Guild Wars 2

Since the thread isn’t open for discussion, had to make a new thread, it was recently updated by Gaile with some examples of what not to talk about.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Reopen-and-Glicko-Adjustment-Requests-Updated/first#post6523980

Gaile

Some months ago, we asked forum members to not create or engage in threads requesting the reopening of a server or the adjustment of Glicko ratings for a specific server. We explained why at the time, but a little more information and an expansion of our request seems in order at this time.

Server Reopening Requests: Worlds reopen most often due to the natural ebb and flow of players, which impacts the number of play hours on a given world. If a world reopens, it is usually because players or guilds changed worlds, players have stopped playing on that world, or, rarely, because we made an overall adjustment to world capacity. We do not reopen servers upon request and ask that you not post such appeals.

Thread about Worlds: While we appreciate “world pride,” quite a few threads about game worlds become unnecessarily contentious and negative, and we need to close those. Sometimes the mods use the term “matchup thread” when taking action. Yet you should know it’s not the matchup that’s the problem, it’s the unpleasant comments or tone. I’ll work with the moderators to help them make closures, warnings, and infractions clearer.

• An example of such a thread is here. As you can see, the thread included several insults. If you want to bash a world or a player, do it in the game!

Glicko Resets: The devs don’t reset a Glicko rating upon request, and resets are not based on perceptions or opinions but on factual data derived from the game info itself. We’ve seen understandable confusion when a reset takes place shortly after someone posts a request thread, or when a reset did not happen even though someone requested it. In order to avoid that kind of confusion, we ask that players not submit Glicko reset requests.

• Here’s an example of such a thread. Again, the thread became unpleasant and the initial request wasn’t in line for action, anyway.

Arguing World Links: The devs make world linking decisions after on a neutral review of data, using algorithms, and based on their best judgment. If you want to discuss your opinions about specific world linkings, you’re welcome to do so. If you have questions, my best advice is to pose your questions in a conversational (not combative) way, because sometimes a dev will be able to provide some information, such as here. However, as a general rule, ArenaNet employees simply do not have the time that would be required to answer individual questions or debate a world linking topic. They do read the forums, however, and will review your constructive feedback on the subject.

I hope these additional details and explanations will help everyone understand our desire for communication coupled with our need to set realistic standards for discussions and forum topics.

Might want to edit the underlined part, as you basically just gave players permission to insult both servers and players in game. It happens already, but I’m sure anet doesn’t want to openly promote that kind of behavior.

I am sort of interested to see what is done with a T1 server that has fallen all the way to high pop. That pop has to be lower than some guests now….

Since I am in T3 it doesn’t really affect me, I only care to see if someone is paying attention….

I am only sad because I am on a full server and my friend just got the game being interested in the WvW and he cant join me :/ So we are waiting to see if it will ever open lol

I was also surprised by the underlined part lol

I would guess that the term ‘bash’ meant to kill them and take their bag. That is promoted by anet. Calling people names – not so much.

Sort of backassward of the real world, but how our digital game works out.

Considering the preceding statement was about throwing insults around in threads, I would still suggest to get rid of that sentence since “bash” can be taken either way, or reword it like “if you want to get even with someone then do it in pvp”.

They need to stop this 5:4:3 point system. No one thinks it brings any positives to the game to begin with. Now it is obvious it just doesn’t work well with glicko to reflect the true strength of a server

Liston.9708:

I am sort of interested to see what is done with a T1 server that has fallen all the way to high pop. That pop has to be lower than some guests now….

Since I am in T3 it doesn’t really affect me, I only care to see if someone is paying attention….

#t1forever

Exciton.8942:

They need to stop this 5:4:3 point system. No one thinks it brings any positives to the game to begin with. Now it is obvious it just doesn’t work well with glicko to reflect the true strength of a server

I pleaded with them not to, but they had some fuzzy logic. The results are not exactly surprising.

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

Why 5,4,3?
Both 5,4,3 and 3,2,1 were suggestions from the Official Feedback Thread: WvW Skirmishes (https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Official-Feedback-Thread-WvW-Skirmishes/page/2). And we have seen general interest in trying 5,4,3. If there is a different set of numbers you would like to try instead, feel free to suggest them.

How is 5,4,3 different than 3,2,1?
Since there has been a lot of debate on this, with most people being right but debating different points, there are three things that are true:

1. The scores will be closer.
2. The placements won’t change.
3. This could impact world rating used for glicko matchmaking.

This is assuming play style remains identical to how it was when 3,2,1 was in play. Player behavior may change since the scores will be closer, but we aren’t sure if they will. This was the same situation with 2,1,1. We weren’t sure if it would change WvW play style, but players seemed generally interested in giving it a shot and one of the reasons WvW is a 3 team gamemode, rather than a 2 team gamemode, is so that worlds could team up and try to take down the dominate world. This isn’t something we incentivized very much before 2,1,1 but having 2v1s in WvW was intended behavior and when it works correctly can lead to more balanced matches.

Will 5,4,3 be there forever?
As stated with the patch notes with 2,1,1 and stays true for 5,4,3: “If we aren’t happy with the results we can change the Skirmish score values again.” If we get feedback that players don’t like 5,4,3 and want to go back to 3,2,1 we can do that. If we get feedback that players want to try some different numbers that we haven’t tried before, we can do that. Changing the numbers is easy for the team, but do keep in mind that it requires a game build, and that schedule is determined by the studio as a whole.

Do we expect 5,4,3 to be a cure-all for scoring problems?
No. 5,4,3 will not make match scores dramatically better than 3,2,1. The scores might look closer, but if a world is dominating 5,4,3 isn’t going to stop them from winning. Population imbalance is the biggest factor in scoring problems and changing the skirmish score values isn’t going to change that. Population imbalance is a different problem that we are working on solving outside of changing the skirmish score values.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Please-don-t-change-scoring-to-5-4-3

Aerwyna.2541:

I am only sad because I am on a full server and my friend just got the game being interested in the WvW and he cant join me :/ So we are waiting to see if it will ever open lol

I was also surprised by the underlined part lol

Why don’t you move to another server? I moved to Kaineng for exactly this reason.

Xenesis.6389:

Might want to edit the underlined part, as you basically just gave players permission to insult both servers and players in game. It happens already, but I’m sure anet doesn’t want to openly promote that kind of behavior.

It is unfortunate but is hard truth, all multiplayer games that involve at least 2 different team of players, there will be trash talking. Most importantly, this isn’t professional league game where everyone are mature players. I believe the main issue is that by posting it in forums or whatever platforms, it stays there permanently unless deleted so people can come across those, be it that the contents are untruth, baseless accusations, exaggerated or whatever. Whoever are ill informed will believe in this information and there will be consequences for that. Then, if you fill up the forums with those nonsense, the forums will no longer be productive.