Guild Wars 2

What title says.

Came, saw, made somebody rage quit, destroyed the other team 504 to zip.
Fully solo que’ed on both teams.

+3 points?
Yes?

uberkingkong.8041:

+3 points?
Yes?

No.

It does not matter for you, how many points the opponent team had.
It only matters how high your rating difference was. Since you obliterated them, I expect you to only gain 1 point.

You are lucky they didn’t put you in timeout to think about want you’ve done.

Since you beat them by more than 400 it’s possible that you’d get +3, but only if they were heavily favored to win.

The two factors in determining leader board point gain are spread and chance of victory. Your spread meets the criteria for +3, but since the chance of winning is always unknown there’s no way to know if you did get +3.

I think we need clear infomation about everything about Ranked PvP on website AND ingame.

Morwath.9817:

I think we need clear infomation about everything about Ranked PvP on website AND ingame.

We actually have enough information, but nobody bother reading it.

If you want some, how about starting with: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/PvP_Matchmaking_Algorithm

Shockwave.1230:

Since you beat them by more than 400 it’s possible that you’d get +3, but only if they were heavily favored to win.

The two factors in determining leader board point gain are spread and chance of victory. Your spread meets the criteria for +3, but since the chance of winning is always unknown there’s no way to know if you did get +3.

No, the difference from the end-score does not matter at all.

Teutos.8620:

Morwath.9817:

I think we need clear infomation about everything about Ranked PvP on website AND ingame.

We actually have enough information, but nobody bother reading it.

If you want some, how about starting with: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/PvP_Matchmaking_Algorithm

I want it ingame, easy accessible.

That link, nothing but nonsense, requires too much critical thinking to figure it out and understand it.

These developers, and coders get paid big bucks not to put information out in only terms other coders and developers know, but to put it into terms where a simpleton can figure out what it means.

Also, I thought if you beat a team bad enough you get more points, and if you get into a really close game if you lose you may get points. I thought the game score matters.

Obviously I was a solo que, my team was solo que and we ANNIHILATED that team, which was solo que. I don’t see how I was in favor to win, we all solo que. I deserve +3 for FLAWLESS victory, heck I deserve +5, FLAWLESS victories should give +5, should be incentive to ANNIHILATE the other team.

You should be able to see how many points you can get per game, and what scores you gotta be within to get those points, like +1 if you win by 100, +2 if you win by 300, +3 if you win FLAWLESSLY. That way people can tell they are able to earn those points in game.

Because I gotta say, some people don’t realize the point system and they play around, and they could be getting +2s +3s but since they played around they got +1.

If flawless victories have more points people like noscoc would have 300-400 points in 100 games

kitten.1685:

If flawless victories have more points people like noscoc would have 300-400 points in 100 games

Oh ya… Sure… Like I said before, mine was a solo que vs solo que.
Wasn’t a premade vs solo que.

Also, I doubt he gets many if any flawless victories against other premades. Probably 1 or 2 tops.

They should, and I’m assuming they do, if you lose by other team flawless victory over you, you should lose just as many points, as in -2 or -3. Should be incentive to keep playing and try instead of throwing in the towel at the moment game begins.

You’re lucky one of the guys on their team didn’t literally quit the game. Because then you would get a +0.

GG uberkingkong. That’s a very legit technique: if you see someone raging in the other team, focus him until he rage quits. I got 70% win in soloq in the test season using this method.

uberkingkong.8041:

Obviously I was a solo que, my team was solo que and we ANNIHILATED that team, which was solo que. I don’t see how I was in favor to win, we all solo que. I deserve +3 for FLAWLESS victory, heck I deserve +5, FLAWLESS victories should give +5, should be incentive to ANNIHILATE the other team.

I can try to simplify for you how the current system works, but since english is not my first language, I might face some problems.

1.) Every players has his own match making rating. It is a four digit number, supposed to show accurately how good you are.
F.e. Player A will have a MMR of 3.000.
Player B will have a MMR of about 1.000.
Every match you play will influence your rating. You win → it growth.
You win against player A → You get a big rating boost
You win against player B → Only a small rating boost.

2.) In a perfect world, with enough players participating, you would only play with and against players which have the same rating as you do.

3.) Since we are not in a perfect world, the average rating between the teams may be different. Out of this difference, the system calculates how big your win chance is.
F.e. Against a team full of player-A: 20%; Against a team full of player-B: 80%.

4.) ONLY the score you reach at the end of the match AND the above mentioned win-chance matters.
You reach 200 points against team A (you had a win chance of 20%) => -1 Point for you.
You reach 300 points against team A (you had a win chance of 20%) => 0 points.
You reach 400 points against team A (you had a win chance of 20%) => +1 Point.

You reach 200 points against Team B (you had a win chance of 80%) =>-2 Points for you.
You reach 300 points against Team B (you had a win chance of 80%) => -1 Point.
You reach 400 points against Team B (You had a win chance of 80%) => 0 Points.

uberkingkong.8041:

kitten.1685:

If flawless victories have more points people like noscoc would have 300-400 points in 100 games

Oh ya… Sure… Like I said before, mine was a solo que vs solo que.
Wasn’t a premade vs solo que.

Also, I doubt he gets many if any flawless victories against other premades. Probably 1 or 2 tops.

They should, and I’m assuming they do, if you lose by other team flawless victory over you, you should lose just as many points, as in -2 or -3. Should be incentive to keep playing and try instead of throwing in the towel at the moment game begins.

Haha don’t quote me but I would bet 90% at least of abjured teamqs are 500 0

Teutos.8620:

Shockwave.1230:

Since you beat them by more than 400 it’s possible that you’d get +3, but only if they were heavily favored to win.

The two factors in determining leader board point gain are spread and chance of victory. Your spread meets the criteria for +3, but since the chance of winning is always unknown there’s no way to know if you did get +3.

No, the difference from the end-score does not matter at all.

You’re right it’s not spread, it’s where you end your points at.

Teutos.8620:

4.) ONLY the score you reach at the end of the match AND the above mentioned win-chance matters.
You reach 200 points against team A (you had a win chance of 20%) => -1 Point for you.
You reach 300 points against team A (you had a win chance of 20%) => 0 points.
You reach 400 points against team A (you had a win chance of 20%) => +1 Point.

You reach 200 points against Team B (you had a win chance of 80%) =>-2 Points for you.
You reach 300 points against Team B (you had a win chance of 80%) => -1 Point.
You reach 400 points against Team B (You had a win chance of 80%) => 0 Points.

There’s a lot of data missing here, for example winning against team A (500 points) would result in +2. The code at this link is fairly self-explanitory: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/PvP_Matchmaking_Algorithm#Ladder

I personally think winning a game with an 80%+ win chance should award 0 points though – you aren’t really proving anything by beating a team that you’re significantly better than.

Random Weird Guy.3528:

There’s a lot of data missing here, for example winning against team A (500 points) would result in +2. The code at this link is fairly self-explanitory: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/PvP_Matchmaking_Algorithm#Ladder

I know that.
For some people the code does not seem to that self-explanatory, therefore I just picked some examples to better explain how the system works. Although posted the link above too

kitten.1685:

uberkingkong.8041:

kitten.1685:

If flawless victories have more points people like noscoc would have 300-400 points in 100 games

Oh ya… Sure… Like I said before, mine was a solo que vs solo que.
Wasn’t a premade vs solo que.

Also, I doubt he gets many if any flawless victories against other premades. Probably 1 or 2 tops.

They should, and I’m assuming they do, if you lose by other team flawless victory over you, you should lose just as many points, as in -2 or -3. Should be incentive to keep playing and try instead of throwing in the towel at the moment game begins.

Haha don’t quote me but I would bet 90% at least of abjured teamqs are 500 0

Aint hard to get at least 1 point.
Also, like I mentioned before my game was a solo que vs solo que, as in a fair matchup and we got flawless victory.

I wouldnt be suprised if Abjured landed a couple flawless victories against a solo que being that they are premade which is unfair therefore should only get the +1.
Now if they got flawless victory against another premade, than I could see it that they get awarded fairly.

And like I said, those who lose to flawless victories should get punished just as hard as those who win by flawless victory. This way it encourages people to not let the other team rack up points, but also encourages the enemy team if they are that much better than you to get those points. If it was where the losing team doesnt get punished, I could see them giving up at start if they know who Abjured is, and its not really fair to consider someone winning flawlessly if the other team doesnt try and they know they going to lose because its a tough team they facing so they dont try and abjured gets freebee flawless victory +3.

That’s why I mentioned if you lose by Flawless victory, you should get a -3. Otherwise it would be leaderboard manipulation. “You know we gonna woop ya, just let us win flawlessly” ez +3., nah get 1 point or 5 point for kill, you get 0 points for losing against team thats suppose to woop you and you didnt lose flawless, and enemy gets +1. You let them win flawless on you, give em that -3.

This is only speculation and not how leaderboard actually works, but it should.
You should have some control of how to get a lot of points rather than wondering, “are we expected to win?” “how can we tell what we gotta do for more points?”.

This current leaderboard is good, but the point distribution sucks, you have no control on it. There should be given’s like flawless victories for +3, and -3 for losing team.

Also, make that dishonor very harsh if you DC and results in your team losing by a flawless victory. Except if you DC before the match even started, because game shouldn’t even start when x<5 people are on a team and not all people are there when match starts. Like if you DC during the map selection phase, it should restart the que, you DC anytime before match actually starts, it should reset the que.

but again. I really should be awarded +3, flawless victory on fair terms isn’t easy to pull off. There should be known ways to increase your point score on the leaderboard more than +1 a game. (Not these guess games wondering if your the expected to win team or expected to lose team).

There should be a % sign at starting 2 min wait timer in the match and it shows each teams % to win. Like red team 75% blue team 25%, and easy to understand how to get points and lose points on leaderboard. Again, flawless victory should be included.

uberkingkong.8041:

kitten.1685:

uberkingkong.8041:

kitten.1685:

If flawless victories have more points people like noscoc would have 300-400 points in 100 games

Oh ya… Sure… Like I said before, mine was a solo que vs solo que.
Wasn’t a premade vs solo que.

Also, I doubt he gets many if any flawless victories against other premades. Probably 1 or 2 tops.

They should, and I’m assuming they do, if you lose by other team flawless victory over you, you should lose just as many points, as in -2 or -3. Should be incentive to keep playing and try instead of throwing in the towel at the moment game begins.

Haha don’t quote me but I would bet 90% at least of abjured teamqs are 500 0

Aint hard to get at least 1 point.

That’s where I would have to disagree, if Abjured was q-ing full strength and with their meta builds there are unlikely to be people in queue who can take a single point from them.

Luckily you often will have swap outs (like phanta playing d/f fresh air, or nos on power necro etc.) which will allow you to break out of bottlenecks! Also from what I’ve seen it’s rare to have full abjured doing team q’s – from what I’ve seen scrims and 2v2 practise are more common).

Siroso.2769:

uberkingkong.8041:

kitten.1685:

uberkingkong.8041:

kitten.1685:

If flawless victories have more points people like noscoc would have 300-400 points in 100 games

Oh ya… Sure… Like I said before, mine was a solo que vs solo que.
Wasn’t a premade vs solo que.

Also, I doubt he gets many if any flawless victories against other premades. Probably 1 or 2 tops.

They should, and I’m assuming they do, if you lose by other team flawless victory over you, you should lose just as many points, as in -2 or -3. Should be incentive to keep playing and try instead of throwing in the towel at the moment game begins.

Haha don’t quote me but I would bet 90% at least of abjured teamqs are 500 0

Aint hard to get at least 1 point.

That’s where I would have to disagree, if Abjured was q-ing full strength and with their meta builds there are unlikely to be people in queue who can take a single point from them.

Luckily you often will have swap outs (like phanta playing d/f fresh air, or nos on power necro etc.) which will allow you to break out of bottlenecks! Also from what I’ve seen it’s rare to have full abjured doing team q’s – from what I’ve seen scrims and 2v2 practise are more common).

Oh i have a picture, not on this comp we scored 100+ points against them, true maybe not full team but there was at least 3 of them.

Scoring 1 point on the team score isnt hard, even if you the best team in the game still doesnt make it kitten

ly way its possible is if the opposing team gives up completely or you play really good.

I’m sure if that team I got flawless victory on if they knew they had to score 1 point they would’ve scored 1 point. Maybe not because I treb real good.

All you gotta do is kill 1 guy or get a tick off a node and there goes the flawless victory.
Those necro’s on Abjured wasnt impossible to kill either, at least 1v1. I made them panic, and there boy toker comes to rescue all the time.

Get toker out of rotation and I’m sure they’ll be defeatable.

Kinda reminds me of watching Hman back in warrior days, all I remember was him going node to node and raging over the people he killed. Get that guy who goes node to node and owns people out of rotation, they become defeatable.

Why would anybody care about the amount of points or the leaderboard position? Its a farm board made for no life people who farm pugs 24/7.

Random Weird Guy.3528:

I personally think winning a game with an 80%+ win chance should award 0 points though – you aren’t really proving anything by beating a team that you’re significantly better than.

But then, what’s the point of playing as a top team? Usually you would face much weaker teams (because there are not enough top teams) and for winning you’d get nothing and for lose you’d lose your rating. Not exactly an incentive to strive being on the top.

The point you totally dismiss is the winning chance..
If you got a 95% to win a game and land a flawless victory, why should you get +3?
They never had a chance. Just imagine you are playing against 5 newbees. It is not that hard to smash them.
Actually, the only possibility to gain +3 is if YOUR win chance is under 20%.
https://www.guildwars2.com/de/news/finding-the-perfect-match/ < look at this page.

The problem is the amount of players. There are not enough at the same time with the same MMR – so the chances will vary and lead to blowouts. And i dont think blowouts are fun for any side of the team..

Meri.7512:

The point you totally dismiss is the winning chance..
If you got a 95% to win a game and land a flawless victory, why should you get +3?
They never had a chance. Just imagine you are playing against 5 newbees. It is not that hard to smash them.
Actually, the only possibility to gain +3 is if YOUR win chance is under 20%.
https://www.guildwars2.com/de/news/finding-the-perfect-match/ < look at this page.

The problem is the amount of players. There are not enough at the same time with the same MMR – so the chances will vary and lead to blowouts. And i dont think blowouts are fun for any side of the team..

Lemme counter you claim,
Both teams ARE solo que’s.

Do you think its good practice for the developers to make matchmaking full of 10 random players and completely 1 side it so one side has 95% chance to win?

Its not like I’m Abjured going against a bunch of solo ques. I can understand a 95% win rate from that, but all 10 solo que’ers and matchmaking makes it so a team has 95% win rate, is that acceptable?

Is that the case in my game? Nope I just consider I had one guy really good at going far and due to his success and my success trebbing we flawlessly won the game, and I should be awarded +3 points from that.

uberkingkong.8041:

Meri.7512:

The point you totally dismiss is the winning chance..
If you got a 95% to win a game and land a flawless victory, why should you get +3?
They never had a chance. Just imagine you are playing against 5 newbees. It is not that hard to smash them.
Actually, the only possibility to gain +3 is if YOUR win chance is under 20%.
https://www.guildwars2.com/de/news/finding-the-perfect-match/ < look at this page.

The problem is the amount of players. There are not enough at the same time with the same MMR – so the chances will vary and lead to blowouts. And i dont think blowouts are fun for any side of the team..

Lemme counter you claim,
Both teams ARE solo que’s.

Do you think its good practice for the developers to make matchmaking full of 10 random players and completely 1 side it so one side has 95% chance to win?

Its not like I’m Abjured going against a bunch of solo ques. I can understand a 95% win rate from that, but all 10 solo que’ers and matchmaking makes it so a team has 95% win rate, is that acceptable?

Is that the case in my game? Nope I just consider I had one guy really good at going far and due to his success and my success trebbing we flawlessly won the game, and I should be awarded +3 points from that.

You need to look at both sides of the argument:

Should you be awarded +3 for the enemy players’ inability to dodge the trebuchet and hold their ground at the home point? Trebs are only used <5% of the match in high tier games because it’s so easy to dodge and even if they don’t, you’ll only hit 1 person due to good player positioning.

Yes this is an exaggeration, but you get my point.

Random Weird Guy.3528:

uberkingkong.8041:

Meri.7512:

The point you totally dismiss is the winning chance..
If you got a 95% to win a game and land a flawless victory, why should you get +3?
They never had a chance. Just imagine you are playing against 5 newbees. It is not that hard to smash them.
Actually, the only possibility to gain +3 is if YOUR win chance is under 20%.
https://www.guildwars2.com/de/news/finding-the-perfect-match/ < look at this page.

The problem is the amount of players. There are not enough at the same time with the same MMR – so the chances will vary and lead to blowouts. And i dont think blowouts are fun for any side of the team..

Lemme counter you claim,
Both teams ARE solo que’s.

Do you think its good practice for the developers to make matchmaking full of 10 random players and completely 1 side it so one side has 95% chance to win?

Its not like I’m Abjured going against a bunch of solo ques. I can understand a 95% win rate from that, but all 10 solo que’ers and matchmaking makes it so a team has 95% win rate, is that acceptable?

Is that the case in my game? Nope I just consider I had one guy really good at going far and due to his success and my success trebbing we flawlessly won the game, and I should be awarded +3 points from that.

You need to look at both sides of the argument:

Should you be awarded +3 for the enemy players’ inability to dodge the trebuchet and hold their ground at the home point? Trebs are only used <5% of the match in high tier games because it’s so easy to dodge and even if they don’t, you’ll only hit 1 person due to good player positioning.

Yes this is an exaggeration, but you get my point.

How many people are in the so called “high tier”
How many people are not in the so called “high tier”

Yes the treb is very effective to the majority.
I rarely even see these “high tier” players in my games.
I’d say theres 30 people considered “high tier” and the PvP population is like 1000.
30/1000 is my chances of seeing a “high tier” player.

I was merely using this example to show that it’s just as valid to say you won because the other team played badly as it is to say because your team played well. Especially if this doesn’t happen most of the games.
And avoiding the treb isn’t restricted to the best players, most people in the teams I’m in and against are competent enough to work around the treb.

uberkingkong.8041:

Meri.7512:

The point you totally dismiss is the winning chance..
If you got a 95% to win a game and land a flawless victory, why should you get +3?
They never had a chance. Just imagine you are playing against 5 newbees. It is not that hard to smash them.
Actually, the only possibility to gain +3 is if YOUR win chance is under 20%.
https://www.guildwars2.com/de/news/finding-the-perfect-match/ < look at this page.

The problem is the amount of players. There are not enough at the same time with the same MMR – so the chances will vary and lead to blowouts. And i dont think blowouts are fun for any side of the team..

Lemme counter you claim,
Both teams ARE solo que’s.

Do you think its good practice for the developers to make matchmaking full of 10 random players and completely 1 side it so one side has 95% chance to win?

Its not like I’m Abjured going against a bunch of solo ques. I can understand a 95% win rate from that, but all 10 solo que’ers and matchmaking makes it so a team has 95% win rate, is that acceptable?

Is that the case in my game? Nope I just consider I had one guy really good at going far and due to his success and my success trebbing we flawlessly won the game, and I should be awarded +3 points from that.

The 95% was an example. Since we, the player, cant look at the winchance, there is no way to find it out. Ask some of the devs for this game, it would be definetely interesting.

And even 5solo vs 5solo doesnt mean they are all equal or that they have their MMR spot on. And thats exactly the problem. Not enough players means the range gets extended and players with lower/higher MMR get picked for a game.

Since we dont get the insight to most of the statistics you can’t lay any claim to points.

If u won against a “better” team, you deserve more points. If it was simply the same you will still get +1.

uberkingkong.8041:

That link, nothing but nonsense, requires too much critical thinking to figure it out and understand it.

These developers, and coders get paid big bucks not to put information out in only terms other coders and developers know, but to put it into terms where a simpleton can figure out what it means.

Also, I thought if you beat a team bad enough you get more points, and if you get into a really close game if you lose you may get points. I thought the game score matters.

Obviously I was a solo que, my team was solo que and we ANNIHILATED that team, which was solo que. I don’t see how I was in favor to win, we all solo que. I deserve +3 for FLAWLESS victory, heck I deserve +5, FLAWLESS victories should give +5, should be incentive to ANNIHILATE the other team.

You should be able to see how many points you can get per game, and what scores you gotta be within to get those points, like +1 if you win by 100, +2 if you win by 300, +3 if you win FLAWLESSLY. That way people can tell they are able to earn those points in game.

Because I gotta say, some people don’t realize the point system and they play around, and they could be getting +2s +3s but since they played around they got +1.

Maybe you team was heavily favored to win… Thus even if you annihilate them, its only a feat of noob bashing and not worthing +3s.

Teutos.8620:

uberkingkong.8041:

Obviously I was a solo que, my team was solo que and we ANNIHILATED that team, which was solo que. I don’t see how I was in favor to win, we all solo que. I deserve +3 for FLAWLESS victory, heck I deserve +5, FLAWLESS victories should give +5, should be incentive to ANNIHILATE the other team.

I can try to simplify for you how the current system works, but since english is not my first language, I might face some problems.

1.) Every players has his own match making rating. It is a four digit number, supposed to show accurately how good you are.
F.e. Player A will have a MMR of 3.000.
Player B will have a MMR of about 1.000.
Every match you play will influence your rating. You win -> it growth.
You win against player A -> You get a big rating boost
You win against player B -> Only a small rating boost.

2.) In a perfect world, with enough players participating, you would only play with and against players which have the same rating as you do.

3.) Since we are not in a perfect world, the average rating between the teams may be different. Out of this difference, the system calculates how big your win chance is.
F.e. Against a team full of player-A: 20%; Against a team full of player-B: 80%.

4.) ONLY the score you reach at the end of the match AND the above mentioned win-chance matters.
You reach 200 points against team A (you had a win chance of 20%) => -1 Point for you.
You reach 300 points against team A (you had a win chance of 20%) => 0 points.
You reach 400 points against team A (you had a win chance of 20%) => +1 Point.

You reach 200 points against Team B (you had a win chance of 80%) =>-2 Points for you.
You reach 300 points against Team B (you had a win chance of 80%) => -1 Point.
You reach 400 points against Team B (You had a win chance of 80%) => 0 Points.

You are kind of playing at semantics. The spread is just another way at looking at how you scored. Scoring 200 is basically the same thing as saying I lost by 300. When you get trounced by 400 (which means you scored 100) you are going to be doing poorly point wise in general. When you win by 500 (which means you scored 500) good things are going to happen point wise. A 500-0 win probably should be worth +3 a lot of the time one could argue that its a flaw in the current system that dominance over people of comparative skill isn’t rewarded more. Why shouldn’t I get max points for stomping people of comparative skill?

brannigan.9831:

You are kind of playing at semantics.

I tried to point out how the current system works. English is not my first language, so I have be careful what I write, to be sure, that people understand me.

A 500-0 win probably should be worth +3 a lot of the time unless the MMRs are way off.

If a team wins 500 to 0, the mmr IS way off. Either some players have a mmr, which does not suit them (some players from the losing team might had a too high rating , or some players from the winning team were too low ranked, or both) OR the match making made a mistake paring those two teams.

Now let’s talk about, how the system should be:
It should NOT give more point, if you win with a bigger margin.

We need a combination of MMR and point farming, so that after a farming period only the top-mmr players are on the top and not the farmers.
WoW has it with their Arenas; and Lol, Dota, SC2, Titanfall with their league system, and we will have it in the future too (Devs already told us, we are heading there).

Are people still trying to climb the leaderboard?

You know for someone who avocates time played above skill should be top of leader board. Has me perplexed on why you think you should get bonus points.

Hell both of you guys should get the same that way everyone is happy and we can just have fun. Yayyyyy!!!!!

Morwath.9817:

I think we need clear infomation about everything about Ranked PvP on website AND ingame.

I agree.

Ormus Black.5134:

Are people still trying to climb the leaderboard?

You know for someone who avocates time played above skill should be top of leader board. Has me perplexed on why you think you should get bonus points.

Hell both of you guys should get the same that way everyone is happy and we can just have fun. Yayyyyy!!!!!

Time played should be a big factor in leaderboard, but you should also be able to get more points by doing hard to do things like 500+ to 0 a game.

As it rewards players greatly, it should also hurt people harshly, as in -3, to prevent match manipulation and freebee points. And if people DC during a 500+ to 0 game, those guys should get -5 points.

Devious.8901:

Morwath.9817:

I think we need clear infomation about everything about Ranked PvP on website AND ingame.

I agree.

Yes, the leaderboard isn’t very clear although there’s a few defenders of it saying it is clear.
The leaderboard should be just as obvious as it is that if you kill someone you get +5 personal points, cap a node you get +10 personal points, it needs to be that obvious, not unusual as it is now, that you gotta goto the leaderboards, do a google search on it, read and put on your thinking cap and figuring it out, nah that’s too much work.

Anet doesn’t pay you to make stuff that makes people think too hard to understand something that should be easy, they pay you to make to make the hard to understand stuff easy to understand.

You know what. This game is rated T for Teens right? A 13 yr old should be able to know what’s going on. You want to censor words because “my kids are playing this, my kids watching this” well than you developers better make the content easily understood so “the kids” can understand it too.

You guys talk about how easy it is for abjured to get flawless victories, well than implement the flawless victory +3 to winners -3 to losers, and lets see how they fly up the leaderboards.

The leaderboards is totally fine, it just needs more incentives for people to ALWAYS be able to get more points than they should. It should never be, “well most you can get this game is +1, tough luck getting +2, +3”.

Also whoever said matchmaking was way off if someone wins 500 to 0, yup it sure is way off.
And to think there was no SET teams, the system they had could’ve easily moved 1 or 2 of my teammates to the other team to make it fair. But nope, they wanted one of those “95% win rate to one team, 5% win rate to the other team” scenario.
I mean its not like I’m a top ESL team facing off solo que’ers, which I could understand a 95% to 5%, but 10 random, single, able to change them around people, and the results come 95% to 5%, that’s silly.

But nope that game was not due to 95% to 5%, that game was totally me trebbing the kitten out of those guys, and that guy at far playing it right and luring the enemy into the treb shots. I deserved a +3 points from that game, I was even the top scorer (usually am, #skills/flex).

Anyways keep the current leaderboard, just add weekly (ex. every Saturday) IN GAME DEVELOPER/GM hosted tournaments that lets people easily enter into, have a big amount of points towards leaderboard for winning games in it and winning the tournament, more ways to get points (flawless victory, other stuff, losing by 300 and coming back and win game, “well they scored a point, we know we too good, so lets give them a 300 point lead and squash them for the +3 leaderboard points”.