Guild Wars 2

Gimme a E. Gimme a N. GOOOOOOOOOO GREEEEEEEEEN!!!

As of the time this post is being written, all 8 NA matchups are being won by green. Makes sense, the green server has the highest ranking in each tier. But there’s a problem: given the current scores there will be no change in the matchups next week!

http://mos.millenium.org/matchups#NA

In my case, it will be the same matchup my tier has had since Kaineng made it past my tier. This seems to be related to weighting in the ranking system. Perhaps that should be tweaked to shake things up a bit, make it more volatile.

Only constructive comments please, or this will get closed.

There’s obviously an issue with the ranking system’s math. Look no further than the numerous threads regarding the subject: many from T8, which I am a part of. One problem is how many ranking points are between T7 and T8 (I would assume that EU servers have a similar problem, but with T8 and T9…). This kind of thing sticks servers like SF with FC and ET, both of whom combined may equal SF’s current Wv3 population. This is also why folk in T8 (and many of those in SF as well, which should say something) have the complaints we collectively do with the current ranking setup.

As it is now, the system needs to account for population growth and shrinkage more fluidly than it does now. Indeed, it should also account strictly based on Wv3
populations between each server. There is 0% worth of a logical reason why a server should have to blowout both opponents for multiple months straight to even attempt a rank-jump.

As I’ve stated in previous threads like this one: Fine, I can deal with the ranking reset having been shelved, but it would be highly appreciated if ANet’s folk would take
a personal look into the situations of the current server matchups. Preferably from all sides in each bracket. When necessary, adjust the ranking algorithm to compensate.
Such a move seems to be the “best” way to please both sides of the “ranking math = problematic” divide.

The tier 8 case is a very special case. No matter who FC and ET play, it’s unlikely their WvW population will ever recover to a point where they can win. It’s actually SF who is getting screwed in that matchup, because as you say it will be weeks maybe months before they can move into tier 7. Volatility, that’s what this ranking system needs.

There have been several threads about increasing volatility of the system to allow for faster shifts, corresponding to quick changes in population. This would allow for tiers to adjust faster, but also mix matches up a bit more. In their latest big patch that introduced the fallback models and reintroduced the “new” culling system, Anet stated, in their divine wisdom, that there was no need to change the rating system.

Change the math so it’s easier to change tiers after consecutive wins/losses. Stable tiers sound good on paper, but they’re pretty boring in practice.

I also wouldn’t mind the removal of the us/eu wall, merging all servers into a global ladder based on seasons, and a change in the way servers handle pop caps based on current activity but let’s start small!

Eviator.9746:

The tier 8 case is a very special case. No matter who FC and ET play, it’s unlikely their WvW population will ever recover to a point where they can win. It’s actually SF who is getting screwed in that matchup, because as you say it will be weeks maybe months before they can move into tier 7. Volatility, that’s what this ranking system needs.

We can agree on volatility. As for population issues, a big issue for us in FC (and to a large degree, ET’s guys as well) is that SF’s only the latest in a series of servers steamrolling through. Months of eating dirt, no matter how hard you scrap, will demoralize anyone. This then shrinks the Wv3 population, which just continues
the downward spiral. And, I’d be willing to bet this can happen to any server.
It just takes a longer time for larger population servers to be noticeably effected.

Another problem with this is we can’t finish 100% map completion for the WvW map. My server has been green I think for the 7th week straight and the gift of exploration is about the only thing I need to make my legendary.

Advent.6193:

We can agree on volatility. As for population issues, a big issue for us in FC (and to a large degree, ET’s guys as well) is that SF’s only the latest in a series of servers steamrolling through. Months of eating dirt, no matter how hard you scrap, will demoralize anyone. This then shrinks the Wv3 population, which just continues
the downward spiral. And, I’d be willing to bet this can happen to any server.
It just takes a longer time for larger population servers to be noticeably effected.

So perhaps with more volatility, an opponent different from SF could rekindle interest in WvW on ET and FC? Just might work.

One of the benefits of the volatile era of the ladder (the first 4-5 months?) was that it gave the illusion of progress by frequent tier shifts up and down. It’s a common thing in games to design it so the player is almost guaranteed a “win” every now and then to keep interest.

It also gives servers that have been green for a while something to work toward, because they see how far they have to go when they shoot up. It’s just as boring to be a green for a month. If there could be a large amount of volatility for consecutive wins/losses, I think this could be accomplished.

Of course the outliers are the tippy top of servers and the very bottom. I don’t think any system can solve for that, though. In the case of GW2, the bottom tier of US/EU should probably be merged with other servers sadly. Their population is very unlikely to increase short of giving free transfers, but that would only make things potentially worse.

Another week, 7 of 8 tiers with green winning. The eighth, green is barely behind. And once again, very little shake up in the predicted matches for next week. GOOOOO GREEEEEEEEN!

Didn’t we write post after post condemning volatility before free transfers ended? And now we’re going to ask for it, demand it, and QQ because we don’t have it?

As soon as that volatility comes back, we’ll start seeing people back on the “we need stability!!!” bandwagon.

Fickle, unsure of what we want (especially after we GET what we wanted in the first place)… No wonder we get completely disregarded by ANet. /eyeroll

Its a sunk cost.

The glicko system isn’t performing well and it needs to be scrapped in favor of a more simple system that can be adjusted more easily.

It should have been done a long time ago.

I’m all in favour of a simple round robin league. This means you would get to fight ALL servers during a WvW season. Sure some weeks you will get smashed, some you’ll smash and some will be tough fights. But at least it adds variety, the guilds on my server can fight some of the higher and lower tier guilds without spending ridiculous amounts of gems on moving servers etc. Would perhaps give people that bit of enjoyment back while you work on the underlying issues in WvW.

Dhampyr.2104:

Didn’t we write post after post condemning volatility before free transfers ended? And now we’re going to ask for it, demand it, and QQ because we don’t have it?

As soon as that volatility comes back, we’ll start seeing people back on the “we need stability!!!” bandwagon.

Fickle, unsure of what we want (especially after we GET what we wanted in the first place)… No wonder we get completely disregarded by ANet. /eyeroll

If they disregard our feedback it’s because of non-constructive responses like yours. We are demostrating a problem with factual data, presenting possible solutions. If you disagree with our conclusions, please post why instead of blowing a gasket.