Guild Wars 2

Can we please get a skilled based League?
Like a legit one, not a fake one.

I’m tired of being put with people that do really dumb stuff.

We were 250-350 winning on Legacy but enemy team had all 3 caps. For w/e reason team didn’t want to go for lord. – Lost

Lost team fight at the start of the game, Ranger Proceeds to AFK rest of match – Lost

Theif that is just running between mid and home, not capping or even fighting most of the time – Lost

Had games where I’m the only one that defends home, gets jumped by three people, team can’t cap mid despite 2v4 advantage – Lost

Theif that does nothing but die in mid while enemy thief is doing what thieves do best. – Lost due to being outrotated by a theif.

All these in a row. 1 person makes too much of a difference for them to do stupid stuff. And can there PLEASE be a way to black list people so they don’t end up on your team? Some people are just in a league way to high for there skill level and/or just troll matches because reasons. There are some players that almost always AFK. No reason just always in base doing nothing all game and then calls a team noob because they don’t win 4v5.

Apparently reporting them does nothing because I’ve had the same guy afk in matches for the past week or so now.

Morte de Angelis.7986:

…Some people are just in a league way to high for there skill level and/or just troll matches because reasons…

I always tell my guildies not to get way too high when they’re in a league, but do they listen?

Of course not :p

We’ve had quite a few “skill based” systems but they all evolved around win percentages. The higher it was, the higher your mmr was. Same for the players you were with.

The issues were 2 things.
1. Queue times were insane. The majority of the casual playerbase didn’t go above 55%. Those who were higher than 60% were in a team of some sort and we all know how many players team queue.

2. Casuals hated it while the elitists loved it. You could guess who had the louder voice.

This is why we have the current pip League system. It meets the Elitists and Casual player base somewhere in the middle.

The current one is a placeholer, just saying.

Saiyan.1704:

We’ve had quite a few “skill based” systems but they all evolved around win percentages. The higher it was, the higher your mmr was. Same for the players you were with.
…

Sorry, it was much more complex than based on win ratio.

I was at 125 rank on the leaderboard and since I was into a casual pvp guild at first, my win ratio wasn’t higher than people rank at 500 or even 95% under.

Win ratio did help tons with a small subset of games, like in 2013. But they fixed that in 2014 to make sure players that only play 20 games (20 win, 0 lost) don’t get rated in the top 100 rank. (even if those account did beat top 100 rank players, usually another account bought by a top 100 guy)

Like the wow arena 2v2/3v3 or 5v5. Even the team composition can play an important role (depending of the extension), this pvp format is really skilled.
It judges your gameplay, your personnal skill and your team symbiosis as well.
The problem with the current pvp format or wvw it judges a lot more your number, your team composition and your teamplay. Not really the personnal skill.
Team decision, rotations are far important than personnal skill. It’s about strategy only and not real pvp skill.

Jourdelune.7456:

Saiyan.1704:

We’ve had quite a few “skill based” systems but they all evolved around win percentages. The higher it was, the higher your mmr was. Same for the players you were with.
…

Sorry, it was much more complex than based on win ratio.

I was at 125 rank on the leaderboard and since I was into a casual pvp guild at first, my win ratio wasn’t higher than people rank at 500 or even 95% under.

Win ratio did help tons with a small subset of games, like in 2013. But they fixed that in 2014 to make sure players that only play 20 games (20 win, 0 lost) don’t get rated in the top 100 rank. (even if those account did beat top 100 rank players, usually another account bought by a top 100 guy)

Oh right I forgotten about that system too. But that system emphasized grinding to the point where any consistent player can be top 15. Now, they indeed incorporated win-ratio towards the end but it still had huge flaws.

I’m curious how they’ll add a more Skill base approach to Leagues but that’s not the challenging part. The question is whether or not Anet can make – say Emerald – “rewarding” enough for players to keep playing through it.

Saiyan.1704:

Jourdelune.7456:

Saiyan.1704:

We’ve had quite a few “skill based” systems but they all evolved around win percentages. The higher it was, the higher your mmr was. Same for the players you were with.
…

Sorry, it was much more complex than based on win ratio.

I was at 125 rank on the leaderboard and since I was into a casual pvp guild at first, my win ratio wasn’t higher than people rank at 500 or even 95% under.

Win ratio did help tons with a small subset of games, like in 2013. But they fixed that in 2014 to make sure players that only play 20 games (20 win, 0 lost) don’t get rated in the top 100 rank. (even if those account did beat top 100 rank players, usually another account bought by a top 100 guy)

Oh right I forgotten about that system too. But that system emphasized grinding to the point where any consistent player can be top 15. Now, they indeed incorporated win-ratio towards the end but it still had huge flaws.

I’m curious how they’ll add a more Skill base approach to Leagues but that’s not the challenging part. The question is whether or not Anet can make – say Emerald – “rewarding” enough for players to keep playing through it.

The grind of wins was put into in test season 1 in january 2015.

It was like going back to alpha stage of ranking.

In 2014, where dd ele was dominating and bunker guard got replace by stacking 2 dd ele, the board was skill based and “tuned”.

The decay was still a problem, many top 100 didn’t play prime time in fear to lose their positions. Playing in night or day, avoiding evening. This was the little glitch of a fair ranking system for the 100 to 1000 ranked positions.

The decay was only on RANK and not MMR. Doing it more slowly on MMR, would had help to make more movement on the top 100 board.

Literally, Team PUMA (friends of MISTCORE in 2013-2014) was all in the 100-200 range and they played 2 or 3 games per week. They kept their rank in that position… with MMR and all. But obviously it was not enough.

If their MMR would decay after a certain threshold (i say 20 games per week), they would had drop the ranking much more.