Guild Wars 2

Another week, another incredibly unbalanced match up. Why in the name of Grenth is NSP (rank 17) being matched up with SBI (rank 10)? That a difference of 7 rank points. That’s like pro boxing suddenly deciding it’d be fun for featherweights to fight heavyweights because, y’know, gotta mix things up. I don’t mind losing, I just want a fair shake at winning. With these match ups it’s not even fun to try. You log on, see the top server spawn-camping you with 3 bloodlust buffs and suddenly grinding T6 mats for a legendary seems appealing again. What happened to all that Anet rhetoric like “We wanna make WvW exciting, fun, and friendly for casual players…. THAT’s why we’re nerfing confusion.”??? That was all Anet could talk about. Then came the horrible new match up system and this dreadful bloodlust buff, frustrating the hardcore WvW’ers and scaring off the casuals pugsters. I really wish someone would just explain the logic behind all this? Is it to push us back to PVE? Does NCSoft want us to ragequit GW2 so we’ll buy Blade & Soul? Please! Spirit of Bear! Tell me what the humans are thinking!

Well, we’ll see how leagues go.

Faranox.4217:

Well, we’ll see how leagues go.

Hahaha…it’s gonna be worse!

Kitten 7 ranks, it’s gonna be 12 ranks difference at its worst match up in NA. You’re going to pray for only 7 ranks difference if you’re the bottom few servers in the gold or silver league.

The league is going to be a WvW disaster, espeically with the wonderful new BL Bloodlust! Can you say, ROTFLMAO_STOMP?

I still wanna know the logic at play here. Most designers want to encourage balance in PvP. Why is Anet encouraging imbalance?

With the old matchup system people complained that the matches were too stale. EU tier 1 and 2 for example were the same for about two months and it took the complete breakdown of two servers to change it.

Yeah things were too static before…

But all ANet had to do was change the Ratings Calc to allow for more volatility so that Servers could more easily move up and down Ranks without getting “tidal locked” in a stale and broken Matchup.

They could even have set it so we had a “Random Match” once-a-month for variety and to allow Ratings to shift more.

There was no need however to go to this system where Servers are playing way out of their Ranking and actually gaining Rating for being blown out and stomped on all week.

best part about that match up is that we get exactly same match up and sbi once again gets same easiest to defend keep in eb….what the actual kitten?

Winner goes up, 2nd place stays, loser goes down. How hard is this to implement?

Meeks.1079:

Winner goes up, 2nd place stays, loser goes down. How hard is this to implement?

I’m sure T3 server would LOVE to play T1 every week… WULD is not going to work, ever.

I also find this match system strange. I’m on SF and some how last week we faced Kianeng and GoM. This week we have Yak’s Bend and HoD. As of writing this the match has been live for only a day or two and Yaks already up by 25k. I would love to know how we are getting these servers.

During my time in WoW they had the PvP system where you went against your opposing faction. In many cases one side was either out numbered or skilled. Of course this was a problem for awhile and there was no way players would leave a winning side so they eventually introduced battlegroups. Pulling players from multiple servers to form one team for each side. Removing the imbalance. This is the only way I see this problem being fixed.

If you don’t want to test your skill and try to win against servers a few tiers above you I don’t know what to say…

EFWinters.5421:

If you don’t want to test your skill and try to win against servers a few tiers above you I don’t know what to say…

Devon, is that you?

The idea behind the current system is ok. It was way too stale before, this RNG match-up system gives us some variety. Winner up, loser down has the risk of having the same match-up every other week.

IMO the only problem is that the RNG used for the matchups allows too big a gap between ranks. NSP (#17) has gotten SBI (#10) then CD (#11) then SBI the past three weeks!

Of course with the Leagues are coming up, God help us all — it could really kill some servers and thus WvW as a whole.

(Love the Devon quote, by the way EFWinters — it’s pretty clear he doesn’t even play the game.)

EFWinters.5421:

If you don’t want to test your skill and try to win against servers a few tiers above you I don’t know what to say…

I know what to say, but I’m too polite to say it.

In all seriousness, this whole “test your skill” against stronger servers concept is something I’ve heard before and it’s not what the WvW public wants. No one on NSP is sitting around saying, “These match ups are all so easy, I wish we could really get a TEST of our skill!” GW2 didn’t design WvW to be the kind of game where skill trumps all. Skill is a huge factor in even population server battles, but there’s a huge drop off of skill and tactics mattering when you are massively outnumbered. Thus the nature of Zerg war. Exponentially, the servers on the higher tiers have higher WvW populations and more participating players. So the only mettle that is tested with this new match up system is “How many WvW players do you have?” This quickly leads to frustration and ultimately boring gameplay.

WvW players want epic battles. The best match I ever played was in the beginning of the year when HoD and GoM were fighting NSP. We were all evenly matched and it led to some incredable battles. There was an assault on our red keep that lasted 4 hours straight and involved a hundred players on both sides. THAT was the WvW I loved. These new match ups NEVER create those moments. It’s a crying shame. So consider the mettle tested, let’s move on to balanced match ups already.

Entropy.4732:

I still wanna know the logic at play here. Most designers want to encourage balance in PvP. Why is Anet encouraging imbalance?

You didn’t play WvW in the first half year of it’s existence. They had the exact system you’re asking for.
Most servers were matched against the same ones for months at a time. It became tiresome.
The randomness could have been toned down a bit (we played against servers r10-11r above us), but there’s nothing wrong with a matchup of 6 ranks difference. There’s only so much you can do with 27/24 servers.

Entropy.4732:

I know what to say, but I’m too polite to say it.

In all seriousness, this whole “test your skill” against stronger servers concept is something I’ve heard before and it’s not what the WvW public wants. No one on NSP is sitting around saying, “These match ups are all so easy, I wish we could really get a TEST of our skill!” GW2 didn’t design WvW to be the kind of game where skill trumps all. Skill is a huge factor in even population server battles, but there’s a huge drop off of skill and tactics mattering when you are massively outnumbered. Thus the nature of Zerg war. Exponentially, the servers on the higher tiers have higher WvW populations and more participating players. So the only mettle that is tested with this new match up system is “How many WvW players do you have?” This quickly leads to frustration and ultimately boring gameplay.

WvW players want epic battles. The best match I ever played was in the beginning of the year when HoD and GoM were fighting NSP. We were all evenly matched and it led to some incredable battles. There was an assault on our red keep that lasted 4 hours straight and involved a hundred players on both sides. THAT was the WvW I loved. These new match ups NEVER create those moments. It’s a crying shame. So consider the mettle tested, let’s move on to balanced match ups already.

Ok now I wish I would have read further before replying to this unfortunate thread. Your post is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever read on these forums.
Just a friendly advice: Don’t think you’re the spokesperson for the WvW public.

Jamais vu.5284:

Entropy.4732:

I still wanna know the logic at play here. Most designers want to encourage balance in PvP. Why is Anet encouraging imbalance?

You didn’t play WvW in the first half year of it’s existence. They had the exact system you’re asking for.
Most servers were matched against the same ones for months at a time. It became tiresome.
The randomness could have been toned down a bit (we played against servers r10-11r above us), but there’s nothing wrong with a matchup of 6 ranks difference. There’s only so much you can do with 27/24 servers.

Entropy.4732:

I know what to say, but I’m too polite to say it.

In all seriousness, this whole “test your skill” against stronger servers concept is something I’ve heard before and it’s not what the WvW public wants. No one on NSP is sitting around saying, “These match ups are all so easy, I wish we could really get a TEST of our skill!” GW2 didn’t design WvW to be the kind of game where skill trumps all. Skill is a huge factor in even population server battles, but there’s a huge drop off of skill and tactics mattering when you are massively outnumbered. Thus the nature of Zerg war. Exponentially, the servers on the higher tiers have higher WvW populations and more participating players. So the only mettle that is tested with this new match up system is “How many WvW players do you have?” This quickly leads to frustration and ultimately boring gameplay.

WvW players want epic battles. The best match I ever played was in the beginning of the year when HoD and GoM were fighting NSP. We were all evenly matched and it led to some incredable battles. There was an assault on our red keep that lasted 4 hours straight and involved a hundred players on both sides. THAT was the WvW I loved. These new match ups NEVER create those moments. It’s a crying shame. So consider the mettle tested, let’s move on to balanced match ups already.

Ok now I wish I would have read further before replying to this unfortunate thread. Your post is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever read on these forums.
Just a friendly advice: Don’t think you’re the spokesperson for the WvW public.

I love you too. And thank you for such a constructive, thoughtful response. Yes, I played WvW since launch. And one look at the WvW forum will show you that many other players feel similarly as I do. Also, go kitten yourself.

Turamarth.3248:

With the old matchup system people complained that the matches were too stale. EU tier 1 and 2 for example were the same for about two months and it took the complete breakdown of two servers to change it.

I do believe it was the Minority that complained, just ask Devon.

Nuzt.7894:

Turamarth.3248:

With the old matchup system people complained that the matches were too stale. EU tier 1 and 2 for example were the same for about two months and it took the complete breakdown of two servers to change it.

I do believe it was the Minority that complained, just ask Devon.

Except that may not have been as much of a minority as you think. For all we know, those few servers may represent a sizable chunk of the overall WvW population.

Zenguy.6421:

Nuzt.7894:

Turamarth.3248:

With the old matchup system people complained that the matches were too stale. EU tier 1 and 2 for example were the same for about two months and it took the complete breakdown of two servers to change it.

I do believe it was the Minority that complained, just ask Devon.

Except that may not have been as much of a minority as you think. For all we know, those few servers may represent a sizable chunk of the overall WvW population.

Your clearly missing the point.

You’re right, I did miss that.

The good thing about Devon’s post was it put out in plain sight what was already happening in practice. That wasn’t the first time someone from Anet had expressed those sentiments. The difference with Devon’s post was that he didn’t sugar coat it or gloss over it, he just spelled it out honestly and I respect him for that (after all, it’s not as if Devon was the originator of that approach).

Overall, I’m very glad Devon made that post. That it occurred directly before the disaster of this latest patch is even better. Now Anet can’t pretend that isn’t what’s been going on and instead are having to engage directly with the consequences of that practice. I’m hoping the result of all this will be that Anet will start paying more attention to the insight and recommendations this community have for improving WvW. The test will be whether Anet have the cahunas to admit they’ve stuffed up and change the direction they’ve been taking WvW.