Guild Wars 2

So I’ve seen a few posts mention the general idea, and overall I think it’s a good idea. I also don’t know of many other metrics other than points that we’d be able to use to determine who wins a wvw matchup.

The general idea is giving extra bonuses to servers who are behind in score to attack the teams ahead of them in score. That way if A is beating B is beating C, then B and C are encouraged point wise to go after A. Once the score difference gets too close, then the encouragement is removed, so that it becomes more FFA.

There are two parameters here that would need to be fined tuned, we’ll call them X and Y.

If server A is beating server B by more than X points, when B takes a capture point from A, B immediately gets 1 tick of points added (from capture) to the score. In this way, B is getting the normal PPT, plus 1 bonus tick to try add incentive.

If server A is beating server B by more than Y points, when B takes a capture point from A, B immediately gets 2 ticks of points added.

In that way, taking a supply camp from a server decently ahead of you in points would give you 5 points immediately, taking a tower would give you 10 immediately, etc. If the server is very far ahead of you in score, then taking a camp would give you 10 immediately, a tower would give 20, etc.

The two levels could be X=25,000 and Y=75,000 (but this is just me picking numbers out of the air based off of point differentials for matchups I’ve seen). You also don’t have to stop at just two levels of bonus.

Why I think this could be good:

• encourages ganging up on the leading server (which if people were only trying to play for first should happen anyway)
• adds more competition (maybe… if nothing else that scores will be closer)
• adds incentive for weaker servers in the match up (under the assumption that people care about points, which might be a bad one)

Why I think this could be bad:

• could be open to abuse
• could not actually fix or improve any of the PPT issues we have

I’d like to see any suggestions or comments. There probably are better ways to improve PPT, but I don’t think the general framework will ever get rid of it. That being said, I think this is a fairly easy to implement idea (of course it wouldn’t happen soon, and needs testing, but it’s an idea).

Makes sense. I like the concept. Not sure when the right time for this to kick in…maybe at a tipping point where it looks like the winning server is going to steam roll the other two?

Yes this is needed. The idea is that a 1v1v1 should balance itself to become competitive by giving stronger sides more reason to fight each other and not gang up on the weakest side. And also giving the two weaker sides reason to gang up on the strongest where currently it benefits them most by fighting each other.

But in disagreeing with the OP, no other metrics besides PPT are even needed. PPT as a system just needs to be fixed. Because it’s completely meaningless and broken as is.

There does not need to be a ‘tipping point’ mechanic. It should be a persistent modifier based on point difference ratios that provides greater rewards for attacking a stronger opponent and less for attacking a weaker opponent. By rewards, I mean exp, karma, gold, wxp.

Second, additional modifiers to rewards for attacking and defending more heavily upgraded objectives. For example, taking a fully upgraded keep should provide a far greater reward (wxp etc…) than karma training SM.

But to add to this, PPT from towers, keeps, and SM should also be based on the level of upgrades.

This would also phase out karma training (blob for maximum rewards and never defend) which is a ridiculous meta that makes a joke out WvW strategy. The reason karma trains are meta is because it makes perfect sense given the way WvW rewards and even PPT is set up. Unless WvW is not supposed to have any strategy, this is a broken system that should be fixed by properly weighting ppt and rewards based on approximate server strengths (points) and levels of upgrades.

I mentioned something like this a long time ago and henceforth agree with it. However, the point augmentations should probably incorporate the overall PPT of servers as well as their overall score. Some servers simply get massive numbers during a particular timezone, but die off during other hours. It wouldn’t be fun for players in the SEA timezone to be fighting off the others servers at once with a PPT of 25, just because their NA timezone gets 400+ PPT. So the rewards, etc. should also (or primarily) scale based off of the current PPT of the servers to promote healthy competition around the clock.

Yes, we definitely need some sort of system in place that discourages ganging up on the LAST PLACE SERVER, as the current system illogically does. The servers coming 1st and 2nd see the 3rd place server as easy free points, either to maintain a lead or to catch up in points respectively.