Guild Wars 2

server WvW participation level -> determine the server status (full,high etc) -> determine tier match up ? would be able to solve the match up locking issue right now, i think.

i’m sure Anet have all the data required to do that…..

EDIT : for example YB could possibly have higher WvW participation level than any of the tier 1 server but due to the large gap in glicko rating their chance of having a T1 match is very remote. with the data Anet have when comparing participation level, they could throw YB to T1 match up. that way we can have more match up variation. T1 is just my example. can also be applicable to lower tiers . 7-day moving average of participation level should be use to determine next match up.

I would love to have YB in T1. Fresh fights.

YB will never get to tier 1 in the next months, tier 1 servers are very close in points. Only if 1 server start a mass exodus which wont happen due to transfers lock.
So if you transfer to YB you got pwned by arena net and you are doomed to pvdoor for a year

to put the glicko back to place just need to start another wvw tourny to mix up some matchups and drain the glicko from each other

that will also encourage another wave of bandwagoning from full server but it might a good thing due to the new pop capping system.

SkyShroud.2865:

to put the glicko back to place just need to start another wvw tourny to mix up some matchups and drain the glicko from each other

Tournaments do very little for “draining glicko” because all servers get to face each other. The only real effect tournaments have had on glicko is the creation of glicko cliffs between leagues.

which is why i’m proposing match up to be based on wvw participation level. like i said above YB could just have higher participation level than TC , as well as any of the Tier 3 server could well have higher participation level than SoS.

glicko tends to lock tiers match ups after a while…..

Just go to the 1 up 1 down method and get rid of glicko, problem solved.

Chaba.5410:

SkyShroud.2865:

to put the glicko back to place just need to start another wvw tourny to mix up some matchups and drain the glicko from each other

Tournaments do very little for “draining glicko” because all servers get to face each other. The only real effect tournaments have had on glicko is the creation of glicko cliffs between leagues.

it is exactly because servers get to face each other, it will allow them to drain glicko from each other.

those who are similiar in strength will have their glicko drained by the one with the lowest glicko. that is to say if YB is truly a T1 material, then, JQ/TC/BG will lose glicko to YB if the PPT come up as equal. this apply to all the servers.

right now, the glicko already stabilised and thus is already out of the “learning” stage.

SkyShroud.2865:

Chaba.5410:

SkyShroud.2865:

to put the glicko back to place just need to start another wvw tourny to mix up some matchups and drain the glicko from each other

Tournaments do very little for “draining glicko” because all servers get to face each other. The only real effect tournaments have had on glicko is the creation of glicko cliffs between leagues.

it is exactly because servers get to face each other, it will allow them to drain glicko from each other.

those who are similiar in strength will have their glicko drained by the one with the lowest glicko. that is to say if YB is truly a T1 material, then, JQ/TC/BG will lose glicko to YB if the PPT come up as equal. this apply to all the servers.

right now, the glicko already stabilised and thus is already out of the “learning” stage.

I think you misunderstand. Because all the servers get to face each other, any glicko that was “drained” gets returned. You cite YB facing JQ/TC/BG. FA and SoS would also face those servers and most likely lose glicko to them. Tournament matches are not determined via glicko so there’s no real gains to be had. The better method would be for Anet to increase the match-up variance.

kefro.9312:

YB will never get to tier 1 in the next months, tier 1 servers are very close in points. Only if 1 server start a mass exodus which wont happen due to transfers lock.
So if you transfer to YB you got pwned by arena net and you are doomed to pvdoor for a year

Not true, YB has an ~10% change of rolling into T1 replacing either BG , TC and even JQ. But as Ken is in holiday we don’t know the exact numbers.

Match-glicko = Glicko + RND(0.45deviation + 10)
deviation is around 125 as you can see in https://leaderboards.guildwars2.com/de/na/wvw

On a +1 roll YB goes up +66pts, on a -1 roll TC/BG/JQ go down -66pts
so the maximum glicko-difference the random-variation can bridge is 132pts at moment.

YB is 91 Glicko-Points behind TC and 97 pts behind BG and 116pts behind JQ http://www.gw2wvw.org/
So it is possible for all of them to be replaced by YB currently.

Now you could start calculating (I am to lazy) how likely it is for YB to roll up ahead of each of the T1 server, and if you add these numbers up (they are really independend), you get the total probability of YB being in T1 next match.

Get rid of the glicko and watch a match and at the end of the week manually move teams around. YB is the worst blob I’ve ever come across. Not only in number but tactics. T1 is funny, JQ can spam 1 to a win every week but somehow the numbers in T1 stay very close. Odd, some weeks I’m there getting rolled and others the blob disappears after capping only outer towers with not a hit on even the inner sentries. Tells me a lot actually. Why can’t ANET just match up YB JQ and BG then make TC FA and SOS one week, substitute YB or FA or SOS with any of the T1s, at this point in the game is there really a difference? I’ve been on servers that have owned the entire map and other weeks can’t find a soul on my team. If it’s ok for lower tiers to face that why not try, FA would definetly show up even more if moved up or if YB blob tower/guard hugger scouts would move up too.

Chaba.5410:

SkyShroud.2865:

Chaba.5410:

SkyShroud.2865:

to put the glicko back to place just need to start another wvw tourny to mix up some matchups and drain the glicko from each other

Tournaments do very little for “draining glicko” because all servers get to face each other. The only real effect tournaments have had on glicko is the creation of glicko cliffs between leagues.

it is exactly because servers get to face each other, it will allow them to drain glicko from each other.

those who are similiar in strength will have their glicko drained by the one with the lowest glicko. that is to say if YB is truly a T1 material, then, JQ/TC/BG will lose glicko to YB if the PPT come up as equal. this apply to all the servers.

right now, the glicko already stabilised and thus is already out of the “learning” stage.

I think you misunderstand. Because all the servers get to face each other, any glicko that was “drained” gets returned. You cite YB facing JQ/TC/BG. FA and SoS would also face those servers and most likely lose glicko to them. Tournament matches are not determined via glicko so there’s no real gains to be had. The better method would be for Anet to increase the match-up variance.

Nope. The glicko has past its learning stage and thus already decided the tiers glicko range. That is to say if YB is indeed a T1 material, then it is a T1 server within a T2 glicko range. So, if BG/TC/JQ were to match up with the other T2 servers excluding YB. They wouldn’t drain as much glicko as YB due to their glicko difference. The system is already expecting BG/TC/JQ to dominate them. However, if the T1 servers are unable to dominate YB then YB will gain huge amount of glicko, pushing itself to T1 glicko range.

I’d rather see EU vs NA.

Most wouldn’t tick anything during off-peak hours, but it would be interesting to watch during overlap of prime.

Jayne.9251:

I’d rather see EU vs NA.

Most wouldn’t tick anything during off-peak hours, but it would be interesting to watch during overlap of prime.

not gonna happen, at least not in the near future. they can’t even do it for PvE, let alone WvW….. would be nice if they could, but i doubt it.

Dayra.7405:

kefro.9312:

YB will never get to tier 1 in the next months, tier 1 servers are very close in points. Only if 1 server start a mass exodus which wont happen due to transfers lock.
So if you transfer to YB you got pwned by arena net and you are doomed to pvdoor for a year

Not true, YB has an ~10% change of rolling into T1 replacing either BG , TC and even JQ. But as Ken is in holiday we don’t know the exact numbers.

Match-glicko = Glicko + RND(0.45deviation + 10)
deviation is around 125 as you can see in https://leaderboards.guildwars2.com/de/na/wvw

On a +1 roll YB goes up +66pts, on a -1 roll TC/BG/JQ go down -66pts
so the maximum glicko-difference the random-variation can bridge is 132pts at moment.

YB is 91 Glicko-Points behind TC and 97 pts behind BG and 116pts behind JQ http://www.gw2wvw.org/
So it is possible for all of them to be replaced by YB currently.

Now you could start calculating (I am to lazy) how likely it is for YB to roll up ahead of each of the T1 server, and if you add these numbers up (they are really independend), you get the total probability of YB being in T1 next match.

Yes you can know the “real” chance of YB getting in T1 right now.

Check out my website : http://coveragewars2.com/matchup.php?world=1003

YB currently have over 17% chance to get into tier 1. The data is calculated every hour and use the same calculation as snowreap.

azizul.8469:

Jayne.9251:

I’d rather see EU vs NA.

Most wouldn’t tick anything during off-peak hours, but it would be interesting to watch during overlap of prime.

not gonna happen, at least not in the near future. they can’t even do it for PvE, let alone WvW….. would be nice if they could, but i doubt it.

Wouldn’t that revive WvW and server pride though eh? I’d go back to my 16 hour days again for that lol.

:)

Jayne.9251:

I’d rather see EU vs NA.

Most wouldn’t tick anything during off-peak hours, but it would be interesting to watch during overlap of prime.

EU server vs NA server is totally boring: NA-prime vs EU-night and EU prim vs NA-day

What would be more interesting is: merge 1 NA-server with 1 EU-server, e.g. EU-1 with NA-24, EU-2 with NA-23, …, EU-24-NA1 (drop EU-25-27)

Would work best if the “Match is moved around the world”, e.g. During EU-Prime it’s hosted in Europe (and all non-EU user are routed to the EU-server), during NA-prime it’s in NA (and all non-NA user are routed to the NA-server) and during OCX/SEA in Singapore/Australia (and all non-OCX/SEA user are routed to the OCX/SEA-server).

I see whats going on here. So your plan to push Yaks Bend isnt working out to well, so now youre making suggestions in the hopes that anet will throw you a bone?

LOL

Zanther Deathbringer.4762:

I see whats going on here. So your plan to push Yaks Bend isnt working out to well, so now youre making suggestions in the hopes that anet will throw you a bone?

LOL

OP is on CD.