Guild Wars 2

X T D.6458:

kefro.9312:

If i was on FA i would riot hard over this, all the time invested on your server affected with a thing like this… shame ANET you are a shame probably you killed FA server community over a stupid injustice like this, i would quit the game because of this… i hope you stay strong…

Anet didnt kill any server ok, FA rolled this matchup due to glicko RNG, same as last week when they rolled a tier 1 matchup. They were not forcibily dropped down to make room for YB in t2. YB was stuck in t3 steamrolling the other 2 servers, for them to move out would have taken weeks. To avoid this Anet sped up the process by giving them the glicko needed to make it possible to roll a better more equal matchup. “Glicko Hell” can keep servers stuck in matchups where there is not enough competition, but due to the slow nature of glicko to compensate and adapt properly to changes on servers and in matchups it can take weeks or even months to allow a server to move up or down, resulting in many unbalanced matchups.

All anet did was speed up the process so players did not get stuck with weeks of blowout matches in t3. Try learning the mechanics, instead of throwing out ridiculous accusations and insults.

You do not understand what random means. If it was random then YB would not need the +150 points but they got the points for the solo reason to move them up. What this did to FA was move them down this IS a chose that was made by the dev NOT RNG.

There no way this t3 match up is going to be a blow out because they killed the will of a lot of commanders in FA to the point where they are simply not showing up.

kefro.9312:

If i was on FA i would riot hard over this, all the time invested on your server affected with a thing like this… shame ANET you are a shame probably you killed FA server community over a stupid injustice like this, i would quit the game because of this… i hope you stay strong…

I don’t know what server this Kefro is on, but he’s not representative of what actual guild leaders on FA have said about rolling T3 so I hope readers here aren’t getting baited into this.

kefro.9312:

If i was on FA i would riot hard over this, all the time invested on your server affected with a thing like this… shame ANET you are a shame probably you killed FA server community over a stupid injustice like this, i would quit the game because of this… i hope you stay strong…

If a community die just because they dropped a tier it’s a pretty bad community imo.
But honestly, you’re the only one who seen upset here.

Chaba.5410:

I don’t know what server this Kefro is on, but he’s not representative of what actual guild leaders on FA have said about rolling T3 so I hope readers here aren’t getting baited into this.

At first it sounded he was just a angry FA player. But it seens it’s just someone with issues from whatever random server.

Jski.6180:

There no way this t3 match up is going to be a blow out because they killed the will of a lot of commanders in FA to the point where they are simply not showing up.

If they really care about being in T2 they SHOULD show be showing up… If FA break that easily, they should join up with Darkhaven which also have their will broken that quick. Except that Dh actually had a real reason to do so.

Jeknar.6184:

kefro.9312:

If i was on FA i would riot hard over this, all the time invested on your server affected with a thing like this… shame ANET you are a shame probably you killed FA server community over a stupid injustice like this, i would quit the game because of this… i hope you stay strong…

If a community die just because they dropped a tier it’s a pretty bad community imo.
But honestly, you’re the only one who seen upset here.

Chaba.5410:

I don’t know what server this Kefro is on, but he’s not representative of what actual guild leaders on FA have said about rolling T3 so I hope readers here aren’t getting baited into this.

At first it sounded he was just a angry FA player. But it seens it’s just someone with issues from whatever random server.

Jski.6180:

There no way this t3 match up is going to be a blow out because they killed the will of a lot of commanders in FA to the point where they are simply not showing up.

If they really care about being in T2 they SHOULD show be showing up… If FA break that easily, they should join up with Darkhaven which also have their will broken that quick. Except that Dh actually had a real reason to do so.

Its not about braking up FA its about blowing out the match and how the points work. FA is so much higher then the other T3 groups we must win and win at a very high amount. And at best FA on a ppt push your going to see major gaps in time zones. At worst ppl are going to get bored dealing with super siege bunkering in objective because CD / SBI are not putting up a fight in open field all that much see the crazy k/d changes for fa when fa use to have the worst in the game.
Also its about what happens to CD / SBI after this match up how many points will they get and will this cause YB to drop right back down into T3 making all of this a lot about nothing and bring up the question will this happen agen and agen. Its about broken trust of rules that every one plays by but for the “chosen” worlds.

Jeknar.6184:

Chaba.5410:

I don’t know what server this Kefro is on, but he’s not representative of what actual guild leaders on FA have said about rolling T3 so I hope readers here aren’t getting baited into this.

At first it sounded he was just a angry FA player. But it seens it’s just someone with issues from whatever random server.

Well you are sort of getting distracted away from the point trying to be made about how this recent manual adjustment seems like the beginning of rather careless usage of the tool, especially when there wasn’t a partial reset of glicko at the changing of the server links. The server doesn’t matter. Every time it seems obvious to players that X server doesn’t “belong” in Y tier, what is going to happen? Why was this solution not used, for example, when YB was trying to break the glicko wall over a year ago?

Cerby was the first to respond on this thread to the news and that guy is on Ehmry Bay, no?

It’s not to me you need to ask these questions Chaba… If it depended on me I would have reset glicko entirely every re-link since the ratings would no longer represent the population of the team after the servers changed.

We made many suggestions, but it ultimately falls to Arena Net to come up with a solution so they don’t have to tweak everytime their system break.

Chaba.5410:

Jeknar.6184:

Chaba.5410:

I don’t know what server this Kefro is on, but he’s not representative of what actual guild leaders on FA have said about rolling T3 so I hope readers here aren’t getting baited into this.

At first it sounded he was just a angry FA player. But it seens it’s just someone with issues from whatever random server.

Well you are sort of getting distracted away from the point trying to be made about how this recent manual adjustment seems like the beginning of rather careless usage of the tool, especially when there wasn’t a partial reset of glicko at the changing of the server links. The server doesn’t matter. Every time it seems obvious to players that X server doesn’t “belong” in Y tier, what is going to happen? Why was this solution not used, for example, when YB was trying to break the glicko wall over a year ago?

Cerby was the first to respond on this thread to the news and that guy is on Ehmry Bay, no?

A year ago Anet wasn’t paying attention to WvW. I’m glad they’ve changed and started paying attention. It was a problem a year ago, it was a problem 3 years ago. Its about time they start to do something about it.

The next step is to change the way matchmaking works. I think everyone agrees on that point. I would even say that they should suspend work on the rest of the scoring changes and make changes to matchmaking.

Broken trust of rules that every one plays by but for the “chosen” worlds. Well done ANET (sarcasm). Why does the server that i am contributes for this discussion plz moderators can you take hand on those trolls they are posting on “cancer forums” about how trolly they are because of this post.

Chaba.5410:

ventusthunder.5067:

For all the complaining we do this was a good idea. They learned from the CD T4 fiasco last link and took action sooner. Isn’t action what you want, people?

By this logic, DB should have had their glicko rating adjusted downward and Mag’s rating should have been adjusted upward two weeks ago. Anytime a server gets stacked or has a large number of players leave, Anet should manually adjust the glicko rating. That will help to foster a sense of fair and competitive play. /sarcasm

Of course it will. WvW has never been anything except fair competitive play with an extremely high skill cap.

ventusthunder.5067:

Chaba.5410:

ventusthunder.5067:

For all the complaining we do this was a good idea. They learned from the CD T4 fiasco last link and took action sooner. Isn’t action what you want, people?

By this logic, DB should have had their glicko rating adjusted downward and Mag’s rating should have been adjusted upward two weeks ago. Anytime a server gets stacked or has a large number of players leave, Anet should manually adjust the glicko rating. That will help to foster a sense of fair and competitive play. /sarcasm

Of course it will. WvW has never been anything except fair competitive play with an extremely high skill cap.

Its never been comply fair but to have a dev modified a score for just one world to solo get out of a rank of wvw is the very def of wrong.

I truly think this is how WvW as a game type in GW2 will die if they keep doing it and or do not say / fix fast.

Johje Holan.4607:

A year ago Anet wasn’t paying attention to WvW. I’m glad they’ve changed and started paying attention. It was a problem a year ago, it was a problem 3 years ago. Its about time they start to do something about it.

Weak argument for why they adjusted YB’s glicko rating upwards in a rather nonchalant way. They adjusted rating manually three years ago for T8 because of a glicko hell situation (no different from what happened to CD and T4) and they approached it with a lot of consideration. What’s being said here, and what Cerby tried to emphasize, is that there wasn’t much consideration given this time. There was no glicko hell situation here. YB would have rolled T2 without a change being needed.

This is a can of worms because anyone who is now unhappy can come to this forum and ask for X server’s rating to be adjusted and point to this precedent. That’s why I earlier illustrated the concept in a sarcastic manner: everyone knows DB is dropping like a rock because they had an exodus of guilds so might as well get them adjusted downward.

Chaba.5410:

Johje Holan.4607:

A year ago Anet wasn’t paying attention to WvW. I’m glad they’ve changed and started paying attention. It was a problem a year ago, it was a problem 3 years ago. Its about time they start to do something about it.

Weak argument for why they adjusted YB’s glicko rating upwards in a rather nonchalant way. They adjusted rating manually three years ago for T8 because of a glicko hell situation (no different from what happened to CD and T4) and they approached it with a lot of consideration. What’s being said here, and what Cerby tried to emphasize, is that there wasn’t much consideration given this time. There was no glicko hell situation here. YB would have rolled T2 without a change being needed.

This is a can of worms because anyone who is now unhappy can come to this forum and ask for X server’s rating to be adjusted and point to this precedent. That’s why I earlier illustrated the concept in a sarcastic manner: everyone knows DB is dropping like a rock because they had an exodus of guilds so might as well get them adjusted downward.

You have no idea how much consideration was given. You’re just making it up that there wasn’t much consideration.

Ha, people have been coming to this forum since the beginning and asking for stuff. Doesn’t mean it gets done. Talk to EU about that. They’ve been complaining about their matches since re-linkings. Nothing has been done. There was obviously a reason that Anet changed YB ratings. And it was not because of one post on the forums. They’re analysis showed them that it needed to be done.

Johje Holan.4607:

Chaba.5410:

Johje Holan.4607:

A year ago Anet wasn’t paying attention to WvW. I’m glad they’ve changed and started paying attention. It was a problem a year ago, it was a problem 3 years ago. Its about time they start to do something about it.

Weak argument for why they adjusted YB’s glicko rating upwards in a rather nonchalant way. They adjusted rating manually three years ago for T8 because of a glicko hell situation (no different from what happened to CD and T4) and they approached it with a lot of consideration. What’s being said here, and what Cerby tried to emphasize, is that there wasn’t much consideration given this time. There was no glicko hell situation here. YB would have rolled T2 without a change being needed.

This is a can of worms because anyone who is now unhappy can come to this forum and ask for X server’s rating to be adjusted and point to this precedent. That’s why I earlier illustrated the concept in a sarcastic manner: everyone knows DB is dropping like a rock because they had an exodus of guilds so might as well get them adjusted downward.

You have no idea how much consideration was given. You’re just making it up that there wasn’t much consideration.

Ha, people have been coming to this forum since the beginning and asking for stuff. Doesn’t mean it gets done. Talk to EU about that. They’ve been complaining about their matches since re-linkings. Nothing has been done. There was obviously a reason that Anet changed YB ratings. And it was not because of one post on the forums. They’re analysis showed them that it needed to be done.

You have no idea if Anet did an analysis or not. Stop making up arguments like you know how much attention is paid. Rating was adjusted manually in the past for glicko hell situations. That didn’t happen this time.

Chaba.5410:

Johje Holan.4607:

Chaba.5410:

Johje Holan.4607:

A year ago Anet wasn’t paying attention to WvW. I’m glad they’ve changed and started paying attention. It was a problem a year ago, it was a problem 3 years ago. Its about time they start to do something about it.

Weak argument for why they adjusted YB’s glicko rating upwards in a rather nonchalant way. They adjusted rating manually three years ago for T8 because of a glicko hell situation (no different from what happened to CD and T4) and they approached it with a lot of consideration. What’s being said here, and what Cerby tried to emphasize, is that there wasn’t much consideration given this time. There was no glicko hell situation here. YB would have rolled T2 without a change being needed.

This is a can of worms because anyone who is now unhappy can come to this forum and ask for X server’s rating to be adjusted and point to this precedent. That’s why I earlier illustrated the concept in a sarcastic manner: everyone knows DB is dropping like a rock because they had an exodus of guilds so might as well get them adjusted downward.

You have no idea how much consideration was given. You’re just making it up that there wasn’t much consideration.

Ha, people have been coming to this forum since the beginning and asking for stuff. Doesn’t mean it gets done. Talk to EU about that. They’ve been complaining about their matches since re-linkings. Nothing has been done. There was obviously a reason that Anet changed YB ratings. And it was not because of one post on the forums. They’re analysis showed them that it needed to be done.

You have no idea if Anet did an analysis or not. Stop making up arguments like you know how much attention is paid.

I never said I knew how much attention was paid. You’re the one that said, “in a rather nonchalant way” and “wasn’t much consideration given”. You don’t know that. You completely made that up.

Johje Holan.4607:

Chaba.5410:

Johje Holan.4607:

A year ago Anet wasn’t paying attention to WvW. I’m glad they’ve changed and started paying attention. It was a problem a year ago, it was a problem 3 years ago. Its about time they start to do something about it.

Weak argument for why they adjusted YB’s glicko rating upwards in a rather nonchalant way. They adjusted rating manually three years ago for T8 because of a glicko hell situation (no different from what happened to CD and T4) and they approached it with a lot of consideration. What’s being said here, and what Cerby tried to emphasize, is that there wasn’t much consideration given this time. There was no glicko hell situation here. YB would have rolled T2 without a change being needed.

This is a can of worms because anyone who is now unhappy can come to this forum and ask for X server’s rating to be adjusted and point to this precedent. That’s why I earlier illustrated the concept in a sarcastic manner: everyone knows DB is dropping like a rock because they had an exodus of guilds so might as well get them adjusted downward.

You have no idea how much consideration was given. You’re just making it up that there wasn’t much consideration.

Ha, people have been coming to this forum since the beginning and asking for stuff. Doesn’t mean it gets done. Talk to EU about that. They’ve been complaining about their matches since re-linkings. Nothing has been done. There was obviously a reason that Anet changed YB ratings. And it was not because of one post on the forums. They’re analysis showed them that it needed to be done.

But what about the analysis of who will fall? This is not a one way thing and what happens to one group or world effects all others. There has been a line crossed here a line that in most pvp games spells doom. The game makers want this world to be higher and by conquest others to fall. This is a game braking tool that kills motivation to do any thing to fight for that week. It becomes less about fighting and more about buying guilds or ppl to play on your side.

Johje Holan.4607:

Chaba.5410:

Johje Holan.4607:

Chaba.5410:

Johje Holan.4607:

A year ago Anet wasn’t paying attention to WvW. I’m glad they’ve changed and started paying attention. It was a problem a year ago, it was a problem 3 years ago. Its about time they start to do something about it.

Weak argument for why they adjusted YB’s glicko rating upwards in a rather nonchalant way. They adjusted rating manually three years ago for T8 because of a glicko hell situation (no different from what happened to CD and T4) and they approached it with a lot of consideration. What’s being said here, and what Cerby tried to emphasize, is that there wasn’t much consideration given this time. There was no glicko hell situation here. YB would have rolled T2 without a change being needed.

This is a can of worms because anyone who is now unhappy can come to this forum and ask for X server’s rating to be adjusted and point to this precedent. That’s why I earlier illustrated the concept in a sarcastic manner: everyone knows DB is dropping like a rock because they had an exodus of guilds so might as well get them adjusted downward.

You have no idea how much consideration was given. You’re just making it up that there wasn’t much consideration.

Ha, people have been coming to this forum since the beginning and asking for stuff. Doesn’t mean it gets done. Talk to EU about that. They’ve been complaining about their matches since re-linkings. Nothing has been done. There was obviously a reason that Anet changed YB ratings. And it was not because of one post on the forums. They’re analysis showed them that it needed to be done.

You have no idea if Anet did an analysis or not. Stop making up arguments like you know how much attention is paid.

I never said I knew how much attention was paid. You’re the one that said, “in a rather nonchalant way” and “wasn’t much consideration given”. You don’t know that. You completely made that up.

Where’s this analysis you say they did? Right….

Look I get it, you posted earlier in support of the idea. You just want to defend your personal preference rather than hold Anet up to a higher standard.

And this is another very important factor i said before but no one seems to want to faces it what happens when YB falls agen do they add more points to hold it up? What if it loose it population do they let the world fall? This is a Pandora’s box that this dev has opened up and they MUST talk about this very soon to what point are they going to do this or the players will simply fill in the question with there own views.

Chaba.5410:

Johje Holan.4607:

A year ago Anet wasn’t paying attention to WvW. I’m glad they’ve changed and started paying attention. It was a problem a year ago, it was a problem 3 years ago. Its about time they start to do something about it.

Weak argument for why they adjusted YB’s glicko rating upwards in a rather nonchalant way. They adjusted rating manually three years ago for T8 because of a glicko hell situation (no different from what happened to CD and T4) and they approached it with a lot of consideration. What’s being said here, and what Cerby tried to emphasize, is that there wasn’t much consideration given this time. There was no glicko hell situation here. YB would have rolled T2 without a change being needed.

This is a can of worms because anyone who is now unhappy can come to this forum and ask for X server’s rating to be adjusted and point to this precedent. That’s why I earlier illustrated the concept in a sarcastic manner: everyone knows DB is dropping like a rock because they had an exodus of guilds so might as well get them adjusted downward.

While I’m not against the change that was made, Chaba here is right: It wasn’t entirely needed like it was on both past scenarios. Not only YB already had a slim chance of rolling T2, but they also were still able to gain rating from the T3 servers as they weren’t that much lower than theirs, increasing their odds with each passing week. Would it suck for T3? Of course it would. Nobody likes to be in a loopsided match that would keep going for weeks. But drastic measures must be left for drastic situations and this wasn’t one.

The fact that Arena Net acted faster this time is what intrigue me. On both past scenarios the situation was worse, and it took much more time to them take their move (CD fiasco took 5 weeks. T8 fiasco took SEVERAL MONTHS) and that’s problably why she is saying Arena Net problably didn’t took much consideration in this one.

Jski.6180:

Johje Holan.4607:

Chaba.5410:

Johje Holan.4607:

A year ago Anet wasn’t paying attention to WvW. I’m glad they’ve changed and started paying attention. It was a problem a year ago, it was a problem 3 years ago. Its about time they start to do something about it.

Weak argument for why they adjusted YB’s glicko rating upwards in a rather nonchalant way. They adjusted rating manually three years ago for T8 because of a glicko hell situation (no different from what happened to CD and T4) and they approached it with a lot of consideration. What’s being said here, and what Cerby tried to emphasize, is that there wasn’t much consideration given this time. There was no glicko hell situation here. YB would have rolled T2 without a change being needed.

This is a can of worms because anyone who is now unhappy can come to this forum and ask for X server’s rating to be adjusted and point to this precedent. That’s why I earlier illustrated the concept in a sarcastic manner: everyone knows DB is dropping like a rock because they had an exodus of guilds so might as well get them adjusted downward.

You have no idea how much consideration was given. You’re just making it up that there wasn’t much consideration.

Ha, people have been coming to this forum since the beginning and asking for stuff. Doesn’t mean it gets done. Talk to EU about that. They’ve been complaining about their matches since re-linkings. Nothing has been done. There was obviously a reason that Anet changed YB ratings. And it was not because of one post on the forums. They’re analysis showed them that it needed to be done.

But what about the analysis of who will fall? This is not a one way thing and what happens to one group or world effects all others. There has been a line crossed here a line that in most pvp games spells doom. The game makers want this world to be higher and by conquest others to fall. This is a game braking tool that kills motivation to do any thing to fight for that week. It becomes less about fighting and more about buying guilds or ppl to play on your side.

I’ve been saying for years that we need a new matchmaking system. The one we have is terrible.

If Anet is not going to make a new matchmaking system, then I think they need to do something. Especially with the linking system which gives us only 2 months before another linking.

Given the response to the manual adjustment to YB, I think it would be wise of Anet to stop all work on other projects and change the matchmaking system. While we wait for that to happen, I think immediately starting with the next linking, either:

1. Adjust Glicko ratings of all servers at the beginning of each linking
2. Adjust the initial matches of a linking according to population. They know this info because that’s what they use to make the linkings.

Chaba.5410:

Johje Holan.4607:

Chaba.5410:

Johje Holan.4607:

Chaba.5410:

Johje Holan.4607:

A year ago Anet wasn’t paying attention to WvW. I’m glad they’ve changed and started paying attention. It was a problem a year ago, it was a problem 3 years ago. Its about time they start to do something about it.

Weak argument for why they adjusted YB’s glicko rating upwards in a rather nonchalant way. They adjusted rating manually three years ago for T8 because of a glicko hell situation (no different from what happened to CD and T4) and they approached it with a lot of consideration. What’s being said here, and what Cerby tried to emphasize, is that there wasn’t much consideration given this time. There was no glicko hell situation here. YB would have rolled T2 without a change being needed.

This is a can of worms because anyone who is now unhappy can come to this forum and ask for X server’s rating to be adjusted and point to this precedent. That’s why I earlier illustrated the concept in a sarcastic manner: everyone knows DB is dropping like a rock because they had an exodus of guilds so might as well get them adjusted downward.

You have no idea how much consideration was given. You’re just making it up that there wasn’t much consideration.

Ha, people have been coming to this forum since the beginning and asking for stuff. Doesn’t mean it gets done. Talk to EU about that. They’ve been complaining about their matches since re-linkings. Nothing has been done. There was obviously a reason that Anet changed YB ratings. And it was not because of one post on the forums. They’re analysis showed them that it needed to be done.

You have no idea if Anet did an analysis or not. Stop making up arguments like you know how much attention is paid.

I never said I knew how much attention was paid. You’re the one that said, “in a rather nonchalant way” and “wasn’t much consideration given”. You don’t know that. You completely made that up.

Where’s this analysis you say they did? Right….

Look I get it, you posted earlier in support of the idea. You just want to defend your personal preference rather than hold Anet up to a higher standard.

You’re being obtuse. Anet doesn’t show their analysis on anything.

Jeknar.6184:

Chaba.5410:

Johje Holan.4607:

A year ago Anet wasn’t paying attention to WvW. I’m glad they’ve changed and started paying attention. It was a problem a year ago, it was a problem 3 years ago. Its about time they start to do something about it.

Weak argument for why they adjusted YB’s glicko rating upwards in a rather nonchalant way. They adjusted rating manually three years ago for T8 because of a glicko hell situation (no different from what happened to CD and T4) and they approached it with a lot of consideration. What’s being said here, and what Cerby tried to emphasize, is that there wasn’t much consideration given this time. There was no glicko hell situation here. YB would have rolled T2 without a change being needed.

This is a can of worms because anyone who is now unhappy can come to this forum and ask for X server’s rating to be adjusted and point to this precedent. That’s why I earlier illustrated the concept in a sarcastic manner: everyone knows DB is dropping like a rock because they had an exodus of guilds so might as well get them adjusted downward.

While I’m not against the change that was made, Chaba here is right: It wasn’t entirely needed like it was on both past scenarios. Not only YB already had a slim chance of rolling T2, but they also were still able to gain rating from the T3 servers as they weren’t that much lower than theirs, increasing their odds with each passing week. Would it suck for T3? Of course it would. Nobody likes to be in a loopsided match that would keep going for weeks. But drastic measures must be left for drastic situations and this wasn’t one.

The fact that Arena Net acted faster this time is what intrigue me. On both past scenarios the situation was worse, and it took much more time to them take their move (CD fiasco took 5 weeks. T8 fiasco took SEVERAL MONTHS) and that’s problably why she is saying Arena Net problably didn’t took much consideration in this one.

Ok, so we should just go back to Anet not paying attention to WvW. And it taking months for anything to happen. Anet shouldn’t do anything quickly because that leads people to think that there wasn’t “much analysis” done. That is what I hear you all saying. Well guess what? That is what people have been complaining about Anet for years. That it takes them forever to do anything. And here they actually do something and you all are saying they need to slow down. Good grief!

Johje Holan.4607:

Jski.6180:

Johje Holan.4607:

Chaba.5410:

Johje Holan.4607:

A year ago Anet wasn’t paying attention to WvW. I’m glad they’ve changed and started paying attention. It was a problem a year ago, it was a problem 3 years ago. Its about time they start to do something about it.

Weak argument for why they adjusted YB’s glicko rating upwards in a rather nonchalant way. They adjusted rating manually three years ago for T8 because of a glicko hell situation (no different from what happened to CD and T4) and they approached it with a lot of consideration. What’s being said here, and what Cerby tried to emphasize, is that there wasn’t much consideration given this time. There was no glicko hell situation here. YB would have rolled T2 without a change being needed.

This is a can of worms because anyone who is now unhappy can come to this forum and ask for X server’s rating to be adjusted and point to this precedent. That’s why I earlier illustrated the concept in a sarcastic manner: everyone knows DB is dropping like a rock because they had an exodus of guilds so might as well get them adjusted downward.

You have no idea how much consideration was given. You’re just making it up that there wasn’t much consideration.

Ha, people have been coming to this forum since the beginning and asking for stuff. Doesn’t mean it gets done. Talk to EU about that. They’ve been complaining about their matches since re-linkings. Nothing has been done. There was obviously a reason that Anet changed YB ratings. And it was not because of one post on the forums. They’re analysis showed them that it needed to be done.

But what about the analysis of who will fall? This is not a one way thing and what happens to one group or world effects all others. There has been a line crossed here a line that in most pvp games spells doom. The game makers want this world to be higher and by conquest others to fall. This is a game braking tool that kills motivation to do any thing to fight for that week. It becomes less about fighting and more about buying guilds or ppl to play on your side.

I’ve been saying for years that we need a new matchmaking system. The one we have is terrible.

If Anet is not going to make a new matchmaking system, then I think they need to do something. Especially with the linking system which gives us only 2 months before another linking.

Given the response to the manual adjustment to YB, I think it would be wise of Anet to stop all work on other projects and change the matchmaking system. While we wait for that to happen, I think immediately starting with the next linking, either:

1. Adjust Glicko ratings of all servers at the beginning of each linking
2. Adjust the initial matches of a linking according to population. They know this info because that’s what they use to make the linkings.

That all stipulation and realty went cant say what they will or will not do we can only say what they have done and giving free points to a world out of no where with out any real info is on the level of misinformation. This is too big to say one thing and duck out.

Johje Holan.4607:

Ok, so we should just go back to Anet not paying attention to WvW. And it taking months for anything to happen. Anet shouldn’t do anything quickly because that leads people to think that there wasn’t “much analysis” done. That is what I hear you all saying. Well guess what? That is what people have been complaining about Anet for years. That it takes them forever to do anything. And here they actually do something and you all are saying they need to slow down. Good grief!

No, that’s not what we mean. Remember when someone made a thread saying that Arena Net claiming objectives was showing favoritism to that specific server? That show just how thin is the glass floor Arena Net is stepping on when dealing with WvW. That’s why we say that they shouldn’t just go around manually intervening in things that don’t really need intervention. And like it was pointed out, this one wasn’t a case like the CD+ and the T8 fiascos. Now that this one happened, people will likely use this one as their argument when they ask: “why server X isn’t moved to tier Y”.

As long the matchmaking system isn’t fixed to quickly adjust to the population shifts that happen we will be seeing a lot of this same scenario happen. I can already start one by saying “NSP don’t belong to T4. They are performing even better than FA, a T2 server, is doing on T3. They clearly don’t belong to this tier. Why they aren’t moved to T3?”

If YB can use the game type better, then they should move to some place where playing against them is not going to be endlessly frustrating for the other servers. I think it’s pretty obvious for anyone watching the scores right now that both the T2 and T3 matchups are closer and more competitive in their current makeup than they would have been if YB and FA had stayed where they were. Anyone who is saying that ANet has betrayed FA on some huge, quit-the-game, the-world-is-ending kind of level is being melodramatic, but I can understand their frustration. That ANet recognized a problem and moved to respond to it is a good thing, but how they went about it is probably not.

I agree that manually adjusting Glicko ratings is just making the whole system be more and more useless, but I also agree with the vast majority of people that Glicko was never good for matchmaking purposes in the first place. It could be used—or some other mathematical variation—for a rating system to be maintained, but it needs some kind of resetting on server relinking, and it should not be solely used for creating matchups, for all the reasons people have always said.

So while I’m glad ANet is working to respond in a more timely fashion than they have in the past, I think it’s time they recognize that if they have to manually adjust ratings, the integrity of Glicko that they relied on in the first place is compromised beyond repair. I also agree that there is no automated system that will ever be superior to a live human being because the mathematics of human behavior have all kinds of ugly variables, and only a human being can really anticipate that with reasonable effectiveness. But I understand why ANet is trying to avoid going that direction too—and this thread is a good example of that. As soon as you enter a live human into the equation, then accusations of favoritism quickly follow. And, additionally, it’s probably not a cost effective way to spend employees’ time. (Though it looks to me like they’re spending that time on this anyway at this point, even with Glicko still in place—I don’t buy for a second that they decided at the last minute to adjust YB’s rating because of a forum post, instead of talking about it in endless meetings all week. Business is business, yanno.)

My suggestion would be to reform the system to make linkings, ratings and matchups, and have these things function on separate systems, though they’d use a lot of the same data to drive them. Linkings, matchups and ratings at the start of a new linkup period should be data-driven but have human oversight, but ratings in the midst of a linkup period should remain entirely mathematical.

Linking—if we’re going to keep it, it should be done entirely by population and coverage (such as matching good oceanic coverage with good NA coverage). This stuff isn’t a change, more or less, BUT… I’d also suggest considering varying the number of total matchups occasionally to keep things unpredictable and allow the smaller servers to play “host” from time to time, so people on those servers can feel validated and server population can be harder to predict, thus making bandwaggoning more challenging a prospect. (Obv if one server is listed “High” pop and the other is “Very High,” players can figure it out, but if all are listed as “High,” for example, it’s going to be more opaque, and the longer there’s a random mixup of which is the host server and which is the guest server, the harder it will be to remember.)

(to be cont.)

Rating—On each new linkup, ANet should reset Glicko scores, not to completely even, but to a range that first factors in population and participation of both/all servers in each new link pairing, then assigning a score to that composite. This would make it so that each server or server team still has a rating, and those ratings should be closer to each other at the start (narrow the range & decrease volatility). And then start the matchups and let Glicko do its work to adjust ratings for the following weeks throughout the linkup period. This would give Glicko something to work with to start out and still reflect that some servers/server teams are stronger and have better coverage/pop than others, which—let’s face it—is just going to be a fact of life. But it wouldn’t mean that future rating would be entirely dictated by the previous linkup (though it would still have influence), thus allowing for the system to respond more quickly to server transfers prior to the beginning of new linkups, as well as responding to the new linkups situations themselves. And it would give the opportunity for the smaller servers to host without screwing up the way the whole system works, because ratings would be determined by individual population of both linked servers in the imminent linkup, rather than just the host server’s performance from a linkup that no longer exists. And finally, it would still allow the rating to have influence on the matchups, which it should—it just shouldn’t dictate them.

I think this would be superior to setting all the ratings to the same score and having human-determined matchups, because then there would be no validity to the rankings. BG might be the strongest given server, but if they have a close first match, they might end up with a lower Glicko than CD, for example, who might have blown their competition out of the water, and they’ll never face each other because they shouldn’t, due to their population discrepancies. The ratings would be meaningless, except in whatever behind-the-scenes kind of way that ANet would use them to advise future matchups. And I dunno—maybe this would be a good thing to get population to spread out more?—but I think people would just complain.

Matchups—I think if the ratings can be dialed in and adjusted more effectively before the beginning of the linkup period, then a lot of the problems with matchups will be ameliorated because matchups will be predicted more accurately, and there won’t be as much carryover and antiquated data from old linkup periods. Matchups should be done on a system that weighs both Glicko and transfers/population, and I think this can and should be automated, so that any matchup would calculated based on Glicko + n(+/- transfers on/off), where n is a value to be determined by ANet according to what makes sense in their data and where they set the middle point of their initial Glicko range, but kept constant, ofc. This would give Glicko a chance to more accurately adjust the ratings by the servers’ performances in the following weeks’ matchups more immediately after transfers that occur, without waiting for its slow-adjusting self to generate the new matchups, and more importantly, without a human directly adjusting the ratings themselves. Then the system could apply the semi-random roll of the dice that determines weekly matchups. All this could be overridden if it’s apparent that there should be a direct matchup between two servers, like YB and FA really ought to have next week. Again, this would be without needing to have a human being adjust ratings because—other than in the first week of a new linkup period—only the Glicko would determine the ratings, but Glicko + transfers/active population would determine the matchups. Thus they would avoid invalidating the objectivity of the rating system in order to generate matchups that need to happen, like what occurred this week. I do think ANet needs a system that allows them to override the matchups occasionally without them having to bugger the scores that determine ratings.

(to be cont.)

(cont.)

And finally, I would get rid of the entire concept of tiers. Just have 3 or 4 or 5 or however many matchups, marked as “JQ v. YB/FC v. DB” etc. and let the ratings determine the rankings, dismissing the idea of “moving up” or “moving down” except as it refers to rating score. That’s been outdated for years now, ever since matches stopped being determined by a flat Rank 1 v. Rank 2 v. Rank 3, and the whole idea is even more absurd under the server linking system. Players—and perhaps ANet too—need to adjust their thinking with regards to servers “belonging” in this tier or that. Ideally, the linked servers would all be tight enough in population and performance that there would be continuous movement in matchups, thus keeping WvW fresh and interesting because there’s always a good matchup either presently or just around the corner. That would require matchups to be less predictable overall, so people couldn’t say for sure who “belongs” anywhere. People talk as if it’s a bad thing that there are four servers who probably “belong in the same tier,” but it’s from their similarities in size and performance that we could get a variety of matches, as long as the system allows it to happen. We need to change that thinking to “four servers who are well-matched” and thus open our thinking about what matches are worth having, and changing that thinking will have an effect on transfers, population and the whole shebang.

Bridget Morrigan.1752:

If YB can use the game type better, then they should move to some place where playing against them is not going to be endlessly frustrating for the other servers.

YB was moving towards that place without the need for such heavy-handedness. T8 three years ago and CD more recently were not, they were stuck in “glicko hell”.

Chaba.5410:

Bridget Morrigan.1752:

If YB can use the game type better, then they should move to some place where playing against them is not going to be endlessly frustrating for the other servers.

YB was moving towards that place without the need for such heavy-handedness. T8 three years ago and CD more recently were not, they were stuck in “glicko hell”.

I realize I wrote a long three posts, but all you had to do was get to the bottom of the first paragraph to see that I agreed with you on this. XD

Johje Holan.4607:

Ok, so we should just go back to Anet not paying attention to WvW. And it taking months for anything to happen. Anet shouldn’t do anything quickly because that leads people to think that there wasn’t “much analysis” done. That is what I hear you all saying. Well guess what? That is what people have been complaining about Anet for years. That it takes them forever to do anything. And here they actually do something and you all are saying they need to slow down. Good grief!

No one said that. Nor did anyone say it should take months for anything to happen. Let’s remember, I’m the only person on this forum who has brought up the issue of glicko’s volatility and deviation not being reset with the recent server links across multiple threads (Snowreap is the only other person to mention it and Liston seems to be the only person acknowledging it). Had you carefully considered this issue, you would have joined me in asking Anet to perform the reset instead of agreeing to the OP’s request.

Manual adjustment like what was done with YB would never have seemed necessary had that step not been missed. I think you are failing to acknowledge the implications here of poor band-aiding on top of mistakes in the process. As Caliburn put it, this takes away something of player agency. As I put it, this moves player agency out of the game and onto this forum.

It is far too easy to point and say “oh look the fault is because of glicko to begin with and we should have a different matchmaking system” until you realize that the system doesn’t matter when there isn’t a strict discipline to the process. The system could be 1-up-1-down for all that matters and someone comes along on the forum to say “X server really doesn’t belong here; look at how they are steamrolling over us, Anet please do something”.

Mixed. Glad they are active and tries to fix problems faster. Sad that they fixed it with a manual adjustment.

I don’t resent the manual adjustment as much as others obviously do (as I don’t consider points competitive, and largely ignore them for anything but match-making).

But would still prefer to see them fix it another way (fix the system, not the symptom).

• Full reset Glicko to 1500 start of each link
• Partial reset glicko to 1500 +/- 100 start of each link, after rank.
• Glicko slowly creeps back toward 1500 each week to remove glicko walls
• Set upper and lower cap to avoid glicko walls being formed

Question, will the +150 extra glicko continue to be given to YB after the end of this current week’s match-up? Because that would put YB squarely in the middle of T1 if current scoring trends continue.

This is an enjoyable thread, pls continue.

Caliburn.1845:

Question, will the +150 extra glicko continue to be given to YB after the end of this current week’s match-up? Because that would put YB squarely in the middle of T1 if current scoring trends continue.

Naw man they should just do an emergency link and give YB two servers like I dunno SoS and Sbi as links, and then place them in t1, move BG out.
Yah man that sounds good.

P.S I’m all for boosting servers ratings if it’s to fix a situation that has no end to it, this is mostly when there’s glicko walls. I don’t agree boosting one server, because you are affecting another server above them with this boost, what does that tell the players on the other server who worked on maintaining their ranking? Too bad someone else deserves your spot because they got a better link this time around, we’ll just give it to them.

If they were already heading to t2 then let them do it on their own time, they were already in range, not like the t4 match that had no hope of that happening for 2 months. It’s come to the point now that glicko ratings no longer have any meaning, you might as well set up all the tier matches as you think they should be and leave it at that.

If you feel the need to boost individual servers now, then do the soft reset of glicko ratings every link, 2000 1900 1800 1700. I’ve sayed it many times already.

RyuDragnier.9476:

The problem Sylvyn is that it creates too many lopsided matches. JQ and FA can barely deal with T1, and T3 can barely deal with anybody from T2. It’s a huge gap between server pops and skill, and a 1-up/1-down ladder would only highlight that worse.

Understood, but how long is it going to take DB to get down to where they obviously need to be, as there is still a 200 point gap between DB and YB? We only have another 5 matchups before linkings change again and populations shift again. Glicko isn’t moving fast enough to take into account the changes. If not a one-up/one-down ladder, and not Glicko, because obviously it doesn’t work without manual adjustments, then what’s left?

Even if we got all the servers in the tiers they need to be in, yes, there are still wide population gaps between each server within a tier, because Anet has to try and balance linked server populations when the server populations themselves are in a constant state of flux…I don’t envy them that job. We may be at the point where we need just 3 tiers, consolidating a few T4 servers into T3 so that it doesn’t hurt so much when a T2 gets dropped into T3. Ideally, in a perfect world, all servers would be able to compete against any other server, at least from a population and coverage standpoint, so that the only determining factor is skill. Yeah, I know…pipe dream.

Thanks, Bridget, for all the thought put into your posts. I wonder at the end of the day, though, as this thread highlights, if people would be resentful of any human intervention in the process. Some people may be pleased, but others may not be. Ultimately, people need to realize that bandwagons and fairweathers make almost any kind of scoring or ladder system break down horribly, so there must be a mechanism in place to counter such population swings.

Sylvyn.4750:

Thanks, Bridget, for all the thought put into your posts. I wonder at the end of the day, though, as this thread highlights, if people would be resentful of any human intervention in the process. Some people may be pleased, but others may not be. Ultimately, people need to realize that bandwagons and fairweathers make almost any kind of scoring or ladder system break down horribly, so there must be a mechanism in place to counter such population swings.

A lot of ppl are looking at this way too short term and that the real problem. This is going to become a real problem down the rode if and when anet dose this agen and agen. Its cutting the legs out from under ppl and the work they did the week before. It makes ppt pointless and population every thing in a lot of ways it makes WvW rank system P2W or at least grind to win something that is comply opposite of the ideal of gw2 with its mostly lack of power creep gear grind.

By doing this the dev has betrayed the wvw community and all it stands for.

Jski.6180:

Sylvyn.4750:

Thanks, Bridget, for all the thought put into your posts. I wonder at the end of the day, though, as this thread highlights, if people would be resentful of any human intervention in the process. Some people may be pleased, but others may not be. Ultimately, people need to realize that bandwagons and fairweathers make almost any kind of scoring or ladder system break down horribly, so there must be a mechanism in place to counter such population swings.

A lot of ppl are looking at this way too short term and that the real problem. This is going to become a real problem down the rode if and when anet dose this agen and agen. Its cutting the legs out from under ppl and the work they did the week before. It makes ppt pointless and population every thing in a lot of ways it makes WvW rank system P2W or at least grind to win something that is comply opposite of the ideal of gw2 with its mostly lack of power creep gear grind.

By doing this the dev has betrayed the wvw community and all it stands for.

no they betrayed YOU. i just love when players speak for the entire wvw community.

are you even playing the t3 match up? or did you quit like that other guy? its not a bad match up at all.

briggah.7910:

no they betrayed YOU. i just love when players speak for the entire wvw community.

are you even playing the t3 match up? or did you quit like that other guy? its not a bad match up at all.

You know that applies to you too right?
right?

YOU may like the matchup, doesn’t mean you speak for the rest of t3, or the t2 server that got dumped there either, not everyone will be happy with what happened.

Xenesis.6389:

briggah.7910:

no they betrayed YOU. i just love when players speak for the entire wvw community.

are you even playing the t3 match up? or did you quit like that other guy? its not a bad match up at all.

You know that applies to you too right?
right?

YOU may like the matchup, doesn’t mean you speak for the rest of t3, or the t2 server that got dumped there either, not everyone will be happy with what happened.

difference is he said anet betrayed the entire wvw community. i said it wasn’t a bad match up at all. i didn’t say the wvw community doesn’t think it is a bad match up at all. nice try though.

wvw all want something different.. anet is screwed no matter what they do..

Honestly, they just “betrayed” people who stress over being ranked in a ranked system that is clearly flawed… As long I can log in and get reasonable fights (not loopsided ones or mindless blobfests) I don’t care which tier I am.

No, they betrayed the game’s ruleset. Established a system of expectations for every player then bent the rules not for purposes of correcting a flaw in the rules (i.e. glicko hell), but to perform match-fixing because of player agency on this forum. It is akin to if the sPvP team were to manually remove pro players from the sPvP season because players complain on forum about getting matched up against them and getting run over rather than making changes to the match-making system.

briggah.7910:

Jski.6180:

Sylvyn.4750:

Thanks, Bridget, for all the thought put into your posts. I wonder at the end of the day, though, as this thread highlights, if people would be resentful of any human intervention in the process. Some people may be pleased, but others may not be. Ultimately, people need to realize that bandwagons and fairweathers make almost any kind of scoring or ladder system break down horribly, so there must be a mechanism in place to counter such population swings.

A lot of ppl are looking at this way too short term and that the real problem. This is going to become a real problem down the rode if and when anet dose this agen and agen. Its cutting the legs out from under ppl and the work they did the week before. It makes ppt pointless and population every thing in a lot of ways it makes WvW rank system P2W or at least grind to win something that is comply opposite of the ideal of gw2 with its mostly lack of power creep gear grind.

By doing this the dev has betrayed the wvw community and all it stands for.

no they betrayed YOU. i just love when players speak for the entire wvw community.

are you even playing the t3 match up? or did you quit like that other guy? its not a bad match up at all.

Well no this is a betrayal of the system that we had with WvW from the start to simply add points to move world after the fact makes the points pointless now. Even the work done by yb is pointless because a dev has come in to saved the day. So now YB is T2 not because of there work but because of some dev giving them free points. What happens next week if YB falls agen do we see the dev do the same thing? What if another world who pop. gets super inflated that stuck in T4 should a dev make them T2 too? This is about more then one week this is about the virility of points and work ppl put into wvw and there world each week. If a dev simply add points to move a world up what is the point of points?

Jski.6180:

what is the point of points?

I’ve been asking this since the day we realized coverage and population wins over anything.

If we’re experiencing extreme problems with match-making (not going to go off on a tangent to answer that question), there are a number of system-wide changes that can be made first before player agency moves out of the game.

- Reset volatility and deviation when new server links are created; if the step is missed, perform it at next reset.
- Full reset of glicko (con: wildy outmatched matches)
- Create process for ratings to be merged if server has frozen rating from previously being linked server
- Increase the range of the randomization roll so that a 150 glicko difference doesn’t create a very low probability of rolling up or down.
- Create upper and lower boundary rating caps so servers cannot fall into a glicko hell or manipulate their matches in order to create glicko walls between tiers.
- Utilize a different method of match-making.

Jeknar.6184:

Jski.6180:

what is the point of points?

I’ve been asking this since the day we realized coverage and population wins over anything.

But there still the ability to out play bigger groups you cant out play free points after the fact. That is what keeps GW2 different then the WoW gear power creep games.

Jski.6180:

Jeknar.6184:

Jski.6180:

what is the point of points?

I’ve been asking this since the day we realized coverage and population wins over anything.

But there still the ability to out play bigger groups you cant out play free points after the fact. That is what keeps GW2 different then the WoW gear power creep games.

No, you didn’t catch what I meant. The server with most population/coverage will always win the scoreboard. Then why does the points matter if simply having more people is enough to win? Sure, it’s nice having a goal to work toward (like try to win the match) but in the end, it all falls to whoever has more people that will be awake when you are asleep. I decided to not bother much with it long ago.

It was just a minor derail I decided to post because of that quoted part. Nothing really to worry about.

Jeknar.6184:

Jski.6180:

Jeknar.6184:

Jski.6180:

what is the point of points?

I’ve been asking this since the day we realized coverage and population wins over anything.

But there still the ability to out play bigger groups you cant out play free points after the fact. That is what keeps GW2 different then the WoW gear power creep games.

No, you didn’t catch what I meant. The server with most population/coverage will always win the scoreboard. Then why does the points matter if simply having more people is enough to win? Sure, it’s nice having a goal to work toward (like try to win the match) but in the end, it all falls to whoever has more people that will be awake when you are asleep. I decided to not bother much with it long ago.

It was just a minor derail I decided to post because of that quoted part. Nothing really to worry about.

There still a differences your not likely to win but you can still when you do not have coverage and numbers but when a dev goes out of there way to changes the scores of rank there is nothing you can do. Its a major leap from being fair rule game to a fixed game.

Holy salt!!! This thread! Not surprising it brings all of our dearest fans.

This shouldn’t be something to cry over. With the manual tinkering of populations with server linking or the open/full statuses etc, why throw a tantrum over another aspect they can use to adjust servers? And if a match blowout occurred in the past with another server why would you defend it and demand more servers repeatedly kill other servers for similar extended periods of time? “Well, the matchup back then was killing wvw but since they went through it in the past you guys have to kill wvw, too!” What kind of illogical nonsense is this? And look at the current scores!

Cry about what you want. Cry about what you get.
People will never be happy.

Good job, Anet.

At the end of the day what is wvw? A game or a competition? If it’s a competition, I’ve never gotten a prize, so let’s call it a game.

If you want people to play a game it has to be fun. Last week’s T3 matchup involved Anet developers on the map observing the situation first hand, but other than that was a total blowout.

By the end SoS was bored, SBI was bored, YB was bored. This was likely to repeat itself for 2-4 more weeks had no adjustment been made and Anet wants people to play wvw. Each successive week would have seen fewer T3 players play and since many wvw players play GW2 just to play wvw, they would have likely stopped playing GW2 for a while. This doesn’t help Anet, this doesn’t help the players.

Anet acknowledged their mistake with CD last linking and came up with a solution. They opted to use the solution they created. YB is competitive in T2. They are currently winning, but they’re not running away with it.

Hesacon.8735:

At the end of the day what is wvw? A game or a competition? If it’s a competition, I’ve never gotten a prize, so let’s call it a game.

If you want people to play a game it has to be fun. Last week’s T3 matchup involved Anet developers on the map observing the situation first hand, but other than that was a total blowout.

By the end SoS was bored, SBI was bored, YB was bored. This was likely to repeat itself for 2-4 more weeks had no adjustment been made and Anet wants people to play wvw. Each successive week would have seen fewer T3 players play and since many wvw players play GW2 just to play wvw, they would have likely stopped playing GW2 for a while. This doesn’t help Anet, this doesn’t help the players.

Anet acknowledged their mistake with CD last linking and came up with a solution. They opted to use the solution they created. YB is competitive in T2. They are currently winning, but they’re not running away with it.

And when they fall back down next week because of SBI and CD getting more points from FA what then? This IS a competitive type of game and the rewards are ranks. Its YB fault for stacking its pop. and for though ppl who came over to yb who where bored ppl make chose and must deal with them but they should not be given a free ride to a higher rank because they are bored. The promise of WvW ranks has been broken just pray your world not on the chopping block next time.