8 Hour Matches — Guild Wars 2 Forums

8 Hour Matches

Straegen.2938Straegen.2938 Member ✭✭✭
edited September 11, 2019 in WvW

How about a week of 2-4 matches per day? Rank servers in the beginning based on typical population during the hours of each match. Tickets are given out at the end of each match based on placement in each tier.

For example if we divide the day up into three 8 hour matches, the system works mostly like it does today only matches last 8 hours instead of 168 (24x7) hours. The difference is when the 8 hour period ends the servers are set back to where they were at the end of the previous cycle. For example, lets use FA as an example:

Friday NA, they start in T1. They lose and move down to NA T2.
Friday OCX, they start in T3. They win and move into OCX T2.
Friday EU, they start in T4. They lose and stay in EU T4.
End of 24 hour cycle. Start the cycle over.
Saturday NA, they start in T2. They come in 2nd and stay in NA T2.
Saturday OCX, they start in T2. They come in 2nd and stay in OCX T2.
Saturday EU, they start in T4. They lose and stay in EU T4.
End of 24 hour cycle. Start the cycle over.
... repeat for the week ...

Comments

  • No, reward system for server ranking equals bandwagoning.

  • might be too often. maybe 1 match a day with a relink every week.

    Te lazla otstra.

  • @Stand The Wall.6987 said:
    might be too often. maybe 1 match a day with a relink every week.

    The concept of an 8 hour event cycle is to mostly reduce/eliminate coverage issues. If a server has a strong NA, they get placed near the top for that cycle. If that same server has a weak Oceanic, they go near the bottom during that cycle. After the first rounds, placement is based on how well the server did in its previous 8 hour window. So an NA server that wins in NA prime, may move up into T1 for the next NA prime but may move to T4 during its Oceanic time.

    I am not saying it will fix the issues but it would be interesting to see if a short skirmish style changes things up enough to create more WvW interest.

    @Abyssisis.3971 said:
    No, reward system for server ranking equals bandwagoning.

    Bandwagons in this format will mean little since tickets should be given based on placement in each tier not overall. Besides the per ticket rewards for each 8 hour event will never net enough to cover the shards on the transfer.

  • Sovereign.1093Sovereign.1093 Member ✭✭✭✭

    48 hours weekend. =)

    not all play at prime time. got work.

    Not Even Coverage is the Only broken thing in WVW.

  • @Straegen.2938 said:
    The concept of an 8 hour event cycle is to mostly reduce/eliminate coverage issues. If a server has a strong NA, they get placed near the top for that cycle. If that same server has a weak Oceanic, they go near the bottom during that cycle. After the first rounds, placement is based on how well the server did in its previous 8 hour window. So an NA server that wins in NA prime, may move up into T1 for the next NA prime but may move to T4 during its Oceanic time.

    ahhhh. interesting man. kitten it might just work.

    Te lazla otstra.

  • You mean like what they have in Edge of the Mist right now?

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 11, 2019

    We already have 2 hour "matches", 12 times a day where the leading server get more rewards (ie faster tickets for players and warscore for the server). This was done by Anet to reduce the coverage issues (you cant eliminate it). Placement - or rather the "starting position" - is already decided by the winner of the previous skirmish since objectives do not reset.

    What's the purpose of this idea that's so different from how it is now? What would actually change except the fact that players can now log on and have no idea whether their server won or lost or what rank they are since there could be 2+ matchups between logons?

    Dont look a gift Asura in the mouth.
    No seriously, dont. Shark teeth.

  • XenesisII.1540XenesisII.1540 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Hey maybe Titan alliance will come back to take their crown.

    "Is there pvp stuff for this?" "Absolutely, eh we actually have a new armor set coming soon."
    "From the back of the room!, the one pvp fan! we got him! WoAH!"
    || Stealth is a Terribad Mechanic ||

  • TheGrimm.5624TheGrimm.5624 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 11, 2019

    I think 8 is too long, maybe 4. NVM, missed a chunk of the above.

    Envy the Madman his musing when Death comes to make fools of us all.
    De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
    TheGrimm PoTBS/GW1/WAR/Rift/GW2/MWO/ESO/WoT/WoW/D2/HoTS/Civ6/CU/AoC

  • Hitman.5829Hitman.5829 Member ✭✭✭✭

    No, most WvW hard core gamers hate the EoTM timers. Making the WvW core maps on 8 hr timers is just going to make a lot of WvW core gamers unhappy!

    Charr Warrior Master Race!
    Black Gate Beast Roamer chicken chaser!

  • Sovereign.1093Sovereign.1093 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Hitman.5829 said:
    No, most WvW hard core gamers hate the EoTM timers. Making the WvW core maps on 8 hr timers is just going to make a lot of WvW core gamers unhappy!

    not true. eotm is not popular because no pips.

    Not Even Coverage is the Only broken thing in WVW.

  • @Dawdler.8521 said:
    What's the purpose of this idea that's so different from how it is now? What would actually change except the fact that players can now log on and have no idea whether their server won or lost or what rank they are since there could be 2+ matchups between logons?

    This system should create a better pairing between populations and account for population shifts quickly. Currently servers are scored on how well they do over a 24 hour period across 7 days. I suggest for a week score servers over what they did in 3 distinct 8 hour periods and rank them for each time of the day. A single server could be T1 in NA Prime, T2 in Oceanic Prime and T4 in EU Prime.

    With each new match comes a reset of the map. Servers won't have to dig out of a hole against T3 structures while defending paper during their prime time. Lastly, rather than weeks for a large guild move to sort itself out in the rankings, it would happen in a day or two max.

    Basically it is a test to see if shorter matches with better population pairing creates a more interesting WvW scene. I see no reason not to try it aside from the development side of it.

  • Strider Pj.2193Strider Pj.2193 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Sovereign.1093 said:

    @Hitman.5829 said:
    No, most WvW hard core gamers hate the EoTM timers. Making the WvW core maps on 8 hr timers is just going to make a lot of WvW core gamers unhappy!

    not true. eotm is not popular because no pips.

    Again.. not true. EoTM died in April of 2016 when regular XP was removed.

    Skirmish tracks for ‘pips’ was added in June of 2017.

    Please be factual.

    Thank You for the {MEME}

  • Strider Pj.2193Strider Pj.2193 Member ✭✭✭✭

    So how do you calculate population during a given time zone?

    I mean, I get defining play hours.. But just how dynamic would it be?

    How quickly would it shift people?

    Within a match?

    At the beginning of a week?

    At relinking?

    Those things change tremendously within a given week for some servers. Most T1 matches (minus this weeks) were close through the weekend as there is coverage on some servers Friday through Sunday. But once Monday hits, there is traditionally one server that locks down The BLs until the NA crew logs in.

    Thank You for the {MEME}

  • @Strider Pj.2193 said:
    So how do you calculate population during a given time zone?

    Basically they guess as they do now when the relink happens. After the first 8 hour match, servers move up or down for each timeframe (NA/EU/OCX) depending on how they do.

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:
    How quickly would it shift people?
    Within a match?

    The system works mostly like it does today only matches last 8 hours instead of 168 (24x7) hours. The difference is when the 8 hour period ends the servers are set back to where they were at the end of the previous cycle. For example, lets use FA as an example:

    At the beginning of NA, they start in T1. They lose and move down to NA T2.
    At the beginning of OCX, they start in T3. They win and move into OCX T2.
    At the beginning of EU, they start in T4. They lose and stay in EU T4.
    End of 24 hour cycle. Start the cycle over.
    At the beginning of NA, they start in T2. They come in 2nd and stay in NA T2.
    At the beginning of OCX, they start in T2. They come in 2nd and stay in OCX T2.
    At the beginning of EU, they start in T4. They lose and stay in EU T4.
    End of 24 hour cycle. Start the cycle over.
    ... repeat for the week ...

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:
    At relinking?
    At the beginning of a week?

    My suggestion is to try it for a week so weekly/relinks don't matter.

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:
    Those things change tremendously within a given week for some servers. Most T1 matches (minus this weeks) were close through the weekend as there is coverage on some servers Friday through Sunday. But once Monday hits, there is traditionally one server that locks down The BLs until the NA crew logs in.

    Monday would be a bit chaotic but it would mostly sort itself by Tuesday.

    This model isn't seeking perfection just trying to get more balanced fights with a fairly simple design instead of waiting ages for Alliances. This also prevents servers from getting demoralized for an entire week because a guild transferred off, a large group purposefully tanks, etc. A server might have 1-2 bad 8 hour windows but it should sort itself pretty quick. The system will likely have negative side effects but in a limited run as an event they should be greatly limited.

  • Straegen.2938Straegen.2938 Member ✭✭✭
    edited September 11, 2019

    EotM's big issue is the same reason few like Red BL. The map is not very fun for most players with long runs and expansive empty areas with PvE content sprinkled about. EotM and RedBL are impressive maps just not for WvW. Also EotM has no group progression as their are no tiers.

    @TheGrimm.5624 said:
    I think 8 is too long, maybe 4.

    My 8 hour suggestion is mostly arbitrary. 8 or 12 seems more logical to me since I believe players don't want a lot of interruptions in a game session which 2, 4 or maybe even 6 create.

  • TheGrimm.5624TheGrimm.5624 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Straegen.2938 said:
    EotM's big issue is the same reason few like Red BL. The map is not very fun for most players with long runs and expansive empty areas with PvE content sprinkled about. EotM and RedBL are impressive maps just not for WvW. Also EotM has no group progression as their are no tiers.

    @TheGrimm.5624 said:
    I think 8 is too long, maybe 4.

    My 8 hour suggestion is mostly arbitrary. 8 or 12 seems more logical to me since I believe players don't want a lot of interruptions in a game session which 2, 4 or maybe even 6 create.

    Disregard my statements I mis understood above, I was thinking you were discussing changes to the current skirmish periods.

    Envy the Madman his musing when Death comes to make fools of us all.
    De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
    TheGrimm PoTBS/GW1/WAR/Rift/GW2/MWO/ESO/WoT/WoW/D2/HoTS/Civ6/CU/AoC

  • Strider Pj.2193Strider Pj.2193 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Straegen.2938 said:

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:
    So how do you calculate population during a given time zone?

    Basically they guess as they do now when the relink happens. After the first 8 hour match, servers move up or down for each timeframe (NA/EU/OCX) depending on how they do.

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:
    How quickly would it shift people?
    Within a match?

    The system works mostly like it does today only matches last 8 hours instead of 168 (24x7) hours. The difference is when the 8 hour period ends the servers are set back to where they were at the end of the previous cycle. For example, lets use FA as an example:

    At the beginning of NA, they start in T1. They lose and move down to NA T2.
    At the beginning of OCX, they start in T3. They win and move into OCX T2.
    At the beginning of EU, they start in T4. They lose and stay in EU T4.
    End of 24 hour cycle. Start the cycle over.
    At the beginning of NA, they start in T2. They come in 2nd and stay in NA T2.
    At the beginning of OCX, they start in T2. They come in 2nd and stay in OCX T2.
    At the beginning of EU, they start in T4. They lose and stay in EU T4.
    End of 24 hour cycle. Start the cycle over.
    ... repeat for the week ...

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:
    At relinking?
    At the beginning of a week?

    My suggestion is to try it for a week so weekly/relinks don't matter.

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:
    Those things change tremendously within a given week for some servers. Most T1 matches (minus this weeks) were close through the weekend as there is coverage on some servers Friday through Sunday. But once Monday hits, there is traditionally one server that locks down The BLs until the NA crew logs in.

    Monday would be a bit chaotic but it would mostly sort itself by Tuesday.

    This model isn't seeking perfection just trying to get more balanced fights with a fairly simple design instead of waiting ages for Alliances. This also prevents servers from getting demoralized for an entire week because a guild transferred off, a large group purposefully tanks, etc. A server might have 1-2 bad 8 hour windows but it should sort itself pretty quick. The system will likely have negative side effects but in a limited run as an event they should be greatly limited.

    The idea seems ok if the resets happen without issue which, even currently, we have issues at reset even once a week, but that may bring more attention to the problems as the resets would be happening throughout the workweek for Anet staff to see issues

    One issue I see may be compounded with this change. If we look at T1 NA right now, the ‘OCX and SEA timezones’ would likely be the gorilla vs current T2 people which would really be hard for a lot of those T2 servers to deal with. Then they would pop up to T 1 to fight with there (currently smaller) NA populace which would result in being sent back down for the timezones when they are at their strongest. I mean that is just one server issue but it may compound others .

    Thank You for the {MEME}

  • Sovereign.1093Sovereign.1093 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 11, 2019

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:

    @Sovereign.1093 said:

    @Hitman.5829 said:
    No, most WvW hard core gamers hate the EoTM timers. Making the WvW core maps on 8 hr timers is just going to make a lot of WvW core gamers unhappy!

    not true. eotm is not popular because no pips.

    Again.. not true. EoTM died in April of 2016 when regular XP was removed.

    Skirmish tracks for ‘pips’ was added in June of 2017.

    Please be factual.

    yes 2017 nailed eotm. sad day for eotm.

    doing a quick youtube search a bit of 2017 still had some eotm action.

    Not Even Coverage is the Only broken thing in WVW.

  • Strider Pj.2193Strider Pj.2193 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Sovereign.1093 said:

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:

    @Sovereign.1093 said:

    @Hitman.5829 said:
    No, most WvW hard core gamers hate the EoTM timers. Making the WvW core maps on 8 hr timers is just going to make a lot of WvW core gamers unhappy!

    not true. eotm is not popular because no pips.

    Again.. not true. EoTM died in April of 2016 when regular XP was removed.

    Skirmish tracks for ‘pips’ was added in June of 2017.

    Please be factual.

    yes 2017 nailed eotm. sad day for eotm.

    doing a quick youtube search a bit of 2017 still had some eotm action.

    Smh... continue to believe that.

    The loss of rank producing XP killed EoTM.

    Everything that was there prior to this change hasn’t changed.

    Pips were introduced to WvW but never removed from EoTM. People left EoTM because their Ktrain died.

    Thank You for the {MEME}

  • Sovereign.1093Sovereign.1093 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:

    @Sovereign.1093 said:

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:

    @Sovereign.1093 said:

    @Hitman.5829 said:
    No, most WvW hard core gamers hate the EoTM timers. Making the WvW core maps on 8 hr timers is just going to make a lot of WvW core gamers unhappy!

    not true. eotm is not popular because no pips.

    Again.. not true. EoTM died in April of 2016 when regular XP was removed.

    Skirmish tracks for ‘pips’ was added in June of 2017.

    Please be factual.

    yes 2017 nailed eotm. sad day for eotm.

    doing a quick youtube search a bit of 2017 still had some eotm action.

    Smh... continue to believe that.

    The loss of rank producing XP killed EoTM.

    Everything that was there prior to this change hasn’t changed.

    Pips were introduced to WvW but never removed from EoTM. People left EoTM because their Ktrain died.

    yet youtube does not lie. 2017 got some eotm vids of zergs, but onwards? not so much.

    Not Even Coverage is the Only broken thing in WVW.

  • Stand The Wall.6987Stand The Wall.6987 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 23, 2019

    this is by far the best solution to coverage I've heard so far.
    sounds like a ton of work tho.

    @Raymond Lukes.6305
    is this possible?

    Te lazla otstra.

  • Strider Pj.2193Strider Pj.2193 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Stand The Wall.6987 said:
    this is by far the best solution to coverage I've heard so far.
    sounds like a ton of work tho.

    @Gaile Gray.6029 @Raymond Lukes.6305 @McKenna Berdrow.2759
    is this possible?

    Might want to try some different people....

    Thank You for the {MEME}

  • Strider Pj.2193Strider Pj.2193 Member ✭✭✭✭

    McKenna and Gaile are no longer with the company. It appears Raymond is.

    Thank You for the {MEME}

©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.