Guild Wars 2

Vieux P.1238:

Dixo.3876:

Maybe they fixed teleports failing on perfectly flat ground at the same time?

Hahahahah haaahaha hahahaha hahaha….. oh,……you were serious!

Of course I wasn’t serious lol

Maybe they fixed teleports failing on perfectly flat ground at the same time?

choovanski.5462:

Fanta.8049:

But what happen when you run out of remove conditions ? because again many condition combine ( believe me ,many except you play condi ele) ,can you got enough condi clear ?nah cuz you need some mobility,stability and some DPS counter too.DPS has many way to counter ( dodge ,block ,invu ,endure, toughness reduce dmg …) but about condition ,the traditional way is remove condi skills ,but seem like not enough ( cuz many ,read up there) ,dodge and block and invu may help a few time ,but really ,most condition skill is spamming type ,they will repeat again and again until you die because run out of condi clean. Remember conditions dmg is a real big deal cuz they ignore the toughness not like DPS,and dont really need crit-chance like DPS.
Most conditions are dmg over time type , so they should not deal dmg as fast and strong as DPS ,and still got a good suitain.The best way is make condition still deal the strong dmg like currently, but let’s they drain HP slower ,reduce the duration a litte bit,dam fine.

it’s called managing your cooldowns and choosing which conditions to clear, ie L2P

The thing that makes me mad about conditions is that because of the spammy application you have no real control over what you remove.

In the past few days I’ve been perma imobolized by ranger entangle while dropping mu null field right on top of myself because of the field cleansing other conditions

Whats your build?

Having played nearly 800 ranked games during the Xmas test season exclusively as a solo queueer I feel like I can offer some good perspective from an environment that is going to be more akin to what an average forum reader can expect than high end tournament Mesmer icons.
I’ve spent most of my games as some variation of CI lockdown, but I’ve played dozens of games in all the various builds that sounded remotely viable to me:

• Double Ranged Shatter
• GS/SW+ Torch Shatter
• GS/SW + Focus CI
• Staff/SW+Focus CI
• SW+SW/various CS
• MtD Condition Shatter
• 0/6/2/6/0 Manta Bunker/Support

My preferred build is Staff/SW + Focus CI. My utilities are Blink/Null Field/Manta. Pack Runes. The main reasons I prefer this build over shatter is that it offers an on point presence and it has the ability to stand on point unlike GS which has to stand off point to be effective.

Shatter Mesmer has three completely unfavorable matchups: LB Ranger, Thief and Meditation Guardian. The consensus is that lockdown is way more favorable against thieves. Rapid fire is prime interrupt bait. Besides stopping the channel they are rooted which lets me easily close the gap and/or stack another immobilize via iLeap or Chaos Storm with another CI proc at which point its game over. Meditation Guardian is also easy to interrupt. In exchange for good matchups against these classes I feel like I’m a lot weaker to a GS Shatter Mesmer for the same reasons that the thief matchup doesn’t turn in our favor; your typical shatter build that you see at my level (GS+Sword Torch) just have a lot of ways to deal with immobilize.

As far as playing on point smart use of blurred frenzy/warden/interrupts lets you avoid off point ranged damage. The roots + short range blinks + huge chaos armor uptime lets you avoid up close damage without running off point. Between chaos armor/storm/bountiful interruption/pack runes you’ll have a good half dozen boons up at once.

As far as damage the shatter has the bounce/lower cd on mirror blade, more frequent shatters and IP. The bounce on mirror blade can wreck a single target but is unreliable as to if it actually goes off. Frequent shatters are good but it can be a bit of a double edged sword. You have increased clone generation and are under constant pressure to shatter before you lose illusions. This leads to missed phantasm attacks and unoptimal shatters. The IP damage benefit is very similar. It can net more damage, but you blow a gap closer/stun break to get the extra benefit and you’re not in melee range where you don’t want to be. Granted you can phase retreat back out to get some distance. To my previous point about point holding though you just blew two defensive cool downs offensively. The other major source of damage are GS autos (fire+air sigil FTW).

CI has greater damage per clone shattered due to the might+fury stacking and greater chances of actually landing the shatter due to the plethora of immobilize opportunities. You also tend to get more mileage out of your phantasms. One thing I forced myself to do over the past weeks is really lean on the sword auto more. It deals a lot of damage (compared to GS auto) and strips a boon. With the debuffs from CI you can usually get a chain off with relative impunity as well. Between the sword chain and nullfield you are still very effective at boon stripping (immobilize in null field ftw).

I’ve shattered one someone’s face + mirror blade for 10+k before. I’ve also rooted someone with a 3k halting strike proc while my iLock connected with a 7.5 crit followed by another 4 k from a mind wrack while they were still immobilized.

If I was on a team with some good bruisers/bunkers to hold the point I’d go shatter and pew pew with the best of them. The reality of random ranked queue is that you end up with 2 rangers and thief and your team and the flexibility of being able point hold while still doing huge bursts just tips the scale for me.

I’m aware that a lot of my points have as much to do with weapon/rune selection as with trait loadout.

Timewarp viable with the cd change? I Ran it last night and want impressed, but I forgot I had it a few times after losing a group fight

I didn’t post the screenshot because of the class stacking but because I had two players who were so bad that they accomplished not one useful thing the entire match. Don’t get me wrong the scoreboard doesn’t necessarily reflect a players contributions, but how do you go the whole game without participating in a kill or at least decapping a point.

You can’ t have 5 1500 players (average) on one side verus 3 2000 players (above average) and 2 750 players (terrible) and call it a fair match because both teams average to 1500.

Don’t get me wrong class stacking is a problem. I agree that daily class wins are a part of the problem here. Besides the fact that dailys exist there is the problem that a casual player doesn’t realize they are throwing a big wrench in the system. With the pvp revamp blog post we were promised fair matches and class specific MMR. I can totally see why san uninformed player might log onto a class for a daily; so what if I’m no good at thief, my thief MMR is low so I’ll play against other low MMR players since the system is suppose to put me in a fair match. It’s not like they had a grand announcement that they actually don’t have class MMR

I didn’t change classes because I don’t have anything else I am good at to change too for one. Another reason is that while it’s allowed now the intent is to not allow switching in the future. Another reason is that shouldn’t have too change classes because of composition. The system is supposed to not stack classes like this.

I have changed builds before to something more tanky with a chance of holding a point. It works if the other people rotate to you and can actually kill something. I’ve learned my lesson on trying that though. Most of the time when I try it my teamates don’t manage to focus a target or they all run off and don’t roatate back to me before I’m overwhelmed.

algorithm gets the outcome of the match right 95% of the kitten time. I’m tired of being saddled with kitten like this.

I’ve had this happen several times and just verified with logs. I wasn’t interrupted, heal just went on full cd with no logged healing.

Ether feast on mesmer if that matters.

Sorel.4870:

Dixo.3876:

Is the problem that the current algorithm consider this a fair (50/50 odds) match and the consensus is that team A will always win?

How about squaring the individual ratings, averaging these and then taking the square root of the average?

Team A = 1813
Team B = 1519

This would weigh better players more. I’m not sure this is a wise solution but I think this could work mathematically to implement it

I like the maths behind this idea. Yes, if we admit that it’s more difficult to win when the variance of the MMR is bigger, this would be a nice implementation. But is it really? In this example, we know who’s on TS. But if no one is? Then a team were everyone plays decently could very well win against a team with very good and very bad players. In a team game, it takes one bad apple to ruin the batch. I personally prefer seeing very bad and very good players against me in a match: I just have to focus on the good players, and know that the bad players will always lose their 1v1 pretty quickly.

Yeah it’s totally up in the air in my mind which team would win. It hinges on what the MMR rating correlate to. I’ll buy that three elite players could carry two bass against five average players. I don’t think three great players could carry two terrible players against five less than geat players.

Are there options in place to try to match the team average MMR and the variance of the team MMR?

Laserbolt.6731:

Justin said in another thread:

“I can mostly explain the first match (a blowout against top players). They had a very low rated player on their team, which skewed the average much closer to your team.”

Below is an example to think about. I’d like to hear your thoughts on it.

How should this be predicted by the Match Prediction? By average MMR and team size?

Team 1:
MMR 2400 On TS, expert rotation knowledge
MMR 2200 On TS, expert rotation knowledge
MMR 2300 On TS, expert rotation knowledge
MMR 550
MMR 500

Average: 1590
============

Team 2:
MMR 1490
MMR 1600
MMR 1450 On TS , low rotation knowledge
MMR 1550 On TS , low rotation knowledge
MMR 1500

Average: 1518

Knowing the complexities of the game, can this situation be accurately represented by average numbers?

I’d like to hear the thoughts of people who know the game well about how this match would actually play out in reality, vs the math of averages.

Is the problem that the current algorithm consider this a fair (50/50 odds) match and the consensus is that team A will always win?

How about squaring the individual ratings, averaging these and then taking the square root of the average?

Team A = 1813
Team B = 1519

This would weigh better players more. I’m not sure this is a wise solution but I think this could work mathematically to implement it

Justin ODell.9517:

LoopySnoopy.7923:

There’s 2 of us me + 1 other we seem to get a decent match evenly spread both sides are equal in ratings.

We add a 3rd player to our team another guildy the balance then shifts we seem to get an imbalanced opposing team they’re either weaker then us or they are hugely stronger then us.

We add a full guild group to the mix and the opposing team all seem to have a larger skill base then us,higher mmr,all r80.

Unfortunately this fits with what I posted earlier. Since we are weighing party size so heavily, you’re getting matched other parties of the same size (or close to it) even though you may not be a good match according to MMR. Again, this suggest we could reduce that scoring some, or increase the scoring for rating.

We basically need to find a balance between two competing goals. On one end we want to match based on rating (which is a stand in for skill), and on the other we want to match based on party size (since premade parties have an advantage.)

Last Tuesday we introduced a change that adjusts a party’s rating based on the number of players in that party. The intent is to match pre-mades with and against higher rated players, assuming that matching a premade against higher skilled solos is less offensive than a premade with equally skilled solos. However, I never went back and reduced the scoring for party size.

Try splitting the difference. I’ve had a lot of premades. Granted I had some premades on my team, but the skill difference has still lead to a lot of bad matches.

imaclown.1628:

One duo and one trio without voice comms is the same as a pug, if you think differently you’ve never played on a true premade.

I agree that it doesn’t compare to a cordianted voice comm team, but the advantage a group of 2+3 has over a group of 5 is very pronounced in my opinion.

In a game mode that boils down to fighting even numbers or advantaged number having people who work together is a huge advantage.

Are there plans for transparency. I’m certainty feel like I’m getting the short end of the stick tonight.

As i posted in another thread I went 17 wins and 39 loses in a day back in December but still gained 15 points. I understand you have to make some concessions to balance queue times to where you want them but it’d be a lot lest frustrating if I knew I was thrown into lopsided matches.

Why post this. It’s widely accepted that you’re one of the best players in the game. From what I’ve gathered you’re not old enough to collect the $$$ in the tourneys which is unfortunate.

I’m sure none of those players are as good as you. I’ve played with a few and can say they are more toward the right of the bell curve than at the center.

If they talked crap to you in game I kinda get it. If you’re just picking on people who grinded to the top of the leaderboard then shame on you. I don’t think people asked for the system we got.

How about a little grace in victory?

Speaking of streaks:Dec 28. The day I almost threw my pc out the window. I went 17 wins and 39 losses and still gained 15 lb points. My obviously got put into match after match that I was destined to lose.

http://www.gw2score.com/PvP/player/Dixo3876

I will say that I’ll take the changed weighting were I’m less likely to face premises as a solo queuer in exchange for an increased chance of duplicate classes any day of the week.

Chaith.8256:

When you have points per win, greater than one, that simply means you’re scoring more points than the odds predicted, on average over all your games.

It’s not really possible to tell if you’re winning when you’re not predicted to, or simply not losing as badly as you’re predicted to. Can’t sort them out because we can’t see the odds. The system may have a binary win/loss prediction, we wouldn’t know, we just know we get rewarded for the more points we score against bad odds of success.

The matchmaking system does its best efforts to put you in a balanced match on a per match basis. When it does matchmaking, it won’t look at someone and be like: “oh they had many matches recently where they were not favoured to win, let’s give em an easy one”

How good is the system overall…….. it succeeds relatively well in the big picture for average MMR people: You will 500-0 spawn camp people just as often as you get 500-0 spawn camped, usually.

However, that’s just the macro look at the matchmaking. What players really want is for every match to be as close as possible.

Also if you’re a high MMR player, you get a 500-0 spawn camped more often because you’re always stuck as the messiah to somehow bring 4 new players to success against a 5 person premade.

High MMR players can only have a good experience in premade vs. premade ranked matches,

New to medium MMR players can only have a good experience if they are alright with rather high occurrences of 500-0ing people and getting 500-0’d.

I’d say the overall new system is worse than the previous, that’s just my opinion.

I’d like to start out that I agree with your points they more of less match my take away of the system.

With that being said are they based on speculation or have you gotten a behind the scenes looks are more of the numbers than the average player :-)?

For you first point, it doesn’t really matter if you’re winning when the system said you should lose or not losing as bad as the system predicted; you’re still getting the short end of the matchmaking stick. Based on the test season I agree that over time the system seems to be balancing out since virtually no one with a ton of games had more than 1 point per win.

I also agree that a couple of weeks ago a good MMR player would seem to be the outlier on a bad team to bring the average in line. Personally I haven’t seen this happen nearly as much lately so maybe they tweaked the allowed variance or more people are playing.

I think the system we have is good wau of doing things on a per match basis given the fact that the system can’t find a perfect 50/50 matchup all the time. I would recommend another test season with some type of cap on the number of games that counted (already suggested by other people).

I’ve haven’t played any matches today so I’m pretty sure the leaderboard is up to date for me at the time of this post.

I’ve gone 22-16 for a total of 26 leaderboard points or nearly 1.2 points per win.

I haven’t spent a lot of time pondering this but I see one of two basic explanations for this.

A) Nearly all my losses occurred in even odds (50%/50% chance of winning) matches and my team scored at least 400.

B) I’ve been in a lot of matches were I was favored to lose and I either won or it was a relatively close game.

I recall maybe 5-6 losses to my part where my team scored 400. Which points more heavily to explanation B.

Does the matchmaking system make any effort to balance your number of games where you are favored to win with the number of games where you are favored to lose?

How good is the system overall? Whats the ratios of 50/50 games to 60/40 games and 80/20 games?

Does the matchmaking system make a binary decision (win/lose) or does it have a predicted point spread as well?

Marcos.3690:

Justin ODell.9517:

We do plan to show the odds of winning as part of the final ladder when it’s released. We simply did not have the UI resources to get anything out in time for the test ladder.

Show MMR as well, it works in other games.

The harrassment will be the same anyway…

Yeah I agree with this as I alluded too in another thread Justin responded too. If you make any information public people will harass you. I got harassed by for using a staff on a mesmer the other day.

Publish all the information you can (except my password and CC number)

At least you can’t get courtyard/spirit watch/skyhammer

The overall skill pool in my games was pretty low compared to what it had been before.; I had a necro on my team pop lich to kill a beast on forest. I soloed a zerker guardian and a thief at the same time as a mesmer. I won one game 500 to sub 100.

I saw a ton of new games. Usually is I see approximately the same people match after match. That still happened but not to the extent is has been in the past.

I see one of two explanations.

A) The system tries so hard to avoid solo versus teams that the skill disparity is too high between two groups of pugs.

B) A lot of people are taking a break (if you don’t enjoy the game or want reward tracks this is possible + even I took time out to do the PvE content). Either the population is lower than usual overall or the population at whatever my MMR is low.

Vapour.7348:

Justin ODell.9517:

The leaderboard now rolls desertions into the losses column.

This is erroneous because I did not disconnect at all in the last hour and yet the system posted that I had 12 losses. The reality is I had 3 wins and 1 loss. How did it come to 12 losses? Prior to this, my win/loss ratio was closer to 60%.

I don’t understand why the system is so punitive, even to those who play fair and honest.

Justin said above he rolled in the entire season’s DCs.

Does that mean if you had a DC and came back at won the win column wasn’t incremented either?

If you bothered to roll them in why not make another column. You said in another post that adding columns was trivial.

I didn’t have a DC or a loss in that time frame. Did that count retroactiveivly. Otherwise you broke something.

I also know my points were 287 all day and that screen shot has me at 290. how could I possibly get enough points to make up for 8 full losses in two hours?

Something is going on. I just been playing for two hours straight and lost my first game and the last scoreboard update has me at +8 losses in that time frame

PUGs announce when their crate elite is up. Discuss

Justin ODell.9517:

Torin.7129:

MMR: I think this algorythm is too complicated. It’s based on Rank, Profession, Ladder Standings etc. etc., but it seems not working.

This is not correct. We use a slightly modified version of Glicko2.

It’s discussed more in-depth here:
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/PvP_Matchmaking_Algorithm#Ratings

Torin.7129:

And i don’t understand, why can’t we see how much is our MMR at the moment.

We don’t want people focus on MMR, and we don’t want people to shame and harass people with lower MMR.

Torin.7129:

Double or tripple profession in same team: Can’t you make an algorythm that doesn’t allow to join 2 or more same profession in a team? Then can be all of the games more balanced.

Looking at the data, the system is actually really good at this, but can be over-shadowed by the new profession dailies. We do not wan’t to put a hard cap on the number because it could greatly increase queue times for the more common professions.

Why publish win and loss rates then. People near the top of the leaderboards get harassed all the time; especially ppl with lower win rates.

Lopez.7369:

Laserbolt.6731:

“Half the people on the front page are in the 50%’s.”

Doesn’t this just mean the matcher does a good job of giving a match where you have a only a 50/50 chance of winning? As designed?

Not necessarily. For example, if I have 10 matches that I win by 500 points and 10 matches that I lose by 500 points, it would show a 50 percent win ratio. But obviously that would be terrible matchmaking.

More importantly, these people aren’t overcoming their losses by making sure they beat good teams. They’re overcoming their losses by playing a ton of games.

That could happen in theory, but it’s not my reality. Sure I get some duds but most of my matches are close. My win % was around 66% until I had a horrible 17-34 record one day. I still went up 15 points because my team typically scored 400 in a loss.

I’ve played a lot of games in this season (12-13) start but most importantly I played a lot before this season but after the MMR reset. The system seems to be doing a good job for me.

Supcutie.2538:

Necro flips condis, engi has aoe condi cleanse, ranger has a lot of passive cleanse.

Are you saying these condition builds are more viable than torment shatter because of their cleanses?

This is one of the reasons I will swap to conditions based on the other teams comp. The condition build I use has a lot of Self/AoE clenses.

If I run a MoTD build I do it for the stealth to counter thieves/torch shatter mesmer or for the clenses and conditions to load engineers.

Lopez.7369:

Greater emphasis on win-loss ratio is a bad idea.

All the developers need to do is attach point gains to MMR, which is what every other game, from World of Warcraft to chess, does.

How does the current system not accomplish this?

The problem is there’s no tranparncey in the point gain or loss. I have to hope the leaderboards update like they should and then try to guess/ remember which games were counted in the last update to see if I was -1,0 or +1 to the team of premade still hat I won every fight I was involved in during the match but still ended up losing by 200 points.

I recognize the headaches involved too. 5 v 5 has to be a lot harder to balance than a 1 v 1 MMR system. Can a really high MMR soloer balance out a duo/trio on another team? It depends; composition, is the premade on team speak or just typing (nothing like getting burst by two people from stealth)

I’ve. Been fairly pleased with my games lately. They’ve been close. Yesterday we have the same (high quality) pugs versus two different premades and won both games by less than 100

I can’t tell if you’re agreeing with me or trying to provide counterpoints. My thoughts on your bullets.

-There is no GM on the top 50 on any ladder on sc2 below .500.

I didn’t do any research on SC2 population. But I’m pretty sure the population of SC2 is at least 1 or 2 orders of magnitude higher than GW2. With a population that large you will have the top percentile who win much more then .500. It’s also 1 v 1 instead of teams?

This seems like a bit of apples to orange comparison. The point of my post was that you can’t judge skill by win percent and that win percent is at best a dubious stats since solo players are being used as fodder to shorten team queue times

-There is no tier system of gw2 that will stop the top 3 on lb partying together from getting a team with super low mmr to the point that the match lasts 2 minutes long <— this happened twice in a row

Is this you admitting to basically forming a premade and farming pugs to get your points? For science solo for 500 games after reset and let’s see what your win percentage is.

-The current MM system cannot accurately judge skill with its heavy emphasis on points scored during a match.

If you mean scoreboard points during game (individual score based and kills/rezs etc.) then I think you’re mistaken;I don’t think these matter at all. How well the teams do realitive to each other is as fair of a way as I can think of doing it. It’s more information than just looking at a binary win/loss and allows a relatively stellar player on the losing team to not take a leader board hit

-Let me put it this way there are players trying to grind the LB who disregard whether they win or lose trying to farm points during a match.

Farm points during a match? Again kills etc isn’t how you get leaderboard points. If you are trying to go up on the leader board as fast as possible then you want the most wins in the shortest amount of time?

-The fact that I get so bored during some matches because I’m actually taking time to remember to let the other team score 100 before we win, is a thought that should never enter my head.

So you are laying down to try to be nice to the pugs your premade is stomping? You’re artificially tanking your MMR and inflating the pugs? Way to further screw up the system bro? How is an computer algorithm ever going to do its job if you manipulate the inputs?

I still think the best realistic thing they could do is leave everyone in the same pool, but assign points to different leaderboards depending on your queue size?

The fact that you even bring up win ratio shows a lack of understanding of the nature of the system. Everyone should end up at around 50% win rate in a system with an infinite population of solo/team queue players across the skill spectrum.

There are two explanations for people with 100+ games played with 70%+ win rates. A) You started with a low MMR and you really are in the top 0.5% of players You’re spending a majority of your time queuing with other people.

I’ve played all my games solo exclusively as Mesmer. I also don’t bother to play unranked when I want to experiment with a new build. Hell I spent a lot of the weekend screwing around with bunker Mesmer builds. I’ve been around on/off since launch.

If the people with high win rates got there solo queuing then my hat’s off to them. I don’t play consistently well enough with the type of build that can carry bad players against the grinder of my happiness that is 5 solo players against a combination of grouped players.

To your original point there are some people at 50% on the front page who are grouped every time I see them. This is the true injustice of the leaderboards.

I think the system is about as fair as it can be given the decision to mix solo and team queue. There is defiantly a very large grinding component to the leaderboards but what should Arenanet do? Give the guy that farms a 80% win rate running a team speak coordinated team against five random pugs all the props or should they try to recognize the pugs who overcame that disadvantage and still made it a close game?
The current system gives them both some reward which is nice.

It’s not much fun for me usually going up against team queuers as a solo queuer, but given the realities of the game I don’t expect them to split out the population again. The only change I would suggest would be to keep the team and solo people in the same queue, but to have people who solo queue points go to a Solo Leader board and people who are team queued go to a Team Leader board. It would still be a grind, but at least you could compare win rates on each board.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/pvp/Team-Your-Name/first#post4615008

It’s team whoever loaded I to the map first. It has nothing to do with mmo or ldr board rank according to ANET

Does this count?

Nice links. I’m family with gear shield and the elixir animations. I must be getting bad luck on aegis

Is it possible to get a list of daze immunity by class (other than stability). For example, I randomly get immune from engineers and haven’t found out why.

ie Berserker’s Stance can’t daze but I pretty sure you can during Endure Pain.

In Gem Store Please

Does getting the you must requeue message grant dishonor. I had two situations where I got this.

Once I got a pop while looking at the trading post and thought I hit accept and brought the trading post window back to the foreground. I guess I could have thought I clicked accept and didn’t.

The second time I heard the horn while I was alt tabbed. I tabbed back in and hit accept and alt tabbed back out. I tabbed back in to the requeue dialog. I never got another horn.

Did I get the requeue dialog because I failed to hit accept or does it happen for any other reason. Does failing to respond to the accept dialog? Cause dishonor?