Guild Wars 2

After a few months, tiers have leveled out and become stagnant, playing the same two servers for weeks.

I know they are about to reset everyone back to zero, but in a few months it will level out again.

::: EDIT ::: (adding new mechanic and clarifying idea)

I’ll use the US servers as an example.

Divide the servers up into two division of 12 servers each.

Division one: servers 1-12

Division two: servers 13-24

Each division has 24 weeks, where each server plays each other twice. Your season score determines your Tier position for the playoffs. Playoffs last two weeks. Play off results determine your prize (some loot, maybe a unique title for the winning server until the next playoffs). Your season total determines if you move up or down a division for the next season.

EU servers would have 3 divisions with 9 servers in each.

This would let you play more servers and would not put current tier 1 servers against bottom tier servers.

So many of the match ups would be ridiculously unbalanced it wouldn’t be very fun for many people. Look what’s been happening to people now in tiers where someone like Kane is moving up. It would only be worse if you started putting random people against SoS and the like. Sounds like a nightmare.

Its a great Idea, I really like it, however I gotta go with Dokyo on this one. Just wouldn’t be fun for many of us in the lower tiers trying to fight Tier 1-3 servers.

But as I said, kudo’s on the idea.

I thought about that but…

Anet has already added mechanics to help out servers that are getting smashed (out manned and break out events) and we know they are working on more mechanics. It wouldn’t surprise me if they add more to help out losing servers even more, which might help take the edge off.

Staying in the same tier makes the better servers stronger, and the weaker ones weaker. Randomizing it might actually help level the playing field slightly. Big servers playing a small server would be able to ‘take the week off’ sort of, etc etc. Many more benefits too.

People on a losing server end up giving up after a few weeks of playing the same teams, but if they know that next week they’ll be playing someone new, they could have renewed hopes and be ready to go at it again.

There is a guild on SoS that has +1500 members who wvw…one guild. Do the math on your servers wvw #’s.

The theory is great behind the idea, but in practice it just ends up with lower pop servers in wvw getting overwhelmed and higher pop servers playing other games in short order.

I actually quite like fighting the same servers week after week. It builds up camaraderie and rivalry with the other guilds and servers you’re playing and you learn a lot of new tricks. A single match-up is not really a long enough time to do this.

I agree the tier system is a bit boring though.

Would have worked before the mass server transfers and population imbalances. Now its too late.

The worst NHL teams (e.g. New York Islanders) would still win some games here and there because it is still 5v5 most of the time. However GW2 WvW now is like 3 on 5 the whole hockey game. The weaker team has no chance of winning. Not to mention the scores gets carry forward to next game.

Mance.5640:

There is a guild on SoS that has +1500 members who wvw…one guild. Do the math on your servers wvw #’s.

Lol, and which guild would this be?

I just added an ::: EDIT ::: to the main post in response to T1 slaughtering lower Tiers.

Straegen.2938:

IMO they should create maps that allow two lessor ranked servers to essentially gang up on higher ranked servers. This would allow a couple T4/T5 servers to play against a T1 server. I think having 4 maps playing the same opponents each week is a wasted opportunity.

I was thinking that if two servers cumulatively own less than 10% of the map then they should become ‘allied’ and immune to each others damage until they owned 30% or more of the map. Or something like that.

Welp, tiers are leveling out and getting stagnant again. Thought I’d bump this brilliant idea. Coincidently it would also deter spies as you’d be up against a different server each week. I also really want to play off against the rest of the community, not just the same two for infinity.

Given the choice between (relatively) close matchups and new matchups, I’ll take close ones.

Kintari.4172:

Given the choice between (relatively) close matchups and new matchups, I’ll take close ones.

It’s okay to disagree. But repeating the same exact thing every week hoping for a different outcome is the definition of insanity ;D

You’re implying that there would be zero close matches in a round robin style. There wouldn’t be as many, but I bet it would happen more often than you think. it would be interesting to see how servers mount up against each other. Different dynamics match up differently against each other. Also, having close matches every week is burning out the wvw base. It would be nice to have an ‘off’ week when playing easier servers.

It’s okay to disagree. But repeating the same exact thing every week hoping for a different outcome is the definition of insanity ;D

Then I suggest your server do something different. Also, thanks for giving me permission to disagree.

You’re implying that there would be zero close matches in a round robin style. There wouldn’t be as many, but I bet it would happen more often than you think. it would be interesting to see how servers mount up against each other. Different dynamics match up differently against each other. Also, having close matches every week is burning out the wvw base. It would be nice to have an ‘off’ week when playing easier servers.

I’m not implying anything, I’m saying it would be worse under your scheme than the current scheme, which seems pretty obvious with the data we have.