Guild Wars 2

On the new leaderboards my ranking comes up at 5%.

5%!!!

I only solo queue.

I am puzzled. I am typically in the top three for my team in “score”.Often at the top.

I work on objectives.

I was winning a lot, but for the past three weeks it seems the teams I am assigned to lose more than we win, and it’s typically against really efficient teams that seem to really work together. (premade groups?)

My win/loss is now 38 wins and 72 losses.

Currently I win some and lose some, so my rating stays the same.

I need to be on teams of people who work together!

But I cannot seem to find that in solo queue.

My two bits of advice would be to either form or join a team. If you see a good player add them to your friends list and always invite them to tourney with you.

Second, top score means extraordinarily little and is no indication of who is winning or who has helped their team win more. A bunker who scores 10 by capping his point and fending off numerous assaults on his point is more valuable than some roamer who scored hundreds of points by winning off-node skirmishes.

If you want to win more play a role you know is serving the team extremely well. Otherwise just don’t take leaderboards seriously, because they’re team leaderboards that solo players happen to get on to.

Well yeah, that and you’d rank higher if they would ever split solo from team premades. It’s kind of unfair they put both on the same leaderboards.

Plus obviously for every team there’s 5 players consistently getting higher ratings than you. So it’s near impossible to get anywhere high on the leaderboards without a team. Does anyone know if there’s some highly ranked players who only solo queue?

JoopFOX.9510:

Plus obviously for every team there’s 5 players consistently getting higher ratings than you. So it’s near impossible to get anywhere high on the leaderboards without a team. Does anyone know if there’s some highly ranked players who only solo queue?

I float between 100-900 just solo queueing. I know of a few other players like myself who just solo queue because it’s more convenient. As for top 100? I think it’s extraordinarily rare. I know ostrich goes solo sometimes but he also has a team sometimes.

I only solo que and the highest I made it was 200, since then I fell out of top 1000. Now 85%. Like I said in another thread solo que is like playing the lottery. I still enjoy it, but it can be frustrating at times. Premades don’t even bother me that much, what I hate is 4v5 and people that quit.

yea i’ve noticed since leaderboards were out, most PUGs will leave once the score is even remotely apart. then once one leaves, another will leave.

often enough, the opposing team will always offer words of condolence. which is nice.

though as it stands, if you’re concerned with ranking, then your best bet is to find a good team. if even not a full team, at least a few that you know you work well with : ))

Isn’t 5% considered the top 5% or am I reading it wrong? Another person posted he was at 85% and outside of the top 1000.

Laserbolt.6731:

On the new leaderboards my ranking comes up at 5%.

5%!!!

I only solo queue.

I am puzzled. I am typically in the top three for my team in “score”.Often at the top.

I work on objectives.

I was winning a lot, but for the past three weeks it seems the teams I am assigned to lose more than we win, and it’s typically against really efficient teams that seem to really work together. (premade groups?)

My win/loss is now 38 wins and 72 losses.

Currently I win some and lose some, so my rating stays the same.

I need to be on teams of people who work together!

But I cannot seem to find that in solo queue.

Don’t worry. The leaderboard works off of a rating system, not any kind of win/loss ratio. So, as soon as you beat people with a higher rating than yours, your own rating will shoot up very quickly.

The reason you are low is probably because you lost to premade teams that had low individual ratings, but then queued together as a group and gained a huge advantage. So, don’t feel like the number means anything at the moment. For example, if you get a premade group together and get on voice chat, anyone who loses to you will go down in rank really fast

Valkyriez.6578:

Isn’t 5% considered the top 5% or am I reading it wrong? Another person posted he was at 85% and outside of the top 1000.

Its from bottom to top, so that’s bottom 5%

For example, in achievements I’m about 100 below the leaderboard and it put’s me at 90% there since I’m not on leaderboard but am about 100 away. I don’t think that means 90% of people are ahead of me in the game with achievements.

And somehow I have 90% by sitting around in hotjoins and dueling with friends and randoms most of the time. Weird how that works.

wookie.8934:

And somehow I have 90% by sitting around in hotjoins and dueling with friends and randoms most of the time. Weird how that works.

So you’ve never tourneyed enough to be considered for the ladder? That’s not too surprising even if that’s the case since players who haven’t tourneyed still have a neutral rating like guilds did in gvg even if they never did any guild battles.

The bottom of the top 1,000 seems to have almost a 50/50 win ratio on average, so below that is probably the norm for players not in the top 1,000. Thus if you have never, or rarely, tourney, it’s not surprising that the neutral rating would be above the majority of players.

Lux.7169:

wookie.8934:

And somehow I have 90% by sitting around in hotjoins and dueling with friends and randoms most of the time. Weird how that works.

So you’ve never tourneyed enough to be considered for the ladder? That’s not too surprising even if that’s the case since players who haven’t tourneyed still have a neutral rating like guilds did in gvg even if they never did any guild battles.

The bottom of the top 1,000 seems to have almost a 50/50 win ratio on average, so below that is probably the norm for players not in the top 1,000. Thus if you have never, or rarely, tourney, it’s not surprising that the neutral rating would be above the majority of players.

Yeah I hardly do tourneys at all. I tend to stick to dueling (since I don’t really have a team to roll with in tPvP). Seems weird that neutral players would be above those who do tourneys more often. Don’t they take into account the number of matches played?

wookie.8934:

Lux.7169:

wookie.8934:

And somehow I have 90% by sitting around in hotjoins and dueling with friends and randoms most of the time. Weird how that works.

So you’ve never tourneyed enough to be considered for the ladder? That’s not too surprising even if that’s the case since players who haven’t tourneyed still have a neutral rating like guilds did in gvg even if they never did any guild battles.

The bottom of the top 1,000 seems to have almost a 50/50 win ratio on average, so below that is probably the norm for players not in the top 1,000. Thus if you have never, or rarely, tourney, it’s not surprising that the neutral rating would be above the majority of players.

Yeah I hardly do tourneys at all. I tend to stick to dueling (since I don’t really have a team to roll with in tPvP). Seems weird that neutral players would be above those who do tourneys more often. Don’t they take into account the number of matches played?

Supposedly the more matches you play the less you fluctuate. I hardly find that to be the case at all, though, since 1 loss can literally tank me 500 places. I realize that # of matches played isn’t a safeguard to tanking your rating but I would think that after having done 700+ tourneys 1 loss (even against complete noobs) shouldn’t lose me 500 ranks considering anything can happen in a given match, especially flukes like someone dc’ing at the beginning of a match.

I just don’t appreciate how temperamental the current system is, other than that I think it’s a solid indicator of team performance. Unfortunately it’s set up like a random arenas that you can enter with a team. Creates a highly biased system towards teams when a lot of solo queuer’s would rather the stable environment it provides as opposed to the fickleness of hotjoins.

Supposedly the more matches you play the less you fluctuate. I hardly find that to be the case at all, though, since 1 loss can literally tank me 500 places. I realize that # of matches played isn’t a safeguard to tanking your rating but I would think that after having done 700+ tourneys 1 loss (even against complete noobs) shouldn’t lose me 500 ranks considering anything can happen in a given match, especially flukes like someone dc’ing at the beginning of a match.

I just don’t appreciate how temperamental the current system is, other than that I think it’s a solid indicator of team performance. Unfortunately it’s set up like a random arenas that you can enter with a team. Creates a highly biased system towards teams when a lot of solo queuer’s would rather the stable environment it provides as opposed to the fickleness of hotjoins.

Apparently I’ve played 13 Matches since April 3rd (5 wins 8 losses) and I’m at 50%.

Can someone explain what this means? Are they tournament matches?

If so, I know for a fact that I have not played 13 tournaments this month, maybe 2.

Are they hotjoin matches? What happens if I leave a hotjoin before it is over?

The MMR does not take Hotjoins into account. You should have played 13 tournament matches since it started recording, which was before April.

Socram.6587:

The MMR does not take Hotjoins into account. You should have played 13 tournament matches since it started recording, which was before April.

Does 50% mean that I am smack in the middle of the entire playerbase? With only 13 games played?

Lux.7169:

Supposedly the more matches you play the less you fluctuate. I hardly find that to be the case at all, though, since 1 loss can literally tank me 500 places. I realize that # of matches played isn’t a safeguard to tanking your rating but I would think that after having done 700+ tourneys 1 loss (even against complete noobs) shouldn’t lose me 500 ranks considering anything can happen in a given match, especially flukes like someone dc’ing at the beginning of a match.

I just don’t appreciate how temperamental the current system is, other than that I think it’s a solid indicator of team performance. Unfortunately it’s set up like a random arenas that you can enter with a team. Creates a highly biased system towards teams when a lot of solo queuer’s would rather the stable environment it provides as opposed to the fickleness of hotjoins.

It has to fluctuate.
Without that people would be forced to either que premade all the time or give up ever wanting to have a decent rank.
I personally find it entertaining running my rank from 180~ to 50 as I get a good premade going. Allot more entertaining that way than having to spend days upon days grinding out of how the whole a few solo Q matches put my rank in…

That goes doubly so if the ladder ranking is what the MMR is based off of, premades quickly gain rank so end up fighting better people/groups… when you pug you start getting matched down after a few losses as it ‘realizes’ you aren’t group queing anymore… it’s extremely crude but kinda works.

Hammerheart.1426:

Socram.6587:

The MMR does not take Hotjoins into account. You should have played 13 tournament matches since it started recording, which was before April.

Does 50% mean that I am smack in the middle of the entire playerbase? With only 13 games played?

Yes, and 75% would mean that 25% of the ranked players are “better” than you (but mixing teams and solo queuers makes evaluating individual players nigh impossible).
I don’t know if that is including the top 1000 or not, though.

I lost with a low-ranked PUG against a 40+ glory ranked premade, and I instantly dropped from 60 to 55 %. And I have played over 150 ranked games. So yeah it fluctuates.

I wouldn’t worry so much about leaderboard/ranking atm, it fluctuates like crazy at the moment and all it does is promote people to be in pre-made groups to gain a position on the board.

As a solo-q player for most of the time myself the most I can hope for is to go against other solo-q players, coz its just more fun and fair. But as it is at the moment, you’ll just have to find a premade team and deal with the problem of everyone being in the same pool fighting for the same leaderboard.

I’m hoping the change will happen soon tho to seperate solo-q and premades. It has to happen, because tpvp will be alot worst of in the long run the longer its delayed. If it never happens at all, if they never split tpvp up, then its obvious they don’t care about all the complaints (rightfully so too) and don’t care enough to fix the glaring issues of pvp.

Hammerheart.1426:

Apparently I’ve played 13 Matches since April 3rd (5 wins 8 losses) and I’m at 50%.

Can someone explain what this means? Are they tournament matches?

If so, I know for a fact that I have not played 13 tournaments this month, maybe 2.

Are they hotjoin matches? What happens if I leave a hotjoin before it is over?

Only tournament matches are counted, but that started taking effect a while before the leaderboards were introduced. I think they started tracking data for the leaderboard back in February, so if you’ve played 13 tournaments since then, that’s what will show up. Hotjoins are not counted at all. And yes, 50% is supposed to be right in the middle of the pack, although as others have said the percentages don’t have a lot of meaning right now.

JoopFOX.9510:

I lost with a low-ranked PUG against a 40+ glory ranked premade, and I instantly dropped from 60 to 55 %. And I have played over 150 ranked games. So yeah it fluctuates.

This was my experience all yesterday too- Three matches in a row against premades and I dropped 5% each time :/

It amazes me that so many people want to pretend they play competitively, yet have no idea how an ELO system works.

An average player can lose 10 times in a row to the best team in the world, and if you manage to beat them on the 11th try you could end up higher than where you started. Win/loss is completely insignificant if you were outclassed on all your losses, or played above your head in all your wins.

I don’t think it is impossible… but based on luck with the groups if you are solo qing. When they started showing percentages I was at 30 and after 7 wins and no losses I was at 50 or 55 I think… but then again it started with one loss after another not only because it might have ranked me too high and the team lost because of me… there were losses because of leavers or of course we had some of the strong guilds with their premade 5 man groups(they probably could have misranked too low and at the way of working their rank up) as enemies or matches we lost really close.

Really jumping a lot even if you are only in the area where it only shows percentage it jumps a lot like by 5 or 10 every few matches. Was back at 40 then going up to 45 then back 40, 35 at the moment.

Let’s wait a few more weaks. I’m sure there hat to be an initial rank for players that have not played matches and a few very strong teams are ranked too low and need to work up to their real(higher) rank and then it should not happen that much that you encounter the very strong guilds at low rank(of course there are also weak guild my random solo q team won and that is okay).

yeah us solo q’ers shouldnt really look at leaderboards.

Really think the different maps need different leaderboards. So much kitten starting with Legacy of Foefire map… I even saw someone with commander tag moving to the enemy lord at the beginning and of course that did not help much because he only got himself killed(but repeatedly tried going there) which did not help us capturing points.

That map is totally different. Other maps you can go directly and fast to the enemy spawn because they are next to each other and here you need to move the long way through the mid area with the 3 points…

needs diffeferent strategies and people good at the other maps(and increasing there ranking there) are not automatically good at this map.

They should make leaderboars for every map. Then copy the values and rankings we have at the moment and use them as start ranking and then record per map… and a faster map rotation maybe every day and not every 3 or 4 days.

At least for the solo q they announced. Premade teams it probably does not matter chat much since they communicate more and should not have that much problems with people doing the wrong thing once there is a map a bit different.

I envy you. I wish I was 5%. I’m 90% right now and I get matched up with solid premades full of 30s and 40s.

Can we switch places?

Celeras.4980:

Win/loss is completely insignificant if you were outclassed on all your losses, or played above your head in all your wins.

Bit frustrating though when you’re grouped with a bunch of fairly high rated mace warriors against some low rated bunker guards/eles and lose, watching your rating drop like a stone.

Laserbolt.6731:

I only solo queue.

You’re kittened man. No room for solos anymore…go premade or die alone, fun is over.

Or just go solo and have fun (Until you’re 4vs5) and give a kitten bout boards, as many already do (Including me) …many others just quitted pvp waiting for a decent matchmaking/leaderboard’s system actually rewarding single players rather than premade teams farming pugs (As it should be if they want a single player ladder)….your choice.

Meanwhile i’m downloading Path of Exile…lol

It is pretty easy to climb up I was 65% until i read on here there going to add real player ranks on one of these forums. I have been solo quing since and went down to 5% up to 30 and have been moving between since. My record is like 188/180 now and it only takes a few wins to gain a % after I get my mesmers title I will prolly play for rating again until then its whateves.

The leaderboards are so volatile that 3 wins in and row and you are easily top thousand OP so I wouldnt worry too much.

i played for the first time since february patch a few days ago for i think 6 games with premade and was ranked 84 even tho we lost 3 times.

don’t worry about the leaderboards. they don’t mean anything. play because you like the game. until they separate the pre-made teams from the random teams it’s like if you saw a college football team(pre-made team) go play a high school team(random team). arenanet has rendered their own system moot until they separate it.

Trying to get to 0% now by being afk to make the team lose. I want to see if it is possible to get up to around 30-50 percent since I have been there for a long time before the Foefire map started(always 50 percent won 50 percent loss). Since Foefire mostly losses so I’ll just try to lose even more on purpose and try to play for real once the maps I like are back in rotation.

Luthan.5236:

Trying to get to 0% now by being afk to make the team lose. I want to see if it is possible to get up to around 30-50 percent since I have been there for a long time before the Foefire map started(always 50 percent won 50 percent loss). Since Foefire mostly losses so I’ll just try to lose even more on purpose and try to play for real once the maps I like are back in rotation.

And screw your team. How good of you.

Celeras.4980:

It amazes me that so many people want to pretend they play competitively, yet have no idea how an ELO system works.

An average player can lose 10 times in a row to the best team in the world, and if you manage to beat them on the 11th try you could end up higher than where you started. Win/loss is completely insignificant if you were outclassed on all your losses, or played above your head in all your wins.

In my experience a loss has a disproportional impact on your rankings.
If you have an even record against what ought to be considered worthy opponents you`ll end up lower on the leaderboard than when you started. My particular anecdote involves my “team” (we play voipless on and off with a fair degree of success) against a top50 pug. We narrowly won the first match and got unceremoniously escorted off the map in the second, and I ended up losing about 20 ranks.

One last thing, it’s Elo not ELO. You know, named after Arpad Elo? Your pompous tone is grossly misplaced especially since the mathematical workings of anet’s system are a mystery – though glicko would be a good guess.

mbh.8301:

In my experience a loss has a disproportional impact on your rankings.
If you have an even record against what ought to be considered worthy opponents you`ll end up lower on the leaderboard than when you started. My particular anecdote involves my “team” (we play voipless on and off with a fair degree of success) against a top50 pug. We narrowly won the first match and got unceremoniously escorted off the map in the second, and I ended up losing about 20 ranks.

One last thing, it’s Elo not ELO. You know, named after Arpad Elo? Your pompous tone is grossly misplaced especially since the mathematical workings of anet’s system are a mystery – though glicko would be a good guess.

This is exactly the kind of ignorance I’m talking about. You can tell by the first few sentences that this person has no clue how the ratings work.

Not to mention, trying to benchmark “20 ranks” as if all the other players around you aren’t playing the same way you are. You lost 20 ranks you must have lost rating, it couldnt possibly be that someone else played games and leapfrogged you? Nope, system is flawed.

Celeras.4980:

Not to mention, trying to benchmark “20 ranks” as if all the other players around you aren’t playing the same way you are. You lost 20 ranks you must have lost rating, it couldnt possibly be that someone else played games and leapfrogged you? Nope, system is flawed.

If a brief look at the 20 ranks above me reveals that their number of games won or lost haven’t changed since the last update, then I can use my 1337 haXXorz brain to figure out that them playing had nothing to do with my losing ranks.

I’ll ignore the fact that you’re currently ranked #150, and that only checking 20 ranks above you is asinine for obvious reasons. However, allow me to explain the incredible ignorance displayed in your first post.

mbh.8301:

In my experience a loss has a disproportional impact on your rankings.
If you have an even record against what ought to be considered worthy opponents you`ll end up lower on the leaderboard than when you started. My particular anecdote involves my “team” (we play voipless on and off with a fair degree of success) against a top50 pug. We narrowly won the first match and got unceremoniously escorted off the map in the second, and I ended up losing about 20 ranks.

I’m glad “your experience” can identity exactly how the rating system is supposed to work, even if your 1337 haXXorz brain can’t manage to realize that its working as intended. Two perfectly identical teams are only perfectly identical for their first matchup. Assuming 100% equal rating, the winning team will win the exact amount of points the losing team lost. If they face eachother again, guess what.. their ratings are no longer equal. And if the team who won the first match now loses, they lost to a team that is rated lower than them, so naturally they will lose more points than they won when they faced off the first time and end up lower than they started.

Maybe now you can understand why anyone with comprehension of the rating system laughed out loud at your post, especially the part where you had the audacity to call somebody else pompous.

Celeras.4980:

I’m glad “your experience” can identity exactly how the rating system is supposed to work, even if your 1337 haXXorz brain can’t manage to realize that its working as intended. Two perfectly identical teams are only perfectly identical for their first matchup. Assuming 100% equal rating, the winning team will win the exact amount of points the losing team lost. If they face eachother again, guess what.. their ratings are no longer equal. And if the team who won the first match now loses, they lost to a team that is rated lower than them, so naturally they will lose more points than they won when they faced off the first time and end up lower than they started.

If I play against 5 players, the lowest of whom has a higher mmr than our highest ranked, then the enemy team clearly has a higher mmr. Keeping in mind that the leaderboards only updates every hour its workings are even more mysterious.

All we know for sure is that their team was higher during the first game, and the impact on my rating from 1-1 was a net loss. What do you suppose happened? Us beating them caused them to drop to rank 400, then us losing to them afterwards caused them to shoot back up where they belonged?

You carefully ignore details that inconvenience your arguments, it’s sad.

That’s the reply I get for dumbing down the algorithm to standards a middle-schooler could understand? A wooshing of this magnitude would be hilarious if it wasn’t so sad.