3 up 3 down
That works fine for t2 and t3, but it causes stagnation for t1 and t4, which is currently a problem. Since they can move only one way, they only get one new opponent per week.
Most people want to be in the same place as their friends and their guilds, so any sort of randomization would have to prioritize pairing mutual friends and guild mates onto the same server.
If people are allowed to move around, we could very easily end up where we are now, so an algorithm that pairs people with as many of their guilds and friends as possible would be essential. A favorites list may help allow you to guarantee being paired with a small number of people. With that in place, there wouldn’t need to be transfers.
I don’t know though, it could get messy.
Restart WvW: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Clean-The-Slate/first#post6208959
#CleanTheSlate
T1 and T4 would still see more activity then its current state. You would still see at least 1 new server every 3 weeks, also you have to keep in mind that from the start it would all be a random selection for the 4 tiers and all that would have to happen to go up a tier is just 3 wins or the best out of 3. Server stacking/ locked worlds will always be a problem simply because that is what a lot of people want for whatever reason, but at least this way you get more variety and it would be consistent.
Also, this system promotes competition. There would be a lot of instances in which people would be tied for second and in those situations kills would matter so, GVGs, Roamers everyone gets some credit for doing their thing and it would actually matter. Yes, KILLS would matter.
Alright, so here’s a layout suggestion if we assume that every server is equally distributed. I think that 9 servers will make for better matchup organization than 12, so I am going to use 9 servers for this example.
First week is random. 3/3/3. Next week, the three first, second, and third place servers fight. On week three, The top two face off again, and the bottom two face off again, but the third slot gets switched with the winner/loser in the middle tier. Week four is the finale of the cycle. If a team lost week one, they could still get back to the top and win the final match. Then after week four, everything resets.
Rewards for winning a cycle are also an option, and it could all hinge on that final week, so players don’t have to burn themselves out if they aim for getting first on week one, second on week two and three, and first on week four.
You could call it “The Great Mist War,” because it is the summation of every foe you face in the mists.
Give out server awards for multiple things, such as:
-Best k/d ratio
-Highest final score
-Most successful yak deliveries
-ect.
Restart WvW: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Clean-The-Slate/first#post6208959
#CleanTheSlate
So it’s still one up one down but on a 3 weeks period right?
I see 2 problems with it :
1. It’s one up, one down
2. It’s on a 3 weeks period
The 3 weeks period is bad because if a server gain a massive amount of bandwagonner (or lose a massive amount of bandwagonner), it shouldn’t take them 3 weeks of very unbalanced match up to move up / down one tier. Also, moving from tier 4 to tier 1 could take 9 (boring) weeks.
The one up, one down is bad because it doesn’t include the score in the equation. No matter if you win by one point in a very balanced match up or if you win by a landslide of 100 000 points, one up one down will consider that you won and will move you up a tier. Balance match up should stay the same unless the match up below or above are very unbalanced.
Any good ranking system will need to include the score in the equation. Basically, if you win by a lot you should move up and if you lose by a lot you should move down. And you should move up / down by the next week. This is the part where glicko fail as it can take you months to move up / down…
Basically it would work like this. Everyone is wiped clean and Randomly matched up in to the 4 current tiers. We would still have 3 servers (with names) but for this purpose lets just say A,B,C. Every three weeks there would be change whoever wins the best of three matches is server A, and moves up. Whoever gets second place is server B, stays the same tier. Whoever loses best of three moves down. If there is a tie between server B and C or A, B, C then it would be based off kills. I think it would promote serious competition every single week. New servers every 3 weeks. No massive gaps in glicko with stale match ups.
Feedback is welcome
New servers except in T1 where the same two servers will always be top and T4 where two servers will always be rock bottom.
Ok many times this has been posted as a cure to matchup stagnation etc.
While I do not believe this has any chance of achieving balance I suggest the following adaptations;
Continue with 4 tiers.
Winner of each tier goes up, loser goes down, middle server remains.
Winner of T1 goes to T4 loser of T4 goes to T1
ie
Week one, abc, def, ghi, jkl
week 2, bdl, ceg, fhj, ika
week 3 kdc, lef, etc
According to the server transfers, they seek better fights and or new matchups, this will most definitely provide new matchups. It will also cause a few laughs with servers fighting for second…
Good luck
Ok many times this has been posted as a cure to matchup stagnation etc.
While I do not believe this has any chance of achieving balance I suggest the following adaptations;
Continue with 4 tiers.
Winner of each tier goes up, loser goes down, middle server remains.
Winner of T1 goes to T4 loser of T4 goes to T1
ieWeek one, abc, def, ghi, jkl
week 2, bdl, ceg, fhj, ika
week 3 kdc, lef, etcAccording to the server transfers, they seek better fights and or new matchups, this will most definitely provide new matchups. It will also cause a few laughs with servers fighting for second…
Good luck
Why does this remind me of the Little League episode of South Park? “Knock that guy back into the ring and make them cap the tower!”
I was more or less thinking either Monty python or Benny Hill chase music, but South Park fits nicely.