Guild Wars 2

I’ve played GW2 practically since launch and spent most of my time in game almost exclusively playing sPvP.

Here is why I quit and have no intention picking it up again in the foreseeable future:

-5v5 is the only game mode that’s been available since launch, what about 2v2, 3v3, 10v10?
-There are literally 4 maps that most hardcore pvpers would even consider voting for and playing, the others seems gimmicky or suffer from bad map layout.
-New transmogs on a seasonal basis. Why do i have to constantly spend rl money to unlock new weapon and armor skins? I don’t mind spending the odd bit of coin to support a game that i love but having to do it consistently to get access to a new shiny skin is ridiculous.
-Casual competitive play. I want to have the tools available to me to start a party and select people who i think will be able to play at a certain skill level from a search list and then queue us up for a fight.
-Build diversity, make at least 2 builds viable per profession…please.

You don’t need esports to draw people in and keep them playing. You need to offer incentives for playing, diversity in game modes, objectives and builds, as well as the tools for people to play how they want, when they want. You should not have to sink a significant amount of time into setting up teams etc… things like that should be able to be organised on the fly.

These are things the sPvP community have been asking for for years. Being a long time and dedicated pvper, I feel shortchanged, neglected and undervalued as part of the player base. GW2 has dynamic pvp, it’s fast paced, adaptable, easy to learn but hard to master and it’s incredibly frustrating to watch the pvp scene become stale due to neglect. Let’s be honest, that’s what it is.

OlrunTheBlade.1486:

Your wins and losses are really the only good way the game has of measuring your performance at the moment. Defining it any other way is really just salt showing through.

Not exactly sure what you mean by the second part of your paragraph. Seeming as winning relies on good team cooperation and/or coherence it is as I said, a very loose measure of your individual performance and more indicative of the success of the previous teams you’ve played with. I feel your use of the word “good” to describe this particular method of statistical analysis misplaced.

Looking forward to taking part in these once I get my hands on my new rig. Will this be a regular event from now on? Every 2 weeks? Every month?

Regardless, thanks for all the effort you’ve put in to organising the event. I’m looking forward to watching the stream.

OlrunTheBlade.1486:

You’re matched based on a hidden MMR (based on your performance) not your rank (based on how long you’ve played).

MMR is very loosely based on your personal performance but it’s more an indicator of the performance of the teams you’ve been in.

High MMR players do not queue against other high MMR players. How many of you even know how MMR and matchmaking work? If MMR calculation is flawed then, inherently, so are the matchmaking algorithms.

ketchup.2783:

it’s not a farfetched assumption that the percentage of games you win correlates reasonably well with skill and smart decision making

right… until you realise that sPvP is after all, a team game, and not a 1v1 environment. The games you win correlates reasonably well with overall team skill and smart decision making*.

As I said, it was a joke, just thought I’d reiterate that lol… In any case why would I or anybody else rage at a score that’s not even a good indication of your actual skill level? You hardly know me so saying I would react in this way or that way is really just an unsubstantiated claim and rather irrelevant to the “debate”, if that’s what you’re actually looking for.

Whats the point of knowing where you’re ranked on an MMR scale when it means very little? People are complaining about the leaderboards because they are “farmboards”; it more or less boils down to whoever plays the most matches, or has a good solid team will be ranked higher than those that don’t

You say: “it may be broken but it is the score which you are assessed.[sic]”. Let me pose a hypothetical situation. Say a Police Academy chooses 10 of their best performing candidates every year, based on the number of donuts they ate every lunchtime as opposed to their aptitude to perform their job correctly, would anyone that is actually serious about becoming a excellent Police Officer pay much mind to the results? No. I understand that the two situations are quite different although the underlying argument is still the same.

How do you know that 1/2 the people who come on the forum think they’re better than they actually are? Also how do you know many people have that attitude when some indication of their MMR has never been available to them?

I spoke with Sizer a number of weeks ago and he said he’s looking at slowly getting back into the competitive scene.

Teams to watch are currently TCG (The Civilized Gentlemen), oRNG (Orange Logo) and the Abjured. There are number of other great teams but these are quite often seen as the top 3, oRNG is possibly the best team currently. ESL, Academy Gaming and AspectGG all offer platforms for competitive tournaments and there are probably a number of more obscure 3rd party organisers.

If you want to start following the competitive scene I’d suggest catching up with the past WTS (World Tournament Series) matches on youtube as well as any of the other tournaments that have been recorded. Other than that keep an eye on the websites of the aforementioned organisers for when tournaments are scheduled, stream details etc…

1) Good point, that would work as well.

2) Your point about good competition is sound, but I believe having exclusive rewards as well as good competition would be a win win situation for us sPvPers. I don’t see any reason why this couldn’t be implemented in addition to the other points made.

4) They are both tied in with one another but yes I agree. I am certainly not a fan of the “Farmboards”.

5) Again, if these kinds of competitions can be successfully managed to provide competitive 2v2 and 3v3 matches through 3rd parties I don’t see why Anet isn’t capable of achieving the same. In any case perhaps an alternative would be to provide and ingame system whereby these kinds of competitions run by 3rd parties can be setup and managed as well as allow for ingame signups and notifications.

6)The reason why I suggested a queue split in addition to the option of 2v2 or 3v3 is that MMR could be more accurately measured and as a result matchups that are more even could be provided. In a PUG environment MMR is difficult to measure but in a stable team environment it would be far easier to gather statistics that are indicative of the skill of the team on a whole . This would provide a more competitive environment without the need to go through 3rd party organisers

kdaddy.5431:

xemplifi.3524:

To answer all your points conclusively, MMR calculations are, just like the leaderboard, flawed.

Points 1 and 3 are contradictory. You say to keep it silent and then you say that you want it displayed.

Your team calculations at the end make utterly no sense at all. You say you’ve been on a 2-1-1-1 (4 players) and a 1-1-1-1-1-1 (6 players). Secondly, how do you know you’ve been on such teams if MMR is not displayed? Premades can also be made out of 5 complete newcomers to sPvP, which means it’s hardly an achievement worth noting if you defeat them with your PUG.

I have tangoed with some of the best in 1v2’s and survived, I have tanked and kited 4 players + for periods of time lasting up to 2 minutes, in those moments I was… GODLIKE and I dare anet or anyone else to tell me that my MMR is 1!

I fixed my numbers there for ya since you took it very literal. Also how does it not make sense. Everyone has a base MMR and it goes up when teamed with another player.

Also you surviving vs 2 there are so many questions like did you own the point, was it in neutral or did you run into a cap point where 2 people were and just killed yourself. Also what ever frustration you might have towards it are you not interested?

The better question is when seeing your MMR will it make you rage? If it does i guess i see why anet wont let people see there mmr since they cant handle the truth. I want the truth but if you cant handle it i guess its better to be stuck in limbo.

I think you should start by reading both of these wikis:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glicko_rating_system
https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/PvP_Matchmaking_Algorithm

After that if you can still justify the importance of having a useless statistic such as MMR displayed then go ahead. The point is that in its current iteration it’s flawed, it’s not a real indication of player skill so what is the point of even displaying it?

Initially that entire paragraph was meant as a bit of a joke, albeit the information was sound. Surviving and winning a 1v2 (something which has occurred numerous times for me, usually every second game or multiple times in a game) means that the rest of my team are fighting 4 vs 3, so whether the point was capped or neutral is really a non issue, this will allow them a 2v2 2v1, or a 3v2 1v1, the benefits of such a matchup are obvious. Surviving also generally means surviving and hence surviving and suiciding at the same time are incompatible.

To be honest I’m not entirely sure why you’re convinced I’m a bad player. Granted, wishful thinking does permeate much of society.

There are enough discussions expressing salty views on burning and dd cele/eles. Lets all do something more productive with our time. Contribute to the discussion fellas. BUMP.

To answer all your points conclusively, MMR calculations are, just like the leaderboard, flawed.

Points 1 and 3 are contradictory. You say to keep it silent and then you say that you want it displayed.

Your team calculations at the end make utterly no sense at all. You say you’ve been on a 2-1-1-1 (4 players) and a 1-1-1-1-1-1 (6 players). Secondly, how do you know you’ve been on such teams if MMR is not displayed? Premades can also be made out of 5 complete newcomers to sPvP, which means it’s hardly an achievement worth noting if you defeat them with your PUG.

I have tangoed with some of the best in 1v2’s and survived, I have tanked and kited 4 players + for periods of time lasting up to 2 minutes, in those moments I was… GODLIKE and I dare anet or anyone else to tell me that my MMR is 1!

I just see an inherent problem with measuring player contributions in 5v5 especially in a PUG environment. I don’t really ever expect to see a leaderboard that covers all the bases. Sure if they are organized teams it’s rather simple, Team A beats Team B, Team A is the better team, Team A advances on the ladder, Team B moves down the ladder or maintains the same rank. For this very reason I would like to see the introduction of 2v2’s and 3v3’s as they would require less organization to form and maintain than teams of 5 as well as broadening the scope of sPvP in GW2. 3 basic forms of gameplay and endgame experiences exist right now; PvE (FotM, Legendary farming etc…), WvW and sPvP, the latter is by and large the least developed out of all of them yet it offers the most dynamic and fast paced gameplay experiences on a moment to moment basis. It’s reasons like this that I feel anet is sitting on a number of very large gold veins but refusing to even scratch the surface. Can we have some feedback on this discussion Anet, so that we can have some clear cut reasoning for why some of these things have not been implemented so far, and what it would take in order for them to be implemented?

Thanks for your post Trevor.

1) Would it really be that difficult to implement such a thing in sPvP alone? I understand that it may make certain stat allocations less viable, such as celestial, but would it not also provide us with more options and make certain builds more viable so that we could begin to move away from the “1 build for each class” meta?

2) I can understand your point here and i completely agree. However, I wasn’t suggesting that we be given something similar to the current rank or leaderboard system but a ladder which is more representative of skill. In a 2v2 or 3v3 environment (with no solo queue) that’s a lot easier; say if team A wins against team B, team A gains 1 mmr point and team B loses 1 mmr point. In this way only those who are actually playing at a competitive level will be able to unlock the right to purchase those items, after achieving say top 1000, top 500, top 100, top 10 etc.. I’m not suggesting that reward tracks be removed completely, of course I would encourage them to add more if anything, which would perhaps encourage more of the community to get into sPvP. I understand that most pvpers, myself included, only wish to get better at the game and become more well known in the community, but with that said I also think that offering us some other incentive or reward would be nice. I mean, who doesn’t want to walk around in some swag you know you earned through hard work and skilled play? It’s like a visual medal of achievement.

5) I can see your point but is it really impossible to offer some kind of lasting balance to a 2v2 environment through the removal of certain skills or the banning of particular amulets? If 3rd party sites and organizers can create a set of rules or guidelines which make this kind of competition viable why is it that anet cannot?

A list questions about sPvP posed as ideas.

!!BEWARE WALL OF TEXT!!

i)Remove amulets and allow us to create our own custom stat distributions using an allocated number of points while ensuring that there is a maximum number of points which can be allocated to any one stat

ii)Create more incentives for those who wish to focus on the sPvP side of the game by offering pvp specific items and skins. Perhaps some as a track rewards and some earned through achieving a particular rank on the leaderboard. Offering a single set of Glory armor in cloth, leather and heavy seems a bit restrictive when practically every other skin comes from PvE. No sPvP specific weapons or weapon skins are even offered.

iii)Provide tournaments or competitions INGAME that don’t have to be organized through 3rd parties and which offer unique weapon/armor rewards, the accumulation of a sPvP specific currency which can be spent on unique armor/weapon rewards, or a fixed gem/gold reward.

iiii) A leaderboard that represents and takes into consideration all contributions to the team. Hypothetical example: a person bunkers point A for the entire match vs 2 or 3 opponents and hence makes the greatest contribution to the team as his/her allies continuously outnumbered the enemy team. However, the point remains contested for the entire match with no “caps” or “decaps” and the bunker receives no kills and no deaths and hence achieves 0 points by the conclusion of the match (for arguments sake lets assume his allies don’t assist him at any point). Hardly seems fair. If something like this cannot be accounted for it begs the question: is there even a point to having a leaderboard? Should it be boiled down to more basic statistics such as; most damage done, most healing done, most damage received etc..? The glaring issue with any leaderboard that takes on either the current format or the aforementioned one is that the players who play more frequently and for longer periods of times than your average player will dominate the higher ranks regardless of actual skill.

iiiii) 2v2 and 3v3, with the banning of certain skills which could be deemed overpowered in those settings. For example: 2 PU burst mesmers both running Signet of Humility.

iiiiii) Offer separate queues for organized teams and solo players.

Any and all feedback is encouraged. Lets make sPvP a thing in GW2 as it should be and not just a side dish.