Guild Wars 2

someone on our guild forums asked a few weeks back if anything had changed to improve the game, so I have this response which I can just cut and paste. note that this was written before the variance reduction for random matchups went into place, so the “plus or minus two tiers” statement needs adjustment (which I am not going to bother to actually do right this instant).

you will, of course, have to judge for yourself how much of an improvement any of these items are, and whether they would really make any difference to you.

• rewards in wvw are now significantly improved; it is no longer necessary to do some pve in order to have enough cash to buy gear or consumables. in many cases pve remains the fastest way to acquire certain gear, but it is now practical to advance via wvw only. I no longer do any pve at all and I am actually making money. also, wvw tokens can now be used to buy all kinds of gear, not just Soldier. you no longer need to farm karma or go to Orr to buy Cleric’s gear, Berserker’s, Knight’s, or whatever.

• magic find on gear is gone — you no longer need to have a ‘magic find’ gear set. instead, magic find is now raised via consumables which you can get by salvaging gear, and it is now account-wide (applied to all characters on your account). karma, gold and dungeon tokens are also now account-wide, making it a lot easier to gear up alts.

• culling is gone. this is a huge improvement in large fights, and it has made it practical for a smaller better-coordinated group to wipe a larger zerg.

• wvw rank points allow wvw-specific character customization — on my guardian I’ve focused on flame ram and burning oil bonuses (in particular, bonuses that reduce incoming damage while using them) while on my engineer I’ve focused instead on bonuses with cannon, trebuchets and catapults (generally bonuses to increase damage, range or aoe radius).

• more variety in match-ups — servers no longer end up playing the same opponents week after week. our own strategy needs to change from week to week based on the strengths and weaknesses of our opponents. during league play, the season schedule is posted so all matchups are known in advance, giving you some opportunity to plan. outside of league play, matchups can’t be predicted with any accuracy due to a randomization factor that can pit you against opponents plus or minus two tiers away — you will not know who your opponents are (or what color you will be playing as) until the new match begins.

• siege matters more, and upgrades do too. arrow carts in particular have been buffed so that a half-dozen defenders with well-placed siege can hold off a large zerg long enough for reinforcements to arrive. some interesting spots have been found (especially in hills) that allow for defensive trebuchets.

• “borderlands bloodlust” has been added. these are 5 objectives in the middle of each borderland map (replacing the central lake) with very tactical terrain. holding 3 out of 5 objectives for two minutes gives your team a buff similar to the original orb buff, until another team is able to hold 3 out of 5 for two minutes. this area is best-suited to small groups of 1-3 people and you’ll find many small fights here although there are no rewards besides the buff and whatever you get from killing enemy players.

• the presence of bots in wvw has been dramatically reduced. you will still find players running cheats/hacks from time to time, but it is now much less of a disruption. also, the eternal battlegrounds jumping puzzle has been moved to a separate map — when a player zones into the EB JP, they free up a slot in EB for an actual wvw player to enter. the only exit from the EB JP is back to Lion’s Arch.

-ken

you could always kick the red team out of that part of the map just long enough to get those last few objectives. I think that’s how most people do it.

-ken

Cottontail.8526:

I just want to know why SOR and TC aren’t matched against one another as the rank 3 and 4 servers.

the way the ratings are right now, JQ and BG are guaranteed to always be in tier 1. the only question is, who will fill the third spot in the T1 match? either SoR or TC has to do it — no other server has a rating high enough now that the randomness has been reduced.

if SoR and TC want to be able to play each other, you need to lose as badly as possible to SoS every time you face them. this will raise SoS’s rating high enough so that sometimes they will play against JQ and BG, and when that happens, that will make it possible for SoR and TC to play each other (unless you get unlucky that week and one or the other of you plays in T3 instead).

the other way for SoR and TC to play each other is for either JQ or BG to implode and drop to rank 3 or lower. that would make it possible for SoR and TC to face each other in the #2 and #3 spots of tier 1.

-ken

your color isn’t based on your ‘absolute’ ranking, it’s based on your ‘matchup’ ranking. ‘matchup’ ranking is based on your server’s rating, plus or minus an 80 point or so random offset.

if you want to end up as green, you need to wait for a week when your server gets a random offset 40 points higher than BG gets.

getting red will be harder because you’ll need a random offset a bit over 80 points higher than SoR’s. not as likely, but still possible.

-ken

If you don’t think the math is so bad, try calculating the probability of your server being matched up against the server ranked below you. there are 276 possible pairs of servers in NA (and 351 distinct pairs of servers in EU), but try to calculate the probability for just one specific pair.

-ken

I think a big part of the confusion here is that one of the recent patch notes (from Wednesday, https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/info/updates/Game-Update-Notes-December-10-2013/3350422) said that it included a fix for wvw reward chests.

so the people who still don’t have their chests are wondering “is that it? am I SOL then?” confirmation from Arenanet that they are aware that the existing patch didn’t fix 100% of the problem and that they’re still working on the rest of it would be helpful.

-ken

iggybl.5034:

Yeah; they really tweaked it all right.

Gunnars (15) vs Augury Rock (9) vs Baruch Bay (8)

Cant say I’m surprised.

there was a less than one tenth of one percent chance of that particular combination coming up. 0.074% by my calculations (which were a bit rough, only 10,000,000 random trials because I was in a hurry and wanted the answer is under 30 seconds).

still, even the unlikely outcomes are bound to occur now and then. last week’s winning lottery numbers were astonishingly unlikely to come up, and yet they did anyway.

-ken

the color you get is based on your matchup ranking. each week, as soon as the previous match has ended, new ratings are calculated for each server, based on how they did in the previous match.

then, a random shift is applied to each one, to form a “matchup rating”. the possible amount of shift is random and based on “deviation” which is calculated at the same time as “rating” (you can see rating and deviation values for each server here: https://leaderboards.guildwars2.com/en/na/wvwmain) but the total shift is never more than plus or minus 100 rating points.

once that’s done, the servers are ordered by “matchup rating”, highest to lowest, and each group of 3 servers is put together for the new match. the highest server gets green, the middle one gets blue and the lowest one gets red.

because of the random shift, you can’t usually predict with any certainty what color you will get, but some colors are more likely than others depending on the particular ratings for that week.

-ken

I think it’s fairly apparent that Arenanet overestimated the ability of lower-ranked servers to take the #1 spot in each league, so which servers ended up with the finisher reward were pretty much known from the start.

still, league play was a lot of fun anyway, because even if you had no shot at coming in first place, you still didn’t want your server coming in lower in the league rankings than your hated rivals. our server played hard every week just to come in second place in each match, not because we thought we had a chance at the finisher, but simply for server pride. or the sweet tears of our enemies. one of those.

-ken

Lord Kuru.3685:

2. Anyone else somewhat disappointed that they calculated the matchup probabilities by running 10,000 simulations instead of actually doing the math?

for problems like this, that’s exactly how you do the math. it’s called the “Monte Carlo method” (you can look it up in wikipedia if you like). although if it were me, I would have run a lot more simulations. I routinely run 100,000,000 for my weekly matchup probability estimates; 10,000 is a pitifully small number.

-ken

also, to answer the OP more directly, here’s how the math works. the basis of the matchups are the “rating” and “deviation” values from the leaderboard (https://leaderboards.guildwars2.com/en/na/wvwmain).

under the original matchup system, you simply sorted the servers by rating and grouped them into threes.

with the first ‘randomized’ matchups, the ‘matchup rating’ can shift up or down by up to (deviation + 40) (capped at 200). once you’ve randomly shifted each rating, the servers are then sorted by matchup rating and grouped into threes, same as before.

now, the amount of random shift has been reduced from (deviation + 40) to (0.45*deviation + 10) and the cap has been reduced to 100. everything else is the same — once the new smaller random shift is applied, the servers are sorted by matchup rating and grouped into threes for matches.

the ‘matchup rating’ is used only for determining the matchups. actual server rating stays as it was, and the rating adjustments at the end of the match continue to be done the way they always have, based on Glicko-2 math.

you don’t actually need to know any Glicko-2 math to calculate the likelihood of getting opponents in matchups, as long as you already know the ratings. but if you don’t know the ratings (for example because the current match isn’t over yet) then Glicko-2 is how you can calculate them (although calculating new ratings requires you to guess what the score outcome of a match will be).

-ken

Johje Holan.4607:

Ken is our best bet.

Anet’s spreadsheet they posted can’t be right. The percentages are all messed up.

up-to-date numbers are posted here:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/matchups/Who-would-you-like-to-face-next-week/3367752

assuming my code is right, of course. there’s always the possibility that it’s wrong but at this point it’s been reviewed pretty carefully (and not just by me, since the source is posted in the API forum other people have been able to review it as well).

the percentages posted are probably correct (even though they look a bit odd) but they are almost certainly based on old ratings. sometimes the numbers come out oddly because your ideal opponent gets dragged into another matchup. this kind of thing even happened from time to time under the old system (although not as often).

-ken

ok, here are the numbers. sure enough, the numbers look a little odd, but this is actually normal due to the reduced variance.

if you look at the NA numbers, you will see that SBI has a very low chance of playing DB, even though SBI and DB are adjacent in the ratings. the reason for this (I’m guessing, without having done a lot of analysis) is that SBI is well able to fill in spot #9 (the last spot in tier 3) or a higher spot, but if SBI ends up playing in tier 4 (due to randomization) there is really only 1 server that is qualified to fill the #9 spot — DB. this makes the probability of SBI vs DB lower because either SBI is in tier 3, or DB is, but rarely both. and SBI and DB can’t both be in tier 4 at once because that means 2 servers below both of you will need to fill spots in tier 3 and the new reduced variances won’t let that happen.

-ken

I’m running numbers now. The change from (1.0, 40.0) parameters to (0.45, 10.0) is easy enough but the ‘cap’ changing from 200 to 100 requires a code change (I was previously unaware that any cap existed).

however, odd percentages can happen (and may even show up in my numbers; we’ll see shortly) because every matchup needs 3 servers. sometimes your best opponent doesn’t get to play you very often because they keep getting dragged into other matches to fill out the third spot.

-ken

variance in this context is unrelated to league play, it is used for the randomized matchups that happen during regular non-league play.

-ken

I kind of suspect that what they meant was, “there are quicker ways to get rewards to individual people who report them as missing, but the fastest way to get rewards to everyone (whether they report the problem or not) is to fix the underlying code.”

-ken

how people feel about particular wvw servers is often very subjective, so you may need to try multiple servers to see how you like them. but this can end up costing you a lot of gems.

the most economical option here may be to buy another copy of GW2, and try making a new character on the #1 ranked server to see how you like it. if it turns out that the queues are too long, delete your character, switch to the next server down the list, then make a new character there. keep doing this until you find a server that has a balance of population / queue times you like. remember, you only have to pay gems to move existing characters. if you have no characters on an account then transfers are free and you can sample as many servers as you like.

once you’ve found a server you like, then you can commit to transferring your regular characters on your main account using gems.

-ken

kRAVen.4195:

This is video is blatant proof of zoom hack. Which is why i ask anet to BAN THE PERSON REPORTING THE HACKER! How dare he come on here and post that truth.

on that topic, I posted a little while ago in a thread on the main WvW forum that was complaining that hiding mesmers in a keep or tower in order to portal people in later was a cheat, then a little later I got a PM saying that the thread had been removed, and that threads about cheats and exploits weren’t allowed.

so yeah, apparently Arenanet is really serious about reporting cheats not being allowed.

-ken

Aitadis.8269:

http://www.twitch.tv/aitadis/c/3183059

So this happened last night again by the same guy Aragorn nonetheless, I was unable to record him doing it but several CD players said it was happening while trying to defend against him. It’s really pathetic that not only is this guy still a commander on Ebay but he is doing stuff like this while he is Commanding. This video is over a month old and was recorded during league and thought it would be important to show it again after what was happening last night.

are you sure it was the AC outside that was hitting you? and not the AC visible on the inner wall at 4:03? (edit: in the original video I mean. I have no idea what the situation was last night. was it the same gate?)

-ken

CattivoUomo.7198:

So am I correct that only 1st place in each league gets a special finisher even though the 1st place of silver and 1st place of bronze actually finished behind the 2nd and/or 3rd place gold teams? That’s a messed up reward system. How does being 3rd/4th or 6th overall warrant getting a reward over what the 2nd place gold team gets?

by this logic, we should give rewards to NA #1 only, and nobody else. in particular, no EU server should get rewards because the #1 EU server has a lower rating than the #4 NA server. effectively the #1 EU server would be #5 in NA, and therefore undeserving of any reward.

you are missing the point of why we have leagues to begin with. a “league” forms a pool of opponents you compete against. opponents outside of that pool don’t count, because you don’t ever get to compete against them. the winner of the league gets a reward. what rewards other winners in other leagues got isn’t relevant — if you didn’t win in your league, you don’t get a prize.

if your server didn’t come in first in your league, you don’t get a finisher. it doesn’t matter that your server could have beaten the winner in another league — the #1 server in your league could have done it too, so if all the servers were put together into one big league, you still wouldn’t have come in first place, so you still wouldn’t get the finisher.

-ken

the same old parameters. until and unless Arenanet tells us what the new parameters are, all I can do is assume they are the same.

-ken

yes, it’s common for new players to focus on Eternal Battlegrounds, and also players who want constant fighting.

the Borderland maps are more important for PPT, so the players who understand the scoring system better (and actually care about it) spend more time there.

-ken

spies and saboteurs was last month. this month the “in” complaint is 2v1’s.

-ken

Chris.3290:

Where did you get the glicko ratings from

ratings came from here:
https://leaderboards.guildwars2.com/en/na/wvwmain

league play has temporarily put the randomized matchups on hold, but as far as I can tell rating calculations have still been happening every week, despite nobody really caring about them.

-ken

here are the estimated matchup probabilities for tomorrow.

-ken

Cactus.2710:

As far as I’m concerned, roughly 1,130 user comments ended up in a black hole in spite of assurances to the contrary.

OK, point taken. I think the concern here is that if Arenanet posts a summary (specifically which items they want to pursue) it will be taken by the user community as a commitment to eventually deliver. So they don’t want to say they want to pursue something until they have at least a basic idea of its feasibility (which is the thing that takes most of the time).

It is, after all, “collaborative development”, not “collaborative blue-skying”. Perhaps the best tactic for now is to give them the benefit of the doubt during the commander / squad discussion, but if they have’t posted any feedback about population by the time the next topic comes up, opt out of this process as a waste of time.

If nothing else, I think ArenaNet should certainly take the existence of this thread as notice that they need to be as prompt with their feedback about our feedback as possible.

-ken

Feedback about what direction they are taking requires them to have already decided what direction that will be. The act of deciding requires them to review a design proposal and approve it. That’s a task that takes time.

But before they can approve the design proposal, then need to communicate it to everyone involved in the approval process, so they have time to review it. This includes people outside of the WvW team because the changes might impact the underlying infrastructure, basic game engine mechanics, UI design, translation, etc. Communicating the proposal is another task that takes time.

But before you can communicate the proposal you need to decide what the proposal should include and write it up. That’s another task. Unless your proposal is approved on your first try, it will often be based on a previous one that was rejected. The time to prepare and discuss all the previous ones can’t be ignored either. You see where I’m going with this?

-ken

I don’t see a problem here. This is what’s commonly known as “pipelining” in the computer business, where you start work on a second job well before the first one is completely done (the idea being: if you put something in one end of a pipe then wait for it to come out the other end before putting anything else in, then if the pipe is long it will be mostly empty most of the time.)

When you have large teams, with individual team members specializing in small parts, this is just how things need to be done if you don’t want to have a lot of team members sitting idle most of the time.

-ken

It’s unclear when exactly the achievements will stop counting.

They started counting the first day of season 1 when the dailies reset (they showed up on patch day, but did not unlock until Friday’s reset of the dailies). For NA servers that was 1 hour before the actual start of season 1, but for EU servers I guess it would have been 6 hours after season 1 had already begun (I’m not playing on EU servers so I don’t know for sure).

So, if they end in the same way, they should end in EU 6 hours after the end of season 1, or in NA, 1 hour before the end of season 1. If that’s true, then I suppose it would be possible for people on EU servers to get a chest at the end of the last match of season 1, and still have 6 hours to finish whatever achievements they need to get a key to unlock it. And on NA servers, I suppose people will need to have finished their achievements 1 hour before the end of the last match.

It all sounds very risky — I would plan to have the achievements all done the day before (Thursday) just to be sure. Why take a chance?

-ken

I recommend that you check FA’s matchup threads for the past couple of months, and find out which servers FA players don’t consider “terrible” or “bads”. that should narrow down your choices.

-ken

the map rotation is unusual, but I wouldn’t call it “wrong”. the party window is, however, completely messed up. but instead of not playing at all, I’d just play without joining a party.

-ken

welcome to WvW. you should post this in the matchup thread where people who actually care will see it.

-ken

I suspect that making objectives harder to capture would actually make zerging worse.

what they need to do is make it easier to take undefended objectives, but harder to take defended ones. taking an undefended objective needs to be so easy that 2-4 players can do it quickly, no matter how upgraded it is.

if they did that, zergs would be forced to leave people behind to guard each objective (if they want to keep them), and the team that has more objectives would naturally need to dedicate more people to defense (or risk losing everything to small roving groups).

unfortunately defense is boring and unrewarding, so while this might be an effective mechanic for server balance, it’s not much fun.

-ken

Why doesn’t this naturally happen already? When server A has 50 players on a map, and B has 25, why is it that server A can so easily sweep B’s side of the map? Why isn’t A’s ability to expand limited by how much they already have (and presumably defend)?

personally I think it’s because defense is too easy. walls, gates and siege make it simple for 1 or 2 to hold off an attacker long enough for your zerg to show up and wipe them. essentially, it doesn’t matter how much territory you hold — since you don’t need to dedicate a significant number of players to defense (and you can easily more a large force in a short time, especially with waypoints) the side with more people can win any offense regardless of how much they already hold, and will only be stopped when they run out of map.

since defense is completely unrewarded anyway, how about you simply remove it? just make all the objectives paper, easily captured even by small groups, and servers will be forced to defend using players. this will naturally limit the ability of a larger server to expand.

(it will also cause players to quit because defense is boring and unrewarding, so clearly this isn’t a good idea.)

it comes down to this: can you fix the game so that defense is rewarding and players will want to do it? if you can, “overextended” should fix itself.

if you can’t do it, then look for another solution. I know you would like to make defense more rewarding but if you can’t actually deliver on this then stop wasting your time and ours, and just put in artificial barriers to unlimited expansion, like the OP suggests.

if you don’t like the idea of a structural debuff (or your tech doesn’t allow it), there are plenty of other options (e.g. giving the server that owns “too much” a speed debuff that reduces their mobility, and therefore reduces their ability to defend).

-ken

I charge in right away, because if it’s not a duel then my teammate may need my help RIGHT NOW. if I see some indication that I just interrupted a duel then I’ll try to back out and let the duelers reset and restart.

I would rather force duelers to have to restart their duel than let a teammate die unassisted.

-ken

I have points in oil mastery and cannon mastery. and rams and catapults too, of course, since offense is the only thing that this game currently rewards.

but sometimes defense is important, even if the game doesn’t reward it, and for those times some of us do have the needed masteries.

-ken

upgrading things a few hours before reset is a waste of time.

the hours before reset also happen to be the best time to join a karma/wxp train so go ahead and do that. why bother to defend when the enemy cannot possibly hold anything long enough to change the outcome of the match?

-ken

welcome to WvW. there are important lessons to be learned here:

1. as a rule of thumb, coverage wins. sometimes skill beats coverage, but eventually skill goes to bed and coverage sweeps the map.

2. losing an objective can be heartbreaking if you have invested heavily in it. in order to avoid heartbreak, either invest less or learn to accept that your upgrades are temporary.

3. siege isn’t an automatic win. you have to place the right pieces in the right places in order to create kill zones, and you have to have enough people manning siege (preferably people with the appropriate masteries). you also need people with good crowd control skills keeping people stunned and rooted in those kill zones. if you don’t have enough people to do all this, see lesson #1.

4. your server has a mix of players, and some of them are better than others. try to focus less on what your server might have achieved if only your best players were logged on, and focus more on what your server can actually achieve with the players you have right now. if the players you have right now aren’t interested in defense, keep that in mind as you make your plans.

-ken

rhapsody.3615:

EB: Was that a mesmer port into CDBL bay just a few min ago?

yes it was, and as far as I know it was legitimate. a mesmer got us past the outer wall, and we dropped 4 rams to burn through the north inner gate as fast as possible.

-ken

if you want to buy guilds, go for it. nobody can stop you, although people will always debate whether any future wins are “legitimate”. but people also have the same debate about whether siege-creeping is legitimate, or the use of warrior hammer trains, or using massed necros to lag your opponents to death, etc. everybody has a different idea of what “pure” WvW is.

but I have to wonder, once you find a guild that can be bought, how do you make sure they stay bought? it seems like a waste of time to buy a guild if some other server can just buy them again. once a guild transfers to your server, there’s no way for you to prevent them from transferring off again, and once it becomes known that they can be bought, I imagine they’ll start getting a lot more offers.

I guess if you can afford to outbid everyone else then it won’t matter.

-ken

it wouldn’t surprise me at all to hear that SBI is currently fielding a much-higher-than-normal proportion of bandwagoners and fairweathers.

most of the ‘pro’ WvW players probably finished all their achievements long ago, saw that they are so far ahead that first place is locked in this week, and simply decided to take a break because they’ve had months to get in all the seal clubbing they would ever want.

so it wouldn’t surprise me that the teabagging, dancing, etc. is from people who are new to WvW (or more specifically, new to winning). when winning isn’t a routine thing for you, you take time to celebrate it. when winning is just more of the same stuff you did last night and the night before, there’s little reason to celebrate — you just move on to the next fight.

but knowing that SBI is fielding a lot of amateurs doesn’t make it any more fun to be on the receiving end. I logged off early last night — I don’t mind getting rolled over by superior numbers but the emotes really sucked all the fun out of being logged on.

-ken

Faux Sheaux.6179:

Yes it is getting old. It’s only a couple people, and this is something that has been a non issue until this matchup. Commanders on TS are starting to get paranoid when they hear that a mesmer is hidden somewhere. This means that they are starting to waste time confirming how the mesmer is getting in and whether or not their source is credible. You guys are not the only people this is an issue for. We’re trying to figure out how to deal with it as well.

it’s extremely disappointing to me when this happens. last night a group of us were on SBI’s borderlands trying to take towers when we noticed that bay had somehow flipped blue. I think we were either at the SE or the SW tower at the time.

when it became clear in chat that it was most likely an exploit (nobody would own up to taking Bay) I simply logged off for the night despite it still being kind of early for me. that’s not the kind of gameplay I want to be associated with.

please please please if you see exploiters, report them. I don’t want them on my server and your reports will help us to be rid of them.

-ken

what kind of fights do you prefer? some servers are better choices than others, depending.

for example, if you are interested in open-field skirmishing, you will want a server that’s known to be bad at it, so that your opponents won’t automatically run away from you (at least, to start with).

Ehmry Bay has queues now, you probably don’t want to come here.

-ken

actually 8 * 7 / 2 makes more sense.

from the perspective of any single server, you have 8 choices of a first opponent, and 7 remaining choices for a second opponent, but getting A then B is the same outcome as getting B then A, so you divide by 2.

so I would have calculated 28 matchups.

-ken

from a rank perspective, EU gold, silver, and bronze all have the same schedule. so it’s likely that NA silver and bronze will have the same schedule too.

assuming that’s true, I’m guessing the following schedule for my own server (Ehmry Bay):
week 1: BP EB YB
week 2: SBI EB NSP
week 3: CD EB DB
week 4: FA EB IoJ
week 5: FA CD EB
week 6: SBI EB YB
week 7: BP EB YB

we’ll see if that turns out to be correct.

NA gold league I won’t try to predict because that’s the only league with 6 servers rather than 9.

-ken

it looks like match 7 is going to be exactly the same as match 1. apparently, the season only really needs to be 6 weeks.

I suspect that the only reason it’s 7 weeks is because originally NA was going to be 2 leagues of 12, and with 12 servers in a league it takes 7 weeks for everyone to play everyone (I haven’t done the math to confirm this). but since NA is going to have no more than 9 servers per league, presumably we could have gone to a 6 week schedule.

-ken

based on the EU matchups, I’m guessing that this is going to happen.

-ken

I’m not posting numbers this week because (as far as I know) ArenaNet hasn’t said how matchups will be determined within leagues. The only information we have is that in EU, there will be 3 leagues of 9 servers each (ranks 1-9, 10-18 and 19-27) and in NA, there will be 3 leagues of 6, 9 and 9 servers (ranks 1-6, 7-15 and 16-24).

-ken

matchups for next week won’t be decided until this week’s matches are done. assuming that league play begins on October 18:

1. first we finish this week’s matches
2. based on the final score from this week’s matches, new ratings are calculated
3. servers are sorted by rating to determine rankings
4. based on rankings, servers are assigned to leagues
5. new matchups are determined for first round of league play

-ken

UrMom.4205:

one thing i don’t understand…why did they go 30,50,60? why not just 20,40,60? My ocd is kicking in big time on this lol

diminishing returns. you get +30 for the first one, an additional +20 for the second one, and an additional +10 for the last one.

-ken