Guild Wars 2

First, this is a serious post and not intended as sarcasm. I’ve observed that the grouping of servers in WvW has produced some grossly imbalanced matchups, where for a whole month some players have to suffer being routinely outnumbered and outscored 2 to 1. To me, the most fun in WvW is when there are even matchups and the weekly winner is in doubt right up to reset.

My view is that the matchups should be created so that the three teams have nearly the same number of active players at all times over the match. Obviously, this can’t be perfectly achieved, which is where optimization and time series analysis come in. Selecting the server groupings for even matchups falls with these disciplines which are not available at all software development companies.

I suggest we players offer to help Anet come up with a practical algorithm for even WvW matchup selection. If Anet will tell us what data they have about WvW player activity (ideally, number of players in WvW for each server at each tick), I’m sure there are people here willing to help (I’ll be the first to volunteer).

There are quite some threads about this already, and no one are really near any good solutions to it either. We just don’t have the metrics to really say anything.

I’d recommend to read the other relevant threads, and post in those instead of making a new one, and basically repeat the same arguments.

I thought Illconceived Was Na.9781’s post in the active thread of “Counting” was pretty spot on. https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/counting/first#post6255542

joneirikb.7506:

There are quite some threads about this already, and no one are really near any good solutions to it either. We just don’t have the metrics to really say anything.

Fair-weather players, school schedules, time zones, guild moves, etc make aligning matches very difficult. There isn’t an easy answer. The only “fix” is to leave the Server v Server system which is fundamentally flawed in every game that uses it but that just isn’t going to happen in a game where WvW is a side show.

I just wrote this in another thread…looks like it is just has applicable here.

The fundamental problem is that we are seeing this has a “server” ranking and ego thing rather than bringing it down to the lower levels of Guilds, Players, and maybe future, Alliances.

Has Straegen also noted above with the comment about server v server fundamentally flawed. And I do believe he and I have been fighting for the past couple of weeks yet here we are in agreement…

First round is on me Straegen if you are of age. If not I’ll still buy but it will have to be milk or apple juice for you.

As optimization problems go, this doesn’t appear to be very hard, especially if you have a month to do the calculations, but you never know until you see the data and try a few solutions. I’m sure there are plenty of smart players with the required skills that would find it a fun project if some test data were made available.

On the other hand, if Anet really has no data on the number of WvW players by server and time, then yes, we can’t create a reasonable solution.

I’m just saying if the data became available, I’d be happy to coordinate the effort and try my hand at a solution.

markdoyle.2159:

On the other hand, if Anet really has no data on the number of WvW players by server and time, then yes, we can’t create a reasonable solution.

This is be a stretch or a major oversight. I would wager they have the data and more from initial login to number of characters, gold per, trading information, and much more. They would be complete idiots if they didn’t have any information regarding who sets foot onto what map and when.

Straegen.2938:

joneirikb.7506:

There are quite some threads about this already, and no one are really near any good solutions to it either. We just don’t have the metrics to really say anything.

Fair-weather players, school schedules, time zones, guild moves, etc make aligning matches very difficult. There isn’t an easy answer. The only “fix” is to leave the Server v Server system which is fundamentally flawed in every game that uses it but that just isn’t going to happen in a game where WvW is a side show.

Agree with this.

I think that the current T4 match-up was as close as they could get to “Balanced” when they made it according to their previous 2 months of data/activity etc. But the moment the new match-up’s where set up, everything changed.

As Straegen said: Fair-weathers, schedules, time zones, guild moves, etc.

If all of those shift around for every single match-up, how the kitten is ANet ever going to be able to create a “fair” match-up ? The “fair” part is removed after reset, when the majority of players have decided how the week is going to end, and thus doesn’t bother playing any more (self fulfilling prophecy btw).

A thought: Perhaps if we actually had server movement, so we would meet new servers each week, that it would stay fresh enough, that people would play and try for at least a few more days before giving up? Don’t know if that would work, but if match-up’s changed more often, we wouldn’t know exactly what we played, and with the links, the “servers” also change every now and then, so we would b even less certain what we where facing.

1. Anet doesn’t listen to players
2. It is a bit hard to calculate how many players play, cos…
a)Some players play from time to time(once a week, others once a month etc.)
b)Server’s population is all about player on the server(pve, wvw, pvp)
c)There are diffrent time zones
3. There is transfer option to linked low populated cheap servers

Trust me. We(WVW community) suggested hundreds of times similar stuff and much more and you know what? Anet don’t care about us at all ^^ Just look at votes, look at all those polls… Option that was best for community had to have 75% while the other, kittenty option, but recomended by anet 25%. Look what they made polls for! Cannons?! Repair Hammers?! They don’t care about WvW population at all!

b)Server’s population is all about player on the server(pve, wvw, pvp)

This was changed, server population is based only on WvW activity (not counting EotM iirc).

joneirikb.7506:

b)Server’s population is all about player on the server(pve, wvw, pvp)

This was changed, server population is based only on WvW activity (not counting EotM iirc).

Ahhh ok, that explains 1 point, yet rest is still up

markdoyle.2159:

First, this is a serious post and not intended as sarcasm. I’ve observed that the grouping of servers in WvW has produced some grossly imbalanced matchups, where for a whole month some players have to suffer being routinely outnumbered and outscored 2 to 1. To me, the most fun in WvW is when there are even matchups and the weekly winner is in doubt right up to reset.

My view is that the matchups should be created so that the three teams have nearly the same number of active players at all times over the match. Obviously, this can’t be perfectly achieved, which is where optimization and time series analysis come in. Selecting the server groupings for even matchups falls with these disciplines which are not available at all software development companies.

I suggest we players offer to help Anet come up with a practical algorithm for even WvW matchup selection. If Anet will tell us what data they have about WvW player activity (ideally, number of players in WvW for each server at each tick), I’m sure there are people here willing to help (I’ll be the first to volunteer).

As long as “insta bandwagonning” exists, there is no algorhithm in existance that can fix things unless there are insta server locks and/or insta mass handicaps.

Unfortunately, due to the wide outcry of the people who are largely responsible for this state of things in the 1st place, none of these things will happen.

The current linking is the best that can be done taking their whining into account. Eventually WVW will become just a single tier because everyone else will get sick and tired of it as they have been sing game launched and leave, but that is still a bit off, maybe a year or 2.

joneirikb.7506:

Agree with this.

I think that the current T4 match-up was as close as they could get to “Balanced” when they made it according to their previous 2 months of data/activity etc. But the moment the new match-up’s where set up, everything changed.

As Straegen said: Fair-weathers, schedules, time zones, guild moves, etc.

If all of those shift around for every single match-up, how the kitten is ANet ever going to be able to create a “fair” match-up ? The “fair” part is removed after reset, when the majority of players have decided how the week is going to end, and thus doesn’t bother playing any more (self fulfilling prophecy btw).

---

A thought: Perhaps if we actually had server movement, so we would meet new servers each week, that it would stay fresh enough, that people would play and try for at least a few more days before giving up? Don’t know if that would work, but if match-up’s changed more often, we wouldn’t know exactly what we played, and with the links, the “servers” also change every now and then, so we would b even less certain what we where facing.

Definitely agree that these match-ups could have been much closer. Anet doesn’t realize the damage that stagnated match-ups does to lower tier servers which in turn makes the balancing much worse.

T4 for instance: I don’t believe many thought the DH/Ebay group would be getting smacked around this badly but right away at the start of the CD match-up Ehmry Bay lost 2 of its largest longest standing guilds which transferred up due to the inability for servers to get out of T4. This then led to the server losing multiple other guilds in the weeks to come.

I know Darkhaven has lost guilds as well.

If match-ups don’t change players will move to find variety; especially those focused on the PvP or GvG aspect of WvW so that they can find different and engaging fights.

Trying to find balance and then immediately implementing something like a 1 up and 1 down system would be the simplest “fix.” But even that wouldn’t last long.