Guild Wars 2

Here’s a quick analysis of Gold League NA, which shows the Swiss Tournament may be a bad thing. I believe we are in a situation where SoS has more incentive to lose than win. This is bad tournament matchup design (remember the Olympics Badminton controversy?).

This is not a matchup thread but rather a discussion on the flaws of the Swiss Tournament format.

If all goes normally, scores will be:

BG: 17:18:23:24:29 <—- score at end of tournament
SoS: 17:22:23:28:29 <—- score at end of tournament

where each number is the points that server has at the beginning of the week (starting week 6, which is this week — and ending at the “beginning of week 10”, which is the end of the tournament).

So BG and SoS will be tied with 29 points. If ties are broken by ratings points, as many people have speculated, then BG will take 3rd and SoS 4th as BG will almost certainly have a higher rating (the gap between the two is currently very large).

But:

SoS has a chance of tying for 3rd with Maguuma instead… and in the case of ratings tiebreaker, will almost certainly take third. Here’s how it works:

//////////////////////////////////

This week (week 6):

BG gets 1 point for total of 18.
SoS loses to both Mag and DB, with Mag placing 1st. SoS and Mag both end up with 18 pts.

So BG/SoS/Mag points are: 18/18/18

////////////////////////////////

Week 7:

TC vs JQ vs BG (as BG has higher rating than SoS and Mag) and
SoS vs Mag vs DB.

BG gets 1 point for a total of 19.
SoS loses again to both Mag and DB. Mag places 1st. SoS ends up with 19 pts, Mag with 23.

So BG/SoS/Mag points are 19/19/23

/////////////////////////////////////////////////

Week 8:

TC vs JQ vs Mag and
BG vs SoS vs DB

Mag gets 1 point for a total of 24.
BG wins with SoS second. Their points are: 24 for BG and 22 for SoS.

So BG/SoS/Mag points are 24/22/24.

////////////////////////////////////////////////

Week 9:

TC vs JQ vs BG and
SoS vs Mag vs DB

BG gets 1 point for a total of 25
SoS wins with Mag second. Their points are 27 (SoS) and 27 (Mag).

so BG/SoS/Mag points are 25/27/27 to finish the season.

/////////////////////////////////////////////////

So SoS and Mag tie for 3rd. But if ratings are used as tiebreakers, SoS takes third, Mag 4th, and BG 5th.

Of course, SoS will have to make sure its ratings don’t fall too much compared to Mag, but their ratings gap is quite big, so that’s not too hard to arrange (don’t lose too badly when you lose).

//////////////////////////////////

TLDR: In the case of tiebreakers by rating at the end of the tournament, SoS can take 3rd instead of 4th by getting losing (getting 3rd) twice on purpose (this week and next).

It was already demonstrated to be a bad thing when trading wins was more beneficial than playing for first :p

BUT! It does give an element of politics and tactics this season, which is a change from the usual, welcome or not

The Swiss tournament is the best of choices but as Reverence said, it adds an element of politics and tactics which is a refreshing switch up so to speak.

I personally don’t like it as I’m benefiting from it and it’s causing the matches to be boring.

I question why people would put this much thought into something for awful rewards.

This is, in a way, worse because it doesn’t require any politics — which I guess some see as “part of the game.” One server can do this all by itself.

Well the swiss tournament is better in the larger leagues. NA Gold has to few servers for the system to work.

Ulion.5476:

Well the swiss tournament is better in the larger leagues. NA Gold has to few servers for the system to work.

Pretty much. Swiss style is not bad for itself, it just doesn’t work how its supposed to when you have few servers and the disparity between them is too big. It may work a bit for some leagues, but definitely not for Gold NA.

Obligatory reminder for people not to turn this into server mudslinging.

Obligatory note to our esteemed moderators that not every thread that mentions server names is a “matchup thread”.

Ulion.5476:

Well the swiss tournament is better in the larger leagues. NA Gold has to few servers for the system to work.

I wouldn’t be surprised at all if the same situation can be seen in Silver league. In that case, you’d want to find a server that wants to avoid the HoD/FA matchup and can push another server into more matchups with HoD/FA by losing on purpose.

I think you’d need more servers to make Swiss a viable format (or reduce the tournament length to 3-4 weeks). Or, you can change the points system of 1 for 3rd place, 3 for 2nd, and 5 for 1st.

I am not saying I can think of a better tournament style, but yeah this definitely stinks.

I am going to have a tactical netflix binge instead of joining WvW. Better strategy. Plus Trailer Park Boys.

On topic: politics during seasons is nice to have, but the current implementation means that only 2 servers out of 6 can benefit. A certain server is almost helpless in that they must simply be the target for the entire duration of the season, which is really boring politics when you think about it. If politics is to be encouraged during tournament play (I think it adds an extra dimension to the 2-year old stacking and recruiting coverage meta), it should be open for everyone to take part.

Ulion.5476:

Well the swiss tournament is better in the larger leagues. NA Gold has to few servers for the system to work.

This is just the tip of the iceberg, but yeah. For swiss to even have a chance to work it they’d have to remove the leagues entirely. Let SoR drop to bronze, let HoD jump up to gold, etc. That might be interesting. As is zZzZZzZZzzzz.

lmperdigao.2567:

Ulion.5476:

Well the swiss tournament is better in the larger leagues. NA Gold has to few servers for the system to work.

Pretty much. Swiss style is not bad for itself, it just doesn’t work how its supposed to when you have few servers and the disparity between them is too big. It may work a bit for some leagues, but definitely not for Gold NA.

Its not just Gold League. In NA Silver SBI can place better in the tournament if we lose to IoJ one week.

Bad system is bad.

It would be a better system if instead of points for win, your total points gained that week was tallied up and given a score out of 100 based on who you’re up against (similar to glicko), with it added up at the end of the tournament to give a final standings, rewarding lower ranked servers who played hard against higher ranked servers, and not shafting higher ranked servers altogether like this season.

SoS will always kill Maguuma, though. Even if letting Maguuma win gave us first, we would still kill Maguuma.

Is the double team on BG due to wanting the (lol) rewards or due to bad blood, history and spite? As far as I can tell it is the latter, changing the swiss system isn’t going to change anything.

renmei.3102:

Is the double team on BG due to wanting the (lol) rewards or due to bad blood, history and spite? As far as I can tell it is the latter, changing the swiss system isn’t going to change anything.

Definitely the later, the difference between 1st and 3rd doesn’t affect the rewards much.

1st gets 500pts so 1 weapon + 1 ascended accessory OR 2 ascended accessories + 100 spare points.
2nd gets 450 pts so 1 weapon + 150 spare pts OR 2 ascended accessories + 50 spare points.
3rd gets 400 pts so 1 weapon + 100 spare pts OR 2 ascended accessories

BAITness.1083:

Lasica.5068:

renmei.3102:

Is the double team on BG due to wanting the (lol) rewards or due to bad blood, history and spite? As far as I can tell it is the latter, changing the swiss system isn’t going to change anything.

Definitely the later, the difference between 1st and 3rd doesn’t affect the rewards much.

1st gets 500pts so 1 weapon + 1 ascended accessory OR 2 ascended accessories + 100 spare points.
2nd gets 450 pts so 1 weapon + 150 spare pts OR 2 ascended accessories + 50 spare points.
3rd gets 400 pts so 1 weapon + 100 spare pts OR 2 ascended accessories

Yes the rewards are terrible but like I said if this was really some bad blood this would have been going on before the tournament started, not after JQ and TC managed to lose their first match in forever. This is a select few guild leaders on these servers dragging the rest of their servers through the mud to try and put some salve on their fragile egos.

Edit: Not that ANet doesn’t deserve their share of the blame for promoting it with their unbelievably awful tournament plans. People ask for WvW updates, so they give us this tournament to make it even worse.

What is wrong with you.

ykyk.2740:

What is wrong with you.

What’s your problem?

Is it very interesting to spew your server propaganda in every single thread and get every single one of them locked because it gets derailed into server mud-slinging? Not everyone is interested in the history and workings of the great Blackgate, some people just want to talk about the tournament and its implementation without tripping on a crying player on every turn. Is that so hard for you to accept?

ykyk.2740:

Is it very interesting to spew your server propaganda in every single thread and get every single one of them locked because it gets derailed into server mud-slinging? Not everyone is interested in the history and workings of the great Blackgate, some people just want to talk about the tournament and its implementation without tripping on a crying player on every turn. Is that so hard for you to accept?

Edit: changed my mind, not taking the obvious bait. Seriously though, the hypocrisy was a good touch.

This is an interesting analysis of the multiple possibilities a server’s war council can position themselves to get better rewards for their population.

The definition of :

Battlefield Tactics : Multiple short-term actions taken by field commanders to influence the results of a battle.

Strategy : Broad long-term actions taken by strategists to influence the outcome of a war.

Buying guilds / attracting people from other time-zones to fill in coverage gaps is a long term strategy which translates into capability to field superior numbers on a battlefield ( tactics ) . Entering into alliances ( long term strategy ) to field superior numbers on a battlefield ( tactics ) achieves the same results.

If you read Sun Tze Art of War, there are strategies such as :

Empty City Ruse
Pretending to be weak while one is really strong
Tactical Retreat

You can lose battles but win the war. Results matter. Imagine the possibility of a rich merchantile server using their economical might to buy alliances and win wars in Season 3. This would be really a player-initiated strategy that changes the WvW meta of just brute forcing with a bigger zerg.

This whole discussion is silly. There is zero chance SoS as a server would intentionally attempt to throw a matchup. Happy for JQ and TC to throw their matchup next week though.

Sol.8341:

If you read Sun Tze Art of War, there are strategies such as :

Empty City Ruse
Pretending to be weak while one is really strong
Tactical Retreat

You can lose battles but win the war. Results matter. Imagine the possibility of a rich merchantile server using their economical might to buy alliances and win wars in Season 3.

<shrug> Sun Tzu is not an appropriate theoretical basis for WvW. You have neither the time nor the space to follow an Eastern way of war. GW2 WvW is Clausewitzian.

The mercantile server analogy doesn’t really hold up either. There is no comparative server economic advantage which isn’t a function of player numbers. There’s no controlling the sub-continent, there’s no VOC, there’s no silk road.

The interesting conundrum for ANet is that the 3-sided WvW design was intended to force fair fights, the fact that it’s being used by certain servers to avoid having to fight is strategically brilliant. Paraphrasing Sun Tzu, (yeah I’m being conceptually inconsistent), the epitome of skill is winning without fighting. The servers using an alliance to manipulate Anet’s system for their mutual advantage are showing, yet again, that ANet really doesn’t understand its PvP systems – or player motivations – as well as their player base.

Lord Kuru.3685:

I wouldn’t be surprised at all if the same situation can be seen in Silver league. In that case, you’d want to find a server that wants to avoid the HoD/FA matchup and can push another server into more matchups with HoD/FA by losing on purpose.

1st and 2nd place in silver were pre-determined by Anet, making the weird churn in the middle we’ve seen unavoidable. FA should have been in gold based on rating but couldn’t because of the whole mutliples-of-three thing they are holed into. Everyone saw the clusterkitten HOD is when the free xfers were announced. It was up in the air whether 1st would be HOD or FA, but when we saw HOD queuing every map for 20 hours straight in week 1 it was pretty much a given.

I imagine a Silver league without FA or free xfers would have been a blast. HOD was steadily increasing their ranking for months before Season 2 started. I’m sure they would have gained some good guilds for S02, but it wouldn’t have been the utter blobfest it is now. YB, SBI, HOD, IOJ, and NSP would have been some good fun fighting for the top 3 positions.

Instead, you’ve got this limp noodle thing going on where HOD wins every week. FA comes in second every week. YB and SBI rotate into that bottom slot of the matchup … every other week. SBI has a major grudge against YB but the two servers will never fight each other … UNLESS YB beats FA one week.

It’s dumb, but its what Anet apparently wanted. Either that or nobody in their office could forsee what free transfers would do even when pretty much … every player in the game could figure it out.

Skroo.1560:

I imagine a Silver league without FA or free xfers would have been a blast. HOD was steadily increasing their ranking for months before Season 2 started. I’m sure they would have gained some good guilds for S02, but it wouldn’t have been the utter blobfest it is now.

S2 without FA and free transfers would have been Db “night capping” its way to the win in silver and FA getting demolished in gold. HOD would be languishing in the same obscurity it has been in since t1 way back when.

I really dont care about league formats… just stop this WvW leagues and add WvW reward track.

Hello Cuddlepie,

Good to see you back in game. Out of curiosity how is WvW Clausewitzian, I am an avid war/history reader but I am not quite sure how it fits in.

FW

Cuddlepie.8109:

GW2 WvW is Clausewitzian.

The mercantile server analogy doesn’t really hold up either. There is no comparative server economic advantage which isn’t a function of player numbers. There’s no controlling the sub-continent, there’s no VOC, there’s no silk road.

The interesting conundrum for ANet is that the 3-sided WvW design was intended to force fair fights, the fact that it’s being used by certain servers to avoid having to fight is strategically brilliant. Paraphrasing Sun Tzu, (yeah I’m being conceptually inconsistent), the epitome of skill is winning without fighting. The servers using an alliance to manipulate Anet’s system for their mutual advantage are showing, yet again, that ANet really doesn’t understand its PvP systems – or player motivations – as well as their player base.

If Anet thought this through for more than 1 second, they would have saw this format is horrible.

I don’t mind seasons and all that. Tournament = WvW. This is just Season 1 (which was a debacle in itself but thats another discussion) with the strat to lose so you can win.

What should have been done:

1. T1-whatever Tier should have had different point values.

T1
1st – 10
2nd – 8
3rd – 5

T2
1st -8
2nd – 5
3rd – 3

Or something along those lines. That would eliminate SoS’s lose to win hilarity.

2. In essence making 1 server have to fight 2 servers who are on the same TS for over half the season is just bad design. It should be round robins or a schedule like Season 1. (not a complaint, TC and JQ have made me rich the past 3 match ups). I am sure TC or JQ would be angry if they had to deal with BG/TC or BG/JQ team ups respectively for 4+ weeks.

They need to change the overall design or have a separate competition.

Something along the lines of WvW tournament (spanning all 4 maps) but ONLY 2 Worlds. They have a seperate WvWvW that gives the WvW tournament worlds bonuses from caps of objectives or whatever.

Example: cap bay (depending on tier), supply delivers spawn faster. T1 Bay = 10% faster. T2= 20%, T3 = 50%.

But as of now, the system (for seasons at least) is completely broken.

BAITness.1083:

Lasica.5068:

renmei.3102:

Is the double team on BG due to wanting the (lol) rewards or due to bad blood, history and spite? As far as I can tell it is the latter, changing the swiss system isn’t going to change anything.

Definitely the later, the difference between 1st and 3rd doesn’t affect the rewards much.

1st gets 500pts so 1 weapon + 1 ascended accessory OR 2 ascended accessories + 100 spare points.
2nd gets 450 pts so 1 weapon + 150 spare pts OR 2 ascended accessories + 50 spare points.
3rd gets 400 pts so 1 weapon + 100 spare pts OR 2 ascended accessories

Yes the rewards are terrible but like I said if this was really some bad blood this would have been going on before the tournament started, not after JQ and TC managed to lose their first match in forever. This is a select few guild leaders on these servers dragging the rest of their servers through the mud to try and put some salve on their fragile egos.

Edit: Not that ANet doesn’t deserve their share of the blame for promoting it with their unbelievably awful tournament plans. People ask for WvW updates, so they give us this tournament to make it even worse.

Fragile egos? It seems like a fitting description for you and BG. You post like literally every thread. And didn’t you say you are playing another game as a result of this 2v1 cause it doesn’t seem that way since you are always PvFing around here.

As for 2 months, answer this how did BG go from losing by 72k to winning by 50k against JQ? Using your analogy of bad blood I’m sure the strength of BG coverage existed before S2 and it was being masked. I mean you can’t tell me BG all of the sudden woke up the day of S2 and became good. Like in the same way you can’t say that hate towards BG just started in S2

Actinotus.6410:

This whole discussion is silly. There is zero chance SoS as a server would intentionally attempt to throw a matchup. Happy for JQ and TC to throw their matchup next week though.

well they barely showed up at all and had a pretty good size lead on JQ 2 weeks ago and then they were non existent for 3-4 days. And i am sure that SoS’s “war council” knew the points system favors lose win lose win.

Zylonite.5913:

ykyk.2740:

Obligatory reminder for people not to turn this into server mudslinging.

Obligatory note to our esteemed moderators that not every thread that mentions server names is a “matchup thread”.

you mean TQ vs. BG? and shameful 2v1?

Edit: added shameful

its not shameful.. its hilarious. 15 ACs in SMC and still lose.

mallas.9836:

Actinotus.6410:

This whole discussion is silly. There is zero chance SoS as a server would intentionally attempt to throw a matchup. Happy for JQ and TC to throw their matchup next week though.

well they barely showed up at all and had a pretty good size lead on JQ 2 weeks ago and then they were non existent for 3-4 days. And i am sure that SoS’s “war council” knew the points system favors lose win lose win.

SoS have zero interest in the T1 shenanigans. Really if TC and JQ are into manipulating matches good for them, but rest of us don’t really care.

Actinotus.6410:

mallas.9836:

Actinotus.6410:

This whole discussion is silly. There is zero chance SoS as a server would intentionally attempt to throw a matchup. Happy for JQ and TC to throw their matchup next week though.

well they barely showed up at all and had a pretty good size lead on JQ 2 weeks ago and then they were non existent for 3-4 days. And i am sure that SoS’s “war council” knew the points system favors lose win lose win.

SoS have zero interest in the T1 shenanigans. Really if TC and JQ are into manipulating matches good for them, but rest of us don’t really care.

then you should have shown up 2 weeks ago and had more forces. 5 people for 5 days in a row = not trying imo.

mallas.9836:

Actinotus.6410:

mallas.9836:

Actinotus.6410:

This whole discussion is silly. There is zero chance SoS as a server would intentionally attempt to throw a matchup. Happy for JQ and TC to throw their matchup next week though.

well they barely showed up at all and had a pretty good size lead on JQ 2 weeks ago and then they were non existent for 3-4 days. And i am sure that SoS’s “war council” knew the points system favors lose win lose win.

SoS have zero interest in the T1 shenanigans. Really if TC and JQ are into manipulating matches good for them, but rest of us don’t really care.

then you should have shown up 2 weeks ago and had more forces. 5 people for 5 days in a row = not trying imo.

Well it is something you need to deal with.

Actinotus.6410:

mallas.9836:

Actinotus.6410:

mallas.9836:

Actinotus.6410:

This whole discussion is silly. There is zero chance SoS as a server would intentionally attempt to throw a matchup. Happy for JQ and TC to throw their matchup next week though.

well they barely showed up at all and had a pretty good size lead on JQ 2 weeks ago and then they were non existent for 3-4 days. And i am sure that SoS’s “war council” knew the points system favors lose win lose win.

SoS have zero interest in the T1 shenanigans. Really if TC and JQ are into manipulating matches good for them, but rest of us don’t really care.

then you should have shown up 2 weeks ago and had more forces. 5 people for 5 days in a row = not trying imo.

Well it is something you need to deal with.

we giggle at it. I believe someone called it cute.

BAITness.1083:

CuRtoKy.8576:

BAITness.1083:

Lasica.5068:

renmei.3102:

Is the double team on BG due to wanting the (lol) rewards or due to bad blood, history and spite? As far as I can tell it is the latter, changing the swiss system isn’t going to change anything.

Definitely the later, the difference between 1st and 3rd doesn’t affect the rewards much.

1st gets 500pts so 1 weapon + 1 ascended accessory OR 2 ascended accessories + 100 spare points.
2nd gets 450 pts so 1 weapon + 150 spare pts OR 2 ascended accessories + 50 spare points.
3rd gets 400 pts so 1 weapon + 100 spare pts OR 2 ascended accessories

Yes the rewards are terrible but like I said if this was really some bad blood this would have been going on before the tournament started, not after JQ and TC managed to lose their first match in forever. This is a select few guild leaders on these servers dragging the rest of their servers through the mud to try and put some salve on their fragile egos.

Edit: Not that ANet doesn’t deserve their share of the blame for promoting it with their unbelievably awful tournament plans. People ask for WvW updates, so they give us this tournament to make it even worse.

Fragile egos? It seems like a fitting description for you and BG. You post like literally every thread. And didn’t you say you are playing another game as a result of this 2v1 cause it doesn’t seem that way since you are always PvFing around here.

As for 2 months, answer this how did BG go from losing by 72k to winning by 50k against JQ? Using your analogy of bad blood I’m sure the strength of BG coverage existed before S2 and it was being masked. I mean you can’t tell me BG all of the sudden woke up the day of S2 and became good. Like in the same way you can’t say that hate towards BG just started in S2

Like I said elsewhere, participating in wvw atm is counterproductive, and the forums are by far the better source of entertainment.

And you should ask jq about that, we were all neck and neck until they took a dive in ppt on Monday and Tuesday, they never recovered from that.

Also like I said above, I think it is clear that this would have been happening for a long time before now if it was related to anything before now. Even giving the benefit of the doubt on this one, I don’t think the servers would have made a win trading agreement if they were just being hateful. Certainly BG is a large server, and even being on it and loving it there are some people I really don’t like, so I can see that angle having merit. I just don’t think that anyone would resort to win trading for their own benefit at the expense of the entire gold league in the hopes that it negatively affected a few people they didn’t like on one server. That seems kind of like dropping a nuke to kill a roach, in the end it kills you and the roach survives.

Edit: and how about the pot calling the kettle! Every post of yours is about this. Are you bored with wvw too? The forums ate way better entertainment.

Due to BG coverage versus our week day coverage. Once BG had enough to automatically win I don’t think they put more effort for the sake of getting more points since they had enough. Everyone knows this. Oh wait except you.

You certainly don’t know what is going on then if you think hate can’t be a reason along with swiss style strategy. Maybe should you stop putting BG up as the victim here cause they certainly aren’t. 2v1 is good for the entire gold league. Look at it S2 and preS2. SoS is going to win all the time in T2 the coverage difference between SoS and Mag and DB. So this is what will happen:

SoS will get more transfers to be the next T1 (see TC history)
A T1 server will implode and SoS will get a bunch of transfers and be really strong
Transfer from lower tier servers into T2
2v1 on SoS

Coverage wars vs 2v1. At least with a 2v1 now people can convince guilds to join them to balance things out instead of stacking because guilds that stack have a potential to get 2v1ed when things matter.

I have posted in a bunch of other threads. In fact I haven’t even posted in the last iono 6 or so threads that have been locked but you on the other hand have posted constantly multiple times in every thread.

BG had their chance to counter 2v1 in W4. They didn’t do it then they complained in W5. They can put pressure and try to counter 2v1 but they don’t. Instead they quit. JQ and TC are perfectly fine with fighting each other once BG is low enough as evident in last week’s matchup.

renmei.3102:

Is the double team on BG due to wanting the (lol) rewards or due to bad blood, history and spite? As far as I can tell it is the latter, changing the swiss system isn’t going to change anything.

definitely not for the rewards, maybe a bit of bad blood, yes, but mostly it’s the principle of winning the tournament despite the idiotic format.

The swiss style obviously doesn’t work for Gold NA currently. Under this design SOS, for example, is pretty much guaranteed at least 29 points, without having to put in much effort and without ever beating one of the T1 servers. In contrast, the T1 servers would have to fight each other hard, while SOS gets a relatively easy ride due to the player/coverage disparity between the T2 servers.

In response, TC/JQ came up with a smarter strategy. Under this strategy neither BG or SOS are guaranteed easy 1st and 2nd placements. Having said that, it’s not a good tournament concept for a league with 6 servers.

Personally I think they should scrap the seasonal tournament idea altogether unless they can come up with a workable model that perhaps drops leagues and uses a different scoring system.

Edit: woah that was way faster than I expected

There is no scenario at this point where SoS gains anything by losing. I speak for a plurality on that server in saying we’d find the satisfaction of defeating a T1 server, more rewarding than a number of tickets.
All the people obsessed with tournament winnings are on BG anyhow.

As for the tournament, it does need to be rethought out.. Gold and Bronze are playing out almost precisely to predictions in terms of rankings. Silver had it’s usual bandwagon juggernaut that had greater success than last season because FA had their night coverage bribed away and a few of their guilds decided to spend the season in Gold League.

Other than that, they just confirmed what most suspected.

Chris, you do not speak for the majority of SoS. The top 3 servers of Tier 1 have functional war councils that can decide and execute strategies. It is no small feat to coordinate many guilds to follow the same strategy.

The only server that is worried about SoS strategy these coming weeks is BG as this post’s analysis suggest a possibility of them ending up as 5th place in season 2 rather than the predicted 1st place. This is potentially a fatal blow that can cause mass exodus of their guilds to other servers. I am sure SoS understands very well how it is to fall from rank 1 , free-fall and struggle back up again. However, to pull off a grand strategy, it all depends on SoS war council ability.

Good historical link to read up on : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Red_Cliffs

All this means is that Pure Swiss tournament format for WvWvW is not the perfect means to balance rankings, although it is better than before.

Maybe a blended format using Swiss and later on, server rating and points proximity to determine match-ups might make for interesting competition. With population imbalances as it is, there is no shroud over why we are caught in a loop of same match-ups across all the leagues. The swiss style would have been more appropriate if the servers were more closely matched, thus able to have the same match-ups with different results thus more difficulty in determining who comes out on top.

My biggest fear is that only Coverage in the past, now, and in the future will determine real victors. Of course, unless you pull off a 2v1 which actually decimates this outstanding problem outright. If servers were fearful of being double-teamed by bringing too many people to their side, there would be a much more even spread of coverage, thus defeating the biggest incentive to double-team since everyone has an equal chance to win.

Sol.8341:

Chris, you do not speak for the majority of SoS. The top 3 servers of Tier 1 have functional war councils that can decide and execute strategies. It is no small feat to coordinate many guilds to follow the same strategy.

The only server that is worried about SoS strategy these coming weeks is BG as this post’s analysis suggest a possibility of them ending up as 5th place in season 2 rather than the predicted 1st place. This is potentially a fatal blow that can cause mass exodus of their guilds to other servers. I am sure SoS understands very well how it is to fall from rank 1 , free-fall and struggle back up again. However, to pull off a grand strategy, it all depends on SoS war council ability.

Good historical link to read up on : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Red_Cliffs

Well SoS doesn’t seem to be following the plan atm. Of course, they should consider working with Maguuma about this.

SoS only has to risk alienating pugs and guilds that always want to win no matter what. Relax and take it easy for 2 weeks, but they can still have a party in Edge of the Mists

If I recall correctly, ties in season one did not have a tiebreaker. They all received the same reward. If five servers all tied for first then they all got the same reward for first place. Server ratings only matter for placement on match ups.

The Swiss tournament style was not very well thought out. With two servers colluding with one another, the final results can easily be determined and fixed. Even now, JQ and TC can share first with one another if they allow SoS to take 2nd next week. Preferably the one that has the higher rating should take 3rd.

The fact that the outcomes can be manipulated so easily shows that what we have this season is far from being an actual competition. Hopefully the next season is planned a little better and a little more thought is put into the next tournament type. Otherwise we may as well just forget about doing a tournament, distribute rewards based on what the likely outcome would be, and then go back to how things normally are where everything in the game except living story is ignored.

Isaac.6041:

Sol.8341:

Chris, you do not speak for the majority of SoS. The top 3 servers of Tier 1 have functional war councils that can decide and execute strategies. It is no small feat to coordinate many guilds to follow the same strategy.

The only server that is worried about SoS strategy these coming weeks is BG as this post’s analysis suggest a possibility of them ending up as 5th place in season 2 rather than the predicted 1st place. This is potentially a fatal blow that can cause mass exodus of their guilds to other servers. I am sure SoS understands very well how it is to fall from rank 1 , free-fall and struggle back up again. However, to pull off a grand strategy, it all depends on SoS war council ability.

Good historical link to read up on : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Red_Cliffs

Well SoS doesn’t seem to be following the plan atm. Of course, they should consider working with Maguuma about this.

Actually, they don’t need to work with anyone. That’s why this is so bad. It doesn’t even have the aspect of inter-server politics that would slightly alleviate the badness.

They just have to tank, but not so badly that their ratings change drastically.

Lots of people say that SoS would never do this. Probably true in the current situation.

But imagine if doing this was the difference between getting a mistforged weapon or not getting one (I wouldn’t be surprised if a server in Silver is in this exact situation).

Even if that’s not enough to cause tanking, it may bring about discord within the server between those who want to win, and those who just want the rewards. This can really damage a server (NSP in WvW Season 1 saw exactly this when many wanted to tank into Bronze before the season and many others didn’t).

If it’s better to lose than to win (and in this SoS example, it’s better if they tank twice!) then the system is designed badly.

Ayrilana.1396:

Even now, JQ and TC can share first with one another if they allow SoS to take 2nd next week. Preferably the one that has the higher rating should take 3rd.

So next week 7
JQ 22+1 23
TC 22+5 27
SoS 22+3 25

BG 18+5 23
MG 14+3 17
DB 10+1 11

Week 8
JQ 23+5
TC 27+3
SoS 25+1

BG 23+5 28
MG 17+3 20
DB 11+1 12

Week 9
JQ 28+5 33
TC 30+3 33
BG 28+1 29

SoS 26+5 31
MG 20+3 23
DB 12+1 13

JQ/TC interchangeable

Interesting scenario but it’s a bit risky for the server that would get 3rd next week. I don’t think JQ or TC are going to take this route.

Isaac.6041:

Ayrilana.1396:

Even now, JQ and TC can share first with one another if they allow SoS to take 2nd next week. Preferably the one that has the higher rating should take 3rd.

So next week 7
JQ 22+1 23
TC 22+5 27
SoS 22+3 25

BG 18+5 23
MG 14+3 17
DB 10+1 11

Week 8
JQ 23+5
TC 27+3
SoS 25+1

BG 23+5 28
MG 17+3 20
DB 11+1 12

Week 9
JQ 28+5 33
TC 30+3 33
BG 28+1 29

SoS 26+5 31
MG 20+3 23
DB 12+1 13

JQ/TC interchangeable

Interesting scenario but it’s a bit risky for the server that would get 3rd next week. I don’t think JQ or TC are going to take this route.

How so? They’re in an alliance trading wins meaning that the risk is minimal. If JQ takes 3rd then that would mean they’d have to win the rest of the matches. Easy enough given the current situation.

Each server can change the final outcome of predicted rankings, which makes it so exciting to watch. Remember that the war council of BG is still capable of counter strategies like buying more mercenaries from other time-zones. Their first wave of foreign reinforcements from Soviet Russia and EU should be landing on their shores this week with more to come after serving the 2 week penalty.

With GW2 on sale till 11th May, servers can also invest in more accounts to flood opposing servers to reduce the numbers of active real participants. They already have spy accounts and the next level is probably to take up a server’s slots in each map with multiple dummy accounts. Do not write off BG yet . Anything can happen !