Guild Wars 2

Adding shapes would be ideal to adding additional colors. But until commanders are able to change their tag color without disbanding squad, all discussions here seem futile.

Ruru.1302:

gebrechen.5643:

Wonder who TC fights in their matchup against FA and JQ. Both servers aren’t known (or ever were) for their huge NA or EU forces.

remember when FA queued 150 on eb and 50+ across all 3 borders on weeknights

Was close to that last match at reset from everyone trying out the patch and the server link. :O

Sylvanwood.2746:

This is precisely the result of what Anet thinks is balancing the population. The lack of NA/EU for JQ has been an obvious problem for several months now. JQ really needed to be merged with a server with NA population and low on SEA/OCX. We had some good fights with TC on Saturday night SEA time and made some gains in points which were all gone by Sunday morning (which is right now – and we have no queue all maps). From what I hear TC has 24/7 queues for EB. No offence to anyone on IoJ, but as Cecilia said, merging IoJ with JQ added about 10 people.

- I didn’t understand why IoJ and JQ were linked. :/
- Making gains during your primary playing time then having those gains wiped all while you slept is a major reason why you too should vote for scoring changes over QoL.

gebrechen.5643:

FA and JQ. Both servers aren’t known (or ever were) for their huge NA or EU forces.

Why do people keep repeating this? FA’s strongest timezone was always NA. o_O

morrolan.9608:

Chaba.5410:

It is only deviation and volatility reset?

If you check Snowreap’s thread, DB/YB/BG was less than 2% chance at that match. FA/JQ/TC was less than 1%.

IMHO hopefully this volatility keeps up. Hope the glicko difference between servers in NA gets smaller.

Maybe but it looks to me like the performance of servers that go up or down a tier are still being being unfairly assessed compared to servers already in that matchup.

Because they’re matching against opponents 2-3 ranks up and don’t get a chance to match against neighboring opponents (ie DB and JQ, Mag and FA, SBI and HoD). Perhaps that can occur over time if the glicko rating between the servers 2-6 ranks apart gets closer from this volatility.

Khang Xithyl.1742:

We did it boys. We beat the terrible evil WvW Alliance. Even with Arena Net helping them. Together with Fort Aspenwood, we were able to crush them.

They got roasted and toasted.

We need your energy to awaken the Beast Gate. With them we can finally destroy this plague on WvW.

We can do it. We can destroy Yak’s Bend.

LOL, Khang. We can now finally turn off the lights and go home.

JQ/TC/FA. Rekt.

It is only deviation and volatility reset?

If you check Snowreap’s thread, DB/YB/BG was less than 2% chance at that match. FA/JQ/TC was less than 1%.

IMHO hopefully this volatility keeps up. Hope the glicko difference between servers in NA gets smaller.

Jayne.9251:

Anet was kind enough to give us a lovely ignore feature for trolls.

And with cross-map chat the reminder of the block feature will be seen by more people. xD

SkyShroud.2865:

put themselves into situation of low NA pop by flooding their off hours which eventually make the server full which then affect their NA population

Hm…
I’m going to assume this was something you learned after your guild’s transfer to DB, which didn’t need any more SEA-time guilds and ended up Full.

Mystle.4538:

Can we just change team chat to something that will be seen accross all maps? We already have map chat; having both have the same function seems meaningless.

I think that’s the idea. Should be done together with scoring changes because increasing team communication would be such a huge impact.

Can you guys just throw in cross-map team chat with the scoring changes? Please?

Cirrion.8951:

Are you sure that the towers never had swords, or did it just not have swords when it was flipped? There seems to be a cooldown on the Swords that can prevent them from showing if the target is engaged for too long, or if it is engaged, disengaged and then re-engaged after the swords clear.

I’ve seen towers and keeps flip before with no defense event popping. It was maybe three matches ago I last saw that. I don’t think it is hacks; more the game bugging out. How does a fortified wall get to 25% with no swords showing? I’ve seen something similar at air keep once where we knew the wall south was low from scouts yet no swords. The timer on the defense event only started after I had run into north gate. IIRC I used /bug then.

I’ll LOL if it is the hackers.

https://dviw3bl0enbyw.cloudfront.net/uploads/forum_attachment/file/223714/tumblr_nl6ph5UUHt1u9zrhbo1_1280.jpg

Three DPS builds can burn down a camp quite fast. 20 seconds for a tower sounds kind of wrong though.

MaLeVoLenT.8129:

I believe ArenaNet said at the end of the week when scores are decided gains will then be bigger and loses will also be greater. I believe MAG rose to Tier 2 on a very low chance. I suspect there will be a rotation despite data given from various websites and statistics.

I think we need to play test longer because this has changed the dynamic and over all performance of every server.

I think what Anet wrote was extremely confusing. The bigger gains/losses already occurred, not that it will occur at the end of this week. What Gaile wrote makes it sound like the partial Glicko reset was going to happen at the end of that first matchup of the beta.

• The first matchup will use current placements (T1 worlds vs T1 worlds, T2 worlds vs T2 worlds, etc.)
• The reset volatility and deviation values will come into effect at the end of that match.

Compare the ending rating of servers from last match with their starting rating this match. Mag rolled T2 on a pretty fair chance.

Sure there could still be rotations, but only with the edge servers it seems. All tiers look like they will end up having servers that are separated by 100+ rating spread within the tier. It won’t improve match-up variability and makes it even easier to game the system to create glicko cliffs, forcing players to make large moves again to shake the system up.

Anet,

If you haven’t noticed yet, NA servers within the same tiers are all close to 100-200 glicko rating points away from each other. Literally, all tiers show servers in the same tier with a predicted glicko rating that is over 100 points wide. This makes it next to impossible for true match-up variation in the manner that EU has and there is absolutely no chance that servers close in rating to each other would ever get a chance to be in the same match. The glicko walls are getting worse! Are you going to be increasing the range of the randomization roll for match-making?

DeWolfe.2174:

The one thing about the recent moves for JQ is that’s JQ is now cancer free. As soon as the server lock is lifted, we’ll recruit again. Though open to helping folks who wish to join our partner world IoJ too.

Ah! So that’s why IoJ was paired with JQ. IoJ needs NA too.

Is this thread supposed to server as the official world linking feedback thread? If so, you gotta figure something out with the map naming.

From a UI usability perspective, if I were on a hosted server and my guild planned to go defend home borderland at reset and I didn’t know in advance which server would be host, I’d be completely confused as to which map was home borderland. That delay can cause a player to end up sitting in hours long queues.

The only saving grace for the vast majority of linked servers this past reset was the playerbase had some idea what the links were going to be.

Suggestion: the home borderland map in the UI should be named according to which server the account is on. Example: green bl in the T3 NA match should show Fort Aspenwood Borderland for any FA player and Borlis Pass Borderland for any Borlis Pass player.

I still don’t understand why an OCX server (IoJ) was paired with a SEA server (JQ) when NA was needed to provide for better matches.

Exciton.8942:

elkirin.8534:

I am not sure how to break it to you , so I will shoot straight from the hip;

Maguuma is currently making a heavy Glicko Win…. it appears they are in the right tier.

FA is currently taking a heavy Glicko Loss…. it appears they are in the right tier.

ET is carrying BG to victory, it appears they are in the right tier. (TIC)

Some are happy with the increased numbers, some long for a return to solo roamers facing solo roamers.

IMHO, Anet has done something, I am happy that they have tried something. Without providing an example of how they could do it better, I will live with this system.

FA losing glicko vs Mag gaining glicko does not necessarily mean they are in the right tier.

It could be due to that T2 and T3 glicko gap is greater than the actual difference.

Remember that there is a population surge in most servers which make the gap between servers much smaller.

Next he’ll say HoD/Ebay is in the right tier while ignoring how close the rating is between rank 9 and rank 10 server. The whole “right tier” way of thinking IMHO doesn’t apply to this beta. That’s an NA way of looking at WvW formed over the years that stagnates match-ups. I don’t find it particularly useful either to make comparisons between matches of individual servers last week and matches of combined servers this week.

cpchow.7416:

Chaba.5410:

Anet,

We’ve suffered in NA for a long time now with Glicko rating between top tiers being too large and leading to match stagnation, which in turn lead to large guild movements in arguably vain attempts to counter it. The goal of all these changes you are doing to WvW should be to even out population across all tiers and create better matches. But…

Glicko was designed for 1v1 matches. WvW is a three-way match where each server gets compared to the other two on an individual basis so what that means is servers at tier borders never match up against each other. Instead they compare themselves against servers 2 ranks above/below them; of course they’re going to do much better/worse than the system predicted.

Resetting volatility and deviation does not look like it is going to cut it. Especially not with the server links increasing the activity levels across all four match-ups. All it has done is make for faster drops/rises. The partial reset does nothing for preventing stagnation of matches.

There are two main extremes that kill WvW for most players: wide population disparities and stagnation. Players need relatively even matches and variation of opponents to keep it both fun and interesting. Right now you have the piece for alleviating population disparities with server linking. If you create matches though where there will be stagnation, all you are doing is boring players again. I wish NA were more like EU, but it is not and now the sample size of only four matches leads to increased inaccuracy. You have to do more. You have to make some way that servers at tier borders can get the chance to be in a match together.

Reset the Glicko system would be a terrible idea. The players in each server work so hard on it. It will destroy all the effort done by servers. Thats no different anet reset your account and delete all your character and say we will see more new players in tyria low level areas!

If you carefully read my post, you’ll notice that I don’t suggest anything about a full reset of Glicko.

Crise.9401:

Something about the new combined serves moving up and down in rating more quickly for now before the match making can settle into matches where the linked worlds are where they should actually be at.

But it won’t happen because tier-edge servers never get a chance to fight against each other, their nearest neighbor in rating. Instead the glicko walls between tiers will be established more quickly.

Look at the current predicted edge servers. Mag and FA, for example, are close in both current and predicted rating to each other (because they are fighting against 2+ rank higher/lower servers). But the two servers above and the two servers below are much further in rating. So all that is possible to happen next match is FA and Mag swap with each other and never fight each other to make a 1v1 Glicko comparison between the two instead of both Mag and FA being in the same tier match with each other. The same thing is going to happen between T1/T2 and T3/T4 edge servers.

All we are going to end up with is servers buying more transfers, this time to the linked, less populated pair, in order to make “pushes” to higher tier.

Increase in population across the board since patch lead to an increase in capture and fight activity? No surprise there. -_-

Earlier tonight a player who tagged up in TD kept inviting me to squad even though I declined every time because I was already in a party with a guildmate and we wanted to stay private. I kept declining and asked him to stop, which resulted in him and another guy to spam invites throughout the entire Chak Gerent event. I blocked him and reported him for spamming.

I appreciate that he tagged up for the TD meta. I do not appreciate the invite spam. It is no one else’s business on why a player won’t join your squad.

I wish there were some mechanism to prevent such an annoyance. In hindsight, I should have tagged up over him so he couldn’t send invites anymore. Anyone else have a similar experience?

The shrubs don’t bother me so much, nor the stairs in the screenshots you provided. The most annoying thing for my guild and I are the stairs south of fire keep going up to the slit (now a gaping maw) on the way to the camp where you can usually place catapults. It is soooo easy to get stuck on those stairs for no obvious reason.

joneirikb.7506:

Going to miss Chaba’s reference to FA as Fort Alamo though.

That wasn’t my reference. :O

I still don’t understand why an OCX server (IoJ) was paired with a SEA server (JQ).

Johje Holan.4607:

Neither Glicko matchmaking or 1U1D is satisfactory. As pointed out they both cause the servers a the edge of the tiers to not meet – thus disallowing the best matchups.

When we consider that the Glicko rating is a reflection of population and coverage and pay attention to the fact that edge servers are next to each other in rank, we cannot ignore that these edge servers would make great match-ups against each other. If only a larger number of NA servers were closer to each other in rating like EU.

Naithe.4271:

Chaba.5410:

Naithe.4271:

Variety is the spice of life.

Borderlands get old, ANet changes them. Builds get old, ANet adds and changes them. Guess what happened when they did all of these changes? People left.

Guilds bandwagon to one server. Two reasons were given: 1. To help rotation (the dream, no strings attached, etc. etc. insert rhetoric here) 2. to play with friends.

In short, you can’t have it both ways. Yes that sucks, that’s how small the community is that’s left.

If you reset right now all glicko (not partial, not just increased volatility), you only temporarily provide variety. Because guilds have localized on a few servers (some by strong deliberate choice, others due to it being their original home and movement of other guilds slowly over time to specific servers), a reset will only temporarily provide variety. Stacked servers if remaining stacked will rise to the top. And then what? Reset again?

People posting here aren’t stupid or ignorant. You know this. So why are you pushing for it instead of spreading out if the dream is constant rotation? Has anyone reached out to EU to find out how they did it? My understanding is they spread out (not band wagoning) and they have a less PPT oriented environment, people care more about the fight engine and engagements.

I get that we have more activity now. Guys, it’s been a week since the patch. Let’s see how the community receives everything after one month let’s say? If the activity is there player wise, and Glicko is propped up, then maybe a hard reset makes sense. For now, and forever, we can’t see the future.

Or we can just try to keep gaming the system.

Honorade and stuff. Because you know Mal, for some of us (ok maybe just me) that’s my dream, and it’s real. No strings.

Honestly, I don’t get what you are trying to say. Pushing for what? You didn’t specify.

EU is how it is for several reasons: they are concentrated in EU timezone, they have national language servers that stifle large population movements, and a social attitude of teamwork that is quite different from NA, which is illustrated by how more willing they are than NA as a playerbase to “spread out”. One cannot replicate the EU experience in NA by telling NA to simply spread out.

I never said telling people what to do was the solution, simply analyzing the situation where others have succeeded to the end some here desire (the EU situation).

Some people here, not particularly you, are pushing for a full reset and yet they stack servers. That does not makes a lot of sense, does it?

tldr: People should be more transparent about their true intentions, whatever they may be.

I agree about analyzing the situation, which is why we should understand why players stack servers in the first place. Or why bandwagons get created. Or why players leave their servers. The twin evils are match stagnation and wide population disparities. Spreading out NA population across 8 tiers became a non-solution as the total population size decreased. One of my points was that EU doesn’t really spread out. The existence of the national language servers discouraged large swaths of EU population to simply remain in place. NA didn’t have that brake on transfers. But now we have server links which can serve that same purpose.

Naithe.4271:

Variety is the spice of life.

Borderlands get old, ANet changes them. Builds get old, ANet adds and changes them. Guess what happened when they did all of these changes? People left.

Guilds bandwagon to one server. Two reasons were given: 1. To help rotation (the dream, no strings attached, etc. etc. insert rhetoric here) 2. to play with friends.

In short, you can’t have it both ways. Yes that sucks, that’s how small the community is that’s left.

If you reset right now all glicko (not partial, not just increased volatility), you only temporarily provide variety. Because guilds have localized on a few servers (some by strong deliberate choice, others due to it being their original home and movement of other guilds slowly over time to specific servers), a reset will only temporarily provide variety. Stacked servers if remaining stacked will rise to the top. And then what? Reset again?

People posting here aren’t stupid or ignorant. You know this. So why are you pushing for it instead of spreading out if the dream is constant rotation? Has anyone reached out to EU to find out how they did it? My understanding is they spread out (not band wagoning) and they have a less PPT oriented environment, people care more about the fight engine and engagements.

I get that we have more activity now. Guys, it’s been a week since the patch. Let’s see how the community receives everything after one month let’s say? If the activity is there player wise, and Glicko is propped up, then maybe a hard reset makes sense. For now, and forever, we can’t see the future.

Or we can just try to keep gaming the system.

Honorade and stuff. Because you know Mal, for some of us (ok maybe just me) that’s my dream, and it’s real. No strings.

Honestly, I don’t get what you are trying to say. Pushing for what? You didn’t specify.

EU is how it is for several reasons: they are concentrated in EU timezone, they have national language servers that stifle large population movements, and a social attitude of teamwork that is quite different from NA, which is illustrated by how more willing they are than NA as a playerbase to “spread out”. One cannot replicate the EU experience in NA by telling NA to simply spread out.

TorquedSoul.8097:

While I agree that reseting all glicko scores would be a better long term solution, there is no point in doing it while they are beta testing server linking.

By that reasoning, what was the point of the partial reset? You might as well be arguing that they should not have reset deviation and volatility because beta test.

Yes, the scoring system plays a role, but so does the fact that tier border servers don’t get much of a chance ever to match up against each other when the rating spread is beyond a certain range. What typically ends up happening is these border servers swap places rather than there being a chance that the middle-of-the-tier servers roll up/down and border servers fight each other (and to get a chance to swap places requires usually draining players from other servers). You may argue that the population disparity is too high, and I’d agree with you most of the time, yet right now with the server links everyone’s queues are flooding.

FogLeg.9354:

Maybe you are rushing in conclusions that “The partial reset does nothing for preventing stagnation of matches.” It has been only 1 reset and just few days so far. You can not deny that ideas to improve WvW have been in right direction, we may need to wait some time to see full effect.

The time to create more match-up variation that smooths out the glicko cliffs between tiers is now during a re-invigorated population time when everyone and their mother are logging in to play and check out the changes. Waiting is only going to bore players away again with stale matches. EU doesn’t have this problem because they have a larger number of servers within close enough rating of each other to already get more match variation. NA on the other hand doesn’t. It needs a much bigger kick than the partial reset.

Fridgemomo.3750:

Population wise the top 6 servers are doing fine them selves and do not need linking

I believe they linked all the worlds in NA for one purpose: getting population to transfer to lower tier servers. Host worlds got marked full while the lowest populated servers suddenly become the only way for someone to transfer to play in a higher tier match. EU doesn’t have the problems with tier rating cliffs that NA does so it was not necessary to link all worlds there.

Anet,

We’ve suffered in NA for a long time now with Glicko rating between top tiers being too large and leading to match stagnation, which in turn lead to large guild movements in arguably vain attempts to counter it. The goal of all these changes you are doing to WvW should be to even out population across all tiers and create better matches. But…

Glicko was designed for 1v1 matches. WvW is a three-way match where each server gets compared to the other two on an individual basis so what that means is servers at tier borders never match up against each other. Instead they compare themselves against servers 2 ranks above/below them; of course they’re going to do much better/worse than the system predicted.

Resetting volatility and deviation does not look like it is going to cut it. Especially not with the server links increasing the activity levels across all four match-ups. All it has done is make for faster drops/rises. The partial reset does nothing for preventing stagnation of matches.

There are two main extremes that kill WvW for most players: wide population disparities and stagnation. Players need relatively even matches and variation of opponents to keep it both fun and interesting. Right now you have the piece for alleviating population disparities with server linking. If you create matches though where there will be stagnation, all you are doing is boring players again. I wish NA were more like EU, but it is not and now the sample size of only four matches leads to increased inaccuracy. You have to do more. You have to make some way that servers at tier borders can get the chance to be in a match together.

Magdurrs and Fabpers

ScionKai.4907:

JQ is a T1 server and our pairing with IoJ has not created any huge queue problems at all.

Pair a server with little NA coverage with another server with little NA coverage and say “time-sliced activity levels” were considered. I’m not buying it. -_-

Really seems like NA should have been reduced to 5 matches, not 4.

Lord Kuru.3685:

By the way, it got absorbed by HoD, not SoS.

Proof that the UI is confusing!

I can’t help but think that 4 matches was too little for NA servers. It should have been reduced to 5 or 6.

Additionally, I was surprised to see IoJ and JQ paired up if these pairings were truly done with time-sliced activity levels considered.

FogLeg.9354:

Don’t transfer anywhere atm. Lots of changes are planned to WvW – server linking, return of Alpine maps and much more.

Alpine is not returning tomorrow. Anet said they’ll rotate it in within about 2 weeks from now.

Outside of WvW guilds, almost all servers have a server community established forum where many of your questions may already be answered. Ask around in mapchat for your server. There’s usually a helpful soul.

Anet hasn’t said they won’t apply. Also they said only volatility and deviation are being reset, not the rating itself. Most likely scenario is match-making will occur as currently done then the partial reset will take place.

I think players forget how EB was always queued first before Alpine borderlands.

There’s been discussion on other threads about TS verification. If you are using the API key, world pairing information will be available: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/community/api/WvW-World-Linking/

Remember when Warrior’s trait Leg Specialist worked with arrow carts? Good times.

Oh boy. They are doing it manually. Better hope the manual process is run with a snapshot of the data close to reset.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/4fjrxt/we_are_the_gw2_dev_team_here_to_chat_with_you/d29gka1

For determining pairings dynamically, Anet had to create an algorithm to match worlds. Any sort of algorithm needs to be tested. Given that, the joke server merge list looks like it is either an alpha test of that algorithm, or a manually created pairing fed to test the linking code.

I don’t see why a dynamic pairing algorithm would not be beta tested during the match-making phase of next reset.

I don’t see a point to delaying it. Yesterday’s “higher than normal” levels of players was due to everyone checking out the new changes.

Is Kveldulf not on TC anymore?

Lemme guess, the VG is aggro-ing off the seekers? Just tried VG and that’s what it looked like he was doing.