Guild Wars 2

I’m always a little bummed about mismatch weeks. Another topic in these forums pointed out this week is another doozy. But I think part of the problem with server mismatches can be easily fixed. I’ll just give the suggested fix now in case you don’t want to read the rest: servers should not battle for first place, second place, and third place. Instead each week there is just one “winner”, and the remaining two servers are both “losers”. The ranks of the servers for the next week should be accordingly adjusted.

Part of the problem with mismatched weeks is that one server quickly (using their large number of pixelated bodies) establishes dominance and upgrades all controlled keeps to T3. The other two remaining servers, realizing breaking into a T3 keep of a server that outnumbers them 2 to 1 is not a very feasible goal, smartly attack each other and duke it out for 2nd place. And…here’s the best part…one of the non-dominant servers gets it FROM BOTH ENDS!!! Oh yes, while the two non-dominant servers are waging their battle for second place, the dominant server decides which server to cripple with a stab in the back. And the result is painful.

The problem here is that one server clearly becomes the uncatchable front runner, and the other two then fight among each other. The current wvw scoring system promotes this behavior. However, if instead the scoring system encouraged the second and third place servers to both attack the first place server, the result might be more fun matchup. So my suggestion is to change the scoring system. After a week-long wvw matchup, the server with the most ppt wins. The other two lose equally badly. (This would mean in tournaments, first gets 5 points, second gets 2 points, and third gets 2 points as well. And something similar in regular play).

Thanks for reading. the tl;dr: wvw should be more like a game of king-of-the-hill. There is one king. We all join forces to dethrone the king. It should be tough being the king, not tough being 2nd or 3rd place. Change the WvW scoring system to reflect this.

Horrible idea.
Fixes nothing.
All this does is makes the backstab politics more important.

Simply limit players according to the number of players. When that outnumbered buff pops…it should have queued the player joining until the outnumbered buff was not there.

WOW’s alterac valley had the same problem. They implemented this system and all was well. They did it in a months time. Speaks volumes when the solution is known and you don’t do it.

i have had many match ups where its a fight for first place and third place is sitting there at the end of the week with a 5 digit score. If anything the out numbered buff needs to do two things put an auto Q on the servers that dont have the debuff running. and give you stat bonuses based on the number of enemies within 5000 range of you. say if you have 20 allies within that range and 50 enemies you would gain 30 to each stat zero allies to 10 enemies would be 10 points to each stat. this would be just enough for a decent commander to push the balance.

My suggestion for changing scoring is the following:

-Each structure of a certain type you control in any BL gives you diminishing returns on PPT the more you own. Thus, its most efficient to try and attack other BL’s (split into small groups) AND helps scores not become such a blowout.

-You could even add additional diminishing returns as your score ticks up between threshold so that teams don’t run away as much, but that might get too complicated.

It would be great if matchups would auto-balance themselves. Thats the essence of 3-way fights. It just been watered down by the ranking system and karma trains going for the least defended nearby keep regardless which opponent holds it.

Didn’t we have something along winner takes it all during the WvW tournaments? Were the matchups balanced then?

Korgov.7645:

Didn’t we have something along winner takes it all during the WvW tournaments? Were the matchups balanced then?

To date, the tournament scoring has been: 1st=5 points, 2nd=3 points, 3rd=1 point. At end of tournament, most points wins.

Rangerdeity.5847:

i have had many match ups where its a fight for first place and third place is sitting there at the end of the week with a 5 digit score.

I think two servers fighting for first place is good. At least then two of the three servers are having fun. I don’t think my suggestion would affect these matchups.

My suggestion is aimed at helping matchups like the ones we’ve seen this week: one highly populated server against two less populated servers. In this case, the high-pop server controls everything (which is boring even if you do win by a landslide), while the other two fight over each other’s paper keeps, while getting rolled by a giant zerg from the high-pop server on a regular basis (also not particularly fun).