Guild Wars 2

John Widdin.9618:

Since a couple patches ago, the game has stopped closing properly, and the process has sat there running.

Hey thanks, I didn’t know about that. I’ll pass it on to him.

Jayne.9251:

Evalana.5480:

ParaldaWind.4523

Mag BL tonight had a queue bug, I think.

Same with DBBL.

What worked for us is telling folks to zone out of WvW before they left for the night. We noticed that people would remain as ghosts on the map long after they logged out if they just camped from WvW. Having them zone out before they logged seemed to help a bit with the bug issue.

A friend of mine often pops up as playing GW2 when he’s on Steam even when he’s been idle for hours. It’s possible that the game is just randomly launching or has odd background processes that incorrectly flag you as logged in… or it’s possible that my friend’s installation of Steam is just messed up.

Evalana.5480:

ParaldaWind.4523

Mag BL tonight had a queue bug, I think.

Same with DBBL.

ArenaNet still hasn’t really acknowledged this as something that happens, so if possible in the future try to take as many notes about the surrounding circumstance as possible (that’s directed at everyone). Maybe they’ll find something in that feedback to fix the problem.

FilthyRat.4652:

Lol…if you had moved to T8 well before the JADE QUARRY war drums were in earshot, then I think people would take you seriously. But this issue has been going on long before BG had the SoS transfers that people were so upset about. Sorry that SoS had to ruin the curbstomping you guys were giving in your tier and made BG fears come true and face JQ again….but feel free to stay in ET as long as you can.

To be completely fair to Jeknar, the majority of guilds leaving SoS transferred to BG. Jeknar left when BG became stronger, not weaker, and preferred losing to JQ over waiting for over an hour to queue up.

It’s cute when people who don’t follow other tiers try to commentate on them.

Grimpaw.7493:

• raisins vs chocolate chips – go!

I actually only like a few types of cookies. White chocolate macadamia is probably at the top of the list, followed closely by peanut butter. Pumpkin cookies are also pretty good. I don’t like raisins and chocolate chip is frankly boring. I tend to be the same way about ice cream as well, as my favorite is nearly impossible to find: green mint. Most green mint ice cream has chocolate chips thrown into it, and the chocolate overpowers the mint flavor (which is disappointing).

Anyway my favorite ice cream topping is a handful of gummy bears, especially this brand: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/11/Gbears.jpg . Haribo’s bears are fine and good, but Taste of Nature brand Care Bears are where it’s at.

Maniac.5163:

When we fought HB they were running much smaller groups than PiNK has been able to in all of our previous matches. Did they mass recruit or merge recently?

HB has somewhere around 100 or so members right now. You can visit their website here if you’re interested in applying to join them.

Daddicus.6128:

Thanks

But why would someone spend a fortune repairing armor for virtually no reward?

Don’t die, and/or repair more frugally.

You don’t really need to repair your armor until something breaks, and even then you can get away skipping repairs for a long time if it’s your helmet or rebreather that’s broken (just play exclusively on land or underwater for a bit, both of which are definitely possible).

If you’re going to die, then die to an environmental effect rather than player damage (such as falling off of a cliff) when you can, as there’s no repair bills for that.

Beyond that, you’re able to play WvW completely naked if you’re manning siege or playing defense. If you’re on a catapult and are firing rocks at people from behind a wall, it doesn’t really matter how much clothing you have on. Don’t bother repairing if you’re not going to be in player combat any time soon.

You learn how to take care of yourself and how to stop squandering money very quickly in WvW. If the only thing keeping you out is repair bills, then you’re frankly doing it wrong. Even siege can be inexpensive if you know what you’re doing; jumping puzzles, badge exchanges, random drops, and map completion all reward you with siege without spending precious silver.

If you’re worried about wasting cash on upgrades, then join or create a guild that’s capable of holding something for extended periods of time. If you can make at least 5s/hour and if upgrading a tower to have oil costs 5s, then if that tower holds for 61 minutes you’re already in the green in terms of investment.

People discussing coverage etc:

Who cares, we’re having fun right?

If you’re on TC and think we’re going to win, I’ll save you some stress: we’re not going to win. Again though, who cares? We’re up against two good servers who both like us and (more importantly) like playing against us. There is a difference between being realistic and settling — recognizing you’re not going to win allows you to focus on stuff other than the score (such as fine-tuning our defense, trying out new professions, things of this nature).

If you’re on Kaineng and think you’re going to win, great! You have a chance of doing so this week, but it’ll depend on how well you prepare your forces during coverage gaps. You guys should be focusing on getting as much defense ready as you can in the hour before your gap windows open to help minimize losses, which is what’s going to be needed to beat Blackgate. Don’t worry about lacking coverage, worry about being the best you can be with what you currently have.

If you’re on Blackgate and want to continue winning, great! Just like with Kaineng, don’t worry about the score; don’t worry about lacking coverage during certain time zones. Worry about having fun and being the best that you can at what you do, and focus on preparing yourselves an hour or so in advance of your coverage gaps. Turtling and fortifying to help your smaller populations hold onto stuff is going to keep you in the lead.

Coverage isn’t an excuse to be angry/smug, and the score isn’t important. I understand that if someone is greatly outnumbered they’re going to lose, but that’s nothing to get upset about. Worry about having fun and worry about improving as an individual, as a guild, and as a server.

Just stop complaining and have some fun out there. This is a game; if you’re complaining or getting frustrated with it, then try a different game for a while instead. The greatest waste of time and the greatest waste of a life isn’t playing games and isn’t being competitive — it’s doing artificial and fake work. When games become work to you, then you need to walk away for a while and do something else.

I recommend baking a cake , which is fun, delicious and awesome. Don’t like cake? Then try Eda’s Apple Pie .

Miiaah.5416:

Happy reset everyone …….Kaineng Style

Why doesn’t Kaineng go with PSY so you can “Oppa Kaineng Style” etc?

How did we lose Hasselhoff to Blackgate?

Is this not the embodiment of Tarnished Coast?

kfarb.6732:

I don’t see one person in there with the bouquet of flowers. Also your map is broken, I think.

He has his map set to rotate. That’s the southwest borderland camp and tower (Bridge tower as I call it).

katz.8376:

i actually wasn’t trying to be nasty. i am really asking for the context you are referring to. i’m NEW. i dunno how many times i have to say that. i didn’t ever see these topics you refer to.

ungood found numbers. you say “find em your d*** self”.

ok, thanks alot

Sorry, I just don’t want to invest even more into this when I’ve already said basically all that I have to say. The search feature on these forums is notoriously bad, so digging through 30+ pages of WvW posts to find the match-up topics and then poke through them for the appropriate posts/discussions would take me hours. Nothing personal.

A quick google search for “numbers in context” takes 30 seconds in comparison, and requires an equal amount of effort as Ungood clicking five buttons on a site and pretending as though every server is the exact same week to week.

katz.8376:

Kerithlan.1659:

This is an interesting analysis of what I’ve posted because I’m not posting speculation, whereas you are.

Ungood posted numbers anyone can find quite easily on the millenium matchup site.

where does your ‘evidence’ come from? can you point to it and say “here it is… this server has this many people, that server has that many, and they used to have so many more/less.” where is your proof? if it’s nowhere but stored in your head, its not proof.

http://xkcd.com/558/
http://blog.thinknewfound.com/statistics-without-context-are-just-numbers/
http://www.badscience.net/2011/01/putting-a-number-in-its-context/

Furthermore all of the transfers that took place were discussed at length in each tier’s respective match-up topics. I’m not going to dig them up because — frankly — you can do it yourself. I understand that you want the burden of proof to be on me, but I already know how important statistical context is and don’t want to be roped into lecturing people regarding things that have nothing to do with the topic.

Ungood.3054:

Kerithlan.1659:

Massive speculation with nothing to back it up and most likely total fantasy that amounts to nothing more then “I don’t like your idea so I am going kitten and whine on the forums until someone listens”

Thanks for the post.

It had me enthralled from start to end, and some day I might even read it.

This is an interesting analysis of what I’ve posted because I’m not posting speculation, whereas you are. I actually keep up with other servers (something that you don’t seem to do), and I actually understand that the rating system moves bigger populations up and smaller populations down (something that you don’t seem to grasp).

Your posts are non-contributory in your own topic — that’s a new one. I’m just going to step out and let other posters make their own decisions pertaining to what I’ve posted.

Jayne.9251:

Masamoon.3864:

Jayne.9251:

Choo is welcome on TC any time they’d like. You guys always behave with dignity and respect, and some good ol’ fashioned teasing. You’d be a good fit.

Do I get to tease you if I come? I have Quaggans.

Absolutely. Teasing Jayne is a perk to joining TC.

Confirmed.

Ungood.3054:

snipped for size

All of this is well and good but you have a problem with context (again). This may be hard for you to understand but population is what is predominantly portrayed in the ratings, not skill etc.

Week 3
Crystal Desert had just increased its rating by eating the mostly-empty IoJ the previous few weeks, and Dragonbrand had just received a few transfers. Additionally, the week before most of IoJ transferred over to Fort Aspenwood, driving IoJ down and moving Dragonbrand up. Crystal Desert remained stable, finding themselves smaller than both Dragonbrand and Fort Aspenwood, causing Crystal Desert to come in third place against two larger servers.

Meanwhile, Maguuma both began to receive transfers and was paired up with the now-gutted IoJ, giving Maguuma a huge win. As Maguuma greatly outnumbered Yak’s Bend 1v1, and with IoJ a non-contender due to a near-complete exodus from the server, Maguuma scored a big win. This allowed them to move past a smaller population server in Crystal Desert and up a tier.

Just like Maguuma, Kaineng scored a huge win against two vastly smaller servers and found themselves moving up a tier to replace the falling and much smaller IoJ, creating the next week’s tiers. Borlis Pass, having lost big to the transfer-bloated Maguuma the previous week, and with the much larger Kaineng moving up from below, was pushed down a tier despite remaining relatively consistent.

Week 4
Maguuma’s rise from T4 to T3 was population fueled, and pitted them against two servers they belonged against. The glicko system placed them in a match-up appropriate for their population and gave them a competitive week of play. Fort Aspenwood, being somewhat larger than either opponent, did ultimately win; however, both Maguuma and Dragonbrand had strong participation during the holes in FA’s coverage, and as such each of the three servers found themselves ticking for +350 ppt during the week.

Kaineng proceeded to advance toward T2 at the same exact rate that your proposed system would have them advance at, but it would have done something that the glicko system does not. Kaineng found themselves against two smaller servers and saw their rating rocket up again in response to it. Since SBI was going to fall the following week, the competition for T2 saw Fort Aspenwood and Kaineng going neck and neck in a contest that Kaineng almost won, despite being in T4 at the time.

Furthermore, Crystal Desert began losing guilds to transfers at this point, and found themselves weaker than they otherwise would have been as they were no longer as consistently large as they had been in the previous weeks. Isle of Janthir remained in free-fall and moved down toward their new home at the same rate that your system would have afforded them, except that under the glicko system they had the potential to skip tiers if presented with and afforded the opportunity to do so.

As has been stated multiple times in this topic now, Sanctum of Rall didn’t magically become better than their opponents. They received half of SBI’s population and ruined the tier. Since SoR was much larger than TC in a 1v1 competition and as SBI was an almost non-participant in that week’s contest, SoR scored a huge win and moved up. Blackgate, remaining consistent in their position and competitive against SoS and JQ, enjoyed a good match-up until SoR grew larger than them and moved up.

This post is getting too large so I’m going to stop here; I’ll continue if asked but I believe I have soundly made my point already.

You’re looking at numbers without context and without trying to understand why those things have happened. You’re not proving or disproving anything — you’re parroting statistics as absolute truth.

The reality is that week-by-week the changes you see represent changes in population, which therefore represent changes in coverage, which therefore represent changes in performance. You’re not seeing servers in flux trying to get to where they belong in terms of skill, but rather you’re seeing the glicko system compensating for changes in server populations.

Nothing that you’ve said has changed this, and in fact the system you’re proposing has more potential to create more blowouts more often. If you think that SoR vs TC vs SBI was a blowout, you’d be right, but to not understand WHY it was a blowout is to lack an understanding of what it is you’re championing.

Having larger servers move down to face two much smaller servers just because the smaller server in the tier above lost doesn’t create balance or an interesting environment. It creates situations where, like SoR vs TC vs SBI, the smallest server is virtually unable to compete. This generates a 1v1 situation between the other two servers, and in a 1v1 situation like that the larger server is going to win.

Your system is just bad. So is glicko, but again, glicko is perfect in comparison.

EnRohbi.2187:

If SF moves up a tier, you’re just gonna get rolled by the server that falls from tier 7 so SF has room to move up. The only difference will be the name of the server.

This is not necessarily correct. However what is correct is that SF moving up and potentially balancing T8 is guaranteed to break the current balance in T7.

The question is not “should that balance be broken” but rather “when will it be?” Will SF be balanced in T7, or will they drop down again? Will they move up to T6 and break more things?

It’s circular imbalance at work. Exchanging one imbalance for another doesn’t solve the problem. It just moves it. Glicko can’t correct it, but the WULD system exacerbates it horribly.

Detharos.3157:

If what others have said is true, which it is, in that the scores between two tiers are apples and oranges, then I ask you all: Isn’t it hypocritical to defend the Glicko2 system with that stance? If they hold no true relevance to each other, why is it that server’s like Sorrow’s Furnace literally need to dominate with 695 ppt at the EXACT SAME TIME the server above randomly starts doing very poorly and losing rating consistently (Something that may or may not happen.) to move up? Just because Sorrow’s furnace can win in our tier with 350k points doesn’t necessarily mean HoD could, or that it could not, or any other server in that tier. Just because SF can’t dominate us with 695 PPT if we don’t let them does not mean they couldn’t compete now, or even win in the tier above. That remains to be seen and tested.

You are confusing score with performance. (snipped for size)

Sorrow’s Furnace needs to perform better than the previous week in order to gain rating. This means that the score gap between opponents needs to be gradually larger than the previous week. As Sorrow’s Furnace earns bigger and bigger victories it is harder for them to increase that gap/margin.

The simple explanation: if Sorrow’s Furnace defeated Ferguson’s Crossing by a margin of 50,000 points last week, then in order to gain rating they need to win by a statistically larger margin this week. After a certain point in time that becomes nearly impossible.

Two weeks ago, SF defeated Ferguson’s Crossing by a margin of 158,053 points, and 2.05 times the score. Last week, Sorrow’s Furnace defeated Ferguson’s Crossing by a margin of 243,580 points, and 2.96 times the score. This is a point margin performance increase of ~154% and a score multiplier increase of 144%.

This week, SF’s current score multiplier over FC is 2.06 times. Without having the final score margin it’s hard to predict, but unless they get near or above 2.96 times FC’s score they’re likely to lose some points to FC as the margin required is going to be larger.

This math is all wrong and I understand that. It’s a simplified version of things. The problem is that SF is unable to perform at a higher level than last week… which honestly is to be expected, considering there’s a full 3 1/2 days left in this match. By the end of the week SF will break even or go positive.

Regarding holidays, glicko actually preserves better matches and compensates for such sudden dips. In the WULD model any server taking a break would be punished by dropping a tier (perhaps unnecessarily and to the detriment of the game) simply because they did not play 24/7 that week. Glicko protects against some of that by ensuring that servers that suddenly tank in rating usually have an opportunity to win it back and maintain their position the next week, rather than putting artificial intervals in the way (tier shuffling).

Also, I’m not defending glicko. I’m attempting to explain why it’s a better option than the one proposed (Winner Up; Loser Down + gating). I’m in favor of any system that makes WvW better. The proposed system does not perform such an act.

Ungood.3054:

Ok. Now. Fact > Fiction

My system would have shaved at least 2 weeks off Sanctum Rails accent, and gotten Sorrows Furnace out of Tier 8.

That is a fact.

This post is cute (snipped for size) but it ignores the fact that SoR didn’t deserve to move up until half of a server transferred over to them, pitting a gutted server against a bloated server. They moved up one full week after that happened. Le gasp.

SoR moved up after their bloated population had one full start-to-finish match against one server whose population tanked. Half of SBI transferred to SoR mid-match. The glicko system adequately and appropriately compensated for the change.

I really am not trying to be sassy, but apparently you don’t know what facts are. I apologize because I know I sound like a jerk. This is becoming a peeing contest over nothing — the simple truth is that you haven’t proved anything or provided evidence as to why the glicko system is inferior to a system that would put you in bad matches more frequently.

I understand that your current match-up is bad and I agree that it needs to change, but to get so hung up on a system that is clearly a negative change is the wrong way to go about seeking improvements. Glicko isn’t perfect but it is way better than this crap.

SoS/BG and probably Kaineng.

TC/FA and somewhat above TC but still below BG is Kaineng.

NA #’s 3/4/5/6/7 are pretty much in perfect order imo.

Ungood.3054:

Kerithlan.1659:

Sometimes the bigger picture can be lost on those who nitpick details.

I could not agree more, but in this case and exchange, you are the one not seeing the big picture here and how over analyzing is working against the worlds having fun and building dynamic match ups, nor are you looking at the details to see how some worlds get stuck in tiers they don’t belong.

I simply disagree, and as unfair as it may be I’m not considering much of your replies to hold weight due to the context manipulation stunt you just pulled. I’m usually not one to act this way but in this case I’m flatly offended.

Hieronymus.2146:

Just got this idea from reading another post, asking for comparisons between NA and EU tier strategies.

Is it possible to mix the continental servers based on tier ranking?
That sounds like it could be pretty epic. Don’t know if this has been mentioned before but it has to have been, so I guess there is some kind of issue in doing this or something.

A little Na vs. EU?

I’ll assume no for the same reason we can’t cross-region guest: the servers are hosted from different data centers, which causes complications and prevents such behavior.

Ungood.3054:

Kerithlan.1659:

Kaineng never jumped tiers.

After this single win, they jumped from tier 5 to tier 3

facts > theory

While Fact > Theory, you need to get yours straight.

It’s cool if you want to blatantly misquote me despite the post I made being not even two posts up the page from yours. It doesn’t help your argument when anyone with eyes can blatantly see what you’ve done.

Kaineng did in fact not jump tiers, as I said. Sanctum of Rall did in fact jump tiers, as I said. I’m not sure if you’re trying to be crafty or if this is a legitimate reading comprehension issue, but okay.

Ungood.3054:

Kerithlan.1659:

Ungood.3054:

Kerithlan.1659:

I’d point to the fact that Kaineng only spent one week in each tier under the glicko system as counter-evidence to the claim that they’d have risen any faster under the system you’re proposing. In fact, your system does not allow for potential shifts to take place where Kaineng would have been able to skip tiers

That is correct, my system would not have allowed them to skip tiers, it also would not have kept them stuck in a tier so long that when the math finally unglued enough to allow them to move they ended up jumping tiers.

In simple words, my system would have noticed the gain, and responded faster to the trend, and awarded them accordingly and moved them up the very week they started winning, saving everyone time and limiting the amount of unbalanced matches.

Ergo, a simple system it is a better system to spot rising stars, and falling ones.

It also keeps evenly matched people rotating around facing roughly the same six equally powered worlds, as opposed to being stuck. Yes, I understand that some people are scared shirtless to step out of some comfort zone, but in is supposed to be a competitive war game, the last place anyone should be is in a comfort zone.

Kaineng never jumped tiers. Your system would have denied them that opportunity were it to arise. The current environment did not.

Sorry sir, but you are dead wrong in this.

My system would have moved them up upon their very first win, and not delayed even for a week, nor denied them any form of progression.

If you think my system would have done otherwise, then sir, do not understand it. Sometimes simple can be too confusing for people who like to over brain things.

http://mos.millenium.org/matchups/history/13#NA

The same week that Kaineng got its first win is the week that TC moved up to T2. The very next week, IoJ won and TC lost. We would have swapped again, even though TC just spent 7 weeks winning T3 by over 90k/week, and IoJ just spent several weeks losing T2 by over 90k/week. Additionally, TC had over 40k less score than IoJ, so even in the reworked proposed WULD system TC would have swapped.

On top of that, the following week Crystal Desert would have been over 50k above TC despite TC having won against CD by over 100k the previous few weeks, so in the reworked/gated WULD system it’d still be wrong.

Sometimes the bigger picture can be lost on those who nitpick details.

Ungood.3054:

Kerithlan.1659:

I’d point to the fact that Kaineng only spent one week in each tier under the glicko system as counter-evidence to the claim that they’d have risen any faster under the system you’re proposing. In fact, your system does not allow for potential shifts to take place where Kaineng would have been able to skip tiers

That is correct, my system would not have allowed them to skip tiers, it also would not have kept them stuck in a tier so long that when the math finally unglued enough to allow them to move they ended up jumping tiers.

In simple words, my system would have noticed the gain, and responded faster to the trend, and awarded them accordingly and moved them up the very week they started winning, saving everyone time and limiting the amount of unbalanced matches.

Ergo, a simple system it is a better system to spot rising stars, and falling ones.

It also keeps evenly matched people rotating around facing roughly the same six equally powered worlds, as opposed to being stuck. Yes, I understand that some people are scared shirtless to step out of some comfort zone, but in is supposed to be a competitive war game, the last place anyone should be is in a comfort zone.

Kaineng never jumped tiers. Your system would have denied them that opportunity were it to arise. The current environment did not.

Sanctum of Rall was in a good match-up before gaining transfers and suddenly getting a ton of score. After this single win, they jumped from tier 5 to tier 3, and the following week went to the top of the tier. They then spent the next billion weeks where they belonged, as second place in T2, until they got transfers again and entered T1.

Under your system, this wouldn’t have happened. They’d actually have moved along at a slower pace, which would have punished pretty much everyone involved.

facts > theory

Fozzik.1742:

Kerithlan.1659:

I was in favor of the ratings reset and still am. I am not in favor of oversimplifying the system to the point that it becomes much more problematic than the current environment is.

Resetting the system just delays the inevitable, unless you change the system. After a reset, a few months later you are in the same situation of heavy stagnation. Maybe individual servers’ positions would be shifted from where they are now, but it would be just as bad, and just as stuck.

Is this really what people want? To play the same two servers every week forever? I’d much rather have variety, even if there are some unbalanced matches. Sometimes they would go your way, sometimes not…much more fun and requires effort on the part of players, rather than a guaranteed, predictable outcome every week for most servers leading to players getting bored or frustrated and no longer logging in.

As of right now I would be perfectly happy facing off against Blackgate and Kaineng forever if I had to, even considering that I’m on the smaller server. I like both of our opponents, and I like FA and SoS too. I’m in a good spot right now in terms of potential match-ups.

I understand that not all players are, and I agree that the math should be tweaked. I touched on that slightly before, but to recap I believe that the exponential requirements dictating ratio gains/losses should be toned down week to week as right now it’s a bit out of wack. SF should have moved up by now because HoD should have lost more rating more quickly and SF should have gained more rating more rapidly.

I’m not against rapid rating switches if they’re deserved, but I am against borderline random switches. Tiers shouldn’t switch because, for example, a server doesn’t OCD over the score and half of the crew sleeps for a week (which would happen in the proposed system). Server performance is more important than server score — yes, they’re separate things. Glicko tracks consistency and performance.

Dayra.7405:

Gab Superstar.4059:

On my EU server I play in the middle of prime time where you even zerg to take supply camps.

Of course, the zerg needs supplies, so it has to take some camps before it can attack a tower or fortress. But beside the main zerg (40+) we try to have several coordinated (they speak with the zerk-commander in a separate TS-channel) small groups (5-20) to take supply-camps, kill dollies, produce battle symbols, take towers, sneak opening of fortresses outer area …

In prime-time this is per map, in off-time this is with scouts on the maps and jumping of zerg and small-groups between maps

No idea how you do it in NA-T1, but in EU-T1 this seems to be standard.

Pretty much identical to how NA-T2 works in my experience.

kfarb.6732:

Kerithlan.1659:

kfarb.6732:

It doesn’t really matter. Maybe there are 4 T1 servers. Either way T1/T2 can’t hold 7 so one is pushed to T3.

Fair enough.

Just saw you were on TC, so I suppose it does matter for you…

Not necessarily, we just want good matches. The new FA was a good match for us and BG, as is the current BG/Kaineng match. I have little doubt that if we end up against DB and YB/CD we’ll have another good match, even if it’s lopsided. I like all of the servers I’ve listed, so we’re going to have fun anywhere we end up.

Obviously it’s better for T3 if TC stays up in T2 simply because of experience/population issues. I just found it interesting that T3 believes there’s a ton of T2 servers while T2 believes there’s a ton of T1 servers. It’s sort of funny in the bigger picture lol.

mucco.1867:

With my system, you will NOT have two different opponents every single week because it’s not straight WULD. How many times do I have to repeat it?

I’m not saying every single week. I am saying more frequently, which is an honest evaluation.

Fozzik.1742:

I agree whole-heartedly with the original poster. He really seems to understand things in a way that most people (even those at ArenaNet) don’t. The current system leads to stagnation, and I know for myself at least, what really appealed to me when I first heard about WvW was the idea of facing different servers each match…getting variety and keeping things fresh, facing new tactics and different players and rising to the challenge.

The psychological effect of the current system on players is very negative. It allows bad feelings between servers to fester and grow for weeks and weeks, and turns the experience into petty bickering and a lot of rude and negative behavior. For all but the winning server, player populations shrink as people get tired of seeing the same thing and completely assured outcomes.

The current system is worst in the bottom tier, where a giant hole is created by the math, making servers appear much worse than they are and forcing endlessly lopsided matches. Worse losses lead to less people playing WvW leading to even worse losses. At least in a system like the original poster describes, players on losing servers would know that each week they would have a fresh possibility of a different outcome, and likely the WvW participation would rise and make matches more competitive.

Of course servers who are winning week after week don’t want any change at all in the system. They don’t want a reset, they don’t want match-ups to change more often. Why? Because then the outcome isn’t assured and every server will have good weeks and bad weeks. That would be infinitely more fair and more fun than what we have now.

I was in favor of the ratings reset and still am. I am not in favor of oversimplifying the system to the point that it becomes much more problematic than the current environment is.

mucco.1867:

Therefore, Glicko is “superior” in the only case that you want rankings to never move again for the eternity.

I believe that this is a dishonest and misguided belief, as it assumes stagnation over time. Again without going too much into it, population simply does in fact move over time.

Anything from holidays to regional lockouts to new games coming out to sudden popularity surges for GW2 (such as expansions) will change populations. It is short-sighted to believe any one server will be locked in position for greater than 6 months, or to believe that the end of free transfers will significantly dent population flux.

Additionally, to only look at the 500k win blowout is to ignore the other half of the equation. For an example of what I’m talking about, look at NA T2 and T3 this week vs last week. Kaineng winning and FA losing improved Kaineng’s experiences at the cost of FA’s experiences. FA went from a great match-up in T2 to what is more or less a blowout in T3, while Kaineng went from a T3 blowout to a competitive T2.

I wouldn’t call that an improvement, but rather an exchange. Your system creates more exchanges, not necessarily balance.

Without going too deeply into it since I’m into my third beer and will soon become incoherent:

I understand that your system is artificially gated through score comparison mathemagics, but what’s missed is the irrelevance between scores between tiers. A huge score in one tier is not necessarily representative of an improved match-up when the winner moves up (see: HoD vs SF being a good match until Kaineng happened, pushing SF down).

Many players ultimately don’t care about the score (especially in Europe) and would rather be paired up with opponents that they can have competitive and fun encounters with/against. Yes the score can be and is a motivating factor, but to solely determine placement based off of scores ignores the long-term ramifications such a system would create.

Servers will never become locked into match-ups for too long because there will always be shifting populations, even with free transfers ending. Old players will eventually retire, new players will come in, and each server will be in constant (albeit smaller) population flux. The glicko system is simply superior because it can account for such fluctuations.

It may not be the best, but it’s definitely superior.

mucco.1867:

As an addendum, the history of SBI from our last win (17 November).
24/11: third by 60k points, we stay T1 (red)
1/12: second, we stay T1 (blue)
8/12: third by 40k, we stay T1 (red)
15/12: third by 30k, we stay T1 (red)
22/12: second, we stay T1 (blue)
29/12: third by 40k, we stay T1 (red)
5/1: third by 120k, we stay T1 (red)
12/1: third by 100k, we go T2 (green)
19/1: third by 90k, we stay T2 (blue)
26/1: third by 220k, we stay T2 (red)
1/2: third by 410k, we go T4 (green)
9/2: third by 100k, we stay T4 (red)
currently: third by 80k, going to go T5.

Three months to move down three tiers so far. Glicko is not fast for moving rapidly dropping teams.

Anecdotal evidence in SBI’s case, especially when the volatility of the end of free transfers and the mass exodus is taken into account.

SBI was originally a good match-up for TC and SoR before half of SBI moved to SoR in Week 3 (19 Jan), and only lingered for a single week before dropping to Tier 4. Additionally, once there SBI was paired up with another falling server (Crystal Desert), and so understandably was slowed down.

It isn’t as dire or as sensational as you’re making it out to be. SBI had an appropriate rating drop for the circumstances it has experienced.

In your system, neither Crystal Desert nor SBI would have moved along at an appropriate rate (as both servers are falling). In fact, Crystal Desert would have incorrectly moved up a tier and into a poor match-up, which frankly is a bad exchange: as servers drop into better match-ups, it shouldn’t cause other servers to move up into worse ones. The same is true of the opposite scenario: as servers move up into better match-ups, it shouldn’t cause other servers to move down into worse ones. That’s what your system causes.

One other problem with your proposed system: it makes blue servers switch positions even less frequently, as they’re sandwiched between much larger and much smaller servers.

The problem with that argument is that you ignore some facts in favor of others to support your argument.

Again, I’d point to the fact that Kaineng only spent one week in each tier under the glicko system as counter-evidence to the claim that they’d have risen any faster under the system you’re proposing. In fact, your system does not allow for potential shifts to take place where Kaineng would have been able to skip tiers, whereas the glicko system does (as is evidenced by Sanctum of Rall’s jump from T5 to T3 in October).

Additionally, your proposed system solves a handful of problems while simultaneously creating an equal or greater number of new problems. In my mind, that isn’t a solution, but rather an exchange. It’s shifting the issue rather than correcting it. In this case, it’s attempting to correct the problem of poor match-ups for some servers by creating more frequently poor match-ups for all servers. That is a sub-par approach in my eyes, and one that we should not be pushing.

SBI has indeed lost the last eight match-ups, but under your system there would be much more volatility and instability for all servers. If we are to assume that SBI belongs in T5/T6, and if we assume that 8 weeks ago is when SBI’s fall should have begun, we’d have ended up with an incredibly different scene.

Instead of the 7th week seeing SBI in T1 again, you’d be in T2 and Blackgate in T1. Sure that sounds fine on paper, but an additional consequence would have been Tarnished Coast and Isle of Janthir switching places again. We’d have seen Fort Aspenwood and Maguuma swapping places, we’d have seen Dragonbrand and Ehmry Bay swapping places, and we’d have seen Henge of Denravi and Kaineng switching places.

None of those are necessarily healthy match-ups: IoJ had begun to implode (which is why TC originally moved up) and would have been no match for SBI and SoR; FA would have absolutely mopped the floor with T4 while pre-transfers Maguuma would have been smashed by TC; and Henge of Denravi would have begun playing horseshoes over T8/T7 several weeks sooner than they currently are.

The system you’re proposing ultimately pairs up servers that don’t belong together and ensures that servers that belong together won’t be together, while the current system at least makes attempts to group relatively equal servers together. Let’s make up some servers to demonstrate this point.

9. Cavalon

10. Istan
11. Snake Dance
12. Mehtani Keys

13. Urgoz’s Warren

Let’s say that Cavalon lost this week, Snake Dance won this week, Mehtani Keys lost this week, and Urgoz’s Warren won this week. The new model then would look like this:

9. Snake Dance

10. Cavalon
11. Istan
12. Urgoz’s Warren

13. Mehtani Keys

Looks good, right? There’s a problem though. We now have servers from three different tiers facing up against each other in a single tier, which all but guarantees a blowout win for Cavalon in a stabilized environment. This is because coverage and population are the greatest factors in determining ladder placement.

Under your system, we’re pitting vastly larger population servers against one smaller server and one much smaller server more often, which is decidedly bad for competition. Even though glicko creates stagnant match-ups, it also pays attention to population shifts and moves servers accordingly long-term, which is something that your system is incapable of doing.

In essence, your system attempts to over-complicate a simple problem with a much more volatile and inconsistent solution. I’m not necessarily defending glicko as the end-all-be-all, but it is a far reach above what you’re suggesting.

A balanced match-up between three servers is what I would consider a healthy “Win some, lose some” environment, as we can see with T6 right now. It is very likely for any of the three servers to ultimately win week-by-week, and we can see a similar scenario right now between Blackgate/Kaineng, Henge of Denravi/Gates of Madness, Vizunah Square/Elona Reach, Piken Square/Seafarer’s Rest, Gandara/Abaddon’s Mouth, Miller’s Sound/Drakkar Lake, and many more.

Forcing servers to have blowout matches more often isn’t healthy, and creating blowouts for the sake of having blowouts is likewise unhealthy. I am not arguing against a better balance for any tier, but rather attempting to explain why your solution is actually poised to create more problems more often. I hope it’s a bit clearer now.

kfarb.6732:

Kerithlan.1659:

kfarb.6732:

Maguuma is made up of many different people with many different opinions. Right now there are 4 T2 servers. I, personally, would like to be in a tier that’s an even matchup. I don’t care about being in a higher tier because it seems like the higher tiers are lazier.

This is an interesting comment, because most people in T2 are of the impression that there’s five T1 servers right now. There is also a lot less complaining about it in T2 but what do I know, I’m a roleplayer.

It doesn’t really matter. Maybe there are 4 T1 servers. Either way T1/T2 can’t hold 7 so one is pushed to T3.

Fair enough.

The only problem with basing it off of final score is that you’re comparing the scores between two different match-ups. I understand that it doesn’t seem like a problem to some folks, but to me it is.

The reason for this is that you’re essentially comparing apples to oranges. I understand that all servers and all tiers are all comprised of the same exact collection of mechanics. I also understand that population is the only real x-factor (contributing variable size, skill, coverage, and so on).

What needs to be understood is that a server scoring big in one tier doesn’t have any bearing on the tier above or below them. Let’s use Sorrow’s Furnace as an example to explain this. Sorrow’s Furnace would move up in your model, and would win out over Henge of Denravi by quite a lot. This would boost them up to Tier 7 (as is desired), but the consequence is that Henge of Denravi isn’t necessarily the best fit for Sorrow’s Furnace’s previous opponents.

Henge of Denravi is in a predominantly healthy match-up right now. They’ve been very close with Gates of Madness for a while now, and in fact their server seems to have a relatively good balance. Their score is lower not because Sorrow’s Furnace is necessarily better than them, but rather because Henge of Denravi has better competition while facing Gates of Madness and Darkhaven than Sorrow’s Furnace does against Ferguson’s Crossing and Eredon Terrace.

The point of the current system is to ensure that servers are eventually and ultimately paired up with other servers with a similar type of play. The system you’re proposing ruins the current Henge of Denravi/Gates of Madness balance and doesn’t necessarily correct the issue Sorrow’s Furnace is experiencing.

Another problem with the system you’re proposing is that it causes servers to drop down more slowly than in the current system, and likewise to rise more slowly than the current system. Disallowing servers from moving multiple tiers (as your model framework does) creates more poor match-ups than might otherwise show up using the glicko ratings.

For example, a couple of weeks ago SBI dropped from Tier 2 to Tier 4, completely skipping Tier 3. Currently, SBI is slated to drop to Tier 5. In the system you’re proposing, SBI would have lingered in the upper tiers for much longer than would otherwise be necessary as they would be forced to go through Tier 3 before reaching Tier 4. Ultimately the results would be the same, but your model would have slowed this progressive decline toward SBI’s new home by at least a week.

Likewise, there would be no positive gain in terms of server advancement. Servers scoring big wins would be prevented from skipping tiers they don’t belong in and would be forced to spend weeks facing servers they don’t belong against. Sure, this wouldn’t matter much for servers like Kaineng that visited each tier on their way up anyway; but for servers such as Sanctum of Rall that did skip tiers on their way up this would mean an additional week wasted.

The glicko system, for all of its faults, is simply superior to any potential, “winner goes up; loser goes down,” system because it allows for these rapid changes to take place. I completely agree that Sorrow’s Furnace needs to move out of T8 and into a better position, but I don’t believe removing the glicko system is necessarily the best way to go about that.

It might be easier to simply tweak the existing glicko formula to not require such exponentially larger victories in order for servers to move around than anything else. As was previously stated in this topic, simple is often the best answer. If viewed in the bigger picture, the simple solution is to tweak the math that already exists, and not overhauling the entire system.

In the end and no matter what happens, Sorrow’s Furnace moving up will ultimately break T7, which will potentially break T6, and so on. Getting new players into Eredon Terrace and Ferguson’s Crossing seems to be a more ideal solution in my mind than overhauling the rating system, but that’s a pipe dream (unless ArenaNet makes transfers to those two servers free or something).

DarkElvenChic.2618:

I Will Rez U.1743:

neomccoy.2657:

Epic fights in KN BL! Shout out to LoTD, GoF and PiNK!

Ahahaha yes it was indeed!! Is little feather still commanding for you guys ??

LF is in the process of moving so he hasn’t been on much but he’s still very much around

Update!

… this is bothering me a bit so I have to ask.

You have 99% world completion and are missing two waypoints — are they the new ones added to Cursed Shore and Straits of Devastation?

Le Rooster.8715:

Hehe Blackgate wanna swap rankings?

/me shoos you away.

Leave our Green team be, we’re trying to forge a confederacy here! We’ll secede from the rankings list one day, you’ll see!

Thobek.1730:

As a player from SoS I would like to see us drop down a tier

As much as I can assure you that you guys would be welcomed into our tier with open arms, we’re having a blast with Blackgate and Kaineng right now and would really like to savor it while it lasts. It’ll be bittersweet for us, so if possible would you guys belay that from happening for a couple of weeks (if it’s going to happen)?

Same thing I posted in another topic I’ll post in this one, as my argument is the same:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Bring-Sorrow-s-Furnace-out-of-Tier-8/1421612

Kerithlan.1659:

My only problem with the “you win, you move up; you lose, you move down” plan is that it generates poor match-ups more often.

I totally agree that we don’t want servers like Sorrow’s Furnace hopelessly eating other servers for months, but at the same time I don’t want to see servers like Ehmry Bay getting paired up with Anvil Rock, or servers like Sanctum of Rall getting matched up with Fort Aspenwood.

Additionally, a simple winner goes up/loser goes down system breaks up competitive tiers that probably should remain together. Borlis Pass/Anvil Rock/Northern Shiverpeaks have been neck and neck for several weeks now and it’s almost a toss-up who’s going to win each week. I don’t think we should arbitrarily break that up for the sake of change if the match-up is healthy, exciting and fun.

My only problem with the “you win, you move up; you lose, you move down” plan is that it generates poor match-ups more often.

I totally agree that we don’t want servers like Sorrow’s Furnace hopelessly eating other servers for months, but at the same time I don’t want to see servers like Ehmry Bay getting paired up with Anvil Rock, or servers like Sanctum of Rall getting matched up with Fort Aspenwood.

Additionally, a simple winner goes up/loser goes down system breaks up competitive tiers that probably should remain together. Borlis Pass/Anvil Rock/Northern Shiverpeaks have been neck and neck for several weeks now and it’s almost a toss-up who’s going to win each week. I don’t think we should arbitrarily break that up for the sake of change if the match-up is healthy, exciting and fun.

salluks.6017:

i was just browsing thru Tier 1 and 2 NA battle threads and was surprised to see sooo many score updates, infact almost every 4th post has one with very nice screeshot along with the score thread.

example – https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/08-02-JQ-SoR-SoS/page/2#post1405062

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/2-8-BG-Kain-TC/first

if u go to EU tier 1 and 2, u will not find even a single post on score update, i mean not one!
example –
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Deso-VS-ER-Round-2/first#post1417102
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Seafarer-s-Rest-Vs-Jade-Sea-Vs-Piken-Square/first

what others things have u noticed between the two ladders and things u would like to adopt from the other side?

One of these things is not like the others (hint: it’s the NA T2 match-up topic).

kfarb.6732:

Maguuma is made up of many different people with many different opinions. Right now there are 4 T2 servers. I, personally, would like to be in a tier that’s an even matchup. I don’t care about being in a higher tier because it seems like the higher tiers are lazier.

This is an interesting comment, because most people in T2 are of the impression that there’s five T1 servers right now. There is also a lot less complaining about it in T2 but what do I know, I’m a roleplayer.

nekos.2584:

I hope both BG and Kaineng some how some way end up in T1 next week. BG belongs in T1 and Kaining would most likely roflstomp both SoR and SoS.

It’s getting boring in T1, we/ JQ need some competition !

This is sort of like asking your friends if you can have their significant others. We’d like to keep them, thanks.

Ash.3641:

Simple discussion; should guards be tougher?

Simple answer: yes.

zastari.1730:

Spencer.1386:

zastari.1730:

Maybe try bringing a stunbreaker and learning to dodgeroll? I applaud people who figure out good PvE items for WvW, it brings some nice variety.

You applaud them until it happens to you. Unless you enjoy losing control of your character and watching as an item clearly not intended for pvp is used to kill you while you have no ability to fight back.

I’ve been on both ends of a gear slinging fight. I won the one on the receiving end (probably because I’m just an OP mesmer but whatever). First I used decoy to break stun, followed up with torch 4 to stealth and get close range. Pop torch 4, sword 3 and 2 + mirror images mind wrack shatter. Dead thief, no problem.

Out of pure curiosity, what if you were against a bunker rather than a thief?

Not trying to argue one way or the other, just looking to figure out if that solution (or one similar to it) is one you’d tag under, “know what you’re doing, this guy clearly doesn’t.”

SquirtyMagoo.8321:

Hydrophidian.4319:

Celebrity Score Update!

These are hilarious, need more of them.

Got to hand it to the BG EU guilds, they are one hell of a headache. If we didn’t have WM I probably would have morphed into a magoomba by now and started complaining about coverage, because nothing stops BG during EU prime-time.

Do all the T1 servers have strong EU guilds or is this Blackgate’s particular strength?

Either way this matchup is making me want to get better at the game (i.e. roll a guardian) which is just what I needed to keep me enjoying the game.

I hope Tier 2 is home now.

No personal experience with T1 here, but [HB] are by and far one of the best guilds on the field today. Blackgate’s lucky to have them.

SmokeyNYY.7841:

Azure Prower.8701:

SmokeyNYY.7841:

You did the date wrong :P

Date looks fine to me.

in the states it goes month first and we are playing on na servers sooo…plus I was just busting his chops and don’t really care.

4-digit year / 2 digit month / 2 digit day / 2 digit hour (24 hour clock) : 2 digit minute : 2 digit second

This is superior as it allows for dates to be filed in the correct order in relation to the chronological flow of time. All times are recorded in UTC (not GMT or local time).

2013/02/09/00:00:00 – 2013/02/15/23:59:59 JQ vs SoR vs SoS

Anthrage.2519:

Just an important note to all you TC players, while as some have said we may not have much influence over the outcome of this match as regards who finishes first, we do have control over whether we stay in this tier or not. Looking at the current points and trend, there is a good chance we will drop down to tier 3…I know all of us enjoy this tier and these dance partners, so don’t let up my friends!

Nah no need to sensationalize things. Kaineng is a new opponent in this tier. It’s just what happens re: rating. We’ll be here next week, and it’ll be then that we find out if we still belong or not.

Either way, I’m fully expecting to rotate with Fort Aspenwood over 6th and 7th for the foreseeable future. It is what it is, let’s not be upset about it.

Hexin.5603:

I found the humor in your tone

thanks – I’m at work still as well for a little bit longer.

http://mos.millenium.org/matchups#NA had an update a few minutes ago:

Blackgate: 369 | +260 ppt
Kaineng: 255 | +165 ppt
Tarnished Coast: 392 | +270 ppt

Allow me to break the ice with score updates. Unfortunately my computer, being 10 years old, does not render characters nicely.

This is clearly a 2v1 situation against Kaineng, and it is obviously the result of “keeping the man down”. Just look at that ppt. It’s so tiny!

Edit: because I just realized it’s hard to detect when posts like this are serious or not, I’m being facetious. Reset scores are hilariously small imho.

So just curious why aren’t we having Hulk Hogan sponsor us this week? Everything about him is a train wreck — seems perfect.