Change Rating Gain/Loss to be Based Somewhat on Personal Performance — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Change Rating Gain/Loss to be Based Somewhat on Personal Performance

This Season is feeling pretty barren at the plat level, and our ratings shouldn't have to suffer because the population is dropping.

-20 for a loss, +9 for a win without the rating boost after placements at Plat1 is pretty ridiculous. The whole system of determining rating gain/loss solely based on the ratings of other players in your match does make some sense, as climbing higher should make your rating a little more volatile, but being the only thing that determines your rating gain/loss is a flawed system.

If i'm playing at Plat1-Low Plat2 and i'm filling in for Golds and Silvers because the matchmaker couldn't find any other Plats to put me with because the population is dropping, that really shouldn't be my problem, yet; i'm thrust into this carry role that even top players struggle with even though i'm nowhere close to playing at that level altogether and especially in that moment, and yet i'm still being punished for it. This has always been a problem with Ranked, but; Idunno, i've really started to feel it more lately. If anyone else has had similar experiences lately, do share.

Ever play Paladins: Champions of the Realm? Really niche game, but similar in a lot of ways to GW2, only the ranked gamemode for that game takes Personal Performance and Streaks into account when determining your rating gain/loss(Or Triumph Points in that game's case) at the end of a match. Fulfilling your role or even multiple roles at once with crazy amounts of damage, healing, objective time, even deaths all gets factored in to determining how soft/hard the rating loss/gain will be. What this means is; if you lose a game and you couldn't contribute even 10% of healing as the dedicated healer, the penalty for losing that game would be significant, whereas if you lost, but managed to contribute 70-80% of your team's healing; the penalty would be much lower. The game also gives you huge rating boosts/drops if you manage to streak wins/losses back to back, because just like GW2; the matchmaker is always pulling you towards an even winrate; trying to get you to lose 1 then win 1. It differs from GW2, because Paladins is usually one step forward, one step back; whereas GW2 is one step forward, two steps back. Performing consistently well in Paladins through whatever the matchmaker throws at you(Win-streaking) earns you more rating, and performing consistently bad knocks you down entire divisions at times(Loss-streaking.)

Just think of all the ways this could apply to GW2 Ranked. If one of your teammates says "gg" after the first midfight and decides to sit in spawn the remainder of the game, they pretty much get off scot-free while you toil in vain for 10 or so minutes to lose a big beefy number. If personal performance mattered, you'd be encouraged to try and play the game normally knowing your contributions will ensure you lose less, and the person pouting in spawn is set to be hit with hard rank penalties for their lack thereof. Win and loss streaks don't matter either right now. The matchmaker does its very best to ensure winstreaks are difficult, but there's no added reward for that difficulty. Infact, the lower rated players in your game to get your there actually make you earn less. It's very discouraging.

One thing I feel the need to make clear is that, Personal Performance does not mean Top Stats. The game should never be about throwing to get top stats. If this ever became a thing, I think the scoreboard would have to be changed to better reflect how the game is actually played, and what matters most. Much in way like @shadowpass.4236 suggests here: https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/53443/new-scoreboard

Anyone else just been feeling this lately? Do these changes sound good to anyone?

Remove Ranked DuoQ pls&ty

Comments

  • Curennos.9307Curennos.9307 Member ✭✭✭

    @Ragnar.4257 said:
    Why does this same exact topic keep getting posted every 3 days? It's been addressed repeatedly.

    Imagine you are playing a weaver/boonbeast/spellbreaker, and you successfully manage to troll far all game, keeping 2 enemies chasing you. You're not doing much damage, as you're mostly kiting. You're not doing much healing, as mostly you're staying alive by kiting, using terrain, evading. You're not contesting or capping the point, as you can't face-tank 1v2 directly on the node. You have NO stats to show for this. And yet, by giving your team a 4v3 on the rest of the map, you have won the game for your team. In this scenario would you be happy to be penalised for not having any top stats?

    Now image you are the kind of idiot who spends 5+ minutes hitting an enemy scrapper on a point that that scrapper owns. You keep hitting and hitting him over and over, but the scrapper can just eat it all up while laughing and watching his own team's score rack up from holding the point. You'll probably get top damage from all that junk damage you splurged into the scrapper's barriers. You'll probably get top "point contested" (offence) as well. And yet you have thrown the game for your team. You are probably the biggest reason your team lost. In this scenario do you think its fair you get rewarded even though you threw the match for your team?

    How do stats differentiate between good play and bad plays? Simply having a top stat doesn't mean you did anything useful, at all. In theory, rating based on personal contribution would be perfect. But you would have to find ways of accurately measuring every possible conceivable combination of good/bad play scenarios. That's simply wishful thinking.

    Imagine writing three paragraphs because you couldn't even be bothered to read one. The last one in the OP, if you must know.

  • Ragnar.4257Ragnar.4257 Member ✭✭✭
    edited September 9, 2019

    @Curennos.9307 said:

    @Ragnar.4257 said:
    Why does this same exact topic keep getting posted every 3 days? It's been addressed repeatedly.

    Imagine you are playing a weaver/boonbeast/spellbreaker, and you successfully manage to troll far all game, keeping 2 enemies chasing you. You're not doing much damage, as you're mostly kiting. You're not doing much healing, as mostly you're staying alive by kiting, using terrain, evading. You're not contesting or capping the point, as you can't face-tank 1v2 directly on the node. You have NO stats to show for this. And yet, by giving your team a 4v3 on the rest of the map, you have won the game for your team. In this scenario would you be happy to be penalised for not having any top stats?

    Now image you are the kind of idiot who spends 5+ minutes hitting an enemy scrapper on a point that that scrapper owns. You keep hitting and hitting him over and over, but the scrapper can just eat it all up while laughing and watching his own team's score rack up from holding the point. You'll probably get top damage from all that junk damage you splurged into the scrapper's barriers. You'll probably get top "point contested" (offence) as well. And yet you have thrown the game for your team. You are probably the biggest reason your team lost. In this scenario do you think its fair you get rewarded even though you threw the match for your team?

    How do stats differentiate between good play and bad plays? Simply having a top stat doesn't mean you did anything useful, at all. In theory, rating based on personal contribution would be perfect. But you would have to find ways of accurately measuring every possible conceivable combination of good/bad play scenarios. That's simply wishful thinking.

    Imagine writing three paragraphs because you couldn't even be bothered to read one. The last one in the OP, if you must know.

    Imagine writing a snarky comment because you couldn't even be bothered to read one paragraph. The last one in my post, if you must know.

    It doesn't matter if the specific metrics are changed. There is NO implementable system of metrics or scoreboards that can accurately and comprehensively track good/bad play in all scenarios. While Shadowpass' suggestion is one of the better thought-out ones, it still falls WELL short of the mark in terms of fully capturing all scenarios. For example, it treats a scrub player who is getting kills via assists the same as a hard-carry-hero who is producing all the 1-shot spikes which are winning fights for the team.

    Now you say "okay, we can adjust it to allow for that"..... but the point is that this is just ONE example out of a billion scenarios you have to account for. Nobody could even list them all out in bullet-points, let alone actually find a way to code them all in to the scoreboard. And even if by some miracle you could, the processing power required to run a billion simultaneous analyses of each players game would be orders of magnitude higher than that needed to run the game.

    The simpler approach is to not even try to analyse a billion over-lapping metrics, and instead treat matches as a "black box" and just look at the end result.

  • Multicolorhipster.9751Multicolorhipster.9751 Member ✭✭✭
    edited September 9, 2019

    @Ragnar.4257 said:
    How do stats differentiate between good play and bad plays? Simply having a top stat doesn't mean you did anything useful, at all. In theory, rating based on personal contribution would be perfect. But you would have to find ways of accurately measuring every possible conceivable combination of good/bad play scenarios. That's simply wishful thinking.

    You don't have anyone to convince. That's pretty much exactly what I said at the end there. When it comes to stats differentiating good and bad plays, if stats actually represented what's meaningful in conquest(Decaps, holding neutral nodes, full-capping, wasting the enemy's time on friendly nodes, kills, assists, healing, revives, damage, kills on-node) then it's easy.

    If i'm playing a side-noder for example and i'm holding a neutral point forever or full-capping, wasting the enemy's time on my node, that shows i'm fulfilling my role well.
    If stats better reflected what actually goes on in a match, this would work for each role whether you play a Damage, Roamer, Support, or Duelist/Side-noder build.

    Top stats as they are now are incredibly misleading, and if that was the standard for gaining or losing rating in Ranked, that would be awful. Honestly, I don't think they should even exist.

    You're probably right to say it's just wishful thinking, but to actually have meaningful contribution be better reflected by stats or score to in turn adjust your rating gain/loss isn't super hard to do. Paladins isn't too big a game, and it managed to find the balance. To write it off as impossible with Gw2 is a bit of an overstatement, and with that line of thinking; if you play ranked, you're only hurting yourself. Unless you afk and throw games, in which case; success, I guess.

    Anyway, just a thought I got playing recently. If you were actually curious, I think these posts just spring up, because lately the total RNG your fate is in the hands of your teammates rating system has gotten worse and worse the lower the population drops.

    Remove Ranked DuoQ pls&ty

  • Ragnar.4257Ragnar.4257 Member ✭✭✭
    edited September 9, 2019

    @Multicolorhipster.9751 said:
    If i'm playing a side-noder for example and i'm holding a neutral point forever or full-capping, wasting the enemy's time on my node, that shows i'm fulfilling my role well.

    I get why you would want this. But consider this:

    You've listed just one scenario which should be scored favourably.

    Now please go and list EVERY other scenario. ALL of them.

    Can't do all of them? Then you're incentivising certain types of play and chasing certain types of metric, and penalising certain other types of play which are actually beneficial to winning. Which, functionally, is the same as giving rewards for the current iteration of top-stats.

  • @Ragnar.4257 said:
    Now please go and list EVERY other scenario. ALL of them.

    Can't do all of them? Then you're incentivising certain types of play and chasing certain types of metric, and penalising certain other types of play which are actually beneficial to winning. Which, functionally, is the same as giving rewards for the current iteration of top-stats.

    Oh boy, i'll try because I consider it worth it, but I don't actually play any of the other roles so like... take this with a grain of salt.

    For a Roamer, which really only covers thief: Being rewarded for decapping and backcapping nodes would be a huge benefit I would think. That's something Top stats never show, but the actual impact that has on a match often makes or breaks them, and it should show imo. They could also benefit from assists since they +1 a lot of fights. It would be especially helpful if assists counted so long as you helped down someone, because often times after +1ing a fight; the thief wants to stay mobile, and might get out of combat while that downed player bleeds out.

    For Damage, I think Necromancers would most benefit from the extra score that comes with fighting on neutral or friendly nodes while providing assists, and damage. When it comes to gankers like Deadeye, Power Mesmer, and Sic 'em SB, obviously they don't want to fight on a node. If they were to engage a Necro, or a warrior, or a Holo, or any less-mobile class really, it presents the opportunity for some real big-brain plays by forcing that less-mobile class off their node so as not to reap the benefit of fighting on it, capping, or decapping it. There doesn't need to be an all-complex algorithm there in my opinion. Just reward the ganker for doing damage, landing kills, assists, decaps, similar to how side-noders do, but with less node-contribution as that's what separates the two. For gankers in particular, I think they'd have the least noticeable change in playstyle with the same potential to do well.

    Support is the easiest, which; is an honest problem. A flaw in this whole idea here. Healing, revives, fighting on node, kills on node, assists. Usually most the percentage of a team's healing and revives(if any) almost always go to the support, and they hold the points friendly and neutral for quite a while, assisting with kills all the while that more often than not happen on point.. By the new scoring system, they'd be the go-to class for easily climbing the ranks, or so I speculate. One solution would be to decrease the value of healing and revives in proportion to rank gain, but then people might be less inclined to do it, and if you do the opposite by increasing the value of offensive stats, you alienate people from playing support.

    The best solution I can think of there, is decreasing the value of node-related contribution based on how much healing and damage you're doing. If you're playing a support, you've got high healing, low damage, but you're also support; so fighting 1v1 on a node, especially an enemy node, would be considered a misplay, yeah? IF the algorithm was able to identify that misplay, then it could punish it while rewarding playing more supportively.

    Big IF tho, and like I said from the get-go; you're probably right. Big changes/reworks like that require a big scary thing called effort. That might be just a word to you and I, but I imagine it's pretty terrifying to Anet, NCSOFT, whoever's in charge. Chances are it always will be RNG until people are dropping -20 as early as Gold3. Rhymes not intended. The least they could do is start taking into account win/loss streaks.

    Remove Ranked DuoQ pls&ty

  • bluri.2653bluri.2653 Member ✭✭✭

    Another terrible idea

    www.twitch.tv/sindrener - Rank 55 Dragons/Orange Logo/Team Aggression

  • @bluri.2653 said:
    Another terrible idea

    Another bit of constructive well-thought out feedback. Thanks.

    Remove Ranked DuoQ pls&ty

  • saerni.2584saerni.2584 Member ✭✭✭✭

    We need to improve top stats. That is, however, not the same as using top stats for rating gain/loss calculations.

    We also need to consider rating gain/loss calculations in terms of ease of programming, mentioned above by numerous people questioning whether any single persons idea of “how to play” should be rewarded. Anet may disagree with posters here on what “playing well” means. Anet is also unable to spend too much time modifying their algorithm at this point beyond minor tweaking.

    One basic change would be to reward close games by decreasing rating loss/gain when games are close. Likewise you would increase gain/loss for definitive victories, giving people the incentive to fight to the end. Unlike personal performance, team performance ultimately is reflected in that final score. How much this should change scores should be determined later, but I would start at +50% modifiers for stomps and 33% for lopsided wins.

    • Win/Lose by over 400 points: +50% rating gain/loss
    • Win/Lose by over 300 points: +33% rating gain/loss
    • Win/Lose by less than 50 points: -50% rating gain/loss
    • Win/Lose by less than 100 points: -33% rating gain/loss

    Only after we actually can have team performance taken into account should we even be looking at individual performance.

    Northern Shiverpeaks (NSP)
    Deadeye (Thief)
    Commandant of P/D and Apex Predator

  • Psycoprophet.8107Psycoprophet.8107 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 9, 2019

    There is no reason why in a game without team q's that ur ranking couldn't be based on ur kills,assists,decaps, full caps and revives etc. Ur ranking depends on random teams how it is now which is stupid as kitten.

  • Poledra Val.1490Poledra Val.1490 Member ✭✭
    edited September 9, 2019

    Unfortunately and I am sad to say this the level of interest in pvp this season has never been lower as is the population.

    Its extremelly telling how a platinum player is now consistently being put in a team with golds or lower in almost every match up. The win to loss ratio in terms of gaining points and losing them is now i feel out of date and MUST reflect the current populations numbers in pvp.

    In addition the pvp matches themselves even though have not been great for some time now in my opinion have never felt worse in terms of overall competitvness and quality.

    Its a sorry state of affairs and i am sorry to say this but Anet is completely responsibile for giving next to nothing in terms content to the pvp community.

    But you know the good news is were getting PvP armor......

  • Multicolorhipster.9751Multicolorhipster.9751 Member ✭✭✭
    edited September 9, 2019

    @saerni.2584 said:

    • Win/Lose by over 400 points: +50% rating gain/loss
    • Win/Lose by over 300 points: +33% rating gain/loss
    • Win/Lose by less than 50 points: -50% rating gain/loss
    • Win/Lose by less than 100 points: -33% rating gain/loss

    Only after we actually can have team performance taken into account should we even be looking at individual performance.

    The problem there is, it often only takes one person consistently misplaying or just giving up and that's likely to result in those 500-50 or 500-100 blowout matches. If you lost a game because one of your teammates decided to sit in spawn, no matter what you do to try and turn it around; you're playing a pretty big disadvantage, and a blowout is more likely and I don't think anyone wants to be punished for someone else breaking the rules, but that's the way it is right now.

    There's already a way to compare team performance. Like you said, top stats just aren't representative right now. That whole endgame score screen isn't either because it pretty much only revolves around kills and damage, and even if it didn't; it doesn't get counted for in determining your rank gain. You could have 60-70% of a team's damage, and someone on your team might be filling a damage role, but doesn't have anymore than 10% of the team's damage done, and contributed most the team's deaths, but everyone losses a lot and gains very little because it's solely based on the ratings of other players.

    The game sort of forces the "a team is only as strong as its weakest player" mentality by punishing you for not being able to carry those games where you're down a player, or you have someone feeding; intentional or not. Doesn't make any sense to me because I think Ranked is moreso about individual performance anyway, considering you don't choose your teammates. It's very defeating that everyone gets punished or rewarded equally, when people's contributions to a win or loss are highly differential.

    Remove Ranked DuoQ pls&ty

  • Psycoprophet.8107Psycoprophet.8107 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

    @saerni.2584 said:

    • Win/Lose by over 400 points: +50% rating gain/loss
    • Win/Lose by over 300 points: +33% rating gain/loss
    • Win/Lose by less than 50 points: -50% rating gain/loss
    • Win/Lose by less than 100 points: -33% rating gain/loss

    Only after we actually can have team performance taken into account should we even be looking at individual performance.

    The problem there is, it often only takes one person consistently misplaying or just giving up and that's likely to result in those 500-50 or 500-100 blowout matches. If you lost a game because one of your teammates decided to sit in spawn, no matter what you do to try and turn it around; you're playing a pretty big disadvantage, and a blowout is more likely and I don't think anyone wants to be punished for someone else breaking the rules, but that's the way it is right now.

    There's already a way to compare team performance. Like you said, top stats just aren't representative right now. That whole endgame score screen isn't either because it pretty much only revolves around kills and damage, and even if it didn't; it doesn't get counted for in determining your rank gain. You could have 60-70% of a team's damage, and someone on your team might be filling a damage role, but doesn't have anymore than 10% of the team's damage done, and contributed most the team's deaths, but everyone losses a lot and gains very little because it's solely based on the ratings of other players.

    The game sort of forces the "a team is only as strong as its weakest player" mentality by punishing you for not being able to carry those games where you're down a player, or you have someone feeding; intentional or not. Doesn't make any sense to me because I think Ranked is moreso about individual performance anyway, considering you don't choose your teammates. It's very defeating that everyone gets punished or rewarded equally, when people's contributions to a win or loss are highly differential.

    Exactly ^
    With the ranking model anets currently using for ranking the top players high ranks are more indicative of them being on the good end of the rng team matching then their actual skill level. It also promotes afks and wintrading behavior. I don't care how skilled someone thinks they are if their opposite a decent to good team but are placed on a team with less players or less skilled players they are not gonna carry the team on their own. If ur opposing team isnt great as well then yeah theres a chance for a carry.
    With how it is now a great player could perform very well in the majority of their matches but due to teammates having less than optimal performance end up in low rank, and depending on the rng that is match making end up in low ranks indefinitely so why even bother.

  • saerni.2584saerni.2584 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

    @saerni.2584 said:

    • Win/Lose by over 400 points: +50% rating gain/loss
    • Win/Lose by over 300 points: +33% rating gain/loss
    • Win/Lose by less than 50 points: -50% rating gain/loss
    • Win/Lose by less than 100 points: -33% rating gain/loss

    Only after we actually can have team performance taken into account should we even be looking at individual performance.

    The problem there is, it often only takes one person consistently misplaying or just giving up and that's likely to result in those 500-50 or 500-100 blowout matches. If you lost a game because one of your teammates decided to sit in spawn, no matter what you do to try and turn it around; you're playing a pretty big disadvantage, and a blowout is more likely and I don't think anyone wants to be punished for someone else breaking the rules, but that's the way it is right now.

    There's already a way to compare team performance. Like you said, top stats just aren't representative right now. That whole endgame score screen isn't either because it pretty much only revolves around kills and damage, and even if it didn't; it doesn't get counted for in determining your rank gain. You could have 60-70% of a team's damage, and someone on your team might be filling a damage role, but doesn't have anymore than 10% of the team's damage done, and contributed most the team's deaths, but everyone losses a lot and gains very little because it's solely based on the ratings of other players.

    The game sort of forces the "a team is only as strong as its weakest player" mentality by punishing you for not being able to carry those games where you're down a player, or you have someone feeding; intentional or not. Doesn't make any sense to me because I think Ranked is moreso about individual performance anyway, considering you don't choose your teammates. It's very defeating that everyone gets punished or rewarded equally, when people's contributions to a win or loss are highly differential.

    A 300 point gap is 500-199. A 400 point gap is 500-99.

    One thrower isn’t enough to put you in that range. Snowball is real but if the rest of the team tries and plays smart they should be able to get 200 points.

    Northern Shiverpeaks (NSP)
    Deadeye (Thief)
    Commandant of P/D and Apex Predator

  • @saerni.2584 said:
    A 300 point gap is 500-199. A 400 point gap is 500-99.

    One thrower isn’t enough to put you in that range. Snowball is real but if the rest of the team tries and plays smart they should be able to get 200 points.

    You'd think, but one thrower kind of is enough to set you below that standard. Even without throwers i've had a ton of games this season that have been either complete blowout wins or losses where the losing team manages less than 100 points.

    People giving up mid-match and throwing is actually toxic is the most literal sense, because the mentality spreads to the other people in the team. Like "Oh this guy is giving up and he's not going to leave, so i'm going to lose rank anyway. Okay, guess i'll afk too no point to even bother." With that in mind, I think it's really kittened up that the thrower who ruined everyone's match is able to leave that match with the same penalty or potentially even lower than that of their teammates, and maybe an hour, few hours, day, few days of dishonor if reports are actually worth anything. I like to think they are because Arenanet has some really great staff that work player reports, but implementing a system that would punish toxic throwers by design rather than having to rely on those reports seems like the infinitely more sophisticated and better option to me.

    The main issue like people have been saying is the effort it would require to actually implement a more sophisticated scoring and rating system.

    @Psycoprophet.8107 said:
    With how it is now a great player could perform very well in the majority of their matches but due to teammates having less than optimal performance end up in low rank, and depending on the rng that is match making end up in low ranks indefinitely so why even bother.

    That's a good question. If you know you're going to lose the same set amount everytime, what is really the point in even trying? It encourages people to give up as soon as they feel a match is unwinnable, which unfortunately is a pretty low threshold for a lot of players.

    Remove Ranked DuoQ pls&ty

  • Psycoprophet.8107Psycoprophet.8107 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

    @saerni.2584 said:
    A 300 point gap is 500-199. A 400 point gap is 500-99.

    One thrower isn’t enough to put you in that range. Snowball is real but if the rest of the team tries and plays smart they should be able to get 200 points.

    You'd think, but one thrower kind of is enough to set you below that standard. Even without throwers i've had a ton of games this season that have been either complete blowout wins or losses where the losing team manages less than 100 points.

    People giving up mid-match and throwing is actually toxic is the most literal sense, because the mentality spreads to the other people in the team. Like "Oh this guy is giving up and he's not going to leave, so i'm going to lose rank anyway. Okay, guess i'll afk too no point to even bother." With that in mind, I think it's really kittened up that the thrower who ruined everyone's match is able to leave that match with the same penalty or potentially even lower than that of their teammates, and maybe an hour, few hours, day, few days of dishonor if reports are actually worth anything. I like to think they are because Arenanet has some really great staff that work player reports, but implementing a system that would punish toxic throwers by design rather than having to rely on those reports seems like the infinitely more sophisticated and better option to me.

    The main issue like people have been saying is the effort it would require to actually implement a more sophisticated scoring and rating system.

    @Psycoprophet.8107 said:
    With how it is now a great player could perform very well in the majority of their matches but due to teammates having less than optimal performance end up in low rank, and depending on the rng that is match making end up in low ranks indefinitely so why even bother.

    That's a good question. If you know you're going to lose the same set amount everytime, what is really the point in even trying? It encourages people to give up as soon as they feel a match is unwinnable, which unfortunately is a pretty low threshold for a lot of players.

    True and that's the problem with other people perfomance being the main factor of brown rank, its kitten. Honestly even as bad as anet is I can't believe their main ranking model they've incorporated is set up to have ur rank depend almost solely on the performance of other players and to top it off its random players lmao. If u have great luck with rng u could be a ok player in play or u could have bad luck in the rng and be a great player in gold. I can see why players said kitten it and win traded to avoid the kitten rank system.

  • Psycoprophet.8107Psycoprophet.8107 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 10, 2019

    I literally just got top dps by just running decap and +1 when my mates lasted long enough to even attempt to lol. So we ofcourse lost and my ranking suffers, this is such absolute BS

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.