Guild Wars 2

https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/6co28x/anet_glicko_needs_to_go/dhwhl30/

AnetChrisB

I’m doing local tests for a change to 1-up/1-down on the other monitor now. No exact date, but we’re aiming to send it toward Live and turn it on when it’s ready.

Interesting. Definitively interested in seeing how this turns out.

Guys, new tanking meta! get on the ship

yea.. im not sure this will make things better. dont get me wrong, manual glicko adjustments havent been good either but this just sounds like a recipe for servers tanking so they dont have to fight certain servers (mainly Mag). this will possibly lead to even more dead maps

Can’t tank below CD, so don’t worry about it.

Probably because all the glicko threads in the forums turn into matchup threads and get deleted, but why does Anet have to respond to Reddit instead of the GW2 forums?

Ni In.6578:

Can’t tank below CD, so don’t worry about it.

LOL good one.

I don’t expect one-up-one-down to be a cure-all but it will be interesting to see how it turns out.

If nothing else, this week’s T “2” roll won’t happen again.

~ Kovu

Kovu.7560:

If nothing else, this week’s T “2” roll won’t happen again.

~ Kovu

and
FA wouldn’t have rollled t3
SOS wouldn’t have rolled t4

maybe over 2 weeks, but not in 1 week….

this makes sense to at least try it……

One up one down will be a mess with only four tiers.

It’s worth trying, it really can’t be any worse than glicko-RNG matchmaking we have now where servers that should be in tier 3/4 roll tier 1, and servers that should be in tier 1 roll tier 3. There might be an issue with people intentionally trying not to get 1st place in tier 2, but I think most servers won’t try to tank intentionally.

Sarika.3756:

One up one down will be a mess with only four tiers.

thats the key word, you passed the exam!

About kitten time.
Really kittening tired of seeing them respond on reddit when that exact conversation has popped up multiple times on this forum though.

Diku.2546:

Sounds complicated & convoluted.

So is Glicko suspended when 1 up 1 down is in play?

I’m going to assume that World Linking will continue right?

---

Definitely can imagine Servers Purposely Tanking to get out of Match-Ups.

---

Instead…can we get a New Core Base Map Mechanic that CAN:

1) Reduce the direct impact of Server stacking to Match-Ups
2) Allow friends & family to play together from many different Worlds
3) Allow Off-peak capping, but let players to work out a solution themselves

Yours truly,
Diku

---

For a Better Long Term Solution to WvW – Try a Google Search for – wvg world vs globes

Its a shame it is taking them so long to do this, maybe pointless now cause 4 tiers. But who knows.

As far as your comments:

1. This has been brought up since game started. It is deeply entrenched and rooted in the transfer system and lack of limitations on it.

2. Everyone knows someone on that server everyone wants to stack on. If this is allowed there will be only 1 server left. You can’t have your #1 if you allow this because cousins uncles sisters granpas friend. The 2 are contradicotory. The 1st needs to limit stacking while providing some positive incentives to destack, the 2nd leads to it and has been very often used as an excuse to do so. O, my guildie has a friend on BG, so lets transfer my 300 person guild there…. See what I mean ?

3. I disagree. Players have been coming up with and executing solution to this since the game started, its called bandwaggoning and overstacking. Its a very dumb idea to let players come up with their own solutions cause they’ll turn out like this has.

Diku.2546:

Sounds complicated & convoluted.

So is Glicko suspended when 1 up 1 down is in play?

I’m going to assume that World Linking will continue right?

---

Definitely can imagine Servers Purposely Tanking to get out of Match-Ups.

---

Instead…can we get a New Core Base Map Mechanic that CAN:

1) Reduce the direct impact of Server stacking to Match-Ups
2) Allow friends & family to play together from many different Worlds
3) Allow Off-peak capping, but let players to work out a solution themselves

Yours truly,
Diku

---

For a Better Long Term Solution to WvW – Try a Google Search for – wvg world vs globes

It’s not complicated — glicko would no longer affect the matchmaking and it would just be one up/one down — you win the tier, you go up, you lose the tier, you go down (2nd place server stays in the same tier). They’d keep the glicko rating for linkings because there’s no way they can go back to 12 tiers with unlinked servers — the bottom 6 tiers would be almost dead.

If you want to play with your friends and family, get them all on the same server/link?

As for your #3, that’s ridiculous, the history of the servers/tiers shows that off-peak capping has only ever been compounded by the player-base. They go where it’s easiest, not where they might have a challenge.

Since with 1U1D every other week will be:

T1: T1 winner, T1 second, T2 winner
T2: T1 loser, T2 second, T3 winner
T3: T2 loser, T3 second, T4 winner

After the server rankings settle down, I wonder how long before the expected winners from T2-T4 start tanking just to avoid getting stomped every other week.

Have you seen those videos of logs in rivers that get sucked down and them comes back up again?

Thats about how gracefull 1U1D will be.

Swamurabi.7890:

Since with 1U1D every other week will be:

T1: T1 winner, T1 second, T2 winner
T2: T1 loser, T2 second, T3 winner
T3: T2 loser, T3 second, T4 winner

After the server rankings settle down, I wonder how long before the expected winners from T2-T4 start tanking just to avoid getting stomped every other week.

There are no rankings, you just go up or down if you win a tier or come last in a tier.
You are assuming that the winner from the tier below can not compete in the tier above, but I think they probably can? YB/FA might not be able to win in tier 1, but I am pretty sure they can be competitive. Mag is just going to beat everyone no matter what tier they are in since they are so stacked, it doesn’t matter if you use 1up/1down or glicko/RNG.

Djamonja.6453:

Swamurabi.7890:

Since with 1U1D every other week will be:

T1: T1 winner, T1 second, T2 winner
T2: T1 loser, T2 second, T3 winner
T3: T2 loser, T3 second, T4 winner

After the server rankings settle down, I wonder how long before the expected winners from T2-T4 start tanking just to avoid getting stomped every other week.

There are no rankings, you just go up or down if you win a tier or come last in a tier.
You are assuming that the winner from the tier below can not compete in the tier above, but I think they probably can? YB/FA might not be able to win in tier 1, but I am pretty sure they can be competitive. Mag is just going to beat everyone no matter what tier they are in since they are so stacked, it doesn’t matter if you use 1up/1down or glicko/RNG.

Since the servers will eventually settle into their ranks, tiers or whatever you want to call them, there will be no way that a lower tier server will be competitive with one from a higher tier unless one of three things happen.

The higher tier server implodes
The lower tier server gets a massive influx of players
The top server decides to play “matchmaker” and join the lower tier server in a 2v1.

None of these are competitive.

One up one down might have worked with eight tiers. Unless the matches are far more balanced, it’s just going to create predictable blow outs rather than random ones, and end up with t2 servers trying not to avoid that guaranteed roll up to t1 more than currently happens.

And we wonder why they’re hesitant to do much with WvW. Make a change, people complain, don’t make a change, people complain.

Djamonja.6453:

There are no rankings, you just go up or down if you win a tier or come last in a tier.

I think this is not a good assumption to make on how the system is going to work. There has to be rank because there are red, blue, green positions and the system has to determine who gets those positions. Historically red position belongs to/was designed for the lowest ranked server in a match, etc.

I hope it is going to be more like a one-rank-up-one-rank-down system where if like a rank 6 server wins a T2 match, it will move up to rank 5. If it keeps winning the next two matches, it will push up to rank 3 and get into the T1 match. That should make for less wild swings in matches.

Jerus.4350:

And we wonder why they’re hesitant to do much with WvW. Make a change, people complain, don’t make a change, people complain.

The problem is, we’ve already seen one up, one down in action. It was called tournament season two.

Mercifully, that only lasted nine weeks. The only thing that made it remotely entertaining was the organized 2v1 that JQ and TC did to BG.

Swamurabi.7890:

Jerus.4350:

And we wonder why they’re hesitant to do much with WvW. Make a change, people complain, don’t make a change, people complain.

The problem is, we’ve already seen one up, one down in action. It was called tournament season two.

Mercifully, that only lasted nine weeks. The only thing that made it remotely entertaining was the organized 2v1 that JQ and TC did to BG.

The tournaments had huge bandwagons because players were trying to win which absolutely kittened up the tiers.
Right now the servers don’t have the same kind of massive differences in population and most of the mass transfers are caused because players were glicko locked into terrible match ups.

With 1 up 1 down no one is going to get an unlucky roll into a a bad match up and be stuck there for multiple weeks at a time. At worst you’ll have the servers that are borderline and end up rotating good and bad weeks until the servers relink and they can try to make the matches more competitive.

Yep, don’t forget server relinks every 2 months, which may change things up before they get too stale…at least I assume they will continue with new linkings…the post linked above doesn’t give much detail.

Too much thinking, testing, deciding, etc, time to act please…

Just thought I’d leave this here…

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Server-Linking-Discussion/6343541

Hey everyone,

I wanted to address the idea of moving world linking to monthly instead of every 2 months, since it is being brought up more and more frequently.

The team isn’t opposed to this idea; we actually think it would be beneficial to move to monthly because it would allow us to iterate faster on how we are calculating which worlds should be linked. However, the main reason for not doing this right now is the matchmaking algorithm, Glicko. Each time we shuffle worlds via world linking it takes about 4 weeks’ worth of matches before Glicko begins to reliably match make those new worlds into balanced matches. If we did world linking monthly, Glicko would not be able to create balanced matchups.

Our next priority poll is going to be asking if players would rather have us work on adding rewards to skirmishes (and possibly other feedback items being collected from this thread) or replace Glicko matchmaking with a 1-up 1-down system (wherein the winner moves up a tier and the loser moves down a tier.) The 1-up 1-down system should work better with monthly linkings than Glicko, so we are most likely going to hold off on 1 month linkings until that system is in.

Another possibility we could pursue is 1 month linkings, but use the Glicko offset system to guarantee the matches. Alternatively, we could manually change Glicko ratings to what we believe they should be for each world. Either option would force worlds to start out closer to being in the correct tier and thus give better matches faster. These options are contentious, so even if everyone on the forums seemed to like this idea it would be something we would poll on.

That post is seven months old.. they’re currently working on skirmish rewards.
Was there even a priority poll done?

Sarika.3756:

One up one down will be a mess with only four tiers.

More or less of a mess than what we’ve had though?

XenesisII.1540:

That post is seven months old.. they’re currently working on skirmish rewards.
Was there even a priority poll done?

That was the last poll they did, and skirmish rewards won.

The existing tiers are a complete mess. CD facing Mag? Nope, not appropriate skill or coverage-wise. At least 1-up/1-down will put CD at the bottom of Tier 4 where the good fights are.

Sviel.7493:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/6co28x/anet_glicko_needs_to_go/dhwhl30/

AnetChrisB

I’m doing local tests for a change to 1-up/1-down on the other monitor now. No exact date, but we’re aiming to send it toward Live and turn it on when it’s ready.

I don’t know if it will be better that what we have now, but I do know that some of the matchups we have been seeing are Kitten Kitten Kitten and it’s worth a try.

An alternative to one up – one down would simply not have the baloney where a T1 server gets put in a T3 match or a T4 server gets put in a T2 match. Just restrict the mobility to one tier.

Either way a reduction of obvious one sided matches is needed.