Guild Wars 2

uh the servers were up during the one time event, it was just a cutscene

phase III is ongoing.

If you missed it, its on youtube.

Oh and I’m red team again, no longer confused! All is as it should be!

We dont usually put a lot of effort into the weekend anyway.

But yes, a lot of the major players took the week off or simply didnt try too often in wvw focusing on the event and pushing PvE chains so we can actually get the reward armors in our server.

SoS decided they would try to morning cap friday morning to see if we could close the score, but DR and Ferg ganged up on us during primetime preventing us from grabbing and maintaining second place.

Which is fine, this means we can be best friends forever

Radio, get a friend in your guild.

Double click siege. click drop bundle (green arrow)
Have friend pick up blueprint, hit #2 ability
repeat for all your bp’s
Switch to alt where you want the bp’s. have him do the same back to you.

Yeah it shouldnt be soulbound but the way around it isnt too much hassle.

Best way to deal with stacks on doors is to put 3-4 arrow carts behind the door out of aoe range to shoot at your own door. Catapults dont do enough DPS.

Sonic yes, many learned hard lessons about ‘gambling’

None of the items that were rewarded out of the chests were BoP so if you wanted them you could make a flat payment and get it off the BLTC.

you dont need a speed booster to complete..

It also doesnt count tword the event title.

happened to me once out of about 12 or so ascents into the glass.

Generally it goes like this:

People that havent completed it yet vs people who have.

I actually like the wait time, When i first started the puzzle eventually I noticed the same people failing over and over with me. I got to meet a bunch of random people from random servers that I would have never met doing anything else.

Finishing it the first time felt great, and thanks to learning the muscle memory to do the puzzle i redid it several times on all my alts.

Also you can get 12-16 ToT bags a run (you can open the chest on the gear you have to go down to after you went up).

DR you should try not to win so you can stay best friends forever with us :P

Except you already can pass siege off.

So…

You can currently pass them to other people using the drop bundle button.

Yep there are things in this game that can hit more than 5 targets.

Op has no understanding how the puzzle works, which requires a wait before it can reset.

Harb, gardavil

How do you get corpse spies to waypoint?

Serious question.

And what’s your opinion of it.

The idea of the system is that it leaves the matchup undetermined for a longer period of time. So even if your server falls behind early, you can catch back up and steal the lead.

Right now under the current system, even in close matchups, you get at least several hours of lame-duck time. Where nothing you do matters to affect the outcome of the match. If someone is beating you by 2k, you might say wow, thats a close matchup, but there is nothing another server can do under the current system to take the lead in the last hour.

the problem gets much worse if some server gets a 40k-50k lead on the other two.

Does it advantage servers to spread their timezone coverage, sure. Does it break the game and let them win the matchup PvD, no.

A bit.

He also seems to misunderstand what green invasion thursday was about.

It wasnt about an alliance, but to give our servers a morale boost the day before friday.

When friday hit all bets were off and it was off to the races. The precondition to the event is that the matchup wasnt close basically it was a done deal, and our servers were in 2nd and 3rd place. We havent had such a thursday night in a while.

Although in this matchup today, devonas rest gets to play kingmaker.

They get to pick who gets second place. Will they focus on fergie and let kain take and hold more points? or will they focus kain and force kain to take last place. Or third option, will they get out of the way entirely and focus on pve and the event till after reset.

Its up to them.

(though i would love it if a release day server ended up in last place behind all 3 late to open servers).

Thats not correct Tzash, even if you took hopping away, things wont settle due to a lot of snowballing mechanics in the game. Servers will never be even with variant populations at variable times. Something anet cannot really control.

A scoring system that takes difficulty into account is nessisary for the long term health of the scoring system.

As demonstrated it wont adjust the outcomes, previously close matches stay close. Matches that get out of control get tamped a bit in order allow late comebacks. And if that server doesnt excercise it, at least they knew they had the chance.

The middle will never really find balance under the current scoring rules because its, win by a kitten ton, go up 5 spaces, get destroyed as badly as y ou won the previously go down 5ranks. it wont find balance till the snowballing score is takin care of.

current score is DR 216, Ferg 167 Kain, 151

Ok Moose I ran your system through my data and got the followin.

I couldnt estimate how often SM would flip in the matchup, so I have no idea how your comback mechanic would actually work, but here are the problems with the system you propose:

1) It emphisizes US and Oceanic players with a 12 hour split. European servers and players would be stuck playing in both sides of the split, not helping those servers at all.
If you split euro servers differently then US players playing on euro servers will be more valueable as they again, play both sides of the split.
2) It doesnt stop snowballing.
3) It has a comeback mechanic – however I find the following problems

By setting SM to +100 you make holding the entirety of EB far more important than any of the BL’s not only that the leading server only has to hold EB to maintain the lead both in points and preventing the other servers from utilizing the ‘comeback’ mechanic.
Each BL map has 145 points availible for the taking.
EB under your system would have 325 points.
425 points are availible on all 3 BL’s. So if the other two servers contest them they will split those points, not passing the 325 mark.

This makes EB far too important so the server thats able to take upgrade and camp EB is going to win, significantly hampering your comeback mechinism. It will also do horrible things to the queues for EB, as its so important everyone is going to queue for it. Anet reduced the amount of points SM was worth, probably for this reason. Later in the matchup, nothing else will matter other than SM, I dont think I will like that picture.

Anyway, here is the comparison on the base points, I cant quantify your comeback system because I really have no clue how much SM will flip when you make it as important as you made it in your post.

To make the comparison i compared % of the total score each server got.

At least they dont have anything to upgrade :P

Guys this is getting off topic, mblue just pm Sirenic those screenshots and work your differences out in private instead of in the open air in this thread.

This thread was doing so well too

Were on the final stretch and it looks like fergie is going to hold us off.

Yea! I’m going to be red next week!

I corpse dance to stop you from being unsportsman like and corpse spying.

If you dont like it, respawn, then you dont have to see it.

If we wiped your force, dont just stay there for 15 minutes to tell your friends what were doing.

Pft. I have contact information for several people on different servers, none of this information I got from ‘transferring’ servers.

Its pretty easy to do. Click enemy, see guild tag, go to guild website, type in player name, chat.
Or right click report, type in account name, chat.

the correct answer is to make it worth more points to chase the leader than it is to beat up on a single server.

@moose, I still plan on throwing your scoring system into the model just to see.

I’m also going to make a few tweaks to my scoring model and see if i can improve it.

OP forgets to mention the ‘tower’ we took in exchange for the ‘fully upgraded tower’

was stonemist castle…

Let them leave, rebuild your community with guilds that want to fight. Kaineng and Devona’s rest never had that problem, you are a release day server so you have a lot of dead weight you got to get rid of before you can right your boat.

We fight as hard or harder on wednesday-thursday than we do on the weekend, regardless of the score.

Encourage the thin skinned guilds to leave your server, you will hurt in the short term but in the long term you are better for it.

Personally I will not welcome any guilds transfering from ferg to kaineng. I will treat them as outcasts.

Recognize them as the thin skinned cowards they are and seek the fight. Throw yourself into the chokepoint to halt an oncoming advance backed up by ballista fire. Make your enemies pay for every step they take.

Chaster I heard the doors drop candy when punched by golems. You should try it.

Taemek.1602:

Draygo.9473:

None of those suggestions deal with out of control snowballing scores in any way.

While I agree with (some of) them, they are not something the topic of this thread is exploring.

Resetting the points tally per server and balancing server population via carefully and well designed thought out merges is not controlling snowballing scores? Ok…..so lets reinvent the wheel then and just confuse the hell out of everyone.

Why do I get the feeling here of the same thing that struck down Warhammer Onlines RvR is about to happen here? Lets rework the system 3 or 4 times…….and everyone gets sick of it and quits…..

No reason to take it personal, but none of your suggestions have any sort of anti-snowball mechanism in them. Your talking about prematch, not during match even in this post again.

Sure reversing the outmanned and orb buffs is a great idea that i fully support, it doesnt do anything to help prevent a score from snowballing. Even if anet follows your suggestions and just starts closing and merging wvw populations, you will still have unbalanced matchups. its plainly unavoidable unless you want to lump everyone together in 3 servers and give everyone really long queues.

?

Dead mesmers cant drop portals.

I ran the numbers on a Score + Bonus system that someone here wanted to see. So removing the multiplier we see the same difference that we saw between the anet system and the multi only system. Basically the server with the best coverage increased its lead, while the second and third servers had hardly any gains in points.

I do think a multiplier is needed to tamp down on the score.

Here is a chart of all 4 types, only the adjusted + bonus model gives a catchable lead by thursday. note that these servers are considered ‘equal skill’ and in each one server 2 wins. Whats changing is the ‘how much’.

None of those suggestions deal with out of control snowballing scores in any way.

While I agree with (some of) them, they are not something the topic of this thread is exploring.

Just pretend mighteous is RPing a disgruntaled general from a different war.

Then it all makes sense. He’s just flavor.

Also why should you be granted easy access to free siege? Its a pvp jumpin puzzle, deal with it. Ive been camped in that puzzle a few times last week, but i got around or killed the camp each time. Its not unsportsmanlike to pvp in a pvp zone.

also abandoning one map and going to another is irrelevent as the multiplier is based on total wvw population, not total population in a single map.

The point about a weakness if a server mass jumps to LA is valid, i think i can mitigate that by taking the highest player total in the last hour as the population marker for the multiplier. So if you jump ship in entirety the other two servers can get some stuff back within that hour.

Couple of things i’m going to try, i’m going to apply mooses scoring system to the model and see the result as well as put mooses proposed population curves in and see how they matchup.

The other thing the model doesnt account for is what happens when servers intentionally target the winning server, one side effect the bonus system might have. The winning server is likely to have higher outstanding bonuses, encouraging attacks from the other two servers. Instead of where the middle server tends to get ganged up on now, by the third place server seeking to get into second and the first place server seeking to secure its lead.

@grimpaw I can probably run that later and modify the last day for a complete logout, but if you go by an earlier graph i posted if someone was to log out most of the day it hurts that servers score. The multiplier is based on the ratio of your servers pop compaired to the other two servers combined, so one server being gone isnt going to kill the muliplier where server B or C couldnt catch you. Plus your leaving your longstanding holdings with probably large bonuses availible for the taking.

Ernest, thats what I thought at first too when I first did a multiplier only.

I found out that the multiplier itself had little effect on outcomes. Because when you have less people you have less stuff. You tend to take stuff back once you start fielding the population capable of taking things back.

You still have to field people, the idea is to normalize it a bit so that one servers population curve being different isnt the sole reason they win their matchup. They have to compete, or attempt to compete in all time slots. If your overall population is down, it is likely that you will lose the matchup. And thats just fine. This scoring system aims to prevent snowballing when one servers population curve is significantly different than the other servers in the matchup.

Just to be clear, I’m not a developer for arenanet.

Its late, ill try to answer more questions tomorrow, if you want a look at the raw data I’m working with, send me a PM and be availible to get on teamspeak.

My current prediction

Kaineng, Devona, Fergison

Kaineng and Devona will be neck and neck, and yes I’m biased.

And yes, I’m predicting fergison’s crossing will take last place.

What i’m saying is I already thought of that.

Ern if you can somehow get the other server in the matchup to also log out, that might be detrimental.

getting your own server to log out only hurts your server.

To illustrate: This is what would happen to the adjusted+bonus score if server 3 did what you said above:

It loses, badly, as expected.

I dont think they promised guesting at launch. They did promise guesting as a feature. They did not say when.

no i dont think so…

could be wrong.

What I ment to address that you get more points for holding something than intentionally losing it, to recapture it later.

You get 25 points a 15 min interval for forts right now, the bonus system only racks up +20 per 15 min interval after 1 hour has passed.

That and the other server might take it before you do means its better to hold an objective than to let someone take it.

The bonus system is letting a server take something back that was capped overnight and recoup part of the points for it, preventing the score from snowballing because a server has a population advantage at particular hours (not just oceanic).

Basically if you want to move ahead in score under this system you have to do better than average at all hours, including night hours than your population is expected to do. Servers with oceanic guilds still have large advantages, this aims to tampen down the score disparity between competing servers.

Also Oceanics are not worth less. I am just using an oceanic timezone advantage in the example, but essentially if your server at any time is PvD’ing your points are going to be worth less for that time period.
Plus things that are captured tend to stay captured if your server has good coverage.

Anet can easily tweak the system to put in caps on bonus point accumulation for example, or tweak any one of the variables to adjust how harsh this system applies its rules.

Oceanics are still a good thing to have, they still get you a lot of points, they just dont give you an explosive lead.

To the person saying that oceanics would be ‘worth less’. Thats hogwash. Currently they are worth much more than a primetime player, this brings their worth in line, makes it equal. And rewards effort against fighting advisories while still giving an advantage to a server with more people.

And yes sorry marm i should be more clear. Bonus is granted on capture to the capturing team.

no
It says that PvD is worth less than PvP

If an oceanic server fought an oceanic server, the scoreing would be equivilant to prime.

Not if the bonus is reduced 90% because you are PvD’ing.

For example the Oceanic server is capping everything during oceanic prime, and isnt getting many points off it. You will get probably ~200-300 more points per day. I can rerun the model on a euro timezone advantage if you like.

How so? Remember its based on population difference not time slot as far as the scoring goes.

You rush europeans when no one is on you wont get as many points if you took something during primetime.

@Newbienince the score model i’m using has one server take over almost all the map in oceanic time each day. Let me see if i can pie chart that.

Below is the snapshot at +18 hours in the model.

If you want the exact details on the model, pm me and ill see a if I can get it to you.

Correct Thievery.

I am having a hard time trying to find exploits in the system. Assume worst case where a team just gives up all its points and doesnt participate

and the other two servers somehow got into an even fight where none of them took anything.

Then on the last day thursday that server took everything everywhere.

In that case they get 80%ish of the total points. I really dont see that happening. Because holding points is always worth more than taking and leaving, its not to the advantage of a team to take and leave.

Also would juicy targets in a close game be a bad thing? If you are losing going all out for a hard to take well fortified objective might be the gambit you need, you can also fail flatly to take it.

Right now the model is using a 2% chance to take a fort in a 15 minute period if pops are even. Chance goes up the larger the population gap. Lowers if you outpop. its something I can configure on the fly, and i played with it a bit to get something that seemed realistic.

The scoring system I proposed here would not affect even matchups like whats going on in teir 1 right now. It will add some tense and wild things by making objectives that have been held for a long time worth points to capture, so you will see teams defending and attempting to take fortified keeps up until the last moments.

Anet is looking to address the camping situation in a different way to allow camped teams to push out. And score does affect morale, my goal is to prevent situations where people simply get depressed when they look at the score thinking they cannot do it or cannot make up the difference, that its pointless.

The system I am proposing here lets comebacks happen, doesnt let servers sit in lame duck or kingmaker situations that are poison to a good system.

Luriyu.6873:

> Assumption 3: You need a minimum of 2 people to take a supply camp

i don’t really agree with this…

i can take an unupgraded supply camp as a single player by just isolating 1-2 enemies, have a bear tank and justPvE tank and Spank. minimum required is 1 but the time required to take a camp is negatively exponential.

I am aware you can take it with 1. But you would have to account for the fact not ‘everyone’ can do this and its likely when only 1 person is on the map that they wont be taking a supply camp.

Often I dont see supply camps flip on a map until there are at least 5. But because that assumption is applied to all 3 servers in the data, it doesnt really affect the outcome of the model.

Same thing with towers and keeps, you CAN do it with less people, its just unlikely that less total people will be on the map when you do it.

For example you attack a keep with 7 people and take it, but while you were doing that there were 3-10 randoms running around on the map for your team.