Guild Wars 2

Silentshoes.1805:

Chaith.8256:

Silentshoes.1805:

Chaith,

It’s fine that you all group up. But the matcher needs to only match you with another team close to your average MMR. And if none of the other elites are playing at the moment, then there is no match available. That’s perfectly fair. That’s a reality of being the best.

That’s essentially putting you in a Super Platinum Bracket.

And that is fair to all players.

There’s only so much harm to the game’s enjoyment 20 people can do who rarely even do ranked queue.

I think there are more than 20 that can dominate the average players. There is a LOT to this game and it takes a while to learn.

We were both talking about elite players not slightly above average players.

Matchmaking can’t work for elite players if no other of the 20 elite players are playing.

However, for above average players and average players, the matchmaking seems to work just fine. What you’re referring to isn’t a problem currently.

Chaith.8256:

Silentshoes.1805:

Chaith.8256:

Silentshoes.1805:

Chaith,

It’s fine that you all group up. But the matcher needs to only match you with another team close to your average MMR. And if none of the other elites are playing at the moment, then there is no match available. That’s perfectly fair. That’s a reality of being the best.

That’s essentially putting you in a Super Platinum Bracket.

And that is fair to all players.

There’s only so much harm to the game’s enjoyment 20 people can do who rarely even do ranked queue.

I think there are more than 20 that can dominate the average players. There is a LOT to this game and it takes a while to learn.

We were both talking about elite players not slightly above average players.

Matchmaking can’t work for elite players if no other of the 20 elite players are playing.

However, for above average players and average players, the matchmaking seems to work just fine. What you’re referring to isn’t a problem currently.

It’s amplified because many Top 300 players grouped on teams, many on Teamspeak, basically cycle through match after match crushing casual soloers. You see this whenever the queues get shorter.

The teams that are winning are having fun and play hour after hour, winning. The low to average skill people get discouraged by blowouts and stop. And more casuals show up after a few minutes and get blown out for a few games, then they leave.

When they tightened up the matching, I, as an average player, started getting good tight matches…but the forums lit up with high-level people complaining that their Q was 30 mins.

Well, of course it was…the matcher was not allowing lopsided matches.

Silentshoes.1805:

Chaith.8256:

Silentshoes.1805:

Chaith.8256:

Silentshoes.1805:

Chaith,

It’s fine that you all group up. But the matcher needs to only match you with another team close to your average MMR. And if none of the other elites are playing at the moment, then there is no match available. That’s perfectly fair. That’s a reality of being the best.

That’s essentially putting you in a Super Platinum Bracket.

And that is fair to all players.

There’s only so much harm to the game’s enjoyment 20 people can do who rarely even do ranked queue.

I think there are more than 20 that can dominate the average players. There is a LOT to this game and it takes a while to learn.

We were both talking about elite players not slightly above average players.

Matchmaking can’t work for elite players if no other of the 20 elite players are playing.

However, for above average players and average players, the matchmaking seems to work just fine. What you’re referring to isn’t a problem currently.

It’s amplified because let’s say, Top 300 players grouped on teams, many on Teamspeak, basically cycle through match after match crushing casual soloers. You see this whenever the queues get shorter.

The teams that are winning are having fun and play hour after hour, winning. The low to average skill people get discouraged by blowouts and stop. Still, more casuals show up after a few minutes and get blown out for a few games, then they leave.

When they tightened up the matching, I, as an average player, started getting good tight matches…but the forums lit up with high-level people complaining that they Q was 30 mins.

Well, of course it was…the matcher was not allowing lopsided matches.

Thing is, there are enough people in the top 300 playing at a time to allow matches between two parties of the same category to happen. And god knows there are enough solo queuing, average players to match amongst themselves.

The game can match a game where all players are perfectly even in MMR. Often one team will win and the losers simply blame the matcher, to be honest. Counter-picks happen and aren’t controllable – matching MMR is only the first step, not the be-all to close matches. Players have to take their win rate into their own hands at some point, where it is possible to influence it. (Tailoring builds in the pre-game, reading up on, and playing effective builds.)

Silentshoes.1805:

Chaith.8256:

Silentshoes.1805:

Chaith.8256:

Silentshoes.1805:

Chaith,

It’s fine that you all group up. But the matcher needs to only match you with another team close to your average MMR. And if none of the other elites are playing at the moment, then there is no match available. That’s perfectly fair. That’s a reality of being the best.

That’s essentially putting you in a Super Platinum Bracket.

And that is fair to all players.

There’s only so much harm to the game’s enjoyment 20 people can do who rarely even do ranked queue.

I think there are more than 20 that can dominate the average players. There is a LOT to this game and it takes a while to learn.

We were both talking about elite players not slightly above average players.

Matchmaking can’t work for elite players if no other of the 20 elite players are playing.

However, for above average players and average players, the matchmaking seems to work just fine. What you’re referring to isn’t a problem currently.

It’s amplified because let’s say, Top 300 players grouped on teams, many on Teamspeak, basically cycle through match after match crushing casual soloers. You see this whenever the queues get shorter.

The teams that are winning are having fun and play hour after hour, winning. The low to average skill people get discouraged by blowouts and stop. Still, more casuals show up after a few minutes and get blown out for a few games, then they leave.

When they tightened up the matching, I, as an average player, started getting good tight matches…but the forums lit up with high-level people complaining that they Q was 30 mins.

Well, of course it was…the matcher was not allowing lopsided matches.

I guess you say it better than me

Do not get caught up on the whole elite 20 players grouping up thing – I am not claiming you guys are ruining the game etc etc

What I am trying to say is the leader boards are not for you and your group of elite buddies – The tournaments with real cash on the line is for you

The leader boards are for casuals and people who are getting into pvp/gw2 in the last few months and those who will buy the game in the future – they need to be rewarded for participating and they need to see progress in the form of a leader board

A perfect scenario would include brackets so that you super platinum players can play against each other all the time the issue is that you guys have NO competition – there is not enough interest in this game/pvp

Leader boards for casuals/average/above average players not the elites helps grow the game – that’s my point

Participation > Leet win %

Silentshoes.1805:

Chaith.8256:

Silentshoes.1805:

Chaith.8256:

Silentshoes.1805:

Chaith,

It’s fine that you all group up. But the matcher needs to only match you with another team close to your average MMR. And if none of the other elites are playing at the moment, then there is no match available. That’s perfectly fair. That’s a reality of being the best.

That’s essentially putting you in a Super Platinum Bracket.

And that is fair to all players.

There’s only so much harm to the game’s enjoyment 20 people can do who rarely even do ranked queue.

I think there are more than 20 that can dominate the average players. There is a LOT to this game and it takes a while to learn.

We were both talking about elite players not slightly above average players.

Matchmaking can’t work for elite players if no other of the 20 elite players are playing.

However, for above average players and average players, the matchmaking seems to work just fine. What you’re referring to isn’t a problem currently.

It’s amplified because let’s say, many Top 300 players grouped on teams, many on Teamspeak, basically cycle through match after match crushing casual soloers. You see this whenever the queues get shorter.

The teams that are winning are having fun and play hour after hour, winning. The low to average skill people get discouraged by blowouts and stop. And more casuals show up after a few minutes and get blown out for a few games, then they leave.

When they tightened up the matching, I, as an average player, started getting good tight matches…but the forums lit up with high-level people complaining that they Q was 30 mins.

Well, of course it was…the matcher was not allowing lopsided matches.

Yeah, but having 30+ min queues is just wrong. I have waited as long as an hour for a q pop, until they fixed it.

Narkodx.1472:

What I am trying to say is the leader boards are not for you

I’m sick of your logic-less, arbitrary statements. Why shouldn’t it work for everybody?

Chaith.8256:

Narkodx.1472:

What I am trying to say is the leader boards are not for you

I’m sick of your logic-less, arbitrary statements. Why shouldn’t it work for everybody?

LOL

The thing is it WILL work for everybody

You think you won’t be high on the leader boards?

YOUR problem with the leader board is that you probably won’t be first because someone with 5000 games played and a lesser win percentage will be above you

That bothers you doesn’t it

Why do the top players insist they HAVE to have a match even if they are going to have a blowout. What is the point of a “match” like that?

You seem to have a problem with matcher-enforced “brackets”. All serious games have brackets.

My personal opinion is the developers need to reassess the solo queue and team queue split.

I think automated team tournaments that are for gold rewards would be more beneficial than leaderboards for team play. There are how many top tier teams? Most premades I come across in queues aren’t entirely serious teams. Put a bigger incentive than a leaderboard into the game and maybe you would start seeing better teams arise.

Narkodx.1472:

You think you won’t be high on the leader boards?

Nope, probably won’t break top 100 because I refuse to pub stomp my way to the top. My playstyle is to team queue when other teams are playing, for quality matches and to not annoy people who aren’t expecting to face an Abjured pug. I might play 25-30 games a week.

Narkodx.1472:

That bothers you doesn’t it

What would you suggest? I can queue up and stomp you and other unsuspecting, average players for 20 hours a week if you’d prefer. I’d definitely be top rated!

Do you see why incentivizing top teams to do this in order to stay competitive is bad?

Chaith.8256:

Narkodx.1472:

You think you won’t be high on the leader boards?

Nope, probably won’t break top 100 because I refuse to pub stomp my way to the top. My playstyle is to team queue when other teams are playing, for quality matches and to not annoy people who aren’t expecting to face an Abjured pug. I might play 25-30 games a week.

Narkodx.1472:

That bothers you doesn’t it

What would you suggest? I can queue up and stomp you and other unsuspecting, average players for 20 hours a week if you’d prefer. I’d definitely be top rated!

Do you see why incentivizing top teams to do this in order to stay competitive is bad?

+1, couldn’t agree more.

Reading through the posts. I really wouldn’t mind a bracket system. It would give people a better sense of where they are in relation to others in the game. It would also prevent people from being paired way up and being steamrolled or way down and getting kitteny. The latter is what I would like to avoid.
I’m a pretty middle of the road player (some may say I suck, but I I feel I’m middle of the road) and I prefer playing with other players of my caliber. I really don’t like playing with lowbies who feel like they are awesome or indigent higher ups who just verbally abuse people and offer no tips but uninstall. Maybe my experiences have jaded me, but brackets sounds like a better idea than leaderboards.

Chaith.8256:

Narkodx.1472:

You think you won’t be high on the leader boards?

Nope, probably won’t break top 100 because I refuse to pub stomp my way to the top. My playstyle is to team queue when other teams are playing, for quality matches and to not annoy people who aren’t expecting to face an Abjured pug. I might play 25-30 games a week.

Narkodx.1472:

That bothers you doesn’t it

What would you suggest? I can queue up and stomp you and other unsuspecting, average players for 20 hours a week if you’d prefer. I’d definitely be top rated!

Do you see why incentivizing top teams to do this in order to stay competitive is bad?

I do not see how revamping leader boards and giving out glorious armor/llama finishers somehow is an incentive to top players

That is clearly something that is geared towards bringing in new/casual/average players

The only incentive for you guys to play and practice is money tournaments – Do you really care about the leader boards? Does it matter if you are not in the top 100?

If the system is well done I think you guys will be represented in the top of the leader boards regardless

Justin ODell.9517:

Lordrosicky.5813:

This last part is vital to the games success. I posted this many times over the last year on the forums. Please don’t sacrifice this ideal because it is so important. Some people will QQ about it. But they have vested interests. It is so important that less skilled people who play alot are rewarded.

I think what people might be forgetting, is that we also have tournaments, ESL cups, etc. to cater to those who want skill to be the absolute determinant.

The leaderboards are supposed to show who the best players are, and not who plays the most games! It’s that simple!

With that said, I don’t think Anet should be focusing on the leaderboards! The game needs more people for it to work! And stop trying to bring PvE-ers into PvP! If they wanted to PvP, they would’ve done so already! There is literally no competition in this game! In every tournament, it’s the same people winning every time! To truly make this game grow Anet needs to figure out a way to get new people to play! There are so many MMO PvP players out there and hardly any of them play Guild Warts 2! Why do you think that is! Probably because there’s only one game mode! Probably because certain maps in the rotation are just plain awful! Probably because you guys release patches SO SLOW!!! Why should this WoW PvPer come over to Guild Warts 2 when Guild Warts 2 doesn’t even have any arenas! Arenas are true esports! So sick of hearing rotations rotations rotations rotations! This is PvP! I want to slay other people and not stand on a goshdarn point!

Not only that but Anet needs to figure out ways to get current players to improve! We can accomplish that by setting up tiers! There are tiers in WvW! You don’t see Blackgate facing Henge of Denravi because Henge of Denravi will just get stomped! The same thing happens in these Mistpedia or ESL tournaments or whatever! Organize people by their MMRs into tiers and have players from each tier face each other for prizes like gems or glorious armor or whatever!

Also, the game is so inaccessible! I firmly believe this game is the best MMO out there! But who’s gonna take my word for it! People need to play it to find out! Make a permanent demo version like World of Wartcraft has! Cap the level at 10 or something! Make it so they can play unranked arenas or hotjoins or something! Goshdarn it this game has so much potential it makes me so angry to see it wasted!

That’s all! Wahoo! Bye frands!

Narkodx.1472:

Chaith.8256:

Narkodx.1472:

You think you won’t be high on the leader boards?

Nope, probably won’t break top 100 because I refuse to pub stomp my way to the top. My playstyle is to team queue when other teams are playing, for quality matches and to not annoy people who aren’t expecting to face an Abjured pug. I might play 25-30 games a week.

Narkodx.1472:

That bothers you doesn’t it

What would you suggest? I can queue up and stomp you and other unsuspecting, average players for 20 hours a week if you’d prefer. I’d definitely be top rated!

Do you see why incentivizing top teams to do this in order to stay competitive is bad?

I do not see how revamping leader boards and giving out glorious armor/llama finishers somehow is an incentive to top players

That is clearly something that is geared towards bringing in new/casual/average players

The only incentive for you guys to play and practice is money tournaments – Do you really care about the leader boards? Does it matter if you are not in the top 100?

If the system is well done I think you guys will be represented in the top of the leader boards regardless

Justin ODell.9517:

Lordrosicky.5813:

This last part is vital to the games success. I posted this many times over the last year on the forums. Please don’t sacrifice this ideal because it is so important. Some people will QQ about it. But they have vested interests. It is so important that less skilled people who play alot are rewarded.

I think what people might be forgetting, is that we also have tournaments, ESL cups, etc. to cater to those who want skill to be the absolute determinant.

What should it be based on other than skill? Lol effort???

These leaderboards are pretty much the old rank system. All it tells is how much someome grinds.

Aaron.2413:

Narkodx.1472:

Chaith.8256:

Narkodx.1472:

You think you won’t be high on the leader boards?

Nope, probably won’t break top 100 because I refuse to pub stomp my way to the top. My playstyle is to team queue when other teams are playing, for quality matches and to not annoy people who aren’t expecting to face an Abjured pug. I might play 25-30 games a week.

Narkodx.1472:

That bothers you doesn’t it

What would you suggest? I can queue up and stomp you and other unsuspecting, average players for 20 hours a week if you’d prefer. I’d definitely be top rated!

Do you see why incentivizing top teams to do this in order to stay competitive is bad?

I do not see how revamping leader boards and giving out glorious armor/llama finishers somehow is an incentive to top players

That is clearly something that is geared towards bringing in new/casual/average players

The only incentive for you guys to play and practice is money tournaments – Do you really care about the leader boards? Does it matter if you are not in the top 100?

If the system is well done I think you guys will be represented in the top of the leader boards regardless

Justin ODell.9517:

Lordrosicky.5813:

This last part is vital to the games success. I posted this many times over the last year on the forums. Please don’t sacrifice this ideal because it is so important. Some people will QQ about it. But they have vested interests. It is so important that less skilled people who play alot are rewarded.

I think what people might be forgetting, is that we also have tournaments, ESL cups, etc. to cater to those who want skill to be the absolute determinant.

What should it be based on other than skill? Lol effort???

How do you measure individual skill of a player when they’re in a regular team?

SobeSoul.6910:

Aaron.2413:

Narkodx.1472:

Chaith.8256:

Narkodx.1472:

You think you won’t be high on the leader boards?

Nope, probably won’t break top 100 because I refuse to pub stomp my way to the top. My playstyle is to team queue when other teams are playing, for quality matches and to not annoy people who aren’t expecting to face an Abjured pug. I might play 25-30 games a week.

Narkodx.1472:

That bothers you doesn’t it

What would you suggest? I can queue up and stomp you and other unsuspecting, average players for 20 hours a week if you’d prefer. I’d definitely be top rated!

Do you see why incentivizing top teams to do this in order to stay competitive is bad?

I do not see how revamping leader boards and giving out glorious armor/llama finishers somehow is an incentive to top players

That is clearly something that is geared towards bringing in new/casual/average players

The only incentive for you guys to play and practice is money tournaments – Do you really care about the leader boards? Does it matter if you are not in the top 100?

If the system is well done I think you guys will be represented in the top of the leader boards regardless

Justin ODell.9517:

Lordrosicky.5813:

This last part is vital to the games success. I posted this many times over the last year on the forums. Please don’t sacrifice this ideal because it is so important. Some people will QQ about it. But they have vested interests. It is so important that less skilled people who play alot are rewarded.

I think what people might be forgetting, is that we also have tournaments, ESL cups, etc. to cater to those who want skill to be the absolute determinant.

What should it be based on other than skill? Lol effort???

How do you measure individual skill of a player when they’re in a regular team?

There will be days they will queue with other people and the mmr system will adjust for the performance.

Player B is good. When he goes away for a week and the team queues without him they lose more games.

I think Justin meant your average skill should not be the absolute determinant of a reward. The Ladder Point Grid gives points for “exceeding your current skill level” in a match.

Chaith.8256:

Narkodx.1472:

You think you won’t be high on the leader boards?

Nope, probably won’t break top 100 because I refuse to pub stomp my way to the top. My playstyle is to team queue when other teams are playing, for quality matches and to not annoy people who aren’t expecting to face an Abjured pug. I might play 25-30 games a week.

Narkodx.1472:

That bothers you doesn’t it

What would you suggest? I can queue up and stomp you and other unsuspecting, average players for 20 hours a week if you’d prefer. I’d definitely be top rated!

Do you see why incentivizing top teams to do this in order to stay competitive is bad?

Here’s an idea. Set up 5 v 5 scrims versus those “top 20 elite” players until this is “fixed”. Gosh, I’m such a genius.

Backpack still being a 16 year old brat. Jesus. Cannot wait for you to start college or get an actual job. You worry about the dumbest stuff ever.

Backpack has valid points even if he doesn’t articulate them in a mature manner.

Teams shouldn’t really be punished for playing together, and the leaderboard shouldn’t be a grinderboard.

Anet’s spvp team ought to think about some other system to encourage teams to play.

It’s why the merging of team and solo queue was bad in my opinion. It can never treat teams and individuals together in a fair manner.

You guys keep mentioning how it wont be fun for casuals…well tell em to gut gud

Benjamin.8237:

You guys keep mentioning how it wont be fun for casuals…well tell em to gut gud

That is part of the problem, from what I am reading, people really can’t get better under this system. Instead there is a false sense of skill using the ladder just because you play more than others.

I can play all day long against others who play all day long and the ladder will reflect that dedication. But if everyone that is playing isn’t really any good we aren’t improving we’re just grinding points.

I would love a system where I not only know where I stand compared to others, but I am matched with others that will push me to be better. I don’t think the ladder system reflects that. I do think that is the goal of the matchmaking system, I’m just not sure how well it is working all the time if it is using ladder points to help make matches.

Backpack.8517:

ghaleon.2861 a Solo Q player had this record
assuming equal matchmaking and close games, he would have around 5000 points……

Wins 5849
Loses 5449

Should he be rank 1, and I be 95%?? Like really??

Surely that wouldn’t happen, because as he got more wins his MMR would rise, and he’d gain fewer points per win (and lose more points per loss to lower-rated teams)?

Lettuce.2945:

Chaith.8256:

Narkodx.1472:

You think you won’t be high on the leader boards?

Nope, probably won’t break top 100 because I refuse to pub stomp my way to the top. My playstyle is to team queue when other teams are playing, for quality matches and to not annoy people who aren’t expecting to face an Abjured pug. I might play 25-30 games a week.

Narkodx.1472:

That bothers you doesn’t it

What would you suggest? I can queue up and stomp you and other unsuspecting, average players for 20 hours a week if you’d prefer. I’d definitely be top rated!

Do you see why incentivizing top teams to do this in order to stay competitive is bad?

Here’s an idea. Set up 5 v 5 scrims versus those “top 20 elite” players until this is “fixed”. Gosh, I’m such a genius.

Backpack still being a 16 year old brat. Jesus. Cannot wait for you to start college or get an actual job. You worry about the dumbest stuff ever.

Glad you are worrying about a 17 year olds worries LOL.. Telling me I have too much time, when you have enough time to call a “kid” out on the forums… Hbu get good and stop worrying about others

We’ll see after the test-season. You have to know things will change a bit when the seasons starts.

Anyway, I still see this at the first step towards leagues. Only then we’ll have the infrastructure pvp needs.

You know what? With this ladder system prince vingador is gonna be #1 EU hands down after playing thousands of matches again.

How bout that…nothing else to say here i guess

So… as much fun as it is to qq, complain and restate problems…I’m gonna keep trying to think of solutions and post those instead.

Factoring in winning percentage and/or MMR into point system.

Harsher punishments for losing and/or higher rewards for higher margin of victory. (margin of defeat is all that matters now).

Any of these things could lessen, or completely fix the sad truth that time played=points right now while still forcing top players to commit to staying active.

Archaon.9524:

You know what? With this ladder system prince vingador is gonna be #1 EU hands down after playing thousands of matches again.

How bout that…nothing else to say here i guess

I bet on Collero #1 eu.

Collero is my horse.

If they don’t change it, if im not mistaken, someone could even get to the leader boards with 0% wins… Even if there s no one with 0 wins now, it s just wrong that it s a possibility in my opinion.

If someone never wins a match eventually their odds of winning will be always 0-39%, so as long as they can get more than 300 points they can keep climbing the leaderboards.

A group of decent to good players can troll the lb getting to the top with 0 wins if they want.

To explain it better if a group of 5 good players lose on purpose eventually they mmr will be so low that their odds of winning will be so low also. And they will always play against players that are new to pvp or that aren t in a full team. So they could keep getting +1 or + 2 if they get to 400 and then let the other team win.

I dont think that someone will try it, but even if no one does it, it feels bad to know that it s technically possible that someone get to the top with 0 wins.

Justin ODell.9517:

crunchyraisin.6054:

So… as much fun as it is to qq, complain and restate problems…I’m gonna keep trying to think of solutions and post those instead.

Please do! I’ve committed to not making decisions (for myself, it’s not my call, we’re a team and we also have designers get paid to think about this stuff, etc.) until I see the data after the season is over.

That said, been wracking my brain trying to think of potential solutions to the concerns brought up. Maybe even something as simple as winning always awards 1 bonus point might help.

I don’t think that would solve Chaithe’s issue. That just means his, and players like him’s, time would probably 25%-50% more efficient, not 100% more efficient, because it’s assumed everyone wins at 50% anyways, and top players are likely to be winning a lot more than 50% of the time.

I think what will likely need to happen is that the weighting of points per win by margin based upon chance at vitory will need to be changed.

Maybe something along the lines of multiplying margin of victory by your calculated chance to win and applying that to your gained points somehow.

Okay, new idea:

What if we restructured this concept of “odds of victory” into a type of handicap system. If a team with significantly lower odds of victory had to score less points in order to clinch a win, could we use that as a way to look only at wins and losses for leaderboards? or maybe wins minus losses as a player’s score? Would this keep high level players and teams entertained if there isn’t a good matchup for them at the time? Would this make less experienced players feel like they have a chance against high level teams?

I know this presents MMR as a problem…ie Good players beating a good team should have a higher reward than bad players beating a bad team..

Also, your team’s score could tick faster when you hold a point, based on how much of an underdog you are predicted to be.

The top team has to hustle. But points would be awarded for wins, not losses at 300 pts.

I think its perfectly fair that playing more = more/better rewards.
This system also punishes leaderboard camping.

Backpack.8517:

Saiyan.1704:

glock.6590:

The bragging will start about how good they are on the ladder when they just played a lot of games. You should just delete it and restart updating the old leaderboard. Just fix the decay . Don’t allow people to afk for months and then get rank 1 on the ladder.

And so many of us solo Q in ranked which gives premades a free win. At least in team Q there was way less solo Q’ers. Most people have an inflated win rate atm if they only played with premade.

Its not even about player skill its literally farming people at a disadvantage.

So winning 10-15 games straight and placing top ranked (old system) is more fair than actually having to grind to see your effective skill level? No more teams that play once a week at low peek times on the weekday against baddies… You’re practically forced to play more games against high rated teams to earn your max 5 points per game.

A person with a higher average of points earned per game Should be ranked higher, than a person with a lower average rank points earned per game. How is this not more fair?

All the games I play are at PRIME TIME, playing the highest MMR players available…. should I really be punished LOL… Im playing roughly 15 games a week now… all at prime time, 500-0ing every single one….

Someone who Qs 100 times a week and wins half their games SHOULD NOT BE HIGHER OR EVEN CLOSE to my MMR or my leaderboard rank…

You make it sould like I am Q dodging and scared to play good players…. I am team quing with the most competitive teams in the game… SURE I would love to play a similarly skilled team… Fact is: there are none.. Why should I then get punished for not having a worthy adversary??

Solo Q 100 Times this week, then we’ll talk ratings. Ill bet the more you Solo Q the more your percentage will average out to a lower one.

Im not impressed in the slightest by players who get together and form a team/practice and play randoms that group up. This has been moot since the days of quake 1…

Dead Muppet.9718:

Backpack.8517:

Saiyan.1704:

glock.6590:

The bragging will start about how good they are on the ladder when they just played a lot of games. You should just delete it and restart updating the old leaderboard. Just fix the decay . Don’t allow people to afk for months and then get rank 1 on the ladder.

And so many of us solo Q in ranked which gives premades a free win. At least in team Q there was way less solo Q’ers. Most people have an inflated win rate atm if they only played with premade.

Its not even about player skill its literally farming people at a disadvantage.

So winning 10-15 games straight and placing top ranked (old system) is more fair than actually having to grind to see your effective skill level? No more teams that play once a week at low peek times on the weekday against baddies… You’re practically forced to play more games against high rated teams to earn your max 5 points per game.

A person with a higher average of points earned per game Should be ranked higher, than a person with a lower average rank points earned per game. How is this not more fair?

All the games I play are at PRIME TIME, playing the highest MMR players available…. should I really be punished LOL… Im playing roughly 15 games a week now… all at prime time, 500-0ing every single one….

Someone who Qs 100 times a week and wins half their games SHOULD NOT BE HIGHER OR EVEN CLOSE to my MMR or my leaderboard rank…

You make it sould like I am Q dodging and scared to play good players…. I am team quing with the most competitive teams in the game… SURE I would love to play a similarly skilled team… Fact is: there are none.. Why should I then get punished for not having a worthy adversary??

Solo Q 100 Times this week, then we’ll talk ratings. Ill bet the more you Solo Q the more your percentage will average out to a lower one.

Im not impressed in the slightest by players who get together and form a team/practice and play randoms that group up. This has been moot since the days of quake 1…

This is a team game. I want to play with players around my skill level. Solo q always matches me with players drastically below my skill level (both on my team and enemy team). I find it un-fun to play with people who dont know how to rotate and play this game effectively. I can control my team, by team quing. Rated q is supposed to be for teams, stop telling teams to dispand.. this game needs more teams.. I’m not going to torture myself by playing with people who really dont play the game near my level. That is most definitely not a solution.

Stop complaining about not having people to play with at your level! The PvP community is too tiny! There’s like maybe 12 people who play really competitively at high levels on NA! Even if the leaderboards and MMRs and solo/team Qs were perfect, you still wouldn’t find any competition because there’s nobody to match you with! The competitive aspect of this game is stagnant and will continue to remain so until Anet finds a way to get more people to play Guild Warts 2! So please get off your high horse because this whole situation is akin to running for office unopposed! Are you really going to flex because you won! Get good son!

As for the rest of the people, the leaderboards should display who’s the best at the game and not who has the most games played! This point system is foolish! Get good sons!

Wahoo! Bye frands!

Yes yes start some super bracket that will have like 5 teams in it on US and EU. Seriously wake up. None of this works because there are hardly any serious teams because this game failed already. This is all the result of this game being a failure. They have to do things like they are currently or you would never get matches at certain times of day otherwise. You would just sit in the queue forever.

I think with divisions, people would have his division at the beginning linked to their skill level. LoL and Starcraft have a ladder point system in every divisions if you win or you lose a match you get /lose points, so basically the true difference is the league system.

In a team game, underline the individual skill it’s not easy, probably a team leaderboard would be more appropriate for teams.

When Justin said with a perfect system win ratio should be 0.5 for everyone, he is right, but spvp population is tiny so strong teams don’t play always at the same time or strong people don’t have the chance to meet strong people with a similar skill level at the same time, this is the first reason because we have people with high win ratio in leaderboard.

I though about it, it’s not really easy underline individual skill in leaderboard. i think in general a league system would be very helpfull but there will be always a grinding component.

I’d like to see other suggestions about how to put best people on top of the leaderboard.

The leaderboards shouldn’t be tailored to casuals or for top teams. Casuals have their pvp reward tracks. Pros have their tournaments. Leaderboards should be tailored for semi-competitive pvpers. I know this is more difficult to define, but nothing should be oversimplified. Win ratio needs to have a bigger effect so that skill is a greater factor, but also activity should be factored to force teams to put themselves out there and risk their rating (or maintain it if they deserve it). Obviously saying it should be somewhere in between where it was and where it is now is the correct answer, but it isn’t the most exact. Anet doesn’t have an easy job, but I trust they will figure it out eventually. More news soon™.

BlueDragon.7054:

If they don’t change it, if im not mistaken, someone could even get to the leader boards with 0% wins… Even if there s no one with 0 wins now, it s just wrong that it s a possibility in my opinion.

If someone never wins a match eventually their odds of winning will be always 0-39%, so as long as they can get more than 300 points they can keep climbing the leaderboards.

A group of decent to good players can troll the lb getting to the top with 0 wins if they want.

To explain it better if a group of 5 good players lose on purpose eventually they mmr will be so low that their odds from winning will be so low also. And they will always play against players that are new to pvp or that aren t in a full team. So they could keep getting +1 or + 2 if they get to 400 and then let the other team win.

I dont think that someone will try it, but even if no one does it, it feels bad to know that it s technically possible that someone get to the top with 0 wins.

oh my god, i need 4 other people to do this with me .D

but srly, this shouldn’t be a thing. I like the idea that a team is rewarded for playing good even if they lose. But i think it shouldn’t give points losing, instead it just shouldn’t give as much minus-points for losing a close game instead of losing 500-0

2 Suggestions, i dunno if it could work or not, but there are simply ideas, it could be interesting having some suggestions:

. CAP Matches during the season - it means a player can play only X matches during the season valid for the leaderboard (an average number calculated after the test season). OF course, player can play rated after they reach the max number of matches played but further matches don’t count for the Season Leaderboard. Only count the first X matches (with X high number but not super high). In this way we have a fair competion like in every sport championship, same number of matches, who get more points, will win. Super grinding is limited.

. Weekly ladder points bonus based based on win ratio . So, having an high win ratio is more a system issue (or better, population issue) than a true skill measurement but the fact remain that there are people who stomp more people than others but play less. With this bonus boost, you’ll receive a weekly boost points for the leaderboard if you keep a good ratio (for example > 0.6/0.7 )

And of course, a league system (bronze, silver etc.)

Justin ODell.9517:

crunchyraisin.6054:

So… as much fun as it is to qq, complain and restate problems…I’m gonna keep trying to think of solutions and post those instead.

That said, been wracking my brain trying to think of potential solutions to the concerns brought up. Maybe even something as simple as winning always awards 1 bonus point might help.

A lot of game theory problems have simple solutions.