Guild Wars 2

Swamurabi.7890:

Your point total analysis is flawed because of the one of the major flaws in WvW. Once a weaker server is wiped from a map , especially their own BL, they have a much more difficult task to just regain what they lost and usually just give up on trying to take anything from that map. You need to be better to defend paper walls than against fortified and if you were better you wouldn’t have been wiped from the map in the first place.

You seem to miss the big part of this:

If a sever is so weak that is can be wiped from the map, down to it’s own borderlands, and if a Server is so strong that it can wipe another sever from the map to their own borderlands, at least 1 of these 3 servers should not be meeting up again next week.

End of Discussion.

Ungood.3054:

Swamurabi.7890:

Your point total analysis is flawed because of the one of the major flaws in WvW. Once a weaker server is wiped from a map , especially their own BL, they have a much more difficult task to just regain what they lost and usually just give up on trying to take anything from that map. You need to be better to defend paper walls than against fortified and if you were better you wouldn’t have been wiped from the map in the first place.

You seem to miss the big part of this:

If a sever is so weak that is can be wiped from the map, down to it’s own borderlands, and if a Server is so strong that it can wipe another sever from the map to their own borderlands, at least 1 of these 3 servers should not be meeting up again next week.

End of Discussion.

Servers have primetimes at separate points during the day.
If one server in a tier has a strong oceanic or asian presence, they are going to capture at least one entire map overnight. This is not an indication that the servers are in the incorrect tier.

EnRohbi.2187:

Ungood.3054:

Ruprect.7260:

Every week would be an even worse curb stomp with your system.

Why do I post fact if no one bothers to look at them?

Why do we bother with numbers if no one is going to read them?

I disproved this fallacy, this myth you cling to is just that, a myth, a fallacy, that the numbers I have shown have disproved time and time again.

This belief that moving out of tier is bad is backed up by nothing more then the weights and merits of old wives and their tales.

If you can show me how it will result in blows out, with cold hard numbers, I’ll look at them, but lets be real here, I am not going to wait for that to arrive in the mail, sort to speak.

I’ve already told you why we ignore your numbers.

MY numbers? You think I made these up? You flatter me, but they are not MY numbers, the are THE Numbers, the Official Numbers I might add.

But yes, you have made it quite clear why you have opted to ignore THE numbers.

EnRohbi.2187:

Ungood.3054:

Swamurabi.7890:

Your point total analysis is flawed because of the one of the major flaws in WvW. Once a weaker server is wiped from a map , especially their own BL, they have a much more difficult task to just regain what they lost and usually just give up on trying to take anything from that map. You need to be better to defend paper walls than against fortified and if you were better you wouldn’t have been wiped from the map in the first place.

You seem to miss the big part of this:

If a sever is so weak that is can be wiped from the map, down to it’s own borderlands, and if a Server is so strong that it can wipe another sever from the map to their own borderlands, at least 1 of these 3 servers should not be meeting up again next week.

End of Discussion.

Servers have primetimes at separate points during the day.
If one server in a tier has a strong oceanic or asian presence, they are going to capture at least one entire map overnight. This is not an indication that the servers are in the incorrect tier.

If either one is losing by or winning by a large margin, then it’s incorrect that they should be facing off again next week.

Again. End of Discussion.

Ungood.3054:

EnRohbi.2187:

Ungood.3054:

Swamurabi.7890:

Your point total analysis is flawed because of the one of the major flaws in WvW. Once a weaker server is wiped from a map , especially their own BL, they have a much more difficult task to just regain what they lost and usually just give up on trying to take anything from that map. You need to be better to defend paper walls than against fortified and if you were better you wouldn’t have been wiped from the map in the first place.

You seem to miss the big part of this:

If a sever is so weak that is can be wiped from the map, down to it’s own borderlands, and if a Server is so strong that it can wipe another sever from the map to their own borderlands, at least 1 of these 3 servers should not be meeting up again next week.

End of Discussion.

Servers have primetimes at separate points during the day.
If one server in a tier has a strong oceanic or asian presence, they are going to capture at least one entire map overnight. This is not an indication that the servers are in the incorrect tier.

If either one is losing by or winning by a large margin, then it’s incorrect that they should be facing off next week.

Again. End of Discussion.

Having separate prime times does not mean the margin between scores will be large.

You post like you are speaking factually, but you show yourself to have less and less understanding of how wvw really works outside of anything but the final score count.

But you are right, this is the end of this discussion.
When you’re met with a logical argument you just copy numbers into your post and pretend they prove things they do not. Everything I’ve said remains completely valid and to continue with you would be redundant unless you choose to actually address any of my points.

EnRohbi.2187:

Ungood.3054:

EnRohbi.2187:

Ungood.3054:

Swamurabi.7890:

Your point total analysis is flawed because of the one of the major flaws in WvW. Once a weaker server is wiped from a map , especially their own BL, they have a much more difficult task to just regain what they lost and usually just give up on trying to take anything from that map. You need to be better to defend paper walls than against fortified and if you were better you wouldn’t have been wiped from the map in the first place.

You seem to miss the big part of this:

If a sever is so weak that is can be wiped from the map, down to it’s own borderlands, and if a Server is so strong that it can wipe another sever from the map to their own borderlands, at least 1 of these 3 servers should not be meeting up again next week.

End of Discussion.

Servers have primetimes at separate points during the day.
If one server in a tier has a strong oceanic or asian presence, they are going to capture at least one entire map overnight. This is not an indication that the servers are in the incorrect tier.

If either one is losing by or winning by a large margin, then it’s incorrect that they should be facing off next week.

Again. End of Discussion.

Having separate prime times does not mean the margin between scores will be large.

You post like you are speaking factually, but you show yourself to have less and less understanding of how wvw really works outside of anything but the final score count.

But you are right, this is the end of this discussion.
When you’re met with a logical argument you just copy numbers into your post and pretend they prove things they do not. Everything I’ve said remains completely valid and to continue with you would be redundant unless you choose to actually address any of my points.

When you first started this, I asked you to support your stand, your retort was to drop a pile of gossip and conjecture into the topic and pass that off as logic and fact.

Well, yes, against fallacies and fiction, I do tend to use facts and numbers.

I gave numbers, and facts, you have not. You have proposed ideas that are in stark contrast and in conflict to the facts. Will I accept that as valid. No I won’t. That is why I did not bother to respond to your post when I asked to support your point and you did not.

If that is the end of our exchange, I welcome it.

Please don’t implement this, the difference between t1 and t2 is miles apart, after everyone bandwagon’d to the top tier due to the end of free transfers. This would just make it so T2 winner every week would move up for a week lose horribly then move back down. So Winning in the T2 bracket would actually be losing because T2 now is by far the best bracket imho. 24/7 fights but not 24/7 Zergs. The system as it is you only move up if you completely dominate your bracket and therefore should be moved up into the next bracket, but if the match is competitive the matchup stays the same as it SHOULD imho.

Dredrum.2563:

Please don’t implement this, the difference between t1 and t2 is miles apart, after everyone bandwagon’d to the top tier due to the end of free transfers. This would just make it so T2 winner every week would move up for a week lose horribly then move back down. So Winning in the T2 bracket would actually be losing because T2 now is by far the best bracket imho. 24/7 fights but not 24/7 Zergs. The system as it is you only move up if you completely dominate your bracket and therefore should be moved up into the next bracket, but if the match is competitive the matchup stays the same as it SHOULD imho.

Great Minds think alike:

Ungood.3054:

You know what would be a very good mix, would be IF a blowout was required to cause a shift, without needing to play complex math or need endless change.

Simple – If a world destroys (Causes a blowout) it’s tier, it moves up, if it gets stomped, it moves down. Otherwise, things stay.

I suggested this, for that very reason as well.

• Because tight fights are fun.
• Because a forced move is not good especially, if they are not good/bad enough to justify the move

at the same time,

• They should move if they are much better or worse then the other servers in their tier and move fast.

No one likes waiting around.

Terrible idea. The coverage disparity between tiers is massive. Just because some server wins their matchup doesn’t mean they suddenly have 1000 more WvW players and are ready to move up a tier.

Given the same variable (transfers) the proposed WULD system would yield the same results as we have now in WV3 the only benefit you would see is some short term advantage for lower tier world advances for a week but would soon be right back where they are today.

Advantage current system.

Ungood.3054:

Swamurabi.7890:

Your point total analysis is flawed because of the one of the major flaws in WvW. Once a weaker server is wiped from a map , especially their own BL, they have a much more difficult task to just regain what they lost and usually just give up on trying to take anything from that map. You need to be better to defend paper walls than against fortified and if you were better you wouldn’t have been wiped from the map in the first place.

You seem to miss the big part of this:

If a sever is so weak that is can be wiped from the map, down to it’s own borderlands, and if a Server is so strong that it can wipe another sever from the map to their own borderlands, at least 1 of these 3 servers should not be meeting up again next week.

End of Discussion.

What you’re missing is the fact that in T2, I was there, I didn’t miss anything

T1 loser BG dropped to Green T2
T2 Blue TC stayed at Blue T2
T3 winner FA became Red T2

The result was FA getting stomped, TC holding on to second, another blowout match between servers from three tiers.

Next week FA went up against T3 and is in a blowout match you’re complaining about.
The only thing keeping the score close is DB having better EU coverage than NA.
Mag is the punching bag this week. This would send FA up into T2 to a repeat stompage, this time against SoS and Kaineg. TC and FA would just flip between T2-T3 week after boring week.

T2-T7 for Red and Green will be just alternately stomp and get stomped. For Blue it will be stagnation.

WULD will lead to the same strategy at all tiers: STOMP RED, because Red is two tiers below green every other week.

Swamurabi.7890:

TC and FA would just flip between T2-T3 week after boring week.

T2-T7 for Red and Green will be just alternately stomp and get stomped. For Blue it will be stagnation.

WULD will lead to the same strategy at all tiers: STOMP RED, because Red is two tiers below green every other week.

Your argument that “TC and FA would just flip between T2-T3 week after boring week” is what most supporters of WULD use as the entire basis for their argument.

You spin it like this is a bad thing but we look at it from the perspective that these servers get to alternate winning and losing RATHER than just staying stagnant as the constant and seemingly unending winners or losers of their tier.

It’s just a circular conversation because some are pointing out the flaws in WULD without considering how it compares to the current system.

Swamurabi.7890:

Ungood.3054:

Swamurabi.7890:

Your point total analysis is flawed because of the one of the major flaws in WvW. Once a weaker server is wiped from a map , especially their own BL, they have a much more difficult task to just regain what they lost and usually just give up on trying to take anything from that map. You need to be better to defend paper walls than against fortified and if you were better you wouldn’t have been wiped from the map in the first place.

You seem to miss the big part of this:

If a sever is so weak that is can be wiped from the map, down to it’s own borderlands, and if a Server is so strong that it can wipe another sever from the map to their own borderlands, at least 1 of these 3 servers should not be meeting up again next week.

End of Discussion.

What you’re missing is the fact that in T2, I was there, I didn’t miss anything

The result was FA getting stomped, TC holding on to second, another blowout match between servers from three tiers.

Against Sanctum Rail you did 111 vs their 452.

That’s a staggering 340K Point difference.

Ok..now in T8, we are getting stomped by SF, and a 200K split is a bit demoralizing to say the least, but, a 340K loss on your part. I mean just thinking of how bad they must have stomped on you, I mean with that kind of split, what was the typically nightly exchange? You took back a BL tower and maybe a supply depot for a few hours a before it ripped asunder, that is assuming that kind of exchange was even nightly. Otherwise maybe got a karma train going once a night, assuming you did not hit one of their forces, And Stormbluff Isle, they defined getting owned, I mean 42 was all they pulled, that’s 410K Disparity, poor guys, did they try to field anyone at all that week, or did they just call it a wash and go PvE.

yah. I get it, I was not there. I am sure it was great tight fights all around and the battles were epic. I mean you scored a 111, I mean gosh, ET did a 116, and that is after a 5 week decline against SF.

But by all means, tell me how great it was, I am sure the hue of green they used to paint the map was lovely.

EnRohbi.2187:

Ungood.3054:

Ruprect.7260:

Every week would be an even worse curb stomp with your system.

Why do I post fact if no one bothers to look at them?

Why do we bother with numbers if no one is going to read them?

I disproved this fallacy, this myth you cling to is just that, a myth, a fallacy, that the numbers I have shown have disproved time and time again.

This belief that moving out of tier is bad is backed up by nothing more then the weights and merits of old wives and their tales.

If you can show me how it will result in blows out, with cold hard numbers, I’ll look at them, but lets be real here, I am not going to wait for that to arrive in the mail, sort to speak.

I’ve already told you why we ignore your numbers.
Your numbers have the same flaw that glicko does; they do not take transfers into account.

Furthermore.
Your numbers are not proof that WULD system would be better than glicko, they are only proof that there is a problem with Glicko.
Which, as I have said before, I don’t think anyone particularly disagrees with.

The WULD model is much better when factoring in transfers. It means if a number of guilds move to a lower ranked server and make that server dominate, they will move through the tiers much more quickly. In the current model, they may need to destroy a particular tier multiple weeks in a row before moving up.

Altie.4571:

And pigeonhold 2nd place into 2nd place permanently?

Force servers into overmatched fights?

Force servers to fight vastly greater numbers?

Remove an incentive to fight for position?

No thanks.

I seriously have no idea what you are talking about here. Let’s discuss:

1. Remove an incentive to fight for position? Huh? There is a huge incentive in WULD.
2. Force servers to fight vastly great numbers? Umm, that’s the situation today. In WULD at least it is only for 1 week vs multiple weeks in the current model.

Dredrum.2563:

Please don’t implement this, the difference between t1 and t2 is miles apart, after everyone bandwagon’d to the top tier due to the end of free transfers. This would just make it so T2 winner every week would move up for a week lose horribly then move back down. So Winning in the T2 bracket would actually be losing because T2 now is by far the best bracket imho. 24/7 fights but not 24/7 Zergs. The system as it is you only move up if you completely dominate your bracket and therefore should be moved up into the next bracket, but if the match is competitive the matchup stays the same as it SHOULD imho.

Huh? You really think blackgate can’t complete with SoR or the other tier 1 servers? In case you didn’t know, BG beat SoR what? 12 weeks in a row or something. Sure SoR is stronger than they were at the time, but saying BG couldn’t compete is just wrong.

Likewise, there isn’t much difference between TC and FA. So if next week’s matchup was SoS, Kain, and FA, who is to say it would be worse than the blowout in tier 2 this week?

I had posted this before, but the problem with the “winner move up loser move down” system is that server might “chose” to “lose on purpose”. They would go to a lower tier just to collect more total annual points by pwning easy servers.

e.g. A server will get more total annual points by playing in Tier 4 than Tier 1. So when playoff/championship comes around a T4 server will get in, while a T1 server will miss the playoffs.

For this system to work, there need to be certain “punishment” or “disadvantages” for going to a lower tier. And there have to some kind of reward for being in a higher tier.

So the best system (in my view) is a system of the combination of the following:

1) Bi-Daily match score tally. So every 2 days servers might move up or down a tier. This also gives a weekend rotation every 2 weeks. (2 days / 7 days a week)

2) Winner server moves up a tier. Loser server moves down a tier.

3) Your servers get bonus annual points for winning in a higher tier than a lower tier every 2 days (e.g. 30k for tier 1, 15k for tier 2, 7.5k for tier 3). You get a smaller bonus for being 2nd place in a tier(e.g. 10k for tier 1, 5k for tier2, 2.5k for tier 3). No bonus for the loser. This means you cannot lose on purpose to pick on smaller servers. You also want to stay in a higher tier for the higher bonuses.

4) For playoffs/championships, total annual scores are rallied up. The playoff/championship ranking is determined by annual total score, not current rank. So the top 9 teams with the highest annual scores enter the playoffs for 2 rounds. (1vs8v9, 2vs6vs7, 3vs4vs5). The 3 winners of 1st round moves to 2nd round. Each round lasts 2 weeks, for a total of 4 weeks of playoff/championship a year. My recommanded month is December, since most people will be home.

-This means that everyday in wvw is important. Tiers might be changed very quickly. This keeps people playing everyday (e.g. even Wednesday and Thursday people will play, since those 2 days still matters). This also means the current score doesn’t matter as much. The emphasis is on the annual score.
-Server will no longer be stuck in the wrong tier (either too high or too low) for weeks.
-Servers will face new opponents all the time. This makes wvw more interesting.
-There is no longer any incentive to lose on purpose to get to a lower tier. Teams will always want to do their best.
-When playoff/championship happens, it is determined by the total annual score. What that means is that you always want to get as many points as possible. But at the same time as you win, you will face harder and harder opponents. So the only way to get ahead is to beat the opponents of your level.

i see no problem with a server sitting out a week in WvW so they can get an easier matchup.

that is possible right now and we don’t see it happening. i doubt it would ever be a big problem.

especially considering WULD would just put them back up there the next week.. the current system actually supports gaming the system more as if they were to take a week off and move down a tier they could sit there longer with glicko than they could with WULD.

Losing on purpose works best on the “Current System” than “Move Up/Down”.

Example Jade Quarry Lose on Purpose 7 times to get to tier 8 and stomp their way back to tier one. Overall they had 7=3rd places and 7=1st Places which don’t make any sense at all or any real benefit to speak of. Same with servers who move down 1 week only to climb back again the next. 1 win 1 lose don’t make them dominate for months.

The current system promotes that the same old server will dominate the other 2 for months and months and the match-up will never change for like an entire century like what’s happening now. The main reason why we had stomping “Evolutions” in the past was due to their “Free Transfers” in the first place. Soon things will all start to even out as Ehmry Bay and Yak’s Bend go to their rightful places. IoJ/Sbi/DR/SF are gonna be next to find out as minor guild/alliance transfers affected them on the last weeks of free transfers. Soon you’ll see more stagnation for long periods of time. Same servers will be painted green, blue and red. Same victors Same losers for months.

People will always complain but at least it won’t be about having the same old opponent stomping them for years after years even if the point gap is around 400k.
The 3rd placer will move down. If they try to lose on purpose it won’t make sense since the 1st place will be replaced by an upper tier 1 and 3rd place will be replace by a lower tier 1.

If Anet intends to keep the losing teams playing it’s up to them how they will motivate them.

Spica.9308:

Losing on purpose works best on the “Current System” than “Move Up/Down”.

Example Jade Quarry Lose on Purpose 7 times to get to tier 8 and stomp their way back to tier one. Overall they had 7=3rd places and 7=1st Places which don’t make any sense at all or any real benefit to speak of. Same with servers who move down 1 week only to climb back again the next. 1 win 1 lose don’t make them dominate for months.

The current system promotes that the same old server will dominate the other 2 for months and months and the match-up will never change for like an entire century like what’s happening now. The main reason why we had stomping “Evolutions” in the past was due to their “Free Transfers” in the first place. Soon things will all start to even out as Ehmry Bay and Yak’s Bend go to their rightful places. IoJ/Sbi/DR/SF are gonna be next to find out as minor guild/alliance transfers affected them on the last weeks of free transfers. Soon you’ll see more stagnation for long periods of time. Same servers will be painted green, blue and red. Same victors Same losers for months.

People will always complain but at least it won’t be about having the same old opponent stomping them for years after years even if the point gap is around 400k.
The 3rd placer will move down. If they try to lose on purpose it won’t make sense since the 1st place will be replaced by an upper tier 1 and 3rd place will be replace by a lower tier 1.

If Anet intends to keep the losing teams playing it’s up to them how they will motivate them.

so you’re asking for different opponents who will stomp you harder week after week. i dont see how that solves anything.

it seems like the majority of proponents for this new system are those in T8. while i understand it’s a tough spot to be in, it doesn’t solve any problems.

so what if SF gets moved up? you have a stronger server taking its place. it doesn’t solve the core issue of the lack of wvw population on the 2 lowest ranking servers. it’s the same issue with the top 7 servers having dramatically highest population than the 8th-10th servers, giving you a constant imbalanced T3 matchup. however most people dont care about final scores, as long as the battles are competitive, most people enjoy it.

The current system is actually quite fine but thanks to everyone taking advantage of free transfers the community has destroyed the ELO rating so much it will now take months to stabilize completely. T1 servers got so many bandwagon players that their ELO is so massive it takes them weeks and weeks to finally drop (i.e. SBI) while massive population servers in lower tiers (i.e. Kaineng) spend weeks and weeks beating the crap out of lower pop servers until their ELO finally improves.

If you want to blame anyone for the way the current system is working you should be blaming yourselves.

You won’t get stomped harder at all.
1. Winning GREEN teams never experienced getting stomped.
2. BLUE teams will fight “losers” from the tier above and “stompers” from tier below.
3. RED teams the one who got “stomped” can breathe air but less likely to steamroll
everyone below since technically they are just “1-3 ranks apart”.

And Nope SF is a good match for darkhaven in tier 7. The math is what keeps them in tier 8. They had a bandwagon of transfers who came or returned from whatever higher level tiers. They are not gonna get stomped at tier 7. So why not give HoD or GoM a break? They deserve wins than SF is now.

Stagnation will be bad in the long-term. Tier 8 thought it was cool too when it was an “even fight”. Now it’s just plain old stupid. We will probably end up playing PVE til they fix it or quit altogether (It’s just a game trying to paint everything GREEN). The charts will eventually show its true color once everything cools off maybe after a month.

My suggestion/variation on the movement system to promote some more variety in the matchups (they’re getting very boring).
1) Every time a server wins 3 times in a row, they move up a tier.
2) The server that moves down is the server that lost the most number of times in the past 3 weeks (or has the lowest net score among all three weeks)
3) If for some reason all 3 servers lost once (unlikely, but I’ll posit this briefly), then either a) random between red and blue (since that means that they’re roughly equal) b) red (since supposedly the “worst”)

What this prevents is the facestomping that you guys say will happen in the current WULD every other week. It also prevents one team from sacrificing a week to try to drop down —> they would have to sacrifice at least 2 weeks.
Fault: the team that moves down could potentially be too strong and would stomp the lower tier, but that would happen for only 3 weeks. Blue might also be stuck in the middle slot, but that’s almost inevitable in all the systems being proposed at the moment.

Last possibility, Anet pays some nerd they have hired somewhere in the corner couple bucks at 3:30 pm PST every Friday to just look at the matchup and make a new one.

If winner move up loser move down it won’t be the same match every week. It will just be every other week. What will happen is winner will move up a tier get steam rolled, loser move down a tier and steam roll both worlds there with one that is two tiers lower than from where they just came. And the middle man will stay and get steam rolled by the team that just came but not as steam rolled as the team that moved up. So in the end what will happen is winner will move back up to where they were (nothing changed) loser move down to where they were (same thing) and the middle man just stay there. So then the next week you have the exact same match up as the week before.

jportell.2197:

If winner move up loser move down it won’t be the same match every week. It will just be every other week. What will happen is winner will move up a tier get steam rolled, loser move down a tier and steam roll both worlds there with one that is two tiers lower than from where they just came. And the middle man will stay and get steam rolled by the team that just came but not as steam rolled as the team that moved up. So in the end what will happen is winner will move back up to where they were (nothing changed) loser move down to where they were (same thing) and the middle man just stay there. So then the next week you have the exact same match up as the week before.

That is one posibility. Another is, those from lower tiers might actually roll the higher tiers and so on.

Sovereign.1093:

jportell.2197:

If winner move up loser move down it won’t be the same match every week. It will just be every other week. What will happen is winner will move up a tier get steam rolled, loser move down a tier and steam roll both worlds there with one that is two tiers lower than from where they just came. And the middle man will stay and get steam rolled by the team that just came but not as steam rolled as the team that moved up. So in the end what will happen is winner will move back up to where they were (nothing changed) loser move down to where they were (same thing) and the middle man just stay there. So then the next week you have the exact same match up as the week before.

That is one posibility. Another is, those from lower tiers might actually roll the higher tiers and so on.

Speaking from experience that RARELY happens. Was on a low tier server when I started game (wvw understanding was beyond lacking) and we held our own usually but never won. When in comes this server from a higher tier. Not our server or the other server owned a single camp/tower/keep/castle for the entire match. We had outmanned in our own BL and it was sad. Now that I am nothing but wvw I moved to a higher tier about 3 months ago and those still happen. Albeit not as much but you still have the straight blowouts like the Kain/DB/Mag match up where kain just kinda roflstomped through us all.

jportell.2197:

Sovereign.1093:

jportell.2197:

If winner move up loser move down it won’t be the same match every week. It will just be every other week. What will happen is winner will move up a tier get steam rolled, loser move down a tier and steam roll both worlds there with one that is two tiers lower than from where they just came. And the middle man will stay and get steam rolled by the team that just came but not as steam rolled as the team that moved up. So in the end what will happen is winner will move back up to where they were (nothing changed) loser move down to where they were (same thing) and the middle man just stay there. So then the next week you have the exact same match up as the week before.

That is one posibility. Another is, those from lower tiers might actually roll the higher tiers and so on.

Speaking from experience that RARELY happens. Was on a low tier server when I started game (wvw understanding was beyond lacking) and we held our own usually but never won. When in comes this server from a higher tier. Not our server or the other server owned a single camp/tower/keep/castle for the entire match. We had outmanned in our own BL and it was sad. Now that I am nothing but wvw I moved to a higher tier about 3 months ago and those still happen. Albeit not as much but you still have the straight blowouts like the Kain/DB/Mag match up where kain just kinda roflstomped through us all.

Those are past experiences. The present may or may not be the same.

You never know until it actually happens.

Sovereign.1093:

jportell.2197:

Sovereign.1093:

jportell.2197:

If winner move up loser move down it won’t be the same match every week. It will just be every other week. What will happen is winner will move up a tier get steam rolled, loser move down a tier and steam roll both worlds there with one that is two tiers lower than from where they just came. And the middle man will stay and get steam rolled by the team that just came but not as steam rolled as the team that moved up. So in the end what will happen is winner will move back up to where they were (nothing changed) loser move down to where they were (same thing) and the middle man just stay there. So then the next week you have the exact same match up as the week before.

That is one posibility. Another is, those from lower tiers might actually roll the higher tiers and so on.

Speaking from experience that RARELY happens. Was on a low tier server when I started game (wvw understanding was beyond lacking) and we held our own usually but never won. When in comes this server from a higher tier. Not our server or the other server owned a single camp/tower/keep/castle for the entire match. We had outmanned in our own BL and it was sad. Now that I am nothing but wvw I moved to a higher tier about 3 months ago and those still happen. Albeit not as much but you still have the straight blowouts like the Kain/DB/Mag match up where kain just kinda roflstomped through us all.

Those are past experiences. The present may or may not be the same.

You never know until it actually happens.

Hey if it does. I will welcome the change for the first week. Then after 3 matches let’s see what happens. And tbh at times it was nice to just look at wvw and be like yeah…. I don’t need to go because it really won’ t matter right now.

jportell.2197:

Sovereign.1093:

jportell.2197:

Sovereign.1093:

jportell.2197:

If winner move up loser move down it won’t be the same match every week. It will just be every other week. What will happen is winner will move up a tier get steam rolled, loser move down a tier and steam roll both worlds there with one that is two tiers lower than from where they just came. And the middle man will stay and get steam rolled by the team that just came but not as steam rolled as the team that moved up. So in the end what will happen is winner will move back up to where they were (nothing changed) loser move down to where they were (same thing) and the middle man just stay there. So then the next week you have the exact same match up as the week before.

That is one posibility. Another is, those from lower tiers might actually roll the higher tiers and so on.

Speaking from experience that RARELY happens. Was on a low tier server when I started game (wvw understanding was beyond lacking) and we held our own usually but never won. When in comes this server from a higher tier. Not our server or the other server owned a single camp/tower/keep/castle for the entire match. We had outmanned in our own BL and it was sad. Now that I am nothing but wvw I moved to a higher tier about 3 months ago and those still happen. Albeit not as much but you still have the straight blowouts like the Kain/DB/Mag match up where kain just kinda roflstomped through us all.

Those are past experiences. The present may or may not be the same.

You never know until it actually happens.

Hey if it does. I will welcome the change for the first week. Then after 3 matches let’s see what happens. And tbh at times it was nice to just look at wvw and be like yeah…. I don’t need to go because it really won’ t matter right now.

That is according to you. And if you justified it like that, then I doubt your opinion will change.

Honestly what’s so bad about fighting the same 2 servers all the time if the match is close? I’ve enjoyed the BG/Kain/TC match-up more than any other match-up I’ve ever seen and would be thrilled to fight the same servers all the time.

I can understand how it could be bad in T8 where the top server always wins but doesn’t leave the tier, but the problem is that there currently isn’t any server that would be a good fit. SF dominates now but I think any server from T7 would dominate just as much if not more. Do you think the blowouts will be more fun if it’s a different server every week?

Vilkata.4725:

Honestly what’s so bad about fighting the same 2 servers all the time if the match is close? I’ve enjoyed the BG/Kain/TC match-up more than any other match-up I’ve ever seen and would be thrilled to fight the same servers all the time.

I can understand how it could be bad in T8 where the top server always wins but doesn’t leave the tier, but the problem is that there currently isn’t any server that would be a good fit. SF dominates now but I think any server from T7 would dominate just as much if not more. Do you think the blowouts will be more fun if it’s a different server every week?

Yes. Different enemies, different strategy, different tactics.

In all honesty both systems would work fine, Gliko is not flawed and and neither would WULD be flawed, IF the main problem was sorted out, server population. Ok I know it wouldn’t magically make blowouts a thing of the past but it would make alot less of them.

Why dont the just merge servers based on population? Please forgive me if they have giving a reason in the past why they have not done this already but I don’t spend much time on forums. It could in some cases also help a little maybe with the night capping situation. Don’t get me wrong we all play to win but i don’t mind losing against a good server no matter how bad a blowout if they were clearly the better. However, losing badly to a server that ur clearly evenly match or better than in prime-time because (in my case as a EU player on an EU server) they have a few NA guilds helping them while my server sleeps.

And what someone was saying about free transfers ruining WvW (please forgive me but i can be bothered to search and quote its late) your absolutly right it does and here’s proof of what I seen on my server first hand from rank 2 all way to 21 at one point, all because a few guilds didnt like to come 2nd and 3rd in tier 1, they wanted to be 1st and with its being so easy to shift ur guild to another server so they did.

For the record we are moving back up slowly.

http://mos.millenium.org/servers/view/23/#history

This massively uneven situation we are in is largely the fault of three months of free transfers which allowed server hoppers to grossly imbalance the fights. As the servers are locked/cost money the cost influx of new players and people quitting will help to balance this over time. Another factor to consider is that assuming the game gains in popularity the addition or more servers would help balance even more.

Regarding a server sitting down on match-up. That’s never going to happen. 1 person or 1 guild can’t dictate whether entire servers will switch to kitten mode at a press of a button. If that was possible blue and reds would’ve teamed up to push the greens to 3rd place before fighting amongst themselves for 1st place on the last days of the week.

I would rather believe WvW will die once players get bored of the stagnant match-up. The teams constantly losing will get tired of trying while those winning will get bored of no challenge. After all tiers gets covered in a sea of green (same servers over and over) will be the only time match-ups change. that’s how the current system works. It “always” requires a lopsided fight before you can see actual movements. Later if match-ups become close it will be rare for new match-ups to occur. I don’t know how some people define that as exciting unless they actually enjoy being a winning team all the time. Easy life, Easy buffs, Easy loots, No repair costs, Map Completions, kitten rights, etc etc that others don’t have the privilege of even having unless they switch servers.

In addition don’t forget the benefits of this kind of match-ups
1. Fresh match-ups = new people, new strategies, new outcomes = exciting fights
2. Test of skills & Learning experience of winners who moved up.
3. Recovery & Practice time for losers who move down.
4. Fair distribution of wins and loses among servers
5. MAP COMPLETION!
6. Hurt from server transfers minimize

If people are that much scared moving a tier why not just give +1 rank, no change and -1 rank for 1st, 2nd and 3rd respectively? Sounds fair enough. As long as no mass server transfers happen to the bottom tier 8 no one will get hurt from this set-up.

Blix.8021:

Terrible idea. The coverage disparity between tiers is massive. Just because some server wins their matchup doesn’t mean they suddenly have 1000 more WvW players and are ready to move up a tier.

Funny people say we (SF) should be in tier 5 because we have won for a few weeks in a row.
Very good point here that some people fail to understand.

wads.5730:

fivekiller.1432:

wads.5730:

i dont understand why people think this is a good idea. do people not have the ability to extrapolate future match ups if they switched to this method?

http://mos.millenium.org/matchups#NA

Here is what it would look like if it were implemented and switched right now with the current scores.

[t1]
Jade Quarry
Sanctum of Rall
Blackgate

[t2]
Sea of Sorrows
Kaening
Fort Aspenwood

[t3]
Tarnished Coast
Dragon Brand
Yak’s Bend

[t4]
Maguuma
Crystal Desert
Ehmry Bay

[t5]
Stormbluff Isle
Devona’s Rest
Anvil Rock

[t6]
Isle of Janthir
Borliss Pass
Darkhaven

[t7]
Northern Shiverpeaks
Henge of Denravi
Sorrow’s Furnace

[t8]
Gates of Madness
Ferguson’s Crossing
Eredon Terrace

i can’t speak for lower tiers, but T3-4 will be stomps, then the week after, you will have the same match ups we have now. nothing changes. you have stomps every other week in T3-4.

No offense but SoS would kit on T2, and JQ would kit on anyone they come against.

Too Frisky.9165:

The current system is actually quite fine

Actually no the situation in T8 is a clear illustration of why the system isn’t fine and its got nothing to do with transfers.

Winner: Up
2nd: Stay
Last: Down

Best idea on earth. Main reason, New fights every week.

For winner: Moving up
Pros: You get to move up a tier and try 2 brand new opponents to see if you can keep winning and climbing. You get a new challenge. Exciting
Cons: You may finally lose. You just won though so that wont be to bad.

For 2nd: Staying
Pros: While you didn’t win you get to stay in your tier and fight 2 brand new opponents. A chance to beat the loser of the tier above you possibly moving you up. Also the winner of the tier below you that wants to kill you. Again exciting.
Cons: You may finally get last, but hey you will be dropping to a lower tier so should win.

For Last: Moving Down
Pros: You get to fight 2 brand new teams on a lower tier. So while you may have just got stomped you have great chances this time around. Get that win! Exciting!
Cons: You may get last place all over again. If that happens you need to keep dropping though. Eventually you will find stability.

Pros, Pros, Pros! 2 New servers to fight every week for everyone! Well almost. In tier 1 both winners will stay so they only get 1 new server. Same goes for tier 8. Both losers stay getting one new opponent. No matter though, not one server will have the same server stomping them twice in a roll. Equaling a good thing.

So with this outlook, my choice is for winner up, 2nd stay, loser down. It just makes sense.

Bedstain.6735:

No offense but SoS would kit on T2, and JQ would kit on anyone they come against.

absolutely!

Things would pretty much be the same as far as the point spreads go in those tiers.

Winner move up and loser down is a great idea. The current system means almost every week is same opponents and provides little motivation to avoid coming third.

Horrible idea as has been stated by other people with very valid points. Many of you say there is something wrong with the current system. Yes there is, but not even remotely close to the degree at which you are advocating. Everything that you are drawing from is still greatly impacted by population movements across servers. Kaineng for example is finally where it should be. It will still take several weeks at least if not a month before servers are close to or where they should be. At that point they should remain where they are meant to be.

While the current system isn’t working as well as some of you may hope, it has not had time to even work as intended until just recently. Those of you crying out for a change have nothing to stand on. The only for sure thing your system will do is have different servers facing off much of the time. However, they could just as quickly turn into fighting the same servers every other week. If you find fighting the same servers often a bad thing, this is just as bad as the current system. The difference is it will almost always be a drastically unbalanced match.

There are different degrees of balance. Perfect balance can never be obtained. However, imbalance can be mitigated. The current system does a much better job at mitigating that imbalance WHEN it has time to work. You can NOT call the current disparities in points a result of the current system. To do so would only show your lack of understanding.

On the point of blowouts. Everyone’s definition is different. Losing is not always a bad thing. You can lose and still have a lot of fun and great fight as has been stated by man TC players and other players across the board. You cannot simply look at final score and determine if that server is having fun. You are determining something with a lack of information and experience. The ONLY people who can be speak accurately to whether the server is doing well or having fun is the ones on that server.

If a server is losing and they are say in second place and behind by 30k-50k points chances are they are still having a lot of fun and good fights. 100k across the board from 1st to 3rd can still be good fights. More than that is usually a sign that the servers aren’t balanced with each other. That however is not the current systems fault. As said above servers still need to settle in and give the system time to work. Lets also not forget that coming out of weekends after one server has a lead. If it’s say a 5k or 10k lead you will see that disparity increase exponentially. This is not because they are drastically unbalanced. This is because of those who don’t want to play because their server isn’t winning. If this was not the case the leads would be going up linearly.

You have servers like TC, SoR, Maguuma, or Yak’s that will keep putting up a good fight especially the closer the match is and good fights they will have. Those are the sub 100k or less matches you call blowouts. When in fact they are still very good fights. You just aren’t there so you assume that if a server is losing by 50k it’s a horrible match. I much rather have these kind of matches and very close matches rather than purposely forcing bad match ups with your proposed system.

Oh and T8 I truly do feel sorry for you. I don’t know what it is like down there. But your situation does not warrant a system such as this. If anything someone from Anet should step in and manually move SF up with the losing T7 server. They should not however ruin every other tier in an attempt to help T8.

Elochai, you’ve convinced me that it can be fun to play when your server is 10k, 20k, 50k, or even 100k points behind the other servers.

Now convince us that WULD is a worse system than glicko!

Because it would produce even larger disparities in points that wouldn’t be fun. Or should I say it would actually cause servers to fight each other that wouldn’t not be fun even regardless of the points because of the mismatch. If you take out the glicko system in certain tiers and a human moves them thats fine. But only in certain tiers. However, if you automate a WULD system you would have more severely unbalanced matches. Those are the matches that are NOT fun and cause people to have their current match up. While I cannot prove without a doubt to the supporters of the WULD system that glicko is better they can in turn not prove the opposite.

The reason I prefer the current system is because based on experience and the information provided glicko is better than WULD. There are far better ways to do it than either one that I posted in a different thread. They are suggestion that Anet would probably not put the money and time into. I’d be happy with WULD in certain tiers but not across the board.

If we were to function under the idea that the Glicko system is in fact working right, and the math is correct, we come to a vastly different problem before us.

Work with this for a moment, If the math is right, and the Glicko system is not the problem then the problem becomes that some worlds really don’t belong to any existing Tier.

Case in point. ST is at 900+ Point scale, but Tier 7 is a 1K+ point scale, and T8 is at 600+ Point Scale, thus SF does not really belong in T7 or, T8

Now it is these “transition” worlds, like SF that make the WULD system would work the best for, as they would be able to move between worlds they are close to, even if they don’t really belong in either of them.

This of course might be a problem of only having 28 worlds and trying to find perfect matches for 3 of them at a time, and ending up where you have 2 worlds that are close matches, and thus good for each other to fight, but there is no available 3rd world to mix with them without causing a blowout one way or the other.

Which in that situation, neither the system or the math is to blame, it is doing the best it can with what it has, it simply does not have the means to make a fair three way match because there is not enough worlds to form these fair matches.

In that vein, we might have to realize that there will never be such a thing as “even matches” using the existing worlds with their existing populations, and in that case, rotation of these “border” worlds is better then stagnating them in one tier or another, when they clearly belong to neither.

Ungood.3054:

If we were to function under the idea that the Glicko system is in fact working right, and the math is correct, we come to a vastly different problem before us.

Work with this for a moment, If the math is right, and the Glicko system is not the problem then the problem becomes that some worlds really don’t belong to any existing Tier.

Case in point. ST is at 900+ Point scale, but Tier 7 is a 1K+ point scale, and T8 is at 600+ Point Scale, thus SF does not really belong in T7 or, T8

Now it is these “transition” worlds, like SF that make the WULD system would work the best for, as they would be able to move between worlds they are close to, even if they don’t really belong in either of them.

This of course might be a problem of only having 28 worlds and trying to find perfect matches for 3 of them at a time, and ending up where you have 2 worlds that are close matches, and thus good for each other to fight, but there is no available 3rd world to mix with them without causing a blowout one way or the other.

Which in that situation, neither the system or the math is to blame, it is doing the best it can with what it has, it simply does not have the means to make a fair three way match because there is not enough worlds to form these fair matches.

In that vein, we might have to realize that there will never be such a thing as “even matches” using the existing worlds with their existing populations, and in that case, rotation of these “border” worlds is better then stagnating them in one tier or another, when they clearly belong to neither.

yes, except you can’t do this in broad generality. this problem only applies to a few tiers.

wads.5730:

Ungood.3054:

If we were to function under the idea that the Glicko system is in fact working right, and the math is correct, we come to a vastly different problem before us.

Work with this for a moment, If the math is right, and the Glicko system is not the problem then the problem becomes that some worlds really don’t belong to any existing Tier.

Case in point. ST is at 900+ Point scale, but Tier 7 is a 1K+ point scale, and T8 is at 600+ Point Scale, thus SF does not really belong in T7 or, T8

Now it is these “transition” worlds, like SF that make the WULD system would work the best for, as they would be able to move between worlds they are close to, even if they don’t really belong in either of them.

This of course might be a problem of only having 28 worlds and trying to find perfect matches for 3 of them at a time, and ending up where you have 2 worlds that are close matches, and thus good for each other to fight, but there is no available 3rd world to mix with them without causing a blowout one way or the other.

Which in that situation, neither the system or the math is to blame, it is doing the best it can with what it has, it simply does not have the means to make a fair three way match because there is not enough worlds to form these fair matches.

In that vein, we might have to realize that there will never be such a thing as “even matches” using the existing worlds with their existing populations, and in that case, rotation of these “border” worlds is better then stagnating them in one tier or another, when they clearly belong to neither.

yes, except you can’t do this in broad generality. this problem only applies to a few tiers.

Exactly what wads said. There will always be servers here and there that wont fit perfectly with their tier. Like I said the WULD system would only work well in select situations on a case by case basis. It would not work as well as glicko in most tiers. As I’ve said in the past fighting the same server could be seen as good or bad. It is a matter of perception. I tend to think it is a good thing as most I know would agree. This is because it produces somethings else that all of us can agree is a good thing. That good thing is a better balance.

Saying servers will always be where they dont fit simply is not true. With a win up, 2nd stay, 3rd down system servers would stack exactly where they need to be. The better stronger servers would win there way up to the top until they reach servers they start losing to. Servers of their skill. Smaller worse serves would fall until they found serves they could beat. Servers of their skill. Servers would bounce around the area where they win and lose. Which is where they should be. Dominate servers would win to the top and beat on each other. Plus you would have new server match us every other week. Not the same 3 servers in a tier over and over. Yes you would evetually be playing the same servers every other week. Only if they never got better or worse but that would mean they are your proper skill. Winners at the top playing each other losers at tye bottom playing each other is used in every tourny bracket for a reason. The simple fact we have this thread is a clear example that the current setup is not working and is not what people want. Change can be good so give it a chance. Yes getting your butt kicked can still be fun at times but in the end every server wants to win eventually and playing even skilled servers is always better. WULD is a easy simple system that works. Its proven. Winners play winners so they evetually lose and losers play losers so they eventually win. Evetually finding balance.

Some of you guys suggest that it works since you’ve never been on lopsided fights for like 4 months straight, some of you suggest that the current system don’t work because gap between tiers are ridiculous. Then how about give it 3 months? will see.

The main reasons IMO are the massive power gaps between ranks or “Brick Walls”.
Base on last & Current match-ups the new brick walls would most likely be:
1 = Jade Quarry
5 = Kaineng
7 = Fort Aspenwood
10 = Yaks Bend
13 = Stormbluff Isle
22 = Sorrow’s Furnace

If the power gap between these servers are too extreme why not just chose to the Rank up Rank down instead of Tier up Tier Down? If a fight gets lopsided that there is a 200k gap between points then Tier Up on that “specific server” alone. That will send them on a more balance match-up much faster. Look at the current system now. All you’ll see are 3 – 2nd and 3rd placers switching places from time to time. Then there’s the case of Sorrow’s Furnace kitten Tier 8 for like 6 weeks in a row and is stuck there. There’s some sort of neglect going on there. How are you going to defend that the current system works on other tiers as well as yours? Just because you’re enjoying? Just because losing teams are fighting back? (They don’t have a choice)

the current system is working to a reasonable degree in ALL tiers except for T8.

using this new system would benefit T8, but would destroy any semblance of balance or stability in all other tiers. it’s not going to happen.

Yeah if only they can merge EU and NA (which isn’t going to happen) can we find less brick walls and more diversity in match ups.

Sad they’d have to Send ET, FC, FoW and Vabbi to heaven real soon.