Guild Wars 2

Because that wouldn’t lead to any sort of trolling lol

That’s wrong.

Chess sites that are smaller than the spvp sites work sufficiently well.

Sars.8792:

Use old system, without decay to prevent the sling shot when you didn’t play for awhile. no need for decay with seasons.

make it take twice as long to build/change mmr to prevent people with a lucky 12-15 games being at top.

2 ez?

12 or 15 games doesn’t sound like luck to me.

Xillllix.3485:

I have a good internet connection, my ping with my isp is under 50.

How can a competitive mode like GW2 PvP have a 266-300 ping? Nothing else is interfering. You need better servers.

It could still be on your end. Your ISP routes your connections to Anet’s server and there could be a problem someone along those lines. I haven’t really experienced lag in spvp lately besides when my ISP acts up.

I have heard EU servers are acting like potatoes lately.

Out of curiosity, why would high MMR people be worried about points on LB?

None of my significantly high MMR friends seem to care about LB and rewards, because they want a LB that shows skill not time played.

Also, it seems like from queuing with one of them that our queue times weren’t significantly high. Probably added 2-3 mins over average queue times.

The problem with saying d/p can be shrekt by CI or shatter in duels and telling someone to go to a dueling arena is that conquest is 5v5.

Sure, you will see good mesmers beating thieves in duels, but duels never include the thief having a buddy who can tank and distract the mesmer.

I don’t think mesmers need a buff to be viable in sPvP. We see mesmers playing at the highest levels and doing good work in torunaments. Why I think mesmers need a buff and the only type of buff I can fathom for shatter (the most popular build) is greater access to condi clear since I have seen mesmers just keel over and die to burning alone.

You could reward the people who play a lot by doing a Seasons Reward Track of some sort, or like WvW seasons and have Achievement stuff. And revert back to a more skill based leaderboard. Everyone would be happy.

Thieves don’t need to be nerfed.

The old system tweaked is better than this system. People are just accumulating points by volumes of games.

Saiyan.1704:

We have a whole year until Justin deems the current system a failure, according to one of his earlier posts. We have to endure and hope for the best.

I’ll give Justin credit. There’s been times where I felt matchmaking was nearly perfect where matches were close and challenging.

Though the point system itself really makes no sense for pvp. pvp should be about promoting competition and not who can generate the most points by volumes of game played.

Point Holder

Roamer

Decapper

There’s also Team Support and DPS. But those roles are a little more blurred along class lines nowadays.

If you don’t understand the terminology, let me know and I’ll explain.

I thought it was most wins on a map.

Blowing SR for a stomp is bad usage of a 60 CD, and a better res utility.

And good thieves will poison bodies and leave as they’re job is primarily to decap or +1 fights.

BlackBeard.2873:

My only concern is how would this work exactly. When one of the best players doesn’t play for a while, are you suggesting they get put back into matches with much lower-quality players to grind back up via ratings? Or perhaps keep matching people with the current MMR formula, and have a separate ranking system that allows your to decay and then….how does that person climb back up the leaderboards? How quickly should wins allow them to climb back so that its not a pure numbers game, but not a cheesy “play 1 game after 2 months and now I’m rank 1…lel”?

The old “non-decay” seems closely tied to a leaderboard that only depends on rating, in my mind. Could you try to flesh out exactly how you think people should decay, and how quickly they can grind back up? Should points for winning be weighted higher for games among high MMR players?

The current system could probably be tweaked to perform similar to the old system, but there are important questions that need to be answered to make that happen.

It seems the old system rewarded players too much for not playing (playing when ranked highly was more likely to just hurt your MMR/ranking, while you could consistently gain rating by playing 1 game every 3 days), while the new system is just a numbers game. How do you think a system should work that isn’t either of these?

The old system, if decay had been fixed, would have worked fine. People would have been forced to play to keep their ranking instead of abusing the /afk feature of it.

Yeah. Exactly this.

Saiyan.1704:

Jasher.6580:

Please use MMR. Check out the link in my signature.

If it was based purely on MMR then it will be bad for solo players.

1. Solo and Premades will need to be seperated within the same ques so it’s impossible for them to play each other.
2. It needs a more strict degenerated rank system, people would have to keep playing, more than a few times a week to keep their rank position. Unlike the old leaderboard.

Yet somehow all of us solo players were OK with the old leaderboard being based on MMR except for it’s horrible decay system.

Arikyali.5804:

What? Word in the lobby was that the MMR was reset. Did I hear wrong?

Yes.

There is no new MMR.

If you want teammates who work together then invite 4 people with TS to communicate with in matches. Rotations in solo queue without voice communication rarely are optimal considering teammates might just follow you to a point.

It’s one of those things where you need to find other people to play with or #dealwithit. Because it’s the way solo queue has always been.

Aomine.5012:

SobeSoul.6910:

StickerHappy.8052:

SobeSoul.6910:

Ranger should have same exact range as Mesmer.

It does untraited, but if you make it that way, Rangers would suck more. Cmon I main mesmer, but you gotta show some sympathy to other classes too. Rangers are in a bad state as it is. Mesmers and Necros too.

Defend a cheesy mechanic all you want, but the game should have a capped ranged which more than one class uses. That by sheer logic resembles something called “balance”.

And FYI, ranger LB trait is 1500 ranged. It shoots farther than 1500. Which means that trait is broken.

Hypocritical to the max. So many classes hit longer than their indicated range and you never mention it, only call out ranger. Just go try, many skills work longer than tool tip noted.

And we’re called ranger for a reason, we’re best at fighting at range! This is called class mechanic, and ranger’s class mechanic is balanced at range.

Just because you’re so used to ranger being useless, doesn’t mean it should be. Why don’t you just stick your nose to the classes that’re really OP, instead of pin-pointing an already under-power class? If ALL CLASSES ARE OP, NO CLASSES ARE OP!

It’s not hypocritical to bring up the fact rangers’ range is broken in a ranger thread. That’s a sweet touch of intellectual dishonesty there.

The fact you mentioned dragon rank makes me think OP is not so hot himself.

Condis only melt engies too stupid to kite though. But even if it doesn’t melt the engie, the engie will have too much pressure to stand on point. Voila decap.

Shatter mesmer. But only if you outskill the engie.

StickerHappy.8052:

SobeSoul.6910:

Ranger should have same exact range as Mesmer.

It does untraited, but if you make it that way, Rangers would suck more. Cmon I main mesmer, but you gotta show some sympathy to other classes too. Rangers are in a bad state as it is. Mesmers and Necros too.

Defend a cheesy mechanic all you want, but the game should have a capped ranged which more than one class uses. That by sheer logic resembles something called “balance”.

And FYI, ranger LB trait is 1500 ranged. It shoots farther than 1500. Which means that trait is broken.

Ranger should have same exact range as Mesmer.

Laraley.7695:

SobeSoul.6910:

If the system is trying to equalize the entire team’s MMR and you have “between” MMR, you are probably going to have the most variation in team quality.

Not sure how accurate this is to how the system is actually working but if you’re MMR is in the middle of the pack, you are placed in to team as the A) Highest MMR B ) Middle MMR C) Lowest MMR.

If you have low or high MMR than you only have really one or possibly two of those categories available to you.

You also have to figure that even if hundreds to low thousands are queuing at this time that the number hitting the queue button at any given time is much lower as people are already in games.

I’m not sure how the system exactly works but I was wondering if it tries to place players with the same mmr into a match or if it puts players with different mmr’s into team so both teams have similar mmr combined. Because if it’s the second case, it really answers a lot of questions I’ve been asking myself.

It tries to equalize the two team’s MMR to match up players. I believe if the playerbase was larger it would do the former, but since the pool of players queuing at one time is not large enough for that, it does the latter.

Dahkeus.8243:

I think it’s people blaming the matchmaking for not putting them where they think they deserve to be on the leaderboard. =P

Not at all. The system is placing new players or inexperienced players who do silly stuff with experienced player who haven’t reached god tier. Thus you don’t get better competition and it’s hard to get better that way.

Marcos.3690:

jportell.2197:

First match I had:

• Xeph from Team Paradigm, if you played the game during 2012-13 you would recognize the name.
• Phantaram
• Tron Jeremy, who all tho runs some trolly builds, is a great thief player, and knows where to be and when to be there.
• A warrior who’s name escapes me but once again was on point with everything.
• And myself on standard shatter mes.

That game was great, rotations were on it, Xeph and I combined could shut down the enemy thief, Phanta 2v1’d far and knew when to leave the fight. It was great all the way around. The match wasn’t a complete steam roll, but it was fun.

Next match: I get

• What I think is a DPS guard, he was running mace focus+GS, can’t be sure but I don’t remember hearing any shouts from him.
• D/P thief running signet of malice (enough said there.)
• A power necro that I don’t think had any wells
• And a pew pew ranger.
  The first mid fight the whole team wiped while i capped home alone. So I said screw it I’m going far. I went far full capped it and portaled back across near home, this was on foe fire.

The rest of the match was just a mud slinging contest of our guardian yelling at our thief and ranger, and me just shaking my head at the entire teams inability to know when it’s time to leave a fight.

So tell me again how matchmaking is working? I don’t mind if i get placed in group one, i honestly don’t mind being placed in group two. But to go directly from group one to group two after winning a match with group one, something isn’t working right. This was not the system just throwing me in with people because the que was taking so long and it prioritized fast matches over appropriately paired ones, both ques popped almost instantly.

Dude, the ladder was reset today what did you expect? everyone is at same MMR

Nope. They only reset standings not MMR.

You get out. You have options to play with four other players you know. If you solo queue you run the risk as everybody else as to who you get teamed with. But most of us have the dignity as to not whine about it on the forums.

blackysharky.7581:

Thanks for the offer Teutos, but I’ve been in the LB last test season top 200 and now top 100, I’ve played more than enough games to know how to play PvP and my class / build, and I’m fairly used to losing streaks, happens quite to often in GW2 PvP in my opinion, but the state currently, its just ridiculous.

But anyway, thanks again for the help =)

No more ridiculous than someone who goes on a losing streak and still being in the top 100 is.

If the system is trying to equalize the entire team’s MMR and you have “between” MMR, you are probably going to have the most variation in team quality.

Not sure how accurate this is to how the system is actually working but if you’re MMR is in the middle of the pack, you are placed in to team as the A) Highest MMR B ) Middle MMR C) Lowest MMR.

If you have low or high MMR than you only have really one or possibly two of those categories available to you.

You also have to figure that even if hundreds to low thousands are queuing at this time that the number hitting the queue button at any given time is much lower as people are already in games.

jportell.2197:

SobeSoul.6910:

You’re queuing solo with what I would guess would be hundreds of players. What do you expect?

A little more consistency. I’m not talking about wanting to be paired up with those specific players all the time. But going from players that have a clear knowledge and understanding of the game, rotations, mechanics, focus fire, peeling etc., to group two right after group one, that does not make sense. You are saying hundreds of players okay, well there should be players at both ends of the spectrum and those in the middle. If MMR is working, I should not go straight from being teamed up with players in group one, to being teamed up with players in group 2.

I’m guessing you have the same “between” MMR as me. I have similar stuff occur frequently.

I agree with this to a point. They would need to fix the horrible decay system of the old leaderboard though.

You’re queuing solo with what I would guess would be hundreds of players. What do you expect?

GhOst.4019:

SobeSoul.6910:

You don’t really understand the decay system if you think they stayed in those positions without playing for 9 months. Besides people with new accounts could get high up the leaderboard for short periods of time, but as those players with 10-3 records played more they would either maintain their positions, lose their positions, or artificially gained positions by afking and only playing one game a week.

Played more? Those are THE FINAL results from the winners in December when they reset them to start the December season… Let me take a screen shot for you so you understand that I didn’t pull those numbers at the beginning of the season. You can double check this with the list of winners that got paid out if you want. I am not sure where that thread is buried…. It may have worked some of the time. It was still flawed.

I don’t care about the screenshot, and trust you, but you are not understanding the old leaderboard system.

1) If a player went 10-3 and then lost 7 games in a row they would be thrown down.
2) The flaw with the old leaderboard system was people could abuse the decay system.
3) Some people argued that new accounts being in the top 50 was horrible. At the time I didn’t care as the leaderboards didn’t offer rewards or anything other than some way to track your skill levels to some degree if you played enough. Currently I think there would be a need for a minimum games play to qualify for ranking.

If they reintroduced that system and with a better decay system, and split solo queue and team queue up, it would satisfy a large majority of vets. Because it more accurately reflected skill levels than the current point based system.

GhOst.4019:

SobeSoul.6910:

Please. It is exactly what you want. And no you couldn’t stay rank 5 for 9 months in the old system by staying 11-1 for 9 months. That wasn’t the flaw. Go learn what decay was and what it actually did.

I know exactly what it did. Do you really want proof? These LB’s went for what? 8 Months I believe? Thousands of games played by top players on the board…but you have these in there…..

NA Team Q Rank 9.
9 Muffins.2495 Muffinnz (17- 1) 94.44% Jade Quarry

NA Solo Q Rank 13
13 SENA LEE.5389 Jal Ja (11- 2) 84.62% Stormbluff Isle

EU Team Q Rank 5
5 Golby.8164 Yo Eternya Yo (54- 8) 87.1% Desolation

EU Solo Q Rank 4
4 meyeR.8569 Vvvvvvvvvvvvvvv (10-3) 76.92% Far Shiverpeaks

This last one had a top ranking of 2….. Was definitely flawed m8. YES those people got TOP rewards when they were given out for their elite skill……

You don’t really understand the decay system if you think they stayed in those positions without playing for 9 months. Besides people with new accounts could get high up the leaderboard for short periods of time, but as those players with 10-3 records played more they would either maintain their positions, lose their positions, or artificially gained positions by afking and only playing one game a week.

Vargamonth.2047:

GhOst.4019:

I understand there is flaws. People on here only want the skilled players to be rewarded. They also complain about Q times and matchmaking. You know what a huge fix for those 2 are? Player base. If the game only rewarded top players, do you honestly think more players would want to come in from other parts of the game with 0 rewards? You have to have a way to reward everyone. YES a ladder system would do that; but as you can see, that is not the direction they are taking right now. Maybe in the future, but for now, that is how it is. You just have to deal with it.

End game. Get more players involved. Can’t do that with 0 incentive.

Yes, there needs to be an incentive for players from other parts of the game to spent time in PvP, but there also needs to be an incentive for players to improve and get better, specially on a competitive game mode (although it can be applied to any part of the whole game).
PvP base rewards not being laughable when compared to some braindead activity like, lets say, Silverwastes chest farm, could be a nice start.

^This.

I think season rewards should be based on performance more so than time spent. Obviously you want to have a" minimum games played" metric to qualify for ladder rewards. However, to keep people interested you could put in a Seasonal type Achievement Point systems with rewards worth our time.

GhOst.4019:

SobeSoul.6910:

GhOst.4019:

Then play 700 games….. Here is the issue with your first statement. You are asking to be rewarded for playing 10% of the games that he worked very hard for. 100 games vs 1000. You want to be rewarded for your casual play? 100 games is nothing in PvP. No matter how bad the LB’s are messed up you need to do a bit more than 100 games to expect anything out of it. Yes there should be a cap on games per season to take out the grind factor. Say the cap is 500 for 2 months, you want to play your best and make those 500 count to get rewarded. Playing 3k games will no longer matter and skill will come into play a bit more.

Here’s the problem with your statement. You are asking to be rewarded for less effective play. That’s absurd.

No I am not. If you played the same 1000 games as him (and kept your elite ratio) you would be much higher than him on the LB’s. This is the way it is for now. There were hundreds of these posts 3 months ago. Nothing new besides everyone looking at you and saying “Oh god, they are coming out of the woodwork again”. Nothing is going to change by people starting to post this crap all over again.

1: Yes it is a grind
2: Nothing you can do about it
3: So just deal with it an move on.
4: You wouldn’t place in the top 25 anyway if it went solely on skill. So either way, you will STILL be settling for a Llama. So if you wouldn’t make top 25 no matter which way it went, why even come on here and complain? Top 500 is easy as hell. Even a casual player can get there with some decent wins.

What would you have? The way it was before? You can go 11-1 and stay rank 5 for 9 months? Lol please dude.

Please. It is exactly what you want. And no you couldn’t stay rank 5 for 9 months in the old system by staying 11-1 for 9 months. That wasn’t the flaw. Go learn what decay was and what it actually did.

Whether or not I would end up in the top 25 has nothing to do with recognizing a bad system that rewards people for not playing as effective as other players.

I predict by the time the expansion releases there will be a more equitable leaderboard than the grindfest one you want.

Dojo.1867:

SobeSoul.6910:

Pet res is OP whether or not you can do those things. It’s not a L2P issue.

And mistform into portal is op. And necro downed state is op dmg. And mesmer/thief invis/teleports are op.

See a pattern? Stupid thread.

Who says I think all the downstate play in the game as is currently is best for the game?

Myopic reply.

Anti.9156:

leaderboards should show the skilllevel/whos best. So it should be MMR based. Its nothing to work for. Otherwise we see Turret Engis on top claiming to be top players in the forums. We had a MMR based Leaderboard before actually. The only flaw was the decay system. So maybe just let our MMR decrease if we dont play enough and take the old leaderboard (players get rusty anyway if they dont play)

There’s a flaw in MMR though. Solo queuers vs. premades. Which is why I think they need to split apart the two again.

GhOst.4019:

Then play 700 games….. Here is the issue with your first statement. You are asking to be rewarded for playing 10% of the games that he worked very hard for. 100 games vs 1000. You want to be rewarded for your casual play? 100 games is nothing in PvP. No matter how bad the LB’s are messed up you need to do a bit more than 100 games to expect anything out of it. Yes there should be a cap on games per season to take out the grind factor. Say the cap is 500 for 2 months, you want to play your best and make those 500 count to get rewarded. Playing 3k games will no longer matter and skill will come into play a bit more.

Here’s the problem with your statement. You are asking to be rewarded for less effective play. That’s absurd.

Lexiceta.4156:

No the other one only played 100 games so guessing he would have 700 is a guess. The other have proven 500 win the first has proven 70. It is about accomplishment not guessing. So by your mind is one person went 1 for 1 they are now going to win 1000 of 1000?

I have taken a few courses in statistics. Of course 1 game is not a big enough sample size. 1000 is only approaching an ample sample size. But on sheer numbers a lone in OP’s scenario, Man U was 20% more effective in the games they played than the 13 y/o kids’ team.

You are basically throwing away all logic by saying a team that played 10 times more game and won 7.7 more times game is the better team.

Pet res is OP whether or not you can do those things. It’s not a L2P issue.

Lexiceta.4156:

I think the answer is obvious, of course the 500/1000 is better. Seriously are you trying to troll the 500 won 7 times as many games.

The other team may have won 700 games if it had played 1000 games. So who is trolling who?

It was nice to read that wins will matter over games played. However, by what basis can the leaderboard not be a grindfest if games played leads to accruing points by victories not lead back to it being a grindfest like the first test season?

I only find the range on Longbow to be broken. I’m fine with the damage. 90% of LB rangers are fairly easy to deal with once in range, but as has been mentioned their range is like 1.8k range. I feel like range should be capped to 1.5k.

Lordrosicky.5813:

SobeSoul.6910:

Lordrosicky.5813:

ArrDee.2573:

Removing the stunbreak is silly! The cooldown needs to be increased back to 45 seconds but removing it is silly! Traited the stunbreak is at 23 seconds making it one of the shortest stunbreak cooldowns in the game and it resets at low health! The puddles should cap at 5! When you spawn a 6th puddle, the first puddle should disappear! Vee Wee has been saying this for a long time now! But nobody listens to Vee Wee!

Wahoo! Bye frands!

This would be a start, but I would rather they just made it useless. Had enough of getting killed by this skill now (especially on warrior) by EVERY engineer (shows it takes no skills at all). People who like trolling with slick shoes have had their fun, now lets just nerf it into the ground and give other skills a chance to thrive.

If you are getting killed by slick shoes on warrior it’s time to rethink your build. Simple as that.

If you are struggling to kill people with slick shoes then I think you need to rethink your build and your play. Simple as that.

Want to continue with this game?

Don’t complain if you don’t run stab. Because I have played hambow in recent times and didn’t have huge issues with slick shoes.

I can use e-gun or Elixir S and kill people fine.

Oh, and guess what… Engies are vulnerable to slick shoes. Somehow it isn’t often that I die from slick shoes on engie.

Lordrosicky.5813:

ArrDee.2573:

Removing the stunbreak is silly! The cooldown needs to be increased back to 45 seconds but removing it is silly! Traited the stunbreak is at 23 seconds making it one of the shortest stunbreak cooldowns in the game and it resets at low health! The puddles should cap at 5! When you spawn a 6th puddle, the first puddle should disappear! Vee Wee has been saying this for a long time now! But nobody listens to Vee Wee!

Wahoo! Bye frands!

This would be a start, but I would rather they just made it useless. Had enough of getting killed by this skill now (especially on warrior) by EVERY engineer (shows it takes no skills at all). People who like trolling with slick shoes have had their fun, now lets just nerf it into the ground and give other skills a chance to thrive.

If you are getting killed by slick shoes on warrior it’s time to rethink your build. Simple as that.

Terrorsquad.2349:

Are we getting a new build ingame? Test Season should’ve started 10 minutes ago

Leaderboards sometimes take 30+ mins to update. Doubt they need a build.

Queue times being faster in unranked might be directly correlated with people queuing unranked instead of ranked :p

I kinda miss when a larger amount of good players were in the old solo queue system and forced me to play better than it takes to beat the average player.

Invoker.5462:

CptCuddles.8912:

Invoker.5462:

sendmark.4731:

Rank on leaderboards means little, you can still have a mediocre mmr. Playing against premades doesn’t mean a lot, as they can still have a similar mmr to you. Add to that the low population means they have to match people together at some point, otherwise ques would be even longer.

Rank on leaderboards means everything, actually. Unless you can tell me another visual statistical source that’s giving you some other information i don’t know about.

Playing against pre-mades with a team assembled of solo qu’ers means that the mmr system lacks basic rules of well- matchmaking. I can name another game with similar matchmaking call of duty- where its mostly random, you think they don’t have enough players?

Matchmaking should take into account the que times… if they are extreme as in, 10 mins or more. I’d rather wait 10 mins and get a fair match than be given a brand new player against a team of premades.

I really wish people would stop referring to the current leaderboard as anything more than a farm. The current system heavily rewards time invested giving it a weak correlation to actual skill and ability to impact the outcome of matches.

What? Where do you get that information? As far as i’m seeing it, you and whoever else believes that is simply lying to themselves since they are low on the leader-board. Seriously though, where did you read that time played was the factor by which the leader-board determined your position?

heres an actual source since you have failed to provide one http://www.glicko.net/glicko/glicko2.pdf

Seems a lot more complex than your theory of time played

The last leaderboard was in no manner a sign of skill. It gave points per win and even could get a point for a loss. Sheer volumes of games played were determining positions on the leaderboard.

Ostrich Eggs had something like a 65% win ratio. He played less than the guys who were on top of the leaderboard. So he got less points.

It was a farmingboard, not a leaderboard. It’s why the upcoming season has been changed to place more importance on winning than games played. Go read today’s post about it.