Guild Wars 2

care telling us how many times the team with a superior number of engineers will win or lose?

Thanks.

The reason I am asking is very simple. I seem to be having a much smaller chance of winning a match (~10% I’d guess, if my team has no engineer and I am facing a team with 2 engineers). My chances are around 20%, if the enemy has only 1 engineer more than I have on my own team. The same goes for winning, if the engineer/s is/are on my team.

Now if these numbers are consistent across the board and not just something that happens to me out of sheer coincidence, how long would such a result be looked at before actually making it into a variable for match predictions rather than just being statistics with no influence whatsoever?

It’d also be cool to see map metrics. I wanna know just how popular Skyhammer is compared to other maps. I think it’s more popular than Spirit Watch and only slightly less popular than Khylo

Ooooh yes this would be interesting….. almost as interesting as finding sneaky new ways to call engi op on the forums.

I’d love to see some statistics, but I’m guessing it would be a lot of work getting the numbers. Numbers don’t lie after all.

Most played map
Least played map
Map that averages the closest scores
Most played profession
Least played profession
Winningest profession
Losingest profession

Justin ODell.9517:

Hmm, that would make an interesting report.

Since Leaderboards displays character name could we also have an information which class is it? Please.

imaclown.1628:

Ooooh yes this would be interesting….. almost as interesting as finding sneaky new ways to call engi op on the forums.

Why are you so concerned with what people call OP on the forums, if I may ask?

I’d really like to see how much my experience differs from others’. We are using the new matchmaking system to get even matches and predictions are cast by the same system to allocate points towards the leaderboards, thus my point is very valid. As soon as you can determine a factor that influences the outcome of matches in a significant way, regardless of what it may be, the factor can and should be used to adjust the matchmaking and the predictions.

Now you could argue that adjusting the system to account for a particular class is not the right way to go, because it may or may not change constantly. Though it is better than not accounting for it at all, if it impacts the system considerably.

Slim.3024:

imaclown.1628:

Ooooh yes this would be interesting….. almost as interesting as finding sneaky new ways to call engi op on the forums.

Why are you so concerned with what people call OP on the forums, if I may ask?

I’d really like to see how much my experience differs from others’. We are using the new matchmaking system to get even matches and predictions are cast by the same system to allocate points towards the leaderboards, thus my point is very valid. As soon as you can determine a factor that influences the outcome of matches in a significant way, regardless of what it may be, the factor can and should be used to adjust the matchmaking and the predictions.

Now you could argue that adjusting the system to account for a particular class is not the right way to go, because it may or may not change constantly. Though it is better than not accounting for it at all, if it impacts the system considerably.

Everything you said could be legitimate. Or it could just be a sneaky way of saying engis are op. If you were to go as far as looking at the win percentage with engis I would also request looking at the teams the engis faced…. since that comp would matter as well seeing how this game has hard and soft counters…. well I guess you would have to look even more into it…. you would have to go all the way into builds since it’s really the builds that counter each other not the class.

Justin ODell.9517:

Abaddon.2105:

Since Leaderboards displays character name could we also have an information which class is it? Please.

The leaderboard shows the last character played, not the one that is used for the majority of the points. We could possibly add profession, I’ll suggest it to the team.

It would be awesome to have a profession symbol next to peoples’ names on the leaderboard. Even if it’s just ‘last profession that was used’ I still think it would be a cool feature worth adding if it didn’t take a lot of work to put on there.

In general, the more information you have on stuff like leaderboards and scoreboards, the better.

Justin ODell.9517:

Abaddon.2105:

Since Leaderboards displays character name could we also have an information which class is it? Please.

The leaderboard shows the last character played, not the one that is used for the majority of the points. We could possibly add profession, I’ll suggest it to the team.

Thank you!

NeXeD.3042:

Slim.3024:

imaclown.1628:

Ooooh yes this would be interesting….. almost as interesting as finding sneaky new ways to call engi op on the forums.

Why are you so concerned with what people call OP on the forums, if I may ask?

I’d really like to see how much my experience differs from others’. We are using the new matchmaking system to get even matches and predictions are cast by the same system to allocate points towards the leaderboards, thus my point is very valid. As soon as you can determine a factor that influences the outcome of matches in a significant way, regardless of what it may be, the factor can and should be used to adjust the matchmaking and the predictions.

Now you could argue that adjusting the system to account for a particular class is not the right way to go, because it may or may not change constantly. Though it is better than not accounting for it at all, if it impacts the system considerably.

Everything you said could be legitimate. Or it could just be a sneaky way of saying engis are op. If you were to go as far as looking at the win percentage with engis I would also request looking at the teams the engis faced…. since that comp would matter as well seeing how this game has hard and soft counters…. well I guess you would have to look even more into it…. you would have to go all the way into builds since it’s really the builds that counter each other not the class.

As long as you look at a large sample size, all that should not matter. If having more engineers on your team than the other directly relates to the win rate, then that in itself is a significant fact that has to be accounted for.

What can be done as a follow up is to look at each class in the same way and check if having a superior number of class x, y or z has the same or similar impact on the win rate.

Slim.3024:

NeXeD.3042:

Slim.3024:

imaclown.1628:

Ooooh yes this would be interesting….. almost as interesting as finding sneaky new ways to call engi op on the forums.

Why are you so concerned with what people call OP on the forums, if I may ask?

I’d really like to see how much my experience differs from others’. We are using the new matchmaking system to get even matches and predictions are cast by the same system to allocate points towards the leaderboards, thus my point is very valid. As soon as you can determine a factor that influences the outcome of matches in a significant way, regardless of what it may be, the factor can and should be used to adjust the matchmaking and the predictions.

Now you could argue that adjusting the system to account for a particular class is not the right way to go, because it may or may not change constantly. Though it is better than not accounting for it at all, if it impacts the system considerably.

Everything you said could be legitimate. Or it could just be a sneaky way of saying engis are op. If you were to go as far as looking at the win percentage with engis I would also request looking at the teams the engis faced…. since that comp would matter as well seeing how this game has hard and soft counters…. well I guess you would have to look even more into it…. you would have to go all the way into builds since it’s really the builds that counter each other not the class.

As long as you look at a large sample size, all that should not matter. If having more engineers on your team than the other directly relates to the win rate, then that in itself is a significant fact that has to be accounted for.

What can be done as a follow up is to look at each class in the same way and check if having a superior number of class x, y or z has the same or similar impact on the win rate.

No it wouldn’t builds matter. Builds counter builds, not classes. This is what I’m trying to tell you. You yourself said you lose more when playing against teams with more engineers than your team. You are trying to say engis are OP in a sneaky way, it’s kind of smart but I know what your doing. Since your doing it that way the real way to do it would be to find out the builds on all teams not just classes. But that wouldn’t support your engi OP case you don’t like it as much as your original idea. Another thing you could do is separate the win loss of classes into mmr divisions since in lower mmr divisions turret engis are going to absolutely dominate compared to higher mmr divisions where turret engis are fodder, yet celestial engis are more prevalent.

No it wouldn’t builds matter. Builds counter builds, not classes. This is what I’m trying to tell you. You yourself said you lose more when playing against teams with more engineers than your team. You are trying to say engis are OP in a sneaky way, it’s kind of smart but I know what your doing. Since your doing it that way the real way to do it would be to find out the builds on all teams not just classes. But that wouldn’t support your engi OP case you don’t like it as much as your original idea. Another thing you could do is separate the win loss of classes into mmr divisions since in lower mmr divisions turret engis are going to absolutely dominate compared to higher mmr divisions where turret engis are fodder, yet celestial engis are more prevalent.

Let’s say that a an extra engineer on your team shows to yield a 90% win rate. How would it matter whether they used a good or bad build? It’s not like opponents magically use worse builds more often.

You simply look at a large sample size and you will catch the good with the bad and the average all at once. If on average the team with an [additional] engineer has a significantly higher chance to win, especially when compared to other classes and way north of the 50% mark, then this has to be accounted for whether that is due to a low tier build overperforming in low tier or a high tier overperforming in a high tier.

What you are trying to do is dilute the formula by throwing in variables that would make it too complicated to accurately gauge and ultimately implement the idea.

When a high MMR player queues for a match, the match will detect this and adjust the matchmaking and prediction accordingly (based on his past performances and his rating, not based on the build he plays). The same would apply for class x, y, z that happens to allow for significantly higher chances of winning by default based on statistics.

You can keep writing this stuff all you want but ultimately the whole point of what your doing is mathematically trying to prove engi is op, while ignoring tons of other variables. It works for players because it’s ok for some players to be overpowered because they are just better.

Just gonna leave this here from the other day… posted it on forums before but //relevant.

In courtyard I would have engaged until they dropped them all then ran away while supporting my teammates to run away and force them to engage us without the turrets or destroy them to engage us. There is so much Los kitten you can do in courtyard.

imaclown.1628:

You can keep writing this stuff all you want but ultimately the whole point of what your doing is mathematically trying to prove engi is op, while ignoring tons of other variables. It works for players because it’s ok for some players to be overpowered because they are just better.

Thats not the point.

The great idea here is , that the system is adapting its own metrics to current situation.

We said at start, oh 2x thief vs 2x ele stacking is vastly different and ofc they answered us back: “well we cant always rewrite the system every day the meta changes”

This would mean the devs dont need to care about current meta.
Is ele/engie 20% more OP ?
ok, then lets expect and demand from them to win 20% more often, if not they get the regular minus points.

Arietta The Broken.1875:

Just gonna leave this here from the other day… posted it on forums before but //relevant.

Why do people always say turrent instead of TURRET

Flumek.9043:

imaclown.1628:

You can keep writing this stuff all you want but ultimately the whole point of what your doing is mathematically trying to prove engi is op, while ignoring tons of other variables. It works for players because it’s ok for some players to be overpowered because they are just better.

Thats not the point.

The great idea here is , that the system is adapting its own metrics to current situation.

We said at start, oh 2x thief vs 2x ele stacking is vastly different and ofc they answered us back: “well we cant always rewrite the system every day the meta changes”

This would mean the devs dont need to care about current meta.
Is ele/engie 20% more OP ?
ok, then lets expect and demand from them to win 20% more often, if not they get the regular minus points.

Seems incredibly unfair to punish someone or reward someone for their choice of proffesion.

Also I find it unlikely the pvp dev isn’t aware of what the current meta is. There are lots of other ways to change or “fix” the meta without punishing or rewarding people for playing certain professions especially considering class stacking isn’t the players fault (usually) and the fact we can’t change classes without losing altogether.

As have been mentioned, while interesting, I would not say that that you could possibly call the nerf bat over this metric.

Classes that are very versatile and viable in that versatility in PvP will appear more often.
At one stage warriors were WAY too common because they could pretty much fulfill EVERY role there is and be very good at it.
The Engineer is in the same place at the moment.

Whats BAD for the game is if there is little to no counter play possible, like for example ranger LB 2. Just the fact that you take half the hits before being able to react makes it OP.
Note : I am NOT saying longbow rangers are OP, im just saying that SPECIFIC skill is.

If Engineer was considered so OP, Necro’s would be more common too as they can counter EVERY SINGLE engineer build out there.

Arietta The Broken.1875:

Just gonna leave this here from the other day… posted it on forums before but //relevant.

WIthout context that is not really relevant?

I just see 4 Engi’s in one team and 3 Guards in the other…
WOuld have been an interesting match if they guards were any good.

@Harbinger.8637

“There are lies, kitten ed lies and statistics” Mark Twain

We are talking perception here. It has little to do with the mechanical merits of a given class. It’s also very situational.

A turret engi is going to be in a lot of trouble in a running fight. I think the issue is really that there are a couple of classes out there that are really optimal in a certain niche.

Narkodx.1472:

Why do people always say turrent instead of TURRET

They weren’t read to as children and have therefore developed more slowly.

Read to your kids, new parents!

On Topic

Engineer is recognized as having a relatively high skill floor, thusly it could be reasonably concluded that engineer players are, on average, more skilled. Which would obviously skew the results of a report.

Something to consider, regardless.

I would like to share a few things as I play engi.
Engi`s are great against warriors, thiefs and rangers.
Engi`s are poor against guardians, necros and mesmers.

The engi`s are OP when you play unranked and you have 5 random people against you, cos they will fail to strike at you with 2/3 characters when you camp.
The engi`s aren`t OP when you face a premade and 2/3 characters stomp at you.

Anet should focus on dragging more players into PVP with rewards, so that the matchmaking system will be able to design teams in a better way.

Now that I’ll agree with. PvP would be improved a lot by having more players.

kpeatop.9458:

The engi`s aren`t OP when you face a premade and 2/3 characters stomp at you.

I have to quote the above line, because it seems like you argue against my idea of adjusting the matchmaking/prediction in case my experiences described in the first post were found to be a constant across the board, based on that allegation.

Regardless of the fact that we have yet to determine whether the class is overperforming and, if it’s overperforming, the class would have to be changed rather than adjusting the system to accomodate for the statistically verified positive outcome when it is present, is there any other class you can think of that you could replace the engineer with in the above statement and which would allow you to deal with the situation described in a more favorable fashion?

In other words, is there any class that when facing a premade or a push of 3 people on it, would have realistic chances of winning? The reason why you aren’t facing a premade as an engineer is ideally the fact that if you yourself are not in a premade, you also do not encounter premades. Along the same lines, it’s usually unlikely for people to rush an engineer with 2-3 people, because both teams only have 5 players each, which renders the whole endeavour more complicated than one would like usually.

Could you please compare how many hours were played before the patch and after? Does the patch has an impact on the pvp community?

If we talking about statistics, could you please add to leaderboard column that contain percentage of all games that were played solo?
That will add some interesting point of view for win ratio column.

And derailed my work here is done! BTW I’m a necro and I kittening hate engis.

imaclown.1628:

And derailed my work here is done! BTW I’m a necro and I kittening hate engis.

You are also a newly emerged engineer who happens to have won 16 out of his last 17 matches on the class in question. Just to complete the picture.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/pvp/Is-matchmaking-broken-for-unranked/first#post4679872

imaclown.1628:

…I’ve played 17 games and won 16 of them…
Yeah NeXeD.3042 is my regular acct but it’s been heavily infracted lately so it’s difficult to post on forums with it. I made this acct because I wanted to learn how to play engi and didn’t feel like deleting a character or adding character slots so I just bought the game again =)

actually it was with a power necro on my main account. this acct. i can pretty much only post once a day on this thing.