Guild Wars 2

The best argument I’ve seen for Time Sliced Matchups has occurred this past reset.

GoM, the rank 13 server won the NA reset against the rank 9 and 11 servers. And the Rank 9 server can take on the Rank 7 and 8 servers on reset – even beat them.

That means that the R13 server’s NA prime players are as good/populous as the R7 server’s NA prime players.

Of course GoM will not win the week or even come close because they don’t have the 24 hour coverage.

How awesome would it be for 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13th ranked servers to all be able to play each other in relatively even matchups!? You’d have variety and relative balance. That’s exactly what would happen with a Time Sliced Matchup System.

Perhaps it can be experimented with? Or what about a Time Sliced Matchup System Tournament?

I think the maps should be doubled in size and add 2 more servers to each weekly match. So instead of 3 servers make it 5. This would eliminate one server getting tag teamed by the other two servers. This might also improve zerg fights and give lower populated servers a chance to hold some stuff for the PPT.
Just my thoughts on what I would like to see.

Map size should be increased, but without adding anymore people to the matches. It will make zergs less efficient.

Waypoints….and…ROUND MAPS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! need to go. You already spawn in 10 seconds away from your home garrison/keep.

At the very least the way the overall scoring is done for match-ups needs some serious thought put into possibly changing in order to feel more meaningful if they are going to remain 7 days in length. Going along with the OP idea, I’ve thought in the past that making it similar to the way tennis is scored would be a first step in the right direction.

Each day would be a “set” broken down into 6 “games” (4 hour time blocks) starting at reset running until the next reset; the match-up would still use “points” (PPT) for each “game” or time block. The server with the most “games” won at the end of a 24 hour period would win the “set”; ties would result in 2 or all 3 servers winning that “set”. If at the end of the week there is a tie in the number of “sets” (or days) won then overall PPT earned through the week (can’t have true tie-breakers like tennis I suppose) would break the tie – whether it be for 1st and 2nd, 2nd and 3rd, or 1st/2nd/3rd.

At least this way a server that is getting the bulk of it’s PPT gap during just one or two time periods (namely OCX/SEA for most and maybe EU for some), where it would normally equate to blowout on the overall score during a 7 day period, might still be challenged otherwise. You could theoretically win in overall PPT if a huge gap was created in short time frames repeatedly, but still lose the match-up if you were weak enough in other time blocks. The block could be adjusted from 6 hours if necessary to make the tiers more actively competitive. I would be interested if I got the time to look at the Millenium website or somewhere, and look at past match-ups to apply a weighted scoring system in certain time blocks for each Tier.

I’m sure we’ve all seen the threads in the past about night capping. A scoring system that would put more emphasis on weighted time periods, so one or two periods don’t decide the entire match-up, yet not eliminating the ability of those who play in those time periods contribute to the resulting match-up is the kind of idea I would be shooting for.

The way it stands now a lot of match-ups are decided by a small % of the overall players participating each week. If you had more people feeling like they can make a difference on the weekly outcome later in the week the game might feel more competitive for the average player (yeah, you can have some pull excessive overtime to make a difference, but that is usually short lived). Rather than the thought that I play during NA prime into late NA every day, and we are usually very close with the other 2 servers only to go to bed/school/work and come back the next day and it may as well already be over, now all I have left for the next 6 days are the fights? Where as it might be we’re all still tied after day 1, because even though 1 server dominated overnight they didn’t do enough otherwise, so I still have something to feel competitive about other than just fighting in GvG or open field pugmannders.

I don’t know how the server rating system would need to change (or if) as a result of such a change, but I’d be less interested in that to start as I would argue it bears much less of an importance as it pertains to competitive balance and possibly keeping more players interested throughout the week.

Johje Holan.4607:

The best argument I’ve seen for Time Sliced Matchups has occurred this past reset.

GoM, the rank 13 server won the NA reset against the rank 9 and 11 servers. And the Rank 9 server can take on the Rank 7 and 8 servers on reset – even beat them.

That means that the R13 server’s NA prime players are as good/populous as the R7 server’s NA prime players.

Of course GoM will not win the week or even come close because they don’t have the 24 hour coverage.

How awesome would it be for 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13th ranked servers to all be able to play each other in relatively even matchups!? You’d have variety and relative balance. That’s exactly what would happen with a Time Sliced Matchup System.

Perhaps it can be experimented with? Or what about a Time Sliced Matchup System Tournament?

So what your sating is your great in the very very short duration, under very specific circumstances, yet have zero stamina to do the distance, and you feel you deserve a reward for this by changing an entire game mode to compensate for your weakness?

Wow, talk about selfish.

dancingmonkey.4902:

Johje Holan.4607:

The best argument I’ve seen for Time Sliced Matchups has occurred this past reset.

GoM, the rank 13 server won the NA reset against the rank 9 and 11 servers. And the Rank 9 server can take on the Rank 7 and 8 servers on reset – even beat them.

That means that the R13 server’s NA prime players are as good/populous as the R7 server’s NA prime players.

Of course GoM will not win the week or even come close because they don’t have the 24 hour coverage.

How awesome would it be for 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13th ranked servers to all be able to play each other in relatively even matchups!? You’d have variety and relative balance. That’s exactly what would happen with a Time Sliced Matchup System.

Perhaps it can be experimented with? Or what about a Time Sliced Matchup System Tournament?

So what your sating is your great in the very very short duration, under very specific circumstances, yet have zero stamina to do the distance, and you feel you deserve a reward for this by changing an entire game mode to compensate for your weakness?

Wow, talk about selfish.

Well first I have no idea how what you wrote was concluded from what I wrote. Second, I’m not on GoM, I’m on SBI so I’m actually being selfless

I don’t give a crap about rewards. The point of it is to make it more fun. It is more fun to fight another team when there is balance and variety.

The 24/7 weeklong battle only works well if there is a large number of people playing and they are divided relatively evenly throughout the day. However, people are not distributed throughout the day evenly amongst the various servers.

Some servers have high population during one or two timezones but lower elsewhere. And the high pop times do not necessarily match with the servers they are fighting. I just think it would be more fun for the players of various timezones to fight other players in their timezones rather than doors.

Perhaps I assumed incorrectly that people were familiar with the Time Slice Match system. It has been discussed before as a way to mitigate population and coverage imbalance. Here’s an example – the time slice discussion starts on page five: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Nerf-the-domination-of-Coverage/page/5

Kuju.2153:

At the very least the way the overall scoring is done for match-ups needs some serious thought put into possibly changing in order to feel more meaningful if they are going to remain 7 days in length. Going along with the OP idea, I’ve thought in the past that making it similar to the way tennis is scored would be a first step in the right direction.

Each day would be a “set” broken down into 6 “games” (4 hour time blocks) starting at reset running until the next reset; the match-up would still use “points” (PPT) for each “game” or time block. The server with the most “games” won at the end of a 24 hour period would win the “set”; ties would result in 2 or all 3 servers winning that “set”. If at the end of the week there is a tie in the number of “sets” (or days) won then overall PPT earned through the week (can’t have true tie-breakers like tennis I suppose) would break the tie – whether it be for 1st and 2nd, 2nd and 3rd, or 1st/2nd/3rd.

I think Devon himself suggested something similar. I’d be all for it. However if it was the same three servers in the matchup in all “games” then if one server dominated a time period, they’d basically have nothing to do all week because they would own most structures all the time since there would be no other timezones to take it back.

As for weighting the scores for different time periods, they’ll never do that. It is perceived by some to be punishing players for playing during their time.