What would be the problem with if you have an ally D/C or leave or whatever, at the end of the game you get a pop up asking “did this player’s absence noticeably affect the outcome of your game?” or something like that. Just a yes or no.
if anyone says yes then you get deserter. if nobody says yes then the D/C never happened.
I also see it as a problem if a team can win the match but have someone desert naer the end, which means their 4 allies all gain LB points, but their MMR does not increase. If the desertion penalty was -4 then it wouldn’t be exploitable because the +4 points you get for the 4 games it wasn’t your turn to desert would cancel out the -4 for desertion, however if it’s -3 then you can infinitely grind leaderboard points without your MMR ever increasing.
hmmm idk
Warrior with portal
warrior with lich form o.O
d/p thief with Moa
Necro with supply crate
if your build can consistently win 1v1s and survive a long time in 1v2s, then eventually you will have a 1v3+ at far. if your team isn’t getting completely outplayed everywhere else, this should almost always start things in your favor.
going far comes down to how well you can mechanically fight 1v1 and 1v2 battles, and also knowing when/how to bail/escape.
if a map mechanic is worth changing your entire build around then it shouldnt be in competitive play
mesmer natural predator is thief and there are lots of thieves around so very little mesmers. also there aren’t enough necros around which is partly why so many engi/eles out there. if nobody plays mesmer at all maybe the thieves will starve and die allowing mesmers to come back into meta. wat
Go to whatever point you want to. If you suck and going to die quickly then I prefer you distracting them a little bit at far instead of rallying the first person I get downed at mid.
but since you only lose a point when you perform less than expected, then in theory your ladderboard points could be equal to your wins, if you’ve never performed less than standard??
if you play mostly solo would it be fairly accurate indication of skill to look at their ladderboard points divided by their wins? higher the % the better they are.
the logic behind that would be the highest % players had the fewest amount of losses that they were expected to win. in other words, all/most their losses were because they were matched against a team they were expected to lose to, and htey performed better than expected.
does this logic make sense? ladderboard points divided by total wins?
Eles have amazing condi cleanse and knockdowns and knockbacks. Necro doesn’t own them that easily.
ele cleanse can’t keep up with necro condi pressure unless the ele simply outplays the necro by evading every important skill the necro tries to land, and with all the dodging they aren’t really doing much DPS either and you’ve just built up full DS. once they start attacking they leave themselves open to attack (because for the most part the more offensive skills have longer cast times during which they are vulnerable).
my warrior has more condi cleanse than a d/d ele and if i’m not careful a necro will kitten me up.
I believe that the shortage of Necros nowadays is partially the reason why there are so many eles and engis. Necros, their natural predator, are rare these days which has allowed the engis and eles to multiply in rapid numbers and corrupt the meta.
necros are wolves and engis and eles are deer and pvp is kittening Yellowstone. yea the metaphor sucks who cares lol
before they changed UI they didn’t want to make templates because they would have to redo them with new UI.
not sure what the reason is now though. dont care?
yea say you have 5 people all exactly 400 MMR
if they all queue solo and get on a team together, that team’s MMR would be 400.
but if they all join a party together and then queue, their MMR should be more like 500 for that queue.
the reason is because if winning is 50% communication, then it severely limits how often someone can play competitively (in other words, can only play competitively when a full team is available and online).
with this revised system the team of 5 players with 400 MMR would be queued at 500 MMR which means if they go against a bunch of pugs, those will all be high-MMR pugs and it should be a tough match.
lich form OP.
but yes necros need to be babysat a lot. but with good team support they absolutely wreck a lot of the builds that tend to cause the most trouble.
lol what you said makes sense but my point was if there is a mesmer around a good thief will hunt the kitten out of him and make him mostly useless a lot of the time. if no good thief around the mesmer can probably contribute a lot pretty freely.
i just think the system should give you an increased predicted chance of winning based on how many people are in your party.
mesmers are one of the best boon strippers which is one of the best ways to counter celestial might-stackers.
im surprised we don’t see more of them.
reason is because thieves too gud?
Its because Prot is burried and hard to remove and burning doesn’t need Might to kill. So the Cele tank has plenty of sustain and having Might stripped doesn’t have much effect on its Mesmer murdering.
i was more imagining the mesmer adding to an existing fight not 1v1’ing an ele
I see haha. So no matter how much you lost at 0 ladderpoints, it wont matter at all.
dat time wasted tho
mesmers are one of the best boon strippers which is one of the best ways to counter celestial might-stackers.
im surprised we don’t see more of them.
reason is because thieves too gud?
there is a limit to how low your MMR can go (zero?).
so this sounds technically exploitable but it would have a maximum benefit of like 10 leaderboard points or something smallish. and you could have gotten those 10 points faster if you just won.
to me fighting d/d ele is like fighting a warrior. they have a lot of sustain over time so it takes a coordinated burst to get them down as fast as possible is the best way otherwise they will always be able to ecsape and they will be healed by the time they reach whatever fight they rotate to.
keeping the ele pressured out of the point prevents them from stacking too much might which means on a cele amulet they are not super dangerous.
also boon stripping isn’t being used often enough in this meta as it probably should be.
I once solo’ed the foefire lord and got him down FTW when the enemy had 499 points and a 2-cap. In chat they were like “gg” “WTF!”
I also had a 4v5 on temple that ended in a tie. good times.
it is important for a large portion of the player base to have a sense of constant progression. wvw’s ranking system is limitless for most players. pvp used to feel a lot like that, but now R80 is much easier than it used to be. reward tracks aren’t the answer. meaningful leaderboard would add a nearly limitless aspect of possible progression for many players.
You said large scale battles. I believe you would be interested in the World vs World section, as the PvP is matches of 5v5.
i haven’t had a major issue with this. i’ve had some matches that never started and i had to queue again, but the amount of time i’ve spent re-queueing is far less than the amount of time I used to spend in 4v5/5v4 matches, and that is preferrable to me.
the main point is that the premade team would get put in queue at a higher MMR which means if they face less than a full premade team, the people that they do face are naturally higher MMR players therefore the match is closer to balanced.
so you are saying if you win 500-499 or if you win 500-3 that your MMR changes by the exact same amount either way?
i don’t believe that is correct Mr Ghost. although i’ve seen things in this game that made even less sense.
it probably depends on your MMR. it always feels like as your MMR increases, instead of getting more skilled enemies, you simply get kittentier allies. (queueing solo i mean)
if you’re playing solo it’s often dangerous to rely on winning a big team fight because you’ll usually have 1-2 noobs that rally everything you manage to get down.
only if the enemy is a full pre-made. if you’re a team of 5 against a group of 5 pugs, it would raise the standards of how well you must perform in order to gain leaderboard points.
I understand that part, what i’m saying is it should take your average MMR and then increase the average based on group size, to account for the better coordination that you SHOULD have in a group.
If so, how much? and if not, why? Why isn’t the system making the assumption that if a team is in a group that they should work together more successfully than if they are queued solo.
to me it would make sense to have like a 5% increase for each person in the party, up to 20% MMR increase for a full party of 5.
i play condition sw/sw LB warrior and I typically run straight to far to prevent the full cap. with 3800 armor and 1k healing power with lots of condi removal and dodges, I rarely die 1v1. in most cases I get the kill and the full cap, unless I am in a 1v2 which happens a lot. In a 1v2 my goal is to survive long enough that my team caps mid and home by being 4v3. Then someone rotates far to assist me, or I gtfo and defend our 2-cap.
it tends to work very well playing solo because if things go well at far I can get the kill and full cap and hold it for several minutes and end up with a starting score of like 100-0.
its a more 1v1 oriented build based on forcing enemy rotations rather than coordinating my own rotations. that’s why its’ good for pugging but maybe not such a good strategy in a coordinated match.
may some people are confused because the OP says matches will be played on Monday.
i have had that happen w/engis before. not eles.
i queued for ranked. then i left the queue to go do some bank rearranging. after 2 minutes being NOT queued I got a ranked match pop. i played and won so I ain’t mad yet haha but still, I can confirm this is happening.
if mighty.meak is still around maybe he can play 24/7 to get #1 rank and get his girlfriend back.
just so you don’t read this incorrectly – this would be a way to basically NOT queue for a match, but still say “I’ll play a match if it’s really balanced”
it would fix the issue of being trapped in the mists if you have something else you’d like to do and it would provide a step in between strict and zero matchmaking standards.
So I have an idea that might fix a LOT…
So maybe you’re doing map completion or crafting or something. You aren’t queued for a PvP match, but you would like to PvP if it’s a very balanced match. No problem!
My solution is PvP players, once they hit a certain rank, would have an option to “allow ranked PvP queue finder”
What this means is the matchmaker starts with pretty strict requirements of making a very fair and balanced match. After a minute or two, instead of resorting to lax standards, it will now search the online players with the “allow ranked PvP queue finder” option enabled. If a player is online and their MMR, class, etc is a wonderful fit to round on the teams, a message pops up to that player that a fair/balanced match is ready if they want to accept. Even though they are not in queue! They get 30 seconds to accept. During this time the server is checking if there are any other people that meet requirements so if the first person declines it will ask the next person.
It asks up to 5 people, or 2.5 minutes total time, before relaxing the matchmaking standards
It would not invite people who are in dungeons, instances, PvP matches, WvW, or with dishonor, even if they have their option enabled and are a perfect fit. They wouldn’t even be part of the search.
The option would automatically disable every time you logged out of GW2, meaning everyone that has the option active has intentionally activated it during their current gaming session (other words, there is a good chance they will accept)
if i had your goal:
a settler amulet condition warrior with undead runes is great for far point “time waster” that you speak of.
longbow + sword with either shield or another sword off hand. something with minimum 0/2/6/0/3 you can spend the other 3 points in different ways depending….
This build is fast enough with signet of fury and sword 2 to easily get to far point right off the bat before the enemy can cap it.
This build has very high armor and regeneration and is defensively strong against both condition and direct damage. When played well, this build has a good advantage against thieves, mesmers, rangers, engineers, and necros that are not condition based. it doesn’t do really well against guardians, other warriors, elementalists, or condition necros, but it can survive quite awhile against pretty much anything. A fear-based condition necromancer is your biggest threat.
it’s not a pure bunker that you are describing, but it is very bunkery and also the classes the enemy team usually sends home first are typically the ones you have an advantage against, so you can waste a lot of the enemy’s time with this build – imo more than you could with a pure bunker build simply because you can actually kill the far point defender and cap the point for yourself a lot of the time where a bunker can’t do that.
Look up Soldier amulet hammer+longbow warrior builds. look for ones with defensive traits (such as 0/0/6/X/X) and uses stances and healing signet.
in my opinion this is the lowest possible skill floor because of it’s very strong passive defenses, allowing you to focus almost purely on playing offensively and strategically.
when you’re running for your life all the time it’s very hard to learn anything about the game. as you learn you will be able to play builds with less passive defense, allowing you to expand your offensive and strategic build options to suit your preferred playstyle.
Sometimes it seems like elementalists are necros on unlimited death shroud but with faster skill CD and higher mobility
good condi necro will wreck a celestial d/d ele in 1v1.
Hi Solstice. In theory sure but in the highest tiers, when Phantaram (ele) beat Nos (nec) it further confirmed its favorable imbalance. And since you’re still working on a necro, I dont know if you actually believe your comment.
Wasn’t Nos built for power though?
It’s might stacking + cele as a combo, neither one necessarily on their own. With these 2, any bunker ele build can hit like a truck. Warrior is the same, look at the new meta sword/warhorn + longbow build. You don’t see zerk d/d eles in spvp for a reason, it’s not nearly as viable. It’s cele/might stacking that’s the issue, not d/d ele.
its might stacking that allows cele to be viable. i can’t think of any celestial builds that aren’t also built to stack might.
and even before celestial, the builds that were called OP the most all were built around might-stacking.
i don’t think it should be normal for people to individually stack 20 stacks of might. yes with allies you should be able to stack lots of might, such as empower, blasting fields, mesmer transferring boons, etc. but in a 1v1 the ele with might stacking runes gets up to 20-25 stacks without any help. that’s just too much, too often.
but it’s not WAY too much. if everything that gave 3 might stacks turned into 2 might stacks it might be too big of a nerf. might have to counterbalance that a little bit with a small boost somewhere else.
one step beyond dueling, let’s go free-for-all!
Sometimes it seems like elementalists are necros on unlimited death shroud but with faster skill CD and higher mobility
good condi necro will wreck a celestial d/d ele in 1v1.
nightshade is a troll. or else he is new but thinks he’s smarter than literally everyone else.
i was playing some practice matches and I notice it keeps adding players to the same team.
what i mean is its 2v2. then its 3v2 red. then its 3v3. then its 4v3 red. then its 4v4. then its 5v4 red. then its (maybe) 5v5.
shouldn’t it be the 5th player is added to one team, the 7th is added to the other, and the 9th is added to the team that is losing?
it would be 3v2 red then 3v3 then 4v3 blue, then 4v4, then 5v4 with the 5 on the team that was losing.
currently in practice matches you spend most of the time 2v3, 3v4, 4v5
if the other people don’t disappear it would be impossible to fight a stealth class in a crowd. also it would be way more intense if everyone fades away but your opponent, the music gets heavy, and the menu lights on fire.
In short – hoelbrak builds up stacks quicker, but strength builds up to a higher total number of stacks.
i’d LOVE to see dueling as an option across the game
you can challenge anyone to a duel. the animation would be slapping their face with a white glove
if they accept, the other toons on your game disappear temporarily and a timer counts down from 5, and you fight for 30 seconds. whoever dies or has less health after 30 seconds loses.
The other people in the map can see you 2 dueling, but you can’t see them. They can watch if they want.
You could maybe even bet in-game currency or items on the duel.
IT WOULD BE SO kitten!
You could also use 2-3 mouse clicks to block all dueling invitations.
In WvW or a PvP match you cannot duel an ally. Nor in a dungeon or mission.
You cannot bet on gold or items if you are in queue for WvW or PvP, nor can you queue for those while you’re in a duel.
The possibilities are endless!
oh, and while you have the “dueling” buff, the heals/boons/etc of other players do not affect you or your enemy.