Discussion About "What Is Killing Our SPvP Community?" And What Can We Do About It? - Page 2 — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home PVP

Discussion About "What Is Killing Our SPvP Community?" And What Can We Do About It?

2>

Comments

  • Crab Fear.1624Crab Fear.1624 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I don't think players are killing the community, unless it counts when they stop playing the game/mode.

  • phokus.8934phokus.8934 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Exedore.6320 said:

    @phokus.8934 said:
    1. Scrap Glicko-2 and use TrueSkill. TrueSkill is a Microsoft rating system that is designed for multiple players.

    Won't make a difference. TrueSkill was only shown to be marginally better than Elo. No comparison was done against Glicko2, which addresses deficiencies in Elo.

    Do you have any links on that because Elo is used primarily in chess and Glicko gets you faster to your rating. It's just mathematically more efficient.

    1. Update the matchmaker to have a tighter rating variance at the expense of longer queue times. I'd rather have statistically better matches than having a gamble with quicker queues.

    I recall that ANet actually experimented with this idea and found no difference in matching, but with a significant increase in wait time.

    That doesn't make any sense. The purpose of tightening the variance is so you don't have a 1700 rated player going up against 1400 rated players. I don't remember them changing how the matchmaker works in this regard. Any link with this change?

    1. Perform big balance updates during off-season and tweaks throughout the season

    Frequency and timing of balance is not the problem. ANet is not doing anything to tackle the egregious power creep. It doesn't matter how often you patch if the patches have almost no impact.

    Frequency is a problem for balancing. If something is overtuned and it takes them months to fix, that's a problem. When they push through updates during midseason that includes an overtuned trait, utility, etc. and then we're forced to wait until the next balance patch, that's an inherently flawed process. By changing when they produce balance patches gives them a better idea of what is overtuned and should theoretically apply it during the season so it doesn't skew matches.

    1. Do actual skill splits and not just number tuning across game modes. Compact the skill splits into PvE and WvW/PvP.

    Disagree here. Skill splits are a double-edged sword. They can help you balance one mode, but now developers have more skills to manage (i.e. more chances to screw up), and players are frustrated when skills have noticeably different behavior across game modes (need to retrain their brain when they swap modes).

    That's their reasoning too but changing a few numbers just doesn't cut it anymore. A great example is Shackling Wave where it was doing too much damage in PvP/WvW so they increased the cast time to a little over 1 second for all game modes. It completely killed power Revs in PvE

    1. Expand the setup time to 2 minutes. If a player is disconnected at the start of the match then scrap it and kick everyone out of the game and back to queue.

    Disagree. The duration is largely unused already. True DCs don't come back on an extra 30 seconds.

    Regardless of the setup time, the match needs to be scraped when someone is disconnected during setup and arguably within a certain time frame of when the match starts.

  • tacoclaw.8251tacoclaw.8251 Member ✭✭
    edited April 18, 2019

    @Eddbopkins.2630 said:
    Everyone is saying so much as to what is killing the pvp community. As for me its the lack of game modes. I can only do so many 5v5,

    I totally respect your statement, and please respect this as an honest and good faith push back: In my life I have probably logged over 10,000 hours playing chess where the games move slowly and the mode is the same as always.

  • tacoclaw.8251tacoclaw.8251 Member ✭✭
    edited April 18, 2019

    TRUTH, AND SOLUTION:

    TRUTH #1. You can't have a casual pve game AND a serious pvp extension without creating two parallel games and GW2 has only done that half way. There are simply way too many pve profession variations that are not viable in pvp and the average pve player will take too much time to figure this all out. They will soon leave, but not after messing up a bunch of games. They deserve our gratitude for even trying, but they will not get it. TRUTH #2. A major shift happens in skill level where players go from playing a solo game to a group synergy game. Unless you can separate those two types of players no one will be happy. Because they are literally playing two different games in the same game space (go look up the OW elo hell episode that almost destroyed the game).

    SOLUTION: Either just play for fun, or if you are looking for high level play then go to tournaments or private games. Or you may want to switch to a true moba.

    When you have a gazillion players this stuff doesn't matter, but as everyone knows this stuff is really becoming a problem. I personally think that smart good players figure out that they have run the course of the game and then move on to other game experiences. I think the problem is the hanger-ons who have become so good and "maximized" that they make the game no fun for the casual player who essentially walks into a buzz saw.

  • otto.5684otto.5684 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 18, 2019

    I always thought it is weird that the rating is not by class. Almost all MMOs do the rating by either class or character, cuz obviously if I am playing a class I rarely play, the game most definitely should not assume I play on the same level as my main.

    For duo que, again, this is a problem that many other games resolved. Most games if their is more than 1 player queuing the entire group rating is assumed based on the highest person rating.

    As for match making, considering the lack of rating by class and how off the balance currently is, the match making is nothing more than a formality.

  • Eddbopkins.2630Eddbopkins.2630 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 18, 2019

    @tacoclaw.8251 said:

    @Eddbopkins.2630 said:
    Everyone is saying so much as to what is killing the pvp community. As for me its the lack of game modes. I can only do so many 5v5,

    I totally respect your statement, and please respect this as an honest and good faith push back: In my life I have probably logged over 10,000 hours playing chess where the games move slowly and the mode is the same as always.

    Same here i have hundreds if not thousands of hours of chess my self...i always have a active game on my phone against the pc at any given day of the week. But gw2 is not chess in any way and i dont think a 1v1 in a chess game with millions of possibilities and outcomes can be compared to what 5v5 conquest 3 capturepoint circle quest that gw2 is.

  • Balsa.3951Balsa.3951 Member ✭✭✭

    I’m not sure if anet has people working full time on PVP at the moment.

    Changes may come but in comparison to pve there is not much money in pvp.

    The best pvp players can do is suggest ways for anet to make money with pvp....

  • FyzE.3472FyzE.3472 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Balsa.3951 said:
    I’m not sure if anet has people working full time on PVP at the moment.

    Changes may come but in comparison to pve there is not much money in pvp.

    The best pvp players can do is suggest ways for anet to make money with pvp....

    I don't get this. I play PvP AND buy stuff in gem store. Yes, I too want to look cool (wow, omg!).
    And the somewhat interesting thing is, I spend more than a wow subscription monthly cost. On a b2p game. I'm definitely not alone too.

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

    1) Lack of 5 man teams in Ranked.
    2) Power Creep.
    3) Stale maps and modes.
    4) Literally any other PvP game is better balanced for pick up and play.
    5) Wasted too much time on 'EEEEEEEEEESPORTS!' dream then on making compelling PvP content.

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

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

  • Balsa.3951Balsa.3951 Member ✭✭✭
    edited April 18, 2019

    @FyzE.3472 said:

    @Balsa.3951 said:
    I’m not sure if anet has people working full time on PVP at the moment.

    Changes may come but in comparison to pve there is not much money in pvp.

    The best pvp players can do is suggest ways for anet to make money with pvp....

    I don't get this. I play PvP AND buy stuff in gem store. Yes, I too want to look cool (wow, omg!).
    And the somewhat interesting thing is, I spend more than a wow subscription monthly cost. On a b2p game. I'm definitely not alone too.

    I know but the how u look is not specific pvp most of the time.

    Or anet thinks there is nothing they can sell pvp oriented players what they not foremost sell in pve.

    Wvw had warclaw skins at least.

    Infusion effects are even disabled in pvp

    So as now everything u buy for pvp is just a side effect of pve. And so long anet can’t find anything they can sell pvp exclusively they are not so motivated sadly.

    All that balance and rework wishes will not happen before anet does not see how they can milk that cow. Pvp is more a side game not even trailers advertising pvp in game.

    This alone shows how anet feels their pvp them self

  • Trevor Boyer.6524Trevor Boyer.6524 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @mortrialus.3062 said:

    1. Create a Sense of Linear Progression.
    2. Make the player constantly one to play One More Turn.
    3. Make the player feel above average.

    Great video btw. What it was explaining was a much deeper look at what I was feeling or noticing with my OP statement. What I stated that I believed was the core issue of social problems "how the algorithm functions in terms of gain/loss" directly breaks the theory of 1, 2 and 3.

    1. It certainly does not feel like linear progression when you are getting +5 on wins and -20 on losses, especially when you KNOW you are the higher rated player in the game between both teams and you are being made to play as the "high risk player" because if you don't, you aren't going to win the match if you don't push for 1v2s and 1v3s or kill other players on a DPS build in some record amount of time. This feels terrible to only get +5 on wins but -20 punishment on losses. A player works hard in high risk play to win 4 matches for +20 to his rating, but then losses his progress in a single game that is a loss. Going even further into this, if that player losses 2x games in a row, now he's at -40 and has to win 8 games in a row to break even from where he started. Everything about this feels bad and is anti-productive for getting players to stay & play. Most people I talk to honestly tell me that they have much more fun in unranked, and after watching that video I can see why. Going back into my point made about social problems, of course the community will be toxic when so many are walking around in a perma-rage because they get +5 on wins and -20 on losses. If you look at this from a macro standpoint, something like individual player Glicko ratings applied to a 5v5 game mode is a design to keep people raging at each other for losing matches and raging at the game in general.
    2. The first point goes directly into this one. There is almost no incentive to "stay and play one more" in ranked, not unless you hit a lose streak and are trying to regrind up the leaderboards, and in that case the reason why you are "staying to play one more" isn't because you are having fun, it just begins to feel like a task or a choir. But for most players, like what you stated already, they hit a peak rating and then sit on, while playin only 1 game every 3 days to avoid decay. The system is so punishing that it by far gives more incentive to not play at all, than to keep playing and enjoying the experience.
    3. No real commentary here. I don't think it's even possible to devise a system that "makes every player feel above average" when applied to Conquest. They would probably need to design a new competitive game mode from the ground up to implement something like that. Hey, I could be wrong.
  • mortrialus.3062mortrialus.3062 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 18, 2019

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

    @mortrialus.3062 said:

    1. Create a Sense of Linear Progression.
    2. Make the player constantly one to play One More Turn.
    3. Make the player feel above average.

    Great video btw. What it was explaining was a much deeper look at what I was feeling or noticing with my OP statement. What I stated that I believed was the core issue of social problems "how the algorithm functions in terms of gain/loss" directly breaks the theory of 1, 2 and 3.

    1. It certainly does not feel like linear progression when you are getting +5 on wins and -20 on losses, especially when you KNOW you are the higher rated player in the game between both teams and you are being made to play as the "high risk player" because if you don't, you aren't going to win the match if you don't push for 1v2s and 1v3s or kill other players on a DPS build in some record amount of time. This feels terrible to only get +5 on wins but -20 punishment on losses. A player works hard in high risk play to win 4 matches for +20 to his rating, but then losses his progress in a single game that is a loss. Going even further into this, if that player losses 2x games in a row, now he's at -40 and has to win 8 games in a row to break even from where he started. Everything about this feels bad and is anti-productive for getting players to stay & play. Most people I talk to honestly tell me that they have much more fun in unranked, and after watching that video I can see why. Going back into my point made about social problems, of course the community will be toxic when so many are walking around in a perma-rage because they get +5 on wins and -20 on losses. If you look at this from a macro standpoint, something like individual player Glicko ratings applied to a 5v5 game mode is a design to keep people raging at each other for losing matches and raging at the game in general.
    2. The first point goes directly into this one. There is almost no incentive to "stay and play one more" in ranked, not unless you hit a lose streak and are trying to regrind up the leaderboards, and in that case the reason why you are "staying to play one more" isn't because you are having fun, it just begins to feel like a task or a choir. But for most players, like what you stated already, they hit a peak rating and then sit on, while playin only 1 game every 3 days to avoid decay. The system is so punishing that it by far gives more incentive to not play at all, than to keep playing and enjoying the experience.
    3. No real commentary here. I don't think it's even possible to devise a system that "makes every player feel above average" when applied to Conquest. They would probably need to design a new competitive game mode from the ground up to implement something like that. Hey, I could be wrong.

    Long video but my god is it relevant and the pay off is incredible. If you just want to skip to the big pay off its at 28:48

    Best Dressed Memser NA.

  • Ralkuth.1456Ralkuth.1456 Member ✭✭✭

    Write up with the compassionate touch, but I believe it's partly as you say and partly because of a low population.

    I also believe this is a cyclical relationship - if more people play and hence suffer from this Glicko-based system, it might be considered more strongly for a change. Right now it might just be an idea with not much motivation behind it.

    Had a friend who'd do stupid kitten with me and queue regardless of rating (he's marginally better, just marginally hahaha) but you don't find these kinda gaming friendships every day. Plus, the matches tend to be frustrating sometimes and it depends on personal strength of will and effective attitude adjustment to keep at it and find fun things even in the worst situations.

    We became so busy IRL we use GW2 as a penpal platform but old times were good times (but the 10 mail limit is kitten).

    Serf of the Arena NA

  • Poor balance, cancer classes running unchecked, kitten matchmaker, and epilepsy causing visual effects that make things hard to follow are what's killed the community. All in all it is in Anet's hands and they've fumbled so much that no one cares.

  • Ithilwen.1529Ithilwen.1529 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 18, 2019

    @mortrialus.3062 said:
    We can talk about things like balance, and the meta, and build diversity, and match making, and the leaderboard, and duo queue. But I think Guild Wars 2's biggest PvP problem is a more fundamental issue with how it builds its player experience right from the beginning. No amount of refining existing systems in a game mode we all currently have played thousands of matches in is ever going to fix the fact that no one can play one game forever and that people move on and there always needs to be an influx of new blood into the population.

    I think there are a lot of interesting points about how Fortnite makes players feel like winners even if they don't win, and how that keeps players playing the game over and over. But like a lot of Guild Wars 2 including basic PvE and WvW, the PvP mode is just not set up well to incentivize people to keep playing, just from a modern game design and psychology perspective. You can have a dynamic PvE or PvP game, with great game feel and interesting flowing metas at the high end but it doesn't matter if players who dip their toe in aren't introduced to an experience that's set up to make them want to play more and if they aren't taught how to play the game.

    Don't worry about the obvious clickbaity thumbnail, the video is about a lot of great real game design principals. Most notably from Sid Meyer's GDC lecture on how to keep people playing his games.

    1. Create a Sense of Linear Progression.
    2. Make the player constantly one to play One More Turn.
    3. Make the player feel above average.

    Guild Wars 2's PvP tends to struggle with 1 and 3, unfortunately.

    I think that #3 nails the critical issue here.

    Not only do you lose, but then you're mocked for it with the closing screen. I end up logging off many nights, feeling bad about myself after losing repeatedly. So, I find myself playing fewer and fewer games..

    One thing that improved the experience for me, win or lose, was the crowd in Coliseum. There's something about hearing the roar of the crowd. It feels especially good to be able to shout out and get a response from the crowd.

    The culture of the game has been built to make a person feel bad if they aren't on the winning side. That is the root of the problem.

    I'll think about how the experience could be improved.

    Mesmerizing Girl

  • mortrialus.3062mortrialus.3062 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 18, 2019

    @Ithilwen.1529 said:

    @mortrialus.3062 said:
    We can talk about things like balance, and the meta, and build diversity, and match making, and the leaderboard, and duo queue. But I think Guild Wars 2's biggest PvP problem is a more fundamental issue with how it builds its player experience right from the beginning. No amount of refining existing systems in a game mode we all currently have played thousands of matches in is ever going to fix the fact that no one can play one game forever and that people move on and there always needs to be an influx of new blood into the population.

    I think there are a lot of interesting points about how Fortnite makes players feel like winners even if they don't win, and how that keeps players playing the game over and over. But like a lot of Guild Wars 2 including basic PvE and WvW, the PvP mode is just not set up well to incentivize people to keep playing, just from a modern game design and psychology perspective. You can have a dynamic PvE or PvP game, with great game feel and interesting flowing metas at the high end but it doesn't matter if players who dip their toe in aren't introduced to an experience that's set up to make them want to play more and if they aren't taught how to play the game.

    Don't worry about the obvious clickbaity thumbnail, the video is about a lot of great real game design principals. Most notably from Sid Meyer's GDC lecture on how to keep people playing his games.

    1. Create a Sense of Linear Progression.
    2. Make the player constantly one to play One More Turn.
    3. Make the player feel above average.

    Guild Wars 2's PvP tends to struggle with 1 and 3, unfortunately.

    I think that #3 nails the critical issue here.

    Not only do you lose, but then you're mocked for it with the closing screen. I end up logging off many nights, feeling bad about myself after losing repeatedly. So, I find myself playing fewer and fewer games..

    One thing that improved the experience for me, win or lose, was the crowd in Coliseum. There's something about hearing the roar of the crowd. It feels especially good to be able to shout out and get a response from the crowd.

    The culture of the game has been built to make a person feel bad if they aren't on the winning side. That is the root of the problem.

    I'll think about how the experience could be improved.

    I think for the end game screen rather than being dead the enemy team should be clapping in the foreground Super Smash Bros style. Yeah you lost but there is something courteous and good sported and less mean spirited about it.

    Best Dressed Memser NA.

  • @mortrialus.3062 said:

    @Ithilwen.1529 said:

    @mortrialus.3062 said:
    We can talk about things like balance, and the meta, and build diversity, and match making, and the leaderboard, and duo queue. But I think Guild Wars 2's biggest PvP problem is a more fundamental issue with how it builds its player experience right from the beginning. No amount of refining existing systems in a game mode we all currently have played thousands of matches in is ever going to fix the fact that no one can play one game forever and that people move on and there always needs to be an influx of new blood into the population.

    I think there are a lot of interesting points about how Fortnite makes players feel like winners even if they don't win, and how that keeps players playing the game over and over. But like a lot of Guild Wars 2 including basic PvE and WvW, the PvP mode is just not set up well to incentivize people to keep playing, just from a modern game design and psychology perspective. You can have a dynamic PvE or PvP game, with great game feel and interesting flowing metas at the high end but it doesn't matter if players who dip their toe in aren't introduced to an experience that's set up to make them want to play more and if they aren't taught how to play the game.

    Don't worry about the obvious clickbaity thumbnail, the video is about a lot of great real game design principals. Most notably from Sid Meyer's GDC lecture on how to keep people playing his games.

    1. Create a Sense of Linear Progression.
    2. Make the player constantly one to play One More Turn.
    3. Make the player feel above average.

    Guild Wars 2's PvP tends to struggle with 1 and 3, unfortunately.

    I think that #3 nails the critical issue here.

    Not only do you lose, but then you're mocked for it with the closing screen. I end up logging off many nights, feeling bad about myself after losing repeatedly. So, I find myself playing fewer and fewer games..

    One thing that improved the experience for me, win or lose, was the crowd in Coliseum. There's something about hearing the roar of the crowd. It feels especially good to be able to shout out and get a response from the crowd.

    The culture of the game has been built to make a person feel bad if they aren't on the winning side. That is the root of the problem.

    I'll think about how the experience could be improved.

    I think for the end game screen rather than being dead the enemy team should be clapping in the foreground Super Smash Bros style. Yeah you lost but there is something courteous and good sported and less mean spirited about it.

    The closing screen cancer has always shown how out of touch and encouraging of toxicity Anet really is. I'm surprised they never added a tea bagging option to it.

  • Falan.1839Falan.1839 Member ✭✭✭
    edited April 18, 2019

    What is killing our SPvP community? Lack of playerbase simply. Anet being super slow with every meaningful improvement doesn't help either, but at this point it's not even the main issue.

    The best MM algorithm in the world can't create good matches when there are not even 10 players of similar skillvl queuing simultaneously.

  • coro.3176coro.3176 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 18, 2019

    @tacoclaw.8251 said:
    TRUTH, AND SOLUTION:

    TRUTH #1. You can't have a casual pve game AND a serious pvp extension without creating two parallel games and GW2 has only done that half way. There are simply way too many pve profession variations that are not viable in pvp and the average pve player will take too much time to figure this all out. They will soon leave, but not after messing up a bunch of games. They deserve our gratitude for even trying, but they will not get it.

    Also, even the builds that WERE viable in pvp no longer are thanks to the expansions' power creep.

    There were builds that I loved playing (3-kit power engi, condi pistols, etc.), but since HoT and PoF they were made obsolete and nothing replaced the complexity of their playstyles.

    So I'm left with two choices: either play the meta builds which I don't enjoy (holo, scrapper), or be a liability to my team.

    .. so I don't play. It's that simple.

    I imagine a lot of other players feel the same way about other builds and playstyles (eg. d/d ele)

    Edit: oh, someone already said it better farther up the thread:

    @Exedore.6320 said:

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:
    Most people would just say "Toxicity!" or "Bad Balance!" Let me explain what I believe to be the reason why all of it is happening. I believe it has nothing to do with general toxicity and very little to do with general balance issues. I believe the root and bulk of the problem begins with how the algorithm functions on a core foundational level:

    Second, elite spec power creep has also alienated players by forcing them to give up on established characters. Many players started out by picking a profession and a playstyle which suited them. They felt comfortable with that choice and became attached to it over time. Then a new round of elite specs hits, leaving everything before it as non-viable for PvP. You have three choices: re-roll, continuing playing the sub-par spec, or quit. For players who make the second choice, a huge divide in power drives them to quit because they simply can't compete against the immense power differential by substituting greater skill.

  • There are not a ton of things to do to have a bigger PvP playerbase. Renew the playerbase is key. If players leave (because life happen) other players must come in. Promoting PvP is the best way to do this.
    During the mount event in WvW (regarding the fact if it was good or bad for the mod, it is not the point), a lot of player tried it, often for the first time, and some, maybe not most of them but still some, like it and play it.
    That is the kind of thing PvP need : advertising to incent people to try it, maybe like it and play more of it.
    Anet can do that (it's obviously their job) if they want the mode to live longer but player can too : talking to friend in guilds, take them to a game, etc.
    It's like a real life store after all, you have to renew your customer base.

  • ReaverKane.7598ReaverKane.7598 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 18, 2019

    @phokus.8934 said:
    1. Scrap Glicko-2 and use TrueSkill. TrueSkill is a Microsoft rating system that is designed for multiple players.
    2. Update the matchmaker to have a tighter rating variance at the expense of longer queue times. I'd rather have statistically better matches than having a gamble with quicker queues.
    3. Bring back team queuing.
    4. Perform big balance updates during off-season and tweaks throughout the season
    5. Do actual skill splits and not just number tuning across game modes. Compact the skill splits into PvE and WvW/PvP.
    6. Expand the setup time to 2 minutes. If a player is disconnected at the start of the match then scrap it and kick everyone out of the game and back to queue.

    This, this is what would have saved sPvP 2-3 years ago... I don't know if even this would save it now...
    Also, pick ban phases before setup. This would minimize balance issues and completely solve class stacking.

    @Exedore.6320 said:

    @phokus.8934 said:
    1. Scrap Glicko-2 and use TrueSkill. TrueSkill is a Microsoft rating system that is designed for multiple players.

    Won't make a difference. TrueSkill was only shown to be marginally better than Elo. No comparison was done against Glicko2, which addresses deficiencies in Elo.

    Not commenting since i didn't see that comparison.

    1. Update the matchmaker to have a tighter rating variance at the expense of longer queue times. I'd rather have statistically better matches than having a gamble with quicker queues.

    I recall that ANet actually experimented with this idea and found no difference in matching, but with a significant increase in wait time.

    Not really, what Arena Net did, was they HAD this already, but removed it because it was increasing queue times, but that was years ago... And yeah, with the current population being so low, it would be like 1h queues for the top ranked.

    1. Bring back team queuing.

    Yes.

    Agreed.

    1. Perform big balance updates during off-season and tweaks throughout the season

    Frequency and timing of balance is not the problem. ANet is not doing anything to tackle the egregious power creep. It doesn't matter how often you patch if the patches have almost no impact.

    I assumed that "big" meant impactful ones, and with weekly/bi-weekly "tweaks" that should solve outlying issues.
    One of the worse "cancers" for PvP in GW2 is that they allow broken metas to keep going for MONTHS, not days or weeks, but months. Then they wonder why sPvP is doing poorly...

    1. Do actual skill splits and not just number tuning across game modes. Compact the skill splits into PvE and WvW/PvP.

    Disagree here. Skill splits are a double-edged sword. They can help you balance one mode, but now developers have more skills to manage (i.e. more chances to screw up), and players are frustrated when skills have noticeably different behavior across game modes (need to retrain their brain when they swap modes).

    Not all skills need splitting... But splitting effects instead of only numbers would improve the overall quality of the game, nowadays there are entire classes, like Necromancer/Scourge that are almost completely useless in PVE because they were completely gutted in the name of sPvP and WvW.
    The fact of the matter is that each game mode has completely different dynamics, sPvP is more about burst potential and quick engagements, WvW is more about survivability and AoE (for big engagements, Roaming is closer to sPvP builds, being focused on either being a duelist or a highly mobile disengager), and PvE drifts between DOT and DPS with a few tanks and supports sprinkled in between.

    But each type requires different damage profiles, and making skills one-size fit all will end up sacrificing one or two of those game modes for the sake of balance in another. Which we have seen repeatedly happen.
    As for amount of skills... GW2 doesn't really have that many, other games manage to be balanced with more, GW1 managed to be decent with more, so why wouldn't they? And unlike other games, and GW1, for weapon skills, they can control what kind of purpose and interaction they have with 5 skills at once, which reduces headway a lot...

    1. Expand the setup time to 2 minutes. If a player is disconnected at the start of the match then scrap it and kick everyone out of the game and back to queue.

    Disagree. The duration is largely unused already. True DCs don't come back on an extra 30 seconds.

    Well, what's a "true dc"? My modem can fail, get no internet light, and be back in under one minute... And anyway, that's the point, if the guy is dcd, true or false, for more than 2 minutes, the game replaces that guy, instead of forcing a team to play without one player...
    League has a similar thing, but with surrender, you can surrender early if someone dcs in the first two minutes... But because GW2 forces you to stick around on losing matches... At least do that in the setup phase...
    Also, having a larger setup could open up space for a pick/ban phase. As in you get to pick and ban specs, and then reformat your build accordingly during those 2 minutes.

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

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

    @mortrialus.3062 said:

    1. Create a Sense of Linear Progression.
    2. Make the player constantly one to play One More Turn.
    3. Make the player feel above average.
    1. No real commentary here. I don't think it's even possible to devise a system that "makes every player feel above average" when applied to Conquest. They would probably need to design a new competitive game mode from the ground up to implement something like that. Hey, I could be wrong.

    Agreed, @mortrialus.3062 that's a great video and rather interesting. I wish Anet would take some learnings from it, especially after how committed they were to PvP to start the game.

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 my disagreement with you is on your third bullet point. Their system of making people feel above average is "top stats." Often times, it's lesser players that get top stats because, frankly, they're not awarded to always go to the most impactful players.

    People who know that top stats mean very little are immune to feeling disappointed when you don't get any, because you know you probably helped your team score as much as they did.

  • mortrialus.3062mortrialus.3062 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I was genuinely scared no one would watch the video because its got the worst clickbaity thumbnail and is about Fortnite.

    Best Dressed Memser NA.

  • Trevor Boyer.6524Trevor Boyer.6524 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Shadow Order.7258 said:

    @mortrialus.3062 said:

    @Ithilwen.1529 said:

    @mortrialus.3062 said:
    We can talk about things like balance, and the meta, and build diversity, and match making, and the leaderboard, and duo queue. But I think Guild Wars 2's biggest PvP problem is a more fundamental issue with how it builds its player experience right from the beginning. No amount of refining existing systems in a game mode we all currently have played thousands of matches in is ever going to fix the fact that no one can play one game forever and that people move on and there always needs to be an influx of new blood into the population.

    I think there are a lot of interesting points about how Fortnite makes players feel like winners even if they don't win, and how that keeps players playing the game over and over. But like a lot of Guild Wars 2 including basic PvE and WvW, the PvP mode is just not set up well to incentivize people to keep playing, just from a modern game design and psychology perspective. You can have a dynamic PvE or PvP game, with great game feel and interesting flowing metas at the high end but it doesn't matter if players who dip their toe in aren't introduced to an experience that's set up to make them want to play more and if they aren't taught how to play the game.

    Don't worry about the obvious clickbaity thumbnail, the video is about a lot of great real game design principals. Most notably from Sid Meyer's GDC lecture on how to keep people playing his games.

    1. Create a Sense of Linear Progression.
    2. Make the player constantly one to play One More Turn.
    3. Make the player feel above average.

    Guild Wars 2's PvP tends to struggle with 1 and 3, unfortunately.

    I think that #3 nails the critical issue here.

    Not only do you lose, but then you're mocked for it with the closing screen. I end up logging off many nights, feeling bad about myself after losing repeatedly. So, I find myself playing fewer and fewer games..

    One thing that improved the experience for me, win or lose, was the crowd in Coliseum. There's something about hearing the roar of the crowd. It feels especially good to be able to shout out and get a response from the crowd.

    The culture of the game has been built to make a person feel bad if they aren't on the winning side. That is the root of the problem.

    I'll think about how the experience could be improved.

    I think for the end game screen rather than being dead the enemy team should be clapping in the foreground Super Smash Bros style. Yeah you lost but there is something courteous and good sported and less mean spirited about it.

    The closing screen cancer has always shown how out of touch and encouraging of toxicity Anet really is. I'm surprised they never added a tea bagging option to it.

    Had a good sincere lol after reading that.

    ty ty

  • Faux Play.6104Faux Play.6104 Member ✭✭✭

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 The social effects of individual Glicko ratings over time when applied to solo/duo only Conquest, is interesting indeed. My point in creating this thread was not to harp at Arenanet, but rather to stir healthy thought & discussion. I fully understand that Glicko is what we are working with. I was however, hoping that maybe someone had an idea for a quick & easy fix, something that might steer the sociology of the community back towards something cohesive, in terms of incentive to play together rather than avoid each other like the plague. I won't claim to have a "miracle suggestion", but I do know that it's the smallest things within a system that dictates how players conduct themselves within and around that system. I believe my initial statement in this thread about "the core of the social problem" to be absolutely true. There has to be something, some small tweak, that could be done to at least lighten the load of this social problem. Possibly something within or added to the algorithm, or something to alter with the que system.

    There are two issues. The biggest one is the nature of players themselves and the gaming industry as a whole. The vast majority of the players aren't going to help other people get better especially at the top end of the spectrum. It is a waste of valuable time. It is that way across all game modes. PVE players are the same way. That is never going to change. Video games have a short shelf life so there is no point in developing players like successful sports do. Anyone that cared about playing competitively or making money playing video games left GW2 long ago for the same reason. Those people aren't going to stick around a game or with "friends" when it is costing them rating, viewers, and money. There is more money/views in the next hot game than there is in a 5 year old game. A good twitch stream has 10s of thousands of viewers. A good guild wars 2 stream has 100.

    IMO there is nothing wrong with glicko it is working correctly. The problem is match maker and how people exploit it.
    1. All alts should use the rating of the main account. People should not be able to have more than one rated account. Tie it to the two factor phone authentication. It is too easy to have 2 1700 players each with a tanked alt that duo together at off hours. One plays their 1700 account and one plays their 1500 account. You can extend this to any level. Boosting ratings is bad for the match maker and enough people are doing it that is makes for very poor match quality.
    2. Soft reset should go away. It gives people huge rating swings in both directions and reduces the overall match quality. Combine that with alt accounts, and you have a mess of people in divisions they don't belong in throughout the season.
    3. Get rid of duo queue. There are too few players for this to work, and all it is used for is boosting accounts. It is virtually impossible to overcome a duo of people that are at a rating they shouldn't be at. There are other game modes where people can play competitively with their "friends".
    4. Give people an option to limit the MMR range they play against. I'd rather have long queue times than be ping ponging between matches against top tier players, and low gold tier players. I don't care if a top 100 player that is playing at 4 in the morning can't find a match. Making them wait will negatively affect far fewer people than putting them with/against people they shouldn't be playing with.
    5. If 4 isn't going to happen then at least show people's rating at the start. If there are going to be huge skill gaps in games make it obvious who are the top rated players and who is going to need help. Just because something is a good class match on the mini map doesn't mean much if a 1400 player is stuck against a 1700 player.