Showing Posts For Rednova.5283:
This is your second thread about this, are you that kitten that someone said mean words to you? Because that’s life.
Regardless of how they acted I highly doubt you’re a saint when you pvp, or at all if you’re trying this hard to spotlight them
I also think it’s funny that anyone acts like they can understand what that code means at all, outside of anet programmers. Those notes are pretty arcane to lamen eyes.
I would hardly call the code arcane. All you have to do is pick up a book for a half hour to figure out what it means. I’m hardly a software engineer but I have taken courses and read a couple text books for fun and I can understand the gist of what is going on. Their notes on the page are also fairly good to help someone else understand what is going on with a little effort.
The fact that there are so many threads about the matchmaker show people have little knowledge about how glicko or the matchmaker works. Regardless, it’s not rocket science if you’re willing to read. You can’t just look at it and go “yup, just what I thought, gibberish. They must be trying to pull a fast one on us.” I digress.
Maybe try writing the code out on a piece of paper and wherever they reference a certain portion in their notes make a mark and reread that when you get there in the code?
Say there were evidence provided of let’s say 10 different players, who had screenshot and/or recorded evidence of their rating vs. rating histories, over the course of 60 to 80 ranked matches.
What if player 1 and player 2 had proof that 60% to 70% of their matches were favorable in terms of being on the higher rated team vs. a lower rated team.
What if players 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 had proof of estimates of 50% to 50%.
what if players 8, 9, 10 had proof of being on the lower rated side 70% of the time.What would you say then? When it was in front of your face?
Would you call it simply luck for those 60 to 80 games?
Would you still call it luck after 3 seasons and 500+ games when the same
players are getting the same types of rhythms?I want to hear actual answers on this.
I may form the project myself.
60 to 80 matches is a small sample size. If you want the matchmaker to show it is doing its job then more matches would be better. Around 150 would begin to provide better accuracy.
You would need to take into account any possible deviations of rating due to any dishonor or similar factor. Decay could also be something that could have an impact on the rating that is viewed when you collect the data at the beginning/end of match. So the matchmaker might view it as higher in determining a match but unless you verified each players rating is without decay then you would only see their effective rating
Then you have to take into account player skill which would make testing the winrate between multiple players challenging due to the simple fact they are not the same player. Their skills will vary.
Then there are also random and external factors such as lag spikes, trolls, and real life situations or off matches on your end that would further skew the data.
Tldr: If you were looking for accurate data you would need hundreds and hundreds of games across multiple accounts with only a few players playing the multiple accounts and further throw away matches that are affected by lag or other external force
(edited by Rednova.5283)
I understand what you’re getting at with changing rating gain to a more personal basis rather than dependant on win/loss and while it seems like a good idea, how would you accomplish it? What criteria would you go off of?
In my opinion there are just far too many variables in trying to determine if you pulled your weight, atleast from an algorithm based stand point. In a match it seems easy to judge who is doing well and who isn’t, but thats not always because of a numbers stand point. Many times it is simply being at the right place at the right time, so to repeat my question, what would your criteria be?
I didn’t even notice the dailies changed, they’re usually done after 1 or 2 matches whether they were the old or new
They do not have same constraints -_- because due to their MMR they already land at 2k rating after placement so for most part they will be always on team A.
It also doesn’t help that those “pro” players (especially on NA) resort to exploiting/cheating/wintrading (not all of them but you know who i mean).
They earned the 2k rating though due to their skill. They achieved that rating under the same exact constraints you and I have. The same. There is no line in the matchmaking that exempts “pro” players from having the same constraints we do, they are just better (minus those that wintrade etc.).
Even if they had a hard reset that placed them in silver I can almost guarantee they will rise back up to the top just because of their skill.
I don’t think its that bad of an idea to make people play their class in unranked x amount of times, but then you have to decide how much is enough. Many times it’s not just playing your class that’s the problem it’s knowing how to play against other classes/tactics which would require more extensive knowledge to become a good player.
Also theres the problem of playing different builds. I know a lot of people that only play the meta which is fine to understand how the class should operate in the meta, but it doesn’t really teach you anything outside of that so if you were to try a new build that plays differently that isn’t strictly meta how would this system stop a player from playing something they are not used to and becoming a liability just because they changed builds? The system would recognize the player as being proficient in their class but it may or may not be true based on build.
I don’t like the idea of voting to determine whether you should be allowed to play a class based on how you did as I can see that leading to trolling. Also many players, myself included, have matches where they are just off or make a bad play. It would be a shame if said players got penalized because of 1 bad game.
Tldr: Support needing a certain number of games to be familiar with class. Don’t support voting on whether you’re allowed to play that class.
Edit: Thinking about it, without a voting system it would be difficult to determine whether you learned how to play your class based on the games you played. For example i could play an ele and try and run around and +1 people. This isn’t the smartest thing for an ele to do, but it would still count as a game played. The problem with the voting system however other than obvious trolling would be it requires players to be much more aware of not only themselves but of their teammates. Which if that were the case we may not have this problem of not knowing your class to begin with.
(edited by Rednova.5283)
And here I thought you would have taken the day between your last thread about thief/mesmer being op to sit down and try to learn how to play against these two classes. Silly me for giving you the benefit of the doubt
A few hints to note, the Daze only Procs on Choking Gas Pulse, the Daze has an ICD separate from the Pulse, Choking Gas alone can only apply 4 Stacks at most each stack only last 2 secs per pulse baseline, so by itself one Choking Gas doesn’t do much, now I could see the Daze ICD being increased to 2 seconds.
But right now it’s a skill that has two separate ICDs and can’t reach the 5 stack threshold alone.
I’m aware how the skill works and as I said I don’t believe it is op in its current state. I may have been a little hasty trying to suggest a potential compromise to the skill, I just didn’t want this improvement to get nerfed just because people refuse to adapt and instead complain about it without learning how the skill works.
We all know how hard dh has been getting nerfed and still people complain about traps, but that is a different subject entirely.
In the spirit of trying to come to a compromise about this, although I don’t believe it is op in its current state, why not just increase the poison threshold instead of sending the skill back down to the depths? Up it to 8. If it were at 8 the thief would either need to spam the skill atleast twice or get help from team mates.
It would require the thief at that point to use another skill to get away as their intiative would be low from committing to an aoe daze. Otherwise the thief would need to run venom to apply the daze if team mates do not contribute to poison stacks.
If you complain at that point for not being able to rez after a thief nearly exhausted their own resources to prevent a rez then I feel it is a L2P issue
Saying “there are people that have been playing for years that say this is bad” as a form of argument is also a very weak argument. I’m sure there are “people who have been playing for years” that don’t believe it is power creep as well. If you define power creep as an improvement to a skill in any way than there will always be power creep. Always. There is not a single mmo out there without power creep by that definition.
A statistical argument is the only sound form of an argument. What else would we base what is op or not on? Emotion derived from the fact that you got bested by the skill?
Atleast wait a week before throwing your hands up saying something is op. People are learning not to stand in dh traps are they not? You have to give changes like this time to settle before making rational judgment.
I don’t understand why this thread had to escalate, all I had originally offered was advice on how to deal with it.
I wouldn’t call a daze that requires certain conditions to be met power creep.
Adding a daze to a skill that used to not have it is the very definition of power creep.
I disagree. It just made the weapon more viable. If you can show me a thief using shortbow for a majority of a fight over d/p or really any other weapon set I will concede and say this was an unnecessary change
Again, stability or invulnerability. If you can’t deal with cleave you shouldn’t try to get a rez off. Not once in my reply did I say “just stop rezzing”.
Would you try and rez someone through a necro or a warrior’s cleave without some form of invulnerability?
Before Heart of Thorns stability was insurance, not a requirement, to help successfully res a teammate.
This is just a needless introduction of more power creep to the game in a patch that was supposedly intended to reduce it.
We aren’t talking about before HoT though. We will never go back to that point. It will not happen. You don’t need stability now to rez someone. The field lasts only a few seconds and if they spam it then it is no different than any other form of cleave.
It wasn’t an introduction of power creep. They simply tried making a weapon that was only used for skill 5, or very very rare occasions skill 4 and 3, more viable. I wouldn’t call a daze that requires certain conditions to be met power creep.
Again, stability or invulnerability. If you can’t deal with cleave you shouldn’t try to get a rez off. Not once in my reply did I say “just stop rezzing”.
Would you try and rez someone through a necro or a warrior’s cleave without some form of invulnerability?
Maybe don’t keep spamming the rez button if you have 5+ stacks of poision without stability inside their poison field? If you keep trying to rez through it I feel as though it’s on you. It’s just a different way of cleaving that players have to be aware of. You wouldn’t try and rez through heavy cleaves without any buffs like stability or invulnerability would you?
It is by no means “absolutely impossible”
(edited by Rednova.5283)
Thief is the best at their role of mobility. It shouldn’t die if played right, but the argument that the team with the thief will win against a team without is a pretty weak one. Why shouldn’t the team with more mobility have an advantage in that aspect of the match? That’s the equivalent of arguing that a team with a support class will have more support than a team without. It’s very obvious that the team with support will have an edge in teamfight if the team without support doesn’t get a quick down on the other team.
If someone on the team without the thief swapped to a class with some mobility then that statistical advantage of mobility is theoretically evened out. At that point it comes down to player skill. A mesmer can put pressure on the thief’s home if the thief decides to get far and even get back to the team fight arguably just as fast, so it doesn’t even have to be a thief that counters the pressure on points.
I think it depends on how you look at it. If you believe you are placed in a division lower than what you feel you should be in (a common belief/misconception) then you will only perceive the season as a grind to get to the spot that you may not even get to that you feel you should be at.
If you work smarter and not harder you’ll progress at a faster rate. Meaning if you analyze your own gameplay and work to improve it you’ll get better faster as opposed to making the same mistakes over and over expecting different results.
Professional athletes have to “grind” per say to get to the top. They aren’t really born better than everyone. So no matter how you look at it you could make the argument that there is a grind element in any system they have or could make. But I do believe it is skill based as opposed to any other system that has been implemented.
First, welcome to the game!
Everyone here really did a great job explaining the basics and such, I just wanted to add something about the living world season 1 content.
While it was limited time and there is a synopsis in the game of what happened, someone did make a very good movie about it. I don’t have the link, but if you were to just type “gw2 season 1 movie” into google it should be near the top.
It is lengthy but if you get into the lore and would like a more in depth retelling without reading through the wiki (although that’s not a bad option either, this is just a different option) I would highly recommend as I thought it was very well put together.
Edit: recommend watching after you complete your personal story though, not necessarily right away
(edited by Rednova.5283)
Let me say it again, for the 3rd time:
It’s not that I think vault thief is OP. It’s that the damage from vault should be distributed more across the character’s other abilities so that they are meaningful and the build structure is more playable in general.
The other skills on staff are meaningful though. The auto attack is fine, 3 removes immobilize which comes in handy when shadowstep is down, 4 is a ranged blind that can also do a few thousand damage and has some range to it. I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve downed a guy whos tried to kite me when he has low health only to be hit with a 3k crit when he was more than likely expecting a vault. Staff 2 even has some uses with spreading weakness albeit for a short duration.
Again, I’m going to point out that there is no perma evading. Who cares if someone is new to the game and doesnt see the opportunity? It is the harsh reality that life isn’t fair.
How do you think a new player would do against a mesmer? I’m talking completely new since this seems to be the way the conversation is going. Any competent mesmer would run circles around someone who doesn’t know how clones and shatters work.
What about warrior and their endure pains/resistance uptimes? Do you not think someone will get frustrated when they’re obviously hitting someone but not doing damage? When the warrior has a whole row of condis but they aren’t doing kitten to him? All the while healing ~700 health per second.
What about ranger and their knock back, root, and lb 2 and pet burst? A new player would just sit there and eat all that damage cause apparently they don’t know where their “oh kitten” buttons are and how to use them. That’s the ranger’s problem though right?
What about a dh, as we all know can really hurt new players who don’t realize not to stand in traps or to kite them off point. What happens when a new player runs into all their traps and gets caught and downed? Oh right, again it’s the dh fault the new player doesn’t take the time to learn to avoid the traps.
I can go all day and name a different build and different scenario from every class, but I hope you get my point. You shouldn’t nerf kitten just because it can “drive people away”. Everybody was new at 1 point and everyone still around has weathered through these builds and situations. We don’t need to spoon feed new players with easier enemies and builds to counter because in the long run it won’t produce good players.
Again, it is not perma evading around. There are windows of opportunity to punish the player. Why should a build get nerfed because people don’t want to spend the time learning how it’s played and how to counter it?
Playing staff thief is impractical and gimmicky to begin with. It can never be a bruiser on point because it dies too fast. Thus the entire purpose of ditching these “go to” skills that everyone uses that D/P uses. The idea I was aiming at was making vault spam dangerous for one purpose and that is point nuking.
I’ve seen other people run variations of vault spam where they are able to stealth themselves and also use the shadow step into vault method. What you seen in that video is with no might stacks, with no vuln on the golems and with no preset condis on them to trigger the +10% damage modifier and the vault is still hitting 4 targets for nearly 10k damage single strike. With a rev next to you buffing might, a team fight going on where condis are applied to various opponents, that stealth into vault shadow step is dangerous. It can hit 15ks or above easily. The idea is not to go on point and bruise, it’s to be sneaky and wait for a perfect moment to shadow step in and down 3 guys at once.
Sure it’s gimmicky but that’s about all you’re going to do to make vault spam viable amongst better players. Just land 1 single attack that they cannot respond to. There is no counter play to a 15k AoE vault that comes from a stealthed thief when you’re already in a 3v3 or a 4v4 against other opponents. Thief just needs to wait for blocks and invulns to go on CDs and then pop in and out, peel somewhere else and do it again.
It’ll never be as good as standard D/P but w/e, cheers.
So you have a problem with the fact the thief gave up nearly all of its mobility, which keep in mind is one of a thief’s strongest attributes, for 1 hit against a group of 4 stationary golems?
That thief is not running acro so other than steal swiftness which is impractical as steal is better used against an enemy they have 0 swiftness on their own. Without acro, their only stunbreak is shadowstep which is blown using this silly 1 vault combo.
Daredevil rune only procs in combat so unless you hit someone before your little stealth/1 vault combo then you wont crit therefore blowing your little “surprise” vault.
The odds of a vault like that downing more than 1 player is extremely slim with all of the evades/invuln/blocks thrown around in a teamfight. You would have better luck just spamming vault which as said previously can be countered. The only time the other team may be vulnerable enough to get hit by this is if they are rezzing but most competent rezzers will have some kind of damage absortion used so they themselves dont get cleaved.
I really tried not to respond to resist the urge to respond to this thread but this “build” that you came up with just won’t work. So unless you show video of it actually working in an actual ranked teamfight you dont have much of a case as anyone can hit 4 golems with a build only built for damage. Also, no one in their right mind would not run valk amulet when you have so few defensive cooldowns especially if your build is supposed to be about entering a team fight. You would vault into a sneezing warrior and get downed.
Tldr: Bad build, won’t work
Statistically speaking, it is near impossible for ANET to create an armor style that caters to everybody.
They can, however, design many different styles with strong, distinct themes that appeal to different player tastes.
Instead, we’re getting trenchcoat nº233 and “Let’s add skulls and spikes everywhere” nº177. (Except they’re shiny now…)
True, they can add different styles and I’m sure they will for different legendary armors. The only problem is they have to create 3 different armor weights each time they add a set while also considering different character models which probably means it takes a little longer than creating a weapon.
I have never done graphic design of this level so I can’t say how long it should take to create this number of combinations and unless someone has a portfolio of similar styled artwork then who are any of us to say how many armor sets they should have created in a set amount of time?
Statistically speaking, it is near impossible for ANET to create an armor style that caters to everybody. Fashion is the exact same irl. Designers can spend time developing a new style that is very high end that not everyone will like or get. Art is also similar.
Personally I like the heavy and the light and I’ll reserve final judgment of the medium based solely on the fact that an asura is wearing it. I’m not against the trench coat look and of all they have done this is near the top of my list aesthetically
How does toughness benefit more from heals?
If you determine the effectiveness of a heal by dividing the amount healed by the total health pool you have and assume the amount healed is constant between a toughness focused build and a vitality focused build, then you would heal a higher percentage of your health if you have a toughness focused build than a vitality focused one
Doesnt really mean it benefits more, you just have a smaller gap of health to heal. With vitality you can heal at a earlier time and possibly even get the heal off through the cast time if your in some heavy pressure. toughness not so much because you die jsut as fast as someone with none.
Theoretically it does mean it would benefit you more in a prolonged fight. I’m not saying I would take toughness over vitality in PvP, but toughness isn’t useless. If you’re being focused in either build chances are you wont get that heal off if any of the players focusing you know how to focus. Saying you die just as fast with or without toughness is just a false statement.
You may have a smaller gap to heal but you also mitigate more damage than if you were to just eat the full damage in a vitality build. This mitigation over a prolonged fight is the reason toughness isn’t useless.
(edited by Rednova.5283)
How does toughness benefit more from heals?
If you determine the effectiveness of a heal by dividing the amount healed by the total health pool you have and assume the amount healed is constant between a toughness focused build and a vitality focused build, then you would heal a higher percentage of your health if you have a toughness focused build than a vitality focused one
I fully support having team que back. While at times it did get frustrating going against a full team solo/duo it rarely happened and even then it wasn’t a guaranteed loss.
I think team que would produce better players. I know personally I’ve learned a lot more about rotations/builds and just pvp in general when I played with a group of people than just solo/duo. I agree with the poster above me as well, I met more people given the option to group as a team rather than just solo/duo.
I want to point out as someone who has worked in customer service that your first block of text is very off putting. It is one thing to rant but it is very hard to be taken seriously when you come off as frustrated because frustration clouds any real sense. With that said, I’ll try and offer what I can to help.
As someone who has worked in customer service for over 10+ years. I call bullkitten.
Stop letting your emotions rule your thought process. Ignore the emotions, look at the facts and use your brain.
I would hate to have you as my CSR when I call/email/chat.
What do you call bull on? That frustration clouds rational sense? Anyone who has worked in customer service for a week let alone 10+ years can see that people act differently frustrated, its a proven fact that ones thought process is different.
The irony is your only contribution to this thread was to try and call me out when I meant no disrespect to the OP and offered my point of view on the issues he raised. All I meant by my statement was that the way he worded it could have been better, I meant no harm
I want to point out as someone who has worked in customer service that your first block of text is very off putting. It is one thing to rant but it is very hard to be taken seriously when you come off as frustrated because frustration clouds any real sense. With that said, I’ll try and offer what I can to help.
1) I’m not sure your class but many do have access to stability which counters most cc. If not you can always avoid the stun/daze with an evade or block. Immobilize and blind can be cleared with condi cleanse among other things. Yes it sucks to be caught in an immobilize at the wrong time but you can either clear it or dodge the skill completely.
2) Passive procs are annoying but it’s part of the game that I doubt will go away. Once you figure out the procs tho they’re easy enough to work around.
3) I’ll agree there are many “dead skills” but they’re all unique and although they arent all good enough for PvP they all have some sort of place.
Build diversity is a unique issue because of the introduction of elite specs. Every class has multiple viable builds they can run however logically there will always be meta builds or builds better than others. I said elite specs made this a unique subject because I believe the problem will fix itself when more elite specs come out.
4) Many classes have skill that are unblockable. While there are certain classes that have more access to blocks than others it is easy to get around, just dont burst into their blocks.
5) Conditions can be cleared in many ways or straight out avoided. There is also resistance. I believe there is enough counterplay. Just have to know which condis are worth clearing and when. Another way of clearing them is through light combo fields provided by some classes.
6) Aoe circles on points can be annoying but I dont believe it’s a real issue or atleast not too important of one. Bunker builds dont have too much of a problem with them and as someone who mains thief, just avoid them if you dont have to stand on a point.
I don’t understand why you linked the video you did to try and back up your point. I don’t know the thief as I dont WvW but he seems to know what he’s doing regardless. He also isn’t just spamming vault which also makes your claim moot.
Those that do spam vault are quickly left with little defenses if they don’t know what they are doing and easily countered. As mentioned previously you can interrupt both the dodge and vault with practice. Just 1v1 a thief and get the timing right.
Evades are a thief’s main defense as well as stealth. These threads complaining about thieves stacking stealth and/or stacking evades on top of damage are just silly. Could you imagine how fast a thief would melt without these defenses?
Everyone has an equal opportunity at the beginning of the match to swap classes. That being said, if you don’t have the desire to capitalize on that opportunity to counter the other team then so be it although it would only be at your disadvantage.
No one is asking you to perfect every class, but you should familiarize yourself with different playstyles such as support or mobility to fill any holes in your team comp. Many times you can use the same class with a different build. A quick look at your post history suggests you favor a mesmer. In my time in pvp I have seen mesmers provide great damage, great support, and/or great mobility.
Tldr- everyone has an equal opportunity to swap builds/classes to fulfill a missing role. You don’t need to perfect all 9 classes
confused, you want faster award tracks, complain that people die too fast, then its everything is telegraphed, then you only play for the rewards. In short you don’t pvp because you enjoy pvp. Never do a thing you don’t enjoy if you can avoid it, – especially in a game lol.
I enjoy the game, pvp is PART of it, when i PVE it does not set me back on my PVP, every minute i spend on pvp is minutes i take away from my PVE grind.
Not doing the grind actively sets me back on accessing PVE content, not doing the PVP grind, sets me back on a title, may be.
I agree with you that PVP is a part of the game, but so is PVE. Saying PVP sets you back on “the PVE grind” may be true, but the same could be said about PVE setting you back on PVP. You lose more than just a title, you lose time spent enjoying and getting better at PVP. This is a good example of opportunity cost, which if you’re unfamiliar is the loss of potential gain from doing an alternative. It is impossible to achieve everything in life, you have to make choices based on what you value.
From what I gather from your post you feel stronger about PVE than PVP which would result in different values placed upon anything resulting from either game mode. Personally I spend most of my time in PVP so having or not having ascended gear doesn’t set me back on my PVE experience.
From what I understand about the matchmaker is it creates teams balanced around a rating that it determines is your skill level. This rating is what is fairly equal between the teams, not the classes. Now I’ve only looked over the mmr algorithm posted on the wiki so if there is an updated one then please feel free to correct me. Now about having “lost on loading screen”, there was nothing preventing you or anyone on your team from swapping classes to a comp to counter three guards such as having a rev or two.