Guild Wars 2

unfortunately, this is pretty much true. there are now 7 US servers with 1800+ ratings. since matchups are in threes, this means that after 6 of the top 7 are put into matchups, there will be one 1800+ rated server left to play against you.

the servers below you are all rated below 1600 so there is little likelihood that the leftover 1800+ server will ever be matched up against them instead of you (it’s unlikely that matchup randomization would stretch the ratings that far).

the only way to escape this is to hope that one of the servers above you melts down, or if one or two servers below you suddenly get a lot better, or if something dramatic changes on IoJ or NSP.

-ken

actually capturing a supply camp while a nearby ally is being killed is an excellent idea, because it will prevent the supply camp from being taken by the enemy for 5 minutes.

only a WvW player would know this and willingly risk death to keep an enemy distracted, or willingly ignore easy kills because capturing an objective is more important.

-ken

Bay, Hills and Garrison.

for towers and camps, we use cardinals (NE, NW, SE, SW, etc.)

-ken

nightcapping is the only sporting way to play. at least at night I have the opportunity to defend, should I choose to stay up.

during the day I am at work and it’s impossible for me to defend even if I wanted to. Arenanet needs to put a stop to daycapping, it is full of cheese. nightcapping should be the only thing allowed.

-ken

by request, I’m posting estimated probabilities for the upcoming matchups in this thread also. these numbers are based on the currently predicted ratings (which are in turn based on the current scores), but if the actual end-of-match ratings differ significantly, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

-ken

here are the estimated probabilities for the new matchups, assuming that predicted ratings are reasonably close to what we will see at the end of the current matches. as always, if predicted ratings turn out to be different from the actual end-of-match ratings, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

also, I’ve included the predicted ratings that I use for these calculations. these are the “na” and “eu” files. these values should fairly closely match predicted ratings from other sites at the time I post them.

-ken

I like to use the lottery as an example (the kind of lottery where you pick, say, 6 numbers out of 36, and the jackpot can get into the millions).

each week, the numbers that come up are extremely unlikely (so unlikely that many weeks have no winners at all), but despite being unlikely they came up anyway. the unlikely results continue to occur week after week.

if a matchup comes up that was predicted to have 0% probability, that would be a fairly good sign that the matchup algorithm may have been adjusted, but it would not be a certainty because when I calculate probabilities I only generate 100,000,000 random matchups (to save time). there are some possible matchups that are so unlikely that they wouldn’t show up in 100,000,000 test runs, but no matter how unlikely they are, they can still happen.

just like lottery numbers.

there are also matchups which are mathematically impossible according to the known matchup rules. if we saw one of those matchups occur, we could be certain that something has changed.

-ken

higher rated servers have more people. you can find the server ratings here:

https://leaderboards.guildwars2.com/en/eu/wvwmain

-ken

sorry about missing last week.

by request, I’m posting estimated probabilities for the upcoming matchups in this thread also. these numbers are based on the currently predicted ratings (which are in turn based on the current scores), but if the actual end-of-match ratings differ significantly, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

-ken

sorry about missing last week’s numbers. it was a busy day and I forgot.

here are the estimated probabilities for the new matchups, assuming that predicted ratings are reasonably close to what we will see at the end of the current matches. as always, if predicted ratings turn out to be different from the actual end-of-match ratings, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

also, I’ve included the predicted ratings that I use for these calculations. these are the “na” and “eu” files. these values should fairly closely match predicted ratings from other sites at the time I post them.

-ken

traits need a way to be reset because otherwise the only way to move points would be to make a new character. once you reach level 80 you stop getting trait points.

WXP points, on the other hand, never stop. no matter how badly you’ve messed up your points you can always get more. WXP points are more like karma in that regard. you get them for playing, you can spend them, and if you don’t have enough points to get what you want it’s easy to get more.

I’m not at all unhappy that ArenaNet gives us a free WXP reset at the start of every tournament, but I wouldn’t turn down a way to reset them more frequently.

I wouldn’t turn down free gold either. but just because I wouldn’t turn it down, doesn’t mean that it would be healthy for the game.

how about this idea: you can respec your WXP points any time you want, but it costs you 10% of your spent points to do it. so if you have 100 points spent and you want to unspend them, they will all be cleared but you’ll only get 90 returned to you to spend anew (the missing 10 points are lost until the start of the next tournament, when you get a ‘complete’ reset).

-ken

the color system hasn’t actually changed.

the reason servers get different colors is due to the matchup randomization, which applies a random plus or minus amount to each server’s rating. the primary reason for the randomization is to allow matchups outside your normal tier to happen (this helps prevent matchup stagnation and improves rating accuracy), but as a side effect it can also cause color assignments to change.

due to the way the math works out, it’s still possible to end up with matchup stagnation (see NA tier 1), but the ratings in tier 1 are still close enough that color randomizatoin can still occur. I think the #1 server would need a rating 200 points above the #2 server to make it impossible to get any color besides green.

-ken

by request, I’m posting estimated probabilities for the upcoming matchups in this thread also. these numbers are based on the currently predicted ratings (which are in turn based on the current scores), but if the actual end-of-match ratings differ significantly, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

-ken

here are the estimated probabilities for the new matchups, assuming that predicted ratings are reasonably close to what we will see at the end of the current matches. as always, if predicted ratings turn out to be different from the actual end-of-match ratings, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

also, I’ve included the predicted ratings that I use for these calculations. these are the “na” and “eu” files. these values should fairly closely match predicted ratings from other sites at the time I post them.

-ken

by request, I’m posting estimated probabilities for the upcoming matchups in this thread also. these numbers are based on the currently predicted ratings (which are in turn based on the current scores), but if the actual end-of-match ratings differ significantly, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

-ken

here are the estimated probabilities for the new matchups, assuming that predicted ratings are reasonably close to what we will see at the end of the current matches. as always, if predicted ratings turn out to be different from the actual end-of-match ratings, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

also, I’ve included the predicted ratings that I use for these calculations. these are the “na” and “eu” files. these values should fairly closely match predicted ratings from other sites at the time I post them.

-ken

by request, I’m posting estimated probabilities for the upcoming matchups in this thread also. these numbers are based on the currently predicted ratings (which are in turn based on the current scores), but if the actual end-of-match ratings differ significantly, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

-ken

here are the estimated probabilities for the new matchups, assuming that predicted ratings are reasonably close to what we will see at the end of the current matches. as always, if predicted ratings turn out to be different from the actual end-of-match ratings, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

also, I’ve included the predicted ratings that I use for these calculations. these are the “na” and “eu” files. these values should fairly closely match predicted ratings from other sites at the time I post them.

-ken

see this thread:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Ingame-GMs-do-they-exist

the TL;DR version is, report these people using the “botting” report category. sending email to exploits@arena.net is not an effective way to stop hacks (it should be used only to report exploitable bugs in the game, things any player can do without third-party tools).

-ken

by request, I’m posting estimated probabilities for the upcoming matchups in this thread also. these numbers are based on the currently predicted ratings (which are in turn based on the current scores), but if the actual end-of-match ratings differ significantly, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

-ken

here are the estimated probabilities for the new matchups, assuming that predicted ratings are reasonably close to what we will see at the end of the current matches. as always, if predicted ratings turn out to be different from the actual end-of-match ratings, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

also, I’ve included the predicted ratings that I use for these calculations. these are the “na” and “eu” files. these values should fairly closely match predicted ratings from other sites at the time I post them.

-ken

“tiers” really aren’t a thing anymore for matchups. the leader board still has a “tier” column, but really it’s just a “matchup number”. tiers still make sense for ranking purposes, but there’s no probability involved there — after every match your new rating is 100% accurate and absolute in determining your new rank.

so if you are wondering whether you will be moving up a tier or not, the thing to look at is your own server’s rating, and the ratings of the servers in the next tier. if it looks like your will end up with a higher rating than one (or more) of the servers in the next tier, then you can expect to move up.

for matchups, “moving up” or “moving down” really means, “can you expect to play against harder (or easier) opponents.”. for that purpose, I suppose the magic number is 50%. if the higher matchups are more than 50% likely then you can “expect” them (i.e. it is more likely that they will occur, rather than not occurring).

but on the whole, the question doesn’t make a lot of sense. it’s kind of like asking whether you can “expect” to get a 7 when rolling a pair of 6-sided dice. you can expect a 7 all you like but if you roll a 2 then that’s what you got.

-ken

one of the key takeaways I’m getting from this thread is that, at least for now, if you cannot click on the cheater or otherwise get their name you cannot report them.

it doesn’t matter if you can’t identify them because they are underground, or because they are using invisibility hacks, or because they teleported away before you thought to click on them, or if you can’t report them for zoom hacks because they are behind a wall and you would have to be using zoom hacks yourself to see who they are.

I hope this gets fixed at some point. we do need some kind of “help! I’m being victimized by a cheater and I don’t know who or where!” option.

-ken

by request, I’m posting estimated probabilities for the upcoming matchups in this thread also. these numbers are based on the currently predicted ratings (which are in turn based on the current scores), but if the actual end-of-match ratings differ significantly, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

-ken

here are the estimated probabilities for the new matchups, assuming that predicted ratings are reasonably close to what we will see at the end of the current matches. as always, if predicted ratings turn out to be different from the actual end-of-match ratings, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

also, I’ve included the predicted ratings that I use for these calculations. these are the “na” and “eu” files. these values should fairly closely match predicted ratings from other sites at the time I post them.

-ken

by request, I’m posting estimated probabilities for the upcoming matchups in this thread also. these numbers are based on the currently predicted ratings (which are in turn based on the current scores), but if the actual end-of-match ratings differ significantly, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

-ken

here are the estimated probabilities for the new matchups, assuming that predicted ratings are reasonably close to what we will see at the end of the current matches. as always, if predicted ratings turn out to be different from the actual end-of-match ratings, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

also, I’ve included the predicted ratings that I use for these calculations. these are the “na” and “eu” files. these values should fairly closely match predicted ratings from other sites at the time I post them.

-ken

by request, I’m posting estimated probabilities for the upcoming matchups in this thread also. these numbers are based on the currently predicted ratings (which are in turn based on the current scores), but if the actual end-of-match ratings differ significantly, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

-ken

here are the estimated probabilities for the new matchups, assuming that predicted ratings are reasonably close to what we will see at the end of the current matches. as always, if predicted ratings turn out to be different from the actual end-of-match ratings, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

also, I’ve included the predicted ratings that I use for these calculations. these are the “na” and “eu” files. these values should fairly closely match predicted ratings from other sites at the time I post them.

-ken

as others have said, the issue with transfer costs is not that it’s not free, it’s that it is the same price regardless of where you are transferring from, or to.

I think there is general agreement that the way that the players have arranged themselves server-wise is not healthy for the game. a different pricing structure for transfers could help by encouraging players to arrange themselves so that matchups are more balanced.

for example, transfers from a higher-rated server to a lower-rated server could be free (or dirt cheap), while transfers from a lower-rated server to a higher one would cost more and more depending on how highly ranked the destination server is.

-ken

^ this is a super idea. maybe not 33% but definitely some randomness.

-ken

count yourself lucky. our server has had the same borderlands for as long as I can remember.

when the game first came out we had one borderlands map that we kept getting over and over, then one week we got a new one where the quaggans were removed but there were ruins instead. since then it has been exactly the same map with the ruins every single week.

-ken

by request, I’m posting estimated probabilities for the upcoming matchups in this thread also. these numbers are based on the currently predicted ratings (which are in turn based on the current scores), but if the actual end-of-match ratings differ significantly, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

-ken

here are the estimated probabilities for the new matchups, assuming that predicted ratings are reasonably close to what we will see at the end of the current matches. as always, if predicted ratings turn out to be different from the actual end-of-match ratings, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

also, I’ve included the predicted ratings that I use for these calculations. these are the “na” and “eu” files. these values should fairly closely match predicted ratings from other sites at the time I post them.

-ken

by request, I’m posting estimated probabilities for the upcoming matchups in this thread also. these numbers are based on the currently predicted ratings (which are in turn based on the current scores), but if the actual end-of-match ratings differ significantly, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

-ken

wow, I just looked at this week’s files for the first time myself. NA T1 and T2 are both completely locked now.

-ken

here are the estimated probabilities for the new matchups, assuming that predicted ratings are reasonably close to what we will see at the end of the current matches. as always, if predicted ratings turn out to be different from the actual end-of-match ratings, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

also, I’ve included the predicted ratings that I use for these calculations. these are the “na” and “eu” files. these values should fairly closely match predicted ratings from other sites at the time I post them.

-ken

an “uplevel” (a WvW player who is not level 80) can indeed cause problems for their own team, so new players who aren’t level 80 have to be careful.

rule #1 of playing WvW as an uplevel — DO NOT GET DOWNED OR KILLED. stay back if you have to. run away frequently if needed; do everything in your power to avoid getting killed. there’s a word for players who are easily downed and killed — “rally bait”. the reason for this term is, when you die any enemy player who did any damage to you will instantly rally if they are downed. this can be very bad for your side in a close fight.

rule #2 for uplevels: wear toughness/vitality gear. don’t show up as an uplevel wearing berserker gear or anything else you can be easily killed in. this is really just another facet of rule #1.

rule #3 for uplevels: do things that you can do well. one of the best things you can do as an uplevel is to operate siege. a level 20 player operating an arrow cart can be just as effective as a level 80 (as long as the level 20 player has spent points in arrow cart mastery). plus, it is often safer running siege from the relative safety of a keep or tower than to be out in the open field where you can be killed (see rule #1).

this is the reason you will get tells asking you to leave. during a WvW fight nobody has time to explain all this in detail. they are often busy fighting the enemy. the fastest, easiest thing to say is “go away”.

-ken

do you look at the matchup probabilities posted each week? some servers are stuck in a position where they are very nearly guaranteed a bad matchup every week. if you’re on one of those servers there may be no option except to transfer.

-ken

maybe just a server thing. I don’t see a lot of people with skins (or maybe I just don’t notice) and all the enemies look the same to me.

I forgot about the finishers though, good call. I retract my “wvw players don’t buy gems” claim.

-ken

I’m not sure that a focus on game design is a good thing.

If they look really closely, they might just conclude that PvE and SPvP are good investments, while WvW is a waste of time for everyone involved.

Living World and new dungeons keep PvE players interested. PvE players spend money on gems. meanwhile, SPvP is ArenaNet’s foot in the door into eSports, and as long as that looks like it could be big they need to maintain their presence there.

but how profitable are the WvW players, really? it may be a fun game mode but I’m not really seeing how it’s making a lot of money for them. as long as WvW doesn’t cost much they might as well leave it in, after all what’s not to like about having another game mode? but I really don’t see where they have any incentive to invest a lot of resources in it.

what could they add to WvW that we would be willing to pay for? and that wouldn’t horribly unbalance things for servers whose players are less willing to pay?

-ken

I would consider bypassing your router to be a “last resort” troubleshooting step. do not do this if you are not up-to-date with security patches for your computer, and make sure you have antivirus and firewall software running (and also up-to-date).

I don’t know how things are nowadays, but I remember reading a few years back that some people did some testing, putting a computer directly on the Internet without patching it first and it got hacked in mere minutes.

a router will stop a lot of attacks, don’t underestimate its value as another layer of protection.

-ken

by request, I’m posting estimated probabilities for the upcoming matchups in this thread also. these numbers are based on the currently predicted ratings (which are in turn based on the current scores), but if the actual end-of-match ratings differ significantly, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

-ken

here are the estimated probabilities for the new matchups, assuming that predicted ratings are reasonably close to what we will see at the end of the current matches. as always, if predicted ratings turn out to be different from the actual end-of-match ratings, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

also, I’ve included the predicted ratings that I use for these calculations. these are the “na” and “eu” files. these values should fairly closely match predicted ratings from other sites at the time I post them.

-ken

this idea is silly. making an “easy mode” that you can use to skip directly to rewards with no effort is a bad idea. they might as well make it so that there is an “easy mode” for dungeon tokens so that you can get the gear or skins you want without the bother of finding a group or actually beating bosses.

instead, you should be able to buy map completion using gems (or maybe laurels) if you don’t want to use the regular gameplay method.

might as well add something to the gem store so that you can instantly level a tradeskill to 500. it would save a lot of time for the people who want to skip that particular gameplay method too.

might as well also make it so that you can go directly to level 50 using gems, some people probably don’t like leveling up and they should get a way to bypass that.

-ken

I had time to kill while waiting for the matchup probability calculations to finish. they’re posted now, so you are unlikely to see any more replies from me in this thread.

-ken

randomized matchups should be resuming with the end of the Fall 2014 WvW tournament.

by request, I’m posting estimated probabilities for the upcoming matchups in this thread also. these numbers are based on the currently predicted ratings (which are in turn based on the current scores), but if the actual end-of-match ratings differ significantly, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

-ken

since this is the last week of the Fall 2014 tournament, and I haven’t heard that any matchmaking changes are coming, I assume will be returning to the randomized matchup system.

here are the estimated probabilities for the new matchups, assuming that predicted ratings are reasonably close to what we will see at the end of the current matches. as always, if predicted ratings turn out to be different from the actual end-of-match ratings, that will throw the numbers off.

the “na1” and “eu1” files have probabilities of getting a particular server as an opponent, while the “na2” and “eu2” files have probabilities of getting specific pairs of servers as opponents.

also, I’ve included the predicted ratings that I use for these calculations. these are the “na” and “eu” files. these values should fairly closely match predicted ratings from other sites at the time I post them.

-ken

I checked the score history and I see plenty of time periods where EB was focusing on FC (EB ppt peaks coinciding with FC ppt valleys). I don’t think your claims that EB has been ignoring FC hold up.

-ken

heh.

but to answer your question, the reason is this. EB is taking everything they can from both FC and SF.

meanwhile, FC is trying to get whatever they can so they don’t come in last. they’re having trouble against EB so instead they are looking at an easier target to score points from. that’s you, SF.

-ken