Guild Wars 2

the 1 up 1 down system sounds terrible to me

These polls only offer the illusion of feedback. In many cases they are yes/no votes and they only serve to make the players feel good (yeah, they listened!) and to make you, the game designers, feel good (well the community voted for this, so…)

+1 -1 sounds like a terrible idea.

Also, there was already a poll 6+ months ago and scoring changes won. Why is there another poll regarding WvW priorities?

I’d like to see how 1 up/1 down plays out as long as you do your best to give every link the same population and stop creating artificial tiers. You’ll also need to reduce the frequency of the links to 1 month to encourage people to remain on their server instead of hopping around every time they get a new link.

Endelon.1042:

Also, there was already a poll 6+ months ago and scoring changes won. Why is there another poll regarding WvW priorities?

scoring changes already happened, basically skirmishes/victory points

http://dulfy.net/2016/04/28/gw2-world-vs-world-poll/

WvW Scoring Improvements

Reduce the impact of night capping.
Lessen the gap between winning scores and losing scores so losing teams can still recover.
Adjust objective score relative to upgrade level.
Adjust score for capturing objectives.
Rebalance the score awarded for activities that don’t reward points per tick.
Take suggestions from the community!

The changes in bold have yet to be implemented even though they were part of the very first “poll”.

1up/1down is meaningless. They are already manually adjusting glicko for better matchups.

This poll is confusing

WvW Matchmaking Improvements:
*Replacing Glicko with a 1 up 1 down system.
*The world that wins the match moves up a tier; the world that loses the match moves down a tier.
*1 up 1 down system would be a test and we would be able to disable it to return to Glicko at any time.

Will WvW be reverted back to pre linking stage (individual server) and use KISS instead of glicko
or
Retain skirmish mode on individual server stage and use KISS instead of glicko
or
Retain linking and use KISS method

If winning match ups and skirmishes all over a sudden matters in terms of rewards, linking needs to go since it’s gamebreaking.

Look at this week

No server without a link is able to win a match up against linked servers since coverage is still everything.

Kaldo.7960:

No server without a link is able to win a match up against linked servers since coverage is still everything.

And eventually people who think winning is more important than their server will filter out. Overstacked servers became overstacked because people wanted to win, after all.

And when those servers stop being overstacked… Well would you look at that, they start getting links.

How would 1up/1down affect the server that places 2nd?

X T D.6458:

How would 1up/1down affect the server that places 2nd?

2nd placing server stays in the tier.

The poll is:

*More varied matches
Vs
*MOAR loot

Not shocked at the results.

Endelon.1042:

http://dulfy.net/2016/04/28/gw2-world-vs-world-poll/

WvW Scoring Improvements

Reduce the impact of night capping.
Lessen the gap between winning scores and losing scores so losing teams can still recover.
Adjust objective score relative to upgrade level.
Adjust score for capturing objectives.
Rebalance the score awarded for activities that don’t reward points per tick.
Take suggestions from the community!

The changes in bold have yet to be implemented even though they were part of the very first “poll”.

This.

Not voting until they finish the stuff they mentioned in the previous polls. Nightcap fix is too important and affects this new poll so until they change it there is no reason to vote now.

Gunner Morton.8340:

Endelon.1042:

http://dulfy.net/2016/04/28/gw2-world-vs-world-poll/

WvW Scoring Improvements

Reduce the impact of night capping.
Lessen the gap between winning scores and losing scores so losing teams can still recover.
Adjust objective score relative to upgrade level.
Adjust score for capturing objectives.
Rebalance the score awarded for activities that don’t reward points per tick.
Take suggestions from the community!

The changes in bold have yet to be implemented even though they were part of the very first “poll”.

This.

Not voting until they finish the stuff they mentioned in the previous polls. Nightcap fix is too important and affects this new poll so until they change it there is no reason to vote now.

Reduce the impact of night capping.
Lessen the gap between winning scores and losing scores so losing teams can still recover.

I think both of those were part of the Skirmish system. As a dreaded night capper, I’m fine with that solution. You aren’t the only people who play, sorry.

1 up 1 down seems completely unnecessary with the manual glicko adjustments you have been doing. There have been countless topics outlining why this system is flawed, particularly now we are down to only 4 Tiers (NA). Read them.

Justine.6351:

The poll is:

*More varied matches
Vs
*MOAR loot

Not shocked at the results.

Are they really that varied? You’ve most likely been playing against a similar groups of people for the last 4 years.

If you want more varied matches, move to a linked server.

SailorSpira.9371:

Gunner Morton.8340:

Endelon.1042:

http://dulfy.net/2016/04/28/gw2-world-vs-world-poll/

WvW Scoring Improvements

Reduce the impact of night capping.
Lessen the gap between winning scores and losing scores so losing teams can still recover.
Adjust objective score relative to upgrade level.
Adjust score for capturing objectives.
Rebalance the score awarded for activities that don’t reward points per tick.
Take suggestions from the community!

The changes in bold have yet to be implemented even though they were part of the very first “poll”.

This.

Not voting until they finish the stuff they mentioned in the previous polls. Nightcap fix is too important and affects this new poll so until they change it there is no reason to vote now.

Reduce the impact of night capping.
Lessen the gap between winning scores and losing scores so losing teams can still recover.

I think both of those were part of the Skirmish system. As a dreaded night capper, I’m fine with that solution. You aren’t the only people who play, sorry.

You mean the solution of no solution at all so you can continue your nightcapping? Yeah, I can figure why you’re fine with ‘that solution’ as it doesn’t prevent nightcappers from ruining the matchup while 90% of the other players are asleep.

Sarrs.4831:

Justine.6351:

The poll is:

*More varied matches
Vs
*MOAR loot

Not shocked at the results.

Are they really that varied? You’ve most likely been playing against a similar groups of people for the last 4 years.

If you want more varied matches, move to a linked server.

?

I’m in t4 with like 9 servers and will probably be here for 2 months.

Justine.6351:

?

I’m in t4 with like 9 servers and will probably be here for 2 months.

If you’re in t4 and you’re in DB/KN/YB, you’re likely going to move up to T3 at some point.

If you’re on one of the other two linksets, you wouldn’t be going anywhere in 1up/1down.

Endelon.1042:

http://dulfy.net/2016/04/28/gw2-world-vs-world-poll/

WvW Scoring Improvements

Reduce the impact of night capping.
Lessen the gap between winning scores and losing scores so losing teams can still recover.
Adjust objective score relative to upgrade level.
Adjust score for capturing objectives.
Rebalance the score awarded for activities that don’t reward points per tick.
Take suggestions from the community!

The changes in bold have yet to be implemented even though they were part of the very first “poll”.

The first two have been implemented with the Skirmishes.
Whether you think the changes were sufficient enough is another matter.

Sarrs.4831:

Justine.6351:

?

I’m in t4 with like 9 servers and will probably be here for 2 months.

If you’re in t4 and you’re in DB/KN/YB, you’re likely going to move up to T3 at some point.

If you’re on one of the other two linksets, you wouldn’t be going anywhere in 1up/1down.

I’m hod, and yes we do win in t4. Don’t know last when but we’ve won t3 aswell.

Sarrs.4831:

Justine.6351:

?

I’m in t4 with like 9 servers and will probably be here for 2 months.

If you’re in t4 and you’re in DB/KN/YB, you’re likely going to move up to T3 at some point.

If you’re on one of the other two linksets, you wouldn’t be going anywhere in 1up/1down.

They won’t go anywhere in the current system unless they get a random glicko roll.
In a 1 up 1 down system they could push hard 1 week for a win. Once you start winning and facing fresh servers a lot of the pve/fairweather players tend to log in more often.

Gunner Morton.8340:

SailorSpira.9371:

Gunner Morton.8340:

Endelon.1042:

http://dulfy.net/2016/04/28/gw2-world-vs-world-poll/

WvW Scoring Improvements

Reduce the impact of night capping.
Lessen the gap between winning scores and losing scores so losing teams can still recover.
Adjust objective score relative to upgrade level.
Adjust score for capturing objectives.
Rebalance the score awarded for activities that don’t reward points per tick.
Take suggestions from the community!

The changes in bold have yet to be implemented even though they were part of the very first “poll”.

This.

Not voting until they finish the stuff they mentioned in the previous polls. Nightcap fix is too important and affects this new poll so until they change it there is no reason to vote now.

Reduce the impact of night capping.
Lessen the gap between winning scores and losing scores so losing teams can still recover.

I think both of those were part of the Skirmish system. As a dreaded night capper, I’m fine with that solution. You aren’t the only people who play, sorry.

You mean the solution of no solution at all so you can continue your nightcapping? Yeah, I can figure why you’re fine with ‘that solution’ as it doesn’t prevent nightcappers from ruining the matchup while 90% of the other players are asleep.

Nightcapping really hasn’t been an issue since skirmishes was implemented. Yeah they still win that particular time zone but that’s not enough to carry a server anymore.

It’s not like when they would win the ppt wars by ticking for 600 for a few hours in the middle of the night despite the fact they would lose the other 20ish hours of the day.

-Add rewards to Skirmishes and potentially to matches.

The reward system should be improve, but it should be design in a way that all servers are equally rewarded to prevent people to bandwagon to the winning server.

(Edit: The reward gap between winning and losing server should not be too big, the bulk of rewards improvement should go to “Top Guilds/Players on each server base on participation/kills etc.” Maybe this way players/guilds would be encourage to go to lower tiers so that they can have better chance of being on the “Top Guilds/Players”. This also might help balance skill gap between servers, as it would encourage skilled groups to go to less skilled servers.).

Currently the rewards on PVE are way better than WvW so I think its necessary to improve rewards on WvW to bring more people to wvw, but at the same time, it should be design in a way were Competitive Players gets rewarded way more than Casual Players, this way it would encourage people to Gear Up/Get Good on wvw instead of going to wvw for Karma Train.

They already reduced the impact of night capping with skirmish mode, they can still go a step further with the extra points per action levels if they wanted, but I think night capping has been fairly addressed. It’s never going to be truly fixed in the current setup, there’s going to be some servers with better coverage.

Lessen the gap between winning scores and losing scores so losing teams can still recover.

The catch up mechanic is still possible but I don’t think a lot of players supported it.

Adjust objective score relative to upgrade level.

Thought they were still working on this.

I no longer agree with the 1 up 1 down system as there are half the servers now in matchups, it would have been better when there were 24 servers around, with more of them closer to each other in populations. Unless they plan on making all servers closer in population as much as possible. Although some have stated the tiers are closer these days. /shrugs

It does solve one problem with servers after new links, it makes it faster for boosted servers to move up and those that lost population to move down quickly, YB DB being the recent examples.

Why is there “noone of those 2 changes” option? Both seems terrible ideas that won’t improve anything, but make it even worse …

Option 1: You want us to do a bad change which doesnt waste too much of our time?
Or
Option 2: You want us to do the really bad change which doesnt waste too much of our time?
Or
Option 3: You realise this is just smoke and mirrors to make some players think we’re actually doing something and listening to you. But you know we really are just into PvE.

Kaldo.7960:

If winning match ups and skirmishes all over a sudden matters in terms of rewards, linking needs to go since it’s gamebreaking.

Look at this week

No server without a link is able to win a match up against linked servers since coverage is still everything.

Blackgate have no link and is winning T1 against Maguuma+Eredon Terrace and Fort Aspenwood+Sanctum of Rall.

Tarnished Coast have no link and is winning T2 matchup against Jade Quarry and Yak’s Bend+Anvil Rock. Keep in mind that JQ have no link and is also ahead of YB+AR.

Your argument about “servers without links cannot win” is flawed.

It is more like “servers with lower population/bad coverage can’t win”. Why would you reward players simply for playing on higher populated servers than others?

Jeknar.6184:

Kaldo.7960:

If winning match ups and skirmishes all over a sudden matters in terms of rewards, linking needs to go since it’s gamebreaking.

Look at this week

No server without a link is able to win a match up against linked servers since coverage is still everything.

Blackgate have no link and is winning T1 against Maguuma+Eredon Terrace and Fort Aspenwood+Sanctum of Rall.

Tarnished Coast have no link and is winning T2 matchup against Jade Quarry and Yak’s Bend+Anvil Rock. Keep in mind that JQ have no link and is also ahead of YB+AR.

Your argument about “servers without links cannot win” is flawed.

I was talking about the EU situation which is different from US anyways since at least german servers usually don’t have ppl from different timezones. And in EU none server without linking wins a match up.

I think Skirmish adjustments are more important than the matchup system because *

• although a matchup can determine how fun an entire week is (and in some cases it has been so uneven to have been unplayable),
• the Skirmishes are a good short-term objective that a Link can focus on no matter how poorly they are doing overall (though I have yet to see a coordinated effort happen in the direction of winning a particular skirmish).

I hope the developers give BIGGER REWARD to the LOSING SIDE, note that nobody is trying to lose and won’t try to lose even if the reward is for losing.

1up1down will not guarantee you better matchups. It only guarantees variance from week to week. It is not a very meaningful change to be honest. As long as there is no relative balance between servers. Varied matchups usually mean bad matchups.

Both of these options are the wrong choice.

It worries me that the winning choice is essentially “give people even more incentive to stack servers”. It’s a terrible idea.

James Rustler.7860:

It worries me that the winning choice is essentially “give people even more incentive to stack servers”. It’s a terrible idea.

this is also what i fear in this poll…
i hope this will not be an imbalancing patch
brace yourselves lads

Why…. just WHY were matchup changes polled against rewards/loot? They are two very different things. It should have been “Should we implement 1u1d, y/n?” and “Are skirmishes staying y/n? Are we giving them rewards? y/n” and…. instead we get this.

UI improvements are heavily needed.
Skirmish rewards should pretty nice as well. This means that no matter how bad our match ups are we can at least work to a reward for our short term efforts.

1 up 1 down would at best prevent glicko adjustments likeYB which isn’t that imbalanced on EU so I don’t really need that. Also I basically gave up caring about the server I fight. Almost all of them are equally bad compared to the old days.

This poll is really a no brainer:

1. something that gives actual reward to winning, and allows people to get to better fights and feel like each week matters. That allows them to leave a matchup they are gettting completely blown away in. Something that defies the almighty glicko overlords that you have refused to rid us of.

2. something that seeks to brainstorm a way to reward people for each 2 hour period of skirmishing, while improving the squad ui………………..a differnt colour of dot?…………………………………………………………………………….I mean given ur track record its probably just gonna be 3 bottles of wvsw experience for the 1st place winner….2 for 2nd place….and 1 for third place. woooop de doooooo! you would have missed the entire point of why people play wvsw….again.

This poll is loaded and mute as soon as it says more loot.

option1) No matter what you attached to the poll the one that has more loot is always going to win. It like asking if you want to keep the current system or add multimap looting like you have in AB. No one voted for this because it had clean up or or improvements. (not saying not one person did but majority read
“more loot that’s what I want”) This is also going to promote Ktrain and blobs.

option 2) Higher pop server in t1/t2 don’t want this system and have the majority of the WvW players. So it’s not going to get voted for. I mean having movement would be great.

The poll should have ask if players would like:

option 1) a 1 up 1 down system with a short explanation
option 2) Glicko scoring adjusting with a short explanation

1U1D will start out as a 1v1v1, then the next week it will start as a 1v1v1, which will become a 1v1v0 before the weekend is over, and finally end up as a 1v0v0.

1U1D will be the death of WvW

Sharen Graves.1276:

This poll is loaded and mute as soon as it says more loot.

option1) No matter what you attached to the poll the one that has more loot is always going to win. It like asking if you want to keep the current system or add multimap looting like you have in AB. No one voted for this because it had clean up or or improvements. (not saying not one person did but majority read
“more loot that’s what I want”) This is also going to promote Ktrain and blobs.

option 2) Higher pop server in t1/t2 don’t want this system and have the majority of the WvW players. So it’s not going to get voted for. I mean having movement would be great.

The poll should have ask if players would like:

option 1) a 1 up 1 down system with a short explanation
option 2) Glicko scoring adjusting with a short explanation

I’m in T1 and I’d love for them to give 1 up 1 down a try. But the problem is these polls are pointless when they don’t put any limitations on who is allowed to vote. They let PvE players that have no interest in the overall health of the game vote, they’ll only show up when their server is winning so why not vote for better rewards for the little time they spend in WvW?
And if you look at Mal’s sig in the first response to this thread you’ll see he has 30 accounts, he’s against a 1 up 1 down system and he can vote 30 times against it. That will actually make a decent impact on a poll where 67% of the people who have looked at it have chosen not to vote.

They shouldn’t let people vote unless they have achieved a certain rank in WvW, this cuts down on the alt account voting and it makes sure the people who are voting have a good understanding of the game mode and how the changes will affect it.

The only reason I play wvw is to push for that sweet sweet gathering bonus faster. More rewards for winning skirmishes? Anet you spoil us too much!

The only thing reducing score gaps between 1st and 3rd will do, is to give a false impression that the 3rd place server is stronger than it actually is. Unless it’s paired with the 1 up 1 down system, it should never be implemented.

1 up 1 down has been debunked since game release as being a silly idea that will result in horrendous matchups unless the servers across the board are somewhat competitive.

Aurust.8961:

1 up 1 down has been debunked since game release as being a silly idea that will result in horrendous matchups unless the servers across the board are somewhat competitive.

With server links there’s no reason why each group couldn’t be somewhat competitive. especially if they relink on a monthly basis so people aren’t server hopping as much.

1 up 1 is great if evenly matched, but since population was never resolved…scoring and match making will forever be an issue making me not care for either option.

At best, for population disparities you can do a weight limit tiers like in UFC. A heavy weight would never have any chance whatsoever to be matched against a welterweight (google it for an adventure!) or light weight. It’s not like there is really variety in game play between said weight tiers, just mass difference (eg population difference).

This way, we don’t end up wasting the time of a light weight server being matched up to Maguuma and Blackgate for an entire week like we have currently. Keeping in mind there are other timezones besides prime, and resert night blobs.

zhonnika.1784:

Why…. just WHY were matchup changes polled against rewards/loot? They are two very different things. It should have been “Should we implement 1u1d, y/n?” and “Are skirmishes staying y/n? Are we giving them rewards? y/n” and…. instead we get this.

Anet is still driving WvW where they want it to go but not where the players need it to go.

That “poll” was proof positive that WvW is being given little thought.

The number of dev players in WvW is amazingly low compared to the first year. If you guys don’t play the game, how can you say you know what it needs?

As it is we still to this day have people glitching into keeps, using hacks and no report in the game in real time or even in a ticket, seems to do a thing since we can’t all do a video on demand. It seems those of us who are witnesses to abuses will never be trusted by those who read those reports.

We have linking that throws a monkey wrench into the stability of any server leading to even more chaos and server hopping than ever before.

We have people telling whole guilds not to play. And most won’t play leaving those who do in a heinous situation when Anet clearly ‘depended’ on the normal population playing that week or even more than a week or two. Manipulation of the scoring internally by players has never been more apparent than it is now.

We have players who abuse the team channel – and there’s no way to report that since it’s not a botting offense, it’s just a rudeness and flooding offense that is ignored no matter how much nastiness is spewed across the server, no matter how vile the words or thoughts conveyed.

“Manually” adjusting any server after the win or loss is about as “ok” as adding a grade or taking one from any school test or certification.

Suggestion for the next project?

Play WvW.

Please.

atheria.2837:

The number of dev players in WvW is amazingly low compared to the first year. If you guys don’t play the game, how can you say you know what it needs?

-snip-

Suggestion for the next project?

Play WvW.

Please.

Where did you get that number?
Do you know the normal accounts of the devs?

1U1D doesn’t work for WvW where the teams are persistent and where there’s a huge divide between servers/tiers themselves. If every server/pairing was roughly equal, it’d be suitable. Fact is, though, the links don’t work well enough to justify doing 1U1D since it’d continue to lead to unfun matchups; first and third place servers would constantly trade no matter how small/large the gaps between them and the others are, and the tier above coming down is only going to lead to an even more one-sided matchup, where servers either stomp or get stomped and nothing ever changes.

I’m honestly surprised (although I guess by this point I shouldn’t be, all things considered) that this option even made it to a poll considering how blatantly obvious the result would be: It’d be worse than now. The only viable method to balance WvW scoring is with heuristic-driven learning AI. Yes, it’s a lot of work. Sad fact is it’s the only actual, real (practical) solution. Simple algorithms do not work effectively on systems that are not fair and on ones that can be manipulated. This is like game design 101, and why good design leads to systems which increase in fairness and prevent manipulation.

All 1U1D does is increase the rate at which servers trade tiers. It doesn’t actually affect volatility unless players make those changes by transferring and stacking, which is what you genuinely don’t want when looking into the future, considering then simple algorithms become more valuable when players push into enforcing fairness on their own accord, which can lead to faster and more interesting responses from the AI given a few tweaks.