Just as a reminder, the beta ladder starts tomorrow shortly after the new build goes live. Before the ladder starts we will disable progression and reset all ladder data except MMR.
We will not start the beta ladder immediately after the build, but soon after when we are sure everything is working correctly.
We will give a one hour notice before the new ladder will begin collecting data.
Good luck!
Server Programmer (sPvP)
Isle of Janthir: Flux, Latch, Aegir
In regards to map selection, I know the map selection on ranked is restricted to Temple, Khylo, Nifelhel, and Foefire. But can unranked play still get Courtyard, Skyhammer, and Spirit Watch?
In regards to map selection, I know the map selection on ranked is restricted to Temple, Khylo, Nifelhel, and Foefire. But can unranked play still get Courtyard, Skyhammer, and Spirit Watch?
They will remain in unranked. Sorry, I’ll go edit that other thread to include that information.
Server Programmer (sPvP)
Isle of Janthir: Flux, Latch, Aegir
My biggest issue is rewards. I already have a mini llama and do not expect to get top 20. Can you please look into titles for players in at least top 1000? It may not take much but that’s only like 4% of the PvP population.
Mistsim…The speculation they are making is that the front page will be filled with nothing but players who play 20-30+ matches per day regardless of skill level.
If the point structure stays the same, we have no reason to believe anything else.
I’m looking forward to this in a good way.
I like the new leaderboard philosophy.
Also, dishonor is going to be turned on too am I right? No more people dc’ing because they know they lost and know theres no punishment therefore leave the game.
I know some people when they know they lost the game they want to just outright leave. But its poor sportsmanship. In a basketball game if your down 30 to 90, you don’t see those players on the losing team just throw the game, they play till the end and shake hands. That’s good sportsmanship, unlike what you see currently in GW2. GW2 its, I’m down 250+ points… Ragequit time.
Hopefully less 4v5 and uneven games due to dishonor being turned ON. FINALLY!
Ladder should reflect skill (winning %, personal scores etc.) over time spent in pvp.
The goal of this scoring method is put emphasis on both skill and effort. Take Rank 1 in both EU and NA. EU has virtually the same score as NA, but had NA to play more than 150 games to achieve the same score. Both represent things that deserve credit: perseverance, consistency, and skill.
We know some players would like skill to be weighted higher than effort, all I can say as that we will review the data and be looking at feedback throughout the season, and especially at the end.
Also, do not forget that the current ladder data isn’t a good test of the system. We had matchmaking errors, configuration changes, etc, not to mention the ladder had a false start where data was being collected before people knew it would be visible.
Server Programmer (sPvP)
Isle of Janthir: Flux, Latch, Aegir
Current ladder is an utter joke (no offense meant)
Most of top players are just pvp bots with <50 games won and over 9000 games grinded.
Please don’t belittle other players like this.
Sure I changed my initial post. But the fact remains the same: 9/25 top players have <60% win ratio. I cant speak for the majority of PvP community but I myself expect GW2 ladder be similar to other competitive ladders (LOL-like). If you keep losing games you cant move top and you should lose points. If you dont lose points for losing its gonna be WvW ranks and EOTM all over again.
A man of knowledge lives by acting, not by thinking about acting.
-Carlos Castaneda
Skady Valda
Why is there such a large emphasis on effort! Why is it that someone who has 3000 games played with a 40% win rate can be higher on the leaderboards than someone who has 1000 games played and an 80% win rate! It doesn’t make any sense at all! It defeats the whole concept of a leaderboard!
Why is there such a large emphasis on effort! Why is it that someone who has 3000 games played with a 40% win rate can be higher on the leaderboards than someone who has 1000 games played and an 80% win rate! It doesn’t make any sense at all! It defeats the whole concept of a leaderboard!
Wahoo! Bye frands!
Cuz love <3
Love those who give time to you by giving back to them! Love is the answer!
LOVE!
Sylvari Elementalist – Mystree Duskbloom (Lv 80)
Norn Guardian – Aurora Lustyr (Lv 80)
Mia A Shadows Glow – Human Thief (Lv 80)
Why is there such a large emphasis on effort! Why is it that someone who has 3000 games played with a 40% win rate can be higher on the leaderboards than someone who has 1000 games played and an 80% win rate! It doesn’t make any sense at all! It defeats the whole concept of a leaderboard!
Wahoo! Bye frands!
Well budzy, probably because the 1000 games weren’t during the ladder period?
You can’t compare account lifetime games played to ladder standing and assume it’ll match up.
Personally, I think the perception of an over-emphasis on effort is caused by the false start. I could be wrong though, so I’m looking forward to seeing how this plays out.
:)
Server Programmer (sPvP)
Isle of Janthir: Flux, Latch, Aegir
If it’s gonna be like this noone would actually care about it anyway
like what? matchups have been good for me, and lots of people care…mists are full.
It’s not about matchups and stuff….if you look at the actual ladder and how people got up there you’re gonna understand and the longer it goes the wider the gap between ppl playing some hours/day at best and nolife farmers playing really bad but going 24/7 for thousands of matches. Those ppl should not even be close to others who have % win ratio above 70-75% but sadly they’re gonna end up even higher….a loss is a loss…and if you lose 2/3 of your games you shouldn’t be nowhere near the top…no matter who you faced.
Personally, I think the perception of an over-emphasis on effort is caused by the false start. I could be wrong though, so I’m looking forward to seeing how this plays out.
:)
When the leaderboards were first visible the guy was ahead by 20-30 points or so with a win rate of about 60%+. Once he hit 120-130 his win rate dropped to around 40%. He now has a consistent win rate of 43-47% range.
For a user who is constantly pvping (hey more power to him) they will always maintain a steady point gain, in spite his occasional, or even often, loss. It’s not that he got a 25+ point lead because he was already playing nonstop. The point is, he shouldn’t be maintaining that lead for this long, given his current statistics.
Add -1 to each -1 for a stricter loss.
Attachments:
aka FalseLights Rank: Top 250 since Season 2 #5 best gerdien in wurld
Why is there such a large emphasis on effort! Why is it that someone who has 3000 games played with a 40% win rate can be higher on the leaderboards than someone who has 1000 games played and an 80% win rate! It doesn’t make any sense at all! It defeats the whole concept of a leaderboard!
Wahoo! Bye frands!
could be that neither of those people are well represented by only those two numbers
JQ: Rikkity
head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions
Are people even looking at the leaderboards when they’re commenting here? The top NA player has about 500+ matches, top EU player has about 350, and below them players generally have played less matches.
I do agree it seems effort seems somewhat too heavily factored in when you look at cases such as this from EU. How come those two places aren’t reverse order. While Mini Collero has substantially less games, look at his win rate and that they both have practically won the same amount of games. Forsaker E shouldn’t get that many points from having lost over 80 matches more than Mini Collero to put him top of ladder…
1 208 Forsaker.9213 Forsaker E 228 116 66.28%
2 194 Obsidia.5127 Mini Collero 226 32 87.60%
Lord Sazed / Hasla the Huntress / Seaguard Hala
Seamarshal Belit / Initiate Xun Tsu / Mistwarden Roshone
Seafarer’s Rest | Northerner @ Dragon Season
Ladder should reflect skill (winning %, personal scores etc.) over time spent in pvp.
The goal of this scoring method is put emphasis on both skill and effort. Take Rank 1 in both EU and NA. EU has virtually the same score as NA, but had NA to play more than 150 games to achieve the same score. Both represent things that deserve credit: perseverance, consistency, and skill.
We know some players would like skill to be weighted higher than effort, all I can say as that we will review the data and be looking at feedback throughout the season, and especially at the end.
Also, do not forget that the current ladder data isn’t a good test of the system. We had matchmaking errors, configuration changes, etc, not to mention the ladder had a false start where data was being collected before people knew it would be visible.
So ladder is not supposed to rank the best players anymore ? I am falling from my chair.
As it stands, the leaderboard rewards grind (time spent) rather than skill. Therefore the leaderboard is not representative of the best, the most skilled, players in the game and thus doesn’t serve its function.
If match making is based on MMR anyway, then surely the leaderboards should be based on MMR, as that is the value used to represent a player’s skill level? While I found the new boards more consistent than the last, which seemed to reward rank ups for 1-3 games every 2 days and rank downs for more games, it does still sound contradictory when the skill level representation isn’t a factor in the leader boards. Everyone seems to view the boards as an indication of who is the best and where they stand in the community, but if it’s not based on the same values used to represent player skill it will never do that.
Why is there such a large emphasis on effort! Why is it that someone who has 3000 games played with a 40% win rate can be higher on the leaderboards than someone who has 1000 games played and an 80% win rate! It doesn’t make any sense at all! It defeats the whole concept of a leaderboard!
Wahoo! Bye frands!
Because the 100 games and 80% win rate might not be from their personal skill as much as 1) the teams they played against, 2) The combined skills and communication of the team they played on.
Everything in the GW2 scoring for the ladder takes into account that as a solo player especially, you WILL be put into matches on a team that is EXPECTED to lose.
If the matches were always more or less even, with everyone on voice communication (or not on it), then win rates would mean something.
I just play for fun, I play about 6 basic ranger builds from power ranger to traps and BM regen, I like pvp and I don’t care about winning. When i play i play a lot I frequently change builds and usually i try to counter rotate, to the dismay of many teammates. One note about leader boards, first it is not about winning it is about points, the system as it is now makes more and more difficult to get points if you win a large percentage of your matches. On a personal note I hate being No. 1 I have been targeted more in the last week than i have in the previous 2 yrs.
I just play for fun, I play about 6 basic ranger builds from power ranger to traps and BM regen, I like pvp and I don’t care about winning. When i play i play a lot i frequently change builds and usually i try to counter rotate, to the dismay of many teammates. One note about leader boards, first it is not about winning it is about points, the system as it is now makes more and more difficult to get points if you win a large percentage of your matches.
Lexiceta,
Thank you for your thoughts. What do you mean by counter rotate?
Yes, I made a special note to remind people that win/loss is not what the ladder is all about, since the matches cannot be made even all the time.
Counter is probably not the best word, but as anyone who has played this game for any amount of time will tell you after a kill or team wipe what have you, people are predictable to which place they will go, I try to go to the last place they think anyone would be dumb enough to go, it is a solo que thing sadly that is gone now and i will not be able to do that any longer
Counter is probably not the best word, but as anyone who has played this game for any amount of time will tell you after a kill or team wipe what have you, people are predictable to which place they will go, I try to go to the last place they think anyone would be dumb enough to go, it is a solo que thing sadly that is gone now and i will not be able to do that any longer
I don’t see why a player that mostly plays solo and plays a lot and wins roughly half there games couldn’t place pretty well on the leaderboard because the deck is stacked heavily against them anyway. Why is running in a full group and winning 70% necessarily considered skillfull? There are so few full regular groups to fight against almost any full group not composed of full kittens will win 70% of there games. This is what the system exists for hopefully to be able to compare credibly a good solo player who plays often with average soley group players that play a moderate amount.
Ladder should reflect skill (winning %, personal scores etc.) over time spent in pvp.
The goal of this scoring method is put emphasis on both skill and effort. Take Rank 1 in both EU and NA. EU has virtually the same score as NA, but had NA to play more than 150 games to achieve the same score. Both represent things that deserve credit: perseverance, consistency, and skill.
We know some players would like skill to be weighted higher than effort, all I can say as that we will review the data and be looking at feedback throughout the season, and especially at the end.
Also, do not forget that the current ladder data isn’t a good test of the system. We had matchmaking errors, configuration changes, etc, not to mention the ladder had a false start where data was being collected before people knew it would be visible.
I’m glad that the current system takes into account both skill and effort. It allows players who are dedicated and willing to work hard to achieve the same status as those who are naturally talented.
