[Removal of Free Tourney Format] ruined the game. — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home PVP

[Removal of Free Tourney Format] ruined the game.

Eurantien.4632Eurantien.4632 Member ✭✭✭✭
edited April 9, 2019 in PVP

Edit: Changed title as this is really more about the lack of incentives to build teams that were removed with free tourneys than leaderboard addition. Although I think that leaderboards are still a factor in toxicity.

The funnest this game has ever been was with free tourneys. The reason for this was you could queue with any number of people and placed in a match. If your team one you progressed to round 2. Won that? Your team goes to round 3. Then that was it. However many games you won, the better reward you got. The point was to win but if someone was a weak link on your team and you lost it wasn't that big of a deal, I could queue again or queue with friends to avoid that. Ideally this would have grown to have old GW1 style where you stay with your team till you lose. That created some awesome comraderie. Still, that's how I found my first PvP buddy's/team. We did great in a free tourney and then eventually stuck together to try paid tourneys.

Now, it's a mess. I queue up, solo or duo. Wait 6 minutes. And have WAY more to lose than if I win. If I win now I get slightly better reward track progression and some rank points. If I lose, I get slightly less rewards but ALSO I lose 2-3 wins worth of rank points on the leaderboard. This just breeds animosity, someone makes a mistake now is way more frustrating because there is so much more to lose. I can't form new bonds and stay with players I thought did decent, because I saw them in 1 game. That's not enough time to form a strong enough impulse to want to queue with someone when weighed against the risk of losing 2-3 games worth of rank points. Not only that, but if i am duo'd we can't queue with that person.

We can't have fun with new builds because it alienates teammates who also have more to lose now than back then. We can't form new bonds with people because the risk is too high. All we can do is queue with who we think are good and slowly grow to hate everyone else. And play builds we know are good.

In free tourney days, I had a desire for other people to get better because I might have to be with them for 3 games in a row.
Now, I just hope that person isn't on my team.

What we have now is not a formula for a healthy community the way free tourneys were. ATs were kind of a growth from this but also fail to breed comraderie. I don't want to risk playing with people I don't know because of the time investment of an AT. I don't want to waste an hour standing around to not win the whole AT. I want to do two ATs a month as to not waste my time. If we lose... I'm already mad at my team because now I have to do at least ANOTHER AT and waste at least another hour to get enough QPs.

TL;DR: leaderboards Make it so there is too much to lose now for little gain. Max duo queue means no way to form new bonds anymore. [Edit: Free tourneys incentivized teams and allowed them to spam games together and not have to wait ages for ATs]. There is little reason to try new things besides to counter meta now because it just triggers teammates. This combo is a complete 180 from the community of free tourney days And it's leading to a toxic community.

Comments

  • JayAction.9056JayAction.9056 Member ✭✭✭
    edited April 8, 2019

    The issue is not leaderboard the issue is variance in player skill.

    Few people in this game have figured it out to the point where anybody that is in their matches not at that level completely destroys the experience and flow of the game

    For example, I come across you on soulbeast and I would argue it OP. I come across a soulbeast in the 1500 range and I honestly question if they are mentally ill and rage silently in real life even though rating would suggest them not far behind you. That being near as close as it gets to you and a few other southeasts playing it at your level

  • Stand The Wall.6987Stand The Wall.6987 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 9, 2019

    couldn't care less if the leader board was removed. it doesn't do much but attract undesirables anyways.

    something to note tho, we will have no real way of keeping track of all those bots! the humanity.

    Te lazla otstara.

  • Make it a hidden leaderboard, but still grant titles. I would like it better that way and I think all of us would too. It helps us find our comfort zone and makes us panic less if we drop out of a certain tier such as top 250 or top 100.

  • Mbelch.9028Mbelch.9028 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I agree. PvP needs a drastic shift beyond what Swiss tournaments will gain us. Nicely written post.

  • Chilli.2976Chilli.2976 Member ✭✭✭✭

    No leaderboard = no competitiveness = no PvP = boring.

  • Stand The Wall.6987Stand The Wall.6987 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Chilli.2976 said:
    No leaderboard = no competitiveness = no PvP = boring.

    no leaderboard = less match manipulation = more pvp = gud.

    Te lazla otstara.

  • Chilli.2976Chilli.2976 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Stand The Wall.6987 said:

    @Chilli.2976 said:
    No leaderboard = no competitiveness = no PvP = boring.

    no leaderboard = less match manipulation = more pvp = gud.

    That is so bull lol, if there was no incentive to play and no competitiveness it will not create more players, in fact it would drastically reduce the amount of players.
    Have a look at any other sport, everything has a leaderboard pretty much - we humans are naturally competitive, and it doesn't have to be games/sports it could be other things.

  • Liza.2758Liza.2758 Member ✭✭

    just revert back to Vanilla system

    this current system was made because the game had esport scene back then

    since there is no longer esport i would love to go back Vanilla system. more fun to play. nothing to lose

  • Stand The Wall.6987Stand The Wall.6987 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Chilli.2976 said:
    That is so bull lol, if there was no incentive to play and no competitiveness it will not create more players, in fact it would drastically reduce the amount of players.
    Have a look at any other sport, everything has a leaderboard pretty much - we humans are naturally competitive, and it doesn't have to be games/sports it could be other things.

    you think most peoples incentive to play is cuz of leader board? that's funny lol. if people actually leave cuz of no leader board, then good, they were probably win traders anyways.
    comparing a video game with ephemeral rewards to other sports where they are paid millions of dollars, well yeah, im sure you get the picture now.

    Te lazla otstara.

  • Swagg.9236Swagg.9236 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 9, 2019

    @JayAction.9056 said:
    The issue is not leaderboard the issue is variance in player skill.

    This game orbits too closely around a gravity well of rock-paper-scissors paradigms to foster a high skill ceiling. Builds are incredibly forgiving and encourage auto-pilot tendencies by removing risk from engagements. The only real difference between a "good" player and a "bad" one is in how the former will have a muscle-memory sense as well as a long-form sense for the timing on skill rotations. This is a very, very basic skill threshold. Getting a sense of timing for 20 or so buttons is a tiny hill to climb when none of them really need to be aimed or properly timed when being used (most abilities that make it onto skill bars are either instant or under 0.75s activations). Moreover, the concept of "gamesense" is mostly absent when everyone has a minimap that is nearly on par with Halo with regards to its generous amount of enemy position info. All of this means that GW2 has less of a "read and predict" skill ceiling and more of a "slow rhythm game" ceiling. It's all about hard-counters and PvE-style rotations rather than aim or timing (especially when instant or passive abilities will consistently negate the efforts of opponents).

    If the game is good, players will find a way to make their own systems. In the same way that certain games like Team Fortress 2 or Age of Empires II will hold their own respective LANs or prize tournaments in 2019, if the playerbase is big enough for GW2, then it would find a way to make its own tournaments. That said, GW2's committed, competitive playerbase is absolutely anemic due to its general PvP gameplay. If stress was taken off of the "need to be plat+" then players might take a more pro-active stance at forming their own ranks and creating in-houses or tournaments for fun which isn't regulated by some mindless robot.

    tl;dr: If you removed the robotic ranking system, players would have to judge for themselves how good they were; if they had to judge for themselves, then they would need a community by which they could measure their skill; that process is what makes a competitive scene healthy and sustainable. Ranked is mostly just killing any urge that most GW2 players might have to create an independent PvP community.

  • Eurantien.4632Eurantien.4632 Member ✭✭✭✭

    By removing the numbers it is no longer who is good by numbers and back to who is good by the "eye test". You keep things like monthly tournaments and what not. People would still know who is good or not. You can watch any game or any sport and tell who is good without seeing their numbers. People play this game cause this combat is good, with little incentive already.

  • Quadox.7834Quadox.7834 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Eurantien.4632 said:
    By removing the numbers it is no longer who is good by numbers and back to who is good by the "eye test". You keep things like monthly tournaments and what not. People would still know who is good or not. You can watch any game or any sport and tell who is good without seeing their numbers. People play this game cause this combat is good, with little incentive already.

    Then it mostly just becomes a game of who you know in the community

    // Yanim

  • Quadox.7834Quadox.7834 Member ✭✭✭✭

    If you just remove LB basically nothing would change. Maybe a few less players each season.

    // Yanim

  • Doctor.1905Doctor.1905 Member ✭✭

    There is no metric of skill that is more accurate than skill rating.

  • @Doctor.1905 said:
    [True or False?] There is no metric of skill that is more accurate than skill rating.

    False

  • Kylden Ar.3724Kylden Ar.3724 Member ✭✭✭✭

    AoE spam ruined the game. The fact that a few classes can attack everything on the point by virtue of existing is bad for the game.

    How many times we gotta tell you GRIND IS NOT CONTENT there ANet?

    Leader of Tyrian Adventure Corp [TACO], [RaW][TACO] Alliance, Kaineng.

  • BadMed.3846BadMed.3846 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Duo and solo q leaderboards should be seperate. One should never get to solo top player as a duo player.

  • Quadox.7834Quadox.7834 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Mbelch.9028 said:

    @Flandre.2870 said:

    @Eurantien.4632 said:
    By removing the numbers it is no longer who is good by numbers and back to who is good by the "eye test". You keep things like monthly tournaments and what not. People would still know who is good or not. You can watch any game or any sport and tell who is good without seeing their numbers. People play this game cause this combat is good, with little incentive already.

    Nah people don't play because PoF is absolute trash and the game is old. No matter what you do at this point the game is unsalvageable and dead. None of your ideas matter.

    Then why do you care so much? Leave us all to rot if that's how you feel, at least we won't have to listen to that pessimistic sentiment.

    It is realistic. Anet have overhauled various systems multiple times, putting resources into yet another system rework is not going to "make pvp good".

    // Yanim

  • maxwelgm.4315maxwelgm.4315 Member ✭✭✭

    I think the topic title does not do justice to your post. Free tourneys are awesome and it baffles me that they moved away from the SEVERAL available modes they could have derived from GW1. Playing with your team until you lose was a great move back then and it would be awesome right now, at least for unranked. The leaderboards I don't think are the real problem but in reality we are all tired of having only the same mode and the same maps forever. This game has so much potential for a variety of PvP modes but all we get is capture-the-point.

  • Mbelch.9028Mbelch.9028 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Quadox.7834 said:

    @Mbelch.9028 said:

    @Flandre.2870 said:

    @Eurantien.4632 said:
    By removing the numbers it is no longer who is good by numbers and back to who is good by the "eye test". You keep things like monthly tournaments and what not. People would still know who is good or not. You can watch any game or any sport and tell who is good without seeing their numbers. People play this game cause this combat is good, with little incentive already.

    Nah people don't play because PoF is absolute trash and the game is old. No matter what you do at this point the game is unsalvageable and dead. None of your ideas matter.

    Then why do you care so much? Leave us all to rot if that's how you feel, at least we won't have to listen to that pessimistic sentiment.

    It is realistic. Anet have overhauled various systems multiple times, putting resources into yet another system rework is not going to "make pvp good".

    If you don't enjoy it, don't play it. If you don't play it, why waste time on its forums?

    See where I'm going?

  • Quadox.7834Quadox.7834 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Mbelch.9028 said:

    @Quadox.7834 said:

    @Mbelch.9028 said:

    @Flandre.2870 said:

    @Eurantien.4632 said:
    By removing the numbers it is no longer who is good by numbers and back to who is good by the "eye test". You keep things like monthly tournaments and what not. People would still know who is good or not. You can watch any game or any sport and tell who is good without seeing their numbers. People play this game cause this combat is good, with little incentive already.

    Nah people don't play because PoF is absolute trash and the game is old. No matter what you do at this point the game is unsalvageable and dead. None of your ideas matter.

    Then why do you care so much? Leave us all to rot if that's how you feel, at least we won't have to listen to that pessimistic sentiment.

    It is realistic. Anet have overhauled various systems multiple times, putting resources into yet another system rework is not going to "make pvp good".

    If you don't enjoy it, don't play it. If you don't play it, why waste time on its forums?

    See where I'm going?

    I can say the same to you. if you don't like the current system, don't play the game.

    // Yanim

  • Vectra.1968Vectra.1968 Member ✭✭

    I am sorry for my English Googolian, be indulgent thank you.
    It's absolutely beautiful post, it's my state of mind for almost 3 years where I say to myself that the community is more and more hermetic and can not pull up the players who are lower in the ranking and are real pearl.
    To make believe that in a team of 5 only one player can shoot the 4 others by himself to victory is false.
    Many explains that arenanet has to question itself that the pvp has to challenge itself, but not as Eurantien says the community must first question themselves and certainly the top 250 because there are examples ...
    As said above pull the pvp community up today when the mood of the environment is nonexistent.
    The solo and duo are made for a ranking of values ​​that initially report in a way that falsifies the ranking.
    Today the state of mind is also you are not in the top 250 you gonna do to one or the top players and well it will sum it up by luck.

  • Stand The Wall.6987Stand The Wall.6987 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I think one good step to less match manipulation is to make legendary easier to get into. how has it been for the past several seasons, maybe like 3 people per season get in there? thats ludicrous. its an entire tier left empty cuz +2 -20 rating scoring.

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:
    snips

    well said.

    Te lazla otstara.

  • Mbelch.9028Mbelch.9028 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Quadox.7834 said:

    @Mbelch.9028 said:

    @Quadox.7834 said:

    @Mbelch.9028 said:

    @Flandre.2870 said:

    @Eurantien.4632 said:
    By removing the numbers it is no longer who is good by numbers and back to who is good by the "eye test". You keep things like monthly tournaments and what not. People would still know who is good or not. You can watch any game or any sport and tell who is good without seeing their numbers. People play this game cause this combat is good, with little incentive already.

    Nah people don't play because PoF is absolute trash and the game is old. No matter what you do at this point the game is unsalvageable and dead. None of your ideas matter.

    Then why do you care so much? Leave us all to rot if that's how you feel, at least we won't have to listen to that pessimistic sentiment.

    It is realistic. Anet have overhauled various systems multiple times, putting resources into yet another system rework is not going to "make pvp good".

    If you don't enjoy it, don't play it. If you don't play it, why waste time on its forums?

    See where I'm going?

    I can say the same to you. if you don't like the current system, don't play the game.

    Some days I don't, but I still play and enjoy the game, which is why I still visit forums. The day I quit is the day I stop visiting the forums. See what I'm saying?

    I enjoy tournaments and I enjoy casual ranked/unranked games. I can want changes in the culture and development but still not call the game trash, old and irrelevant, which is how you've described it.

  • Quadox.7834Quadox.7834 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 10, 2019

    @Mbelch.9028 said:

    @Quadox.7834 said:

    @Mbelch.9028 said:

    @Quadox.7834 said:

    @Mbelch.9028 said:

    @Flandre.2870 said:

    @Eurantien.4632 said:
    By removing the numbers it is no longer who is good by numbers and back to who is good by the "eye test". You keep things like monthly tournaments and what not. People would still know who is good or not. You can watch any game or any sport and tell who is good without seeing their numbers. People play this game cause this combat is good, with little incentive already.

    Nah people don't play because PoF is absolute trash and the game is old. No matter what you do at this point the game is unsalvageable and dead. None of your ideas matter.

    Then why do you care so much? Leave us all to rot if that's how you feel, at least we won't have to listen to that pessimistic sentiment.

    It is realistic. Anet have overhauled various systems multiple times, putting resources into yet another system rework is not going to "make pvp good".

    If you don't enjoy it, don't play it. If you don't play it, why waste time on its forums?

    See where I'm going?

    I can say the same to you. if you don't like the current system, don't play the game.

    Some days I don't, but I still play and enjoy the game, which is why I still visit forums. The day I quit is the day I stop visiting the forums. See what I'm saying?

    I enjoy tournaments and I enjoy casual ranked/unranked games. I can want changes in the culture and development but still not call the game trash, old and irrelevant, which is how you've described it.

    Flandre said their/your suggestions won't change anything, and I called it realistic. Overhauling the system (again) won't make people come back, enjoy the game, create communitues, teams, and so on. It is just wishful thinking.

    // Yanim

  • Mbelch.9028Mbelch.9028 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Quadox.7834 said:

    @Mbelch.9028 said:

    @Quadox.7834 said:

    @Mbelch.9028 said:

    @Quadox.7834 said:

    @Mbelch.9028 said:

    @Flandre.2870 said:

    @Eurantien.4632 said:
    By removing the numbers it is no longer who is good by numbers and back to who is good by the "eye test". You keep things like monthly tournaments and what not. People would still know who is good or not. You can watch any game or any sport and tell who is good without seeing their numbers. People play this game cause this combat is good, with little incentive already.

    Nah people don't play because PoF is absolute trash and the game is old. No matter what you do at this point the game is unsalvageable and dead. None of your ideas matter.

    Then why do you care so much? Leave us all to rot if that's how you feel, at least we won't have to listen to that pessimistic sentiment.

    It is realistic. Anet have overhauled various systems multiple times, putting resources into yet another system rework is not going to "make pvp good".

    If you don't enjoy it, don't play it. If you don't play it, why waste time on its forums?

    See where I'm going?

    I can say the same to you. if you don't like the current system, don't play the game.

    Some days I don't, but I still play and enjoy the game, which is why I still visit forums. The day I quit is the day I stop visiting the forums. See what I'm saying?

    I enjoy tournaments and I enjoy casual ranked/unranked games. I can want changes in the culture and development but still not call the game trash, old and irrelevant, which is how you've described it.

    Flandre said their/your suggestions won't change anything, and I called it realistic. Overhauling the system (again) won't make people come back, enjoy the game, create communitues, teams, and so on. It is just wishful thinking.

    K. Disagree, but K.

  • Exedore.6320Exedore.6320 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Stand The Wall.6987 said:
    I think one good step to less match manipulation is to make legendary easier to get into. how has it been for the past several seasons, maybe like 3 people per season get in there? thats ludicrous. its an entire tier left empty cuz +2 -20 rating scoring.

    The problem with legendary tier, especially on NA, is population - plain and simple.
    To understand it, first realize that rating is a bell curve. When population is small, the extremes of the bell curve can't push out as far, as the rating system will maintain the shape of the curve. Think of it as a pile of sand in an hourglass: as more sand falls, the pile spreads out more. The small rating adjustments on a win - and big on a loss - will always happen at the positive extreme of any bell curve rating system. Again due to low population, this is happening earlier than one would expect (around 1700-1800 rather than 2000+).

    The most sensible way to address the lack of legendary players is to assign tiers (bronze, silver, gold, platinum, legendary) based on percentile of the population, rather than fixed cut-offs. For example, the top 1% would be legendary, top 5% platinum, etc.