Guild Wars 2

after this season please throw this idea away

It’s the worst possible matchup system. Except for all the other matchup systems.

It would be awesome system if there were no different leagues but all servers were in the same one. Swiss system is probably the best matchmaking system out there, but it really requires at least about 20 teams (servers) to work.

Seriously is awful how the population can vary from kitten T3… T3 cant fight T2 yet T2 cant fight T1 so they should only kitten only T2, and T3 only T3.

Swap tier if a server is no longer competitive.

Thats it!

PS: it REALLY frustrating having to fight higher tier. You cant do anything. ANYTHING. They just overwhelm you. Plus, if they are evil little kitten they spawn camp with their zerg… And it happens way more than it should.

Next time this is done the tourney should only be 5 weeks and include all 24-27 servers. Tiers in a swiss system doesn’t work very well when the tournament last for so long.

Klonko.8341:

Seriously is awful how the population can vary from kitten T3… T3 cant fight T2 yet T2 cant fight T1 so they should only kitten only T2, and T3 only T3.

Swap tier if a server is no longer competitive.

Thats it!

PS: it REALLY frustrating having to fight higher tier. You cant do anything. ANYTHING. They just overwhelm you. Plus, if they are evil little kitten they spawn camp with their zerg… And it happens way more than it should.

just all join 1 server
every week, we go random blu, red or green and just play wvw for fun

Swiss not only doesn’t work with a small pool of teams, but it also doesn’t work very well with 3-way matchups.

Well, der.

Check out NA Silver. Despite comprehensively winning every SBI-IOJ-CD match-up, SBI will probably end up being ranked the same as IOJ and CD.

Probably more examples out there too.

Anet actually managed to take a good idea (match servers according to how well they are doing) and implement it in the worst possible way. Literally everything that can go wrong about it has gone wrong.

So kudos, it’s not easy to screw up this bad but you managed it.

Not only does it not work with a small pool of teams and 3-way matchups:

It doesn’t work when there are vast differences in the “potential” (refering to the ability to compete with another team in the tournament due to population/skill/coverage/whatever).

And it doesn’t work with long matches. (Dealing with getting blown out for a day is fine – but not a week).

Next post will simulate a suggestion of including all servers in the pool.

It’s why we don’t get any Developer feedback in these forums because they haven’t got a clue how to improve WvW and they couldn’t care less about WvW.

They care only about their beloved sPvP and Esports.

I know a lot of us on Blackgate don’t like this weeks match up. Everyone on TS during reset was kinda feeling like a bully on DB and Mag. Could not give a idea on how to fix it, but I have to agree it seems really broken.

I thought everyone had forgotten Anet changed the matchup system.

Yes it’s terrible, please throw it away. Having pride in the fact that an alghorithm patted you on the head for being stomped is not a sufficient reward, or replacement for balanced matches.

I don’t care about stagnant matchups, give me close and exciting games.

Well I was going to do a simulation of including all NA servers in the pool but it quickly became ridiculous. Here’s a summary.

In Week 2 you would have such ridiculous matches as:
DH/Ebay/JQ
ET/TC/Mag

Week 3:
BG/SBI/JQ (lol SBI, thats my server)
BP/DH/TC

I gave up halfway through Week 4. Its also obvious that your placement in the first week dictates you’re subsequent success.

Anyway its hopeless. Some mathmatical genius needs to come up with a system for creating 3-way matches that takes into account Glicko Score, W-L and the number of times you’ve previously played a server.

Now if the “tournament” matches only lasted a day or two that would be better. Maybe the tournament could be Sat and Sun and the rest of the week a regular match?

Pick any server and count how many balanced matchups there are for that server. You’ll see that there is no tournament format that can work.

Because of population imbalance and the way transfers were handled I dont think any format would be fair, but in the EU Gold League between Desolation, BB and SFR it has been very much competitive unlike the weeks one of us dropped down where Desolation and BB have won quite easily.

Exact. If they don’t address the population issue, there’s no format in the world that could make this tournament fair.

In a server or faction based system, there simply is no good matchup system. There will always be a heavy imbalance somewhere.

The only systems I have seen that work are ones that align players together then align them into matches on a regular basis. My suggestion for GW2 is allow guilds to align with each other and then each week shuffle the guild deck into guild alliances versus other guild alliances. This way the matchups are not stale, far more balanced and players would fight for their guild alliance rather than an arbitrary server. It could create an entirely new dimension of WvW since guilds would constantly shift alliances.

Dredd Spirit Caller.4082:

Klonko.8341:

Seriously is awful how the population can vary from kitten T3… T3 cant fight T2 yet T2 cant fight T1 so they should only kitten only T2, and T3 only T3.

Swap tier if a server is no longer competitive.

Thats it!

PS: it REALLY frustrating having to fight higher tier. You cant do anything. ANYTHING. They just overwhelm you. Plus, if they are evil little kitten they spawn camp with their zerg… And it happens way more than it should.

just all join 1 server
every week, we go random blu, red or green and just play wvw for fun

no, no, a thousand times no!

What makes WvW is the camaraderie, developed over months, between members of a server. If you want random, anonymous, match ups EOTM is there for you.

If the argument is that servers need more equally matched numbers and 24hr coverage, then they could implement “server alliances” between different time zones (https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Is-it-about-time-for-a-few-Server-WvW-merges/first#post3708496). There is no reason, in this day and age, why a properly funded peering arrangement between Europe and America should add anything but truly negligible latency, so WvW game servers can be situated in either locale for all players. Already, without such investment, many players choose to play on servers in a different continent.

No match making helps, only enforce player balance https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Proposal-Enforced-Player-Balance may help.

Or a restart, i.e. the replacement of the server by something else (e.g. Alliance vs Alliance).

T2 is not the place for some T1 servers to be. We were amused (the T1 guys) at how undefended important areas are and this is supposed to be in the Gold league. We saw gates that were never repaired, Garrisons that had full supplies and 0 upgrades — except for that 1 poor sap who tried to defend the lords room with 1 AC placed directly next to the lord champ (RIP). We’ve seen some terrible golem rushes where people just waste 10 Omegas and misuse them really badly.

I love playing servers that have 1000% more coverage then my server, it’s so fun throwing siege down and then losing a keep an hour later because we only have 15 defending.

I can’t wait for HoD to fall apart when they get into tier 1. They will fall apart so quickly.

grifflyman.8102:

I can’t wait for HoD to fall apart when they get into tier 1. They will fall apart so quickly.

Don’t blame all of us on HoD. Many of us were there from the head start weekend.

Also, I might be the only one but I don’t like the influx of people to HoD, despite most of them being very nice and helpful. Sure we are doing better but there is all too often non-stop bickering between original & new commanders / players. It’s only a few players on each side doing all the bickering but some times, it goes on and on and on and on ….. very annoying.

As someone who still really enjoys WvW, I have a couple thoughts.

More servers, not less. The bigger a server is, the more opportunity for trolls and bickering as a server becomes a big city instead of a small town. More servers also provides more opportunity for more match ups (good for tournaments, breaking stale match ups up, etc). Smaller servers make is easier for new people to get involved as the atmosphere is more friendly (and players are needed more). The bad part would be splitting up communities and maybe not being able to defend everything as well but that might be a good thing. Oh, and expanding servers would give a PR boost of sorts as it would appear GW2 is expanding.

Take a census of the past month, find the smallest server and split the servers up until servers are similar size. You could even make it to where half of NA gw2 servers are large (like maybe what they are now) and then half do what I said a sentence ago with the hope that all kinds of players can play the style of WvW they want.

Dano.5298:

As someone who still really enjoys WvW, I have a couple thoughts.

More servers, not less. The bigger a server is, the more opportunity for trolls and bickering as a server becomes a big city instead of a small town. More servers also provides more opportunity for more match ups (good for tournaments, breaking stale match ups up, etc). Smaller servers make is easier for new people to get involved as the atmosphere is more friendly (and players are needed more). The bad part would be splitting up communities and maybe not being able to defend everything as well but that might be a good thing. Oh, and expanding servers would give a PR boost of sorts as it would appear GW2 is expanding.

Take a census of the past month, find the smallest server and split the servers up until servers are similar size. You could even make it to where half of NA gw2 servers are large (like maybe what they are now) and then half do what I said a sentence ago with the hope that all kinds of players can play the style of WvW they want.

They’re moving in exactly the opposite direction of what you’re describing. I don’t think they learned anything from the disastrous effects of lack of community in EoTM (and PvE megaservers). They are extremely likely to move towards consolidating servers (probably using the megaserver/EoTM model).

Lord Kuru.3685:

Dano.5298:

As someone who still really enjoys WvW, I have a couple thoughts.

More servers, not less. The bigger a server is, the more opportunity for trolls and bickering as a server becomes a big city instead of a small town. More servers also provides more opportunity for more match ups (good for tournaments, breaking stale match ups up, etc). Smaller servers make is easier for new people to get involved as the atmosphere is more friendly (and players are needed more). The bad part would be splitting up communities and maybe not being able to defend everything as well but that might be a good thing. Oh, and expanding servers would give a PR boost of sorts as it would appear GW2 is expanding.

Take a census of the past month, find the smallest server and split the servers up until servers are similar size. You could even make it to where half of NA gw2 servers are large (like maybe what they are now) and then half do what I said a sentence ago with the hope that all kinds of players can play the style of WvW they want.

They’re moving in exactly the opposite direction of what you’re describing. I don’t think they learned anything from the disastrous effects of lack of community in EoTM (and PvE megaservers). They are extremely likely to move towards consolidating servers (probably using the megaserver/EoTM model).

Well if what you say does indeed turn out to be the case, I will hope for the best.

I still think WvW is great and overall works well (infrastructure, limited bugs). Right now the only thing holding it back are just too tough of odds for some servers and PPT hovering at the top of your screen 24/7 (obviously, right?).

I think it makes sense considering each type of gameplay to run megaservers for PVE but the opposite of megaservers (be community oriented) for WvW. I think community oriented WvW has a better chance of happening with smaller populations.

As well as this, I don’t see why we couldn’t for a week or two every month or so have servers team up and play together against the gold league.

So imagine this:

-9 Servers remain relatively large (in case players like being on a huge pop server)
-All other servers are adjusted to be the size of the smallest current server (obviously increases amount of servers total)
-Once a month 6 servers are merged into 3 servers and play in large servers to decrease stale match ups in the large league.

Amaryllis Viper.2318:

I know a lot of us on Blackgate don’t like this weeks match up. Everyone on TS during reset was kinda feeling like a bully on DB and Mag. Could not give a idea on how to fix it, but I have to agree it seems really broken.

Agree. Some of us ended up leaving.

At this point, doesn’t seem there’s a reasonable way to climb out of this whole mess without a complete overhaul of the entire system and a reset/restart. Existing servers would need to be dissolved which will attrit a large number of customers.

The problem is the inherent bandwagon effect. It’s too easy to get to “winning” servers via transfer without having to start from scratch (unfortunately in this game, that’s a minor speedbump as well since leveling is so easy.) And yet transfers should have been the answer for the lower pop servers.

What we have right now is a half-baked system that punishes lower pop servers and continues to reward high pop (derp). That’s wrong and everybody knows it.

This isn’t team sports where the winning teams have last choice in draft rounds and the player roster has a cap.

I’d love to see the devs actually have a physical sit-down roundtable discussion with players from all tiers to brainstorm. Totally impractical. Not even getting feedback on suggestions posted on the forum.

Perhaps the answer is for ANet to pick a vision for what WvW ought to become (GvG, faction, some hybrid combination, throw out tournaments altogether) and deal with the attrition that results. Because the current status quo of limp along, throw a different kind of tournament structure at the players is doing more harm than good.

-Captain Obvious

Would scrapping the entire PPT system and instead having the points added based on a timer from when you capped it be better. This could put more emphasis on defending rather than capping a bunch of points right before tally reset.

Another thing I was thinking would be to gain points for capping locations similar to how they do it with stomping. My hopes is that it would added a little volatility to the scores and add a benefit to continuously cap points.

I’m not sure what the overall impact that this would be and whether it would actually improve WvW. I’m also not sure if this would benefit smaller servers who could continuously flip camps/towers. It could help them keep up with stacked server or it could not. The benefit for defending a point should outweigh the benefit for capping it though.

We’ve had multiple discussions / suggestions out here for changing PPT, for adding points for defending and we’ve gotten no change and radio silence.

-Sorry, my frustration is showing. I agree there needs to be a change.

Pondering impractical 9-way server matchups (combo of 3 servers, 1 from each tier) against 2 other 3-way combos for a week, then rotate the temporary alliances for the next match up…. 3x the maps…..makes my head hurt.

Megaserver and AvAvA. Is the way to go.

+1
each guild should choose a faction and fight for it and not for a server, rewards should be linked to your victory and guild victory when you are in WvW not to a server.
After that, this game will be a Guild Wars!

I seem to remember folks complaining about the random matchups last season. No one is ever going to be happy.

Crunk n monkey.3749:

I seem to remember folks complaining about the random matchups last season. No one is ever going to be happy.

Random? I remember there being a set schedule but the placement was “random” in favor of one server.

Right now any tournament is pointless due to disparities in active server population. A stacked server will will unless 2v1’d. Servers should not have to rely on that just to stand a chance.

The reason players stack is because the rewards are better.

Anet has to end this idea that first place gets first prize. Either eliminate the prizes altogether (everybody who completes the meta gets the prize), or give first prize to top tier servers, not just top server.

If you gave Gold Reward to The top third not just top 1 (in NA that is 8 servers) and threw everybody into Swiss matchups, there would be a big scramble and a lot of drama even now in week 6-7 of the tournament.

Sure the most overstocked server would be winning every week, but there would be actual competition and matches where the results mattered somewhere.

Klonko.8341:

Seriously is awful how the population can vary from kitten T3… T3 cant fight T2 yet T2 cant fight T1 so they should only kitten only T2, and T3 only T3.

Swap tier if a server is no longer competitive.

Thats it!

PS: it REALLY frustrating having to fight higher tier. You cant do anything. ANYTHING. They just overwhelm you. Plus, if they are evil little kitten they spawn camp with their zerg… And it happens way more than it should.

Who cares, have fun, and try.

Watching YB beat FA, CD beat IoJ, and BP beat NSP last week, made the swiss style interesting.

Bronze isn’t bad as well.

Gold would be terrible, if it wasn’t for the 2v1 going on.

I only read a few posts here so I apologize if I am repeating something here….

Anet, if you’re going to keep the servers split up into specific locations (NA UK or where ever), then only allow people in that area to join their server group. Because by splitting up the server groups you have created “off hours”. Which means the more people that are on a server that isn’t in their area the more of an advantage that server has during off hours. Which is a big reason why competition can be so lopsided when playing a server in a higher/lower tier. Every single persons location is easily determined by their IP, so it isn’t hard to make sure people in the area for the UK servers can only join the UK servers… and likewise for any of the other server group locations.

Otherwise make WvW play time during certain hours of the day…. like from 6AM til 12AM server time… this way there aren’t any off hours. But then that would really suck… so obviously that isn’t the solution… so what is the solution? Unfortunately the only fair option I see is to restrict players from joining a server outside of their location, or, if you do allow them to join a server outside of their location then don’t allow them to play WvW. Which, by the way, would really suck as well! You created this fiasco, ANET not us. It’s already sad that the outcome of nearly every match up can be dictated if 2 servers ally against 1. Remember this is a game you built, people expect fairness by the developers, not who can get as many people on their server as possible so they have the best chance of winning….

I’m thinking they should offer weekly meta achievements, and give rewards for those. Then they can hand out finishers based on server placement. After the season ends, free transfer period to any server. Then a few weeks of off-season to help shake out where the servers actually stand. Then a short transfer period aimed at evening out the tiers/leagues. Then add in gem store stuff like completing Ogres gives them chainsaws and bazookas instead of clubs and bows. Also add fishing to the game and bobsledding.