Guild Wars 2

only 2 million rolls? I’ll do some runs with 100 million rolls and add my data to that thread.

-ken

Snowreap.5174:

only 2 million rolls? I’ll do some runs with 100 million rolls and add my data to that thread.

-ken

Please do. His data shows SoS-CD-EB; and I’m supposed to go on a trip this weekend. If that’s going down, I may just have to suffer my wife’s wrath or come down with some dengue fever in order to make that one!

ugh, I hate when results don’t match. 2 million rolls is certainly enough to get in the right ballpark; all an extra 98 million rolls should do is give you a couple more digits of accuracy. our numbers differ by enough that I don’t think the number of rolls can explain it.

maybe his results are wrong, or maybe mine are.

I don’t think my results are wrong.

but what if they are?

I’m going to be worried about this all day.

-ken

I wasn’t kidding when I said I’d worry about this. Just to check, I did 4 runs of 2 million rolls each, and checked the top 3 matchups for SoS after each run. here are the results:

Sea of Sorrows
5.152700 Tarnished Coast Dragonbrand
3.954150 Maguuma Yak’s Bend
3.943900 Maguuma Kaineng

Sea of Sorrows
5.168800 Tarnished Coast Dragonbrand
3.955300 Maguuma Kaineng
3.924700 Maguuma Yak’s Bend

Sea of Sorrows
5.144200 Tarnished Coast Dragonbrand
3.947200 Maguuma Yak’s Bend
3.934800 Maguuma Kaineng

Sea of Sorrows
5.149500 Tarnished Coast Dragonbrand
3.933400 Maguuma Yak’s Bend
3.924150 Maguuma Kaineng

if my code is wrong, it is at least consistently wrong (but I don’t think it’s wrong).

2 million rolls looks like it should be enough for accurate probability estimates down to about a tenth of a percent.

-ken

I hoped his were right but fear that yours are Ken.

I dream of T1 having a 50% chance of facing each other and can live with T2 having a 20% (which is what his results showed) but yours seem to have much more volatility.

If we get TC/DB, I’m moving on to something else. Three weeks of this garbage is enough.

Snowreap.5174:

only 2 million rolls? I’ll do some runs with 100 million rolls and add my data to that thread.

-ken

That statistical difference between the two is insignificant.

Or were you actually being serious?

Yeahhhhh this isn’t going to work is it?

Well, if’s Snow’s numbers are right I’ll be going on a roadtrip tomorrow night. (I would anyhow, but I can actually be happy about it).

Question about those numbers, Ken. Why doesn’t Fort Aspenwood show up on them? In ratings they are light years closer to us than TC (TC is twice as close to JQ than they are to us and DB is equi-distant).
Maguuma, CD, and KN are closer to us than all three.

Is it volatility?

It’s complicated.

You’re right, FA has a closer rating to you than TC does, and if you calculate the probabilities of getting a particular server as one of your two opponents, you will get FA more often than you get TC:

Sea of Sorrows
5.395263 Sanctum of Rall
5.851026 Blackgate
9.915445 Jade Quarry
17.306499 Tarnished Coast
19.826024 Dragonbrand
21.769310 Fort Aspenwood
23.766748 Maguuma
22.275408 Kaineng
22.277815 Yak’s Bend
21.650310 Crystal Desert
20.571471 Ehmry Bay
3.945356 Stormbluff Isle
3.635472 Borlis Pass
1.617123 Anvil Rock

but when you calculate the probabilities of getting particular pairs of servers, the numbers don’t always fall the way you expect. I only posted the top 3 matches above, but there are lots more:

Sea of Sorrows
5.151287 Tarnished Coast Dragonbrand
3.946896 Maguuma Kaineng
3.938119 Maguuma Yak’s Bend
3.789833 Yak’s Bend Ehmry Bay
3.786308 Kaineng Yak’s Bend
3.766360 Maguuma Crystal Desert
3.750176 Crystal Desert Ehmry Bay
3.743293 Kaineng Ehmry Bay
3.741479 Yak’s Bend Crystal Desert
3.711017 Kaineng Crystal Desert
3.484831 Maguuma Ehmry Bay
3.074847 Tarnished Coast Fort Aspenwood
2.677353 Jade Quarry Dragonbrand
2.475916 Fort Aspenwood Yak’s Bend
2.473737 Dragonbrand Fort Aspenwood
2.470704 Fort Aspenwood Kaineng
2.354762 Fort Aspenwood Crystal Desert
2.298803 Fort Aspenwood Maguuma
2.172299 Fort Aspenwood Ehmry Bay
2.032138 Jade Quarry Fort Aspenwood
2.011202 Jade Quarry Tarnished Coast
1.611680 Dragonbrand Maguuma
1.586965 Tarnished Coast Maguuma
1.383278 Dragonbrand Kaineng
1.379293 Blackgate Dragonbrand
1.374626 Dragonbrand Yak’s Bend
1.308281 Dragonbrand Crystal Desert
1.249175 Sanctum of Rall Dragonbrand
1.150110 Dragonbrand Ehmry Bay
1.077918 Blackgate Fort Aspenwood

(and there are well over 100 more after this 30, the full list is posted in that other thread).

The single most likely matchup for you is TC+DB, but notice that the top 30 doesn’t list TC very often (only 4 times, TC+DB, TC+FA, JQ+TC and TC+Mag). meanwhile, FA shows up a lot (9 times: TC+FA, FA+YB, DB+FA, FA+KN, FA+CD, FA+Mag, FA+EB, JQ+FA and BG+FA). individually, each of the FA matchups is less likely than TC+DB, but because there are more of them you’re actually more likely to get FA than you are to get TC (and the likelihood of getting both FA and TC is 3.07%).

-ken

Hickeroar.9734:

Snowreap.5174:

only 2 million rolls? I’ll do some runs with 100 million rolls and add my data to that thread.

-ken

That statistical difference between the two is insignificant.

Or were you actually being serious?

it was tongue in cheek. but I really did do runs with 100 million rolls (actually it was 600 million: I did 3 runs of 100 million each to get single-opponent, paired-opponent and color-sensitive probabilities, for both NA and EU).

2 million rolls appears to produce results with about one tenth of a percent accuracy (I don’t happen to know the confidence interval). I’m guessing that the extra 98 million rolls adds a couple of digits of additional accuracy.

since it only takes me a few minutes to do 100 million, and it gives slightly more accurate results, I went ahead and did it. the program I use to do the calculations is actually designed to handle runs of 10 billion trials or more (run overnight of course — that many trials can take hours to finish) so I consider runs between 1 and 100 million to be pretty small.

-ken

i’m using NA server match up for this discussion

it seems now server match up selection pool are divided into 2 groups, group 1 (rank 1-12) and group 2 (rank 13-24). however some servers are too powerful for few others.

perhaps the group selection should be divided further into 4 pools.
group 1 (rank 1-6)
group 2 (rank 7-12)
group 3 (rank 13-18)
group 4 (rank 19-24)

.. then we can have more or less fair match up…..

azizul.8469:

perhaps the group selection should be divided further into 4 pools.
group 1 (rank 1-6)
group 2 (rank 7-12)
group 3 (rank 13-18)
group 4 (rank 19-24)

For anyone at the border of a group this is bad, e.g. rank 6, 12 and 18 will always get stronger opponents and rank 7, 13, 19 will always get weaker opponents.

As soon as the strength of some servers change the groups become inadequate

And last but not least: The ladder will disintegrate again, Glicko-2 ratings between groups will be incomparable, only showing the relative strength of servers within a group but not the relative strength of servers between groups.

Better would be: reroll until every match has a rank-difference of mostly 5 (or 4 or 6 or 7) 1-3-6 ok, 1-3-7 reroll all servers.

Mmm, yeh this aint working out, at least i can only talk for EU, not looked in depth at NA.
DL 137,216
FSP 145,377

Combined score of 282,593

Piken 317,755

Yeh something quite not right here, i can understand more variety of matches but surely there can be variety and balance. Don’t get me wrong me personally have had some nice fights this week, but there have been times where we have been farmed by Piken’s mass PvE community that have come out to play too since they have seen the lead they’re server has which isn’t that much fun at all.

I’d be happy to stay on this system if Anet can confirm that this system is the way forward and will balance itself out, or even if Anet could take a good look at things and slightly adjust some ratings to make this less random and more balanced.

As for UW and FR they are in same position as FSP and DL are now, we can give it all we got but there is only so much we can do the server with the advantage gets extra WvW player base because of their lead in the match and the lower servers get lower player base because they are sick of being farmed. So strictly speaking the lower servers cant play at their full potential against a higher tier server because of its decrease in numbers and moral.

I have seen some good suggestions on the forums about wvw systems and am sure that some systems like winner up loser down etc, has its down sides too, but is there any reasons why the Devs haven’t gone ahead with something like this, or is it something they looked at in depth and have come to realise it wouldn’t work for some reason?

Edit: just been thinking, instead of repairing/finding a solution to T9 EU (please forgive me but don’t keep track of NA), this system has currently made more Vabbi’s, hope in the long run it fixes things for all.

I originally posted this in another thread, but it’s on-topic here and I think a lot of people didn’t see it in that other thread, so here it is again (it was actually two posts but I’ve combined them here into one):
________________

I’m not sure why there are so many complaints about the new matchups. they look pretty reasonable to me this week. not perfect, of course, but you will rarely get a ‘perfect’ week when there’s any randomness involved. and we definitely need some randomness — the old system had none and we had a lot of problems as a result.

Here are the ranks of the servers in each NA matchup this week:

T1: 1 2 3
T2: 5 7 11
T3: 4 6 8
T4: 9 10 12
T5: 13 14 15
T6: 16 17 20
T7: 18 19 22
T8: 21 23 24

look at that. 8 out of the top 9 servers are in the top 3 matchups. 9 out of the bottom 9 servers are in the bottom 3 matchups, and the middle servers tend to be in the middle matchups.

really the only NA servers that should be complaining are BG, SoR and JQ who are getting exactly the same matchup that the old stagnation-prone system kept giving them over and over (although I wouldn’t be suprised if they actually preferred the stagnation since for them, any match outside of tier 1 might be considered a demotion), and CD (who does have a very difficult match this week against TC and SoS).

and here are the EU matchups:

T1: 1 4 7
T2: 3 5 6
T3: 2 10 11
T4: 8 15 16
T5: 9 17 18
T6: 12 13 14
T7: 19 22 25
T8: 20 21 23
T9: 24 26 27

EU does have a little more room to complain. only 7 out of the top 9 servers got into one of the top 3 matchups. 9 out of the bottom 9 are in the bottom 3 matchups. the middle servers generally are in the middle.

on the surface, Vizunah Square vs Jade Sea vs Desolation looks a bit lopsided, but this is a T1 vs T2 vs T3 match, which is exactly the kind of match you’d expect to see every other week if we were using the Winner-Up-Loser-Down system that so many people are claiming would be better. so there’s little point complaining about that one.

Riverside and Abaddon’s Mouth will have their hands full this week playing Elona Reach (although if RS and AM are anything like Ehmry Bay they’ll be welcoming this opportunity rather than complaining about it). Drakkar Lake and Far Shiverpeaks will similarly have their hands full playing Piken Square this week, just like Fort Ranik and Underworld will versus Augury Rock. these three are all somewhat lopsided matches, but in all cases it’s 1 strong server versus 2 weaker ones, which is a much better outcome than 2 strong servers versus 1 weak opponent (although I can understand why people on FoW and Vabbi might actually prefer such a match, if only to see how it would play out for them).

I do happen to think that the randomness needs to be adjusted down just a bit, but really these matches don’t look that bad. there is some variety in who plays whom, but for the most part the higher servers are playing the higher servers and the lower servers are playing the lower servers.

I’m not certain what server you’re on, but if it’s one of FSP, AM or FR then the matchup system is working properly for you. It has put you up against a very strong opponent to see how you do, and you are losing rating against them. When your rating goes down, the likelihood of facing those opponents again goes down as well.

The exception is if you’re on AM. in the ER/RS/AM matchup, the big winner is RS who is proving that they are every bit as good as AM and that they shouldn’t have a lower rating than AM. and even though ER is winning (as expected), they aren’t winning by as much as expected so their rating is actually coming down. as a result, AM (and RS) are actually more likely to get this matchup again. if you’re on AM and you don’t want to face ER again you need to lose by more.

This is something the old system never did — it gives lower servers the opportunity more often to prove that they deserve to move up. but that same opportunity to prove that you deserve to move up can also prove that you deserve to stay exactly where you are.

If server strengths never changed once established, the old system could have worked. But server strengths do change over time, and in order to determine when a server is over-rated or under-rated it needs to play a lopsided match now and then, just to make sure that the actual outcomes match the expected outcomes.

It is bad luck to get 3 matches in a row where you’re severely outclassed. I do hope that you have better luck next matchup. on Ehmry Bay we got the worst possible roll for the first week of randomized matchups (we got the exact matchup that everyone was certain they did not want to get), but the next week we got a much better roll that matched us against very high opponents (we lost that match, but we gained rating and we had a lot of fun testing ourselves against a high-rated server). so I do understand how heartbreaking bad luck on the matchups can be.

-ken

Snowreap.5174:

on the surface, Vizunah Square vs Jade Sea vs Desolation looks a bit lopsided, but this is a T1 vs T2 vs T3 match, which is exactly the kind of match you’d expect to see every other week if we were using the Winner-Up-Loser-Down system that so many people are claiming would be better. so there’s little point complaining about that one.

It’s a 106k BLOWOUT, can people finally stop saying WULD is better, because this shows that it is not.

The hours leading up to reset are much more fun now though. Not knowing and the anticipation of who we will be facing is great.

Exactly how often did the old system kitten up?

There was Kaineng’s rise to T2, but that could have been messed up and taken longer in the new system (if they rolled low a few times, it could have been even more painful for the other servers.

There was Ehmry Bay stuck in T5 and Sea of Sorrows stuck in T4

EB was stuck because SBI and CD were trading blows until CD got a fresh infusion and map stagnation got to SBI in a bad way.

SoS was stuck because the glicko rating system was never designed around the idea that someone else would be scoring points while the other opponent(s) were sleeping; and SBI and CD were competitive with us in NA (especially CD).

So basically, the only thing that needed to be fixed was that there was a lot of parity in the mid-high to mid-level servers in EU in terms of score but not in ability; and that we have an Oceanic server that is not WvW focused.

Yep, roll out the fire trucks, you better mess everything up and build from scratch????

This method mixing up matchups isn’t a good measure of competition since WvW team size varies so much. There is no test of skills since team sizes are not kept in check (and there is no being outnumbered advantages). The mixing just makes matches lame for all involved. I’m on Tarnished Coast and we’re steamrolling all week, it’s not fair or enjoyable.

LilMcGinley.3890:

Snowreap.5174:

on the surface, Vizunah Square vs Jade Sea vs Desolation looks a bit lopsided, but this is a T1 vs T2 vs T3 match, which is exactly the kind of match you’d expect to see every other week if we were using the Winner-Up-Loser-Down system that so many people are claiming would be better. so there’s little point complaining about that one.

It’s a 106k BLOWOUT, can people finally stop saying WULD is better, because this shows that it is not.

Actually your comparison and reasoning is wrong. Visunah is rank 1. Desolation is rank 7. So using winner goes up and loser goes down, Desolation would have never been ranked against #1, but the dropping rank 3 and rank 5. Note that the difference between Desolation and Jade Sea weekly score was actually only about 20k points, despite Desolation was fighting outmanned most of the time and double-teamed by the two French servers. Using WULD Visunah would have been pitted against rank 2 and rank 4.

I think everybody was expecting Desolation to lose more. Earlier this year when we had still those big guilds our score in tier #1 was similar to this week’s results. This Spring Desolation lost around 10 big WvWvW guilds to other servers. Iron Triangle, Vengeange of the Fallen, Golden Horden, BULL etc. just to mention a few. They left due the tier 1 lag and being tired to fight against Visunah, which is the only server in EU with 24/7 coverage. Only if Desolation would have similar coverage…

Now Desolation got unlucky once again for the Nth time in the row (never any luck in match ups whole year!). Our rank is 7 and we got ranked against #1 and the server which now rose up to rank #3. Using WULD this would have never been possible.

OMG RoF-Gandara-Miller’S really Anet?
ranks 21-15-12

Hule.8794:

OMG RoF-Gandara-Miller’S really Anet?
ranks 21-15-12

I’ve got to love Desolations luck at the moment Kodash and SFR wasn’t so bad considering, wow this system is bad for us and some others we are trying to rebuild our community but get matched with more organized better wvw populated servers.

I’d love to hear how many more weeks we’re going to have to endure at this heavily weighted rate of variance. Variance is fine, but I’d love to limit the damage a bit… This is getting a little tiresome.

Or just give us T2 back. >:[

LilMcGinley.3890:

Snowreap.5174:

on the surface, Vizunah Square vs Jade Sea vs Desolation looks a bit lopsided, but this is a T1 vs T2 vs T3 match, which is exactly the kind of match you’d expect to see every other week if we were using the Winner-Up-Loser-Down system that so many people are claiming would be better. so there’s little point complaining about that one.

It’s a 106k BLOWOUT, can people finally stop saying WULD is better, because this shows that it is not.

Speaking of blowouts: TC is currently about 210k ahead of SoS. :-/

In this new exciting matcup system you have in place Anet 2/3 weeks have been blowouts one way or another, how many people do you want to just not play this game for whole weeks at a time? I understand you don’t want to make changes on immediate reactions to let things settle but you need to understand that this was a horrible idea in the first place on your part, so change it again and we’ll say no more.

in the Potential Matchups thread (https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/matchups/Potential-Matchups-6-21) there are some nice graphs posted that help explain why we are seeing so many mismatches in EU.

for the EU servers in the middle, they are getting very wide and flat spans of possible matchup rankings. for the NA servers in the middle, the possible matchup rankings aren’t as wide, and they usually have a clear peak.

what this means is, NA servers will have more of a tendency to get rankings closer to the expectation, while EU servers will get a lot more variation.

this may be because there is a lot more uncertainty about the ‘correctness’ of the EU ratings, as shown by the larger deviations they tend to have. it would be interesting to run simulations to see if EU would see similar spreads if they had lower deviations like the NA servers.

-ken

Like I said earlier, most of the EU servers are lumped in closer in ratings range. A natural phenomenon when you have one server just massively dominating and two at the bottom that don’t play at all.

There’s not only 1 less tier in NA, but since NA typically has a broader timezone (as we include SEA and Oceanic players as well, outside two EU guilds in T1) we have even a greater than average variation in coverage.

NA has had so many T1 servers fall apart, that it’s permanently hosed the ability for us to get a mid-ground. I think for NA alone they should have gone with the original idea of resetting the ratings.

Everyone will find their spots sooner and just scrap RNG influenced matches because they are not fixing the ratings gap(s) in NA; or the real problem with map stagnation in NA.

Deniara Devious.3948:

Actually your comparison and reasoning is wrong. Visunah is rank 1. Desolation is rank 7. So using winner goes up and loser goes down, Desolation would have never been ranked against #1, but the dropping rank 3 and rank 5.

This may not be a big deal in EU where the gaps might not be as large between tiers, but on the NA side whether its JQ, SoR, or BG, facing T1 with a T3 will result in one thing: slaughter. So the idea of T1 vs. T2 vs. T3 blowouts that WULD would guarantee on a bi-weekly basis is valid, at least in NA with utmost certainty.

Chris.3290:

Exactly how often did the old system kitten up?

HoD, ET, SoS, SBI, and every other server that imploded had a slow, painful climb down the tiers while stifling the ability of other servers to climb up to where they actually belong (likewise for the bandwagon servers who had to climb their way upwards but had to fight for months to climb because glicko wasn’t a proper measure for cross-tier performance). T8 was a catastrophe until the devs forcefully intervened.

You seem to have forget a lot of terrible events with the old system.

Vena.8436:

You seem to have forget a lot of terrible events with the old system.

Then the game stablized. This wacky randomness could lead to transfers and the mess they had with the first system.

Those on the t3 servers that can be matched against the t1 servers may see movement away. Same with the t8 servers. No one wants to get smashed every week.

But perhaps that is what they want.

Vena.8436:

Deniara Devious.3948:

Actually your comparison and reasoning is wrong. Visunah is rank 1. Desolation is rank 7. So using winner goes up and loser goes down, Desolation would have never been ranked against #1, but the dropping rank 3 and rank 5.

This may not be a big deal in EU where the gaps might not be as large between tiers, but on the NA side whether its JQ, SoR, or BG, facing T1 with a T3 will result in one thing: slaughter. So the idea of T1 vs. T2 vs. T3 blowouts that WULD would guarantee on a bi-weekly basis is valid, at least in NA with utmost certainty.

Chris.3290:

Exactly how often did the old system kitten up?

HoD, ET, SoS, SBI, and every other server that imploded had a slow, painful climb down the tiers while stifling the ability of other servers to climb up to where they actually belong (likewise for the bandwagon servers who had to climb their way upwards but had to fight for months to climb because glicko wasn’t a proper measure for cross-tier performance). T8 was a catastrophe until the devs forcefully intervened.

You seem to have forget a lot of terrible events with the old system.

ET took from week 41 to week 1 to get from T1 to T8. That’s 12 weeks of pointless matches.

KA took from week 51 to week 7 to get from T8 to T2. Scoring 400k in most weeks.

I love this new system so much more than that one.

I don’t know about stabilized. The devs manually intervened to get SF out of T8. ET and FC were paired for months with a T6 level server.

Snowreap.5174:

I wasn’t kidding when I said I’d worry about this. Just to check, I did 4 runs of 2 million rolls each, and checked the top 3 matchups for SoS after each run. here are the results:

Sea of Sorrows
5.152700 Tarnished Coast Dragonbrand
3.954150 Maguuma Yak’s Bend
3.943900 Maguuma Kaineng

Sea of Sorrows
5.168800 Tarnished Coast Dragonbrand
3.955300 Maguuma Kaineng
3.924700 Maguuma Yak’s Bend

Sea of Sorrows
5.144200 Tarnished Coast Dragonbrand
3.947200 Maguuma Yak’s Bend
3.934800 Maguuma Kaineng

Sea of Sorrows
5.149500 Tarnished Coast Dragonbrand
3.933400 Maguuma Yak’s Bend
3.924150 Maguuma Kaineng

if my code is wrong, it is at least consistently wrong (but I don’t think it’s wrong).

2 million rolls looks like it should be enough for accurate probability estimates down to about a tenth of a percent.

-ken

Do keep in mind that the random number generator is based on the time of the day. So rolling it now will give a slightly different results to when the reset actually happens.

That said, get ready for TC and DB. :P

CHIPS.6018:

That said, get ready for TC and DB. :P

That’s not quite completely fair or accurate. While it is the most likely matchup for SoS, it also only has a 5% chance of occurring.

there’s no reason to suppose that ArenaNet is seeding their random number generator from the time of day. hardware entropy sources are commonly available now, and even built into many processors.

and even if they were, after 2 million trials (or 96 million 32-bit random integers) the time of day makes no discernable difference. when the time comes, ArenaNet is going to run just 1 trial, and whatever numbers come up they’re going to go with, regardless of how likely or unlikely that combination of numbers might have been.

that’s kind of the point of 2 million trials. you get a wide variety of results, and by counting how many of each you can figure out which results are likely and which ones aren’t.

also, the thing about having a 5.1% chance of getting TC+DB is, that means a 94.9% chance of getting something else. getting TC+DB would be like rolling a 20 on a 20-sided die. (or a 1, depending on whether you think TC+DB would be fun or not).

-ken

Is everyone getting excited for the next week of semi-random uneven matchups?

Ladder ranking is the only way to go:

Have third in first Tier move down, have first in last Tier move up. In every other Tier the winner move up and third goes down. No internal mumbo jumbo ranking calculating needed, just start with the current rankings and let it play itself out. Works fine in every other competitive game I’ve played and it is the most fair system too.

The current randomness destroy any feeling of server pride and goals of improving to the next level in WvW warfare. The only real sense of reward in WvW was lost for me by this kittened change. Why bother even trying when we probably get annihilated by a server 8 ranks higher next week, just like we were this week. Personal rank? Who cares.

But as I already stated some pages back, ANET has a plan for everything they do. Less WvW players=More event players=More cash shop buyers.

This new system is getting old. So far SoS has had 4 weeks of getting paired up with the higher tier Zerg more servers. My guess is that Anet wants us to transfer out to a higher or lower tier to get out of these weekly beatings.

ShinNakon.9085:

This new system is getting old. So far SoS has had 4 weeks of getting paired up with the higher tier Zerg more servers. My guess is that Anet wants us to transfer out to a higher or lower tier to get out of these weekly beatings.

I haven’t been on yet but SoS and Ebay seem to be holding DB pretty well at the moment during NA prime time, +ppt is pretty even between the three. Oceanic is SoS’s strongest time so let’s see how we go then.

The 2 lowest servers by far are FC and ET. In someone’s infinite wisdom, they aren’t matched up against each other this week. I guess being thumped by 2 sides instead of one is a great plan in bizaaro world.

Its funny because instead of addressing match making (which wasnt really the core problem) they could have addressed why the match ups end the way they do.

Lets face it, no matter what match making system you put in place, if there is only 1 or 2 powerhouse servers (Viz and lately Elona) nobody else is going to be able to compete with them. Similarly whoever you pair the bottom 2 servers in EU with, they will get stomped.

What Arenanet should have done was address the issues of coverage the the overwhelming impact it has on the outcome of wvw. Why address match making when the scoring is flawed? All they did was try to put in place a bandaid fix and it backfired even more than we could have imagined.

Im sorry but if you think the only alternative to people getting out of a bad tier is to transfer you are mistaken. The other alternative is to quit playing the game.

Personally my server got a good match up for this week, but I cant help but laugh when I look at some of the other match ups, and with this system, somebodies going to get the short end of the stick every single week….. and so the complaints will continue.

Hematuria.4051:

The 2 lowest servers by far are FC and ET. In someone’s infinite wisdom, they aren’t matched up against each other this week. I guess being thumped by 2 sides instead of one is a great plan in bizaaro world.

You may not be able to fathom this, but we actually prefer not being matched up. We are both too weak to take on any of the servers right now when paired up. When the other two servers are more evenly matched nobody is camping our spawns. Just look at the difference between the last two weeks and the first week of the new matchups. This really is better for us at the bottom.

Play for fun.

Fun =/= winning.

Stack just one map if you only have numbers for one, since zergballing is the current meta.

Kinda ridiculous how there were no tears when people are doing the rolling but almost non stop whining when being rolled.

Actinotus.6410:

ShinNakon.9085:

This new system is getting old. So far SoS has had 4 weeks of getting paired up with the higher tier Zerg more servers. My guess is that Anet wants us to transfer out to a higher or lower tier to get out of these weekly beatings.

I haven’t been on yet but SoS and Ebay seem to be holding DB pretty well at the moment during NA prime time, +ppt is pretty even between the three. Oceanic is SoS’s strongest time so let’s see how we go then.

First hour was not fun at all. Unless you where in EB it seemed all we did was hand them the deeds to all our stuff and feed them some bags.

SoS does not have the numbers to deal with higher ranked servers with more organized guilds that are WvW based. Most of our people are made up of militia.

gunhaver.2057:

Hematuria.4051:

The 2 lowest servers by far are FC and ET. In someone’s infinite wisdom, they aren’t matched up against each other this week. I guess being thumped by 2 sides instead of one is a great plan in bizaaro world.

You may not be able to fathom this, but we actually prefer not being matched up. We are both too weak to take on any of the servers right now when paired up. When the other two servers are more evenly matched nobody is camping our spawns. Just look at the difference between the last two weeks and the first week of the new matchups. This really is better for us at the bottom.

Scoring is going to turn out the same. Having 2 bigger population servers fight over 4 maps is gonna look a lot like 1 bigger population server fighting over 4 maps. Reset night looks close because everyone is excited to see the new matchup. There wont be any difference by the end of the week.

Hematuria.4051:

gunhaver.2057:

Hematuria.4051:

The 2 lowest servers by far are FC and ET. In someone’s infinite wisdom, they aren’t matched up against each other this week. I guess being thumped by 2 sides instead of one is a great plan in bizaaro world.

You may not be able to fathom this, but we actually prefer not being matched up. We are both too weak to take on any of the servers right now when paired up. When the other two servers are more evenly matched nobody is camping our spawns. Just look at the difference between the last two weeks and the first week of the new matchups. This really is better for us at the bottom.

Scoring is going to turn out the same. Having 2 bigger population servers fight over 4 maps is gonna look a lot like 1 bigger population server fighting over 4 maps. Reset night looks close because everyone is excited to see the new matchup. There wont be any difference by the end of the week.

Just look at FC’s week with IoJ and DR to know that what you said is not true. Now I know that IoJ and DR hate each other so we did better than we should have, but beating DR with a little help is sooooo much better than the week before it or the two after it. http://mos.millenium.org/servers/view/48/75

Now I don’t know what server you play on but I can tell you everyone I talked to in that DR IoJ FC match had a lot of fun. We had more people on our teamspeak and people in the borderlands that were very active. The match was great! Did we win? No, of course not. The awesome thing was not being focused constantly. So yeah, this match up is way better for us.

Don’t try to speak for the lower tiers when clearly you have no idea what we feel.

Turn off the PPT during the hours people are “normally” sleeping in those time zones if people are that concerned about scores. Everything operates the same, the only difference is, PPT does not tick.

What would be a “fair” time this could occur within the time zones? I suppose an average number could be reached. For example, on NA, perhaps central time is the guide, and PPT is turned off between the hours of 12am – 8am.

Would that make people happy?

give me a new mmo that focus’s on pvp, fed up with all these pve mmos. wvw is only world pvp content in this whole game since release… what the hell is that all about?

Isnt this game called guildwars, and yet a guild war is about the hardest thing to come by.

First developers to produce a purely pvp mmo wins.

DeadlySynz.3471:

Would that make people happy?

5 months ago it would

gunhaver.2057:

Hematuria.4051:

The 2 lowest servers by far are FC and ET. In someone’s infinite wisdom, they aren’t matched up against each other this week. I guess being thumped by 2 sides instead of one is a great plan in bizaaro world.

You may not be able to fathom this, but we actually prefer not being matched up. We are both too weak to take on any of the servers right now when paired up. When the other two servers are more evenly matched nobody is camping our spawns. Just look at the difference between the last two weeks and the first week of the new matchups. This really is better for us at the bottom.

Im playing on ET atm and I much prefer this weeks matchup with HOD and SF over last weeks playing against FC and HOD.