Guild Wars 2

Rednik.3809:

Truga.5897:

Yeah, which is why we need something so we can despawn our own siege when we want it to. Not to mention, this would work just fine for sieges in castles/towers only, let the ones outside despawn normally.

Imagine same evil guy, who can just come to you keep before attack and despawn all your siege.

They could just add a counter to see that a good number of ppl want it to despawn or if the owner wants to destroy it.

WXP is not the best measurement for performance because it is influenced by how volatile towers and keeps are in the respective tier and by how many hours somebody plays.
It’s only good for a kind of personal progression & utilities that give you a very small advantage if you have them.

The current ranking system isn’t bad, they just need something that would bridge the gaps between tiers making it possible to actually move up.

I believe their new change they plan to be too volatile. I understand that points that kept moving up need to go back down the ladder, but if the top bleeds too many points too fast, it will, already as of 2nd or 3rd week, potentially match a T1 server against a T4.

I just hope that matchups dont get boring because of this new system…

Khayoss.2019:

LostBalloon.6423:

The big issue with the tier 1 and why we complain about the change is that if we end up against a T3 server (potentially even T2), the matchup just wont be fun, the gap between T1 and T2 is enormous. I think only DB would have a shot at being competitive. and even then, they seem to be struggling agains TC and FA…

And as of 2nd week, with our ratings drastically dropping due to the change even if we wipe the floor with you guys in the lower tiers, the chances of getting even lower servers will increase.

I honestly think Kaining is fairing much better against Maguuma and Yak’s than they would against SoR, and according to the example they gave, it could be a potential matchup. pitting #1 server who is winning by a lot for the past weeks against the other T1 servers against #7 will be a boring blowout.

And “winning by a lot” does not mean JQ and BG are bad or dont have the coverage for 24h a day. Even them against Kaining would be a blowout. T1 NA is really another game.

I understand that, but you also have to understand that your situation isn’t isolated or new. The gap between Tier 4 – including EBay at the top of Tier 5 – and the rest of Tier 5 is probably close to as big as the gap between Tier 1 and 2… and we have been living that “no fun” situation week in and week out for 3months now with no way out. The only way to even this out is to have opportunity to steal points from higher rated servers instead of lower ones. That inherently means that some higher ranked servers are going to have to win some landslides but lose points to lesser competition just like we have already been doing. Its the only way to fix us and those like us.

In this system, you’ll have a week now and then where you don’t have a lot of fun, but we will actually have hope of having a fun challenge for the first time in months. What you are complaining about seems like a dream come true from our side of the fence.

The reason I complain is the “random” factor in the whole thing. Think about it, its not about winning or losing, but having interesting matchups, with us bleeding rating points (yes, ratings do need to be fixed, but the ranking system is broken from its core), we might end up close enough for the randomness to match us against a server from tier 4 by the 2nd week of this new system.

That just wouldn’t be fun for either side.

Pinder.5261:

Edited for accuracy:

You cannot change your avatar. That feature does not exist.

For your signature, click “Forum Profile”, then under your name the “Edit Profile” button has your signature controls.

thanks, it was helpful

Khayoss.2019:

Handin.4032:

But with the current statistics, in fact, theres a smaller chance of you getting a match “in tier”, than out. You’re right, a T4 server could equal probability of facing a T3 or T5 server, as well as a T2 or T6 server. So, the T4 server might finally get to have a win, but what about the other server? Or, how would the T4 server feel if they went against a T2 server? It might be a different person server, but it probably won’t be much happier for them. The current statistics make it acutally fairly likely for a match up to be a blow out, its just whether or not you’re the server dominating, or being dominated. Their new method actually, statistically, CAN work out well, with a better range ~-0.5->0.5. This would ensure that you can still fight outside your tier still.

You’re statement that "With these new system you have the same chance to get a weaker opponent, than you have to get a stronger opponent. " forgets one important thing: what about the weaker server? If people are concerned with blow outs, they have to look at the matches as a WHOLE, not just “what will my server get.” Yes, your server might be a lucky one, and be rank 8 and face a rank 12 server. SO, what about the rank 12 server? The matches must be looked at as a whole to determine the fairness, especially when using the glicko server. It would be drastically unfair for a rank 4 server to face a rank 8, by pure chance, and lose enough rating to drop to rank 5, even if they win. This however, is a possibility under the new system, with the current parameters. I repeat this again, a server should NEVER be punished, especially not be losing a rank, etc, for winning and doing well, ESPECIALLY when the matches are purely random, and out of their control. If they tweak their parameters, it should allow that the tiers already in constant blow outs face new people, but also make it so that the matches are still somewhat balanced (3rd place T4 verse 1st or 2nd place T5).

[…]

Second, I can speak for the potentially weaker server that we relish the chance to be the one having it’s doors blown off by a “tier 3” server should the perfect storm of random numbers line up. For 3 months we’ve wanted to have another shot at Yaks Bend. They may be tier 3, but we feel like we are closer to them than we ever were before… We’ve also wanted to test ourselves against SBI for many months now, but have never been able to because of the rigid tiered system. The SBI, Yaks, EBay match that the promo spat out had us all drooling. If we lose, we lose. But it’ll be 100x more fun than winning without trying. Losing to Maguuma by 90k was infinitely more fun than beating Anvil Rock by 180k.

I can’t remember what your signature said, but I am assuming you are an NA T1 or T2 player? Those seem to be the ones most opposed to the change. The tier differentiation in those top 2 NA tiers does not hold true across all tiers, many are much closer than you can know looking at the numbers on MOS. They should all be given the chance to see how they truly stack up.

The big issue with the tier 1 and why we complain about the change is that if we end up against a T3 server (potentially even T2), the matchup just wont be fun, the gap between T1 and T2 is enormous. I think only DB would have a shot at being competitive. and even then, they seem to be struggling agains TC and FA…

And as of 2nd week, with our ratings drastically dropping due to the change even if we wipe the floor with you guys in the lower tiers, the chances of getting even lower servers will increase.

I honestly think Kaining is fairing much better against Maguuma and Yak’s than they would against SoR, and according to the example they gave, it could be a potential matchup. pitting #1 server who is winning by a lot for the past weeks against the other T1 servers against #7 will be a boring blowout.

And “winning by a lot” does not mean JQ and BG are bad or dont have the coverage for 24h a day. Even them against Kaining would be a blowout. T1 NA is really another game.

Look at it like this. SoR currently has the most rank points. We will probably end up facing other servers than BG or JQ and already currently blowing them out would just maintain our points.

Now facing these other opponents will surely decrease our points wether we destroy our competition or not.

End results of this is good for rebalancing the ladder and making server shifts possible, but there are many negative aspects to this too.

For instance, the server can unwillingly and uncontrollably lose rank event though they should be above another server (im talking about all servers here).
But even worse, the loss of points for top servers and gain in points for lower servers making even odder match-ups. I’d hate to have +500 constant ppt just because we were matched up to much weaker servers, and those weaker servers will not enjoy the blowout either.

“The will reduce the range after” means that chances are that with time ratings will again stabilize as the number of potential opponents will drop and rating points will keep flowing up the ranks at a certain rate because they will try to eliminate the annoying and unfair blowouts.

The normalisation of the points is only a temporary fix to bring things back together, they need to fix their whole rating system, because its not the “tiers” that are broken, but the scoring system at it’s roots.

Maladon.5760:

If you can’t use your abilities because there’s too many people in an area you’re not really fighting at all. The caps need to be lowered no matter what, the game can’t support large fights right now.

Skill lag has not been as bad lately, its been getting much better, and capping maps at 50 players would really suck. It would prevent so many players from getting in on top servers that do have a decent wvw population…

From what I see in the article, the change will only make things worse if you look at the potential matchup listing they gave in that article.

JQ would steamroll its opposition during asian/oceanic time while fairing well against DB’s NA and good luck to FA in that matchup.

The 2nd matchup, SoR BG & Kaining, i think would end up in a 1 on 1 between SoR and BG with Kaining getting the short end of the stick. Kaining would get wiped off maps the moment they show an outmanned buff and have a hard time ticking above 200 ppt even during their primetime. SoR has the strongest NA and a large one at that while BG has good numbers around the clock.

And beyond that, all top tier servers will start bleeding rating points because it is almost impossible to dominate with a difference higher than 100k points even in an extremely unbalanced matchup, causing these top servers to be matched agains even weaker servers than the ones they will destroy…

I know with the old tier system they had an issue making it impossible for servers to change tiers as weeks went by, but at least matchups were pretty even or at least servers were matched up with those that fit their ability best. I feel this new change is horrible, all they needed to do was to tweak their current rating system to actually make it possible for a server to go up or drop down from a tier…

style.6173:

The more I think about this, the more I like it. Those who need to plan out their reset nights will hate it of course, but it is also exciting. Until the reset happens, you have no idea who you are playing and you have no idea what color you will be. Should be really fun.

Doesn’t matter, all tier 1 servers have organized guilds to cover each of the maps on reset, good luck to those facing them, they will get rolled and most probably picked on for easy points.

From what i see on this page https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/big-changes-coming-to-wvw-matchups/
The change will only make things worse if you look at the potential matchup listing they gave in that article.

JQ would steamroll its opposition during asian/oceanic time while fairing well against DB’s NA and good luck to FA in that matchup.

The 2nd matchup, SoR BG & Kaining, i think would end up in a 1 on 1 between SoR and BG with Kaining getting the short end of the stick. Kaining would get wiped off maps the moment they show an outmanned buff and have a hard time ticking above 200 ppt even during their primetime. SoR has the strongest NA and a large one at that while BG has good numbers around the clock.

I know with the old tier system they had an issue making it impossible to change tiers as weeks went by, but at least matchups were pretty even or at least servers were matched up with those that fit their ability best. I feel this new change is horrible, all they needed to do was to tweak their current rating system to actually make it possible for a server to go up or drop down from a tier…

Polismassa.6740:

the new ranking system will NOT correct or even address population imbalances in any way shape or form, it may even excacerbate the differences in population causing you to see situations like the one you linked more frequently. That said, what it will do is spice up the ranking a bit so that servers that are completely outmatched coverage wise will not have to wait as long for a fix. During the next matchup you may see your server face other servers that far exceed the coverage, population and size of your own server, but on the other hand, you will likely not see that server for another few weeks if you fare poorly against them.

Nobody can really predict how the new ranking system will affect the atmosphere and environment of WvW, but it is a major change, and hopefully one that will turn out to be for the better.

Just out of curiosity, are you from the JQ server and happened to get hit like that when trying to take SoR bl northern supply camp just before reset?

:3 if you did, well your death was inevitable, either at the hand of 7+ balistas or the zergball that was sitting there waiting for reset.

That said, 17k hp isnt much and with no toughness or almost none, its to be expected.
I really hope youre not trying to use a pve build out in wvw, it just doesnt work.

Reducing balista damage would render the siege useless, it has limited use and is easy to counter. You have to always keep an eye out for siege.

Im guessing you tried to gank the operator and got owned, its actually funny to see that happen to a thief

And btw, siege bunker = -5% dmg
Balista mastery = +25% dmg. I heard rumors it might get reduced though

so you are still getting hit for +20% if the operator specked in that.

Essence Snow.3194:

What the WP change accomplishes

1) Less friendly PuGs and/or less pugs in general (why all the hate towards pugs?)
2) Groups finishing boss encounters while dead player remains dead being denied boss loot
3) Players less likely to help less experienced players in dungeons
4) Player mandated gear checking/title checking/ etc…

What good does this change accomplish?

1)Players with superiority complexes can feel better about themselves
2)I can’t really think of anything else…I simply don’t see the good in this

All in all this doesn’t really change things for groups that already had no issues with the dungeons. It doesn’t make it anymore challenging for them. What it does do is raises the barriers to entry for those who are new/less experienced/ and, or just well not as capable. How is that a good thing?

I have to agree with you, I’ve seen every aspect you’ve been talking about. I find it sad that anet that promised no grinding and the game being friendly to casual players is doing the exact opposite. They also tend to use the terms “Making it more fun and challenging”.

To answer your question (How is that a good thing?): No matter how you look at it, it’s not. I love the game, but i don’t like their approach at “fixing unpredicted player behaviour”.

Why stop “res-rushing”. Parties that do that:
1) Already waste time. Since they are not all 5 on the boss it takes longer to kill than an experienced party.
2) It did enable parties to learn the dungeons on a more positive note and allowed them to learn strategies on fighting the boss because trying something out didn’t have the outcome of having to start over if your idea didn’t work. (it encourages learning)
3) Overall less frustration and player discrimination.

A much nicer way to have handled the “res-rushing” issue could’ve been by scaling the reward the boss gives (ex: give more pouches containing coins/tokens/karma or extra tokens or rarer items in reward chest, etc. for beating it without using the WP)

Werat.7063:

Pixelninja.6971:

Some fair fights in SoS Borderland. JQ wanted the SoS Garrison really badly and spend many hours to siege it down, but we lost a good portion of our map.

Score-update:

Was the way point up in garri? Cannot see it but i got a reason for asking.

for everything else here, i am honestly in a “eyebrow raising” moment
Every good t3 server can teach you a thing on how to run a “night shift” and play defense. They can also prolly tell you how to properly work wuvwuv by utilizing whatever you have (and being willing to do so in terms of a community sense that includes everyone) without stress.
I have the feeling here the servers are so relying on the guilds only that you never learned to work with pugs/ small guilds) or, for that matter, build up a rep with them. They will not “push out” with you otherwhise. There are commanders in t2/t3 that know how to work the crowd, even managing to get pve people in.
I am not denying guilds their status, i am just saying there is more to it than only recruiting whole guilds.

Nevertheless, judging by what I saw, I would not dare understimating one side or the other. Choo keeps derailing on sos as well, when there are more than a few level 80 on besides the many peeps plaing up alts :P. And I keep wondering if you guys on jq are happy in terms of gameplay (not ppt) with a 50k lead and no opposition….but i guess that is not the question one should ask in t1. Good thing we are upping that garri every time so you get something to do :P

I doubt they mind having that 50k lead when its been mostly an overnight PvDoor conquest :O