Whichever Server is firstplace at the end of week, moves up one Tier, whichever is last moves down one Tier. Second place Server stays in the Tier. That seems to be much more intuitive and would create more dynamic matchups each week.
Whichever Server is firstplace at the end of week, moves up one Tier, whichever is last moves down one Tier. Second place Server stays in the Tier. That seems to be much more intuitive and would create more dynamic matchups each week.
This is so sad…
While the glicko rating is not a good system and should be changed / adapted, why is it always a worst system that player are suggesting and why is it always THAT worst system that player are suggesting.
The system you describe is commonly referred as one-up-one-down. It has been discussed to death in over 1000 threads, will create way more problem than what we currently have and will not be implemented.
Please, go back to the drawing board and devise a better system.
1. Our current system is too stale, which means that servers get stuck in the same match up forever because they can’t move up or down.
2. One up, one down is too volatile, which means that you will get a lot of very unbalanced match up because server that shouldn’t move up / down are force to.
If you want to design a good ranking system, you need to aim somewhere between the two.
“Since alternate matchmaking systems require some of the same peoples’ time as the scoring improvements we’re currently working on, Glicko alternatives or adjustments may be options in future polls once the scoring improvement work is done.”
1. Our current system is too stale, which means that servers get stuck in the same match up forever because they can’t move up or down.
2. One up, one down is too volatile, which means that you will get a lot of very unbalanced match up because server that shouldn’t move up / down are force to.
If you want to design a good ranking system, you need to aim somewhere between the two.
Whats better more volatile or staleness? I would argue more volatility is better because it at least provides variety. JQ is being outblobbed in T1 but at least its something different for a week. With proper linking 1 up 1 down should reduce the disparities between the tiers. The issue I guess is that anet is making a complete hash of the linking system.
Jade Quarry [SoX]
Miranda Zero – Ele / Twitch Zero – Mes / Chargrin Soulboom – Engi
Aliera Zero – Guardian / Reaver Zero – Necro
1. Our current system is too stale, which means that servers get stuck in the same match up forever because they can’t move up or down.
2. One up, one down is too volatile, which means that you will get a lot of very unbalanced match up because server that shouldn’t move up / down are force to.
If you want to design a good ranking system, you need to aim somewhere between the two.
That thread is over 3 years old when their were twice as many tiers and a much larger population difference between the tiers.
Players on both of my servers are having a blast this week because the match ups are fresh. Neither server stands a chance of winning the coverage wars but everyone is out their playing and having fun.
Also known as Puck when my account isn’t suspended
LGN
Players wouldnt game such a system at all to make servers go where they want to by transfering on purpose, oh no…
I dont think Glicko should be used to determine matchups but at least it offer some slack and reaction times when it comes to population shifts. One up one down would literally be weekly transfer heaven.
People need to be really quiet about that or Anet will get ideas.
What about one up one down with a random chance that the servers will switch? This way rank swapping could be limited to trigger 25% or 33% of the time. If you want to get creative, the chance could increase dynamically the longer a matchup hasn’t changed.
Players wouldnt game such a system at all to make servers go where they want to by transfering on purpose, oh no…
I dont think Glicko should be used to determine matchups but at least it offer some slack and reaction times when it comes to population shifts. One up one down would literally be weekly transfer heaven.
People need to be really quiet about that or Anet will get ideas.
Players wouldn’t game the system.
Tournaments aren’t a thing anymore, the bigger guilds that influenced stuff like that are just trying to keep things entertaining at this point. Avoiding playing the game for several weeks so your server drops and you can kitten stomp your way back up isn’t entertaining.
Even if someone did decide to do that, each tier would only have to deal with a blown out match for 1 week.
I’ll take the risk of 1 bad week every so often instead of having several months of boring, stale matches.
Also known as Puck when my account isn’t suspended
LGN
Players always try to game the system, especially if it’s simple or easy to do so.
The players that game the system, like the kittenters alliance, do so to break up the stale match ups. Like I said, even if they did game the system it wouldn’t hurt as bad as the current system.
Also known as Puck when my account isn’t suspended
LGN
Players always try to game the system, especially if it’s simple or easy to do so.
The players that game the system, like the kittenters alliance, do so to break up the stale match ups. Like I said, even if they did game the system it wouldn’t hurt as bad as the current system.
Player Driven…yet…Somewhat ANet Controlled
Game Mode is still fixable…imho
ANet is doing the best they can to bake us a Thanksgiving Day Turkey Dinner with the WvW Tofu they’re dealt with.
Yours truly,
Diku
Possible Better Long Term Solution – Google Search – wvg world vs globes
That thread is over 3 years old when their were twice as many tiers and a much larger population difference between the tiers.
Players on both of my servers are having a blast this week because the match ups are fresh. Neither server stands a chance of winning the coverage wars but everyone is out their playing and having fun.
Glicko is quite good in predicting the outcome of matches (except after re-links and massive transfers).
If you want more volatility spread out population more equal, than volatility makes sense and it will happen.
But if you all want to stack on the most overstacked server, than it does not make sense and it will not happen / happen less likely.
Thanks to national servers EU is better balanced and we have the volatility you ask for. But if you would get this now in NA, it would only lead to more frustration, producing even more overstacking.
That thread is over 3 years old when their were twice as many tiers and a much larger population difference between the tiers.
Players on both of my servers are having a blast this week because the match ups are fresh. Neither server stands a chance of winning the coverage wars but everyone is out their playing and having fun.
Glicko is quite good in predicting the outcome of matches (except after re-links and massive transfers).
If you want more volatility spread out population more equal, than volatility makes sense and it will happen.
But if you all want to stack on the most overstacked server, than it does not make sense and it will not happen / happen less likely.
Thanks to national servers EU is better balanced and we have the volatility you ask for. But if you would get this now in NA, it would only lead to more frustration, producing even more overstacking.
You realize the whole point of pairing up servers was to make the population more even right?
In the past couple months between my accounts I’ve played across every tier and the population difference, especially during prime time, isn’t as massive as people make it out to be. When they first linked servers everyone had queues because people weren’t bored of the stale matches. Any server could have fought any other server at that point and had fun. The servers with the best coverage would have won the ppt wars but people could of still enjoyed whatever match up they were in. Once they start using the proposed scoring change even coverage will be less of an issue.
The thing that hurt the new system the most was they never reset the glicko scores when they linked the servers. Every tier was locked, players got bored and transfered to find new fights, the top servers got stacked again because of it. If it had been a winner up/loser down system at that point I bet T4 wouldn’t be the kitten show it is right now.
Also known as Puck when my account isn’t suspended
LGN
Players always try to game the system, especially if it’s simple or easy to do so.
The players that game the system, like the kittenters alliance, do so to break up the stale match ups. Like I said, even if they did game the system it wouldn’t hurt as bad as the current system.
You ignore human nature. There are always people who try to game any system — the easier it is, the more often it’s tried. Look at how many people put Aviator boxes or Bobblehead labs next to NPCs or gathering nodes — they don’t even get a personal advantage and often aren’t even around to see people reacting to their handiwork.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
That thread is over 3 years old when their were twice as many tiers and a much larger population difference between the tiers.
Players on both of my servers are having a blast this week because the match ups are fresh. Neither server stands a chance of winning the coverage wars but everyone is out their playing and having fun.
Probably a good time to remove servers from the equation then and just let everyone have at it. Remove server, focus on players, what they do, and how they do it.
Just need a portal (real one) that list such achievements, victories, losses, deaths, and other things unique to players and classes. Much like a game had back in 2001… /boggle
But yes, there is some fun although there is only so much one can actually take when everything is uneven by orders of magnitude.
Main – Laaz Rocket – Guardian (Ehmry Bay)
Johnny Johnny – Ranger (Ehmry Bay)
Hárvey Wallbanger – Alt Warrior (Ehmry Bay)
Majority of the people won’t be transferring weekly, don’t worry about that. It’s a big deal for guilds to move, it’s quite expensive and they often lose a few players in the process.
Glicko has been proven it can be manipulated and gamed. Especially now that Anet is manually adjusting values for some servers. It’s time for the system to go. The one up, one down method will keep things more interesting. Staleness is what kills the game-mode, not just in WvW, but all game-modes. It can’t be worse than the current glicko system, therefore it should at least be given a chance.
Everybody knows ratings mean nothing these days. Any sort of ranking or ratings system are only valid up until player manipulated the system. That was already done, multiple times I might add. Time for glicko to go, and time for Anet to merge servers.
The problem of winner up looser down is that it is very stale if the ranking is correct:
1 week: 1-2-3 & 4-5-6 & 7-8-9
2 week: 1-2-4 & 3-5-7 & 6-8-9
3 week like 1st
4 week like 2nd
and so on.
Other problems are:
3 never plays against 4, (6 never against 7) they always only switch places.
whenever the 7th is in T2, the 3rd is in T2 as well, which give a very bad match
Except we see 2nd and 3rd place changing pretty often in each tier so it won’t work like that. Plus if players really want to move up they will push harder for the win since they know winning actually means moving up a tier and not just shaving 10 glicko points off the 200+ glicko wall.
Also known as Puck when my account isn’t suspended
LGN
The problem of winner up looser down is that it is very stale if the ranking is correct:
1 week: 1-2-3 & 4-5-6 & 7-8-9
2 week: 1-2-4 & 3-5-7 & 6-8-9
3 week like 1st
4 week like 2nd
and so on.
Other problems are:
3 never plays against 4, (6 never against 7) they always only switch places.
whenever the 7th is in T2, the 3rd is in T2 as well, which give a very bad match
Except we see 2nd and 3rd place changing pretty often in each tier so it won’t work like that. Plus if players really want to move up they will push harder for the win since they know winning actually means moving up a tier and not just shaving 10 glicko points off the 200+ glicko wall.
The glicko wall is real, and is not only affected by how well one server does against the other two in its tier, but how well the other 2 servers in the tier above do against a higher tier server moving down. In effect, T1 through T3 can (and did) pull themselves upwards if they experience a lot of up and down movement and leave a huge gap between T3 and T4. If we keep glicko, it has to be reset with each new pairing so that the incremental gaps left over from past pairings don’t spiral out of control over time.
The problem with NA-T4 is that the main server it is populated with are in reality T5 server (rank 13-15) and not the T4 server (rank 10-12). https://leaderboards.guildwars2.com/de/na/wvw
This produced an impassable border, not glicko itself.
The problem of winner up looser down is that it is very stale if the ranking is correct:
1 week: 1-2-3 & 4-5-6 & 7-8-9
2 week: 1-2-4 & 3-5-7 & 6-8-9
3 week like 1st
4 week like 2nd
and so on.
Other problems are:
3 never plays against 4, (6 never against 7) they always only switch places.
whenever the 7th is in T2, the 3rd is in T2 as well, which give a very bad match
Except we see 2nd and 3rd place changing pretty often in each tier so it won’t work like that. Plus if players really want to move up they will push harder for the win since they know winning actually means moving up a tier and not just shaving 10 glicko points off the 200+ glicko wall.
The glicko wall is real, and is not only affected by how well one server does against the other two in its tier, but how well the other 2 servers in the tier above do against a higher tier server moving down. In effect, T1 through T3 can (and did) pull themselves upwards if they experience a lot of up and down movement and leave a huge gap between T3 and T4. If we keep glicko, it has to be reset with each new pairing so that the incremental gaps left over from past pairings don’t spiral out of control over time.
Not only that, glicko actually encourages servers to attack the weakest server in their tier to prevent them from draining points.
Also known as Puck when my account isn’t suspended
LGN
Not only that, glicko actually encourages servers to attack the weakest server in their tier to prevent them from draining points.
Depends entirely on the commander. Most of the time, people focus on claiming our map (home BL) or claiming our third (EB) and only worry about “attacking the weakest server” if there’s nothing much else to do. A few commanders focus on PPT. The ones who worry the most about “weakest” or “strongest” usually try to figure out how to encourage the other two servers to fight each other, so we can clean up behind them.
tl;dr it depends on the commander (and the tier), more so than if there’s a glicko-weak server on the map.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
The problem with NA-T4 is that the main server it is populated with are in reality T5 server (rank 13-15) and not the T4 server (rank 10-12). https://leaderboards.guildwars2.com/de/na/wvw
This produced an impassable border, not glicko itself.
Because Anet wasn’t smart enough to see this when they choose to use the ratings of the host servers amirite? Honestly, we been asking for glicko reset for quite a while now and I think they should bring that to pool asap.
The problem with NA-T4 is that the main server it is populated with are in reality T5 server (rank 13-15) and not the T4 server (rank 10-12). https://leaderboards.guildwars2.com/de/na/wvw
This produced an impassable border, not glicko itself.
Which could have been mitigated with better server pairings, such as not combining any T1 or T2 server and having the other 18 make up the other 6 teams. Giving CD 3 other servers created a solid T3 server against 2 T5 servers.
