Guild Wars 2

The first 40 pages is 1000 people. The next 40 pages goes to 47%.

I take it that means that player#2000 is at 47%, and therefore has 47% of the total lower than himself.

Therefore the 2000 = 53% of the total.

Therefore 1% = 2000/53 = 37.73

There are 3,773 players on the leaderboard at the moment. These are people who have played at least 12 games.

EU is a bit larger than NA, I hear.

So anet sold 3.000.000+ games and only 4.000 pvp in each region. (0,13%)

Conquest is definitely the way to go!

Le failure.

This is likely the reason they didn’t want to separate people with solo queue, just not enough people playing.

The team leaderboard has over 20,000, and EU has more. Not everyone has played enough games to get rated yet.

This is an mmorpg, most people that play mmos don’t play for the pvp they play for the raids. unfortunately this mmo doesn’t have raids, so if I was to guess it wont last that long, because people will eventually become tired of living story and move onto a real traditional mmorpg. I’m looking at TESO, maybe EQNext I played EQ and fan of it, I’ll give EQNext a try even though it looks way too cartoony, looks pretty easy mode too, but then again GW2 is just as easymode as any other game out there.

uberkingkong.8041:

This is an mmorpg, most people that play mmos don’t play for the pvp they play for the raids. unfortunately this mmo doesn’t have raids, so if I was to guess it wont last that long, because people will eventually become tired of living story and move onto a real traditional mmorpg. I’m looking at TESO, maybe EQNext I played EQ and fan of it, I’ll give EQNext a try even though it looks way too cartoony, looks pretty easy mode too, but then again GW2 is just as easymode as any other game out there.

Good thing I play for the pvp then. Guess i’ll stay here. Have fun in.. eqnext.. lol

uberkingkong.8041:

This is an mmorpg, most people that play mmos don’t play for the pvp they play for the raids.

Why even buy a game then? Why not just stare at a blank screen and press your 1 key every 3 seconds. All the fun of a raid and for free!

As some others pointed out the spvp/tpvp population surely must be higher than 4000, but it is probably in the magnitude of couple of tens of thousands, which is still just roughly 1% of all Guild Wars 2 accounts. That is little.

I am 100% sure that the WvWvW player base is much larger than the spvp/tpvp population. Just one server can have over 100 players on each WvWvW map (4 maps) and there can many hours of queue to WvWvW. Yet, WvWvW continues to have less attention from Arenanet. Pve is obviously the most popular game mode, but instead of having new interesting permanent pve content (Southsun Cove is dead and empty again), we get time-limited Living Story stuff, which people play just for the achievement points and rewards (not because it is interesting itself).

Even more sad is that this game continues to be “balanced” based on tpvp/spvp only (there is very little or no skill split between spvp and WvWvW). As if the rest of the game is about sitting in a small circle and contesting or holding it!?!

Arenanet clearly doesn’t have any person, who plays WvWvW at highly competitive level. You can laugh about this, but there are players who do it:
http://www.gw2gvg.com/index.php

The meta in top guild vs guild and organized zerg fights has been more or less the same since Autumn 2012. Guardians and warriors form the base melee line, supported by elementalists, necromancers and mesmers. Medium armor professions aren’t needed (some top teams use thieves and rangers as snipers, but they are still small minority). Despite warriors have always been good in pve and WvWvW, Arenanet has been buffing them in those game formats, because they have been doing badly in tpvp. Yes, they also needed to buff the guardians, which compete with warriors being the most frequent profession in WvWvW and pve. I am quite sure thieves are in top 3 as they are by far most common roamer profession in WvWvW.

Last night I was playing warrior in WvWvW. Our server was heavily outnumbered (yep, we had that “buff” on us) at Eternal Battlegrounds. We often had just 5-10 people following our thief commander. There was also several other thieves and mostly others were playing the typical roamer professions, who have easy escapes. I play a very low mobility warrior (nor warhorn nor greatsword). Despite that I died only one time despite the overwhelming enemy and our group getting wiped several times. Obviously this was because warrior is so “bad” in WvWvW and needs more buffing. LOL

Profession balancing fails for other game modes. And wait a minute: the game balance for spvp/tpvp seems to be wrecked at the moment.

the population is so stagnant that the meta has no hope of adapting without patch notes. there aren’t enough ppl playing.

in any population sample, you have a small % of innovators, a somewhat larger % of first adopters, then a huge % of followers once success has been vetted.

it doesn’t matter what ANet releases in patch notes; these changes are just artificial infusions to give the semblance of innovation. there are too few innovators in this game ( innovation requires 5 players dedicated to it, which compounds the issue ).

whether the possibility of innovation even exists within the game systems ANet has created simply cannot be answered. if there were top teams that were willing to dedicate a solid month ( at least ) to exploring a new team build, things might be different.

there is a culture created by ratings that results in teams unwilling to sacrifice that many games; they will lose 2 or 3 matches & deem something unplayable, returning quickly to the status quo without truly understanding something’s potential. then ANet sees that everybody plays the same thing & adjusts patch notes just to force ppl down a different path. perhaps there truly are no other options, which simply reflects poor design choices.

it is a vicious cycle that has no end in sight. or rather, it has only 1 inevitable conclusion.

If PvP is sold at 5-bucks edition or even free-to-play we could see an ENORMOUS population boost that PvP needs so much.

You cant make GW2 any esports-worthy if people need to pay 40-50bucks just for a percentage of the game. Sell PvP separately.

Quickfoot Katana.8642:

If PvP is sold at 5-bucks edition or even free-to-play we could see an ENORMOUS population boost that PvP needs so much.

You cant make GW2 any esports-worthy if people need to pay 40-50bucks just for a percentage of the game. Sell PvP separately.

You have probably forgotten that this is MMORPG

Ajihat.4617:

Quickfoot Katana.8642:

If PvP is sold at 5-bucks edition or even free-to-play we could see an ENORMOUS population boost that PvP needs so much.

You cant make GW2 any esports-worthy if people need to pay 40-50bucks just for a percentage of the game. Sell PvP separately.

You have probably forgotten that this is MMORPG

Even PvP devs forgot that this is an MMO. Join and tournament format is a slight lol-copy, hotjoin browser is like an FPS game, and this is the only “MMO” with only one gamemode.

If they don’t split the community with gamemodes, there won’t be players to split.

No hate on devs or anything but Gw2 PvP was messed up royaly since launch. From UI to bugs to zergy hotjoin for casuals. It wasnt fun and most people who had potential interest in Gw2 PvP throw in the towel and left.

Ajihat.4617:

Quickfoot Katana.8642:

If PvP is sold at 5-bucks edition or even free-to-play we could see an ENORMOUS population boost that PvP needs so much.

You cant make GW2 any esports-worthy if people need to pay 40-50bucks just for a percentage of the game. Sell PvP separately.

You have probably forgotten that this is MMORPG

You probably never played GW1. They did the same there (selling pvp-only version for a cheaper price)

Im positive that they will do the same for GW2 they are just trying to clean up the infrasctruture first. After we get templates and pvp rewards improved, expect that happening

I’m a bit confused, how does one look beyond the first 1000s players who rank?

Also how does the math take into account that multiple people will sit at the same ? You can have a bunch of people sitting at every % from 99 to 1%. Doesn’t this presume that each % is occupied by an identical population?

Vena.8436:

I’m a bit confused, how does one look beyond the first 1000s players who rank?

Also how does the math take into account that multiple people will sit at the same ? You can have a bunch of people sitting at every % from 99 to 1%. Doesn’t this presume that each % is occupied by an identical population?

People dont occupy .They occupy ratings and the % is just how many are below you from the rated population.if you are better than 95 and then you get with 1 win to top1000 we can assumme that you are now in the top 5% which is 1000 .So you can estimate the total population
I dont know though how they know exactly how many rated people there are.
Maybe they updated it and it shows past 1000

Vena,

To see the percentages, reverse the “sort” on the rating. The 0% will appear, then you go through the pages and the percentage rises until at 40 pages, I saw 47%.

Vena.8436:

Avead.5760:

People dont occupy .They occupy ratings and the % is just how many are below you from the rated population.if you are better than 95 and then you get with 1 win to top1000 we can assumme that you are now in the top 5% which is 1000 .So you can estimate the total population
I dont know though how they know exactly how many rated people there are.
Maybe they updated it and it shows past 1000

Guess I wasn’t clear or I’m not clearly understanding how the % are tallied.

If you are 90%, well multiple people can be tied for 90% and 89%, 88%, etc… how does one ever weigh such a thing? If I sit at some ELO record, occupying the 50th percentile and someone else is also at an ELO for 50th percentile, there’s no way to differentiate us if you just look at percentages.

Well in reality you arent 90%.You are 90.123456789 % :P
And thats only you and no one else.If more people came to 90% and you were above them rating wise you wouldnt be 90% now.You would be 95% or something.
You confuse ratings with position in the ladder.There is still a ladder beyond the top1000.They just dont say to you that you are 1567 or something.They just tell you how much of the total population is below you.If those people get higher than you or near you your % will change

Avead.5760:

Well in reality you arent 90%.You are 90.123456789 % :P
And thats only you and no one else.If more people came to 90% and you were above them rating wise you wouldnt be 90% now.You would be 95% or something.
You confuse ratings with position in the ladder.There is still a ladder beyond the top1000.They just dont say to you that you are 1567 or something.They just tell you how much of the total population is below you.If those people get higher than you or near you your % will change

Not sure what happened to my post (O-o), but alright. I think I understand this now.

Thanks.

I’m still curious how one goes beyond the top 1k players.

Just fyi, I know several people who are consistent pvpers, that don’t have their 10 matches yet. Combination of doing the new pve content and wanting the MMR to settle out some before playing.

I’d expect the number of players on the board to keep growing for a few more weeks.

Brigg.6189:

Just fyi, I know several people who are consistent pvpers, that don’t have their 10 matches yet. Combination of doing the new pve content and wanting the MMR to settle out some before playing.

I’d expect the number of players on the board to keep growing for a few more weeks.

And meanwhile I know for a fact atleast half of the people who are at the leaderboards won’t play until its absolutely needed before decay kicks in. So whoever is going to start SoloQ now, the ammount of people not playing is increasing aswell.

Quickfoot Katana.8642:

fact

Zzzz. That word shouldn’t be used that way, ever.

Vena, do you now know how to see the percentage pages? I posted it above.

Ahh I didn’t see that thanks, somehow I missed it in glancing through the thread.

Thanks.

In Europe the team leadeboards goes to more or less 98% and then u enter the 1000 leaderboards. With some math: (100/2)*1000 → 50.000.
In NA I don’t know so well, but let’s say it’s another 40.000 (let’s be optimistic, and say 100.000 with the 2).
Let’s say that half of players that bought gw2 still play, 1.5 million players.
Roughly 6.6%. Of course i’m just guessing here, and maybe half or more of those players in the team leaderboards aren’t playing anymore. But I don’t think it’s much more or less than 6.6%. Indeed i would bet for 5%.

That’s why i laugh hard when anyone says esport refering to gw2, i’m still amazed that arena.net paid from his own pocket a “professional” tourmanet (prize 10.000 for 5 members… 2000 per player, they will be rich like hell).
Also they seem to balance a lot for spvp when it isn’t played, forgetting pve and wvw that have the huge bulk of players. As a bussiness, they seem to make stupid decisions for the esport dreams (it isn’t as weird as you will think, banks also did really stupid things, granted it’s not the same because banks are run by bankers and bankers, as yes minister and yes prime minister shows, don’t know anything, but still).

You guys do realize that it takes 10 games to get ranked, right? Each day there are hundreds of more people getting into the Leaderboard.

Silentshoes.1805:

Vena,

To see the percentages, reverse the “sort” on the rating. The 0% will appear, then you go through the pages and the percentage rises until at 40 pages, I saw 47%.

OK, I got it.

Though my math is producing a vastly different number.

• Each % is occupied by 22-25 people (below 43%, I counted).
• The top 1000 is 56% and above of the population (I am estimating this by the evolution of my ranking, while at work, decreasing from 990 to 55%).
• The bottom 55%, assuming a constant rather than gaussian distribution of populations (particularly around 50%) would lead to…
• 2210 people who have passed the 10 fight limit.
• Or just 22 people per % for 100% = 2200 players.
• Assuming that there is no gaussian spike in the middle, though I saw no upward rising trend from 0% to 43% so unless there are literally orders of magnitude more players around 50% than anywhere else… it wouldn’t be there.

This is guess work, though, since I have no idea what happens between 43-55% and if my assumption on 55% being the cut-off to top 1000 is accurate for NA. I can’t judge EU at all aside from each percentile being occupied by 37-40 people below 26% (if we do the same, there are 3700 people in EU).

Either I’m making a mistake or your assumption on #2000 being 47% is wrong.

Vena,
It’s probably changing.

I just counted how many pages of people there were: 40 pages of 1-1000, and 40 more pages (1,000 more people) of 0% to 47%.

Vena.8436:

Quickfoot Katana.8642:

fact

Zzzz. That word shouldn’t be used that way, ever.

It is a fact. I manually checked the EU leaderboards out of curiosity. You can extrapolate the remainings.

Makes sense, to be honest. They’re too slow with fixing basic problems, and there’s no reward structure.

Vena.8436:

I’m a bit confused, how does one look beyond the first 1000s players who rank?

Also how does the math take into account that multiple people will sit at the same ? You can have a bunch of people sitting at every % from 99 to 1%. Doesn’t this presume that each % is occupied by an identical population?

For the team que for awhile you could never get 94%, which means your better than 94% of players because 94% was leaderboard worthy, now its 96% I believe, so all that really tells you is GW2 PvP population is growing OR that a lot of people played enough games to play the leaderboard, which doesn’t really mean they still play it just means its tougher to get a better % with more people on it and more competition.

So having a % like 85+ is nice because your better than 85% of pvp population, but when it comes to competitive teams, you just have to be on the leaderboards to be worthy for a team. If % stops at 96% that means 4% of population is all leaderboards. You may advance fast in % but once you get on leaderboards you don’t advance as fast anymore.