Guild Wars 2

Justin ODell.9517:

Also, win/loss ratio shouldn’t mean anything to you. With an ideal perfect matchmaking everyone’d would be at 50%.

That’s why I’m happy playing .501

Blackmoa.3186:

what this leaderboard desperatly needs is a league system like in lol or other similar games

This is entirely the issue right now.

You should be placed into a bracket at the start of a season based on your MMR, and your ladder points in that bracket based on your activity. This is how other online competitive games do it.

For example in SC2 by MMR:
Bronze – bottom 10% of players
Silver – next 35% (10-45)
Gold – next 35% (45-80)
Platinum – next 15% (80-95)
Diamond – next 5% (95-99)
Master and GM – top 1%

This way, you won’t see a ‘meh’ MMR player in the top 25 of all the LB due to sheer activity. They’d be top in their lower MMR bracket, and the best by MMR would still be visible in the high brackets.

People will be rewarded for skill and improvement by placing in higher brackets as new seasons come and go, and rewarded by participation by winning their bracket. Could even have an end of season reward structure that better rewards the higher brackets. This encourages everyone to play, because even the lower skilled players have something to strive for in winning the lower end brackets, rather than being rank 8000 or w/e it is now.

Nettle.9025:

Blackmoa.3186:

what this leaderboard desperatly needs is a league system like in lol or other similar games

This is entirely the issue right now.

You should be placed into a bracket at the start of a season based on your MMR, and your ladder points in that bracket based on your activity. This is how other online competitive games do it.

For example in SC2 by MMR:
Bronze – bottom 10% of players
Silver – next 35% (10-45)
Gold – next 35% (45-80)
Platinum – next 15% (80-95)
Diamond – next 5% (95-99)
Master and GM – top 1%

This way, you won’t see a ‘meh’ MMR player in the top 25 of all the LB due to sheer activity. They’d be top in their lower MMR bracket, and the best by MMR would still be visible in the high brackets.

People will be rewarded for skill and improvement by placing in higher brackets as new seasons come and go, and rewarded by participation by winning their bracket. Could even have an end of season reward structure that better rewards the higher brackets. This encourages everyone to play, because even the lower skilled players have something to strive for in winning the lower end brackets, rather than being rank 8000 or w/e it is now.

Going on my friends account so I can +1 this again.

Nettle.9025:

Blackmoa.3186:

what this leaderboard desperatly needs is a league system like in lol or other similar games

This is entirely the issue right now.

You should be placed into a bracket at the start of a season based on your MMR, and your ladder points in that bracket based on your activity. This is how other online competitive games do it.

For example in SC2 by MMR:
Bronze – bottom 10% of players
Silver – next 35% (10-45)
Gold – next 35% (45-80)
Platinum – next 15% (80-95)
Diamond – next 5% (95-99)
Master and GM – top 1%

This way, you won’t see a ‘meh’ MMR player in the top 25 of all the LB due to sheer activity. They’d be top in their lower MMR bracket, and the best by MMR would still be visible in the high brackets.

People will be rewarded for skill and improvement by placing in higher brackets as new seasons come and go, and rewarded by participation by winning their bracket. Could even have an end of season reward structure that better rewards the higher brackets. This encourages everyone to play, because even the lower skilled players have something to strive for in winning the lower end brackets, rather than being rank 8000 or w/e it is now.

Yes, this should be the final step, but this game is not ready yet.

The purpose of this TEST season is to test stuff, so i think we need to be more patients and we’ll see what works and what doesn’t work at the end of the season.

First of all the key is always the matchmaking, for a good leagues structure, matchmaking needs to work really well and for now it’s not perfect and devs are working on it.

Leaderboard is totally new, i’m the first one who thinks probably time played will be the best factor in this leaderboard but we need time to see what will happen.

Rewards, same thing, rewards are poor for this seasons but it’s ok, it’s a test, of course a reward league system would be better and more competitive, but this is the first seasons test, so i think we need to monitor this seasons and suggest good correctives when we’ll see how things will work on live.

Please explain me how it is possible that Rom.4536 played 10 games (10 won) and he has 6 points ? so it clearly shows that you have a bug in formula…..
http://imgur.com/42a4imT
After looking at laderboard and when i see my position i know that it is something wrong…(i’m too kitten high).

While I’ve only played hotjoin since the update, I want to thank Justin for his open communication and quick responses. I’ve been following this feedback (which is why I’m only having fun in hotjoin in the meantime), and while it has been mostly negative, I’m excited for the future of pvp once all the changes are functioning up to standards.

Obsidia.5127:

Lordrosicky.5813:

The leaderboards SHOULD be a grind. It SHOULD be a mix of skill and playing alot. Otherwise you get a stagnant community where people only play with their “full” teams and stomp people. And afkers will win the leaderboards. This game will be so healthy if the leaderboards are a bit of a grind. They have tournaments for full teams to lame it up and win something. Leaderboards should primarily be designed to encourage participation.

So I hope these leaderboards are a sign of things to come.

100% Agreed.

100% agreed.

This is by far the newest thing to grace these forums today.

How would leagues work when solo/teamq is merged though. Teams will always have the advantage in gaining ladderpoints. So a soloplayer wouldn’t be able to get in the highest bracket?

And don’t we need something with set teamrosters and such?

Anyway, regardless of all that. Leagues are a glorified reward infrastructure, they better get that right first.

I understand what you guys are trying to do but the thing is that Leaderboards is supposed to show who’s better. Now the point system is fine but the fact is that people that are less skilled than others could be higher on the Leaderboard. If someone plays against a team with higher MMR and wins then he will get extra points but the thing is that you are not thinking about the fact that the top players could not be amongst the the top on the Leaderboard. I mean all it takes is for someone to play really well for his specific MMR but that does not make him the best. There should be some way of making points and MMR count in your standing in the leaderboard otherwise it’s just useless to even bother with it. People that are serious about it are so because they want to compare themselves to other top players and not to compare themselves to players with low MMR that play a few good games. The leaderboard rankings should be based both on MMR and points not one or the other. Top players that play well will remain top and low MMR players that play well will be higher than a person with the same MMR that doesn’t. That seems logical enough.

solution.

New Score=Points*(2*wins/games played)

Justin ODell.9517:

MarkPhilips.5169:

I’m ready to bet that in the final top100 there will be people with a really bad win ratio and a huge amount of matches played.

I don’t think this will happen, but if it does happen we can change the table so losing always takes away points. It’s only the narrow losses, or going up against a higher MMR and doing OK, that will let you stay neutral after a loss.

I think it is very important that narrow losses on evenly matched teams should not take away points. These are by far the most exciting matches where everyone (winners and losers) walk away with positive attitude, GGs flying everywhere. This will also encourage people to fight hard, even when things start to go south, to try to squeeze out a narrow loss. Great idea!

Archon.6480:

Justin ODell.9517:

MarkPhilips.5169:

I’m ready to bet that in the final top100 there will be people with a really bad win ratio and a huge amount of matches played.

I don’t think this will happen, but if it does happen we can change the table so losing always takes away points. It’s only the narrow losses, or going up against a higher MMR and doing OK, that will let you stay neutral after a loss.

I think it is very important that narrow losses on evenly matched teams should not take away points. These are by far the most exciting matches where everyone (winners and losers) walk away with positive attitude, GGs flying everywhere. This will also encourage people to fight hard, even when things start to go south, to try to squeeze out a narrow loss. Great idea!

No problem. The winner gets 2 points. The loser loses nothing.

No comments on a thing that scoring doesn’t work properly ?

¹ Winning will always award a minimum of one point.

http://imgur.com/42a4imT