still isn’t enough to qualify for a kill against a champ.

    So clearly ANet has mechanisms to judge that an afk’er isn’t contributing, and for not giving them rewards. I assume the same they use for single kills, events, and champions, also apply for dragons. Fair assumption?

    I don’t think it’s reasonable to assume the event is messed up by afk’ers, given known GW2 mechanisms that deal with this.

    Do we have any reason to believe afk’ers get counted in the dragon event scaling? Or that afk’ers would get rewarded for afk’ing around the dragon event?

    —–

    I’ll give you the improper scaling. Things do die faster with more people bashing on them, clearly scaling isn’t working 100%. That is, I don’t believe afk’ers affect the fight… but I do believe high-populations have an advantage.

    The improper scaling shows in champ farms. Champs die much faster on JQ than on Kaineng, and the real difference is the size of zergs. If scaling worked 100%, then champs should die at the same speed.

  • As Lady Rhonwyn said, most AFK’ers don’t care about rewards. They are there because they have something planned for later and want to be on the main map when they come back, or they just forgot to log off.

    How they mess up event for everyone else?
    – they take place of active players that cannot join because the map is full,
    – and if they AFK while on turret,.. well, maybe you can kill Tequatl without one. Without two? I don’t know.

    This is a problem for Tequatl fight only. For other maps/events AFKers are not a problem and most things scale just fine.

  • QUOTE

    So clearly ANet has mechanisms to judge that an afk'er isn't contributing, and for not giving them rewards. I assume the same they use for single kills, events, and champions, also apply for dragons. Fair assumption?
    
    

    I don’t think it’s reasonable to assume the event is messed up by afk’ers, given known GW2 mechanisms that deal with this.

    Do we have any reason to believe afk’ers get counted in the dragon event scaling? Or that afk’ers would get rewarded for afk’ing around the dragon event?

    They don’t get rewarded, but that’s not primarily the point of /afk-ing on the home-server map. I won’t go into details, but let’s just say that it’s easily possible to cheat the /afk detection and not have your character thrown out due to inactivity. On my server Tequatl is killed fairly regularly, therefore people abuse this system to keep their spots during off-hours and kill it during prime-time. This makes it near-impossible to get a spot even two weeks into the event.

    Generally, /afk-ing makes home-servers being unreliable, either they are constantly camped – or deserted because slots are being taken up and the active players cannot muster enough numbers anymore before triggering the overflow. Mind you that downscaling doesn’t work – be it intentional or not – you need a large group for this event.

    As a result, I’ve seen some organized groups/guilds trying to move everyone to a specific overflow, which is tricky and time-consuming at best. They should just let us pick overflows like districts in GW1, that way you could at least say “let’s get organized in overflow xy”.

  • QUOTE

    They should just let us pick overflows like districts in GW1, that way you could at least say "let's get organized in overflow xy".

    Agreed. That would be great.

  • i already said that it’s a horrible idea to have separated servers even before launch, before beta even but they still did it.
    if only they simply made 3 servers for europe and 2 servers for the US and continue with districts, it would’ve made everything so much better and easier to organize.

  • Ugh…

    Everyone on the same server would have made a bigger mess, Sorudo. Imagine trying to get into the same overflow with your friends or guild, as overflows get filled up. It was already difficult to do that in GW1 during events even when you could pick which instance you wanted to join, as the low instance numbers would get filled up to capacity.

    I remember instances getting hosted by big guilds who would bring ingredients to get the cooks happy during some Shing Jea celebration… it was not the happy rosy glasses you seem to remember.

    I don’t see this as being much different from the mess we have with being able to guest on other servers.

  • it’s better then the community in 25 parts of the game, all disconnected from each other and removed from any and all chances of getting together without losing anything from the guild.
    i have a guild to run, if it was district based i would actually have no problem adding ppl and go to others, now i can only get ppl from my home server and any other server removes everything i added to the guild including the points i got.

    everything has it’s up’s and down’s, servers the way Anet made them separates so many of us vets, it’s maybe big if it was district based but at least you would have a choice where you play, with who and with how many in the district.

  • With respect to what we were talking about though, the district system and the guesting system are not really different, in that neither system allows you to easily group up with whomever you want and keep out leechers / afk’ers. Only instances allow that level of control, and I don’t see how they’d implement that at the level of 500’s of people.

    You know. Aside for having a good scaling algorithm.

    Again, I’d like to emphasize. Only ANet has attempted to do this.