Guild Wars 2

http://imgur.com/OyqaYmU

Hi, this is not a complaining post but just a request for ANet devs to reconsider how the MMR gain/loss are calculate for next season. Atm even with 90% win rate every session I still lose progress with 2 losts. This is an example of my recent win/losts ration. This is in Prime time. As you can see, one lost = 4 wins almost. This is why no ones want to queue on their main account when they got legend. Because each loss took minimum 3 games to recover. I understand the need to lose more than you gain to create a sense of “Progression” but this is just dumb. A more acceptable win/gain ratio would be win +10 lose -15. Then at least you still make progress with a 60% win rate. However with the current gain and lose ratio, Even with 90% win rate it still possible to lose progress in 2 loses.

If you wan proof just check my channel VoD. All my stream session I always have ~85% win rate and sometimes I ended stream with negative rating because each lost reduce so many rating. Please consider reworking how rating gain/loss is calculated. Thank you

Consider urself lucky I haven’t gotten less than -40 per loss since December

and to add on to that na has more volatility because there are more high -end or high-end equal level players EU than NA does (arguable) but it is a factor that contributes to the massive loss in rating – because more high-end players increases your chance of an expected loss during a match i guess

or you guys at the top could just grow a pair and q up. what you are suggesting is to make the loss penalty similar to something like bronze. everyone would be in platinum if this were the case.

So… No one queue at high rating because the population at this rating is too low to give fair matches, and the population at this rating is too low because no one queue.

And you want anet to change how mmr gain/loss is calculated to solve this issue? I don’t think you actually understand the problem here.

The system seems designed to destroy points and to drag everyone down. The more they play, the lower their ratings will be, even if they perform far beyond the average.

The only way to win is not to play.

chronometria.3708:

The system seems designed to destroy points and to drag everyone down. The more they play, the lower their ratings will be, even if they perform far beyond the average.

The only way to win is not to play.

The real issue is that there is not many players at high rating (late Platinum/Legendary) which makes the system to match them with lower tiers (Gold/Early Plat) and if they lose, they lose a lot of points. I don’t see how they can fix that tbh, we can only hope the average players get better and increase their rating

Evan Lesh.3295:

If point gains were arbitrary as you describe, then there would be no upper bound on MMR, and you would see people who play a lot with 10k rating at the top of the leaderboard. This is not accurate and just takes us back to seasons 1-4.

The reason you are gaining very little is because you are expected to win all those matches and your rating is already accurate. When you lose a match you are expected to win, you take a decent hit. Your history shows that you can easily maintain your rating, which is good. If you’re already one of the best players, why do you need your rating to continually rise?

I can understand the argument that high-skilled players might want some sense of progression past being number 1, but that is outside the scope of MMR. This is one of the reasons you consistently get more rewards while highly rated.

Hello Evan,

Thank you for your response. I understand your points, however, more than half of the losts I took are against the top players on their alts. And the system think I supposed to win those when in fact it is stacked against my favors. I know this is not the system’s faults that people play on their alts. However, the reason most of these players alts is because of the reason I stated. The point gain ratio I mentioned is just an example, the reason I ask for a less punishing ratio of points gains/lose is in hope that it will encourage more high rated players to queue. Instead of the current five or six players who still queue when they’re high rated, that including me.

This season has been the best one so far and I am just sharing my suggestion for next season. Thanks for the hard work.

Stand The Wall.6987:

or you guys at the top could just grow a pair and q up. what you are suggesting is to make the loss penalty similar to something like bronze. everyone would be in platinum if this were the case.

I have almost 1k games this season and I streamed 90% of my games. I dropped out of top 250 like twice a week during the season to entertain my stream and climbed back to top 25 the next day no problem. What I want is just more high rated players queuing on their mains and stop dodging, altings, and camping rating. The suggestion to lower point lost upon losses is in hope of encouraging people from playing on mains more.

The problem is that for some reason the higher rated players in NA play less trying to protect there rating versus there EU counterparts. I don’t think the raw numbers of top player are significantly less.

Evan Lesh.3295:

If point gains were arbitrary as you describe, then there would be no upper bound on MMR, and you would see people who play a lot with 10k rating at the top of the leaderboard. This is not accurate and just takes us back to seasons 1-4.

The reason you are gaining very little is because you are expected to win all those matches and your rating is already accurate. When you lose a match you are expected to win, you take a decent hit. Your history shows that you can easily maintain your rating, which is good. If you’re already one of the best players, why do you need your rating to continually rise?

I can understand the argument that high-skilled players might want some sense of progression past being number 1, but that is outside the scope of MMR. This is one of the reasons you consistently get more rewards while highly rated.

no, evan, not is good, a winratio of +80% shows a machmaker fault, top players vs not so top players, the correct thing is top vs top and the top of the top ones having a winratio of max 60%

The fact that today’s mass-purge on the leaderboard resulted in the top 250 ending under 1700 shows just how thin the population is at the top, which makes matchmaking so difficult to be accurate and all the more punishing.

Evan Lesh.3295:

If point gains were arbitrary as you describe, then there would be no upper bound on MMR, and you would see people who play a lot with 10k rating at the top of the leaderboard. This is not accurate and just takes us back to seasons 1-4.

The reason you are gaining very little is because you are expected to win all those matches and your rating is already accurate. When you lose a match you are expected to win, you take a decent hit. Your history shows that you can easily maintain your rating, which is good. If you’re already one of the best players, why do you need your rating to continually rise?

It’s simply too difficult for most people to actually stay in legendary and even platinum, which exacerbates population problems even more and just encourages people to AFK for days and forcibly decay their accounts for larger gains. I think you’re doing the right thing to place an upper bound on the leaderboard, but it just feels like the matchmaker is trying to force a bell curve too heavily.

steelheart.7386:

The problem is that for some reason the higher rated players in NA play less trying to protect there rating versus there EU counterparts. I don’t think the raw numbers of top player are significantly less.

But there are more EU players in legendary/platinum than there are in NA. The top 250 in EU finishes out at 1853. At the time of my writing this post, the NA top 250 finishes out at 1695.

https://gw2armory.com/leaderboards/pvp/na
https://gw2armory.com/leaderboards/pvp/eu

Ratings are completely arbitrary when taken out of the context. You can’t, for example, say that someone that’s 1850 in EU is actually better than someone that’s 1750 in NA, as a given rating is meaningful only when compared to other ratings relative to the same data set (e.g., an 1850 EU player is better than a 1750 EU player).

It does, however, represent that there are more players in EU with a higher rating than those in NA, which snowballs a lot of the problems NA players deal with that EU players might not.

Simply put, it is much harder to actually stay in legendary in NA than it is in EU when all other aspects of glicko are considered (i.e., team rating deviations), and this makes people like Kratos work a lot harder than they actually should to stay there.

xKratos.4758:

I have almost 1k games this season and I streamed 90% of my games. I dropped out of top 250 like twice a week during the season to entertain my stream and climbed back to top 25 the next day no problem. What I want is just more high rated players queuing on their mains and stop dodging, altings, and camping rating. The suggestion to lower point lost upon losses is in hope of encouraging people from playing on mains more.

that’s great but minority votes in a democracy are supposed to lose for a reason. we could have it the way it is now, where its a struggle to stay on top, or like the old legendary champion title that was grinded out by a lot of noobs. I guess a middle ground is a reasonable request.

the best thing would be to allow only 1 leaderboard spot from 1 ip address. this would take care of everything. I don’t think this would really cut into profits because there are only so many people at the top that actually care about this to pay another $40. it would benefit more people to not favor the top 10%. hey wait a minute, where have I heard this before?!?! ERMEHGERD GUISE

I’d like to see anyone in legendary be made to play everyday to keep their position, the system is far too lenient on them. Being legendary atm means playing only when necessary and only playing favorable games, wheres the competition in that. Make them earn and keep their places daily, it should be dog eat dog at the top.

Sooloo.1364:

I’d like to see anyone in legendary be made to play everyday to keep their position, the system is far too lenient on them. Being legendary atm means playing only when necessary and only playing favorable games, wheres the competition in that. Make them earn and keep their places daily, it should be dog eat dog at the top.

yes but at the same time favoring no lifers is not a great philosophy to endorse.

megilandil.7506:

Evan Lesh.3295:

If point gains were arbitrary as you describe, then there would be no upper bound on MMR, and you would see people who play a lot with 10k rating at the top of the leaderboard. This is not accurate and just takes us back to seasons 1-4.

The reason you are gaining very little is because you are expected to win all those matches and your rating is already accurate. When you lose a match you are expected to win, you take a decent hit. Your history shows that you can easily maintain your rating, which is good. If you’re already one of the best players, why do you need your rating to continually rise?

I can understand the argument that high-skilled players might want some sense of progression past being number 1, but that is outside the scope of MMR. This is one of the reasons you consistently get more rewards while highly rated.

no, evan, not is good, a winratio of +80% shows a machmaker fault, top players vs not so top players, the correct thing is top vs top and the top of the top ones having a winratio of max 60%

The system currently matches appropriately, but the issue is that it can only pair people against people who are actively online and queuing. I think you’re forgetting the top 250 have lives and other things to do besides play gw2 all day.

For what it’s worth, I didn’t run into any of the top 100 players until I got right under the top 250/inside it, and I played up from T1 Silver after my placements.

GW2 cant have a system that gains low rating to get top ranking, this is a pvp wit 5 members, and duoqs, so if a player doesnt play the expected in team they can lose, doesnt matter how good they are, so its a +-70% lucky game climbing ladder… Wow use this system cuz its just 2v2, 3v3 wit a TEAM FORMED, see like an example dota 5 vs 5 everygame u win/lose 20-25

pleeease make if someone play duoq he need to face a duoq versus too, or remove this kitten!!

LucianTheAngelic.7054:

megilandil.7506:

Evan Lesh.3295:

If point gains were arbitrary as you describe, then there would be no upper bound on MMR, and you would see people who play a lot with 10k rating at the top of the leaderboard. This is not accurate and just takes us back to seasons 1-4.

The reason you are gaining very little is because you are expected to win all those matches and your rating is already accurate. When you lose a match you are expected to win, you take a decent hit. Your history shows that you can easily maintain your rating, which is good. If you’re already one of the best players, why do you need your rating to continually rise?

I can understand the argument that high-skilled players might want some sense of progression past being number 1, but that is outside the scope of MMR. This is one of the reasons you consistently get more rewards while highly rated.

no, evan, not is good, a winratio of +80% shows a machmaker fault, top players vs not so top players, the correct thing is top vs top and the top of the top ones having a winratio of max 60%

The system currently matches appropriately, but the issue is that it can only pair people against people who are actively online and queuing. I think you’re forgetting the top 250 have lives and other things to do besides play gw2 all day.

For what it’s worth, I didn’t run into any of the top 100 players until I got right under the top 250/inside it, and I played up from T1 Silver after my placements.

I ran into top players almost every 2nd or 3rd game, even against a top 20 duo q, as a Silver…

Same thing for me sephiroth I’d run into top tier duos all the time and I’d just end up getting frustrated and not queue. Also I’d start queue dodging too since as a solo q player I had no chance vs that in gold/plat (they were legend).

This just made the problem worse as everyone queue dodge or don’t play and in the end it even affects silver league players :/

Evan Lesh.3295:

If point gains were arbitrary as you describe, then there would be no upper bound on MMR, and you would see people who play a lot with 10k rating at the top of the leaderboard. This is not accurate and just takes us back to seasons 1-4.

The reason you are gaining very little is because you are expected to win all those matches and your rating is already accurate. When you lose a match you are expected to win, you take a decent hit. Your history shows that you can easily maintain your rating, which is good. If you’re already one of the best players, why do you need your rating to continually rise?

I can understand the argument that high-skilled players might want some sense of progression past being number 1, but that is outside the scope of MMR. This is one of the reasons you consistently get more rewards while highly rated.

If that is indeed the intended design, I’m sorry to say the system gets it wrong often. The system clearly does not account for counter comps, afkers, d/cs or ragequitters who come back before match end, and the big one - people who just don’t know what they are doing (which could be an MMR issue to be fixed gradually with the soft-resets between seasons, but I’m not so sure how much weight MMR really plays in this new system). This is based on just seeing them play, and then getting hit hard when losing as a result. I did not think it would work this way because of the engine trying to force a 50% win:lose ratio, and on that note, how is an engine which does this also calculate that one should be winning all his games?

Evan Lesh.3295:

If point gains were arbitrary as you describe, then there would be no upper bound on MMR, and you would see people who play a lot with 10k rating at the top of the leaderboard. This is not accurate and just takes us back to seasons 1-4.

The reason you are gaining very little is because you are expected to win all those matches and your rating is already accurate. When you lose a match you are expected to win, you take a decent hit. Your history shows that you can easily maintain your rating, which is good. If you’re already one of the best players, why do you need your rating to continually rise?

I can understand the argument that high-skilled players might want some sense of progression past being number 1, but that is outside the scope of MMR. This is one of the reasons you consistently get more rewards while highly rated.

This is happening not only in high rating, but gold as well. I climbed to platinum and now I am back at gold 2. Even with 60% win rate or more you always lose more than you gain. Evan, I don’t understand your logic, because this system actually helps those who play a lot, because they can just grind it. I can spend all day climbing, then lose a few matches thanks to your broken matchmaking and go back to square one. It’s not fun, it’s not rewarding.

Mmmm case and point: my last half a dozen games. Lost 18 for 2 DH being 2v1 a condi thief all match, another with 2 longbow druids insisting they are God’s gift running builds that are 100% countered by enemy comps. More losses from general lack of skill and or game knowledge. Double thief almost every match, and the other is beyond awful 95% of the time. Last game actually won despite the pistol thief literally only using dodge and auto attack, and gained a whopping 8 points after dropping over 50.

One day pretty much undid and entire week of carefully picking the time of day to queue, and queue dodging numerous bads. I’m pretty much trading my rating for the 20g reward chests before the season end, but it’s irritating nonetheless.

Excuse what appears to be me moaning. This is the simplest way to paint the picture that this system’s ability to accurately predict the outcome of a match is either non-existent, or the majority of players are just so random in what they do that it is impossible to predict what they are going to pull. Either way, the leaderboards have to be based on what the case actually is, not what it should be if everything was predictable and or working as intended.

That all said, I’d trade season 5, any subsequent season, and any improvements thereof, for the competitive scene - i.e. weekly+ tournaments - back. Any news on that?

@Impact there’s like nobody playing on NA right now lol most of us just hoard the rating and sit afk.

The problem is the rest of your team is gonna be silver or gold cuz nobody wants to queue and lose their rating which means you have to hard carry AND you’ll lose -16 or -18 and gain like nothimg since the average team MMR is gonna be gold or lower.

You have to queue during NA prime or expect huge losses

Evan Lesh.3295:

If point gains were arbitrary as you describe, then there would be no upper bound on MMR, and you would see people who play a lot with 10k rating at the top of the leaderboard. This is not accurate and just takes us back to seasons 1-4.

The reason you are gaining very little is because you are expected to win all those matches and your rating is already accurate. When you lose a match you are expected to win, you take a decent hit. Your history shows that you can easily maintain your rating, which is good. If you’re already one of the best players, why do you need your rating to continually rise?

I can understand the argument that high-skilled players might want some sense of progression past being number 1, but that is outside the scope of MMR. This is one of the reasons you consistently get more rewards while highly rated.

Hi Evan,

While going putting limit on MMR games is good for the reasons you’ve mentioned the biggest problem is that “I can understand the argument that high-skilled players might want some sense of progression past being number 1, but that is outside the scope of MMR. This is one of the reasons you consistently get more rewards while highly rated.”

There’s just no incentive to queue besides small gold rewards after you get into the top 100/25/10 or w/e that players goal is.

Queuing at your ‘max’ rating is pretty much guaranteeing that you WILL decline, so people WILL stop playing… obviously this bad. Maybe a further incentive like every game you play in the top 100 yields ‘x’ reward…

Even though there are technically higher rewards already, the differences are unnoticeable. I’m not certain of the solution is exactly other than that there needs to be more incentive to keep playing.

Impact.2780:

One day pretty much undid and entire week of carefully picking the time of day to queue, and queue dodging numerous bads. I’m pretty much trading my rating for the 20g reward chests before the season end, but it’s irritating nonetheless.

Not to be that guy, but if your position on the leaderboard was that precarious, maybe you didn’t belong on it in the first place.

I went from 1790 and fell to 1715 today, but what difference does it make? All it takes is 4-5 straight wins to go from #250 to #100. I’ve spent the entire season floating up and down, in and out of the leaderboard.

I wouldn’t get so wrapped up in it, especially when so many people in the top 250 don’t really belong there in the first place and just decay their accounts or play the bare minimum matches. There has been so little gamesmanship this season it has rendered the whole process pretty meaningless. It wouldn’t be the worst thing to accept you made the best of all the things going on this season and the next will be a lot more competitive.

I think it’s also pretty common knowledge at this point in the season the matchmaking will be at its most volatile.

imo around the 1750+ rating and up should have rating gain normalized that way it’s not such a big sting for winning 21 rating after 3 matches only to lose all of it in 1 match, Keep the loss of rating where it’s at so it still has a impact, but set a minimum amount of rating gain so people aren’t getting like 5-7 rating for a match. It’ll add more incentive to keep on the main account, instead of alt hopping.

Things that should happen next season.
-150 matches required to be placed on the boards.
-Placement Matches – 1000 rating starting point, Highest you can be placed is in High Gold, lowest is obviously Bronze.