Guild Wars 2

Its a sunk cost.

The glicko system isn’t performing well and it needs to be scrapped in favor of a more simple system that can be adjusted more easily.

It should have been done a long time ago.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Implement-Winner-Moves-Up-Loser-Moves-Down/page/3#post1455783

Some people, including me argue for winner up loser down.

Some people, including me argue for changes to the math.

Arenanet seems content though, and this is what matters most. Perhaps in March we will see something done.

I think their glicko system could work with some minor adjustments along with a ratings reset that does not simply set the ratings all to 1500.

The main problem with its current state is its a system that wants to lock servers into tiers. In the design phase the system designers made the erroneous assumption that the WvW system would be capable of reasonably balanced matchups. We are now suffering the consequences of that error.

Peetee.9406:

You cant fault people for transferring to JQ. It’s the only NA server that offers an active population every hour of the day. It’s not dishonorable to want people to play with.

Blackgate also has an active population every hour of the day.

Jade Quarry and Blackgate have players on maps at all times 24/7.

SOR has people playing about 30-50% of the time and is fairly dead the rest.
SOS is spotty as well with very strong presence when they want.

Kaening I do not know about as they are fairly new to the top levels.

Tarnished Coast is a lot like SOR (playtime-wise only)

anything below tier 2, especially tier 4 and lower you start getting into situations where sometimes your server will just have almost noone on the maps at times.

Even the servers with little to no non-NA presence like SOR will have at least one map you can find allies during odd times so long as you stay in tiers 1 and 2.

http://mos.millenium.org/matchups#NA has a list of what servers are in what tiers.

did not vote.

do not feel the game “is really awesome” and i am not “getting bored” either.

The game is worth playing.
The WvW system currently is extremely flawed.

At the same time it is very much above and beyond what the game’s competitors have to offer so i will play it as long as this remains the case.

I reject the premise based on the my experience with burst builds seeming overwhelmingly popular and effective in every MMORPG I have played including those with the trinity.

I feel there is not enough evidence to support the hypothesis that the lack of the trinity is to blame.

I am also skeptical of the link between the lack of trinity and ubiquitous condition damage removal you are drawing. I feel this was a lower level game design decision and unrelated to the higher level trinity decision.

i find it rewarding so i play it.

Elochai, you’ve convinced me that it can be fun to play when your server is 10k, 20k, 50k, or even 100k points behind the other servers.

Now convince us that WULD is a worse system than glicko!

Bedstain.6735:

No offense but SoS would kit on T2, and JQ would kit on anyone they come against.

absolutely!

Things would pretty much be the same as far as the point spreads go in those tiers.

Lavath.8924:

Fuzzion.2504:

Lavath.8924:

Heya Jeb. I couldn’t help notice that your sig reads “JQ since beta”. I was wondering.. beta of which game?

I reckon you are trolling, but just in case you are not, and english is not your first language, his sig states he was in JQ since the beta programs of last year.

Which would be a false statement… hence my question.

Some people like to brag about how they have been on JQ a long time, before it was cool and all.

Some people think thats funny.

I especially do as I was clearly on JQ before any of them. I inherited my account from my grandfather, shown here choosing JQ as his server in 1953.

covenn.7165:

fivekiller.1432:

covenn.7165:

tons of fights with EMP tonight. I enjoy them and I am glad you never give up, that is the mark of true warriors.

same to you!

i know every time my server or group fights TW, when we come out ahead you guys are going to run right back and give it your all!

When that happens the first time, I guarantee you that we will be proud to follow your example and tenacious attitude. You have really set a gold standard that should be followed by all.

lol, you are a funny fellow.

i’ve never been defeated either.. should we ever meet on the field no doubt the battle would be eternal!

i see no problem with a server sitting out a week in WvW so they can get an easier matchup.

that is possible right now and we don’t see it happening. i doubt it would ever be a big problem.

especially considering WULD would just put them back up there the next week.. the current system actually supports gaming the system more as if they were to take a week off and move down a tier they could sit there longer with glicko than they could with WULD.

Swamurabi.7890:

TC and FA would just flip between T2-T3 week after boring week.

T2-T7 for Red and Green will be just alternately stomp and get stomped. For Blue it will be stagnation.

WULD will lead to the same strategy at all tiers: STOMP RED, because Red is two tiers below green every other week.

Your argument that “TC and FA would just flip between T2-T3 week after boring week” is what most supporters of WULD use as the entire basis for their argument.

You spin it like this is a bad thing but we look at it from the perspective that these servers get to alternate winning and losing RATHER than just staying stagnant as the constant and seemingly unending winners or losers of their tier.

It’s just a circular conversation because some are pointing out the flaws in WULD without considering how it compares to the current system.

Geko, Which tier are you talking about?

I don’t wish to make projections for several months. The current system will yield roughly the same results over the course of months as winner up loser down will so i’m not sure its entirely relevant.

As far as how balanced those matchups will be?

the answer in my personal opinion: not very balanced at all.

Once again though, the WvW game mode itself is not capable of balanced matches. So as far as finding balanced matches goes there is not going to be a matching system capable of doing that.

I will just agree to disagree on your assumption that every other week will be a worse week than we are currently seeing for the majority of servers. I’ve seen no evidence this is the case.

wads.5730:

i dont understand why people think this is a good idea. do people not have the ability to extrapolate future match ups if they switched to this method?

http://mos.millenium.org/matchups#NA

Here is what it would look like if it were implemented and switched right now with the current scores.

[t1]
Jade Quarry
Sanctum of Rall
Blackgate

[t2]
Sea of Sorrows
Kaening
Fort Aspenwood

[t3]
Tarnished Coast
Dragon Brand
Yak’s Bend

[t4]
Maguuma
Crystal Desert
Ehmry Bay

[t5]
Stormbluff Isle
Devona’s Rest
Anvil Rock

[t6]
Isle of Janthir
Borliss Pass
Darkhaven

[t7]
Northern Shiverpeaks
Henge of Denravi
Sorrow’s Furnace

[t8]
Gates of Madness
Ferguson’s Crossing
Eredon Terrace

covenn.7165:

tons of fights with EMP tonight. I enjoy them and I am glad you never give up, that is the mark of true warriors.

same to you!

i know every time my server or group fights TW, when we come out ahead you guys are going to run right back and give it your all!

TW’s dedication and ability to weather tough times and keep fighting both with and without friends at their back has really helped your server out. That guild’s die hard attitude really shows.

salluks.6017:

didnt EMP lose 5-0 against Votf?

proof here
http://www.guildwars2guru.com/topic/80025-tier-1-gvg-emptsym-hb-votf/

EMP has probably lost a lot of fights to VOTF. i’ve also seen EMP wipe VOTF many times.

these are both excellent guilds with a lot of great players.

take any great guild like HB, VOTF, EMP, RG..
they are gonna win some and lose some, thats just how it goes.

all worthy of respect.

[EMP] on Jade Quarry imo

Thobek.1730:

does anyone other than SoR players post here?

I’m not from SOR.

Here’s a post! (and a nifty score update)

here is a thread that goes over all of it.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Instead-of-Reviewing-the-Math-lets-Remove-it/page/3#post1434324

proponents argue that careful examination shows the common reaction, stating “it would lead to imbalanced matchups,” is an invalid argument.

opponents argue that “it would lead to imbalanced matchups.”

i’ve never seen a strong argument against it.

just some baseless rhetoric, “what ifs,” and copy/paste responses of those.

the best i’ve found was made by a fellow in a similar thread who pointed out that while it may be better than the current system for many or most of the tiers. it would possibly periodically ruin the one or two good matchups that do occur here and there.

covenn.7165:

Nuked.2360:

ConradR.6940:

PRX why did you guys leave JQ BL just now? TW and CDS are bored now. Did yall just go to SOR BL for easy points? lol …. cowards

Would be nice if TW didn’t run in 50+ man groups when we were fighting can’t call people cowards if no one can use skills on our end.

Sorry.We dont have 50 in the guild. You must be mistaken

Exactly 15 of us online right now.

The game mechanics do allow us to run with those not in our own guild.

A: It depends.

You may be put with a lower rated server that may leave you in anywhere from a better to worse position balance-wise.

It is also possible you will simply be playing the same servers until the day the servers go away.

if you want to ask a more detailed question I can attempt a more detailed answer.

i’m all for it.

covenn.7165:

Anyways, it is kind of funny that we have more people from T2 servers currently posting in the T1 thread than we do from T1.

Its nothing worth getting upset or angry about! We should try to just relax, take a deep breath, remain calm, and have a score update!

wads.5730:

fivekiller.1432:

it is bad with a system incapable of generating balanced matches.

such as the one we are using (i think, open to correction).

its not the system that’s incapable of generating balanced matches, its the fact that there aren’t an even number of well matched servers. for example, there are 7 T1 servers populating T1-2. any one of those servers will be a good match for any other, which always will leave 1 T1 server to dominate T3. there is NO system that would solve this issue.

similar problems exist in lower tiers. this new proposed system would not give balanced matches anymore than the current.

Sorry, the system to which i was referring was the WvW game system as a whole apart from the glicko/matchmaking. I wasn’t clear.

I believe the way they have designed the server setup and the WvW gameplay as a whole altogether creates a system incapable of creating balanced matches. Their ranking system is a separate system altogether that would then also be lacking as it seems reliant on there being some semblance of balance within that WvW system with which it interacts.

wads.5730:

it’s not a bad thing for everyone. it’s ONLY a bad thing if the ‘locked in’ matches are imbalanced. anet and wvw players would much rather have balanced matches, but against the same servers, rather than one sided stomps against different servers every week.

it is bad with a system incapable of generating balanced matches.

such as the one we are using (i think, open to correction).

Krakah.3582:

Azure Prower.8701:

All I can say is, I’m looking forward to fighting Kain and TC next week.

Kain for the old WM rivals and TC because they’re awesome.

It’ll still be about 2 more weeks at the earliest, since there’s no change in the rating system. It could happen faster if there’s a WvW boycott though.

On a side note, it would be interesting if there was a mass boycott of WvW across all servers showing displeasure at the shallow resources the PvP side of the game is getting.

my fear would be the resource pool would only become that much more shallow!

not saying its a bad idea though.. dunno

Ungood.3054:

Kerithlan.1659:

katz.8376:

Kerithlan.1659:

This is an interesting analysis of what I’ve posted because I’m not posting speculation, whereas you are.

Ungood posted numbers anyone can find quite easily on the millenium matchup site.

where does your ‘evidence’ come from? can you point to it and say “here it is… this server has this many people, that server has that many, and they used to have so many more/less.” where is your proof? if it’s nowhere but stored in your head, its not proof.

http://xkcd.com/558/
http://blog.thinknewfound.com/statistics-without-context-are-just-numbers/
http://www.badscience.net/2011/01/putting-a-number-in-its-context/

Furthermore all of the transfers that took place were discussed at length in each tier’s respective match-up topics. I’m not going to dig them up because — frankly — you can do it yourself. I understand that you want the burden of proof to be on me, but I already know how important statistical context is and don’t want to be roped into lecturing people regarding things that have nothing to do with the topic.

This is a real fancy way to say “The numbers disagree with me, so I am going to deny their validity and toss around rumors to support my claim”

I linked a viable site, that anyone who knows anything at all about WvWvW uses. You have “Oh yah. I read it on the forums somewhere”

Keep trying.

Fact > Theory.

Maybe you never should have said that to start with, if you knew you never had the the facts to begin with.

it doesn’t take much proof.

I can throw a dart at the matchups list and likely hit a tier where green up red down will result in a matchup that is either equal or better than the one the glicko will yield.

there are fewer instances i can find where the glicko system will yield an equal or better matchup.

I had a dev point out where I was wrong about something in a thread earlier, i’m open to the possibility there is a problem with winner up loser down none of us are seeing. Noone has pointed that problem out yet though.

Kreen.3925:

That is actually a very good score update, I can see Fiesty has a challenger.

I wouldn’t dare challenge Fiesty, but i’m glad you liked it!

I just snap random images and get lucky every now and again. Fiesty turns out good work every time

kid of like this guy suggested?
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Cap-the-maps-already/first#post836098

the bot issue is old, but my point still stands that servers could close out a map and then organize a blackout on it holding it with a minimum of people, gaming the system and killing the fun.

maybe i misunderstood your idea though?

My list would include close to 20 tiers.

Things seem even like with SOS and SOR, and BG and Kain right now.. but take JQ out of the mix and do a few SOS/BG/SOR runs? it won’t look as even most likely. SOS and SOR only look even when they are both being suppressed by JQ.

points-wise, the system we have that arenanet has created is not capable of producing balanced matches in the way most would normally consider a match balanced.

as such I would say my subjective impression is we have around 20 separate tiers, with 24 servers.

my advice is:

When you want to complain about Nightcapping,
Do a 2 page write-up about how you/your server really doesn’t suck,
Say “thanks for all the bags”,
or Demean/defame any person, guild, or server,

instead, just:

Post a score update!

Score update, Get your nightcaps on peeps!

Its always a sign a guild is doing well when everyone is trash talking them randomly on the officials.

The bit about breaking up healthy tiers is probably the best argument against it(winner up loser down) one could make.

The only problem being there are so few healthy tiers. (and no matchup change will help that)

This is the problem that would have to be addressed somehow before any matchmaking system can work to everyone’s liking.

oZii.2864:

So my upcoming match would look like

Ehmry bay vs Borliss pass vs SBI

I don’t think this is right.

From the current matchup, if you are on Ehmry Bay, your tier would do the following:

Ehmry Bay will move up and trade places with SBI.
Yak’s Bend will trade places with Maguuma.
CD will move into 11th place in T4.

your new matchup (from green up red down) would then be

Maguuma – Green
Crystal Desert – Blue
Ehmry Bay – Red

*note: this is the same predicted matchup next week under the current system.

and you might say you have no chance against Maguuma.. but as it is you guys are mopping the floor in a tier that has no chance against you and Maguuma is getting stomped in their tier so.. your new matchup would be anywhere from about the same to better.

oZii.2864:

It will add variety thats for sure and the people of T8 would maybe have fun fighting someone different for 3 days then it would suck.

So you admit it would be more fun.

fun fighting something different for 3 days = 3 days of fun

3 is greater than zero.

i learned a new one.

so from now on when my server outnumbers the other server i can say “its because we are so skilled you guys all left the map.”

good to know!

Soon SOS will skillfully outplay SOR into leaving a few maps. followed by that JQ will outskill the other 2 servers tomorrow afternoon until they leave the maps as well.

all in all i guess by that logic JQ is the most skillful as they more consistently use their skillful play to empty the enemy from their maps.

i dig it.

Catisa.6507:

winner moves up and loser moves down is a TERRIBLE idea. There are huge difference between most tiers and you’d just end up with massively unbalanced matches every single week.

This is not the argument I would take against this.

As you and another have said, the proposed system would result in some bad matchups.

What you guys must realize is the current system has resulted in “massively unbalanced matches every single week.” Currently over half of the servers in NA are playing in matches they know with near certainty they can not win.

The whole premise is that there currently is not balance within tiers, that there is not balance between tiers doesn’t exactly counter the OP’s argument.

Takerukun.8924:

While anything might be preferable, it’s demeaning to everyone involved to think that a solution that’s still terrible, and which would lead to WvW populations probably having a bi-weekly turn out for the most part, is still a solution. It makes no sense that anyone should be happy for the conditions to go from dismal to below sub-par.

the previous posters didn’t all suggest “anything is preferable.” it was only said as a sort of off the cuff jab at the current system.

a solution that is less than optimal but better than the current solution isn’t demeaning to anyone.

The best solution would be one that addressed competitiveness in WvW altogether so that matchups could be more competitive within a given tier. Since that isn’t happening any time soon if ever, a less than optimal solution would then be preferable.

What those who say things like “a bad matchup every other week would not be fun” are ignoring is that right now there are at least 13 servers in a matchup that they have nearly zero chance of winning.

that is over half of all servers playing a battle they know they will lose. many of which know they will be in the same battle next week and many weeks after.

its not ideal, but what many who preach the problems of disparities between tiers ignore is the disparities already existing within tiers.

time zone wars, hammer trains, culling abuse.

its all just part of the pro strat.

take all of that away and there will just be organized groups using some new pro strat we will all complain about.

such is online gaming!

Besetment.9187:

Volatility. It means that every other week you go from completely smoking a server with vastly inferior coverage to getting dominated by a server with vastly superior coverage.

This is the reason to support such a system.

The situation you describe is preferable to the current.

Malandreca.8261:

Or if u are in denial check this grafic

http://mos.millenium.org/servers/view/29/20

See some padron?
I hope you saw some light there

do you mean to say “pattern?”

if so, the most obvious thing that stands out is that the score differential starts out tight and gets steadily more erratic as the graph continues.

before the graph becomes more erratic on the Wed Feb 6 mark, none of the datapoints appear to be very far off from the mean aside from the 14:12 Feb 4 point where green is at 435.

I haven’t done any math but thats the only one that i would hold suspect as more than a standard deviation or two out from the mean just within that one truncated period of time.

kefro.9312:

But we have to change mentality here if dont Anet should do something or we will end with everyone on 1 server banguing doors with no oponents.

Maybe some of us really do not like doors and are fine with this.

Stay the course imo.

can’t help but notice SF is ticking +600 in a blowout match.

yet is still losing rating :/

why is green moves up red moves down a worse system?

i’d personally rather see some servers in a (stomp/get stomped) cycle than servers sitting for weeks or months on end in one static state of stomping or getting stomped.

if you actually look at the matchups as they are now and apply the green up red down system you would find next weeks matches would be somewhere between the same and much better — not worse.

kefro.9312:

Don’t care, it’s from the bandwagon server so there is no skill

if you are on Ferguson’s Crossing why are you so worried about this matchup thread?

on a separate note – The garrison doesn’t count until you get a WP in it.

i think its a fair point.

siege is often more useful in a tower than outside and players are often safer outside a tower attacking than inside defending.

it is strange

kefro.9312:

wvwvw is going 24/7, but the points will go on 2 or 3 night with 500/600 points per tick so after some days is useless to even join in wvwvw.
The true score is what you see at weekend day time when the numbers are balanced. After that is just pure player vs doors if you are happy with that cause you win even when it was proved you were much worse when the players number is balanced… good for you.

personally, i feel the only true measure of a server is their performance between 5am and 11am central tuesday morning.

to each his own i guess.

This has been known a while. Here are some videos showing it.

This shows how to attack from below a tower:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b72bKmc5qXc

and this one shows how to kill enemy siege out of attack range from atop the tower:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CwM4u24ERA

I’ve read or seen nothing to indicate that is is a glitch, bug, or abuse of any kind. The “guard” ability outside of this has absolutely no use whatsoever so I can only assume this is the single reason to keep such an otherwise worthless ability on one’s bar.

MikeFerguson.8921:

We decided to remove them from the spawn points because far too many people were just bouncing into WvW so they could use all the services there for extended periods of time without actually going out and fighting in the map, which just exacerbated the queue issues for many servers.

At the same time, we were also looking to make the personnel upgrade path for keeps a little more enticing for players, so moving the bankers out of the safe areas and into the upgrade path was a way for us to tackle both issues at once.

Yes, people can still use the crafting stations in their server’s borderland map to reach their bank, but we consider that to be a bit of ‘home field advantage’ if you will, and so far those haven’t seemed to create a bunch of traffic that isn’t interested in just camping out in the safe zone.

This makes a lot of sense then. I am a convert.