Guild Wars 2

For the next season, please change the system. Swiss round is really boring for some servers. Basically the server that rolls over everyone is green. The server in the middle stays blue and the server that gets beaten by everyone stays red.

I don’t know for other leagues, but Silver EU, we have Gandara that keeps the top spot, Gunnar’s Hold that keeps the fifth slot and Fort Ranik that keeps the ninth slot. So Gandara stays green, Gunnar’s Hold stays blue and Fort Ranik stays red.

Also, since the servers stabilized in their position, Gandara has never fought us (Gunnar’s Hold) again and we absolutely never fought Fort Ranik (I don’t remember fighting Ring of Fire as well, but I might be wrong). I guess, Gandara will only fight 3 servers in the rest of the time (Piken Square, Abaddon’s Mouth and Far Shiverpeaks). And Fort Ranik will only fight Aurora Glade, Drakkar Lake and Ring of Fire.

In the lot, by staying in the 5th position of the silver league, we are the luckiest ones since we see nearly all servers.

So you actually made it so what you wanted to avoid a year ago with a random factor in the pairings has appeared again.

Been fighting the same servers for weeks. It sux…

The score distribution is on all leagues (except the 6-team NA gold, obviously) literally exactly the same. I am not kittening making this up. Check the tables on mos.millennium.
If this isn’t a failure of matchmaking I don’t know what is.

FA dropped down this week, so silver NA is not the same this week as last. (FA got double teamed for a few days and couldn’t recover in score). But this means we finally have a SBI vs Yaks matchup. If the double team didn’t happen we wouldn’t have this showdown.

Basically its up to you, the matchups can continue to be the same until a server is willing to double team for an edge.

Draygo.9473:

Basically its up to you, the matchups can continue to be the same until a server is willing to double team for an edge.

EBay and ET focused Kaineng and the result is another week of EBay/Kain/ET…

Looks like it doesn’t work everytime…

Draygo.9473:

FA dropped down this week, so silver NA is not the same this week as last. (FA got double teamed for a few days and couldn’t recover in score). But this means we finally have a SBI vs Yaks matchup. If the double team didn’t happen we wouldn’t have this showdown.

Basically its up to you, the matchups can continue to be the same until a server is willing to double team for an edge.

As it turns out cd/ioj -bp/nsp also flip flopped from previous results. All 3 matches are different.

What I would change is the points system, 1st server – 4 pts, 2nd – 2pts, 3rd – 1pt. I think it would give more reason to actually go and attack the 1st place, than accept that 1 server is strongest/most covered and the fight goes on for 2nd spot or any lower. (at least in EU)

Draygo.9473:

(FA got double teamed for a few days and couldn’t recover in score). But this means we finally have a SBI vs Yaks & HoD* matchup. If the double team didn’t happen we wouldn’t have this showdown.

Basically its up to you, the matchups can continue to be the same until a server is willing to double team for an edge.

FTFY

Atoss.1056:

What I would change is the points system, 1st server – 4 pts, 2nd – 2pts, 3rd – 1pt. I think it would give more reason to actually go and attack the 1st place, than accept that 1 server is strongest/most covered and the fight goes on for 2nd spot or any lower. (at least in EU)

Whichever server that gets the 3rd place on tier 1 is likely to win the next matchup on tier 2 and end up scoring as many points as the one consistetly achieving the 2nd place on the highest tier.
From a scoring point of view, there’s actually no point for tier 1 servers on fighting for anything but the 1st place. It’s the only placement that can make a difference.

The current system has a few issues, like some servers being encouraged to underperorm and lose on purpose at some point.
For example, a server that can win in t2 during the 8th week and then probably get the 3rd place in t1 on the next matchup, might prefer to end up being second in t2 and then play again in the same tier, were a win is likely to happen, effectively trading a 5-1 for a 3-5 and adding 2 extra points to the final score.
Nothing in the system promotes, however, a competition for 2nd/3rd place (unless on the 3rd tier of the league, obviously).

The system you propose doesn’t solve the losing on purpose on problem (a 4-1 is still worse than a 2-4). In fact, it encourages it even more, since an elevator server gets better results (4-1) than the one consistently hitting the 2nd place (2-2).
Winning the matchup is encouraged, yes, but that also happens in the current system. Once the winner of a match has been decided, however, your system would favour the server that gave up earlier or bring up a completely unhealthy and counter intuitive situation where 2 servers try to achieve as less PPT as possible. With the current system, even if pointless for scoring, we can have at least these servers fighting for pride.

Maguuma has been fighting the same servers repeatedly in gold tier. We finally got a fight VS. Blackgate due to BG getting double-teams and a bunch of hard core groups jumping ship on BG. Only to have BG steamrolling both DB and Mag simply because BG has double the pop we do.

monkeysensei.6492:

Maguuma has been fighting the same servers repeatedly in gold tier. We finally got a fight VS. Blackgate due to BG getting double-teams and a bunch of hard core groups jumping ship on BG. Only to have BG steamrolling both DB and Mag simply because BG has double the pop we do.

Population is life, population is love