Jump to content
  • Sign Up

NA prime time scores on NA servers


Hesione.9412

Recommended Posts

To me this is yet another example of poor linking management as well as a complete failure to manage bandwagoning in any way.

I don’t have a myriad of ideas on that other than making it almost impossible to transfer for at least the first couple of weeks, or more, after relinks. People just flip around immediately after relink to linked servers etc.

Nothing can be done about the intentional tanking that some servers, like the one in this instance does though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

@"Hesione.9412" said:Oh, we're not trying to tank. We're just completely overwhelmed by the other servers. It's like being in silver PvP and having platinums fight against you.

No we’re not, but other servers are.

Well, this is nothing new since 2012. It is scoring- and population mechanics that are anathematic to the ladder we play on. It could be as simple as Balthazzar points out with other servers tanking around you to inflate your position on the ladder and you didn't see it in time to adapt.

It could also be something more benign but easily as problematic. Something as small as a 10-man night crew that has no opposition in your "actual" tier inflating you up to a tier where they finally get some opposition, only then, your prime-time is out-populated 2:1 and has to suffer the consequences. Things like that can also pull and push you up and down like a yo-yo between content that matches you poorly. So you may simply be two tiers too high than what your are supposed to be at but what's broken in scoring and population mechanics simply lands you there.

It could also be transfers of course and that is reaching some rather ridiculous levels by now where the movement of communities that are as small as a single guild in size can move servers across the entire spectrum from 500-gem husk to locked/unlinked simply because the content creator-consumer balance has grown so incredibly out of whack due to ArenaNet's actions. Guilds are often blamed for the migrations but in reality it is almost always "everyone else" that is the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@subversiontwo.7501 said:

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

@"Hesione.9412" said:Oh, we're not trying to tank. We're just completely overwhelmed by the other servers. It's like being in silver PvP and having platinums fight against you.

No we’re not, but other servers are.

Well, this is nothing new since 2012. It is scoring- and population mechanics that are anathematic to the ladder we play on. It could be as simple as Balthazzar points out with other servers tanking around you to inflate your position on the ladder and you didn't see it in time to adapt.

It could also be something more benign but easily as problematic. Something as small as a 10-man night crew that has no opposition in your "actual" tier inflating you up to a tier where they finally get some opposition, only then, your prime-time is out-populated 2:1 and has to suffer the consequences. Things like that can also pull and push you up and down like a yo-yo between content that matches you poorly. So you may simply be two tiers too high than what your are supposed to be at but what's broken in scoring and population mechanics simply lands you there.

It could also be transfers of course and that is reaching some rather ridiculous levels by now where the movement of communities that are as small as a single guild in size can move servers across the entire spectrum from 500-gem husk to locked/unlinked simply because the content creator-consumer balance has grown so incredibly out of whack due to ArenaNet's actions. Guilds are often blamed for the migrations but in reality it is almost always "everyone else" that is the problem.

Nope. This is prime time at the bottom of the tier ladder with one server in particular that does this regularly, coupled with bandwagons. It’s not the other groups that are too high, in other words.

I’ll never understand the need to play this way. And ANet can’t, or won’t do anything to deal with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

@"Hesione.9412" said:Oh, we're not trying to tank. We're just completely overwhelmed by the other servers. It's like being in silver PvP and having platinums fight against you.

No we’re not, but other servers are.

Well, this is nothing new since 2012. It is scoring- and population mechanics that are anathematic to the ladder we play on. It could be as simple as Balthazzar points out with other servers tanking around you to inflate your position on the ladder and you didn't see it in time to adapt.

It could also be something more benign but easily as problematic. Something as small as a 10-man night crew that has no opposition in your "actual" tier inflating you up to a tier where they finally get some opposition, only then, your prime-time is out-populated 2:1 and has to suffer the consequences. Things like that can also pull and push you up and down like a yo-yo between content that matches you poorly. So you may simply be two tiers too high than what your are supposed to be at but what's broken in scoring and population mechanics simply lands you there.

It could also be transfers of course and that is reaching some rather ridiculous levels by now where the movement of communities that are as small as a single guild in size can move servers across the entire spectrum from 500-gem husk to locked/unlinked simply because the content creator-consumer balance has grown so incredibly out of whack due to ArenaNet's actions. Guilds are often blamed for the migrations but in reality it is almost always "everyone else" that is the problem.

Nope. This is prime time at the bottom of the tier ladder with one server in particular that does this regularly, coupled with bandwagons. It’s not the other groups that are too high, in other words.

I’ll never understand the need to play this way. And ANet can’t, or won’t do anything to deal with it.

This is the current tick. In addition, GREEN is 3x our score in the current skirmish.https://imgur.com/a/aiNeVpf

you guys are still on this 2016 conspiracy that mag is tanking so they can get "easy bags" when you could easily log on during ocx/sea/eu hours and see that mag has absolutely 0 presence during those hours. we try our best to ppt during na prime to get out of this forsaken tier but it can't deal with the heavy ppt during the morning hours. Unlike these other servers that post pictures from NA prime on NA servers, we actually have outnumbered buffs when your blobs are rolling through our bl and ebg keep daily so there's kind of an excuse. mag has zero public tags that they don't laugh off and are currently linked with dr that only has fight guilds that log on late na. Please tell me why it's not ok to have a populated NA prime on NA servers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:lol scared? I doubt it. But this is more really about the apparent inability of our game host to manage “balance”. Relinking then allowing people to bandwagon off and recreate unbalanced pops immediately is nothing short of ridiculous. THAT is the true issue here.

You specifically said that you'll "never understand the need to play this way" in reference to your conspiratorial belief that mag is purposefully tanking. so you walking back your points doesn't work. to your second point, no one is bandwaggoning to mag of all servers. Most fight guilds and relevant players (players that aren't just empty bags for the enemy server) know that mag is horrible at ppt and generally want to fight t1/t2 which requires ppt. The fight guilds on DR have been on DR since their last link with BG and I'm pretty sure whichever server they were linked to before that. To my knowledge there have been 0 guilds transferring to mag since the last link change nor the one before that. Mag doesn't want to be in t4 either, but you deal with the links you get. Do you see how easily explainable things are when you actually play on the server rather than accusing them of being some insidious plague on WvW from the outside?

If your issue is that you believe that CD and HoD link servers were thriving and fully bandwaggoned up before they got linked up with their current servers, NSP was linked with Mag and kept us in T1 pretty solely because [EBG] and [XD], two longtime nsp guilds, ran in hours where mag needed coverage. Sorrow's Furnace was linked with Jade Quarry, permanently in T4. Bangwaggoning is an issue, just not here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the current tick. In addition, green is 3x our score in the current skirmish.

https://imgur.com/a/UuIUr94

almost 4 hours later red logs on to continue the flipping of ebg territory that green had done earlier. you can see in the bottom right of the image there's that illustrious outnumbered buff that all these other servers claim to have during NA prime. I guess the only real difference between mag and the other two is they don't spend their time whining about the circumstances and looking for others to commiserate in their 'permanently farmed' status with. oh, and I guess that they play during NA hours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Lya Babies.9632" said:This is the current tick. In addition, green is 3x our score in the current skirmish.

https://imgur.com/a/UuIUr94

almost 4 hours later red logs on to continue the flipping of ebg territory that green had done earlier. you can see in the bottom right of the image there's that illustrious outnumbered buff that all these other servers claim to have during NA prime. I guess the only real difference between mag and the other two is they don't spend their time whining about the circumstances and looking for others to commiserate in their 'permanently farmed' status with. oh, and I guess that they play during NA hours.

oh I don’t walk back on the tanking point. I’ve seen it. I was actually on that server for a while and experienced it first hand.

The other issues, however, are actually more of a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lya Babies.9632 said:

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

@"Hesione.9412" said:Oh, we're not trying to tank. We're just completely overwhelmed by the other servers. It's like being in silver PvP and having platinums fight against you.

No we’re not, but other servers are.

Well, this is nothing new since 2012. It is scoring- and population mechanics that are anathematic to the ladder we play on. It could be as simple as Balthazzar points out with other servers tanking around you to inflate your position on the ladder and you didn't see it in time to adapt.

It could also be something more benign but easily as problematic. Something as small as a 10-man night crew that has no opposition in your "actual" tier inflating you up to a tier where they finally get some opposition, only then, your prime-time is out-populated 2:1 and has to suffer the consequences. Things like that can also pull and push you up and down like a yo-yo between content that matches you poorly. So you may simply be two tiers too high than what your are supposed to be at but what's broken in scoring and population mechanics simply lands you there.

It could also be transfers of course and that is reaching some rather ridiculous levels by now where the movement of communities that are as small as a single guild in size can move servers across the entire spectrum from 500-gem husk to locked/unlinked simply because the content creator-consumer balance has grown so incredibly out of whack due to ArenaNet's actions. Guilds are often blamed for the migrations but in reality it is almost always "everyone else" that is the problem.

Nope. This is prime time at the bottom of the tier ladder with one server in particular that does this regularly, coupled with bandwagons. It’s not the other groups that are too high, in other words.

I’ll never understand the need to play this way. And ANet can’t, or won’t do anything to deal with it.

This is the current tick. In addition, GREEN is 3x our score in the current skirmish.

you guys are still on this 2016 conspiracy that mag is tanking so they can get "easy bags" when you could easily log on during ocx/sea/eu hours and see that mag has absolutely 0 presence during those hours. we try our best to ppt during na prime to get out of this forsaken tier but it can't deal with the heavy ppt during the morning hours. Unlike these other servers that post pictures from NA prime on NA servers, we actually have outnumbered buffs when your blobs are rolling through our bl and ebg keep daily so there's kind of an excuse. mag has zero public tags that they don't laugh off and are currently linked with dr that only has fight guilds that log on late na. Please tell me why it's not ok to have a populated NA prime on NA servers.

Taking it back to the more general point, if the servers were comparable in coverage, etc, then we would expect to see similar victory point scores. But we don't. For some servers, their KDR in a skirmish more than compensates for the objectives held.

Take your example where the 259 potential points are being added to the war score. For argument's sake, let's assume that the server holds all those objectives at the same tier for an entire skirmish. Ignoring opposing player kills, that adds 6,216 points to the skirmish (259*(120/5)). Say that server wins the skirmish and gets 5 Victory Points.

Which now brings us to scoring. As we all know, the winning server in each skirmish gets 5 points, the middle one 4, and the losing one 3. With 84 skirmish periods per week ( 7 days x 24 hours divided by 2, the latter being the skirmish duration), the maximum number of points is 420 (84x5) and the minimum number is 252 (84x3). This means that, at the end of the week, if the wiki points information is correct, then all three servers will have a score that lies somewhere between 252 and 420. If servers had a similar number of off-peak hours which occurred at different times all three skirmish scores should rotate around so that wins, second, and last should be roughly equal. But they are not. The server that pulls away by the third day after the weekly rematch gets an unassailable lead because pulling away in top score on Fri/Sat server time is correlated with a win rate that is relatively consistent for the rest of the week. Conversely, having the lowest score over that period is correlated with being the losing server at the end of the week.

With a balanced system, one would expect that the wins/middle/losses should rotate around the servers at a roughly even rate. That the server in your example with the lowest objective score is the one that is likely to win the current week suggests that the low score shown is not correlated with winning for the week. My image shows the likely placement of the three servers at the end of the week: blue will win, red will come second, and green will lose.

Which then brings us to the point about "tanking". Seeing a server come down to a lower tier and then comprehensively win the week at the lower tier does look like tanking from the perspective of the servers that are now being slaughtered by that server. Given your point about lack of coverage during certain hours for your server and that your server appears to be bouncing between tiers 3 and 4 (correct me if I'm wrong on that point), then lack of coverage for your server appears to be a problem just like our being overwhelmed so much that it has been difficult to see how the winning server could drop to our tier in the absence of tanking.

That a server can outperform other servers in one tier, go up to the next tier, and then get slaughtered so that they come back down to the lower tier suggests that the servers aren't performing equally well (within a range, of course). If the match-ups were made on the basis of trying to create server-link teams of roughly equal expected outcomes, then such an outcome shouldn't exist. Basically, the "oh, we were last for another week again" or "oh, we got up to the next higher tier, only to drop back down to the lower tier again" - the problem is the again.

tl;dr are any of us happy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Hesione.9412 said:

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

@Hesione.9412 said:Oh, we're not trying to tank. We're just completely overwhelmed by the other servers. It's like being in silver PvP and having platinums fight against you.

No we’re not, but other servers are.

Well, this is nothing new since 2012. It is scoring- and population mechanics that are anathematic to the ladder we play on. It could be as simple as Balthazzar points out with other servers tanking around you to inflate your position on the ladder and you didn't see it in time to adapt.

It could also be something more benign but easily as problematic. Something as small as a 10-man night crew that has no opposition in your "actual" tier inflating you up to a tier where they finally get some opposition, only then, your prime-time is out-populated 2:1 and has to suffer the consequences. Things like that can also pull and push you up and down like a yo-yo between content that matches you poorly. So you may simply be two tiers too high than what your are supposed to be at but what's broken in scoring and population mechanics simply lands you there.

It could also be transfers of course and that is reaching some rather ridiculous levels by now where the movement of communities that are as small as a single guild in size can move servers across the entire spectrum from 500-gem husk to locked/unlinked simply because the content creator-consumer balance has grown so incredibly out of whack due to ArenaNet's actions. Guilds are often blamed for the migrations but in reality it is almost always "everyone else" that is the problem.

Nope. This is prime time at the bottom of the tier ladder with one server in particular that does this regularly, coupled with bandwagons. It’s not the other groups that are too high, in other words.

I’ll never understand the need to play this way. And ANet can’t, or won’t do anything to deal with it.

This is the current tick. In addition, GREEN is 3x our score in the current skirmish.

you guys are still on this 2016 conspiracy that mag is tanking so they can get "easy bags" when you could easily log on during ocx/sea/eu hours and see that mag has absolutely 0 presence during those hours. we try our best to ppt during na prime to get out of this forsaken tier but it can't deal with the heavy ppt during the morning hours. Unlike these other servers that post pictures from NA prime on NA servers, we actually have outnumbered buffs when your blobs are rolling through our bl and ebg keep daily so there's kind of an excuse. mag has zero public tags that they don't laugh off and are currently linked with dr that only has fight guilds that log on late na. Please tell me why it's not ok to have a populated NA prime on NA servers.

Taking it back to the more general point, if the servers were comparable in coverage, etc, then we would expect to see similar victory point scores. But we don't. For some servers, their KDR in a skirmish more than compensates for the objectives held.

Take your example where the 259 potential points are being added to the war score. For argument's sake, let's assume that the server holds all those objectives at the same tier for an entire skirmish. Ignoring opposing player kills, that adds 6,216 points to the skirmish (259*(120/5)). Say that server wins the skirmish and gets 5 Victory Points.

Which now brings us to scoring. As we all know, the winning server in each skirmish gets 5 points, the middle one 4, and the losing one 3. With 84 skirmish periods per week ( 7 days x 24 hours divided by 2, the latter being the skirmish duration), the maximum number of points is 420 (84x5) and the minimum number is 252 (84x3). This means that, at the end of the week, if the wiki points information is correct, then all three servers will have a score that lies somewhere between 252 and 420. If servers had a similar number of off-peak hours
which occurred at different times
all three skirmish scores should rotate around so that wins, second, and last should be roughly equal.
But they are not
. The server that pulls away by the third day after the weekly rematch gets an assailable lead
because pulling away in top score on Fri/Sat server time is correlated with a win rate that is relatively consistent for the rest of the week
. Conversely,
having the lowest score over that period is correlated with being the losing server at the end of the week
.

With a balanced system, one would expect that the wins/middle/losses should rotate around the servers at a roughly even rate. That the server in your example with the lowest objective score is the one that is likely to win the current week suggests that the low score shown is not correlated with winning for the week. My image shows the likely placement of the three servers at the end of the week: blue will win, red will come second, and green will lose.

Which then brings us to the point about "tanking". Seeing a server come down to a lower tier and then comprehensively win the week at the lower tier does look like tanking from the perspective of the servers that are now being slaughtered by that server. Given your point about lack of coverage during certain hours for your server and that your server appears to be bouncing between tiers 3 and 4 (correct me if I'm wrong on that point), then lack of coverage for your server appears to be a problem just like our being overwhelmed so much that it has been difficult to see how the winning server could drop to our tier in the absence of tanking.

That a server can outperform other servers in one tier, go up to the next tier, and then get slaughtered so that they come back down to the lower tier suggests that the servers aren't performing equally well (within a range, of course). If the match-ups were made on the basis of trying to create server-link teams of roughly equal expected outcomes, then such an outcome shouldn't exist. Basically, the "oh, we were last for another week
again
" or "oh, we got up to the next higher tier, only to drop back down to the lower tier
again
" - the problem is the
again
.

tl;dr are any of us happy?

You do know you can fact check all of your wrong information with this website, http://gw2stats.com/na/matchups/ , no? Since the last link change, mag fell fast into t4 and has remained there. There is no up down for us and I genuinely don't know why you act like this isn't true when HoD or "green" was the server in question that moved up two weeks ago only to fall down this week. Your point that by the end of the week Mag will move up is also wrong given that the current scores are based on weekends only. What happens, as what happened just two weeks ago when HoD and Mag were matched up, is that HoD will PPT on weekdays during mag dead hours and move up. We don't have to speculate and calculate about what will happen because we have already seen this play out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

@"Lya Babies.9632" said:This is the current tick. In addition, green is 3x our score in the current skirmish.

almost 4 hours later red logs on to continue the flipping of ebg territory that green had done earlier. you can see in the bottom right of the image there's that illustrious outnumbered buff that all these other servers claim to have during NA prime. I guess the only real difference between mag and the other two is they don't spend their time whining about the circumstances and looking for others to commiserate in their 'permanently farmed' status with. oh, and I guess that they play during NA hours.

oh I don’t walk back on the tanking point. I’ve seen it. I was actually on that server for a while and experienced it first hand.

The other issues, however, are actually more of a problem.

You were on that server for a while, so why are you talking about it now? 2016 Mag wasn't 2017 Mag nor is it 2020 Mag. You have no idea how Mag works now but as I said earlier you are holding onto this tired narrative that they are the same as they were in the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lya Babies.9632 said:

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

@Lya Babies.9632 said:This is the current tick. In addition, green is 3x our score in the current skirmish.

almost 4 hours later red logs on to continue the flipping of ebg territory that green had done earlier. you can see in the bottom right of the image there's that illustrious outnumbered buff that all these other servers claim to have during NA prime. I guess the only real difference between mag and the other two is they don't spend their time whining about the circumstances and looking for others to commiserate in their 'permanently farmed' status with. oh, and I guess that they play during NA hours.

oh I don’t walk back on the tanking point. I’ve seen it. I was actually on that server for a while and experienced it first hand.

The other issues, however, are actually more of a problem.

You were on that server for a while, so why are you talking about it now? 2016 Mag wasn't 2017 Mag nor is it 2020 Mag. You have no idea how Mag works now but as I said earlier you are holding onto this tired narrative that they are the same as they were in the past.

lol. The pattern hasn’t changed. But I’ll stop now and let you get the last word. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Lya Babies.9632" said:You were on that server for a while, so why are you talking about it now? 2016 Mag wasn't 2017 Mag nor is it 2020 Mag. You have no idea how Mag works now but as I said earlier you are holding onto this tired narrative that they are the same as they were in the past.My server was linked with Maguuma in June and July of 2020. I was "yelled at" for getting in the way of Maguuma players on their alts k-training our own borderland in order to keep us from going up in tier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Hesione.9412 said:I count another 6 threads in this forum, on the first page, that are about match-ups. It does seem to be a relatively popular discussion topic. :(

Ya. I think your thread was fine until people started throwing our server names.

It’s good to have a discussion about imbalance of severs that are matched (and frankly this is in every tier) but now that specific servers were mentioned.... I’m guessing this thread will be shut down soon. If not , then maybe the mods are getting a bit more lax or just never checking threads ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems pretty normal to me. In EU in some of the previous link phases in T1 the best servers pwned hard. Also in T5 the 2 weakest got pwnd hard by the stronger on in T5 there. And that most of the time leading to huge differences in victory points.

Screen here could even only be temporarily. Doesn't mean anything without more data. (Maybe this really happens only at certain times when more people are online for one server and when the others come back it will balance itself.)

Edit: Okay prime time score? Maybe the wrong people (PvE guys doing achievements) got into the maps for the other servers. And queue for the real players. And so one server is pwning. :D Or unbalanced at the top or at the bottim (highest or lowest tier). In the middle tiers there should be better balance. (At least a few weeks after re-linking. Shortly after linking everything is unbalanced until every server/link climbs to a stable position.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Lya Babies.9632" said:you guys are still on this 2016 conspiracy that mag is tanking so they can get "easy bags" when you could easily log on during ocx/sea/eu hours and see that mag has absolutely 0 presence during those hours. we try our best to ppt during na prime to get out of this forsaken tier but it can't deal with the heavy ppt during the morning hours. Unlike these other servers that post pictures from NA prime on NA servers, we actually have outnumbered buffs when your blobs are rolling through our bl and ebg keep daily so there's kind of an excuse. mag has zero public tags that they don't laugh off and are currently linked with dr that only has fight guilds that log on late na. Please tell me why it's not ok to have a populated NA prime on NA servers.

Except it's actually true. Maguuma ONLY cares about SMC and it's bags. That's why other servers regularly party in their Home BL Garrison. TC fought against them last week and said "fuck it" and left EBG all to Maguuma and they started freaking out because they didn't want to go up (turns out T3ing EVERYTHING on EBG gives a lot of PPT).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...