Showing Posts For Bjyoric Orcstone.1728:
I found that Nginx is great as a rate limiting reverse proxy. Just lookup “rate limiting with nginx” to get started. Extra nice that you can partition the rate limiting. So >5reqs/sec I slowed a little for a couple seconds but >20reqs/sec got throttled to 4/s for a big chunk of time.
Good luck, I feel your pain. This stuff always happens at 2AM on a holiday.
More instrumentation of WvW will help future revisions be based on facts and numbers.
Extending the kills, deaths JSON in /v2/wvw/matches/<match-id> with “players” would work.
Probably total player minutes/world determines the win. Comparing world population “high” vs “medium” doesn’t reveal Asian and European guilds covering wee hours for US worlds.
A 2nd suggestion: Instrumenting world population at a daily granularity. This would allow charting population vs active WvW players. I suspect there are huge migrations every time WvW rules change.
From my research over the last 6 months:
1) Wins are NOT determined by positive kills : deaths ratio.
2) When the kills plus deaths sum is greater than other worlds then you win.
The results point to online player hours around the clock.
Why am I researching this? Because I used to love WvW and would like to see it flourish. Unfortunately, skirmish mode settles the week’s contest by Sunday. No point in playing because you can’t catch up. Yes I instrumented this too.
I know skirmishes were are an attempt to make things more balanced but instead it has lead to huge population shifts. Since “skirmish” started, loads of money has been spent by hundreds of players on switching worlds. That is not sustainable game design for the future.
Thanks for reading,
Orc
That looks great!
Anyway, I’d suggest to add skirmish start/end (or just one) into each skirmish. I know I can calculate time at my end. but I ‘d love to see it comes with API. (TBH, I’m too lazy to calculate it myself.)
The skirmish_end_time is provided. You are always in the current skirmish and the end time tells you how long there is until the next skirmish. What would you need a skirmish start time for? It’s in the past and can’t help your team. You know later skirmishs will be starting a fixed time from the skirmish_end_time. Just really curious about the use.
Thanks for the explanation.
Using /v2/wvw/matches/1-2 and checking total deaths vs kills and I’m puzzled:
total deaths across all maps is 145302
while total kills = 147806
So there are 2504 more kills than deaths.
How can that be?
I’d understand more deaths that kills if falling off cliffs counted.
I voted for scoring changes but nothing in the list sound good.
1) I have read the papers on Glicko. It is a system intended for rating individual against each other. It makes the assumption that a player doesn’t change in skill quickly.
This is not true in WvW. At the levels Dragonbrand has played we see 4-5 whole guild moving from world to world weekly. Guilds will move during matches. Population and skill can fluctuate massively during the week. So having a Glicko term for past performance is bogus. The constant c should probably be tied to population but that isn’t constant during the matches.
2) I’ve setup my own private site to pull average points per tick via API. Last week TC had 680, DB 420. That shows the match was being determined by blob combat. You can’t score 680 on PPT. TC’s was usually under 280 on the non kill tick. So all you people that think there is not enough influence from PVP action – wrong. 100 DB’ers getting killed every 15m all day adds up.
3) WvW players can be divided into (a) giant PvP battle lovers, (b) strategic conquest lovers [Havoc] and © those that like both. A and B are unhappy. WvW is not fully wonderful for either. Is there is a solution to this division? The players have solved it (in past) by moving to top tiers for bigger blobs. Maybe ANET should set up a massive blobs PvP league – like Guild v Guild. Of course, blob guilds would want 1000 member guilds then. Basically, the A and B types drift apart – mostly B’s will stop playing.
Still completely invunerable in dragonbrand tonight.
Might as well vent here because that thread is 7 months old (though you have steered almost a whole page of new comments there!).
There is definitely a bug in the new sizing code – almost like it ignores the actual vertical size of you Eyefinity setup.
Additional problem – when using “window” mode the character preview on login screen is distorted – squeezed vertically and stretched about 3x horizontally.
(edited by Bjyoric Orcstone.1728)
GW2 is now unplayable on my setup. I run 3×1 with window bar across all 3 windows.
The user interface doesn’t adjust the bounds of the interface area properly. Now the UI is bounded by a 1280×1280 area forcing the menu of icons off the top of the screen.
Changing interface drastically should be rolled out in a quiet time in a sort of stealth beta test. Dropping in this bomb of a change at same time at major new content is poor planing unless ArenaNet wants AMD users to move on.
I’ve seen a suggestion that one make the windows bar only on the center screen but why should I be changing my PC setup to accommodate a programmer’s mistake. There is NO WAY the UI bounding box should be 1280 high on a 1024 high screen.