Guild Wars 2

Actinotus.6410:

Teevell.1684:

I just had a thought, and it’s probably crazy, but what about combining two low-ranked servers to fight together? So it would be SoS+Mag (red team) vs. TC (green team)vs. DB (blue team) or something (just the first four servers I could think of, don’t critique this actual match-up). So in this scenario, SoS and Mag would be partners, sharing one BL and points. This might help them achieve the coverage and numbers needed to go against higher ranked servers, which creates more of a challenge for the other two servers. Next week they might be paired up with a different server, or if they’d risen in rank (because the game kept track of their individual rating on its own, that way if one server is doing all the work they get credit for it) they could end up fighting on their own again, or be paired with a different server.

Just a rough idea I had that might alleviate some problems (though I realize that it might cause others) and make more dynamic matches. Requesting input in 3…2…1

By extension you would combine TC and DB in order to be “competitive” against SoR and BG. Why not transfer servers from TC to DB?

Look, in the SoS/TC/Mag matchup at the moment, the overall score does not reflect what is happening on the field. TC has greater overall coverage , but both Mag and SoS can more than match TC at their own peak times – maybe not on all 3 borderlands, but certainly EB plus two borderlands. I’ve said since last year that i reckon they should reduce the number of maps (since almost no server can fill all 4 maps), and/or change it so you get more points for TAKING an objective rather than holding it (which would serve a similar purpose).

Aye, this is indeed correct. Both Mags and SoS are more than capable of keeping up with TC at peak times and with even numbers, it’s just the coverage issue across all 4 maps. Mostly this happens with overnight coverage.

As you said, this is easily counterable by just reducing the number of maps, because nearly no server (except for the top 3) can cover all 4 maps at once. Will they do this though? Make 21 servers happy or indifferent, while the last 3 will be ticked the que times will be through the roof?

I also like the idea of getting more points for taking objectives rather than holding onto them. For me, I don’t even like the PPT system. I think it’d be better if we just got points for taking structures, defending structures, completing PvE group events in WvW, and for killing our opponents. I also think doing any of the above while outmanned should yield at least double the points.

If Anet followed this plan, We’d definitely see a giant shake up in the server ratings.

It`s been TOO LONG since I had a challenging/interesting/fun week in WvW.
Either we are against servers that play like pros, 24/24 with 100% scouts in every tower and we have no way to get anything, or we are against servers that don`t really care about WvW and there is nothing to kill / capture.

New system = Epic fail. We lost against some pretty weak enemies last week and now we have two really powerful ones. Stupid system is stupid.

I think it’s been made clear that this system needs a babysitter. As the (or a, depending on how long it takes me to write this) it defeats the “score correction” benefit of this system if you can lose to weaker servers, but then get bumped up and end up with a net positive score increase over the two matches.

I think it will be time to officially pull the plug when all matches see point increase of <+/- 50 points per week change in all servers.

For instance, T1-T4 has stabilized, with the exception of Kaineng which will NOT be able to stabilize in the new system due to the almost 300 point different between them and Borlis Pass.
This is the 500lb gorilla in the room and is where this system will fail the most. Condolences to the folks at Kaineng, you deserve better than what ANet is doing to you.

T5-T8 has a few more corrections. AR has completely imploded, and DH and DR have came out of nowhere with a huge jump in fighting power. IoJ and ET’s deviations are solely due to their matchups (IoJ shouldn’t be losing 60 points for winning, another HUGE failure of this system).

So ANet, I can’t speak for EU but I think RNG ran systems have ran their course in NA. The only remaining reasons for continuing is sadism. If that’s the case, could you give us a safeword?

Wow, I just saw the EU matchups. Way to go ANET, you’ve outdone yourselves this week.

Chris.3290:

Wow, I just saw the EU matchups. Way to go ANET, you’ve outdone yourselves this week.

It’d be comical if it wasn’t so tragic.

the EU matchups, at first glance, look whacked. but look more closely.

#9 Piken is winning vs #2 Elona and #4 Seafarers. is this a time zone thing? because otherwise I’d say that Piken may end up really happy with this matchup.

#6 Desolation and #10 Riverside are putting up a big fight against #1 Vizunah. both underdogs are gaining rating.

#3 vs #5 vs #7 looks like an excellent matchup, score is close there.

I don’t have much to say about the other matchups, except that they don’t look terrible, and the highest ranked server isn’t winning in every case. #11 is beating #8, and #17 is beating #12.

-ken

Piken has some very tough and very hyper-organized guilds. Where they lose rating is during off-peak hours. Have felt very lucky to have been part of some of their pushes, it’s a sight to behold.

Dear Anet,
are you joking? Please look at history of RoF matchups with current system.
At the change, we won against WSR and Arb.The your RNG send us down to fight Vabbi and FoW. Rank 22 then fight rank 17 Underworld and Blacktide. It was nice matchup, but Underworld have bigger numbers.
RoS-RoF-WSR really nice close matchup and probably last enemies we faced with similiar coverage. We were second,we doesn? even won, RoS did. And RNG throw RoS to fight Vabbi and FoW.
We got Gandara and Miller’s, rank 12,13 and 21 in one matchup. Go please see the history. RNG send us again to fight FoW and Vabbi.
And this matchup we face Gandara and Drakkar. Rank 12,17 and 21.

So in last 6 resets with current “stabilizating” system we had 1 even match and 5 blowouts. Does this seem to you as stabile system?
Every friday we pray for DZ,GH,WSR,BT,ARB,RoS but no.

If you look on numbers in EU bracket. There is normal to fight 9 ranks different server with difference of almost 300k points.

How long we need to wait until you make new blog post about changing WvW matchups? You say give it few weeks. They is no way that you will fight 9 ranks different servers (currently 3 matchups with 9 ranks difference).
But on regular base this system is much much worse. You need at least to lower randomly generated number so you wont servers 9 ranks higher.

Snowreap.5174:

the EU matchups, at first glance, look whacked. but look more closely.

1. Piken is winning vs #2 Elona and #4 Seafarers. is this a time zone thing? because otherwise I’d say that Piken may end up really happy with this matchup.

1. Desolation and #10 Riverside are putting up a big fight against #1 Vizunah. both underdogs are gaining rating.

1. vs #5 vs #7 looks like an excellent matchup, score is close there.

I don’t have much to say about the other matchups, except that they don’t look terrible, and the highest ranked server isn’t winning in every case. #11 is beating #8, and #17 is beating #12.

-ken

It is way too early to tell how the results will be in those two tiers you mentioned first.

I know Piken Square has some really good, well-organized hard core WvWvW players and guilds, which moved from Desolation. So they are definitely gonna be strong in prime time, stronger than their rating says. But I have no idea if they have night time or morning coverage?

Visunah Square has always been relatively weak on Friday and Saturday. Then on Friday the French monster starts to awake and during the week it shows why it is #1 in EU. Riverside has managed to summon impressive amount of players for the reset. I was fighting with the outmanned buff most of this evening at Riverside BL. Let’s see if Riverside can keep up the numbers for the entire week.

Rank #3 vs #5 and #7 definitely looks like an even match up (and it should be, only 4 rank difference).

Worst fix ever for WvW~!

Snowreap.5174:

the EU matchups, at first glance, look whacked. but look more closely.

1. Piken is winning vs #2 Elona and #4 Seafarers. is this a time zone thing? because otherwise I’d say that Piken may end up really happy with this matchup.

1. Desolation and #10 Riverside are putting up a big fight against #1 Vizunah. both underdogs are gaining rating.

1. vs #5 vs #7 looks like an excellent matchup, score is close there.

I don’t have much to say about the other matchups, except that they don’t look terrible, and the highest ranked server isn’t winning in every case. #11 is beating #8, and #17 is beating #12.

-ken

Week long matches are a marathon, not a sprint.

How many weeks has this been going on now? It’s still horrible and horribly implemented. At this point we might as well switch to a simpler and more intuitive week-to-week system of moving winners up and losers down. That makes a whole lot more sense than this randomized matchup garbage. It defeats the purpose of having a rating system if you’re just going to be in a perpetual round robin. When a server gets put into a bad match they don’t even bother to play to their potential, the guilds and commanders don’t bother to come out and for everyone else it’s 7 days of WvW being unavailable. I have not seen a decent zerg for the better part of a month. These matchups are so bad it’s causing people to stop playing.

Chris.3290:

This is the 500lb gorilla in the room and is where this system will fail the most. Condolences to the folks at Kaineng, you deserve better than what ANet is doing to you.

TY for the condolences, but tbh, the reason we are in the situation we are in is because all of the guilds that helped bring us out of the dungeon have been jumping ship when they realized we couldn’t get past T2.

The first few weeks of the new system had us in pretty good matchups, but since we have been hemorrhaging wvw guilds for a few months, we haven’t been able to get a win. Then going up against 4 and 6 right after losing the last xfer guild to 4 killed a lot of morale. Now it is pretty much just the hardcore wvwers that keep us afloat. We have finally dropped to 12th place after being teased for weeks, but as you said, it’ll be weeks again before we can stabilize where we belong at this point (somewhere in T5 or 6) with the big point difference between us and BP.

Shun.9475:

Why the heck does a Tier 4 Server SoS, Tier 2 TC, get matched up with SoR?

We are getting farmed, its the first freaking day and we are already getting siege spawn camped on our own borderlands

Don’t complain. Lovely Rank 12 Kaineng gets Rank 8 and Rank 6 FA and Maguuma. Our prime time is currently 60 v 30 and they have those numbers on every BL. We have every person who plays WvW in our home borderland trying to hold Garrison.

With the matchups completely bad every week I stopped caring about being on for reset weeks ago, and spend most of the time in open-field, and the jumping puzzle. I almost never buy a keep upgrade, or use a buff other than +5 supply on something. Because it is completely pointless, other than a waste of gold, to do so.

How many 1000s of posts/views are required for a change?

You can start by limiting the # of players allowed on a map when the other team has under 20. Another limit for 40, and so on. Instead of 80 vs 20, 10 of which are AFK. Voice comms are more discussions about “what other pvp games are fun right now?”

And EU tier 1 is the same as the rest. Will we be looking at 8 blowouts from 9 matches?

How hard is it for the 3rd place to drop a tier. 1st place move up a tier. It not rocket science anet

neostars.7029:

How hard is it for the 3rd place to drop a tier. 1st place move up a tier. It not rocket science anet

If you do that, people will throw matches on purpose.

“Let’s lose so we don’t have to fight X next week”.

This current system is not broken, only RNG factor is.

neostars.7029:

How hard is it for the 3rd place to drop a tier. 1st place move up a tier. It not rocket science anet

Is it so hard for you to read the countless posts as to why 1 up 1 down is a terrible way to have this system work? SoS is going to have a good matchup this week. Maybe all the kittening will stop.

Snowreap.5174:

the EU matchups, at first glance, look whacked. but look more closely.

1. Piken is winning vs #2 Elona and #4 Seafarers. is this a time zone thing? because otherwise I’d say that Piken may end up really happy with this matchup.

1. Desolation and #10 Riverside are putting up a big fight against #1 Vizunah. both underdogs are gaining rating.

1. vs #5 vs #7 looks like an excellent matchup, score is close there.

I don’t have much to say about the other matchups, except that they don’t look terrible, and the highest ranked server isn’t winning in every case. #11 is beating #8, and #17 is beating #12.

-ken

You must be new to the EU matchup.

VS doesnt win because they are good, they win because they spend all week nightcapping. Its still weekend. Wait untill monday and watch how they tick 600 all night and morning long.

Ofcourse right now Deso isnt really playing because this great new matchup system keeps thinking its funny of having us play VS over and over. After months of nothing else, we now get “randomly” put with them again over and over.

The more things change, the more stuff stays the same.

What’s funny is that an ANet developer said they weren’t going to make any changes to the system because “a few weeks worth of data” isn’t enough for them to make a change…

They must not play WvW.

Anet are doing a great job of slowly killing this game off, It’s becoming stale and repetitive. Adding crappy Bi-Monthly PVE updates and totally failing on the one thing that is holding this dwindling community together “WvW”.

Ynot.8397:

neostars.7029:

How hard is it for the 3rd place to drop a tier. 1st place move up a tier. It not rocket science anet

Is it so hard for you to read the countless posts as to why 1 up 1 down is a terrible way to have this system work? SoS is going to have a good matchup this week. Maybe all the kittening will stop.

It’s not as terrible as the current system, that’s the point. The goal was to introduce variation to the matchups, and week-to-week movement is better than the loose randomization they have going right now.

Having server ratings in the first place was not a well-thought out idea, seeing as to how servers are not people and their performance can change overnight because of guild movements, while ratings are slow to respond to such changes. That lesson was never more obvious than at launch when you could transfer freely. That flaw is still there, just less prominent since it costs gems to move around. But when people do decide to move, the same thing still happens, you get bad matchups for weeks and months at a time.

We need a system that allows for rapid changes in ranking in accordance with rapid changes in performance. What we don’t need is tier 4 servers randomly being matched against tier 2 servers, fully six ranks apart. That level of randomization isn’t even sound in theory, and is obviously not working in reality. This is supposed to be a “recalibration” period to allow the ratings to resettle in new values, but the numbers being produced aren’t accurate because people are dropping out of WvW. You’re recalibrating the servers to incorrect values so that once you nail down the new rankings and reduce randomization, you will have even more long-term mismatches.

> Anet
> Doing an experiment
> Not controlling variables

phokus.8934:

What’s funny is that an ANet developer said they weren’t going to make any changes to the system because “a few weeks worth of data” isn’t enough for them to make a change…

They must not play WvW.

This. They’re balancing the game for sPvP – it’s all about attracting the e-Sports $, not WvW. I guess they’re not bothered about losing the community when the next tri-realm game comes along (we all know there’s at least a couple on the way). We’ve had a nice manifesto, but promises mean delays, sadly.

Svarty.8019:

neostars.7029:

How hard is it for the 3rd place to drop a tier. 1st place move up a tier. It not rocket science anet

If you do that, people will throw matches on purpose.

“Let’s lose so we don’t have to fight X next week”.

They can do that regardless.

Leablo.2651:

Svarty.8019:

neostars.7029:

How hard is it for the 3rd place to drop a tier. 1st place move up a tier. It not rocket science anet

If you do that, people will throw matches on purpose.

“Let’s lose so we don’t have to fight X next week”.

They can do that regardless.

I’ll let someone else correct you.

Leablo.2651:

Ynot.8397:

neostars.7029:

How hard is it for the 3rd place to drop a tier. 1st place move up a tier. It not rocket science anet

Is it so hard for you to read the countless posts as to why 1 up 1 down is a terrible way to have this system work? SoS is going to have a good matchup this week. Maybe all the kittening will stop.

It’s not as terrible as the current system, that’s the point. The goal was to introduce variation to the matchups, and week-to-week movement is better than the loose randomization they have going right now.

Having server ratings in the first place was not a well-thought out idea, seeing as to how servers are not people and their performance can change overnight because of guild movements, while ratings are slow to respond to such changes. That lesson was never more obvious than at launch when you could transfer freely. That flaw is still there, just less prominent since it costs gems to move around. But when people do decide to move, the same thing still happens, you get bad matchups for weeks and months at a time.

We need a system that allows for rapid changes in ranking in accordance with rapid changes in performance. What we don’t need is tier 4 servers randomly being matched against tier 2 servers, fully six ranks apart. That level of randomization isn’t even sound in theory, and is obviously not working in reality. This is supposed to be a “recalibration” period to allow the ratings to resettle in new values, but the numbers being produced aren’t accurate because people are dropping out of WvW. You’re recalibrating the servers to incorrect values so that once you nail down the new rankings and reduce randomization, you will have even more long-term mismatches.

> Anet
> Doing an experiment
> Not controlling variables

The variance is waaay too high right now, but what they plan on doing eventually is to reduce that. If they were to cut it in half you would only fight the people in tiers next to you. The matches like kaineng getting stomped by fort aspenwood would not happen very often at all. If we had 1 up 1 down it would be kittenty matches every other week. What they are trying to do will give us a bit of room so that not every match is easy. The current system is messed up because the variance is much too far.

I also think that this system works much better for the lower tiers than the highest. There are 6-9 servers facing each other in the bottom 3 tiers instead of the same stale matchups.

The best system would be to have someone pick the matches themselves so we don’t get the obvious blowouts.

Anyone who has played on a server that is so badly outmatched that the winner of the week had 400% more points than the bottom server knows that it was better for the bottom server to just not play that week and avoid the aggravation. And when it happens for weeks in a row, then you start looking at other games, accepting that this will not be resolved anytime soon.

The issue is not that it is unsolvable. The issue that the designer’s egos will not let them accept that they are wrong. They will hide behind worn out clichés claiming you need to give it time, we are constantly evaluating results and you will learn new strategies. It is easier to deny an issue than to resolve it (less code!) especially if you pushed for a code change to implement this fiasco.

A simple solution is the golf paradigm. Give the seriously out manned servers a handicap to level the playing field. And not just the lame out manned buffer.

So my little snowflakes, you can complain (a futile gesture), leave WvW for awhile and wait for the promised miracle, find a new game or just make the best out of a rotten situation.

Ynot.8397
neostars.7029:
How hard is it for the 3rd place to drop a tier. 1st place move up a tier. It not rocket science anet
Is it so hard for you to read the countless posts as to why 1 up 1 down is a terrible way to have this system work? SoS is going to have a good matchup this week. Maybe all the kittening will stop.
Ferguson’s Crossing

No it not hard for me to read the countless posts because I have read them.
Because there countless posts doesn’t mean I agree.
1 UP 1 DOWN IS NOT A BAD SYSTEM and way better than this current system.
And NO SOS is not going to have a good matchup this week. Easy victory or a flogging is not what I want. I want a close competitive match. Get it.

neostars.7029:

Ynot.8397
neostars.7029:
How hard is it for the 3rd place to drop a tier. 1st place move up a tier. It not rocket science anet
Is it so hard for you to read the countless posts as to why 1 up 1 down is a terrible way to have this system work? SoS is going to have a good matchup this week. Maybe all the kittening will stop.
Ferguson’s Crossing

No it not hard for me to read the countless posts because I have read them.
Because there countless posts doesn’t mean I agree.
1 UP 1 DOWN IS NOT A BAD SYSTEM and way better than this current system.
And NO SOS is not going to have a good matchup this week. Easy victory or a flogging is not what I want. I want a close competitive match. Get it.

So every other week you want JQ? Sounds lovely. I’m sure Yak’s Bend would love a healthy dose of Fort Aspenwood. How can that possibly be better than relatively close matches if they make the system less random?

This current system is just horrible.

Tier 1 servers facerolling t2 servers. Tier 2 servers obliterating t4 servers.

In spite of it all, we have ‘perfectionists’ bagging on a 1 up 1 down suggestion in fear of people ‘throwing’ matches, offering no alternative because they’re too busy chasing after something that doesn’t exist.

Let’s be honest here, so what if servers magically organize to throw matches. We’ve already seen T1 servers fighting T2 and below servers…. but omg no!!! for the love of kittens man think of the what if…. WHAT. IF. !
>_>;;;;

Let’s get our priorities in order here.

Just like when free transfers broke WvW, something needs to be done about the current system. Even if it’s a simple hard lock of 2 ranks. (as in, the winning tier 1 server can never leave the tier 1 match up until they lose t1 enough to not be #1)

But honestly, let’s just move to something that is actually better already so we can deal with the new problems that manifest from that system.

This is what fun looks like?

Svarty.8019:

neostars.7029:

How hard is it for the 3rd place to drop a tier. 1st place move up a tier. It not rocket science anet

If you do that, people will throw matches on purpose.

“Let’s lose so we don’t have to fight X next week”.

it would be an improvement since in this system it is almost impossible to drop a tier. servers have been loosing on purpose for weeks and still couldn’t get to appropriate tier for their performance lvl.

1 up/ 1 down would be a great fix. so what if some1 wants to drop a tier… it will actually fix the matchups if they ever become stale.

also 1 up/ 1 down will actually react instantly to population movement. this means it will be possible to make an effort to bring T1 servers down since moving up will be instant (at least compared to what we have now). so bringing EU viz down will become possible. now they are just matched up against wrong opponents and any server trying to make an effort to go against viz will “never” get to T1 from lower tiers. with 1 up/ 1 down it would take only 7 weeks to get from T8 to T1.

tell me that is not awesome:P

PetricaKerempuh.7958:

Svarty.8019:

neostars.7029:

How hard is it for the 3rd place to drop a tier. 1st place move up a tier. It not rocket science anet

If you do that, people will throw matches on purpose.

“Let’s lose so we don’t have to fight X next week”.

it would be an improvement since in this system it is almost impossible to drop a tier. servers have been loosing on purpose for weeks and still couldn’t get to appropriate tier for their performance lvl.

1 up/ 1 down would be a great fix. so what if some1 wants to drop a tier… it will actually fix the matchups if they ever become stale.

also 1 up/ 1 down will actually react instantly to population movement. this means it will be possible to make an effort to bring T1 servers down since moving up will be instant (at least compared to what we have now). so bringing EU viz down will become possible. now they are just matched up against wrong opponents and any server trying to make an effort to go against viz will “never” get to T1 from lower tiers. with 1 up/ 1 down it would take only 7 weeks to get from T8 to T1.

tell me that is not awesome:P

One up one down seems to be an obvious answer compared to this horrible thing they pretend is a matchup.

Tiers generally represent only 2: coverage and numbers. They do not represent actual fighting capability of a server, thus the ominous “what happened? Night came, that’s what happened”

So, a tier can’t try to lose all the time to find an easy opponent and roflstomp them throughout the month. As it stands, this system is horribly bad to mine data right now, mainly because the damage has already been done: t1 servers get overpopulated, lower tiers underpopulated.

This system would be nice when:
1) delete every piece of data about server rankings
2) stop wvw for a whole week and allow free transfers during that time
3) do something about outmanned servers instead of giving it Magic Find bonus

Then, they can throw random matches. This may mix things up a bit, and when everything’s over, everyone’s rankings will reflect their performance again.

I still like my idea of two concurrent games with their own ratings: one that runs from, say, 12 PM local time to12 AM local time, then another that runs from 12 AM local time to 12 PM local time. There are a lot of ups and downs of the system, but it would do a lot to mitigate the coverage problem.

violentlycar.5267:

I still like my idea of two concurrent games with their own ratings: one that runs from, say, 12 PM local time to12 AM local time, then another that runs from 12 AM local time to 12 PM local time. There are a lot of ups and downs of the system, but it would do a lot to mitigate the coverage problem.

Everyone should not be stuck because their mother-in-law decided to stall the conversation a bit longer

16 pages, 788 replies and ANet is just ignoring us? Really, ANet? Really?

You guys could at least quickly jump in here and admit you pulled an ANet* again. But the way you handle this fiasco feels like you just don’t want me to buy your gems?

[* Pulling an ANet: kittening things up in the absolute worst way possible.]

pulling an ANet: of all offered solutions, presenting your own and making things worse than they actually were.

Are there any plans to change this system? It’s pretty bad.

I really doubt they have any plans to change their system and if their is, they are not sharing how. I love that they gave us variety however the match-ups are very unfair 90% of the time. And it’s all because smaller wvw servers getting paired up against larger wvw servers. Right now, since the change I have NEVER EVER seen jade quarry, blackgate, sanctum of rall get any other opponent, just them 3 get to play with each other always, where everyone else gets paired up with tarnished coast, dragonbrand and fort aspenwood. Which is unfair as those top 6 servers have the wvw coverage 24/7 for all 4 borderlands.
They really need to match servers up better for the # of players in a 24 hour period. The way im seeing it, servers 1-6 should play only themselves, 7-12(maybe 15) should only play each other, and so on. Because as the way it is now, more and more ppl are quitting wvw when they get the shaft and face servers that outnumber them 5-1 which makes it even harder for the hardcore wvw players to enjoy. Plus when anet isn’t even fixing the hacks ppl are using to shoot ac’s where they shouldn’t be just makes it that much harder when you are badly outnumbered.
Anyways I propose anet changes it as I mentioned about which servers fight who, or just go back to old system and reset the ranks, and make every server climb the ladder again which would bring back the variety we want, and when you do get the shaft by taking on a server that majorly outnumbers you, it wont be for very long as they’ll shoot up the ladder faster and get out of everyone’s way.

They should just change the deviation to slightly lower the values. SoS should not be fighting SBI, it’s not remotely fair to SBI who has a 400+ rating lower than us. A bracket of - 200 rating, maybe yes ok but 400? No thanks.

1 up 1 down sucks because every week JQ would stomp a T3 server into oblivion. A lower threshold of deviation would both allow for ‘fresh matchups’ without too much roflstomping.

Sorry people, but no scoring system is going to be able to correct the inherent flaws of the WvW setup that Anet is using. They promoted WvW as a 24/7 battleground, but they forgot to make them 24/7 by making them region based.

Until Anet completely rewrites their server architecture software to enable global play without consequences you will have to make due with this flawed system.

1 Global pool of WvW servers will mean there won’t be a downtime or almost none for servers as when one group goes to bed another is ready to take over. This way the scoring system would actually work. Step 2 would be to make sure matchups don’t go stale.

fishball.7204:

They should just change the deviation to slightly lower the values. SoS should not be fighting SBI, it’s not remotely fair to SBI who has a 400+ rating lower than us. A bracket of - 200 rating, maybe yes ok but 400? No thanks.

1 up 1 down sucks because every week JQ would stomp a T3 server into oblivion. A lower threshold of deviation would both allow for ‘fresh matchups’ without too much roflstomping.

But I like playing you all. Just not every week. Only once and awhile.

Plus, we are closer to you all than you are to TC, despite what the “ratings” say.

Johje Holan.4607:

fishball.7204:

They should just change the deviation to slightly lower the values. SoS should not be fighting SBI, it’s not remotely fair to SBI who has a 400+ rating lower than us. A bracket of - 200 rating, maybe yes ok but 400? No thanks.

1 up 1 down sucks because every week JQ would stomp a T3 server into oblivion. A lower threshold of deviation would both allow for ‘fresh matchups’ without too much roflstomping.

But I like playing you all. Just not every week. Only once and awhile.

Plus, we are closer to you all than you are to TC, despite what the “ratings” say.

How about what the score says?

The interesting thing about the SoS/CD/SBI blowout is that it’s the exact same matchup that the old system had running for months.

SoS has been posting about the new system ‘creating’ unfair matchups all over the forum when they were already in one of the biggest blowout matchups we’ve seen under either system. It took them less than a day to start posting about how unfair it all is when they had to fight outnumbered for a change.

If you subtract the complaints from SoS players and the responses to them from this thread, it’s a whole lot shorter. Props to Fishball btw, one of the few SoS posters who hasn’t complained about having to play up, but down. He may even be the first. The rest just wanted to get back to zerging down 2 smaller servers every week.

Vurse.9873:

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is what you call a game in a tailspin.

and here we are in this thread, arguing over whether we should be spinning clockwise or counter-clockwise (or end-over-end for the WULD crowd).

the match-up system is not the problem, the problem is population imbalance and a scoring system that discourages participation during blowout matches (for both the stronger team because their participation won’t be needed, and the weaker team because their participation won’t change the outcome).

I don’t think there can be any fix for population imbalance as long as players can choose where to play. but changing the way scores are displayed (par scores or handicaps would both work) might help keep players interested.

-ken

I wish everyone would stop saying SoS should stop complaining because we got an easy matchup.

How is having the #14 server face the #7 good for anyone?

Don’t get me wrong, SoS needed a break; and CD/SBI have been very eager to show us how they’ve improved (and they have); but the outcome has never been in doubt.

The only reason the score difference isn’t greater, is that we’re swamped with PvE’rs coming in and trying to organize our militia is driving our commanders to drink….more.

All I can say is that getting smashed four weeks in a row from servers 2 – 6 levels higher is killing moral on Kaineng. Sure we are out matched but over half of our WvW players have finally stopped playing. We could have fun even if we didn’t win before, now it’s making people quit and leave. Give us some dignity and drop us a few tiers… please… if random matchups put a server against massively OP servers for or more than four weeks in a row then it shouldn’t be so random… add some logic so the same server cant draw the short straw every time.

Having a system that takes months to balance when WvW guilds migrate can kill the game for some people.

fileark.4709:

All I can say is that getting smashed four weeks in a row from servers 2 – 6 levels higher is killing moral on Kaineng. Sure we are out matched but over half of our WvW players have finally stopped playing. We could have fun even if we didn’t win before, now it’s making people quit and leave. Give us some dignity and drop us a few tiers… please… if random matchups put a server against massively OP servers for or more than four weeks in a row then it shouldn’t be so random… add some logic so the same server cant draw the short straw every time.

Having a system that takes months to balance when WvW guilds migrate can kill the game for some people.

All of this right here

For people who get paid to develop games for a living I really can’t believe that you guys didn’t account for the variables that could destroy or enhance a servers performance. Maybe if we had an Arenanet dev in a Kaineng WvW guild they would understand the situation… oh wait we did… they left to Tarnished Coast /goodbye

Like fileark said, 4 weeks of this garbage it’s not even worth playing. Most of us are asking ourselves, “is it friday yet?”

btw you guys take forever to figure kitten out