Guild Wars 2

Since day 1 there has been an issue with “Night Capping” and Anet stated they will do nothing to fix this because they don’t want to take away from a players ability to help their server.

So here’s my theory for a fair solution Why not create some sort of “PPT Cap”?
Now this wouldn’t be as simple as just giving a set cap of say 350PPT, because how often during a fair days playing is a single server 350PPT above the 2nd place PPT.
Why?When this “Night Capping” is happening it isn’t uncommon for the server doing it to achieve 600+PPT out of a total of 695PPT. So this server is pretty much gaining their full PPT ahead of the other server(s); While during “Fair” play most servers are within a 100PPT (Ex: Green:235PPT Blue: 230PPT Red: 230PPT) of each other, meaning they are only really gaining 0PPT-100PPT ahead/closer of the other two servers.
Possible Solutions
1.A single server can’t gain more PPT than the other two combined.Server “G” focuses server “B” to ~25PPT and leaves server “R” untouched, Server “G” the next day focuses server “R” leaving server “B” untouched to keep that gain ahead.
2.A server can’t gain more than xxxPPT(100PPT for example) ahead of another server. Now if a single server is falling too behind for too long it will actually hurt the “Night Capper” or 2v1 scenario. How?Say this is the current scoring: G:400PPT B:250PPT R:45PPT. Now “G” and “B” are both making 145PPT this will then begin to effect their total points and in turn effect their total WvW Server Ranking. This solution also doesn’t effect a player’s ability to contribute to their server as they can still play and capture points and flip all the empty towers/keeps and get all theirs upgraded peacefully.

xxxPPT could be determined via average PPT data during equal population play time.(I’m sure Anet tracks point gaining data.)
“G”=Green “B”=Blue “R”=Red

Get more players to cover your time zone, otherwise no thanks.

CreativeAnarchy.6324:

Get more players to cover your time zone, otherwise no thanks.

My timezone(NA) has plenty of player;s it’s the non-NA players where the problem is.. all the oceanics can still PvD to their hearts content- they just wont get thousands of points ahead by doing it.

CreativeAnarchy.6324:

Get more players to cover your time zone, otherwise no thanks.

Yes because it’s just that easy!

Why is it up to the GW2 players to bring in people to their server, and why is it accepted that this is the only way to fix this issue? It’s a poorly designed system when it’s up to the player base to balance a key part to the game. If people would like to help bring players in then by all means go for it, however, it should not be the sole solution to a horrible imbalance in population problems.

Why should i have my timezome in WvW capped on points?. Ever since i started playing GW2 my server has always been outmanned at night, every single night. We have 15-20 dedicated night guys(all friendlies, not a guild) yet can still manage to get 450+ ppt against servers that field 50+ people during this time. Either you have to learn how to play smarter/better or you recruit more people, don’t try to limit other people just because you cannot organise yourselves.

The difficulty with maths solutions is the players ability to work the system.

I would suggest Anet needs to track players in WvW and use it as part of the rating calculation, not adjust the ppt.

Saint Scarlet.2906:

Why should i have my timezome in WvW capped on points?. Ever since i started playing GW2 my server has always been outmanned at night, every single night. We have 15-20 dedicated night guys(all friendlies, not a guild) yet can still manage to get 450+ ppt against servers that field 50+ people during this time. Either you have to learn how to play smarter/better or you recruit more people, don’t try to limit other people just because you cannot organise yourselves.

Sorry you misread, this is not for a specific timezone. Why you’re attacking makes no sense- you would be making the same positive points as usual since this cap would always be in effect.

elkirin.8534:

The difficulty with maths solutions is the players ability to work the system.

I would suggest Anet needs to track players in WvW and use it as part of the rating calculation, not adjust the ppt.

The math is simple if you pressure one server too low you move to the next one until they regain points..this also help keep away the dreaded 2v1.
Getting an entire server to stop playing WvW would be pretty impressive way to “work the system”.

There’s no such thing as nightcapping because your night is someone else’s day.

Nokaru.7831:

There’s no such thing as nightcapping because your night is someone else’s day.

Which is why this would be balancing my day and their day to be equal in possible points gained.

Night capping isn’t a problem. It’s people living and playing in different areas of the world than you.

Night capping? What’s that? There’s no fixes for this. Only fix Anet can do is perhaps merge the EU and NA scores or possibly their maps? i.e. tier1 Green NA+Red EU, Blue NA+Blue EU, Red NA+Green EU. Either let them crossover to assist each other as an alliance or combine their scores. Maybe the gaps will be closer? But that’s not possible since it’ll make this fight more of a real World vs World… not just continent vs continent which the name should’ve been changed to.

old issue. not sure if OP is new or old player of GW2….

This is quite annoying as most of you guys are just reading the title of “Night Capping” and raving what you did the 1st time it came up without even reading what I have had to say it’s fairly obvious when the one guy who took time to write a paragraph’s first 4 words prove he read nothing I wrote.

What I have done here is merely put a cap to the amount of points ANY(sorry all you people who feel your being targeted, but this would effect EVERYONE, so there goes the whole you’re against this or that time slot crying,which sadly is all that has happened so far.) time slot can achieve ahead of the others to keep the game closer. The limit would be decided by ANET via their numbers they collect whilst giving server rankings.

Been here since beta; just finally thought I would give my theory a go on the forums.

DoomMagick.5963:

Nokaru.7831:

There’s no such thing as nightcapping because your night is someone else’s day.

Which is why this would be balancing my day and their day to be equal in possible points gained.

Their day have the same possible points your day have… The only problem is that your server don’t have people as their server have at this time…

DoomMagick.5963:

This is quite annoying as most of you guys are just reading the title of “Night Capping” and raving what you did the 1st time it came up without even reading what I have had to say it’s fairly obvious when the one guy who took time to write a paragraph’s first 4 words prove he read nothing I wrote.

What I have done here is merely put a cap to the amount of points ANY(sorry all you people who feel your being targeted, but this would effect EVERYONE, so there goes the whole you’re against this or that time slot crying,which sadly is all that has happened so far.) time slot can achieve ahead of the others to keep the game closer. The limit would be decided by ANET via their numbers they collect whilst giving server rankings.

Been here since beta; just finally thought I would give my theory a go on the forums.

part of the issue is that your problem has nothing to do with night-capping. its really the large point discrepancies that build up when teams are mus-matched. but is limiting he score really helping? sure, you have closer point scores, but that also makes it harder for the matchmaking to sort them into their rightful place.

I appreciate the initiative here. The problem with any population solution is that it singles out players who do not play in a popular time zone for their server. This makes their efforts less recognized than players who are in a popular time zone. 10 skilled players are superior to 30 unskilled players any day no matter which time zone people are one.

What you’re pointing out here is that there is a problem with the scoring system.

You first need to establish why a server who is currently dominating the number of capped points, doesn’t deserve that fact to be reflected in their PPT score.

In a genuine three way battle, the only difference you solution will make is to lessen the perceived winning margin.

Server G may genuinely be a dominate server, but the cap will make it appear that they are not that far ahead. The other servers will only take mild remedial action, then wonder why they are still losing.

In the specific example you give of one server being a long way behind, what if this is actually the case? That is, they can only ever field a small group, and are not a genuine chance in any time zone. You’d then have forced draws, even if one server is capping more points – in that sense winning.

The other thing you need to consider is the point of view of the guilds / players where a large PPT can be gained. They spend hours capping the point, organising between guilds and across maps, and want that effort reflected in the score/PPT. E.g., a server has have 2/3rds of the points, they should have massive PPT lead. Conversely, how does a ‘losing’ PPT server make assessments how how much work they need to do to make up the difference and gain the lead PPT. Making up a 100 PPT deficit could now mean they have to take the whole map back, or just take a keep and a few towers.

“My timezone(NA) has plenty of player;s it’s the non-NA players where the problem is.. all the oceanics can still PvD to their hearts content- they just wont get thousands of points ahead by doing it”

If I can put this argument back to you: the current score doesn’t impact, in anyway, how you play the game. you can still WvW to your hearts content, and get as many points as you deserve for it.

The implicit assumption is that players outside the ‘prime’ (read N/A) time zones, are not real players and aren’t deploying the same tactics or strategies of the N/A player base. They still need to make decisions about what to attack, and how to manage the enemy presence, and push advantages when there is little or no defence. We are playing the same game as you – it doesn’t change depending on what side of the earth is facing the sun.

it may be “night” here but its day somewhere in the world. you have to remember this is an international game.

Just move to JQ and we can help you solve all your night cap problems

Change PPT to Magic Find if your opponent has the outmanned buff. That way it’s still rewarding to do WvW, you are still helping your team by downgrading the enemy, and when the enemy does log in you have the advantage of owning everything.

But too many servers are winning their tiers because they have coverage while the opposition does not. It’s about time SoR finally covers a timezone besides NA so that now these fakers on BG and JQ will know the true power of the Sanctum of Rall.

Fuzzion.2504:

Just move to JQ and we can help you solve all your night cap problems

It intrigue me how EVERY thread have someone to say “Come to JQ” which is already a superstacked server…

Nokaru.7831:

There’s no such thing as nightcapping because your night is someone else’s day.

Sorry, this is non-sense. Real-world night’s and days do not matter in the game, thats true, but we play on “virtual worlds” and it’s easy to define “night on a virtual world” as the period of time where fewest player play (are awake) on this world. And if this virtual night of a server corresponds to a real world night of some timezone is completely irrelevant (but probably correlated, the virtual world has night because it has a high amount of players in this real world timezone.).

Similar for WvW-matches, a wvw-match has night, where the total number of players in this match is below X.

Similar you can define prime-time of a match as the period of time where “on map” + “queued” is larger than “map capacity”.

It may be the case that NA-T1 servers have no night, but I am in doubt that they have 24/7 primetime. I am also pretty sure that lower tiers in NA have a night, and I know that all tiers in EU have a night and a prime-time and time which is neither nor.

The problem with the current system is that a prime-time player has nearly no value for the outcome of a match, whereas a night-time player has a decisive influence on the outcome of a match.

And at least I think, that it is boring that matches aren’t decided by huge battles of a lot of players, but they are decided by a few doing PvD.

A score-weight by amount of players in WvW, or a dynamic availability of objectives based on players (kind of overflow maps) would be much more fair and fun.

If worlds are mismatched by population, capping the points only exacerbates the problem – it sweeps it under the rug and keeps an unfair match going. Capping those points doesn’t change the fact that you’re getting your kitten kicked, so unless your only obsession is with the score, it doesn’t actually help you. The correct (and currently being worked-on) solution is to change the ratings system to make it easier for worlds to move between tiers, to more quickly push worlds with good coverage up and let worlds with bad coverage fall.

To put this into actual context, right now you’re complaining about this because of the current SoS/CD/SBI matchup, where pretty much everyone is already in agreement that SoS should be in T3 and CD/SBI may not be as strong as EBay from T5 even. How does messing around with the points itself, keeping all three worlds locked in a match that isn’t much fun for them in the long run (SoS with a guaranteed win, CD and SBI stuck fighting for second place), really fix the problem that these worlds probably don’t really belong in their current tier?

Jeknar.6184:

Fuzzion.2504:

Just move to JQ and we can help you solve all your night cap problems

It intrigue me how EVERY thread have someone to say “Come to JQ” which is already a superstacked server…

Unfortunately, the myth continues… JQ isn’t as stacked when it comes to WvW. At least it isn’t anymore. Some guilds left, some retired due to WvW’s failed state, some just decided to go PVE, etc. PVE area and population is superstacked that’s for sure. Hardly even a queue during reset. 5-15 minutes waits? During weekends and weekdays, you can probably use one of them BL’s or heck even EB to map to Lion’s Arch for free.

If you have coverage you have coverage. If you don’t…you don’t.

However, if you’re allowing an enemy server to get more than +600 PPT….that seems to come down to a “learn to play” issue.

Even in T2, I’ve seen us holding several keeps and towers pretty solidly when outnumbered 10 vs 60 on the maps.

On the flip side, if you’re running even with these people via makeup on the other times of the day, then they could make the same argument against your side. Why is it fair that they lose their “lead” just because YOU have more players. It’s fair…because it’s fair.

I did NOT argued that a 10:60 is unfair and should not score points.

I argued that a time where there are 1200 are fighting (100 per map and world, i,e,. all maps full) should be more valuable in scoring than a time where only 70 or even 0 are fighting in a match.

If 1200 are fighting for 695 points thats around 0.5 points score per player, if 70 are fighting for 695 pts this is 10 points score per player, i.e. an off-time player scores around 20 times as many points as an prime-time player.

Dayra.7405:

I did NOT argued that a 10:60 is unfair and should not score points.

I argued that a time where there are 1200 are fighting (100 per map and world, i,e,. all maps full) should be more valuable in scoring than a time where only 70 or even 0 are fighting in a match.

If 1200 are fighting for 695 points thats around 0.5 points score per player, if 70 are fighting for 695 pts this is 10 points score per player, i.e. an off-time player scores around 20 times as many points as an prime-time player.

That just sounds like a balancing and QQ nightmare.

DoomMagick.5963:

Since day 1 there has been an issue with “Night Capping” and Anet stated they will do nothing to fix this because they don’t want to take away from a players ability to help their server.

So here’s my theory for a fair solution Why not create some sort of “PPT Cap”?
Now this wouldn’t be as simple as just giving a set cap of say 350PPT, because how often during a fair days playing is a single server 350PPT above the 2nd place PPT.
Why?When this “Night Capping” is happening it isn’t uncommon for the server doing it to achieve 600+PPT out of a total of 695PPT. So this server is pretty much gaining their full PPT ahead of the other server(s); While during “Fair” play most servers are within a 100PPT (Ex: Green:235PPT Blue: 230PPT Red: 230PPT) of each other, meaning they are only really gaining 0PPT-100PPT ahead/closer of the other two servers.
Possible Solutions
1.A single server can’t gain more PPT than the other two combined.Server “G” focuses server “B” to ~25PPT and leaves server “R” untouched, Server “G” the next day focuses server “R” leaving server “B” untouched to keep that gain ahead.
2.A server can’t gain more than xxxPPT(100PPT for example) ahead of another server. Now if a single server is falling too behind for too long it will actually hurt the “Night Capper” or 2v1 scenario. How?Say this is the current scoring: G:400PPT B:250PPT R:45PPT. Now “G” and “B” are both making 145PPT this will then begin to effect their total points and in turn effect their total WvW Server Ranking. This solution also doesn’t effect a player’s ability to contribute to their server as they can still play and capture points and flip all the empty towers/keeps and get all theirs upgraded peacefully.

xxxPPT could be determined via average PPT data during equal population play time.(I’m sure Anet tracks point gaining data.)
“G”=Green “B”=Blue “R”=Red

This is not a problem. Why are people always trying to solve things that are not a problem.

SleepingDragon.1596:

Unfortunately, the myth continues… JQ isn’t as stacked when it comes to WvW. At least it isn’t anymore. Some guilds left, some retired due to WvW’s failed state, some just decided to go PVE, etc. PVE area and population is superstacked that’s for sure. Hardly even a queue during reset. 5-15 minutes waits? During weekends and weekdays, you can probably use one of them BL’s or heck even EB to map to Lion’s Arch for free.

It’s not a myth mate… JQ is (or at least was) superstacked… Or you will tell me that magically JQ dethroned SoS that won many weeks straight without receiving more people? Also BG superstacked in order to face JQ overwhelming numbers…

Now if JQ started to implode in WvW, that’s ANOTHER completely different story…

Hickeroar.9734:

That just sounds like a balancing and QQ nightmare.

I do not see the balancing aspect of summing up the total number of players of all servers.
A time where 300:0:0 people are fighting is scored equally (300 in total) to a time where 100:100:100 (also 300 in total) are fighting.

Any limitations to what can be earned during a period of time (North American, Asian or European) would affect the gameplay of people playing in that period of time and thus change the experience which ANet are strongly against.

Developers have said in the past quite clearly they will never make a change to the way the scoring works as WvW is meant to be a 24/7 event.

Sorry to burst any bubbles you had.

Ascii.9726:

Any limitations to what can be earned during a period of time (North American, Asian or European) would affect the gameplay of people playing in that period of time and thus change the experience which ANet are strongly against.

Developers have said in the past quite clearly they will never make a change to the way the scoring works as WvW is meant to be a 24/7 event.

Sorry to burst any bubbles you had.

Of course it’s up to ANet to choose between making 70 people happier than 1200 people or vice versa. Given their current history of WvW changes, I agree it’s more likely that they continue to make 70 happy

Dayra.7405:

Hickeroar.9734:

That just sounds like a balancing and QQ nightmare.

I do not see the balancing aspect of summing up the total number of players of all servers.
A time where 300:0:0 people are fighting is scored equally (300 in total) to a time where 100:100:100 (also 300 in total) are fighting.

So what happens when two servers are fielding 300 each, and the third is only able to field 30? Those two servers benefit from the greater scaling of the points, while the third gets absolutely shafted.

Everyone sides score is multiplied equaliy by 630 on every ticker as there are 630 people in WvW. (but not by 1200 (100 per map and side), which I guess is the maximum capacity of a WvW match)

Dayra.7405:

Everyone side is scaled equaliy by 630 on every ticker where 630 people are in WvW. (but not by 1200 (100 per map and side), which I guess is the maximum capacity of a WvW match)

Will we all get participation trophies?

Am achievement for playing 1’500’000 hours WvW would be in line with the other WvW Achievements

Wait you mean to say because i’m australian i should have to contribute less to WvW then someone who lives in the US?

This isn’t that powerful. It is nice for those that don’t have good condition removal but it doesn’t always fit with builds so it doesn’t get used for every situation or even every profession.

I don’t ever use it because I don’t need it. I’m sure a elementalist doesn’t need to use it either. If it was so powerful, I would choose it above any other food. I even carry several different foods depending upon the situation.

So a condition build is going to have a hard time against someone that uses this food combined with runes. Guess what, you just need to walk away from that fight if you are so afraid. You do not need to be able to kill every one out there, someone will run a build/gear/food combination that can counter yours. That is called variety.

If it was so op, everyone would run this all the time and I know that does not happen.

Ascii.9726:

Any limitations to what can be earned during a period of time (North American, Asian or European) would affect the gameplay of people playing in that period of time and thus change the experience which ANet are strongly against.

Developers have said in the past quite clearly they will never make a change to the way the scoring works as WvW is meant to be a 24/7 event.

Sorry to burst any bubbles you had.

Of course they should just leave it how it is if they want people to stop playing the game because there’s no competition on most of the tiers. Every tier winner is pretty much decided by Saturday/Sunday, and the winners/losers are not moving up or down tiers.

Sounds like an incredible system that they definitely shouldn’t think of changing.

Le Rooster.8715:

Wait you mean to say because i’m australian i should have to contribute less to WvW then someone who lives in the US?

No, I said that currently in a most american match you are much more important for your server than any american on you server. The truth of this you can see in any recruitment thread: “We would love to get more EU or Occeanic, hm, if you are from a US timezone we cannot hinder you joining us, but you better stay away we have long NA-prime-time queues”

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/TC-needs-Oceanic-Asian-EU-Guilds-Players is the last one I found.

And I only proposed to make it more even, not to make it uneven in the other direction.

What constitutes as “fair” exactly? Each server has a dominant time zone in each tier.
I play in NA zone, but we have a huge gap in coverage while I’m at work, I don’t really consider it fair that servers with better EU coverage are taking advantage of that weakness while I’m at work, but that’s the reality of the game and I take comfort in the fact that we’ll be able to catch up when I get home from work and log on with other NA players who just got home from work as well. For some, that’s the ONLY way for them to “catch up” on score so it doesn’t look like they lost by a huge margin even though they’re in 3rd place.

Server A will go after Server B to make sure they stay in 1st place. Meanwhile, Server C will go after Server B to get 2nd place. It’s a competition and you go after the one with the weakest coverage, no matter what in order to max out the PPT in order to maximize the score. I’m not saying that everyone does this, but that is the general sense and strategy behind WvW.

Also if you look at it based on Timezone, everyone is “night capping”. Right about now, Eu is roughly around 1-3 AM, while it’s only 7:30 PM for me. They’re already night capping while I"m still eating dinner :‘(. And their maximum potential cap is 695(i think), and that’s alright, given that while EU is sleeping, I’ll be taking my Borderland back.

Basically, for your solution, I believe you’re trying to maximize the gain for your timezone by using that as a benchmark for other time zones as well, which does not apply since all of us have differing strength in timezones. If you limit the cap from the maximum capacity, I can see a lot of players saying “what’s the point? we can only gain 100PPT for this hour anyway?”. The only solution that players will find in this is to server hop to find where they can create the most impact in PPT, keep in mind, once you cap the PPT for the “slow” and “unfair” hours, that becomes the new MAX PPT for those hours of gameplay, so serious players who like to score high, will find servers where they can find the 100PPT that players are fighting for, rather than aiming for the 695PPT during their slow hours.

Just no, my time is worth as much as an Americans

Seren.6850:

Just no, my time is worth as much as an Americans

Yes, but it should also not worth more

Anyhow the OP-proposal is to complicated a simple:

New Accumulated score =
Old Accumulated score +
(current ticker * total of players in this match)

instead of the current
New Accumulated score =
Old Accumulated score + current ticker

would do already better and be more fair (as argued by me above).

Modifying the scoring system is the wrong answer, will create a bias that isn’t meant to be in the game.

Here are two solutions:

1. Get people to fill your coverage gaps. It works – look at Blackgate or SoR in NA T1.

2. Quit sleeping. Sleep is for the weak anyway.

Both solutions are ones that anyone can implement, no ANet involvement required.

Dhampyr.2104:

Modifying the scoring system is the wrong answer, will create a bias that isn’t meant to be in the game.

Here are two solutions:

1. Get people to fill your coverage gaps. It works – look at Blackgate or SoR in NA T1.

2. Quit sleeping. Sleep is for the weak anyway.

Both solutions are ones that anyone can implement, no ANet involvement required.

Neither of your solutions is practical — the problem is ANet’s to fix. Whether they will do so is another matter, but having matchups decided by Sat/Sun and no servers moving up or down is not good for the longterm health of the WvW game.

Dhampyr.2104:

1. Get people to fill your coverage gaps. It works – look at Blackgate or SoR in NA T1.

3 of 51 server made it, cool. Where are the players for the other servers found?

2. Quit sleeping. Sleep is for the weak anyway.

Yeah exactly this is leading to PvD in EU, some sleep some play at night. But as they don’t do it on all nights, they usually miss each other and do PvD instead of PvP. But a game that does promote PvP instead of PvD is funnier.

Both solutions are ones that anyone can implement, no ANet involvement required.

This is the big advantage of your solution over mine. And for the weak there is a third solution: switch to a game that is already designed to let you sleep at night.

OP makes no sense. If you cap the PPT, and are always on the losing end, you still lose. 400 PPT to 0 PPT at peak Night hours is the same as 600 PPT to 0 PPT, only it doesn’t hurt as bad. He has yet to explain why there should be a handicap on an opponent’s server simply because he’s asleep. With a cap in place, there’d be no incentive to play.

What if I were to recommend that there be a cap on how many points an individual server can score on their side, based on how many players are in the Borderland/EB? So if OP’s server only had 20 people in their BL at that time, then they can only get a max of 20 PPT. Seem fair?

One need only to compare how much PPT each time zone is netting to see that Arena Net’s solution does not value every player equally. I guess I should also say that I don’t play from NA, I don’t care for the scoreboard very much, and I have accounts on both European and NA servers.

Lets declare three major time zones:

Europe – Primarily European servers
America – Primarily NA servers
Oceanic & East Asia – Primarily NA servers

Let’s say each prime time last for 6 hours (18:00 – 24:00 local time), and that we have 3 competing servers.

Server A: Primarily NA coverage.
Server B: Primarily Oceanic / East Asian coverage.
Server C: Primarily European coverage.

18:00 – 24:00 server time.
Server A gains 695ppt during NA prime time.

02:00 – 08:00 server time.
Server B gains 695ppt during Oceanic prime time.

09:00 – 15:00 server time.
Server C gains 695ppt during European prime time.

After 24 hours;
Server A: 22,240
Server B: 19,460
Server C: 25,040

The above would result in pretty even scores. However;

• European coverage is typically extremely low on NA servers, because they prefer to play on European servers.
• Every NA server has some sort of NA coverage. You will probably not see a server’s potential go sky high during NA prime because of this. I can’t recall a single 695ppt during NA prime on any server.

So let’s factor these things in. Server C is turned into a falling T1 server or something.

18:00 – 24:00 server time.
Server A gains 395ppt during NA prime time.
Server B gains 150ppt during NA prime time.
Server C gains 150 ppt during NA prime time.

02:00 – 08:00 server time.
Server A gains 100ppt during Oceanic prime time.
Server B gains 495ppt during Oceanic prime time.
Server C gains 100ppt during Oceanic prime time.

Now here is where the interesting part lies. Since European prime time is low on NA servers, ppt stay mostly static until NA players can get home from work. So let’s say;

09:00 – 15:00 server time.
Server A gains 150ppt during European prime time.
Server B gains 395ppt during European prime time.
Server C gains 150ppt during European prime time.

After 24 hours;
Server A: 21,640
Server B: 31,260
Server C: 13,000

Clearly Oceanic / East Asian players are worth the most with Arena Net’s system. Note that the effects would be even worse on European servers, but because Oceanics / East Asian players lag horribly there, and because NA players have their own servers, this issue is much less prominent.

I guess I should also note that my experience is based mostly on play in T5-7, and as I said, I don’t really care either way. I just think that if Arena Net wants every player to feel valued then they can’t stick with the current system.