Guild Wars 2

Changes for the live map :

- Guild name when you mouse over
- Changing position of mouse over pop up (so the objective on the right side have visible mouse over on small screen)
- Adding cookie to remember your server

Paavotar.3971:

www.trustissuewars2.com maybe?

I think there is bigger problems than builds in a guild if the leader doesn’t trust his members.

That’s a very sad way to think about it. I had a totally different view on it.

My idea was more to help everyone get to the desired result faster. When you come up with totally different builds and wanna try a new tactics, it sometimes take a very long time to set up all your raiders. Time which could be spent raiding.

For example, when someone give me a new build, I would really like to be able to quickly see what I need to change in order to get his build without going through every piece of armor, sigil, runes, utility and trait one by one to make sure I picked the right one.

It can also help to manage expectation for casual groups. If the raid leader wanna try a new tactic that require specific gear/build and that only 3 players out of 25 can get that gear for the raid then you know that the result might not be optimal.

In the end, it would be a tool to help players, even if they decide to use it for “evil” stuff…

I have been thinking about a new website idea but wonder how many would like to use it…

Since they are releasing the trait API soon, it will be possible to get the entire build of a player from the API and all you need is the token key.

So, for example, if all the players in a guild were to give their token key to their guild leader, he could see the list of all the players in the guild and he could see at a glimpse if they are running the builds they are supposed to run and have the gear they are supposed to have.

Would any group be interested in such a website?

- Adding spawn location (to make it easier to see where each side spawn)
- Adding bloodlust owner

- Fixed multiple bugs in the live map
- Added stars for quick preview of time held
- Added mouse over for more information

Brand new Live Map section! Check it out

http://coveragewars2.com/live/

Just a note that many guilds are currently leaving SoS. Frankly, it’s a poor time to transfer there as that server is highly unstable, are getting stomped by an overstacked YB and you will pay 1800 gems to transfer as they are ranked very high.

There are some good medium/high server to transfer to if you want. Check out this thread :

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/What-Server-Should-I-Transfer-To-1/first#post5332022

Tier are the current match up. The match up don’t match exactly the ratings but are influence by it. You can take a look at this blog post to understand how it is calculated.

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/big-changes-coming-to-wvw-matchups/

Then if you want to know what are the chance you will get a specific opponent next week, you can check it here

http://coveragewars2.com/matchup.php

TexZero.7910:

Assuming a lot here, double worker, Increased Supply on that are never flipped this is the minimum it would take.

Bay

Cannon: 11 mins
Wall: 15 mins
Gate: 30 mins
Mortar: 22 mins
WP: 44 mins
Fortification: 1 hour

Hill

Cannon: 13 mins
Wall: 16 mins
Gate: 32 mins
Mortar: 26 mins
WP: 52 mins
Fortification: 1 hours 4 mins

Garrison

Cannon: 19 mins
Wall: 23 mins
Gate: 46 mins
Mortar: 38 mins
WP: 1 hour 16 mins
Fortification: 1 hours 32 mins

Thx, that’s useful

What would be your random guess about

1. the average time to build a waypoint?
2. the minimum time to build a waypoint?
3. the maximum time without a waypoint?

Calculate that time from the moment the keep is taken.

For #3, I know the theorical maximum is 1 week but if you held a keep for a few days and still don’t have a waypoint in it, there is a serious problem.

roamzero.9486:

Sea of Sorrows was full for the longest time solely because of the PVE population that didn’t WvW, and still holds position in T2. As far as a higher tier transfer I can’t think of one with more potential.

SoS is similar to DB for the fact that they are carried by their “off hour” if you speak from a NA player point of view. For SoS it’s their OCX and for DB it’s SEA. The problem with SoS is that they are stuck in tier 2 with the super stack Yak Bend that will make every match up terrible.

Another problem is that they are ranked as very high so it cost 1800 gems instead of 500 gems to transfer to them.

Then, one last thing is that since they are already very high there is a risk that it could become full very soon. What happen if not all your friends were able to get to that server in time?

Miracle.1365:

So.. If I understand correctly, you are trying to simulate the ratings depending only in the points each server get in a particular interval, but what was your starting point where you decided to start to calculate the ratings separately?

Like.. why does Baruch has 1822k points past week for the last interval (0-3AM)?

When I initialize the servers, I give them the rating that they currently have (https://leaderboards.guildwars2.com/en/eu/wvw) and I apply that to every timezone. Then I start to calculate the score that each server get in each zone and you get the new ratings.

For Europe, it started to calculate the rating last week on Wednesday so it only took t he score from Wednesday to Friday to calculate the new ratings. It will take a few weeks for the ratings to stabilize and show the real strength of each server in each timezone.

Note : Initialization happen only 1 time. For Europe it was last week, for NA it was 5 weeks ago I think.

At the moment of this writing, the most unbalanced server is currently Dragonbrand. They are ranked as high as 11 in SEA timezone and as low as 17 in late NA/EU prime. Dragonbrand is infamous for their SEA guilds (that have never moved?) that carry the entire server and make it very boring for anyone to play against them.

Here is a typical match up against DB. You won’t get any fights from them all they long making it super boring then suddenly between 9 – 12 UTC, there will be blobs of them flipping every single of your fortified structures.

Dragonbrand is actually my current recommandation for transfer.

It might sounds crazy, but every NA players that transfer to DB will make them a bit more balanced making it a better WvW experience for them and for all the servers around them.

DB recently suffered from a mass exodus and are in the process of rebuilding. If you can’t read between the lines, rebuilding means opportunity. Any NA guild that transfer to them would make a big difference and they wouldn’t have to worry about “off hour”.

The bonus? They are currently ranked as medium population wise so it only costs 500 gems!

Are you looking for your next server?

With the recent change to population calculation, chance are that many players might decide to switch server. Either because their server is full or because they want a transfer to a lost cost (medium) server.

Anyway, no matter what is the reason, one important thing to consider when you transfer (especially if you are moving an entire guild) is to try to balance the timezones on the server your are switching to. It’s not fun to play on an unbalanced server because during some hour you will PvDoor without opposition and during other hours you will get spawned camp. It’s also not fun to play against an unbalanced server.

Hence, the recommendations will be about balancing the servers. To that end, I made a tool that calculate the rating/rank of each server in each timezone : http://coveragewars2.com

Happy Transfers!

Tongku.5326:

Gudradain.3892:

Glicko Hell : A condition where no matter how much you win or lose, you will be stuck in the same tier foreever.

Examples :

1. Current T1/T2 situation :
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Reducing-the-glicko-on-T1-NA-servers/first#post5309837
2. Tier 8 NA a long time ago (they were getting stomped non-stop by SF for months but SF couldn’t move up because the gap between tier 8 and 7 was too big)

An easy to implement and permanent solution would be to put a cap on maximum rating and minimum rating that servers can have.

For example, you could put the maximum rating at 2000 and the minimum rating at 1000. It would take a few weeks for the new ratings to stabilize but after that you would no longer have any server that are stuck in tiers without any chance to move up or down.

What do you think?

Hi, I was one of the people organizing that stomping in T8 on SF and you have your facts wrong. SF couldn’t move up cause timezones. No other reasons. The stale gameplay was result of timezone gaps which resulted in people leaving either the server or the game entirely.

SF was based entirely on NA prime and late NA prime with US PST timezone players + Latin players from Central and South Americas. Pass that we had nothing and no matter how much effort we put in, could not get out. our primary playtime was around 6pm PST to 1am PST on weekends, shorter on weekdays. Pass that we had so few people that any group of 10 could take entire maps uncontested, which is exactly what happened.

Just thought I’d set the record straight a bit. The current situation on SF is entirely different and I have no clue what its like there now as I have not been on that server for a long time.

As for T1 and T2 …. Its a mess. All 3 T2 servers are pretty horrible right now to play on and the artificial YB inflation is only making it worse. Also curious as to who will drop from T1.

Please, go reread your own history.

SF was stuck with ET and FC for a couple of weeks in the first year the game was realeased. At the 14th week on 2013, Anet bump the rating of those 3 servers by a few hundred glicko points to unstuck them. At that time, SF was 350 points above ET and FC, was litterally destroying them every weeks but just couldn’t get out of the tier.

It had nothing to do with the lack of coverage of SF. Just thought I should set the record straight a bit.

Source :

Week 13 : http://mos.millenium.org/na/matchups/history/56
Week 14 : http://mos.millenium.org/na/matchups/history/58

joneirikb.7506:

I think this would be a quick fix “right here, right now”. But given enough time I think they could replicate the problem again. By again creating such a high difference between say 2-4 servers at 2000 glicko, and the next ones once they start hitting under 1900.

I’d suggest a small glicko “equalizer” each week, so that all servers (very) slowly lose/gain glicko to creep back toward 1500 rating. That way you would have to work on staying on top (or bottom), but at least occasionally be forced to meet up with other servers, and thus let them try to gain glico vs you etc.

It is more permanent than you think.

First, it will be very hard to nearly impossible to keep many servers at 2000 glicko. Let’s take T1. If we cap the glicko at 2000 then next week each t1 server will be at 2000 but by the end of the week, there will be only 1 server at 2000 (most likely) and the others will be at something like 1970.

Second, the gab to lock a tier is currently 130ish rating in difference. Considering that there are 8 tier for NA sharing a range of 1000 glicko ratings (from 1000 to 2000), it would be very hard for them to create any tier that is stuck playing together forever since all the servers would be in a much smaller glicko range. Just for an idea, the average gab between tiers would be at max 1000/8 = 125 (which is still smaller than the 130ish you need to break into a tier). Currently that gab is around 141.

What I think would happen is :

T1 rating being capped, they are finally going to be able to play with T2. Which will result in them pushing T2 down which will make them play more with T3 too.

Then from the bottom, T8 ratings will be bumped and stuck at 1000 minimum which is going to increase the rating of all servers in T8, T7, T6 and increase matchup variety.

It is not a drastic change but just a little and simple modification that could fix the problem permanently.

Kaiser.9873:

If they did cap Glicko at 2000 that would be a fix for the T1/T2 issue. Cannot speak for the differences between T7/T8.

From the many threads on here the T8 match has a far different issue than the T1/T2 situation. If the T1/T2 lock is broken the T1 servers wouldn’t be stuck with a week of nothing if they happened to roll down. They would get great NA fights, and decent fights elsewhere(except SEA time).

From what I’ve read though if a T7 server happened to roll down to T8 it would be a horrid week for them. ET players are actively stating that ET has as few as 3 and 4 players on a map. A statement that really doesn’t make any WvW guilds want to move to T8 anytime soon.

The example I was giving about T7/T8 is from roughly 2 years ago when Anet manually ajusted the rating of T8 to get them out of the Glicko Hell. It has nothing to do with the current population problem that T8 suffer from.

Glicko Hell : A condition where no matter how much you win or lose, you will be stuck in the same tier foreever.

Examples :

1. Current T1/T2 situation :
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Reducing-the-glicko-on-T1-NA-servers/first#post5309837
2. Tier 8 NA a long time ago (they were getting stomped non-stop by SF for months but SF couldn’t move up because the gap between tier 8 and 7 was too big)

An easy to implement and permanent solution would be to put a cap on maximum rating and minimum rating that servers can have.

For example, you could put the maximum rating at 2000 and the minimum rating at 1000. It would take a few weeks for the new ratings to stabilize but after that you would no longer have any server that are stuck in tiers without any chance to move up or down.

What do you think?

msalakka.4653:

Only NA works. Nothing happens if I select EU.

OS X 10.10.4, Safari 8.0.7

Could you retry?

I just fixed 2 different bugs in the javascript that affected all browsers except google chrome.

So, EU should work on all browsers now

Note : You might need to refresh your page in order to refresh the script files.

Liston.9708:

If I understand this properly, it is for a week. Considering last week was “different” with the golems – I suspect the values from the week before were more representative…..

What you see is the data for the current week but the rating is persisted across all the weeks. Ok I don’t have any clear way to explain it in 1 sentence so here is an example.

Example 1 : Data for the week

Glicko rating from 1 to 4 UTC at the start of the week

Server A : 1500
Server B : 1500
Server C : 1500

Friday from 1 to 4 UTC (NA prime)

Server A got 3000 points : total 3000 points
Server B got 2000 points : total 2000 points
Server C got 2000 points : total 2000 points

Rating you will see at 4 UTC for 1 to 4 UTC period (NA prime)

Server A : 1600
Server B : 1450
Server C :1450

Saturday from 1 to 4 UTC (NA Prime)

Server A got 1000 points : total 4000 points
Server B got 4000 points : total 6000 points
Server C got 2000 points : total 4000 points

Rating you will see on Saturday 4 UTC for the 1 to 4 UTC period (NA Prime)

Server A : 1450
Server B : 1600
Server C : 1450

So, it accumulates the score in each timezone during the week then it calculates the glicko rating based on the total.

Example 2 – Rating are carried to the next week

Rating at the start of week 1

1 to 4 UTC 4 to 7 UTC

Server A : 1500 Server A : 1500
Server B : 1500 Server B : 1500
Server C : 1500 Server C : 1500

Rating at the end of week 1

1 to 4 UTC 4 to 7 UTC

Server A : 1600 Server A : 1450
Server B :1450 Server B : 1600
Server C :1450 Server C :1450

Rating at the start of week 2

1 to 4 UTC 4 to 7 UTC

Server A : 1600 Server A : 1450
Server B :1450 Server B : 1600
Server C :1450 Server C :1450

So, the rating that you currently see for NA are the combination of the rating each server had last week for each timezone + how well each server is doing in the current match up.

I never seems to find the right word to explain it correctly… Just hope it’s clear :P

msalakka.4653:

Only NA works. Nothing happens if I select EU.

OS X 10.10.4, Safari 8.0.7

Thx for the feedback.

It seems the javascript doesn’t work on safari mobile too. Will have to check it up.

EDIT : Something is making one of the script crash. Might be the cookies…

Ever wanted to know how strong your server is in a specific timezone compare to the other servers? Well, now you can!

http://coveragewars2.com is a WvW fan website. It currently features :

- Server Strength by Timezone
- Prediction for next match ups

The website is still under development. Planning to use this thread to post the lastest updates. Also, if you have feature suggestions write them down in this thread I might try to do them if I have time.

Enjoy

Agreed and +1 to OP

Guys, it’s time to update your signature…

Guys, watch the full video

At some point, Colin Johanson tells her that currently SoR sometimes beat his server (SBI)… At the date of this video, 2015/01/09, SBI was ranked #10 and SoR was ranked #23. When that video was posted SBI has been stronger than SoR for nearly 1 year.

I guess he plays a lot of WvW…

Zolazie Grengche.3051:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajDiZkUNpe0

Yup… They don’t even realize it.

Zolazie Grengche.3051:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajDiZkUNpe0

Yup, they are completely out of touch.

How many time did we see people ask that they removed all towers/keeps and just make WvW about fighting. Well, now you have it!

This event should be considered a god send for any fighting guild that is tiring to fight players that always run behind gates and sit on arrow cart.

Note: If you get killed by a golem, you are a terrible player.

Take a look over here :

http://coveragewars2.com

It tells you the strength of each server in each timezone. As you can read on it, EBAY is good during OC but we are bad during SEA (so a little help would be nice). I don’t play much during that time but on weekend I usually see 20-40 players in WvW. Sometimes all spread on all 4 maps and sometimes all in 1 zerg ball. A tag is definitely useful during that time as we don’t always have a commander on the maps but when one pop up he usually get a little zerg.

I have to agree with Reverence post about spy. The thing is, as stupid as it may seems, the tier 8 servers are actively spying on each others… Maybe it’s out of boreness and they are trying to find a group to fight or to make themself more “competitive”. It’s to the point that commander won’t put a tag up because they are scared of spies.

The problem with that is that when you have a map without a tag it looks like a dead map to anyone that is new to WvW. If there is any hope that the server rebuilt itself it will be by always having a tag on the maps. The karma train is practically always the first step that any WvW player experienced before joining a WvW guild, getting in teamspeak and becoming a great players. But it’s inexistant down there. We can all thank EotM and Megaserver for that…

Anyway, just saying that without putting up a tag, even if they spy on you (as lame as it is), you won’t get out of there.

Player made server merge?

The webiste now feature 2 new sections

1. Rank by timezone
2. Average PPT by timezone

I’m sorry to tell you that but you still have a pretty good chance to roll Mag and SBI next week again. Check the predictions for yourself :

http://coveragewars2.com/matchup.php?world=1004

You have 1/3 chance to get Mag and SBI next week

Just a random stupid idea but…

Since Arena Net doesn’t want to merge server, has it been tried to do a player based server merge?

By that, I mean a long term agreement that everyone on server X would be transfered on server Y and that server Y would help financially the transfer for every players on server X.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m against server stacking and the buying of guilds as I think it destroyed a lot of community and didn’t help wvw at all. But frankly, it’s not always fun for the poor souls that are stuck on tier 8 servers and they often don’t want to leave to abandon their friends behind so they stick through it.

Anyway, just a random thought. Is it crazy or it could be something nice?

Since commander tags are account bound, do you keep it if you delete all your characters then switch server?

(Might be interesting for some of my alts…)

The website just got updated. It now has a menu, a logo and a brand new section : predicted match up.

Check it out!

http://coveragewars2.com/matchup.php?world=1010

Ah ok, but don’t just look at the gain. You need to look at the number next to it too that represent the current rating.

By clicking on the rows, you can see the average PPT in each timezone. The average PPT is the best indication of who is winning each timezone in the current matchup. While the rating is the best indication we can get on your server compared to the 24 others.

Good luck in finding a server.

Aside from the fact that 5 out of 6 servers are full in T1/T2 on NA servers… I would suggest you take a look over here.

http://coveragewars2.com/

It gives you the strength of each server in each timezone. Depending on what you want, it makes it very easy to pick the right server.

For example, if you are looking for a free ride then just pick the server that is ranked the highest in the timezone that you play and they will carry you to victory in their karma train.

On the other hand, if you want to do the “right thing” and be a part of the solution, pick the server that is the weakest in your timezone for the tier you are looking to transfer and help them out.

Currently it’s just the beginning of the week, but as we close to friday, it will give you a much better indication of how well each server perform in each timezone across the week.

Also, don’t rule out tier 3 and below completely. They don’t provide zerg as big as tier 1-2 as consistently during those time, but they can be fun if you like small community.

SkyShroud.2865:

yea….

the numbers are quite misleading…
it is only true if the data consist of the same severs for several weeks
just like neural network which require lots of data to be accurate

i suggest putting “number of weeks” for that identical match up to give a better idea of the coverage between servers

Nope they are not misleading.

Glicko2 is meant to give you the relative strength of every opponents. For example, if server A has a rating of 2000 and server B has a rating of 1500, you know that server A is stronger than server B even if they have never faced each other. It’s like that that it works in chess 2. You don’t need to face the world ranked player that has 2500 glicko rating to know that he will wipe your kitten in a competition.

As I said before, these numbers work as well as the official ratings and really represent the strength of each server in each timezone the way that Arena Net calculate them.

Liston.9708:

Otokomae.9356:

Dhemize.8649:

Wow YB was the only server that never went into red at any time. I was hoping to see number of players though because that would very interesting. We just need Anet to hand over that info so we can all place blame on each other with an accurate chart.

?

The chart above shows Yak’s Bend going Red in 6 Timezones. Looks like Crystal Desert and Borlis Pass are the only servers with 24/7 coverage, in comparison to the rest of their current Tiers.

Seems this is for current 24 hr period versus historical look over time? Those values may change drastically weekend versus weekday etc…..

The ratings that you see are for the current week in the specific time periods.

For example, the ratings for 1 to 4 UTC are calculated by :

1. Getting the ratings for 1 to 4 UTC of the previous week
2. Then for every day in the week, combine the score that each server gain between 1 to 4 UTC
3. With the score calculated in #2, calculate the ratings for this week.
4. At reset (on friday), the rating for the week that just ended are permanently stored in the database

So, to answer your question, it is an historical look over time. It will take a few weeks for the ratings to stabilize and indicate the true strength of each server but once it does, it will indicate for each timezone the “true” strength of each server. It’s as reliable as the “true” strength that Anet gives us over there https://leaderboards.guildwars2.com/en/na/wvw

Let’s say I was to transform all my gold into a certain item and stock it. Which one would you pick?

Keeping a lot of gold on you don’t always seem like a good idea as the price of items seem to constantly increase making your gold worth less and less as the months pass. So which item would you bet on?

Three questions :

1. Is it possible to get a copy of all the mail sent to a certain player?
2. Is it possible to get the amount of gold a player is currently possessing?
3. Is it possible to get the amount of gold/items stored in a guild bank?

The only thing I seem to get from the new map is that defense will be easier, meaning that you will need a much bigger group to capture an objective. Why I think that it will be easier?

1. Auto upgrade so it will be more likely that you will have everything upgraded if you can keep it
2. Tower blocking path : this reduce possible enemy movements and make it easier for you to scout them
3. Better siege placement : They are redisigning the towers’ gate to give you more places to put arrow carts all around them or even ballista that can hit ram which means that standing on the wall is no longer a death wish.
4. Gigantic keeps with automatic defense
5. Very hard to kill boss in lord room

Put all that together and you have basically create a map that is very easy to defend and very hard to attack. Which makes me think that every server will simply turtle in their respective objectives all day long…

Well, actually CD will probably move up next week so they might become the bottom of their new tier.

Orochimaru.4730:

OK, but where are all the EU servers?

Will be added later, when the site get out of alpha.

Website is back up and hopefully for good now

Find out by yourself :

http://coveragewars2.com

It tells you the strength of each server by timezone. It’s brand new and will take a few weeks for the ratings to adjust but it should already give you a good idea

Still pretty much in development but if you want to see the strength of each server per timezone, now you can :

http://coveragewars2.com

Johje Holan.4607:

Now I assume you’re talking about a guild that attacks the stronger servers upgraded stuff.

Exactly.

I have no interest what so ever to bully the weaker server.

It’s a pity really that guild like that seems to be a dying breed…

PvD isn’t exactly something I enjoy doing. If you outnumber your enemy so badly that you could have PvDoor to victory than there would have been ton of more efficient way to get in but all those would probably not have been fun without some sort of challenge…