Guild Wars 2

I. Hate. Celery.

#carrots

I’ve faced a 5 turret engi team before. We destroyed them. Kill the engi and the turrets die with them.

I don’t think they count already.

I have a counter example still. What if my team is losing really badly, and one person from the team leaves at the end of the match (before it ends) just to spite the other team? Does the other team not get credit now?

I started PvE in GW2 in September. Did my first PvP match in November (well, in my defense I played for a month when it came out but got busy with life), and I am now qualified for the North American WTSIQ next Sunday… oh and I’m probably the only guy who isn’t even close to a dragon rank yet.

Luck? Carried? You tell me. Heh.

You’re lucky one of the guys on their team didn’t literally quit the game. Because then you would get a +0.

Sorry Justin. I know you all had good intentions, but it doesn’t seem to have panned out as well. I am still impressed that Lexi managed to put in 800 games in the span of 4 weeks.

This is what they want… for everyone to play more.

Yep. They did that back in GW1. Tournaments could swing your ladder rank 10 times more than normal ranked matches. The same should occur for tournaments, where winning would give you +10 points and losing could give you -10 points.

You can still swap in unranked.

Yep. All concerns are sound.

This is absolutely why MMR and ladder need to be one and the same (or just eliminate MMR altogether and have ladder ranking replace MMR in matchmaking). Win probability should be based on your ladder rank. Therefore, higher ladder rank, higher win probability. Vice versa would occur for a low rank (it should be intuitive and logical). Because unranked matches exist now, you can try your new professions there.

You can even tank your MMR but keep your ladder ranking if you just lose every match 400-500.

If you’re really saying there are only a few teams at my team’s MMR… well. That’s the point of the probability of winning; so we can have uneven MMRs and still have a game.

Queue time has never been more than 3 minutes.

I’ve been doing a 5-man ranked team for about 5 hours now. We’ll continuously face the same teams 2-3 times in a row (at least some people in the team are the same) before getting different opponents. Would it make sense to add something to the matchmaking that discourages re-matches? Any comments? Not sure if this was planned, but it is what’s happening.

Some of the matches we stomp the team multiple times. The other times, we get stomped so it goes both ways.

Umm. I think it should be like this instead:

Sigil of Pacification
50% Chance on Hit: Remove Stability
(Cooldown: 5 Seconds. 0 Seconds if removing warrior stability)

There we go, strap on this sigil and your opposing warriors no longer have perma stab.

It’s going to be a lot harder in balancing both conquest and death match. Good luck if y’all decide to add it permanently.

To Justin O’Dell and whoever else is working with the new PvP system,

I really like the idea of using final score and odds of victory as the metric for ladder ranking so kudos to you for coming up with it! Doing something like this is what we have long needed. Even though ELO/MMR rating was good, it never captured how close a game was. If we only counted wins and losses, then we would find TCU or Baylor in the college football playoffs right now, even though they clearly had weak non-conference opponents.

I thought about it for a while, and a simple modification could be to eliminate the “0” points on the chart; instead changing it to another specified value depending on victory odds. The current system basically allows a player to grind their way to the top because of an example like the following: If a team has a 80-100% chance of victory, the likelihood of the team losing with 0-199 points is nearly 0%. If you assumed the point spread was a normal distribution, then this would be a valid way to score. However, most capture point games can be kept quite close and may have a skewed distribution towards the 300-499 point loss results.

Ultimately, it’s all speculations, since we can agree people aren’t taking this test season as seriously, but I trust you’ll re-examine how the points are given based on the two metrics again to make sure the best are really at the top since that is the purpose of the ladder (and not who plays the most). Comments or questions anyone?

Source:
https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/finding-the-perfect-match/

This is why they are testing it. All they would need to do is adjust it so you lose more points for losing. If you just take out the 0 point loss, then that would probably fix it.

I’m curious to see how this plays out. He has a point, though. If we assume that you are actually decent at the top of the ladder, then you may never lose a match more more than 400-500. Thus, you would never lose points.

With the all GW1 ELO system, you would tend to lose more points than you would win. Thus, it was very hard to stay at the top of the ladder (the only flaw being that you can stop playing at rank 1 and not drop).

I’d argue it’s more reasonable to make the resolution of points higher. More point gain for winning and more point loss for losing. But once again, we’ll have to wait and see.

I’ve gotten quite the opposite. I’ve solo queue’d 5 times so far.

4 Blowouts where we win.
1 Close loss.

Maybe it’s my skill contributing, but I haven’t been paired up yet with anybody that wasn’t also solo queue’ing.