Guild Wars 2

I come back after 2 months, I’m ranked 53%, play one game, jump to #10 on the leaderboards.

Before I left I wasn’t close to 10, I was probably 200-300.

If Arenanet wants people to take this game seriously and have a competitive community, maybe they should start by fixing the abysmal rating system.

In addition to just being ridiculous, rating jumps like this don’t encourage people to keep playing. Look at the two guys at the top of the NA solo boards right now with less than 20 games played. I personally don’t feel like playing more now that I’m at the top of the leaderboards being really rusty and knowing I’ll get destroyed by the people of similar rating.

It blows my mind how many times you kids are told how the leaderboards work and you still complain about it, no one is playing soloq, there are 100s of people above you in terms of rating but none of them are active, the system would work fine with an active playerbase but there are <50 good active players in the entire game so even if they remade leaderboards it would not matter because it would just be a bunch of noobs complaining about the new leaderboards.

• Any decay you accrued while being inactive is undone the first match you play.
• Those 200-300 people above your previous rank probably also have decay from inactivity which boost you up.
• Most active players have fallen below the hidden default start rating. So new accounts after just winning a handful of match gets

Decay needs to be permanent, but the devs argue that it makes match making difficult as they don’t have a true measure of skill once someone decays down.

IMO, it would be cool if they did weekly leaderboard and reward prizes. After each week you can carry over 1/2 of your rating to start off.

It would work fine if decay was perma, if those players are truly good they would work their way back up pretty quickly. If they’ve taken a break they should have to fight scrubs for a bit to get back up.

“lederborsd”.

NeXeD.3042:

It would work fine if decay was perma, if those players are truly good they would work their way back up pretty quickly. If they’ve taken a break they should have to fight scrubs for a bit to get back up.

And new players shouldnt face top 10 ppl right off the bat. On my US account i faced Caed, Kensuda and Hiba within my first 3 games….during peak hours. Got to top 7 within 10 games played.

I understand they these ppl will drop again sooner or later … but with Anets focus on casual players those players get replaced by other new players. So it never stops. And these > 10 games played players take the spot of more experienced players that get pushed out of certain matchups due to this issue.

I understand they want to avoid really long queue times. But as a high rated player your queue time should be longer. You should be playing during peakhours to get proper matches.

Lopez.7369:

This doesn’t show anything wrong with how the leaderboard works, beyond the weird choice to make decay temporary.

So you think its normal i get instant q pops vs Caed, Kensuda and Hiba during my first 3 games on a fresh US account?

The problem is that the matchmaking tends to be more or less RNG with such a system, combining quick decay and beginners being placed at any rank( #1 to lowest).

Then, you can have anyone at any rank. Be #100 and being teamed with 4 beginners who won their first matchs, be 90% and teamed with beginners against players who got 1200 wins/1000 loses.
Experience should be reflected in the ladder..

Play spvp everyday andI don’t care much about winning or losing anymore because i know it won’t hurt my ranking..

Rank @ 99% all day every day, teaching all those lvl 2’s how to stay on point.

(My back is kinda hurting though)

Zirith.6429:

It blows my mind how many times you kids are told how the leaderboards work and you still complain about it, no one is playing soloq, there are 100s of people above you in terms of rating but none of them are active, the system would work fine with an active playerbase but there are <50 good active players in the entire game so even if they remade leaderboards it would not matter because it would just be a bunch of noobs complaining about the new leaderboards.

Listen up, kid.

My rating was around 300 before I left 2 months ago. If I had played an extra game and won before I had left, it probably would have been about 260. But, if I wait a couple of months, that extra game will make me jump to #10 on the leaderboards.

No logical rating system would make me gain a massive amount of rating just by winning 1 game after being inactive for a long period of time.

This also allows people to abuse the boards because by not playing, you gain substantially more rating when you finally win a game than by playing frequently. And I can guarantee you that no other game with semi-respectable leaderboards (LoL, DotA, WoW, etc) has ratings that work like this.

Has been, still is and from the looks of it will always be…

New accounts require at least 10 matches played before you can appear on the leaderboard.

How about requiring at least 10 match played after dropping off the leaderboard from decay or X amount of time inactive before you can appear on leaderboard again.

Anet can keep their funky rating system, do 1 small change and at the same time encourage more play.

I went from 0 games played on team que leaderboards……. to 794 756 games played and rank 148 on leaderboards after 1 win. Havent played team que since September 2013 too.

Nice to know leaderboards still keeps all your old games from previous leaderboards…. If only it made me rank 1 on leaderboards so I get my title…. Thinking about waiting for my rank to decay, so I face bad teams and hopefully win and get shot back to rank 1 that way if it works.

uberkingkong.8041:

Thinking about waiting for my rank to decay, so I face bad teams and hopefully win and get shot back to rank 1 that way if it works.

Your “decayed” leaderboard ranking is not used for matchmaking.

If you are rank100 but decayed to rank900. You will not be playing against other rank900 players, but rather rank100’s. (Assuming sufficient population)

Too bad anet doesn’t show you your hidden MMR values along with the rankings.

the rating system is a bell curve, as you get a higher rating you find less people with that rating and therefore win less points and lose way more, so unless they maintained a 75% winrate everyone above you has gone down due to less people to play against so the maximum achievable rating has also decreased. Since you were nearish to the top of the rankings (~15 win streak from first) and due to the significant reduction in the player base, your rating which was inflated due to a larger population is now much higher relative to everyone else that has to play in a more restricted rating range.

kirito.4138:

uberkingkong.8041:

Thinking about waiting for my rank to decay, so I face bad teams and hopefully win and get shot back to rank 1 that way if it works.

Your “decayed” leaderboard ranking is not used for matchmaking.

If you are rank100 but decayed to rank900. You will not be playing against other rank900 players, but rather rank100’s. (Assuming sufficient population)

Too bad anet doesn’t show you your hidden MMR values along with the rankings.

Maybe right, but I went against bunch of scrubs that game and went to 148.
I played more games, lost 2 went from 148 to 95%… Than won the next 4 and went from 95% to 603.

So when people talk about leaderboards rewards little if you win and hurts a ton if you lose, they aint lieing because 148 to 95% in 2 games, that hurts A LOT. Than I win 4 more in a row and just go up 100 each game, not very rewarding.

Zirith.6429:

the rating system is a bell curve, as you get a higher rating you find less people with that rating and therefore win less points and lose way more, so unless they maintained a 75% winrate everyone above you has gone down due to less people to play against so the maximum achievable rating has also decreased. Since you were nearish to the top of the rankings (~15 win streak from first) and due to the significant reduction in the player base, your rating which was inflated due to a larger population is now much higher relative to everyone else that has to play in a more restricted rating range.

Please show me some statistics that show that the community is now exponentially smaller than it was two months ago, I’d love to see them.

before april 15 ______
after april 15 *—_
tol announced —
stagnation after tol —(you quit here)__

get graphed

infantrydiv.1620:

Zirith.6429:

the rating system is a bell curve, as you get a higher rating you find less people with that rating and therefore win less points and lose way more, so unless they maintained a 75% winrate everyone above you has gone down due to less people to play against so the maximum achievable rating has also decreased. Since you were nearish to the top of the rankings (~15 win streak from first) and due to the significant reduction in the player base, your rating which was inflated due to a larger population is now much higher relative to everyone else that has to play in a more restricted rating range.

Please show me some statistics that show that the community is now exponentially smaller than it was two months ago, I’d love to see them.

just go mists and you see it yourself

its a megaserver (complete NA or EU) – mists now looks like the mists before the megaserver patch

What confuses me is why any of you care about the leaderboard. Who cares? Teams are judged by how well they do in tournaments. You can be the #1 ranked person in team queue, but if your team doesn’t do well in the big tournaments, no one cares about you.

Solo queue leaderboards are even worse since a number of people refuse to play skyhammer.

In other words, just play. Leaderboards mean nothing.