Guild Wars 2

Because it can not be said enough times . . . . .

SF can not get out of T8 because the scoring system is stacked against it.

Take last weeks score
SF 383 619
FC 97 536
ET 131 612

evolution 27.571

[see the history here http://mos.millenium.org/servers/view/45/#history ]

Win by 250k and get only 27 points added to your score. Now, do even better the following week or lose points. Sometimes, you just can not do any better. Add burn out and frustration to that and you get the self-fulfilling prophesy of a dying server when by all rights SF should be moving up a tier.

Compound that with not a single comment by ANET and you get people looking to jump ship.

We all know that every game has its flaws. Most publishers strive for effective communication with their player base. Players want to know where they stand. When things that are important to them will be addressed (or not). ANET appears to be an exception.

Jump on the bandwagon. Help us demand feedback from the publisher!

I’m not even in this tier, but I would like to hear from anet too. About this and several other things. They are bad a talking to players it seems, especially on this board.

Do we really need 3 threads a day about tier 8?

I agree that something should be done, specifically about tier 8 that would hopefully not negatively affect the rest of the game, but spamming the forums is not it.

Morale is depleting, fun is gone, my money isn’t going into arena nets pocket until they at least say “We are aware and working on it” (if anything, a company is scared to lose money…maybe T8 should halt purchases for giggles, but this is becoming a serious problem)

This is all we ask of you a net, a simple use of PR can go a long way for your players.

roostapro.9827:

part edited by Moderator

Morale is depleting, fun is gone, my money isn’t going into arena nets pocket until they at least say “We are aware and working on it” (if anything, a company is scared to lose money…maybe T8 should halt purchases for giggles, but this is becoming a serious problem)

This is all we ask of you a net, a simple use of PR can go a long way for your players.

part edited by Moderator.

Why?
It doesn’t make any sense.
Mods delete and lock the threads, they are not devs and not the ones who will fix your problem.

One consolidated thread is enough for Devs,
Or, you know
You could PM one of them and ask for an update, if it’s something you think needs direct Dev attention (Which clearly it is).

I don’t understand what you hope to gain by antagonizing the mods.

Everyone always says blah blah blah well for one it isnt march yet, two anet dont respond cause they created something they dont know how to evaluate with out the curent system, three its every tier up too tier two that has problems. If anet thinks its fun fighting the same server over and over knowing the first time fight was a loss and players will return to wvw atmospheer under the presumption that they will win in one of the weeks,and then the winning teams never leave that tier its way way to much for me to stand, absolutley no way for my server to progress in wvw with our number but we are a tier 3 ranked server its jokes and needs to be fixed.

I think that this type of issue has really been ongoing, and it only exacerbated by the rating system. The upcoming changes may make some difference, but not in this specific arena (afaik). It is really an issue that has plagued open field PvP games since their inception. It either tends to go full AoE, or just huge numbers to win the day.

I feel that the two best solutions, when taking dev time and player satisfaction in equal consideration, are to either remove AoE limits or employ a dynamic “outmanned” system. I think the latter is a better option, even though I am not against removing AoE limits. The objective would be to create a system that adjusts player stats in an applicable radius that is determined by how many numbers each server has. If balanced properly (BIG if), this would allow skill to start to be able to mitigate numbers. The only time this happens currently is if the ones with the numbers essentially have zero experience, and the smaller group is very well practiced.

So, it would basically be the outmanned buff, just rehashed and made… relevant and dynamic. As more players from a given server join a specific fight, the stats would adjust according to the changes on the fly. In any tier, this would allow skill to start to matter equally to numbers. As it stands, numbers are the name of the game. Skill only becomes remotely relevant if one side has no skill whatsoever, or the numbers are very close to equal.

Actually, if the dynamic adjustment system could be done well, and packaged properly, its probably an engine that could be sold to other games, developers, etc.

EnRohbi.2187:

Do we really need 3 threads a day about tier 8?

I agree that something should be done, specifically about tier 8 that would hopefully not negatively affect the rest of the game, but spamming the forums is not it.

Yes, we do. What is currently going on in T8 is already starting to slowly creep up into higher tiers as well. Endlessly unbalanced match ups will be the norm soon if nothing is done.

Gab Superstar.4059:

EnRohbi.2187:

Do we really need 3 threads a day about tier 8?

I agree that something should be done, specifically about tier 8 that would hopefully not negatively affect the rest of the game, but spamming the forums is not it.

Yes, we do. What is currently going on in T8 is already starting to slowly creep up into higher tiers as well. Endlessly unbalanced match ups will be the norm soon if nothing is done.

They are already the norm.
The playerbase stacked the top 5~6 servers and left the rest of the game behind.

Unless Anet merges servers or forcibly relocates people out of the top servers,
Then this is what we will have for matches for a very, very long time.

And see my subsequent posts,
Having a problem is not a reason to spam the forums,
The mods will just shut down threads and Devs will never read them.

One thread is enough

EnRohbi.2187:

Gab Superstar.4059:

EnRohbi.2187:

Do we really need 3 threads a day about tier 8?

I agree that something should be done, specifically about tier 8 that would hopefully not negatively affect the rest of the game, but spamming the forums is not it.

Yes, we do. What is currently going on in T8 is already starting to slowly creep up into higher tiers as well. Endlessly unbalanced match ups will be the norm soon if nothing is done.

They are already the norm.
The playerbase stacked the top 5~6 servers and left the rest of the game behind.

Unless Anet merges servers or forcibly relocates people out of the top servers,
Then this is what we will have for matches for a very, very long time.

And see my subsequent posts,
Having a problem is not a reason to spam the forums,
The mods will just shut down threads and Devs will never read them.

One thread is enough

The fact that people stacked on the top 5-6 servers is actually not the problem. Hell, I know for a fact that many people on HoD enjoy WvW much more without the huge zergs. No, the problem is the broken rating system.

Gab Superstar.4059:

EnRohbi.2187:

Gab Superstar.4059:

EnRohbi.2187:

Do we really need 3 threads a day about tier 8?

I agree that something should be done, specifically about tier 8 that would hopefully not negatively affect the rest of the game, but spamming the forums is not it.

Yes, we do. What is currently going on in T8 is already starting to slowly creep up into higher tiers as well. Endlessly unbalanced match ups will be the norm soon if nothing is done.

They are already the norm.
The playerbase stacked the top 5~6 servers and left the rest of the game behind.

Unless Anet merges servers or forcibly relocates people out of the top servers,
Then this is what we will have for matches for a very, very long time.

And see my subsequent posts,
Having a problem is not a reason to spam the forums,
The mods will just shut down threads and Devs will never read them.

One thread is enough

The fact that people stacked on the top 5-6 servers is actually not the problem. Hell, I know for a fact that many people on HoD enjoy WvW much more without the huge zergs. No, the problem is the broken rating system.

You’re completely blind.
I never said every server should be the same,
In fact, if the top servers weren’t so stacked the zergs would be far less prominent with the population spread out more.
But the players unbalanced every server this dramatically on their own.

Being “locked into place” is not causing the problems, the fact that there are just no possible combination of fair matches is. And that is the playerbase’s fault. Having new opponents isn’t going to fix that.

EnRohbi.2187:

Being “locked into place” is not causing the problems, the fact that there are just no possible combination of fair matches is. And that is the playerbase’s fault. Having new opponents isn’t going to fix that.

Please prove to us that there is no possible combination of fair matches. Elaborate on this vast experience in multiple tiers that leads you to make such statements. while your at it, define your version of “fair” just so there wont be any confusion.

Furthermore, blaming the players is just silly. Players have their own set of goals and will do what they want to achieve them. Game publishers have design specifications and are expected to build sufficient intelligence into their game such that these are not violated. When they are, they are expected to fix the problem.

Ragnarz.1750:

EnRohbi.2187:

Being “locked into place” is not causing the problems, the fact that there are just no possible combination of fair matches is. And that is the playerbase’s fault. Having new opponents isn’t going to fix that.

Please prove to us that there is no possible combination of fair matches. Elaborate on this vast experience in multiple tiers that leads you to make such statements. while your at it, define your version of “fair” just so there wont be any confusion.

Furthermore, blaming the players is just silly. Players have their own set of goals and will do what they want to achieve them. Game publishers have design specifications and are expected to build sufficient intelligence into their game such that these are not violated. When they are, they are expected to fix the problem.

The fact is, I’m not obligated to prove anything.
You are the ones complaining, the burden of proof is on you.

So I’m not going to sit here and explain to you how different every tier is from the tiers above and below it, because anyone who’s actually moved in tiers recently can vouch for this. If you’re a tier 4 server you will not be balanced in either tier 3 nor tier 5. The same thing resonates through just about every tier, if not every one.

Blaming the players is far from silly, they caused the problem. It’s their fault.
Just because Anet did not explicitly ban mass server transfers does not mean Anet caused everyone to stack the top of the game. The players are responsible for their own actions, they don’t get to just absolve themselves because Anet happened to /allow/ it to happen.

Anet allows terrain exploits and hacks in WvW to continue, but I bet you’re not out there going “Everybody should hack into keeps because Anet isn’t good enough to fix it”.

EDIT: I’ll define my version of “Fair” however.
My version of Fair is a match whose winner is not obvious at the end of the weekend.
We had matches back in tiers 5 or 4 where we did not pull into the lead until Thursday, and those were some of the best matches we’d had, as far as “fairness” goes.

OMFG ALL THE OTHER SERVERS WOULD BE WORSE THAN SF!!!!! there is a reason SF is in T8.

while this is quite unfortunate for t8 i dont think you guys will fare much better against any of the servers in t7, honestly if you care about WvW that much, i dont think t8 is the place for you at this point

My Dead Characters.9517:

OMFG ALL THE OTHER SERVERS WOULD BE WORSE THAN SF!!!!! there is a reason SF is in T8.

ThaOwner.7560:

while this is quite unfortunate for t8 i dont think you guys will fare much better against any of the servers in t7, honestly if you care about WvW that much, i dont think t8 is the place for you at this point

These kind of posts show you guys clearly have no understanding of what the situation is, how the scoring system is detrimental, and instead have some misguided notion that the system is behaving correctly for the benefit of everyone.

We have a very established guild on our server, many actives and many casuals, there is no way we are going to migrate 200-300 accounts to a new server when the transfer fees are expensive as they are. Beyond that, because of the way guild’s are currently structured, we would lose our hundreds of thousands of built up influence, existing upgrades and bonuses that our guild has earned over the past 6 months.

Moving is not an option.

Months ago we landed in tier 8, and at that time we relatively deserved to land in there, as I have posted many times before we have had our PvE playerbase come back from events (Wintersday), several transfers from higher tiers, and co-ordinated Commanders / Guilds for tactics ON TOP of having excess numbers for zergs.

We have improved, A LOT. Our WvW guilds are growing bored again, and are suffering because of the scoring system. Because of the balance in the higher tiers, servers have a chance to bounce back and forth and be tested amongst other tiers.

Getting thrown in Tier 8 against two undermanned/underpowered servers sucks the availability for progress which is what the ranking system is dependant on. When we completely wipe the floor with these two tiers our score goes up a negligible amount, if for some reason they decide to put any kind of a fight, and instead of winning them by a vast majority, we win by an average majority we lose a significant amount of points that prevent us from having the same ‘chance’ that higher tiers have.

You can say things are fine all you want, and argue about whether SF would do fine in higher tiers, the reality is though, we do not have the opportunity to prove that. Unless something dramatic happens in the higher tiers, we are stuck here for what appears to be more months on end, despite the months we’ve already been here.

pulsecodesgnl.3470:

My Dead Characters.9517:

OMFG ALL THE OTHER SERVERS WOULD BE WORSE THAN SF!!!!! there is a reason SF is in T8.

ThaOwner.7560:

while this is quite unfortunate for t8 i dont think you guys will fare much better against any of the servers in t7, honestly if you care about WvW that much, i dont think t8 is the place for you at this point

These kind of posts show you guys clearly have no understanding of what the situation is, how the scoring system is detrimental, and instead have some misguided notion that the system is behaving correctly for the benefit of everyone.

We have a very established guild on our server, many actives and many casuals, there is no way we are going to migrate 200-300 accounts to a new server when the transfer fees are expensive as they are. Beyond that, because of the way guild’s are currently structured, we would lose our hundreds of thousands of built up influence, existing upgrades and bonuses that our guild has earned over the past 6 months.

Moving is not an option.

Months ago we landed in tier 8, and at that time we relatively deserved to land in there, as I have posted many times before we have had our PvE playerbase come back from events (Wintersday), several transfers from higher tiers, and co-ordinated Commanders / Guilds for tactics ON TOP of having excess numbers for zergs.

We have improved, A LOT. Our WvW guilds are growing bored again, and are suffering because of the scoring system. Because of the balance in the higher tiers, servers have a chance to bounce back and forth and be tested amongst other tiers.

Getting thrown in Tier 8 against two undermanned/underpowered servers sucks the availability for progress which is what the ranking system is dependant on. When we completely wipe the floor with these two tiers our score goes up a negligible amount, if for some reason they decide to put any kind of a fight, and instead of winning them by a vast majority, we win by an average majority we lose a significant amount of points that prevent us from having the same ‘chance’ that higher tiers have.

You can say things are fine all you want, and argue about whether SF would do fine in higher tiers, the reality is though, we do not have the opportunity to prove that. Unless something dramatic happens in the higher tiers, we are stuck here for what appears to be more months on end, despite the months we’ve already been here.

so what if you improved? that DOES NOT MEAN that noone else did. SF probably had the same amount or less of transfers. maybe if you used, dare i say it, STRATEGY, you could take stuff. maybe never will you take SM, but you will make a difference. taking a keep by hitting 2 entrances with trebs while secretly pounding down a third entrance is GREAT fun.

EDIT: PS, im in T8 in euro servers, were getting roflstomped by blacktide, but WE STILL GET KEEPS! how? STRATEGY!!!!!(and our lord flame ram)

pulsecodesgnl.3470:

My Dead Characters.9517:

OMFG ALL THE OTHER SERVERS WOULD BE WORSE THAN SF!!!!! there is a reason SF is in T8.

ThaOwner.7560:

while this is quite unfortunate for t8 i dont think you guys will fare much better against any of the servers in t7, honestly if you care about WvW that much, i dont think t8 is the place for you at this point

These kind of posts show you guys clearly have no understanding of what the situation is, how the scoring system is detrimental, and instead have some misguided notion that the system is behaving correctly for the benefit of everyone.

We have a very established guild on our server, many actives and many casuals, there is no way we are going to migrate 200-300 accounts to a new server when the transfer fees are expensive as they are. Beyond that, because of the way guild’s are currently structured, we would lose our hundreds of thousands of built up influence, existing upgrades and bonuses that our guild has earned over the past 6 months.

Moving is not an option.

Months ago we landed in tier 8, and at that time we relatively deserved to land in there, as I have posted many times before we have had our PvE playerbase come back from events (Wintersday), several transfers from higher tiers, and co-ordinated Commanders / Guilds for tactics ON TOP of having excess numbers for zergs.

We have improved, A LOT. Our WvW guilds are growing bored again, and are suffering because of the scoring system. Because of the balance in the higher tiers, servers have a chance to bounce back and forth and be tested amongst other tiers.

Getting thrown in Tier 8 against two undermanned/underpowered servers sucks the availability for progress which is what the ranking system is dependant on. When we completely wipe the floor with these two tiers our score goes up a negligible amount, if for some reason they decide to put any kind of a fight, and instead of winning them by a vast majority, we win by an average majority we lose a significant amount of points that prevent us from having the same ‘chance’ that higher tiers have.

You can say things are fine all you want, and argue about whether SF would do fine in higher tiers, the reality is though, we do not have the opportunity to prove that. Unless something dramatic happens in the higher tiers, we are stuck here for what appears to be more months on end, despite the months we’ve already been here.

The problem being, of course, Anet isn’t going to disrupt every other tier just to give SF a chance to “prove themselves” in a tier that they may, or may not, be competitive in.

Not a lot of people are saying the ratings system is fine, it’s a known and mostly agreed upon problem.
But people also seem to be realizing that the ratings system is not the biggest problem we have right now, and fixing the ratings is not going to make matches any more balanced. Increased volatility would hurt a lot of tiers just to have the potential to fix tier 8.

People have suggested putting a ratings floor on tier 8 to prevent servers from falling too far to recover. I have no issue with this, I can’t see it negatively affecting the other tiers. Not that I get to make the decision for Anet, but I would support that idea.

My Dead Characters.9517:

so what if you improved? that DOES NOT MEAN that noone else did. SF probably had the same amount or less of transfers. maybe if you used, dare i say it, STRATEGY, you could take stuff. maybe never will you take SM, but you will make a difference. taking a keep by hitting 2 entrances with trebs while secretly pounding down a third entrance is GREAT fun.

*faceplam. We usually own all four maps. What more do we need to take to move up a tier eh? I feel like I’m being trolled here -_-.

EnRohbi.2187:

The problem being, of course, Anet isn’t going to disrupt every other tier just to give SF a chance to “prove themselves” in a tier that they may, or may not, be competitive in.

Not a lot of people are saying the ratings system is fine, it’s a known and mostly agreed upon problem.
But people also seem to be realizing that the ratings system is not the biggest problem we have right now, and fixing the ratings is not going to make matches any more balanced. Increased volatility would hurt a lot of tiers just to have the potential to fix tier 8.

People have suggested putting a ratings floor on tier 8 to prevent servers from falling too far to recover. I have no issue with this, I can’t see it negatively affecting the other tiers. Not that I get to make the decision for Anet, but I would support that idea.

I am not arguing for manual fixing of ratings, in fact I’m going to go as far as saying that I don’t have a fix (there are plenty of viable options but I don’t want to get into them).

My entire point was educational, there are still those that believe this is for the best, I am only trying to point out how that is not the case, that it is in fact detrimental, and in some way it needs to be changed. Are there other things that need to be fixed? Sure, but this is a significant issue for those of us trying to enjoy the game in our tier, and doesn’t need to be neglected for that fact.

Being a member of Kaineng since about 2 weeks after release, I know the feeling.

Took us a LONG time to dig out of T8 when we started winning every week by huge margins, at least 2 months (this is after being curb stomped by Devona’s Rest until about December)

It’ll come with time, but I do agree that T8 really digs itself an embarrassingly deep hole.

So folks can understand what the issue actually is, I direct you to the following tidbits from the (now locked) “Tier 8 Needs More Attention” thread:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/suggestions/In-my-opinion-t8-rankings-need-more-attention/page/2#post1408111

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/suggestions/In-my-opinion-t8-rankings-need-more-attention/page/2#post1408390

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/suggestions/In-my-opinion-t8-rankings-need-more-attention/page/2#post1409276

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/suggestions/In-my-opinion-t8-rankings-need-more-attention/page/2#post1409573

For a little history, SF landed in T8 at the beginning of January. GoM was dominating T7 and it was a tossup whether it would be us or HoD who would drop down into T8. We narrowly lost to HoD that week and fell into T8.

We narrowly lost our first T8 match, narrowly won our second T8 match and have been having blowout matches ever since. We have been having blowout matches for a solid MONTH now with no end in sight. Why are we still in T8? Because our rating score got sucked down into the T8 abyss due to the crazy low scores of our opposing servers. And we still have yet to claw our way out of the T8 score trap.

In this match, SF is WELL in the lead (again). Yet we are currently projected to LOOSE points this week. Why? Because our opposition is picking up a wee bit of steam and the blowout isn’t at the magnitude of what it was last week. We’re not winning by as much as we did last week, but the score is still a blowout. However, because Glicko projected continued improvement for SF (which is an impossible expectation to meet), it penalizes us if we don’t meet its expectations. Even though we’re still winning by a VERY healthy margin, we’re “underperforming” according to Glicko.

The math is broken, plain and simple. No server should have to curbstomp their opposition for well over a month to qualify to move up to the next tier. And no server should fear a ratings loss when they are curbstomping the opposition. Curbstomping isn’t “underperforming.” We’ve already proved (for 5 weeks straight!) that we should be in a tier above T8. We should get that chance.

I see SF owning both servers and still losing points for next week in the standing. LOL this is so mess up. Gecko is clearly broken.

TheComet.6471:

Being a member of Kaineng since about 2 weeks after release, I know the feeling.

Took us a LONG time to dig out of T8 when we started winning every week by huge margins, at least 2 months (this is after being curb stomped by Devona’s Rest until about December)

It’ll come with time, but I do agree that T8 really digs itself an embarrassingly deep hole.

SF’s situation is very different from Kaineng, they’re not going to get a sudden massive player base now that server transfers are paid, so they wont be able to blitz through tiers. They’re winning the way they’re intended to win and additions to their player base are from their own server with renewed interest along with their w3 regulars. Kaineng would likely be where SF is right now had that sudden mass transfer rush not happened before paid transfers, those massive shifts wont happen again now.

kash.9213:

SF’s situation is very different from Kaineng, they’re not going to get a sudden massive player base now that server transfers are paid, so they wont be able to blitz through tiers. They’re winning the way they’re intended to win and additions to their player base are from their own server with renewed interest along with their w3 regulars. Kaineng would likely be where SF is right now had that sudden mass transfer rush not happened before paid transfers, those massive shifts wont happen again now.

Not as different as you would think.

We already got a sudden rush of players before the free transfers ended. Both returning from other servers and actual transfers from higher tiers (namely SoR). Not as massive as Kaineng, but the dynamic is still very clearly there.

“They’re winning the way they’re intended to win” comes off as writing us off as fitting in place here. If ‘intended’ is roflstomping ET/FC week after week while our rating drops, then what’s intended needs to change.

And how would you know whether it’s similar or not, are you here and just trolling as Mag?

pulsecodesgnl.3470:

Not as different as you would think.

We already got a sudden rush of players before the free transfers ended. Both returning from other servers and actual transfers from higher tiers (namely SoR). Not as massive as Kaineng, but the dynamic is still very clearly there.

“They’re winning the way they’re intended to win” comes off as writing us off as fitting in place here. If ‘intended’ is roflstomping ET/FC week after week while our rating drops, then what’s intended needs to change.

And how would you know whether it’s similar or not, are you here and just trolling as Mag?

Go take a walk and cool off.

By intended, I mean winning without having a massive rush of tier one guilds and player base suddenly show up and 24/7 for you, meaning your server is winning mostly by having it’s own player base being active consistently over a long period like w3 was intended

….Meaning if the system worked well your server would have moved up by now. It basically takes an element outside of the systems calculations like mass server transfers or exits from other servers to advance in tiers considerably.

Ah, clarification appreciated. Getting a little tired of repeating myself on the ‘they deserve to stay in t8’ sentiments.

As advised, taking a walk and cooling off. :P

That was harsh of me.

I realistically don’t know how similar the situation is, I mostly go by the forums. It get’s to be a bit bland watching the w3 season play out and instead of reading about the big plays and crazy moves winning or losing the day, we hear about which guilds moved where and the effects of that. It’s not an exciting league right now.

I still think that Anet should only keep the data for x amount of weeks (for example, 8 weeks of data gets averaged into the scores). This would allow for quicker movement, and after about 7 more weeks, bring us back in line with paid transfers (instead of doing it all at once).

Going forward, this would also help reshape the server lineups when there are mass exits from a server as well, instead of being stuck in a higher tier than your server can fend off.

I think this is the simplest solution that would benefit everyone all around (those who cried that resets would be bad and those who want to see fresh new servers every now and then).

I feel no pity for SF they are a server made up of bandwagoners that thought they could exploit the glicko system and free transfer instead they got burned by it after it stabilized.

Reminds me of the guy who leaves his girlfriend for greener pastures only to get burned by a terminal std.

Asglarek.8976:

I feel no pity for SF they are a server made up of bandwagoners that thought they could exploit the glicko system and free transfer instead they got burned by it after it stabilized.

Reminds me of the guy who leaves his girlfriend for greener pastures only to get burned by a terminal std.

Troll on trolla…..

Expanding on my original post here, describing what I feel is a super awesome idea ( ) ;

Anet continues to make changes like this:

Event Scaling

A new test version of our advanced event scaling algorithm has been applied to four high-level, regularly played events to help us monitor the feasibility of this system in the live environment. This new scaling algorithm dynamically increases the difficulty of events by using the current system of increasing the difficulty of existing creatures, while also adding a new system that substitutes creatures of lower difficulty with different creatures as the event scales up. If successful, this system will be slowly extended to other events across the game during 2013.

Using this same system, it could potentially be applied to engagements in WvW. Where each battle in a given radius would be viewed as a “DE.” It would scale stats in proportion to set variables. It seems the groundwork is there (with uplevelling and the algorithms being created for DEs), I think this would solve a lot of issues with WvW in regards to numbers being superior to skill in almost every situation.

Tuluum.9638:

Expanding on my original post here, describing what I feel is a super awesome idea ( ) ;

Anet continues to make changes like this:

Event Scaling

A new test version of our advanced event scaling algorithm has been applied to four high-level, regularly played events to help us monitor the feasibility of this system in the live environment. This new scaling algorithm dynamically increases the difficulty of events by using the current system of increasing the difficulty of existing creatures, while also adding a new system that substitutes creatures of lower difficulty with different creatures as the event scales up. If successful, this system will be slowly extended to other events across the game during 2013.

Using this same system, it could potentially be applied to engagements in WvW. Where each battle in a given radius would be viewed as a “DE.” It would scale stats in proportion to set variables. It seems the groundwork is there (with uplevelling and the algorithms being created for DEs), I think this would solve a lot of issues with WvW in regards to numbers being superior to skill in almost every situation.

I really don’t think giving people higher stats is the same as showcasing higher skill.

This wouldn’t discourage zerging so much as it’d discourage PUGs

It’d take about a week before the organized guilds realized that the random PUGs in wvw would be doing nothing for them except making their characters weaker, and that would lead to animosity and wvw being less welcoming for new players.

There are ways to discourage zergs, but changing stats has already proven in the past (Orbs) to be a bad approach to wvw in general.

EnRohbi.2187:

I really don’t think giving people higher stats is the same as showcasing higher skill.

This wouldn’t discourage zerging so much as it’d discourage PUGs

It’d take about a week before the organized guilds realized that the random PUGs in wvw would be doing nothing for them except making their characters weaker, and that would lead to animosity and wvw being less welcoming for new players.

There are ways to discourage zergs, but changing stats has already proven in the past (Orbs) to be a bad approach to wvw in general.

Everything you bring up are things that can be programmed and mitigated with variables. Of course, it it was done right, there would be balance. It wouldnt mean that the larger zerg would be weaker, obviously, since they have the numbers. It also wouldnt mean giving people higher stats would showcase skill. What it would do is allow those with said skill to be able to compete against a larger force without as much skill. Right now, the only way it will happen is if the larger force has little to no skill and the smaller force is well practiced and knowledgeable about the game. The idea is to reduce that disparity. Of course, balanced and tested like anything should be done in a video game!

I am not interested in discouraging zergs. Nor am I interested in giving map-wide buffs like orbs. What I am interested in seeing is in seeing smaller group play encouraged, very specifically WITHOUT discouraging zergs. You may have zero interest in that though, so we would disagree on a fundamental level making it difficult to see eye to eye. I see some issues with the system, but there are issues with the current system as well. I also do not see anything you brought up to be too detrimental, as it all would depend on exactly the type of variables and “buffing” that occurred.

Do I necessarily trust Anet to do this properly? Well, lets just say I have my doubts. I would be interested in hearing more criticism about it though, just maybe from a standpoint of the “ideal” situation rather than if Anet implemented it in the worst way they possibly could imagine. Its usually better to work towards an ideal than negate any action through possible, yet avoidable, failure.

Tuluum.9638:

EnRohbi.2187:

I really don’t think giving people higher stats is the same as showcasing higher skill.

This wouldn’t discourage zerging so much as it’d discourage PUGs

It’d take about a week before the organized guilds realized that the random PUGs in wvw would be doing nothing for them except making their characters weaker, and that would lead to animosity and wvw being less welcoming for new players.

There are ways to discourage zergs, but changing stats has already proven in the past (Orbs) to be a bad approach to wvw in general.

Everything you bring up are things that can be programmed and mitigated with variables. Of course, it it was done right, there would be balance. It wouldnt mean that the larger zerg would be weaker, obviously, since they have the numbers. It also wouldnt mean giving people higher stats would showcase skill. What it would do is allow those with said skill to be able to compete against a larger force without as much skill. Right now, the only way it will happen is if the larger force has little to no skill and the smaller force is well practiced and knowledgeable about the game. The idea is to reduce that disparity. Of course, balanced and tested like anything should be done in a video game!

I am not interested in discouraging zergs. Nor am I interested in giving map-wide buffs like orbs. I see some issues with the system, but there are issues with the current system as well. I also do not see anything you brought up to be too detrimental, as it all would depend on exactly the type of variables and “buffing” that occurred.

Do I necessarily trust Anet to do this properly? Well, lets just say I have my doubts. I would be interested in hearing more criticism about it though, just maybe from a standpoint of the “ideal” situation rather than if Anet implemented it in the worst way they possibly could imagine. Its usually better to work towards an ideal than negate any action through possible, yet avoidable, failure.

No amount of being “programmed and mitigated with variables” is going to stop guild groups from telling pugs to “Get the kitten away from me because you’re lowering my stats”

As soon as you tell the wvw community that they get weaker the more people are around them, they start getting hostile to people around them

EnRohbi.2187:

No amount of being “programmed and mitigated with variables” is going to stop guild groups from telling pugs to “Get the kitten away from me because you’re lowering my stats”

As soon as you tell the wvw community that they get weaker the more people are around them, they start getting hostile to people around them

Who said anything about debuffing the group with larger numbers? That would just make it more complicated than it needs to be anyway.

Like I said, if you are completely against making smaller groups more viable, then we wont see eye to eye at all and you will just look for anything to confirm your bias on it. Working towards how to make it work, instead of discarding it completely because your individual vision of its implementation is flawed, is not exactly the most productive way to go about things.

Of course, if you think that things are perfect the way they are, then that is your stance. Obviously, any solution brought up, no matter how viable, will be thrown out the window due to bias. You want it to stay the way it is, so that IS the best solution for you. Others have other ideas though..

Tuluum.9638:

EnRohbi.2187:

No amount of being “programmed and mitigated with variables” is going to stop guild groups from telling pugs to “Get the kitten away from me because you’re lowering my stats”

As soon as you tell the wvw community that they get weaker the more people are around them, they start getting hostile to people around them

Who said anything about debuffing the group with larger numbers? That would just make it more complicated than it needs to be anyway.

Like I said, if you are completely against making smaller groups more viable, then we wont see eye to eye at all and you will just look for anything to confirm your bias on it. Working towards how to make it work, instead of discarding it completely because your individual vision of its implementation is flawed, is not exactly the most productive way to go about things.

Of course, if you think that things are perfect the way they are, then that is your stance. Obviously, any solution brought up, no matter how viable, will be thrown out the window due to bias instead of reality.

I never said either of those things,
I do most of my wvwing in small groups and agree that zergs are not everything wvw should be.

You are making very strong (And very false) assumptions by assuming otherwise.

But adjusting stats is not the way to go.

Removing the AoE target cap would go a lot longer way into breaking up zergs than improving the stats on small groups would.

EnRohbi.2187:

I never said either of those things,

I never said you did Thats why all of those “ifs” were in there. Because there are people who love the way it is.

You are making very strong (And very false) assumptions by assuming otherwise.

Never made any assumptions, which is the whole deal with the “if” thing. Again, there are people who love it the way it is. And if thats the case, then any proposed solutions would be discarded by “you” since there is no problem to be solved.

But adjusting stats is not the way to go.

Removing the AoE target cap would go a lot longer way into breaking up zergs than improving the stats on small groups would.

It would, and as I said before, removing the AoE cap and dynamic stat adjustment are the two most viable options I see. The biggest difference is that if Anet could design such a dynamic balancing system, it could be marketed whereas the AoE cap would just have an effect on this sole game. It would be a better business decision to go with a dynamic balance system, which is mostly already in place with how stats already are adjusted, and how dynamic events scale. If they could package it, and make it work right, they could make money off of it. And in the end, its not like the users/players would really know the difference of what actually took place to get the right balance of zergs and small groups.

edit: regardless, I have thrown the idea out there. It will be ignored like so many others, lol. This current conversation is certainly going no where productive though. C’est la vie!

edit2: Just because I am curious, do you agree with the decision on stat adjustment for upleveling non level capped characters in WvW?

ANet is not good at communicating. I would agree.

Tuluum.9638:

edit2: Just because I am curious, do you agree with the decision on stat adjustment for upleveling non level capped characters in WvW?

You’re lucky I came back to read that, I thought our conversation was over. o;

I think upleveling in wvw is more useful to give people a taste of what wvw is like at lower levels. Because honestly, you should know as well as I do that an upleveled level 40 in wvw wearing blues or greens is not going to preform very well.

But I do not consider it to be a very serious feature, no. It primarily just supplies a bunch of easy targets for the opposing team.

Zergs are the SHIZ thats not the problem, it"s spending server money on upgrades that can be taken in less time then the upgrade it self. I say anet should give us what we want zerg zeplins invun buffs mabey for a hour every 3 hours for for camps and towers mabey, bigger and better seige weapons, and bigger and better guild bounus, and server bonus.