Reply
  • Go To
  • Page
Views: 260 | Replies: 2
[ Suggestions ] about the new cross server swb, just a suggestion.

 [

Copy Link

]

  • Registered: 2017-07-24
  • Topics: 49
  • Posts: 1169
On 2017-05-26 16:17:27Show this Author OnlyDescending Order
1# Go To
I'm one, seems, of the very few that thinks cross server swb was a good idea because it actually helps the large part of the population that is free to play, that live in a server with less than 30 active people and that have no chance to be top3 (so, more or less, 70% of the whole population). But what the other 20-30% says it's partially true, in the sense that right now the problem is that the difference between first and last per battlefield is too wide. I don't know if thia was your purpose. I suppose it wasn't, looking at what you claimed, then I just suggest you to set up the cap per field at 39-42 players instead of 75. The reason of this difference in power is that you are trying to fill every field with 75 people. Are too many if the purpose is to get even matches, overall if you think that not everyone joins swb for many reasons. If you add to this the fact that if you are in the middle of the field you know also next time you'll be put together with half of the people from the previous battlefield you get the point. Lower the cap to 39 or 42 per battlefield and you'll give us what you promised. It's only the fact you want 75 people per battlefield that messes up everything.
  • Registered: 2017-07-24
  • Topics: 29
  • Posts: 2271
On 2017-05-26 17:20:11Show this Author Only
2#
Just FYI, even with just 39 players, the gap of "group 1" of each server cluster is going to be 40-100k (that is to say, 60-70k minimal with whatever highest ptw is, which is 100k+ in most clusters, highest being 163k, which means there could be a 100k gap there)
Now, if they can get rid of clustering and put all server of a region in one pool, then group 1 would be all 80k+, thou that still means 30-80k gap.
So in the end, group 1, regardless of size, would *.

Now, if the group size changes every time, then it would be better. For example, if it changes between 30 and 75, then the player 31st to 75 c*l be "top" of their group sometimes(when the group is just small enough) whereas the 11th to 30th player have a decent change to win when the group is large as they can beat MOST of the players so they have a chance (granted, chances are 21st to 30th will almost never win, but that would require more complex change)

There is also rumor that the grouping aren't done as promised, that is to say there are, for example two 40-100k lv 90 groups(instead of say 65-100k and a 40-65k one) within the same server cluster. That said, of the fellow 90 in my group that I was able to talk to, they were all in the same sage.

Anyway, overall, Xserver sage is messed up in many ways, I'm not sure if it really can be fixed...
Reply
  • Go To
  • Page
Quicky Post


Reply

Log in in order to Post. | Register

You have selected 1 Topic.
Reason:
undefined200undefined
Confirm
You did not select a Topic.!
You have selected 1 Topic.
undefined200undefined
Confirm
You did not select a Topic.!
Report
Enter the Reason of the Report:
undefined200undefined
Confirm
You did not select a Topic.!
You have selected 1 Topic.
Reason:
undefined200undefined
Confirm
You did not select a Topic.!
You have selected 1 Topic.
Reason:
undefined200undefined
Confirm
You did not select a Topic.!
You have selected 1 Topic.

Confirm Delete Selected Topics?

Reason:
undefined200undefined
Confirm
You did not select a Topic.!
You have selected 1 Topic.

Confirm Delete The post you selected?

Reason:
undefined200undefined
Confirm
You did not select a Topic.!
Ban (for this Section)

Status:

Ban Type:
Ban for a Period:
  • Hour(s)
  • Day(s)
  • Month(s)
  • Ban Permanently
Reason:
undefined200undefined
Confirm
You did not select a Topic.!