Guild Wars 2

The Problem in Short: Every match is a snowball match and no one is happy with snowball matches. By snowball matches I mean matches with one decisive winner that the other two servers cannot contest.

Q: Is it really EVERY MATCH?
A: Take a look at http://mos.millenium.org/matchups#NA
7 out of 8! Yes, astonishing 7 out of the 8 tiers are shaping up to be snowball matches with an uncontested winner.

Is this intended and good for WvW? Clearly not.
> Why even play if there’s no risk of your competition overtaking you.
> Why even play if there’s no risk of overtaking your competition.
At least as far as score is concerned.

Why does this ALWAYS happen?
I can’t imagine the massive score differences being due to proportionally massive population differences on every single tier… Presumably it has to be a small difference in population and coverage that spirals out over time and battles into big differences in score. Then as the competition (as far as score is concerned) becomes pointless, morale kicks in and does the rest.

IMO this is the most significant problem with WvW and the one Anet should be putting the most urgency in solving.

- – -

Edit:

Here’s some ideas on how this could be solved in a (hopefully) balanced way that would remain fun for all sides.

- The solutions should primarily be defensive and counterbalance the difference in numbers on the map so the teams with significantly less population at the time have a decent fighting chance at holding and keeping their objectives.

- The solutions should ideally be map-wide and dynamic, changing based on the number of players each side has on the map.

- It should not impact open field fights of even numbers. (Should not be global stat boost to players directly).

Here are some factors that could be changed dynamically based on map populations:
- Stats and numbers of NPCs.
- Outnumbered stat boosts to players near (or inside) their towers.
- Outnumbered stat boosts to anti-personal siege weapons or all siege weapon damage vs players.
- Outnumbered siege damage reduced vs walls and doors.

Are snowballs and momentum a bad thing? Are they unnatural?

EasymodeX.4062:

Are snowballs and momentum a bad thing? Are they unnatural?

In any kind of competition where score is supposed to matter, yes. That’s my opinion anyway. Maybe you prefer winning/losing by a landslide.

DotA / LoL / HoN are “snowball-y”. Seems to be doing ok for those games. Guarantee score matters more in those games than in GW2.

You also haven’t explained why momentum is unnatural.

Unfortunately,
The difference IS that big between server’s wvw population in most tiers.

There’s no real practical solution to this, unless Anet starts merging servers or forcibly relocating people (The latter option isn’t going to happen, I’m not advocating it and I’m sure Anet wouldn’t even consider it)

In most tiers you know who’s going to win as soon as you know who your opponents are. And if you’re not the server that’s going to win, half your wvw population won’t bother playing past Monday.

I’m honestly growing bored with week long matches, I think there is an argument to be made for shortening match lengths significantly,
But I don’t think this thread is the place to do it.

Well, I wouldn’t advocate shorter matches based on that rationale.

The Tues-Friday downtime for players allows them to back off from the game and relax more freely. Take some time off and watch LoL LCS, or whatever.

E.g. there’s life beyond GW2.

Week-long still allows for the conclusion of close matches when they occur. Note that “close” doesn’t have to be all 3 servers. Even if two of the 3 are close, it can be an interesting matchup.

EasymodeX.4062:

DotA / LoL / HoN are “snowball-y”. Seems to be doing ok for those games. Guarantee score matters more in those games than in GW2.

You also haven’t explained why momentum is unnatural.

No because in those games you win very shortly after you/team snowballs. It doesn’t drag on to become pointless.

And whatever do you mean by ‘unnatural’? It’s unnatural to drag on any kind of score-based match for a week when the winner is already decided. Clearly the fun in WvW is not primarily about the score but it just seems like a big flaw in the design.

I got an idea while watching Family Feud (which, as we all know, is almost identical to WvW). During the later rounds, point values are increased. I thought, what if point values in WvW were tripled on Thursday or something? A losing team could rally.

Of course, the winning team could just win by a bajillion more points, but at least it would add some incentive.

EasymodeX.4062:

Well, I wouldn’t advocate shorter matches based on that rationale.

The Tues-Friday downtime for players allows them to back off from the game and relax more freely. Take some time off and watch LoL LCS, or whatever.

E.g. there’s life beyond GW2.

Week-long still allows for the conclusion of close matches when they occur. Note that “close” doesn’t have to be all 3 servers. Even if two of the 3 are close, it can be an interesting matchup.

That isn’t the bulk of the rationale I would argue for shorter matches on :P
As I said, this thread isn’t the place for it, or my post would have been three times longer (To explain the rest) and have little to do with the actual topic.

But to be as concise as possible,
I think that with weeklong matches, servers are pretty locked into their fate with scores by Monday or Tuesday. At least if the matches were 2-3 days long, servers could really rally together for a shorter period of time and win a match or two that they would have otherwise lost because they don’t have the population or stamina to compete for a whole week.

If a match was made out of snowballs it would not light very well so what good would it be. It would fall apart as tried to strike light them. And pack of matches would get soggy if they melted.

The more I think about it the more I see the parallels between WvW and Family Fued… make it stop!!!

Each server isn’t comprised of the same skill, same players, or time people play. There is a vast variety and the match ups group “like” servers together, not guaranteeing a super balanced fight.

As groups and guilds shift servers, the balance will always be in flux.

Edited OP with some suggestions or ideas how to balance matches. Though I’m curious if WvW is ‘working as intended’ for Anet.

EnRohbi.2187:

Unfortunately,
The difference IS that big between server’s wvw population in most tiers.

What I mean is when a server is winning by a factor of 3 or 4 to 1 in points over 2nd and 3rd, it doesn’t mean they have 3 or 4 times as many people as the 2nd and 3rd servers combined.

It’s too easy for a small difference in numbers or coverage to turn into a huge difference in score.

Zephyrus.9680:

EasymodeX.4062:

DotA / LoL / HoN are “snowball-y”. Seems to be doing ok for those games. Guarantee score matters more in those games than in GW2.

You also haven’t explained why momentum is unnatural.

No because in those games you win very shortly after you/team snowballs. It doesn’t drag on to become pointless.

And whatever do you mean by ‘unnatural’? It’s unnatural to drag on any kind of score-based match for a week when the winner is already decided. Clearly the fun in WvW is not primarily about the score but it just seems like a big flaw in the design.

Drag on? It’s all relative. 1-week matches in GW2 are a blink of an eye. Compare this to DAOC’s 2-year matches.

Of course, LoL’s 45 minute matches are shorter … shrug?

3-day matches in GW2 are far too fast. I would advocate 2 week matches.

No matter what time limit you set, quitters will quit halfway through.

Problem = not solved.

The current 1-week model allows for a lot of activity during the weekends, once every match.

EnRohbi.2187:

I think that with weeklong matches, servers are pretty locked into their fate with scores by Monday or Tuesday. At least if the matches were 2-3 days long, servers could really rally together for a shorter period of time and win a match or two that they would have otherwise lost because they don’t have the population or stamina to compete for a whole week.

Monday or Tuesday is about halfway through the time period. That means you had ~4 (of 7) days of significant action.

If the matches were 2-3 days long, then after 48 hours, people would quit.

In addition you’d have absurd weekend versus weekday coverage disparities that would rock GLICKO on a match-by-match basis. Is that a good thing? Perhaps, perhaps not. It would make matches less fair, but also shake them up.

If this thread is about more fair matchups, then this solution would negatively impact the ratings. If this change is about more chaos and variety, then it would be a positive impact.

I actually agree with everything the OP posted.

I still would like to see more dynamic matches though.

We cannot wait for Anet to solve this, it’s not going to happen. Perhaps better rewards, more shinys, outmanned, etc. may help but the fact is when you are getting beaten at every turn, its just not fun and so less people log on and it becomes even worse, it’s a vicious circle.

If you have a lower population or varied coverage to begin with you simply cannot take on the dominant server. And then you have the other server hitting you in the back when you even try to do something against the dominant server.

Here is the solution: You’ve got to give your troops some victories. And the way to do that is for both of the non-dominant servers to gang up on the dominant server.

For some reason a lot of people think its underhanded or dishonest or something for two servers to gang up. That’s ridiculous. It is perfectly legit and in fact intended! Anet has said so themselves. It’s the reason there are three servers and not two.

Let’s face it, as said before, we know who is going to win the tier before the match even starts. But can they beat both servers at the same time?

In WWII, if the western allies and the Soviet Union felt they had to fight each other as well as Germany we would be looking at a very different Europe right now. Folks, it’s the early 1940’s, the dominant server in each tier is Germany, what are you going to do?

Johje Holan.4607:

Let’s face it, as said before, we know who is going to win the tier before the match even starts. But can they beat both servers at the same time?

^
This.

Player problem, player solution.

How easy is this.

This is basically what was about to happen to HOD in the first month, with JQ and ET about to enter T1 at the same time. Unfortunately TA bailed the week that they would have hard a straight 1v2.

In terms of snowballing, all ANet can reasonably do is to give the losing servers the tools to retake footholds on the map. IMO, there should be some tweaks to supply buildup, stored supply, and siege decay. But, that’s about it.

EasymodeX.4062:

EnRohbi.2187:

I think that with weeklong matches, servers are pretty locked into their fate with scores by Monday or Tuesday. At least if the matches were 2-3 days long, servers could really rally together for a shorter period of time and win a match or two that they would have otherwise lost because they don’t have the population or stamina to compete for a whole week.

Monday or Tuesday is about halfway through the time period. That means you had ~4 (of 7) days of significant action.

If the matches were 2-3 days long, then after 48 hours, people would quit.

In addition you’d have absurd weekend versus weekday coverage disparities that would rock GLICKO on a match-by-match basis. Is that a good thing? Perhaps, perhaps not. It would make matches less fair, but also shake them up.

If this thread is about more fair matchups, then this solution would negatively impact the ratings. If this change is about more chaos and variety, then it would be a positive impact.

Well,
As I’ve said (Now in the third post in a row),
This has nothing to do with this thread :P

Well, the OP is saying that the snowballed matches last too long, so that leads directly to a consideration of how long the matches are.

EasymodeX.4062:

Zephyrus.9680:

EasymodeX.4062:

DotA / LoL / HoN are “snowball-y”. Seems to be doing ok for those games. Guarantee score matters more in those games than in GW2.

You also haven’t explained why momentum is unnatural.

No because in those games you win very shortly after you/team snowballs. It doesn’t drag on to become pointless.

And whatever do you mean by ‘unnatural’? It’s unnatural to drag on any kind of score-based match for a week when the winner is already decided. Clearly the fun in WvW is not primarily about the score but it just seems like a big flaw in the design.

Drag on? It’s all relative. […]

No it’s not relative to anything and that was my point. On GW2 the match ends after a week, period. Relative to nothing.

On LoL the match ends when your base is destroyed which is based on how well your team did. If it’s looking pointless, you can vote to surrender and end the match immediately. It’s not a relative comparison; it’s completely different because there is nothing that’s dragged on.

But I’m not the one arguing for shorter matches. That won’t really solve any of the imbalances.

WvW is supposed to be a constant battlefield but half the time it’s PvD and maps all one color. Does anyone really enjoy PvD?

We would need more mechanisms to balance the playing field for the underdogs at the time so that everyone is having a challenge, all the time.

Zephyrus.9680:

Here’s some ideas on how this could be solved in a (hopefully) balanced way that would remain fun for all sides.

- The solutions should primarily be defensive and counterbalance the difference in numbers on the map so the teams with significantly less population at the time have a decent fighting chance at holding and keeping their objectives.

- The solutions should ideally be map-wide and dynamic, changing based on the number of players each side has on the map.

- It should not impact open field fights of even numbers. (Should not be global stat boost to players directly).

Here are some factors that could be changed dynamically based on map populations:
- Stats and numbers of NPCs.
- Outnumbered stat boosts to players near (or inside) their towers.
- Outnumbered stat boosts to anti-personal siege weapons or all siege weapon damage vs players.
- Outnumbered siege damage reduced vs walls and doors.

Also possible to dynamically change- point ticks.
i.e. Given an equal number of players amongst the 4 wvwvw maps, you get the full point value. However, at various thresholds of superior numbers, the points assigned are decreased by a commensurate amount for the next tick.
It would not even have to be a strict ratio. For example, at 120% of 1/3 the total wvwvw population, you recieve 90% of the “normal” point tick. Sort of an outmanned buff for the score.
In theory, it would reward skill, coordination, etc and combat the zerg mentality, yet still allow numerically superior servers to control more point generating locations. Sun Tzu-esque application of overwhelming force would still be valuable as a means of controlling territory and strongpoints like keeps, but the landslide of points days into a match could be mitigated.

EasymodeX.4062:

Well, the OP is saying that the snowballed matches last too long, so that leads directly to a consideration of how long the matches are.

Well then let me elaborate a bit.

Glicko might not be the best system to deal with shorter matches,
But a lot of people are in agreement that Glicko isn’t the best way to handle the matches we have now either. :P

I do, in fact, think it would be a good thing for weekend and weekday matches to be different.

The weekends and weekdays already play very differently from each other.
I’ve always felt that in close matches, the weekends are one of the least important times of week (Which is unfortunate since it’s also the time with the highest participation),
While in lopsided matches, the weekend can be the most important time.

Coming out of the weekend with a 50,000+ point lead is pretty much the end of the match.

Because of the server populations, even with shorter matches it is likely that the matches will be largely stagnant, but the refresh in scores every couple days could at least bring the fairweather players out more frequently. And as I touched on previously, it is much easier to rally your server’s real determination and forces for 48-72 hours than it is to keep them playing all week. Even servers with lesser populations would have a chance at having a victory or two, where as they would otherwise lose horribly in an attrition fight.

Anet’s original plan was for two weeks matches but, as far as I recall and based on what Anet released, it was decided after one week matches began that two-week matches would have been too long. It’s possible that one week matches are too long too.

One thing that does seem to magnify the ‘snowballing’ of the stronger servers score is the desire of the other two servers to not be last. Often the other two servers will target each other which leaves the stronger server relatively unopposed.

As an incentive to attack the current PPT server, bonus points could be awarded for capturing territory off them. Maybe a bounty could be placed on the head of current PPT server players in the form of +100% magic find. Both these options have there flaws but I think they could result in more competitive matches.

I honestly don’t agree with the whole “Snowbally” sentiment when it comes to points.

I’ve seen a lot of cases on the match up scores where a server had a substantial lead on Sunday evening and another server completely overtook them by Friday reset. I’ve had my server win due to this. Bringing itself to first place during the week. Also I’ve lost to this by losing first place during the week.

The thing I think has a snowball effect is WvW populations, if a server is winning more people play for it, if it starts losing then the randoms stop coming and the die hard WvW guilds are all that’s left. Simple as that. Then, to me, it shows the true skill of a server.

I honestly tend to to stop playing when we take an early lead because it becomes too easy due to the huge influx randomers, I’ve also seen other big WvWers stop while we’re in a big lead. Not only does this empty WvW it makes it easier for the then losing servers allowing them to take that lead in the week.

Ermahgerd team up against the bigger server guyz! Stop fighting for 2nd places and take the big dood out maybe just maybe the bigger server wont win everytime. it’s weird that we have 3 servers so that there wont ever be anyone teaming up against the server that outnumbers both…. it’z craziness

EasymodeX.4062:

Well, I wouldn’t advocate shorter matches based on that rationale.

The Tues-Friday downtime for players allows them to back off from the game and relax more freely. Take some time off and watch LoL LCS, or whatever.

E.g. there’s life beyond GW2.

Week-long still allows for the conclusion of close matches when they occur. Note that “close” doesn’t have to be all 3 servers. Even if two of the 3 are close, it can be an interesting matchup.

Bold for lulz… Life beyond GW2… Watching someone else play another game. Exciting life!

EasymodeX.4062:

DotA / LoL / HoN are “snowball-y”. Seems to be doing ok for those games. Guarantee score matters more in those games than in GW2.

You also haven’t explained why momentum is unnatural.

You’re comparing Guild Wars 2 to an entirely different game with a different aim. WvWvW is snowballed so badly. Momentum is unnatural when one server remains dominant for a long period of time with no opposition to contest them.

@OP
Another way snowballs can be slowed down is if the first place world was NOT given a break-out. Especially given in other worlds, this makes no sense.

I like the global stat buff idea. I don’t see how bonus EXP, Karma and Magic Find help in a case where you’re outnumbered.

IMO the best thing they could do is take out the gold sink for WvW.

I don’t think the score bothers people so much, most know that this game is won by coverage. What people do hate is to spend all that gold every day to upgrade everything because it it lost to the other servers night crew.

this will not fix everything but I do believe it would get many more people playing WvW.

either increase the karma cost or create some WvW currency that you get for kills and events that is used for upgrades.