You realize u can throw any number on a spreadsheet and say you did extensive testing. I’m calling bs that a rev can even come anywhere close to 30k dps on anything less than full buffs
it wasnt spreadsheet wars. it was a test on the golem. and the 23.5k with realistic buffs is far higher than your 15k and in the top 4.
It’s not a good calculation to be fair.
For some weird reason, the herald test, unlike for other classes, is done with perma alacrity which allows to use #2 more frequently and inflates the final results.
In any case, over 20k are totally possible, and that’s still a lot higher than 15k.its a good calculation because its “realistic”. the revenant will always be in a party with a chrono. and the dps difference without alacrity is insignificant
But many times it will be just with the chrono, in which case he could easily be missing many of the other chosen buffs.
I don’t know, even if Herald isn’t exactly the class that benefits the most from alacrity, I find kinda unfair to make DPS comparisons using different boon setups.
You realize u can throw any number on a spreadsheet and say you did extensive testing. I’m calling bs that a rev can even come anywhere close to 30k dps on anything less than full buffs
it wasnt spreadsheet wars. it was a test on the golem. and the 23.5k with realistic buffs is far higher than your 15k and in the top 4.
It’s not a good calculation to be fair.
For some weird reason, the herald test, unlike for other classes, is done with perma alacrity which allows to use #2 more frequently and inflates the final results.
In any case, over 20k are totally possible, and that’s still a lot higher than 15k.
Rev DPS is considerably higher than Warrior’s, but Warrior provides a much higher party wide stat bonus than Rev, which in the end results on higher total DPS and thus, a preferred choice (might stacks can be handled with a Herald and a Chrono).
Rev also provides Fury, extended Boon Duration and even Protection if needed. However, Fury can be handled by Druids which, now again, provide more powerful party wide boosts on top of healing, and the boon duration, which is important mostly for quickness, can be covered with exotic commander trinkets with platinum doubloons.
Protection can be interesting, but far from needed.
Revenants also provide great CC, but that’s something where warriros shine too and both classes tank their DPS in the process.
It’s definitely not an easy case.
Rev DPS contribution going up is not a good solution. If it manages to compete with warriors’ then those will be out of the meta because Revenants can provide protection on top of might, and that could easily become a problem for Guardians too.
The best approach could be about ensuring that the boon duration bonus remains desirable for mesmers (maybe destroy platinum doubloons, although I’m not sure if it would be enough). This could promote the Herald+Chrono two man group, which I find great as it uses a single spot for each class.
Having the Chrono a pretty much guaranteed spot in every raid group, double chrono comps becoming a thing looks quite dangerous.
Same could be said about Druids, whose Fury upkeep make Heralds less desirable.
In any case, Herald, while in danger, is not in the worst position among the nine classes. Too many mirror groups, so too many double-X comps, don’t leave room for all classes to be represented.
Something needs to happen to promote asimetry, like the Chrono+Herald group, the single healer, the old Engineer slick shoes which never had to be duplicated, …
With the buffs you listed you won’t get 40k on elementalist unless you’re testing on the 1M golem, which provides unrealistic results due to an extremely bursty opening.
On the 4M HP Golem, and without taking advantage on tricks like precasting an Ice Bow, you should be getting “just” slightly above 30k on a large target and even less on a normal one.
Those same buffs should be enough for the Herald to be really close if not above 20k DPS.
(edited by Vargamonth.2047)
I don’t know which realistic buffs you were using, but there has to be something wrong if you’re getting 15k on a Herald and 40k on Tempest.
Would you mind linking the path you’re using?
ANother pain point is how much effort and money is needed to ascend gear – fractals get you rings, laurels get you amulets – crafting gets you your armour and weapons, im level 457 weaponsmith – materials cost too much – yet vendor price only costs copper?
Place buy orders for the materials you need to craft a Berserker’s Pearl Reaver. Craft it. Put it on sale for slightly less than the lowest direct sell price (ignore buy orders).
Once it has been sold, proceed again and again and again until you reach 500. Just take it easy.
Obviously check numbers (or let a web do it for you) before every craft because prices might change (remember there’s a 15% total tax).
Completely ignore ascended armor. You only need it for the highest fractal levels, and you might get it as loot just by playing the levels below. Now again, just take it easy.
What game mode are we talking about?
Shiro/Glint is the most common thing in PvP these days, but weapon swap is definitely used there.
Weapon swap is far less valuable in PvE: most people probably bring hammer for open world as a ranged option while staff is used in raids and fractals for barely anything but the #5 CC skill. On the other hand, Shiro is probably the less useful legend for raids and even for several fractal fights, specially if you bring a decent chrono.
Not saying the class is OK. It obviously has serious design flaws.
Jalis and Ventari skillsets are pretty much useless in PvP and there’s some mess with Mallyx and all the changes it received during the beta without proper side updates.
For PvE, the reasons to pick Jalis, Mallyx or Ventari for high end content are laughable: Either an strong antiprojectile tool or a small damage bonus where self quickness stops being useful, with 3/4 of the skillset being almost completely unused.
Can’t speak about WvW, but I guess the majority of the class is quite useless there too.
Glint is probably the only legend that remains truly strong in every game mode, and that’s probably because the obvious lack of sinergy between most core legends.
So, in my opinion, the first big thing that should change for Revenant is a completely locked utility bar for each legend. We might keep single heals and elite skills as long as they’re interesting enough, but we should get a couple more regular utilities to play with and replace all the kitten our chosen gamemode has no use for.
(edited by Vargamonth.2047)
It’ll be interesting to see if they survive as a concept beyond HoT. They were apparently very well received at launch, but anecdotally speaking, they seem wildly unpopular and out of place.
They suffer from the same problem that many other unpopular content: lack of meaningful rewards.
Those that hate them, hate them passionately, specially after being somewhat forced to play them for mastery points.
Those who love them, like me, have barely any reason to invest our time on them. We might give a couple of tries to the ones we know we’ll get gold easily for a fast rare (exotic drop rate seems ridiculously low) if we happen to be nearby and that’s all.
Spending a good time trying to improve and beat our own record for nothing? Even if I do it from time to time just for fun, it has all the ingredients to be a really niche activity.
(edited by Vargamonth.2047)
What the game really needs is some initial aproximation of roles for the matchmaking.
Amulets could be used for that. Something using paladins could be taken as a bruiser, while something with marauders is more likely to roam and +1.
In no way is it going to be perfect, but it should easily be a step forward from almost completely random compositions.
Power Rev is still really strong, but I’m not sure about it remaining top tier if mesmer, which is a direct counter, is there too.
After straight victories during S2 I asked myself “What is the meta chrono builds weaknesses? How could I beat this.” So I logged on to warrior and went about destroying it.
So it’s hilarious to me that you can’t take the proverbial weakest class and beat the Super Mighty Morphing Omega Power OP Chrono. Warriors in the warrior forum, more warrior than I’ll ever be, have attested to the counter. This is the definition of what it means to be a scrub at play.
“OMG, Mesmer so OP, I can’t beat it with my established meta build/class. I refuse to learn and/or take steps to bring a different a class/build capable of doing the job. Woe is me! Nerf Anet, please. Its my only hope!”
And before you go getting your panties in a twist, nobody’s saying things like Double moa via CS doesnt need consideration etc etc, but if you think Mesmer is so OP because it’s utterly unbeatable, well this is simply not one of those times.
Anyway, don’t let me derail the hate train, it’s wildly entertaining. Choo choo!
:D
Unfortunately having a build which can beat chronos isn’t enough.
You could do that on a Warrior and you probably could have done with different classes too, but in the end everything is about how well the build performs when not facing the chrono.
If the chrono finds there’s a build that counters him in the enemy team, he will just try to avoid it during the whole match, something he probably won’t have many problems doing with vertical blinks and portal.
Sometimes you might be able to catch him on a situation where he has to fight you or concede a point, and definitely you’re going to counter his overall impact in the game … but that’s something that will also happen to you, and your build capabilites on that situations is what determines if it’s a viable counter o not.
Another big problem with adventures: many us (probably the ones who like adventures the most) aren’t competing against the gold timer anymore. The gold time mark is far far behind what we usually do so we get a yellow item on the first try without any effort, and then, any time spent trying to improve and beat our own record (which can be A LOT) goes totally unrewarded.
IMHO advneture rewards should be reworked and made more interesting.
There could be some additional reward for getting gold medal N times in a row, for beating your own highest personal score, for achieving one of the best N scores of the day … that kind of things.
I don’t expect it to cause any inflation. We were probably on a deflationary economy which needed some fix.
You pretty much answered yourself.
What’s the point?
If I were a new player, why whould I skip a couple of weeks of exploring low level maps at their intended level and learning the ropes of the game?
Why would even pay for an endgame expansion before reaching level 80 when I can experience all the leveling content and much more for free?
As a veteran player, why would I need this kind of item when I’ve already stockpiled a ridiculous amount of knowledge tomes and maybe even birthday scrolls?
There always has been people out there who look for “end game” content from the very beginning, for whom leveling is an annoying process even the first time.
I guess those are mainly the ones this feature is trying to tease into purchasing HoT.
Anyways, if I’m going to receive a free shared slot everytime, they can make as many marketing experiments as they want. There’s hardly any satisfaction loss with this one.
In my experience as a Shiro/Glint revenant, Mesmers are far more dangerous than reapers, even without taking moa into account.
I find Reapers to be somewhat beatable (it obviosuly comes down to how much life force the reaper starts with and what amulet the revenant is using, and may also require to give up the point for a few seconds when they get into shroud).
Which title holds more prestige? It absolutely comes down to how much one does value grind as a source of prestige.
For a decent player who doesn’t play many matches a day, S2 legendary is far easier to get. On the other hand, S1 legend was pretty much guaranteed for a not-so-good one who played a lot.
I disagree, some pro streamers wouldn’t have made it to legendary if they didn’t team up with their pal. I viciously grinded rank during Season 1, only to get stuck at ruby Tier 6, then again i only play warrior. However, the S1 meta (not the algorithm) made it possible for the average bunker mes/ druids/ ele to make legendary with grinding.
You’re right.
S1 was a handicap for the best players because the Matchmaking couldn’t find similar MMR allies and enemies for a competitive game. This often did lead to weird matches, facing ESL premades over and over or having the burden of an absolutely uncarry-able guy just for MMR balancing purposes.
For the average player? Not so much. A much larger pool of close MMR players prevented most of this, so it was mostly about playing a lot of around 50% winrate predcited matches until a double pip win or a no pip lose happened (which was actually more common on low-mid MMR brackets, since many full/partial premades there are nothing but friends playing together, getting barely any advantage from premading).
Your case is actually quite special because you’re playing with a non-meta class.
During S1 the game tried to balance MMR for both teams. If you were playing a warrior while the other team had a guy with a MMR value close to yours using something like, lets say, a bunker mes, the odds were stacked against you.
On S2 you might eventually overcome the build handicap with skill. That was just impossible on S1 unless you tanked your MMR way below your true level.
Some average guy that reached legendary on S1 just by sticking to a comfortable meta build can be, on the other hand, totally stuck at some point of ruby/diamond this time.
Which title holds more prestige? It absolutely comes down to how much one does value grind as a source of prestige.
For a decent player who doesn’t play many matches a day, S2 legendary is far easier to get. On the other hand, S1 legend was pretty much guaranteed for a not-so-good one who played a lot.
It would be interesting if we could had a fix for this tomorrow, with no material time to complete collections just by buying spots :P
Lets try this …
35 baubles: 1 super weapon skin. 1 super weapon skin: 7x gold. So 35 baubles: 7x gold.
We should also look at what the gem/gold conversion was when those boom boxes were introduced in the gemstore and how the “value” of gold has evolved since then.
100 gems used to cost about 5.2 gold back then, so a boom box would be around 41.6 gold (equals 24 old ascalonian catacombs runs, just for the shake of pointless data).
The price for dusk precursor, for example, is only 36% higher than during those days, so we could say that those 41.6 gold would worth around 56.6 today, which is less than the 7x gold a super weapon, which equals 35 baubles, costs right now.
There’s no way to properly estimate the value of something involving account bound currencies, after more than two years and on a compeltely different state of the economy.
The truth is, boom boxes probably did not sell well the first time they appeared , so ANet expected a similar result this time and decided they could make a better use of them this new way.
I could understand the outrage if a gemstore item would be reintroduced for a pityful amount of gold a few days or weeks after leaving the gemstore, but after more than 2 years?
It’s not even the first time something like this happens. Just look at the majority of finishers for example: after plenty of time being gemstore items they were moved to Black Lion Chests, made tradeable and now are sold for arguably cheap prices on the trading post.
Unless I’m completely wrong and I am the idiot here, and mastery rank 163 IS obtainable without HAVING to do these “adventures”; then PLEASE, someone correct me! Though if it’s true that you’d never attain mastery rank 163 without doing at least some of the adventures (including “gold”), then they REALLY * NEED * to come up with a different or another way to be able to obtain this without HAVING to do these stupid “mini games”…
</rant>
You need to do some adventures to reach 163 mastery level, but you don’t need to complete every single adventure on gold to reach that cap.
Fallen Masks Gold is definitely something you should be skipping if you are only interested on capping the masteries. Depending on your ability to play shooter games, you may also want to entirely skip Shooting Gallery (both silver and gold).
The Floor is Lava, as someone pointed above, isn’t really that hard (there are far easier ones tough, so it may also deserve a skip).
It can be very ping or lag sensitive and maybe impossible to do under a bad connection.
Outside of that, there’s no RNG involved and it’s mostly about picking a good spore sequence, which is where i think most people are failing.
(edited by Vargamonth.2047)
perhaps the gains and loss of MMR needs to be updated in the next season.
for example, if losing to a team with higher MMR, the MMR should not reduce by too much, just a bit, and vice versa perhaps.
That’s how things are already supposed to work. Glicko2 MMR does it by default at least, and I can’t see any reason for that part of the formula to have been changed.
There’s a constant (-400 by default) which rules how big the shifts are during unfair matches, so the change is really simple if they want to push this feature firther.
That only applies to full premades.
With the first season system, someone with a too high MMR would have been outweighted by placing a lower MMR player on his team.The really good players who advanced fast during season one, did it mostly not only on full premade but also including a smurf account which lowered their mean MMR and division placement.
Even if they did it to lower stupidly high queue times, it definitely also helped on having even overall easier games.thats just false. I watched plenty of soloq streams that proved otherwise.
I guess there might be plenty of different cases. I can recall some Helseth stream where he got a negative progression on emerald after playing for several hours.
MMR based divisions would be great and would definitely produce way fairier matches, but they are also a LONG term competition.
It’s not reasonable to expect people to vastly improve out of sudden in the span of a few weeks, so players would see a very slow, if any, progression.It only matters if you make the rewards depend on them. Award tickets based on some other criteria.
Well, that’s where the big problem exactly is I guess, on wether if we want rewards to be “skill” based or not.
MMR based divisions would be great and would definitely produce way fairier matches, but they are also a LONG term competition.
It’s not reasonable to expect people to vastly improve out of sudden in the span of a few weeks, so players would see a very slow, if any, progression.
If the idea behind leagues is to offer a short progression based system, then making them also skill based is far from easy.
The first league was far more grind than skill based. This second one is better in that sense, but we are all seeing obvious downcomes in the system.
Having some initial MMR played spread along different divisions would definitely help.
(edited by Vargamonth.2047)
If the MMR is accurate, there’s no reason for good players to have an above 50% winrate. They’re being matched against players who in theory are as good as them.
If anyone gets a steady over 50% winrate, someone in the same MMR bracket needs to be necessarily below 50%.
It’s the same situation for everybody but the very top and the very bottom.
Except that’s not how things work in real life. Above assumes an infinite skill range with an infinite player base constantly playing so you can get the best possible match up.
The real story is that good players don’t always have peers on to challenge them. So MM matches them against someone a step below. Hence, they end up with a greater than 50% win rate.
I mean I don’t even need to prove it, look at how much faster the good players progressed back when it was meant for 50-50. They obviously had much much higher win rates than 50%. The actual legendary players got it weeks before all the grinders got it.
That only applies to full premades.
With the first season system, someone with a too high MMR would have been outweighted by placing a lower MMR player on his team.
The really good players who advanced fast during season one, did it mostly not only on full premade but also including a smurf account which lowered their mean MMR and division placement.
Even if they did it to lower stupidly high queue times, it definitely also helped on having even overall easier games.
If you have a decent amout of ranked games, your MMR should be pretty stable and few lost games won’t affect it much. New player’s MMR should drop faster. And if you have an average MMR it means there are about as much ppl with lower MMR as there are with higher MMR so it is very unlikely to get matched only against those better players and it is getting less and less likely the longer the league is going on.
“few lost games”
Well yes – but the problem has been that people are getting massive losing streaks 10-15 games not being uncommon. This is going to have a significant impact.
If the games were really unbalanced, the MMR shift could be as little as losing a couple of regular fair matches.
I don’t think you can really say something like that confidently without knowing the numbers.
What we can say is that people’s actual experience is that their matches, win or lose, are generally significantly lopsided – in my last 10 games I’ve only had 2 come within a 200 points difference. The losses are brutal, the wins are a cakewalk.Glicko2 formulas are public.
For a 1500 MMR player, losing agaisnt a 1900 team weights 5-6 times less than agaisnt a 1500 one.
For a 1100 MMR player, losing against the 1900 team wights about 50 time less than against a 1100 one.“Glicko2 formulas are public.”
Anet’s algorithm isn’t.
Saying our system is based on the Glicko2 formula is like saying this film is BASED on a true story.
Also actual accounts of people’s experience is reality.I hope you’re not from the “you’ve lost 15 games in a row?!… lol l2p, matchmaking’s fine” camp.
edit: actually their algorithm IS public: https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/PvP_Matchmaking_Algorithm
… enjoy the read.
There’s a whole section in the wiki about the matchmaking system, and it directly links to the wikipedia Glicko2 article.
The only stated change is about volatility, which is mostly a deviation increase over periods of inactivity.
The Glicko2 produces lower MMR shifts the less fair the games are (high MMR differences, high enemy rating deviation, …).
Honestly, I have no reason to even think they could have changed this.
I consider myself a slightly above average PVPer. I jumped into ranked the last 2 weeks of season 1 and got to about halfway through Ruby. playing an average of 15 matches a day. This season, it seems like i’m on the “bad player list.” Could my MMR rating have suffered because i got into the season late?
15 matches/day for 2 weeks seems a high enough number of games to have a somewhat stable MMR with moderately low deviation.
Slightly above average is, however, a quite dangerous placement. You could be being paired with fresh players (probably with way higher MMR than they should) for catastrofic results.
If you have a decent amout of ranked games, your MMR should be pretty stable and few lost games won’t affect it much. New player’s MMR should drop faster. And if you have an average MMR it means there are about as much ppl with lower MMR as there are with higher MMR so it is very unlikely to get matched only against those better players and it is getting less and less likely the longer the league is going on.
“few lost games”
Well yes – but the problem has been that people are getting massive losing streaks 10-15 games not being uncommon. This is going to have a significant impact.
If the games were really unbalanced, the MMR shift could be as little as losing a couple of regular fair matches.
I don’t think you can really say something like that confidently without knowing the numbers.
What we can say is that people’s actual experience is that their matches, win or lose, are generally significantly lopsided – in my last 10 games I’ve only had 2 come within a 200 points difference. The losses are brutal, the wins are a cakewalk.
Glicko2 formulas are public.
For a 1500 MMR player, losing agaisnt a 1900 team weights 5-6 times less than agaisnt a 1500 one.
For a 1100 MMR player, losing against the 1900 team wights about 50 time less than against a 1100 one.
How does season one MM prevent bad players from climbing up to legendary if they’re matched against other bad players for fair matches, so around a 50% winrate?
With the first season system, everybody but the very top and very bottom plays on equal ground.
I would even say that it’s easier to climb with a below average MMR, since premades hardly play like premades in those brackets and performing good against them usually granted multiple pips (which is what makes players advance on the 50/50 scenario).bad players = 50/50 win loss or worse. They might get a win streak out of amber, but they will go on lose streaks too and go back into amber.
50/50 = no progression.
Previously bad players could grind it out. They could wait for a 5 win streak basically and tier up. That wouldn’t happen with these changes. The losses would out weigh the win streaks.
Not sure how to make it any clearer.
Bad players will have low MMR and have a 50% or less win rate which means no progression.
Good players will be above 51% and progress until competition is too tough for them.
Starting at low MMR you’ll have worse team mates if you can truly carry anyway. Its not like MMR is static, it will also raise or lower to become more accurate. But that can only happen if you have even match ups…
If the MMR is accurate, there’s no reason for good players to have an above 50% winrate. They’re being matched against players who in theory are as good as them.
If anyone gets a steady over 50% winrate, someone in the same MMR bracket needs to be necessarily below 50%.
It’s the same situation for everybody but the very top and the very bottom.
If you have a decent amout of ranked games, your MMR should be pretty stable and few lost games won’t affect it much. New player’s MMR should drop faster. And if you have an average MMR it means there are about as much ppl with lower MMR as there are with higher MMR so it is very unlikely to get matched only against those better players and it is getting less and less likely the longer the league is going on.
“few lost games”
Well yes – but the problem has been that people are getting massive losing streaks 10-15 games not being uncommon. This is going to have a significant impact.
If the games were really unbalanced, the MMR shift could be as little as losing a couple of regular fair matches.
1. Revert MM changes/bring back season one MM
2. Make ALL tiers/divs losable. (yes even amber tiers)
This makes fights fair again. Keeps bad players from climbing into legendary.
How does season one MM prevent bad players from climbing up to legendary if they’re matched against other bad players for fair matches, so around a 50% winrate?
With the first season system, everybody but the very top and very bottom plays on equal ground.
I would even say that it’s easier to climb with a below average MMR, since premades hardly play like premades in those brackets and performing good against them usually granted multiple pips (which is what makes players advance on the 50/50 scenario).
You’re confusing MMR with league division. You could be a legend from last season with a horribly low MMR, or be a pro-league player in last season’s amber fighting other pro-league players.
MMR isn’t just +1 if win, -1 if lose. If you expose yourself to a 50/50 win ratio longer than someone else you will have a higher MMR.
Technically, you should just get a lower MMR Deviation (another parameterm tied to your MMR which indicates how acurate it is), with your MMR staying somewhat stable.
I really don’t understand how ppl can defend a system that pair good team vs bad team, and don’t try to balance the matches.
I don’t defend the current system.
I think it’s increadibly moronic, as whatever the final player spread between division is, it’s going to be a close copy of a MMR spread, which is something we already have but it’s just hidden to us.
It’s nothing but several weeks of unbalanced matches (specially at the very beginning) which, in the end, fulfill no real purpose.
The system is, however, among the few possible ways to achieve a short time progression based competition which is also tied to player skill.
It’s not easy to have both.
Most players won’t suddenly improve in the span of a few weeks, so on a MMR based division system (since it’s the most accurate measure of skill), they wouldn’t see any progression at all.
On the other hand, on a pip based division system which takes MMR into account to produce fair matches (like the previous one), there’s no skill measurement at all.
It’s basically a grind driven system where anyone can reach any division as long as he plays enough and where legendary players from some MMR bracket would be demolished by Ruby players from a higher one.
Yesterday, kept winning 90% of my matches, today impossible to win a single one, what’s going on with this matchmaking.
I don’t know what your current league position is, but you need to realize that matches were going to become increasingly thougher past amber.
There’s no pip loss in amber so even players with really bad winrates can make their way through it from the very beginning, which means you can get paired against them and easily win.
All these players see their progress suddenly slowed down once the pip loss begins, having to rely on lucky win streaks to advance a tier.
Without these players, the overall skill level of the next tier becomes higher, blocking some other players that were comfortably progressing before, and so on.
The players who complaint about the old system are probably not the same ones who do it about the current one :P
I think, you can even gain higher MMR from defeats, if you score better than expected. So a lost game doesn’t neccessarily mean a disadvantage for further games. At least that’s how it should be.
Glicko algorythm can’t do that unless it has been heavily modified.
It’s a system used for chess after all, and there’s nothing like a score there AFAIK.
the thing is brannigan, it doesnt take into account my mmr when building the other team. This means that we could literally be queued against abjured for the forst game of pvp. We would lose, and as a result our mmr would drop, resulting in garbage situations such as this. Basically if you get lucky on the first match, and get queued with a good team, you get started on a track in which you get queued with better teammates, and then you start curbstomping people, and the opposite is true if you start off queued with a bad team. How is this hard to understand?
As far as I know, MMR has not been reset for the new season, nor it did for the previous one.
All but new players are starting the season with a MMR value acquired through months of play.
On top of that, MMR variations based on the outcome of any match are tightly tied to how even the match is.
For example, if you are at 1500 MMR and Abjured is at, lets say, 1900, a loss against them would weight roughly about 5-6 times less than a win or loss against a team around your own 1500 rating.
For a 1100 MMR player, losing against The Abjured would weight about 50 times less than an even match.
Even if in small doses, the new system can definitely tank down low MMRs and push high MMRs up for a noticeable score at the beginning of every season, and that could cause some problems in the long run.
The idea around your fate being heavily determined by the outcome of the first season match is, however, completely wrong (as long as there has not been MMR and deviation resets).
I’m really keen to see an example of a person who has 15 winning streak and is in solo queue.
I have won the 10 games I’ve played, all of them running alts for the league profession achievements.
The opposing team reached 400 once, and 300 in other two games. 4 times they didn’t even score 100 points (one of them being a 500-0).
I’ve had the easiest games at the end of amber / beginning of emerald, probably because that’s the point where all the people who cross amber through grind against low winrates gets stuck.
And I’m not even close to ESL level.A screenshot showing the wins from the Season 2 PvP league menu that proves your statement. Or it did not happen.
http://i.imgur.com/u0ZVBY3.jpg
There’s no way to tell that I was solo tough
(edited by Vargamonth.2047)
I’m really keen to see an example of a person who has 15 winning streak and is in solo queue.
I have won the 10 games I’ve played, all of them running alts for the league profession achievements.
The opposing team reached 400 once, and 300 in other two games. 4 times they didn’t even score 100 points (one of them being a 500-0).
I’ve had the easiest games at the end of amber / beginning of emerald, probably because that’s the point where all the people who cross amber through grind against low winrates gets stuck.
And I’m not even close to ESL level.
Vargamoth made reference to the same idea by suggesting that players avoid pvp to allow the stronger players to move out of amber.
I find the suggestion deeply elitist.
Please explain why I should not be able to play, for the convenience of more skilled players? Also, please explain why I should not be able to get a level playing field for the first several days of the season?
It’s not for the convenience of more skilled players. Those are going to advance without problems anyways and open a gap once they reach the divisions where pip and tiers can be lost.
It’s just for saving less skilled players from an experince they could find disgusting. If you’re having terrible losing streaks but you’re still having fun, there’s no problem if you keep playing (I just think that playing unranked could easily provide a far better experince during the first season days).
Could the system be tweaked so less skilled players don’t met this situation at the beginning of every next season? Sure.
We could have, for example, some pre-season qualifying games and directly place players into higher tiers or even divisions from the very beginning (these qualifiers would be, however, the same slaughterhouse as amber is right now, and not every player is guaranteed to partake on them, specially if they’re interested on some easy wins for profession achievements), or we could just do it directly based on MMR.
That poses the question, however. if all except the ELS players will stop playing in order to wait them out, how those ESL players are going to advance? Wouldn’t it be better, then to actually play more, in order to feed them wins that much faster?
ESL players are not the only ones advancing fast right now.
I’m certainly not ESL material and I’ve won every single match I’ve played today while playing on alts for the class achievements.
About 50% of the PvP population should be experiencing an above 50% winrate, so there’s no reason to wait for them.
The only time a player should think about stopping (or moving to unranked for a while) is when facing a clearly sub 50% winrate.
“We’ll then find you opponents within that same pip range and pair them against you, regardless of their skill level.”
Correct me if I’m wrong, but this comes from the homepage, and noone is mentioning neither win rate or MMR anywhere.
I played again today, mostly soloQ now, and matches were pretty random. 500-200 loss because half the team gave up, 500-200 win because my team looked at the minimap and knew how to rotate, and a pretty devastating loss because I personally sucked that match and botched objectives. All factors are random, human, and not arenanet’s.
“We’ll search for other players that fall within your pip range (which can extend outside of your division depending on where you’re currently placed) and pair you up with teammates who have a similar skill level to your own. We’ll then find you opponents within that same pip range and pair them against you, regardless of their skill level”
When they talk about “skill level” they mean MMR, as it is the only way they’ve to measure it.
At the start of the season, your own team is created somewhat around your own MMR, while the opposing team is formed around some enemy player MMR (so totally unrelated and random to you).
@Vargamonth.2047
Am I to understand that you recommend that players do not play PvP? Of course, it makes sense that all other players should stand aside for the ESL pro players and those of similar skill levels.
After all, it stands to reason that those without very high skill levels don’t deserve to be able to queue and enjoy the game. Does it not?
I recommend to not spam RANKED games.
Unlike the previous one, this is not a grind friendly system. If you want to play PvP, just play the 3 daily games for the league achievements if you are interested, and then play unraked as much as you want (which is going to provide fairier matches at this point).
After a few days, there will be some kind of MMR spread between divisions and you’ll have a much more enoyable experience in ranked arenas.
Why are people even talking about MMR? It’s irrelevant in Season 2. The matchups are based on your league progress. If you have 0 pips in Amber, your match will be with and against other players in that vicinity.
That can include an 0-50 mouthbreather or a pro league all star who just hasn’t played yet.
Not unless is full premade vs full premade.
If the system has to create rosters, your teammates will be chosen based on your league position AND MMR, while your enemies will be chosen only based on your league system (they will be put together based on someone’s MMR).
The old system totally failed on making divisions a reflection of “skill”.
Many people reached high divisions, but everyone did it on his own “MMR bracket”.
The current system is far better for this purpose, but it obviously has the downside of completely unbalanced matches at the beginning of every new season.
Average and below average players (hard to tell without any access to our MMR rating, but easy to guess after looking at the outcome of a few matches under the new matchmaking) should probably take it easy during the first days (maybe just play 3 matches for the legendary backpack achievements if they’re interested on it) and let other people advance.
Trying to climb divisions through grind against a below 50% winrate is not going to solve anything, as you’ll keep getting paired mostly against higher MMR players who are not spamming so many games.
Win Streaks are good if you play in a team.
As a pug? No.
Even if we talk about skill level, I still get those matches (even now) People with Primordial Legend titles who play like noobs.
If you solo q, no matter how good you are, you will get matches or 1-2 persons in your team who will either go far every time and die every single time too.
So what if you are skilled but your teammates are….
So it clearly works in your disadvantage. Just because as a solo quer, you can never control the other people in your team, yes you can team chat but guess what there are those people who take advices negatively then proceed to throw the game.
- As long there is no exact way to tell MMR, you will get teammates that absolutely have no idea what they are doing. Yes Chaith, You and I both know (With the High MMR you have) you still get those people when you que.
Well Atleast we get the losing streak being broken by 1 extra pip, but I just think it’s time to address or show our MMR. I am so sick of matches that are easily winnable yet you get those people in your team that seem so oblivious to pvp mechanics.
Primoridal legend indicates nothing but the player reaching legendary division during season one ON HIS OWN “MMR BRACKET”.
The matchmaking won’t use MMR to balance matches anymore. If you’re in the high-end of the MMR spectrum, you will be teamed with other high MMR players and matched against another team on the same league position but with a completely unrelated MMR rating.
Basically, the clueless legendary (probably lower MMR) you used to get in your team for MMR balance purposes will be now on the opposing team and you will get one of the decent ones you used to play against.
Well, most likely you won’t be at the same division that the clueless legendary anymore.
You’re applying old matchmaking with a new streak mechanic, not taking into account that decent players will breeze through early divisions on streaks with the new PIP based matchmaking.
The new matchmaking system may be even worse. After all, if it’s trying to present “fair” match-ups each time, then how can an individual player expect to win more than half his matches, much less consecutively?
The new matchmaking won’t try to create “fair” matches anymore.
The system will use your league position to select which players you are matched with and against.
However, your MMR (which is the most accurate “skill” measure the system can get) will only be used to choose your allies. The enemy team will be created around another random MMR value, based on availability on that league position, which could be way higher or lower than yours.
At the very beginning of the new season, for example, with everybody being in amber division, a solo player with high MMR will be teamed with other skilled players against teams statiscally far worse than them.
These players will count the majority of their games as victories, gaining a lot of bonus pips through streaks and rapidly advancing through divisions.
The main purpose of the streaks (which will happen, A LOT) is to acelerate the speed at which more skilled players progress through the league system, so less skilled players met faster the situation in which they can have fair matches and eventually become the top dogs of their division and advance too.
With the new system, if you ever face the situation where you’re at 50% win rate, it can only mean two things:
1) You’re in a transient state in which you’re at the average MMR of your league position. Over time, the highest MMR players on that position will advance and be replaced with players that you already left behind who shouldn’t be hard to beat (unless you advance through grind, which can be specially true for the lower divisions where you can’t lose tiers or even pips). Eventually, you’ll have an above average MMR for that position and start to win more than you lose.
2) The MMR spread over divisions is completed and the majority of players (except those who played too little, or those at the very top or low end of the MMR spectrum) will face winrates around 50%.
This state will probably be caused by skilled but not PvP dedicated players reaching legendary status and losing interest. These players probably won’t aim to climb through legendary N tiers but still appear to complete their dailies, and will eventually create some kind of bottleneck at legendary division (and high diamond tiers).
It’s not extremely different from the first situation, just a much slower transient which could easily create hard division caps for some MMR tiers by the end of the season.
The discrepancy between hammer guard and rev is so large that even another minor nerf to rev will kick em from raids permanently.
The discrepancy is only that high when you just factor in the personal DPS.
If DH does 24k DPS and herald 19k, that would mean DH is doing 26.31% more damage than herald, which is definitely A LOT.
Thsi doesn’t account, however, for the effect of those 150 ferocity additional points over another 4 players. If the crit damage on full berserker gear is around 215% and 150 ferocity means a 10% increase in critical damage, assuming 100% crit chance, every other character would see its phisical damage increased by about 4.5%.
If the herald is mid tier DPS and we can take the herald DPS as group wide average, this little boon can easily reduce the discrepancy to below 10% levels, which is still a noticeable amount, but doesn’t exactly allow for a lot of other sacrifices in the group composition.