Guild Wars 2

Aitadis.8269:

Played 1 game in which I LOST and went from 52% to r13 in solo que lol

This is most likely because your decay was erased, not because your actual MMR was adjusted by a huge amount.

uberkingkong.8041:

Like I said its the volatility of leaderboard decay for the vast majority while a small minority don’t see any.

Leaderboard decay works, put simply, by multiplying the player’s MMR by a configured percent by the power of how many hours they have been inactive (after the first). Since it works by percentage, and not a fixed amount, players at the top actually see a larger decay in terms of fixed amount.

LeaderboardRating = ActualRating * pow(DecayRate, HoursInactive)

This decay exists only on the leaderboard, and is not used for matchmaking. The decay will also be completely erased from the leaderboard the next time it updates after you play a game.

The leaderboards are currently ranked by your Glicko2 matchmaking rating (MMR) which is hidden.

How much your ranking changes depends on a few things.

• Your current MMR deviation. Glicko2 tries to factor in how well it knows you. If it doesn’t know you, it will adjust your MMR more to try and find the best placement for you.
• The MMR of the team you last fought against. A win against a higher MMR team will raise you faster, while a loss against a lower MMR team will lower you faster.
• Decay. The leaderboard itself has a decay mechanism that will lower your ranking after periods of inactivity. However, since we don’t want to destroy your MMR because its valuable for matchmaking, this decay is only on the leaderboard itself, so when someone plays a match after a long-ish period of inactivity they will jump around faster.
• How much the other players around you are moving. The people near you are probably very close to you in MMR, so any small changes can mean a relatively big jump.

How does matchmaking work?
Right now the algorithm is incredibly simple. (Read: not intelligent)

• For solo arena we find 10 players near the same MMR and then shuffle those players into teams to make the teams as even as possible (MMR-wise).
• For team arena we find 5 players near the same MMR, no shuffling. We then find another team near the same MMR and put them together.
• The range of players you get paired with grows over time as you’re waiting to increase chances of finding a match. Which can lead to playing with people outside your skill range (usually lower).
• It doesn’t factor in PvP rank, profession, leaderboard rank, or anything else. It’s all about the MMR.

I’m not aware of any plans to do this. Will take a look when I get into the office.

Thanks for the heads up.

@audkyrie.5096
I took a look at your history but couldn’t find anything out of place. I definitely saw the 10 losses (11, actually) in a row, but there were no unusually MMR shifts that would explain the trend. On the bright side, it looks like you’ve been on a roll and have already made up the difference.

I’ll keep an eye on your account for a while longer, just in case.

@tanztante.6532
Your data looks good, nothing out of place. Let me know if you do see anything strange though.

No, nothing has changed. I’ll take a look at your data tomorrow to see if anything might have happened.

Sorry for the trolls. :\

This shouldn’t be an issue after the next SPvP release.

Kharr.5746:

Instead, have you considered offering a handicap in terms of points per objective and player kill? … snip …

A handicap isn’t a bad idea either, and would be a good topic for another thread.

eleshazar.6902:

Yes there is a fair solution: Throw them back into the queue to have a new grouping chosen. A match like that should never take place, because as you alluded to, it will never be fair.

Currently, the only way it is possible is for one or more players to be waiting in the queue for a long time. The alternative is for them to just never get a match. Acandis’ poll is a good start for that discussion.

eleshazar.6902:

Personally I don’t understand how the MMR is failing as badly as it is. True you guys have hidden ranks (which I agree after a certain point, say may 30, are pointless), but it isn’t hard to tell by actions (such as 3 people on your team running home and staying there for cap) or stomps (someone using a deer finisher), or titles (someone wearing Gladiator) that the skill levels are not being matched up fairly in the least.

Excluding the initial period when MMR is “warming up”, every single instance I’ve looked at has been a fair pairing. The downside of not showing the data is that many people will assume the worst.

The experience gap, which MMR does not look at, is one of the first things we’ll likely be changing in the future.

eleshazar.6902:

Maybe you aren’t putting in enough of a time wait before expanding the MMR range of a player. I recall an Anet person (Josh?) saying that the longer you are in the queue the wider the flexibility of your MMR range. In other words if I start being able to accept others on my team between 10-12 it eventually can expand to 1-21.

It might have been me, I’ve said it more than a few times. We could expand the time it takes, and as I mentioned above, Acandis’ poll is a good start.

eleshazar.6902:

Or maybe it is caused by the last minute grabs. I know that when someone leaves a roster, or leaves a game right before it starts, the system grabs someone fast to try to not have a 4v5, well I have a feeling it grabs pretty quickly and doesn’t wait at all which would lead to high variance in what is actually grabbed.

Unfortunately the system does not do that. While you’re right that it could cause problems, I think could solve more than it creates.

eleshazar.6902:

Something your post just sparked in my mind. Are you guys tallying team MMR using mean or median? I think that could be a huge flaw if you guys use mean. An outlier can pull that number to look falsely high when (as you use in your example) just having a 20 on a team doesn’t make up for having a 2 or a 1. In order to properly rank the team’s MMR I definitely think you should be using the medium MMR and not the average since the outliers can totally mess that up. Not sure which you use…

Both mean and median have their edge cases where they can cause problems. When we make adjustments to the system, we generally try to simulate the changes with realistic data and make choices with the most common outcome in mind.

Solstice.1097:

yea in this scenario the only remotely fair setup would be a 2v4 >.<

Is this something the community would like to see? I could definitely do that, but I’m worried how it would be perceived by those actually playing the game.

Also, in that scenario, even if we stacked everyone against the 20 the numbers would still be on the 20’s side, even though the game mechanics would pretty much guarantee a loss.

eleshazar.6902:

So say example A of your algorithm failing:

List at start for a 3v3 (20, 5, 4, 4, 2, 1)

According to your algorithm the team comp would look like this at the end:

Team A: (20, 2 ,1) = 23
Team B: (5, 4, 4) = 13

Seems fair right? There has to be more to your algorithm for Solo Q because this one seem awfully barbaric…

That’s the team shuffling algorithm. Which happens after 10 players are gathered using the matchmaking algorithm.

Obviously matchmaking should try to prevent that scenario from happening at all but if for some reason it does fails so bad as to create your scenario, do you see any other combination that would be more fair?

This was related to the bug that was disabling progression on our arenas. Now that it is fixed, people should be directed to our custom arenas.

This was my fault, I made a typo on one of the map identifiers in our configuration files and the server didn’t recognize it as a standard configuration.

It should be working now.

Sciva.4865:

Thanks, but you’ve also broken somthing I think. Pressing play dumps me into custom servers instead of an Anet server (which are mostly empty or have 2-8 players). I’m also getting lots of network error messages when server hopping.

We haven’t changed that functionality. It will still put you in any custom arena with progression enabled and has room.

This change was just for people that desired more arenas with the standard configuration.

This should be working now. Sorry guys. :\

We’ve added 50 more standard custom arenas. I’ve also randomized the map order.

Terrorsquad.2349:

With no “available slots” do you mean servers need to be 20/20? Who goes spectating a hotjoin match 5v5 with 10 ppl.. Or does it start another server when Anet’s custom arena’s are 10/20 full? because in theory, it’s full aswel because we can’t play..

By “available slots”, I mean that if its a 5v5 and there are less than 10 players (including spectators) in the game.

I’m not 100% sure why they’re always full.

Some times when multiple players hit "play now " at nearly the same time they will get the same arena. This happens because we don’t increment the player count until a player actually joins.

It will also happen because people are just going to the arenas that have the most players. This could be fixed by showing spectator count separately, but we don’t currently have a reliable way to do that and it’s a lower priority.

EverythingEnds.4261:

If HotJoin Arenas basicly are Custom Arenas, doesn’t this mean, the only thing you had to create, when you introduced Custom Arenas was a more player-friendly Interface for creating your Custom Arena?
If that’s true, it took you pretty long to do so.

No, the old “Play Now” functionality was replaced with new code that uses custom arenas.

Sulecen.4937:

Yes this happened 2 days ago, so it was after the feature patch but in between hotfixes.

That sounds normal, your friends were in one instance that belongs to the old build, and you were put in a new instance for the new build. There is no way around that as builds may not be compatible with each other.

The only alternative would be to not create a new instance until the old one is closed. This would still mean people in the new build wouldn’t be able to play in the old one.

Sulecen.4937:

Justin, there is the “issue” of our custom arenas having two instances sometimes, and it seems like a bug. Such as I’ve been skirmishing with my guild at times in my own arena and I’ve left to switch characters. When I come back in I’m on a totally different map then my guildies, such as when this happened a few days ago they were playing on Forest of Nifhel and I loaded into Battle of Khylo. The room was not full, and even when I left the room and attempted to “Join friend in PvP” it sent me right back to Khylo rather than Forest where everyone else was playing.

Did this happen after a build?

It tries to use player run custom arenas by design. The hot-join arenas are just custom arenas that we run, and are not treated any differently.

If we can’t find a custom arena with available slots, we will spin up another one and start placing players there as well.

If you want to keep people out of your arena, password protect it. If you want to exclude it from play now, then disable progression. If you want progression, you have to accept other players coming in.

vorpal.1497:

However! Unskilled players are not a problem. It is only when one team gets populated by one or more unskilled players, meanwhile the other team gets all average/good players, which is the problem. So by hiding rank now, they hide this broken situation of a team hamstrung by an unskilled player while paired with average/good players.

In solo arena, the system works by sorting players by their MMR – deviation descending and them placing them onto the team that has the lower running total MMR. This means that if one side has more new players then it is just random chance. It also means the players on other team have a lower than average MMR becaue they were comparable to a new player with the default MMR – a very wide deviation. None of this gets reflected by ranks.

In team arena, players are put onto rosters based on their MMR – deviation, and then the matched against another roster by matching based on average MMR.

In both cases, the algorithm will very gradually increase the range of MMRs it will search over time to give players on the edges of the curve the opportunity to play.

vorpal.1497:

Take home point: ArenaNet is aware of these issues with mismatched games, and have made the conscious decision to not fix it, due to lack of time or simply the architecture of the code doesn’t allow them to. Thus they hide rank so we will stop “proving” via screenshots that there is a problem with mismatched teams.

We are aware of the issue, and we have made the conscious choice to fix them, but those changes are not yet ready. If you’ve followed any of the many matchmaking threads, you should have a good idea where we are going. If not, we will give out more information as we get closer to the release of those changes.

Locuz.2651:

You disagree because you have no clue. Do you play this game even? A rank 10 will be worse 99.99% of the cases.

You are entitled to your opinion. We know new players are likely to have lower skill because they are ignorant and don’t know how to play the game, but you’re looking at one part of the problem in isolation. Once you get past the initial ranks, using rank for matchmaking falls apart, i.e. you can have two rank 30s with vastly different skill levels.

We will improve the handling of new players, but using ranks for matchmaking everyone else is just a bad idea.

Locuz.2651:

Yet your system pushes totally new players up to the top after 3-4 lucky wins during their first 10 games.

This happens for a few reasons. 1) Player MMR will fluctuate rapidly as the system tries to figure out where they should be. 2) The number of games required to show on the leaderboards is likely too low.

The first is by design, and should not be changed. The second is something we can investigate changing, but may not be relevant if we move to a ladder system.

manveruppd.7601:

Uhhh…. I’m 110% positive than on 2 different occasions today I clicked “play now” and got sent to a Courtyard map!

Not that I’m complaining, it’s fun, and if it’s a bug I’m not sure I want you to fix it :p

I was wrong, we changed it some time back so it will include any custom arena that has progression enabled.

I will look into this as soon as I get into work tomorrow.

bhagwad.4281:

If you matchmake based on ranks, it will be more accurate and effective that what you have now.

I disagree, using ranks instead of MMR may help reduce matchup against new players but it would make matches for everyone else just as bad, if not worse.

We have plans to better ease new players into solo and team arena, which should help with this problem without ruining the game for everyone else.

bhagwad.4281:

Make it happen!

I am, I am!

Rezz.8019:

So Justin: how exactly will you show skill? Will you use ladder rank or something?

That depends on what the community wants, and ladders do seem to fit.

Steve Whitley.8359:

if matchmaking is/was based on rank, then how is that even relevant? from what i’ve seen before the patch / post patch matchups are not based on rank, but rather just whomever is queued…

Matchmaking has never used rank. We use the Glicko2 MMR algorithm. While we will always be limited to whoever is in the queue at any given time, we do not just throw players together at random.

Weapon rarity has no affect on stats in structured PvP.

How long ago did this happen?

EverythingEnds.4261:

… so more experienced players don’t get paired up with them.

Already working on it.

Nabbo.2845:

Justin ODell.9517:

Nabbo.2845:

But courtyard is excluded from that?

Correct. Courtyard is not part of the standard custom arena configuration.

May I ask why?

TDM is not a supported game mode, at least not yet. We are watching the how community responds to the format, and then we’ll go from there.

Nabbo.2845:

But courtyard is excluded from that?

Correct. Courtyard is not part of the standard custom arena configuration.

Matchmaking has not changed. We stopped showing ranks because they were being used incorrectly (as if they implied skill rather than time invested), causing a toxic environment where players felt justified (wrongly) while harassing each other.

We are working on changes to matchmaking, but those changes are unrelated to the decision to not show ranks.

That said, there has been a huge influx of new players, and this is likely what you are noticing. They are likely going to need some time to learn the ropes and figure out how to play. May I suggest taking a patient, mentoring approach?

Teutos.8620:

Last time I clicked “Play Now” I got onto a custom arena, but I think one with the same settings as the hot-join servers from ArenaNet.

That’s by design. Our hot-join servers are really just custom arenas that we run. All that is required to be picked up by the “Play Now” feature is to use the standard config.

Sunshine.5014:

They should make it so that if people click Play Now, and there is no available left, they should create an addition server.

Unless there is a bug, it should already be doing this.

RoRo.8270:

Translation vent until you eventually realise it is futile and cough up them gems

Hah. You need better translation software.

Darek.1836:

Justin ODell.9517:

Darek.1836:

I thought everything could be done in PVP according to Devs in Ready Up? Why do we need to go to PVE? Why do we need to level up for cosmetics when PVP is completely seperate?

This is a migration issue, not a regular thing.

Ok, what about the levels? If I make a new character I am not going to level him up for hours just to put on a kittening shoulder piece.

Just play PvP on any custom arena that rewards progression, or play solo/team arena. It will happen without you doing anything different except double clicking your rewards.

Darek.1836:

I thought everything could be done in PVP according to Devs in Ready Up? Why do we need to go to PVE? Why do we need to level up for cosmetics when PVP is completely seperate?

This is a migration issue, not a regular thing.

Their should be one in every major city. I believe there is also one at Vigil Keep near Evon Gnashblade.

Pyriall.5027:

And what of all those character slots we purchased for the sole intention of pvp’ing? Multiple characters of the same profession that we need to unlock traits and level?

I can’t really add anything more to what has already been said, but feel free to continue posting feedback in one of the threads regarding character-bound unlocks. We are listening.

Thorn.7963:

Thats true, I didn’t think about that, but that now means I have to spend a lot of bank space or character space holding different item skins if I’m someone who likes to swap skins when I feel like it.

I liked having the huge storage I could put everything I had and could swap with whenever I wanted.

If the game had free skin changes like DCUO or LOTRO this wouldn’t be an issue, but why should we have to pay for it?

I can’t speak for that design decision, it goes beyond just the PvP team and also involves the economy folks. I do believe there are a lot of very good arguments for it, but honestly I’m ignorant and haven’t been following the internal discussion.

I will say that we made sure that you are able to receive transmutation charges from playing PvP alone because we know there are players that like to switch often, myself included.

Justin ODell.9517:

Outlaw.3421:

Justin, how about weapon swap? That unlocks at level 7 correct? I had a guild member who only does sPvP (level 2), but can’t buy shoulders or swap weapons.

Let me find out.

Talked to the gameplay peopleguys, they said it works, you just need to equip the second set. You should ask them try equipping the second set from the PvP build UI.

Thorn.7963:

Which I assume is also why PVPers aren’t allowed to freely change their skins now without having to get charges now.

You apply skins to weapons and armor, after you apply it you can still keep them in your inventory and swap them for free.

JinDaVikk.7291:

How about the missing armor sets? Without a list available to me from old version How am I to know all the armor sets now missing? Thanks for stealing from me.

:edit

They were gem bought sets.

You can see your entire skin collection from the bank, it’s a new tab. You should check out this thread for better answers and discussion.

Thorn.7963:

Could you at least tell us WHY you did this change? It seems so pointless.

To bring PvP in line with how the rest of the game works.

Outlaw.3421:

Justin, how about weapon swap? That unlocks at level 7 correct? I had a guild member who only does sPvP (level 2), but can’t buy shoulders or swap weapons.

Let me find out.

TainoFuerte.8136:

“Just deal with it”

Thanks, bro.

I wouldn’t put it that way, but we did expect a period of adjustment.

Thorn.7963:

Justin ODell.9517:

Chest, leg, and boot are used. You’re fine without a helmet, shoulders, or gloves.

And if someone wants helmet shoulders and gloves?

I believe shoulders are the only slots gated by level but I could be wrong. In any case, just play some PvP and your character will be high enough soon.

Xista.7391:

Justin ODell.9517:

Chest, leg, and boot are used. You’re fine without a helmet, shoulders, or gloves.

Can you explain the reasoning why we have to level up now to get our old ‘looks’ back?

Why can’t there be lvl 1 shoulders/helms etc at the vendor?

This is the way it is in PvE and WvW, we just brought PvP in line with the rest of the game.

You can level through PvP only. You will receive tomes of knowledge from reward tracks, along with other rewards.

Thorn.7963:

“You can play from level 1, you only need chest, legs, and boots as they are the only gear that count toward armor rating.”

What happened to “You can jump in and do PVP right away as soon as you finished the tutorial”?

What was the point in merging PvE and PvP like this?

I don’t follow what you mean. You will only be missing some cosmetic only gear, this should not be a barrier to entry in any way.