I think the best way to fix wvw to make it fair would be to rollout actual wvw and not wvwvw 1 on1 true rankings no interference. If anet wants more than 2 worlds in wvw then goto a team system #1 & #3 vs #2 & #4 or #1  vs #2 & #3 etc. 2 vs 2 and you can’t attack your team mate. Not as accurate rankings but noone can say they were double teamed. One last thing to expand on my idea. If 1 and 3 are dominating 2 and 4 then anet can adjust the matchups to #1  vs #2 & #3 or even expand further like #1 & #6 vs #2 & #5. This would make for a better matchup balance where if #1 is far greater than #2 then It could be expanded to something like #1 & #7 vs #2 & #3. Whatever matchup that would yield as close as possible to a 50/50 split of the map and the most competitive matchup.
It’s just so stupid to whine about imbalanced matchups nowdays when we DO have random roll affecting server points. This new system isn’t about the same level servers facing each other, we had that system for ages and is just sucked. Now we finally have some variety and all the children are whining about losing? Grow some balls, new system is all about sometimes getting your kitten kicked, sometimes walking over others and sometimes even matches. You all wanted this a month back and now there’s crybabies all over the place
Make winning officially about improving server rank. Update the UI to reflect this, and the problems solve themselves. Undermanned servers now have reasonable goals to attain.
Even servers like vabbi can gain rating. In their case if they just karma train camps all day they will gain rating.
I think the best way to fix wvw to make it fair would be to rollout actual wvw and not wvwvw 1 on1 true rankings no interference. If anet wants more than 2 worlds in wvw then goto a team system #1 & #3 vs #2 & #4 or #1  vs #2 & #3 etc. 2 vs 2 and you can’t attack your team mate. Not as accurate rankings but noone can say they were double teamed. One last thing to expand on my idea. If 1 and 3 are dominating 2 and 4 then anet can adjust the matchups to #1  vs #2 & #3 or even expand further like #1 & #6 vs #2 & #5. This would make for a better matchup balance where if #1 is far greater than #2 then It could be expanded to something like #1 & #7 vs #2 & #3. Whatever matchup that would yield as close as possible to a 50/50 split of the map and the most competetive matchup.
2 v 2 is bad. Very bad. It is actually worse than a 1v1 matchup. The most balanced scenarios with built in gangup options follow these rules:
1) there are an even number of opponents
2) there are more than 2 opponents
The first time that happens is 4. An FFA with 4 participants is the minimum for a fair system where you can have unbalanced factions and have the gameplay rebalance itself. Were stuck with 3 faction systems because DAOC.
Just gaining rating even tho you’re not accomplishing anything on the map is not fun. If I wanted to just play a numbers game I’d break out the board games and turn off the computer. I want to win a battle, kill things, and gain territory to go up in rank. Sitting at your spawn point being murdered because you’re outmanned 100v1 is not fun…even if you are gaining rank while you do it. That’s not a real testament to skill.
“We are the Sisters Mary. You are now safe”
Sister Mary Madness- Mesmer [VLK]
Tianu Light Feather- Ranger/HoD since beta
The concept of tiers has little meaning at this point and you should try to stop thinking of matchups in those terms. Servers are matched up by proximity of rating, not proximity of “tier”. If the tiers have ratings that are within the range of the random adjustment, they can end up fighting each other. This is going to result in blowouts, no doubt about it. However, we are not going to make changes to this after just 2 weeks of the system. There are things we can do. We will almost certainly end up adjusting the total added to each server rating to group the matchups a little more closely. First however, we need to let the ratings adjust by having more varied matchups like these. If you look at EU, which is using the exact same system, you can see matchups with numerous surprising results. The same will likely be true by the end of the NA matchup.
TL;DR: We are going to wait at least a couple more weeks before changing any of the math behind the new system, but it is very likely we’ll decrease the size of the variation at some point.
You and the rest of the anet WvW staff are banned from making anymore WvW tiering decisions until you finish watch this video to help you with your numbers. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxAIBFsRpqU
The concept of tiers has little meaning at this point and you should try to stop thinking of matchups in those terms. Servers are matched up by proximity of rating, not proximity of “tier”. If the tiers have ratings that are within the range of the random adjustment, they can end up fighting each other. This is going to result in blowouts, no doubt about it. However, we are not going to make changes to this after just 2 weeks of the system. There are things we can do. We will almost certainly end up adjusting the total added to each server rating to group the matchups a little more closely. First however, we need to let the ratings adjust by having more varied matchups like these. If you look at EU, which is using the exact same system, you can see matchups with numerous surprising results. The same will likely be true by the end of the NA matchup.
TL;DR: We are going to wait at least a couple more weeks before changing any of the math behind the new system, but it is very likely we’ll decrease the size of the variation at some point.
I’ve pointed it out several times that all of this griping would not happen if the random number range is between -0.5 and 0.5. Devs keep saying they’ll wait a few more weeks to change the math, but matches are bad NOW, servers are getting farmed NOW. For the servers that keep getting bad matches, being told “well we’ll wait a few more weeks to change it” will only make them stop playing for those few weeks, kill morale and hurt the WvW in the long run. The fix is so easy to make, and the math shows that the rank-difference in the matches will be much much better.
Is there any reason why it cant’ be change now until it stabilizes, giving better matches now, instead of people hoping for the “future” time when it’ll get changed or they’ll eventually get better matches?
TC Golden Dolyak – [DOLY]
Mesmer – FURY
Rank 55 – Bunker Engi, Top 300
I would love to get a official answer about what they think of these terrible match ups. Of they are going to do something about it or even if they are aware this is a issue.
“World vs. World is a lot about tactics, and when you fight the same worlds with the same tactics you never really get to learn anything new and adapt your strategy. This is your chance for your world to rally together, recruit more people, and try to overthrow a server above you. Like most of you, we love a good underdog story and now you’ll be able to write your own in WvW. At the end of the day, this is going to create new fresh matchups, let you see the tactics from different teams, bring some variety to the Eternal Battlegrounds, and help us to establish a more accurate new World vs. World order.”
With that said, I LOVE what they’re doing, and I hope the complainers don’t make them abandon this experiment so soon. I DO NOT want to go back to the way it was before. It was just awful!!
That is not a official answer to everyone asking if they are aware of the horrible match-ups. I also did NOT write anything about the RNG being a bad idea. It is a fairly good idea. BUT you can’t expect to stick a Rank 15 server with a rank 20 and 21 servers and expect anything other than what is happening now. It is no fun for ANY of the servers involved. They need to narrow their margin a bit on the RNG or something. Make it more fair and fun for all involved.
PS Still looking for that “Offical Answer” Thanx
Ceithlenn – Necromancer
Hell’s Disciples [HD] – Commander
Henge Of Denravi since beta
The biggest problem, and it is fairly obvious after two weeks is that the differences in populations between some of the tiers is too great for these matches to ever work out in any way except blowouts. This is ANets fault for creating the tier rankings in the beginning. Everyone began lumping up in the higher tiers as they assumed a higher ranked server meant more skill and higher notoriety. What we have now is tier 1’s being massively larger than tier 2, and tier 2 being massively larger than tier 3.
Even if you tone down the RNG, it won’t help much because dropping even one tier is too much with the server imbalances.
I like this new system if only for it de-emphisizing the importance of “tiers” and eventually even the weekly scores. This hopefully will move the mindset of WvWers more towards competitive and fun gameplay. Where before, you had people abusing unfun tactics like server blobing and mass transferring just to ensure their little point score at the end of the week was higher.
Dont get me wrong the over arcing competition of server vs server should still be a motivating factor but I dont think it was ever meant to be the ONLY factor. If you play to win and compete for the time you are literally in game, youll enjoy it much more.
I think the best way to fix wvw to make it fair would be to rollout actual wvw and not wvwvw 1 on1 true rankings no interference. If anet wants more than 2 worlds in wvw then goto a team system #1 & #3 vs #2 & #4 or #1  vs #2 & #3 etc. 2 vs 2 and you can’t attack your team mate. Not as accurate rankings but noone can say they were double teamed. One last thing to expand on my idea. If 1 and 3 are dominating 2 and 4 then anet can adjust the matchups to #1  vs #2 & #3 or even expand further like #1 & #6 vs #2 & #5. This would make for a better matchup balance where if #1 is far greater than #2 then It could be expanded to something like #1 & #7 vs #2 & #3. Whatever matchup that would yield as close as possible to a 50/50 split of the map and the most competetive matchup.
2 v 2 is bad. Very bad. It is actually worse than a 1v1 matchup. The most balanced scenarios with built in gangup options follow these rules:
1) there are an even number of opponents
2) there are more than 2 opponents
The first time that happens is 4. An FFA with 4 participants is the minimum for a fair system where you can have unbalanced factions and have the gameplay rebalance itself. Were stuck with 3 faction systems because DAOC.
If you read what I said tho, there would be no way to be any gang up tactics. If the 1st ranked and 3rd ranked worlds were a team they would share towers etc. and could not attack each other they would be there for competetive balance if the first ranked server had 2x the people as the second for instance it would be #1  against #2 . So the dominant server would carry a weaker team mate for competions sake. It’s not a perfect system but 3 worlds wasn’t working up to this point either so 1vs 1 it is lol.
The concept of tiers has little meaning at this point and you should try to stop thinking of matchups in those terms. Servers are matched up by proximity of rating, not proximity of “tier”. If the tiers have ratings that are within the range of the random adjustment, they can end up fighting each other. This is going to result in blowouts, no doubt about it. However, we are not going to make changes to this after just 2 weeks of the system. There are things we can do. We will almost certainly end up adjusting the total added to each server rating to group the matchups a little more closely. First however, we need to let the ratings adjust by having more varied matchups like these. If you look at EU, which is using the exact same system, you can see matchups with numerous surprising results. The same will likely be true by the end of the NA matchup.
TL;DR: We are going to wait at least a couple more weeks before changing any of the math behind the new system, but it is very likely we’ll decrease the size of the variation at some point.
Congrats on further alienating your player base. You’re in over your head. The answer isn’t to keep going full steam ahead.
The concept of tiers has little meaning at this point and you should try to stop thinking of matchups in those terms. Servers are matched up by proximity of rating, not proximity of “tier”. If the tiers have ratings that are within the range of the random adjustment, they can end up fighting each other. This is going to result in blowouts, no doubt about it. However, we are not going to make changes to this after just 2 weeks of the system. There are things we can do. We will almost certainly end up adjusting the total added to each server rating to group the matchups a little more closely. First however, we need to let the ratings adjust by having more varied matchups like these. If you look at EU, which is using the exact same system, you can see matchups with numerous surprising results. The same will likely be true by the end of the NA matchup.
TL;DR: We are going to wait at least a couple more weeks before changing any of the math behind the new system, but it is very likely we’ll decrease the size of the variation at some point.
The problem is, the ratings system itself is misapplied. We aren’t talking about individual chess players, or (mostly) static baseball team rosters. We are talking about highly variable populations which very rarely accurately display their true skill level due to numerous factors.
The main two factors I see preventing this math from accurately rating server skill are:
-“fairweather” syndrome, more people show up for the loot/exp/etc duing an easy win, creating a snowball effect, and it’s polar opposite (foulweather effect?) as player simply choose not to participate in an obvious blowout match
-guild transfers creating major shifts in population/coverage (this is somewhat relieved by the random factor currently implemented, but it has had the effect of exacerbating the previous problem I listed with the fair/foul-weather effects)
The math assumes everyone is showing up and playing their best on all sides all the time. Therein lies the flaw. That assumption is erroneous and thus the entire construct of the ratings system is built on a shaky foundation at best.
Hats off to all the ones who stood before me, and taught a fool to ride.
Patience, guys… patience! Go in there and do the best you can. For now, let the new system have its time in the sun to hopefully give us more accurate data. Oh, and try to enjoy it and learn from the worlds that you’re matched up against, especially when you’re the underdog.
Playing against the bigger kids can make you better! Crystal Desert is definitely making the most of this new system. Hats off to CD!! And hang tough, DB… hang tough!
Good luck to all!
Moonlight Wish – GoM
at a certain point you are outnumbered so bad, that you don’t play better, but actually play a lot worse!
There is no strategy involved in losing your keep, meeting a zerg every corner, never having the numbers to make any difference.
This whole argument of ‘becoming better ’ and ’strategy’ is worth nothing untill the number differences determine everything in WvW.
Our own little server faces incredibly bigger groups right now, and people don’t fight better… they simply can’t fight at all.
Wiggely, wobbely and other wombaty wabbity creatures…
the match up with FC GOM and ET is really bad right now FC and ET cant compete with GOM’s high population, FC could compete with IoJ or DR and IoJ were some what equals allowing FC some breathing room but with the 2 lowest population servers vs. what used to be a high tier 7 server, we are overwhelmed.
out of the 8 matches this week only ONE is a good match and surprisingly it is number 9 v10 v 11 shocker huh.
We went from the top 9 having closely contested matchups in teirs 1 through 3 each week to a boring lopsided matchups where no one is enjoying it (the people getting smacked don’t wanna play because it is not fun to play when you have 0 chance at winning, and the people who are winning are not being given a decent fight which is also not fun)
Durring NA all server population is very high if not full so are able to field the same amount, sure some servers have higher wvw pops. The thing is its just for fun some weeks you will smash people and some weeks get smashed it is just the way it is. If your server is getting smashed well do some yaking and if your smashing guard your yaks lol. You could always try recruiting you would be shocked how much a lil effort can make. gl everyone and gods speed
I see good ideas every day …good in theory. – Shawn Farthing
Masters in Geek Mythology
YOU ARE NOT THE INVENTOR OF WORDS!!! lol
what about the tier 7 and 8 folks being matched up against folks with 24 hour coverage… were getting crushed and you tell us to wait a few weeks… this was a very poorly thought out decision..
After 4 fricking months of falling DR finally has a couple hotly contested fights and now were getting face rolled by pure zerg servers and off hours servers, how the heck is that fun for us…
and I mean zerg servers in they think a pack of 10+ is solo roaming or small man.
Typical anet response. Change something drastically with zero testing based purely on the perceived inadaquacies of the original system. The old system is borked, the new system is worse, then we all settle for the third system in 4 weeks that’s pretty crappy too.
Guess what, I don’t know what the answer is, but I do know the guy in charge has zero kittening clue and is tossing darts into a dartboard. Ironically, the best answer is for us all to just quit because at least tht will 100 pct fix wvw as it stands now.
Guess what, I don’t know what the answer is, but I do know the guy in charge has zero kittening clue and is tossing darts into a dartboard. Ironically, the best answer is for us all to just quit because at least tht will 100 pct fix wvw as it stands now.
Indeed, I too don’t know the answer but i and many others are NOT going to put up with this kitten much longer, This game is in a terrible state and Anet knows it.
One option is to merge bottom tier servers in WvW only. Otherwise if you are on the bottom 3-4 you will keep getting camped at your spawn in EB all day. They even have siege up,lol.
One kitten in my guild was saying he doesn’t want server mergers because he doesn’t want to play along strangers in WvW. Same guy who is petitioning to have the dulfy site blocked.
I’m just amazed at some people sometimes. Anet should hire him!
The concept of tiers has little meaning at this point and you should try to stop thinking of matchups in those terms. Servers are matched up by proximity of rating, not proximity of “tier”.
Nice spin, tiers are nothing but a grouping of ratings by proximity, a way of identifying what a match-up would have been via the old system. Why should players not be using it as a comparison between the old and new systems?
What I think ANET fails to realize is that blow outs cause people to leave the game. The matches are frustrating for those being camped, its boring for those on the winning end, its really only enjoyable for those on the losing servers that enjoy target rich environments.
A full week of a boring or frustrating match means people stop logging in, they go do something else and every time that occurs some of those folks just do not bother coming back. Eventually a guild will lose critical mass resulting in a bunch of other folks quitting.
I fail to see why the rating differences between matches cannot start a lot tighter and be expanded as needed, rather then the stupidity we are seeing now.
that’s why niim anet needs to move the goalposts from overall server points in a match to the rating system entirely.
If all that matters now in matchmaking is your server rating than servers should be playing for rating over overall points. Previously you had to win your tier over and over again to move up, now you just have to siphon points away from other servers by doing better than anticipated.
Move the goalposts anet in the UI to emphasize server rating.
The concept of tiers has little meaning at this point and you should try to stop thinking of matchups in those terms. Servers are matched up by proximity of rating, not proximity of “tier”. If the tiers have ratings that are within the range of the random adjustment, they can end up fighting each other. This is going to result in blowouts, no doubt about it. However, we are not going to make changes to this after just 2 weeks of the system. There are things we can do. We will almost certainly end up adjusting the total added to each server rating to group the matchups a little more closely. First however, we need to let the ratings adjust by having more varied matchups like these. If you look at EU, which is using the exact same system, you can see matchups with numerous surprising results. The same will likely be true by the end of the NA matchup.
TL;DR: We are going to wait at least a couple more weeks before changing any of the math behind the new system, but it is very likely we’ll decrease the size of the variation at some point.
I rly don’t get this stupid idea of Random thing. For me this is anet thinking okey guy we need another way to wvw. I rly hope ESO to be a good game cos right now GW2 for me is the way to kill time till ESO come out. So maybe I can stay in a game for a longer period, I lose all hope in Anet.
We play this out for a few weeks so, in the long run, we have a better game overall.
I remember when I was a kid I had to wait an entire year for my birthday. You kids these days expect your birthday to roll around every two weeks. Some things just take some time.
We play this out for a few weeks so, in the long run, we have a better game overall.
I remember when I was a kid I had to wait an entire year for my birthday. You kids these days expect your birthday to roll around every two weeks. Some things just take some time.
The issue is that for some servers, having week after week of having total blow outs for matches will make them leave. Your analogy and statement doesn’t fit here at all…. The problem is that while anet “waits” servers are having weeks of blow outs. If their “Several” more weeks is 3-4 weeks, then some servers, many in fact, will have over a MONTH of blow out matches. People who play WvW won’t want to log in every day to get farmed because the other server in the match up has many times their numbers 24/7.
TC Golden Dolyak – [DOLY]
Mesmer – FURY
Rank 55 – Bunker Engi, Top 300
The concept of tiers has little meaning at this point and you should try to stop thinking of matchups in those terms. Servers are matched up by proximity of rating, not proximity of “tier”. If the tiers have ratings that are within the range of the random adjustment, they can end up fighting each other. This is going to result in blowouts, no doubt about it. However, we are not going to make changes to this after just 2 weeks of the system. There are things we can do. We will almost certainly end up adjusting the total added to each server rating to group the matchups a little more closely. First however, we need to let the ratings adjust by having more varied matchups like these. If you look at EU, which is using the exact same system, you can see matchups with numerous surprising results. The same will likely be true by the end of the NA matchup.
TL;DR: We are going to wait at least a couple more weeks before changing any of the math behind the new system, but it is very likely we’ll decrease the size of the variation at some point.
You were told this was going to happen well before you implemented it, you even had 1 poster provide the math to prove it. You can undoubtedly run better analysis of the scenarios than the players can, yet you still went ahead and implemented it with a random factor range that was too wide. This situation is just ridiculous and shows how poorly the game is being supported I’m afraid.
Jade Quarry [SoX]
Miranda Zero – Ele / Twitch Zero – Mes / Chargrin Soulboom – Engi
Aliera Zero – Guardian / Reaver Zero – Necro
The concept of tiers has little meaning at this point and you should try to stop thinking of matchups in those terms. Servers are matched up by proximity of rating, not proximity of “tier”. If the tiers have ratings that are within the range of the random adjustment, they can end up fighting each other. This is going to result in blowouts, no doubt about it. However, we are not going to make changes to this after just 2 weeks of the system. There are things we can do. We will almost certainly end up adjusting the total added to each server rating to group the matchups a little more closely. First however, we need to let the ratings adjust by having more varied matchups like these. If you look at EU, which is using the exact same system, you can see matchups with numerous surprising results. The same will likely be true by the end of the NA matchup.
TL;DR: We are going to wait at least a couple more weeks before changing any of the math behind the new system, but it is very likely we’ll decrease the size of the variation at some point.
You were told this was going to happen well before you implemented it, you even had 1 poster provide the math to prove it. You can undoubtedly run better analysis of the scenarios than the players can, yet you still went ahead and implemented it with a random factor range that was too wide. This situation is just ridiculous and shows how poorly the game is being supported I’m afraid.
^——- I luld This new system is terrible……. terribly great <3 it
Bender the offender – Proud violator of 17 safe spaces –
We play this out for a few weeks so, in the long run, we have a better game overall.
I remember when I was a kid I had to wait an entire year for my birthday. You kids these days expect your birthday to roll around every two weeks. Some things just take some time.
The issue is that for some servers, having week after week of having total blow outs for matches will make them leave. Your analogy and statement doesn’t fit here at all…. The problem is that while anet “waits” servers are having weeks of blow outs. If their “Several” more weeks is 3-4 weeks, then some servers, many in fact, will have over a MONTH of blow out matches. People who play WvW won’t want to log in every day to get farmed because the other server in the match up has many times their numbers 24/7.
Pretty much this.. On SoS we were very exciting to be FINALLY playing in T3, except what happens? We get thrown in WAY over our head with the #3 and #4 server, and then #1 and #4… just to get completely and absolutely demolished because we are now fighting against 5 months of Recruiting Wars..
Gaining this rating JUST because of a random roll DOES NOT reflect the server in any aspect and won’t over the long run. What happens when SoS KEEPS getting high rolls and KEEPS gaining rating? Are we going to be stuck with a 1800 rating with the same number of people we had at 1600?
If SoS gets stuck with another match-up like this, we should just boycott so we don’t gain rating points.
NSP>ET>SoS>BG>ET>SoS>JQ>SoS>Mag>JQ
My fun laughs at your server pride.
The concept of tiers has little meaning at this point and you should try to stop thinking of matchups in those terms. Servers are matched up by proximity of rating, not proximity of “tier”. If the tiers have ratings that are within the range of the random adjustment, they can end up fighting each other. This is going to result in blowouts, no doubt about it. However, we are not going to make changes to this after just 2 weeks of the system. There are things we can do. We will almost certainly end up adjusting the total added to each server rating to group the matchups a little more closely. First however, we need to let the ratings adjust by having more varied matchups like these. If you look at EU, which is using the exact same system, you can see matchups with numerous surprising results. The same will likely be true by the end of the NA matchup.
TL;DR: We are going to wait at least a couple more weeks before changing any of the math behind the new system, but it is very likely we’ll decrease the size of the variation at some point.
The math being used is awful. I’ve seen people post above this Devs response. 1 up 1 down. That’s all that’s needed to make matches fun and exciting. Why make a math problem that equals RNG. It’s neat Anet is trying to make more servers populated but it will total 6 and the others will be ghost towns. Once this system is in place 6 servers will always be doing a RNG shuffle. Bet they are really hoping servers like SOR JQ and bg guilds will spread out.
I really hope this change they are doing is for the players and not more gems / money from transfers. Right now it looks like its for the money.
1 up 1 down is for the players not some garbage math used to start the housing crisis in MERICA
The concept of tiers has little meaning at this point and you should try to stop thinking of matchups in those terms. Servers are matched up by proximity of rating, not proximity of “tier”. If the tiers have ratings that are within the range of the random adjustment, they can end up fighting each other. This is going to result in blowouts, no doubt about it. However, we are not going to make changes to this after just 2 weeks of the system. There are things we can do. We will almost certainly end up adjusting the total added to each server rating to group the matchups a little more closely. First however, we need to let the ratings adjust by having more varied matchups like these. If you look at EU, which is using the exact same system, you can see matchups with numerous surprising results. The same will likely be true by the end of the NA matchup.
TL;DR: We are going to wait at least a couple more weeks before changing any of the math behind the new system, but it is very likely we’ll decrease the size of the variation at some point.
If you made the matchups more about quality of guilds instead of just 24 zerg coverage then you would not have this problem.
If you want to fix this then add in bonuses for servers that take stuff with less people.
“World vs. World is a lot about tactics, and when you fight the same worlds with the same tactics you never really get to learn anything new and adapt your strategy. This is your chance for your world to rally together, recruit more people, and try to overthrow a server above you. Like most of you, we love a good underdog story and now you’ll be able to write your own in WvW. At the end of the day, this is going to create new fresh matchups, let you see the tactics from different teams, bring some variety to the Eternal Battlegrounds, and help us to establish a more accurate new World vs. World order.”
Who cares about new tactics if we don’t have fun?! This isn’t fun. Our borderlands are only able to get 60 people in a map without queue, but SoR can hold 100 people in one map somehow. SoS isn’t helping either, they are only being annoying by pushing us in EB because they know SoR will get mad if they push them (which I don’t blame them for), but my god. TC is good, but TC also has a TON of militia. SoR is exclusively guild people. They have insane scouts and many different impressive organization skills. This isn’t a fight. It’s a slaughter, and people are already not having fun.
The concept of tiers has little meaning at this point and you should try to stop thinking of matchups in those terms. Servers are matched up by proximity of rating, not proximity of “tier”..
It’s funny how those servers who are rated “higher” seem to utterly destroy the other two, look at your own statistics, it’s a slaughterhouse in almost every matchup, there is 1 server dominating it, and every single time it’s the higher ranked server.
They need to play on tc and SOS. Last night streaming a dev named captin culling was standing with a troll group that I was apart of. Just killing tc running out from garrison. I do give him credit for not flanking with us and killing 30 tc looking the wrong way, super classy.
I’m a semi-casual player from SoS but all I have to say is that some players are really sore losers. After months of dominating SBI and CD over and over and over again week after week, we lose for 2 weeks in a row and suddenly it’s table flips and ragequitting the game.
Have you guys ever stopped to think how SBI and CD players feel about losing for 2 months because we really should have moved up a tier a month ago? And you can’t handle it for 2 weeks.
Teething hurts. Give the new system at least the same time SBI and CD have been losing consecutively to us before popping a vein.
If you look at EU, which is using the exact same system, you can see matchups with numerous surprising results. The same will likely be true by the end of the NA matchup.
This is a flat out lie!
Every match up in EU is being won by the higher ranked server, most of which are blowouts.
Thats not gonna work lol. SoR is too big. Tedrrible match up .. i am hardcore wvwer but i think i am gonna stand down this week -.-
Teaming up against SoR will absolutely work. Its not going to win you the match of course. But what it will do is allow you to have some fun and a sense of accomplishment.
Because you will be able to fight without having to worry about getting run over in the back by the other server. Turn it into a two front war for SoR and a one front war for TC and SoS.
And of course its not going to work at all times. But believe me, I’m on SBI, and we just got out of a mismatch with DB. And when Mag and us were able to 2v1 DB, it was great fun.
It probably wont do much for the actual matchup, but it would at least make it fun for everyone. I had a great time in EB with you guys coming at us on both fronts on reset, it was quite interesting.
If you look at EU, which is using the exact same system, you can see matchups with numerous surprising results. The same will likely be true by the end of the NA matchup.
This is a flat out lie!
Every match up in EU is being won by the higher ranked server, most of which are blowouts.
Exactly, this rankings system does not work.
You can’t expect a player to get excited over a great rating when they can’t even take over their own own garrison. What’s their reward for their great rating? A lopsided match up the following week where they can’t even make it to their own garrison, let alone take it over. RNG is a culprit in this, and I’m really perplexed as to what game developers infatuation is with this useless mechanism.
If you want to make an even match up.. take these into consideration (and in this very order).
1. Coverage
2. WvW Population
3. How high is the PPT maintained on average
We play this out for a few weeks so, in the long run, we have a better game overall.
I remember when I was a kid I had to wait an entire year for my birthday. You kids these days expect your birthday to roll around every two weeks. Some things just take some time.
Glad your not on the dev team or any gaming dev team that expects to make a profit. Continue with your entertaining and wise replies, please.
The concept of tiers has little meaning at this point and you should try to stop thinking of matchups in those terms. Servers are matched up by proximity of rating, not proximity of “tier”. If the tiers have ratings that are within the range of the random adjustment, they can end up fighting each other. This is going to result in blowouts, no doubt about it. However, we are not going to make changes to this after just 2 weeks of the system. There are things we can do. We will almost certainly end up adjusting the total added to each server rating to group the matchups a little more closely. First however, we need to let the ratings adjust by having more varied matchups like these. If you look at EU, which is using the exact same system, you can see matchups with numerous surprising results. The same will likely be true by the end of the NA matchup.
TL;DR: We are going to wait at least a couple more weeks before changing any of the math behind the new system, but it is very likely we’ll decrease the size of the variation at some point.
You were told this was going to happen well before you implemented it, you even had 1 poster provide the math to prove it. You can undoubtedly run better analysis of the scenarios than the players can, yet you still went ahead and implemented it with a random factor range that was too wide. This situation is just ridiculous and shows how poorly the game is being supported I’m afraid.
Just don’t let whomever came up with the system walk into the Anet building again. We don’t want to see any of their brilliant ideas again.
The concept of tiers has little meaning at this point and you should try to stop thinking of matchups in those terms. Servers are matched up by proximity of rating, not proximity of “tier”. If the tiers have ratings that are within the range of the random adjustment, they can end up fighting each other. This is going to result in blowouts, no doubt about it. However, we are not going to make changes to this after just 2 weeks of the system. There are things we can do. We will almost certainly end up adjusting the total added to each server rating to group the matchups a little more closely. First however, we need to let the ratings adjust by having more varied matchups like these. If you look at EU, which is using the exact same system, you can see matchups with numerous surprising results. The same will likely be true by the end of the NA matchup.
TL;DR: We are going to wait at least a couple more weeks before changing any of the math behind the new system, but it is very likely we’ll decrease the size of the variation at some point.
Why are you continuing to try and incorporate a system that has already proven to be a fluke? I don’t understand what value a leaderboard has, if the point score becomes so complicated in the end, that it loses all its meaning. Not to mention; what value a point based leaderboard has for a game mode, that is ultimately decided based around the amount of players who arbitrarily plays on a weekly basis.
It seems to me like you’ve lost track of what exactly the leaderboard is suppose to be for, and are now only trying to fix it based on nothing more then a principle. I think you should stop wasting your time and come up with a new leaderboard instead, that’s based around how many players are active on a server, by a weekly basis. Or it could even be a leaderboard that’s based around how well guilds from all servers are doing. All this current leaderboard implementation is doing, is create bad match-ups, based around a leaderboard system that only a minimal amount of players find any value in. Just take a step back and consider what it is you’re spending your time on here..
80 Ranger | 80 Mesmer | 80 Thief | 80 Guardian | 40 Engineer
“The learned is happy, nature to explore. The fool is happy, that he knows no more.”
-Alexander Pope
The concept of tiers has little meaning at this point and you should try to stop thinking of matchups in those terms. Servers are matched up by proximity of rating, not proximity of “tier”. If the tiers have ratings that are within the range of the random adjustment, they can end up fighting each other. This is going to result in blowouts, no doubt about it. However, we are not going to make changes to this after just 2 weeks of the system. There are things we can do. We will almost certainly end up adjusting the total added to each server rating to group the matchups a little more closely. First however, we need to let the ratings adjust by having more varied matchups like these. If you look at EU, which is using the exact same system, you can see matchups with numerous surprising results. The same will likely be true by the end of the NA matchup.
TL;DR: We are going to wait at least a couple more weeks before changing any of the math behind the new system, but it is very likely we’ll decrease the size of the variation at some point.
Servers matched on proximity of rating…
Well…
Both SoS and DB had great ratings, lets ask them how they feel this ratings system works.
