Guild Wars 2

when there are no players that match my rating/skill level?

I don´t wanna play with noobs when i play serious, all they do is they mess up my rating

Happens all the time and it sucks. Happens more the higher rating you get. Which is why it is better to mess around some games to lower your rating and then have fun. It literally goes like this:

- Get to rank 40ish
- Now nobody active (plays often) in your bracket (esp not peak times)
- Get paired with people rank 1000+ vs people 800 ish rank
- If you cant carry these beginners = lose 100 ranks. If you can = gain 2 ranks

lol

Blackjack has a point here. Scary thing is – what is the solution? Well the solution is it takes more account of your teammates when giving rating after a match (i.e. if you with bad people it should give you more rating for carrying and cost you less for losing). Also have permanent decay….

Well you are never going to have all people near your rank playing that would require everyone playing the game 24/7 to be available so you would basically probably not get matches for hours at time if you put in a super hard queue. All you can ask for is that both teams when you average out the rank are fairly close which they can do but probably won’t because it would require a lot of modification to there awful roster system. It should take the 10 closest players in the queue by rating and then divide them one to each team in a way that makes the two sides closest rating wise as possible.

If you don’t want to play with random players, don’t queue solo.

If you are rank 1, statistically, there are half as many players within a thousand ranks of you as if you are rank 1000. In other words, matchmaking will always get less good the higher you go, no matter what. There’s no way around it.

Also, you posted this around 10 am NA.

Dee Jay.2460:

If you don’t want to play with random players, don’t queue solo.

That doesn’t really make sense at all. Even if he was playing with similarly ranked players they would be random. What is the point of leaderboards then if everything is suppossed to be random? Why have rating at? Seriously we were sold a bill of goods by A-net don’t knee jerk defend them even if that wasn’t your intention its basically a defense of soloq saying don’t expect anything from it.

NevirSayDie.6235:

If you are rank 1, statistically, there are half as many players within a thousand ranks of you as if you are rank 1000. In other words, matchmaking will always get less good the higher you go, no matter what. There’s no way around it.

Also, you posted this around 10 am NA.

Again, not really true. Sure it won’t be as good as if every player was somehow available but they can do a much better job. All you can ask for is that A-net matches you with the 10 best players available rating wise at the time of your queue and then puts them on the 2 teams in a way that makes sense. They are not doing that currently. So it can be improved and it can be improved quite a lot. Saying nothing can be done again just lets a-net off the hook and makes excuses for them to leave solo q in the deplorable state it is now.

Kwll.1468:

NevirSayDie.6235:

If you are rank 1, statistically, there are half as many players within a thousand ranks of you as if you are rank 1000. In other words, matchmaking will always get less good the higher you go, no matter what. There’s no way around it.

Also, you posted this around 10 am NA.

Again, not really true. Sure it won’t be as good as if every player was somehow available but they can do a much better job. All you can ask for is that A-net matches you with the 10 best players available rating wise at the time of your queue and then puts them on the 2 teams in a way that makes sense. They are not doing that currently. So it can be improved and it can be improved quite a lot. Saying nothing can be done again just lets a-net off the hook and makes excuses for them to leave solo q in the deplorable state it is now.

I’m not saying it couldn’t be improved, but it is definitely true that there is a smaller pool of players near your rank if you are high on the leaderboards. Think it through. If you are rank 1, there are 999 players within 1k ranks of you.

If you are rank 1000, there are 999 player within 1k ranks (above) you as well as another thousand directly below you. So in any game, playing at the top of the leaderboard will always feel like the matchmaking isn’t as good as playing in the middle of the leaderboard.

Just because there are other things that could be improved doesn’t mean that “that’s not true.”

because the ladders are pretty empty

games need a lot of participation to maintain a good separation in skill levels on a ladder otherwise everyone has extremely long q times or Anet just lets wider and wider skill levels team up.

Dee Jay.2460:

If you don’t want to play with random players, don’t queue solo.

It should tell you when nobody near you is on. They could do this via a “Predicted wait time” thing. The longer the time the more you know you wont get matched

Kwll.1468:

Dee Jay.2460:

If you don’t want to play with random players, don’t queue solo.

That doesn’t really make sense at all. Even if he was playing with similarly ranked players they would be random. What is the point of leaderboards then if everything is suppossed to be random? Why have rating at? Seriously we were sold a bill of goods by A-net don’t knee jerk defend them even if that wasn’t your intention its basically a defense of soloq saying don’t expect anything from it.

Because the nature of random numbers is that given a large enough sample size, every random element will be equally distributed.

So for every game you win because of a 5 vs. 4, you will statistically also lose one because of 4 vs. 5.

I’m not saying solo-queue is great, but it functions as advertised. Any additional parameters you’d add to the queue would just increase the wait-times. And additional wait-times just exasperate the issue because it just causes less people to queue.

Dee Jay.2460:

So for every game you win because of a 5 vs. 4, you will statistically also lose one because of 4 vs. 5.

Well you yourself are one of those players, so if you never leave a game, there are only 4 possible leavers on your side and 5 on the other. (might help motivate, at least) It could be that a lower rated player has a higher chance to leave a game than a high rated player so if you get high up on the leaderboard and get matched with noobs its more likely they’ll leave.

The only way to increase efficiency of matchmaking is by getting more players in, otherwise its just balancing between wait time and effectiveness with the odd algorithm change. Wont get better unless the game gets better. However if you are the jesus of gaming you will always run into this.

Blackjack.5621:

when there are no players that match my rating/skill level?

I don´t wanna play with noobs when i play serious, all they do is they mess up my rating

because nobody plays.

Why would they play and risk to lose their rank when they can simply not play and keep it ?
Why should they play if there’s no rewards in doing so ?

I lost 400 ranks before quitting in 5 matches ( was around 300, got around 700 than raised a bit before quitting) due to being matched with people not even in the leaderboard.

And lol, i’m sure iìm still there in the leaderboard after more than 1 month without playing.

The system is broken, period.

Just don’t play.

You can play, but you shouldn’t care about rankings since they tell you nothing useful. If there is still anyone who takes leaderboards seriously he is just hurting himself.

Dhunis.9072:

You can play, but you shouldn’t care about rankings since they tell you nothing useful. If there is still anyone who takes leaderboards seriously he is just hurting himself.

A lot of truth to that. It’s a random queue. You could get a top 200 player who has no idea what he’s doing, because it’s random.

I also hold to the fact that the higher you are on a leaderboard, the harder it is for a matchmaker to work properly. If you’re ranked #1, you will have a 100% chance that all four of your teammates have a much lower rank than you. If you are rank 10, you’ll still have a very high chance that all your teammates are lower; rank 100, slightly lower chance; etc. There is simply no one higher than rank 1, so…who do we expect to be ranked with?

NevirSayDie.6235:

Dhunis.9072:

You can play, but you shouldn’t care about rankings since they tell you nothing useful. If there is still anyone who takes leaderboards seriously he is just hurting himself.

A lot of truth to that. It’s a random queue. You could get a top 200 player who has no idea what he’s doing, because it’s random.

I also hold to the fact that the higher you are on a leaderboard, the harder it is for a matchmaker to work properly. If you’re ranked #1, you will have a 100% chance that all four of your teammates have a much lower rank than you. If you are rank 10, you’ll still have a very high chance that all your teammates are lower; rank 100, slightly lower chance; etc. There is simply no one higher than rank 1, so…who do we expect to be ranked with?

The whole leaderboard system is arguably wrong.

It should be done based on rating, EFFECTIVE rating, not some random number like 100, 130, 200 on the ladder.

For all we know, there could be a MEANINGLESS difference between rank 1 and rank 100, and even more meaningless between a rank 200 and a rank 500.

For all we know, the difference between a rank 200 and a rank 500 could be a 0,3 coefficient, explaning why you get paired with “apparently” much lower ranked players, when in reality there’s no really that difference.

Basically those numbers on the leaderboard simply cause rage, since you “think” you’re paired with very bad players when it could be really not the case.

The point is that it effectively seems to be a really huge difference in skill even if the difference is only of a 0,4 coefficient, and this is seriously an issue, since it means people DON’T PLAY and ELOs flat consequentially, especially for mid ladder leaderboard.