Guild Wars 2

Ramiamesan has been in the top 5 since the leaderboards came out but he has not played since the leaderboards came out. Now he is rank 1 without doing anything. This is a great example of how something needs to be added to the system. I really hope in the future something will be done to punish people for not playing for extended amounts of time.

lol

More like, I would like to see leader board reset either weekly or monthly.

Not sure how that would effect the top50 players though, with the Custom Arena kit

lol yea its a joke I’ve been tracking a guy on my friends list who has moved up from the 200s to top 100 by not playing

Gw2 = only game where you get near the top then are rewarded for not playing/playing very rarely.

Number 1 on eu and number 1 on NA have played a combined 4 tournament games in the last 3 weeks according to tracking websites.

lol. The gw2 way!

I found it funny how my friend that hasn’t even pvp’d anymore since february is in the top 1000, but they use the beta tag as a scapegoat

SImple rating degradation would solve this problem. Since it would degrade everyone at an equal pace active players will be unaffected and the inactives would slowly be weeded out while not over harshly punishing those that dont play.

Alternatively you could degrade all players with less than X games played in a week by Y rank. This would slowly take out real inactive players while allowing players who do become inactive for whatever reason to not come back and be completely unranked.

The problem with these solutions, however, is that players who leave the game that were ranked high and come back will start playing against very low ranked players. That will be a total mismatch because the previously high ranked player did dont lose skill at the same pace as he lost rank points.

To take that into consideration, my final fix proposal is to split ranks into 2 categories, match making rank and leaderboard rank. Your match making rank works as it does now. A consistent number that is used to match you against players that are close to your equal. The leadboard rank would gain and lose rank points in the same way as match making rank keeping it a valid measure of your level, with the addition of degradation to keep leaderboard list accurate.

To show there are even more valid solutions Ill detail another completely different solution that is equally as valid as the one I detailed above.

If a player is inactive for X amount of time remove them from the leaderboard ranking but do not adjust their rank. When they resume playing their rank is added back to the leaderboard. (Possible problem – people will play 1 game within the X amount of time to maintain their rank, however it will get rid of people who have moved on from GW2 pvp that are taking up space)

Game needs seasons, a ladder rating separate from MMR, and a ladder reset every couple months at season end.

See: Every popular competitive game out with leaderboards

Nettle.9025:

Game needs seasons, a ladder rating separate from MMR, and a ladder reset every couple months at season end.

See: Every popular competitive game out with leaderboards

Another valid solution. Hopefully Anet is watching, though I doubt we will ever get a response from a dev that they even think this is a problem.

Parisalchuk.9230:

…is to split ranks into 2 categories, match making rank and leaderboard rank….

somethink like that. like if you havent played for 2 weeks you disappear from the ladder without loosing rating. as soon as you start to play again you continue with your mmr as you left and reappear on the ladder.

personally i’d like it more if you loose rating by not playing

Lordrosicky.5813:

Gw2 = only game where you get near the top then are rewarded for not playing/playing very rarely.

Actually, SCII was like that up until a few months ago. And SCII was pretty much considered the pinnacle of automatic matchmaking in vidyagaemz.

Current top 4 only played 13 games in his entire career.

I hope for him to be rank 1 and get the record of gaining the most rank with the fewest games played.

A whole new ELO/League/MMR system would be fantastic. With most games switching to/or already have league(Sc2/COD/LoL) it would be really nice to see that in GW2 with both a solo/team Q.

But for now, if they added in MMR loss over time, or after inactivity, that would be a nice band-aid.

Ya, someone in my guild just did tPvP when the laurel monthly was bugged. He’s 7-4 and been sitting at around 200 since the lb came out. lol

I’ve gone from 50% to 59%.

The secret? Do absolutely no tournaments.

Im on my way to the top!

Don’t know about other game, but SC2 last time i played had a point ladder system with a pool of extra points. U get some extra points to this pool per day, the amount is the same for everyone. If u win a game, as long as u have extra points in that pool, u get double points. It was a nice way to encourage playing atleast some games per week to use all the extra points.

We can only hope that gw2 doesn’t try to reinvent the wheel and be innovative again.

There’s no decay factor, when the rankings first came out I was rank 200 for weeks and weeks without playing (I’m not telling you this to brag I’m telling you this because of how surprised I was that, in a few games, I could be rank 200 and stay there for a week or more of not doing anything)… then I did soloq… honestly, the rank system should be taken with grain of salt because it doesn’t mean much until they get their act together

NEW META – Get to top 50 on the leaderboards, afk for a month and BOOM!!!! Your now rank 1!!! GG!

The leaderboard should reset weekly, just like wvw, however you should have a lifetime leaderboard as well. With rank being how you placed each week.

I think they should change 2 things.

1. Add decay. Its funny how people that played 10 games or so, somehow end up high in rankings. Also people that stop playing improve in ranking. These things should not happen. If someone is not playing for week, slowly start lowering his rank. If someone is not playing for a month remove his rank a lot. If someone is not playing for more then a month, maybe just remove him all together.

2. Adjust rank gain/loss. To me this one is biggest problem. I only solo q and I’ve been in range of rank 700 – 85% lately. Problem is if I win 2 games, I’ll jump to top 800, if I lose 2 games I’ll fall to 90%. This is just ridiculous. I had once 2 wins: 1 loss, and when I checked leaderboard update I fell from 520 to 850 spot or something like that.
This is bad for all high rank people as well. They are afraid to play if their trusted team is not with them, because if they lose they gonna drop fast. And this is why people play tournaments less and less, and play arenas more. If you want people to play tournaments for fun, then u should make it so that u cant drop more then 5 spots per game. Also u cant raise more then 5, that way people will mass games trying to get up but at the same time wont be afraid to lose because its only 5 spots they losing.

Exactly. I agree with your 2nd point. Yesterday i won almost all games and i jumped from 95% to r710. I did only soloQ and seemed to face mostly soloQ players.

Today i did 1 match, i was matched with r5-15 players against a r45-58 premade and i’ve lost 255 ranks. This makes no sense

This is how ladders work. It’s how they work in DOTA, it’s how they work in WoW, it’s how they work here. Noobs need to get a clue.

i guess.. one small addition to the leaderboards is that when and if someone doesn’t play for a certain amount of time, they lose rank. whether how that works can of course be entirely up to ANet.

Lordrosicky.5813:

Gw2 = only game where you get near the top then are rewarded for not playing/playing very rarely.

lol. The gw2 way!

Same used to happen in warcraft, not sure if still does.

Celeras.4980:

This is how ladders work. It’s how they work in DOTA, it’s how they work in WoW, it’s how they work here. Noobs need to get a clue.

I think you are one of only a handful of people that can in your mind somehow equate poor design (even if its in other games, it does not make it good design) and ‘noobs’. Thats not a compliment.

Just add decay. If you haven’t played for a week you lose a certain amount of rating. If you really do deserve the place in top, it won’t be a problem to come back after your PvP break and win the rating again.

good to know Colin thanks for info

We need decay and a split between solo queue ranking and premade ranking. Honestly I find it hard to not just ignore the leaderboards right now. I’ll get up to the 100’s if I stick to just premades with my team for a while then easily drop to 90% or 80% after a chain of losses in solo queue due to 4v5’s, going up against an organized premade with a full pug, just getting bad luck, or because I’m trying out a class as I’m not as experienced with (or play warrior, which I call hard mode spvp) etc. I like going into solo queues with classes I don’t normally play, for variety/fun (it is all about having fun isn’t it?) but the current ranking system strongly encourages people to only do premades and with 1 or maybe two classes. There has to be some place you can solo queue for fun and to try out new classes without it all being tied to a single ranking. Together those two things are just really distorting the leaders from reflecting who the best active players actually are at the moment.

ColinJohanson.2394:

We’re aware of this, and plan to address it absolutely.

Thank you! Official response, and the right one.

I dont know why is so difficult…Dont separate the matchmaking….Give the chance to high lvl premades face high lvl soloqers(i know its lame but lets face it,theres not a huge playerbase to support separate soloq-premade) and give X rating..But when a match is soloqers against soloqers give another rating Y,totally different from the X

ColinJohanson.2394:

We’re aware of this, and plan to address it absolutely.

I take it you’re installing a system then where it’s based upon points and not wins, and that you lose a % of your current score a week (higher % the higher up you are on the rankings) so you have to keep playing to stay in #1?

RyuDragnier.9476:

ColinJohanson.2394:

We’re aware of this, and plan to address it absolutely.

I take it you’re installing a system then where it’s based upon points and not wins, and that you lose a % of your current score a week (higher % the higher up you are on the rankings) so you have to keep playing to stay in #1?

This is only semi right.

You cannot just decay a players rating. While this seems to achieve the goal what happens when the best player in GW2 takes a 1 month vacation and doesnt play? He comes back, has a super low rank, and while he regains his rank he carries teams and creates unfair matchups until his skill level matches his rank.

That is why you need to split the rank and your leaderboard position. You can then decay the leaderboard position while retaining rank so that you do run into the issue I describe. Alternatively, and probably the better solution, you can remove an inactive player from the leaderboard while retaining their rank until the player is active.

I also do not understand your suggestion of an exponential decay rate. That helps no one and makes players artificially closer in rankings. In addition, managing rank by points is not viable either. A proper bunker may only gain 10 points in a match if they capture their location and are able to defend it and cause opponents to flee. Why should they be punished for the build they played?

ColinJohanson.2394:

We’re aware of this, and plan to address it absolutely.

I don’t think it’s fair to punish people who are inactive for a month at a time. Arenanet doesn’t seem to have any issue with letting gameplay-breaking bugs sit around for a month before releasing a fix – I don’t see any reason why a high ranking player can’t sit on his rank until ArenaNet fixes some problem they introduced that adversely affected his/her gameplay and, ultimately, his/her rank.

Seems reasonable to me.

Thedenofsin.7340:

I don’t think it’s fair to punish people who are inactive for a month at a time. Arenanet doesn’t seem to have any issue with letting gameplay-breaking bugs sit around for a month before releasing a fix – I don’t see any reason why a high ranking player can’t sit on his rank until ArenaNet fixes some problem they introduced that adversely affected his/her gameplay and, ultimately, his/her rank.

Seems reasonable to me.

I can’t name a single other competitive game with a ladder system that is widely played and has no sort of decay.

The big two right now, SC2 and LoL (dota 2 does not have a ladder in place), both have something to handle this. LoL has a decay system that kicks in after 4 weeks, whereas SC2 has a bonus pool that gives bonus points to actives. I’m pretty sure that even WoW has seasons with resets, and I think maybe they just introduced something like a bonus pool?

Seriously, the ladder system could use a degradation of rating over time. Also, why don’t they reveal the rating formula and implement it as a stat in-game? It feels like a chore to keep minimizing and checking if the ladder has been updated.

BakiSaN.9281:

Seriously, the ladder system could use a degradation of rating over time. Also, why don’t they reveal the rating formula and implement it as a stat in-game? It feels like a chore to keep minimizing and checking if the ladder has been updated.

the thing with wow is it takes a while for the teams and rankings to get established at a new season. with gw2 leaderboard teams played 10 games and got top 20 rank. you couldn’t do that in wow.

Dardamaniac.1295:

I dont know why is so difficult…Dont separate the matchmaking….Give the chance to high lvl premades face high lvl soloqers(i know its lame but lets face it,theres not a huge playerbase to support separate soloq-premade) and give X rating..But when a match is soloqers against soloqers give another rating Y,totally different from the X

Yeah as long as the matchmaking is working I personally agree that it would be fine to let the queue stay together, BUT there should be two different rank scores (and ladders) tracked separately. If a team queues with 4 or less the result will affect their “Random” rank while if they queue with a full 5 team it affects their “Team” rank. Also, premade teams should get a smaller rank bump to their “Team” rank if up against a random group while that group would get a bigger “Random” rank bump if they beat a full team. I really think the majority of the player base would be made happy by this set up.

Abazigal.3679:

Exactly. I agree with your 2nd point. Yesterday i won almost all games and i jumped from 95% to r710. I did only soloQ and seemed to face mostly soloQ players.

Today i did 1 match, i was matched with r5-15 players against a r45-58 premade and i’ve lost 255 ranks. This makes no sense

Yeah because there is no ELO system, they never clarified how there system works, but all I notice is 1 win is a set amount of points no matter how low of a rank people are and 1 loss is set amount of points no matter how good the other team is.

So if you get lucky enough to play 30 games of complete bad players, as in you find some trick into there system where you got all the good players on your friends list and que up when all the good players are in a game and play nothing but bad players, in theory you should make it to r1 with those 30 consecutive wins against bad players.

Someone can prove me wrong but that’s what I noticed, and if your in % you’ll likely go up 2-3% (regardless if you beat a crazy good ranking leaderboard team that somehow was que’ed against you), they made it harder than what it was before (5%), and you most likely lose a lot of points now while on leaderboards but I haven’t managed to get onto the leaderboards as much as I’d like to after this change. My guessing is they want the people with most win % to stay on leaderboard, regardless of how many strong teams you play against.