Jump to content
  • Sign Up

About the new EU World Links (6/27/2019)


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 170
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

@DanCjr.2406 said:

@"Chaba.5410" said: Sorrow's Furnace, Borlis Pass, and Maguuma all had lower glicko score than YB. Matchmaking on relinks is done by glicko.

I know rematching is done by glicko, my question was more of a "explain to me how your glicko calculations actually came up with this disaster of a situation."

@Dayra.7405 said: And the Glicko numbers are so close together (due to the 3-4-5 pts per skirmish), that the random number dominates, the matchmaking. So you are in a higher tear as you rolled a higher number than the others. That's it.

This is a major problem if a 'random' number can shoot a server so far out of whack from where it should realistically be. I understand the new bandwagons are always in tier 4 at the start of a new match but putting the old tier 4 servers into tier 2 makes no sense. It's Monday morning and we're already losing by 50 points. What do you think this does to a server? No one's logging in, when they do they're getting spawned camped for an entire day. Saddest part of that was FC had to resort to mortars and trebs when they started to get actual push back despite their spawn campers still having almost double the numbers. Oh, and I'm not crying about it, I'm just saying it's pretty sad a 'good' server can't win outnumbered fights without siege. Definitely something to brag about to the other top tier servers right FC?

Lol FC has, besides STRM 5 players in ocx and SEA

We Both know that's not FC spawncamping

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a Dzagonur player, I'm pleasantly surprised by Gunnar.Communication works fine and fights often went smoothly.There were a lot of Hitler-related messages coming from some Gunnar people at reset, though, but luckily that seems to have died down as well.Also, suddenly everywhere are roamers. ^^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DanCjr.2406 said:

@L A T I O N.8923 said:Lol FC has, besides STRM 5 players in ocx and SEA

We Both know that's not FC spawncamping

Who said this happened during ocx and sea timezones. The situation I described was from about 11am est until 11pm est on Sunday. Take a guess who is thicc during that timezone?
cough
fc
cough

No clue, im from EU and sleep around those TimesBut plz tell me more

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Dediggefedde.4961 said:As a Dzagonur player, I'm pleasantly surprised by Gunnar.Communication works fine and fights often went smoothly.There were a lot of kitten-related messages coming from some Gunnar people at reset, though, but luckily that seems to have died down as well.Also, suddenly everywhere are roamers. ^^

Gunnar's Holdian here, was a bit worried when I first saw we were with german server, but then I saw you are quite a pleasant link to have, many comms, and good communication between us two, so I'm gonna appreciate this new change !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally ANet made a good decision regarding WvW! Linking the servers internationally was the best thing they have given WvW for a long time. We can cope perfectly with our international partner server and finally there seem to bee a lot more players than before. In my opinion, they should first wait and see if the alliance system, as planned, will be needed at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DanCjr.2406 said:

@"Chaba.5410" said: Sorrow's Furnace, Borlis Pass, and Maguuma all had lower glicko score than YB. Matchmaking on relinks is done by glicko.

I know rematching is done by glicko, my question was more of a "explain to me how your glicko calculations actually came up with this disaster of a situation."

Which is exactly what I've been trying to explain if you read some of my other responses here.

Look at the chart on this old blog post that explains the calculation. You see the ranks and rating columns doesn't match the matchmaking rating. #1 rated BG in that chart rolls blue T2.https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/big-changes-coming-to-wvw-matchups/

And realize that they now cap the random adjustment to matchmaking rating at 100:https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/wvw-matchup-variance-reduction/

Now go to https://leaderboards.guildwars2.com/en/na/wvw and look at how close in glicko rating a bunch of T2/T3 servers are, not more than 100 points away from each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@aspirine.6852 said:So already your linking is being undermined by massive transfers Anet. Great thinking there.

Do you mean people moving to the higher tiers, cause blacktide is suddenly back from the dead too. So it's probably impossible to drop out of T1, with such an influx of transfers.

Thanks to how cheap transfers to link servers are, even English speaking guilds will move to EU national servers, if it's linked to a International one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@CrimsonNeonite.1048 said:

@aspirine.6852 said:So already your linking is being undermined by massive transfers Anet. Great thinking there.

Do you mean people moving to the higher tiers, cause blacktide is suddenly back from the dead too. So it's probably impossible to drop out of T1, with such an influx of transfers.

Thanks to how cheap transfers to link servers are, even English speaking guilds will move to EU national servers, if it's linked to a International one.

Yes the sad bandwagoners are now frequently spotted on blacktide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am still waiting for an explanation as to how this new matchup was set? We are considered Tier 2 and were matched up with a Tier 8 for however long these typically last, meanwhile for the week this is what we are faced with 2 groups consisting of Tier 2 matched with Tier 4. Now if you look at the combined rating points in rankings it leaves our group at 2,770.8945 matched against group 2 with a rating of 3,396.7259 and group 3 with 3,532.6748. None of this makes any bloody sense and clearly something is broken or there is some kind of biased in these rankings and matchups. Someone at Anet needs to come to the forefront and explain what the hell is going on and what the rational is because I can't make any sense of it, regardless of which stats I look at.

Also while i'm at it why is TC locked as full, I've been here since day 1 and i can tell you we do not have the same level or volumes of players as we originally had, and I'm not just talking WvW. Why can't the numbers be published so we get a good idea of what is reality because lord knows we could use an influx and everyone I've spoken to that wants to join our server cannot because it's locked. If the system is set based on accounts then you need to review if these are all original accounts or someone with 30 alt accounts causing this.Can we just get some answers, or she would just move on to something else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Long standing and loyal server guilds split up and fractured. Borderlands empty at reset on "full", (cough), I mean locked servers and not a word from the Dev's yet other than "we'll keep an eye on it" in some generic, faceless blanket post.

For months and months and months we fed gold/gems/even real money! into the machine to keep our guildies with us with the re-linking. That was an annoyance for sure but a necessary sacrifice we were happy to make for the benefit of 1. our guild/community and 2. the game as a whole to maintain stability on our server.

I also have a rather cynical suspicion that this situation has arisen simply to provide another short-term revenue stream. Lets split entire guilds up and force them to relocate to other servers because some of their members are now left in no man's land on a server they either have no connection to, or just simply moved to for a re-link to their desired one with their friends and guild mates.

The question of this becoming a necessity or a last resort action at all, is a sour one. It shouldn't even have to be posed in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Change...bad...must...hate...on...it!

I like the changes (WSR). Being tri-lingual is sure a bonus for me, but its actually not even necessary. Seeing no real language related issues, just the usual "why did we get linked with X against Y" complaints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Dovahkiin from HighRock.4682" said:Nice Job ANet ! Matchups have never been so well balanced. Yes Nice job. If you want to destroy WvW just delete it, this will be just faster. one against ten whatever the hour is, Yes Nice job ANet !

It's not ANet that destroys balance, but the player transferring, as they prefer to win without effort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Dayra.7405" said:> It's not ANet that destroys balance, but the player transferring, as they prefer to win without effort.Really????"We are considered Tier 2 and were matched up with a Tier 8 for however long these typically last, meanwhile for the week this is what we are faced with 2 groups consisting of Tier 2 matched with Tier 4. Now if you look at the combined rating points in rankings it leaves our group at 2,770.8945 matched against group 2 with a rating of 3,396.7259 and group 3 with 3,532.6748. None of this makes any bloody sense and clearly something is broken or there is some kind of biased in these rankings and matchups."Yes, there are players making it worse but i can tell you, the situation above is strictly their doing, so is the fact our server is lol "Full". These issues are all their doing not the players so go ahead and defend them but frankly many of us are still waiting on explanations as to how and why these things keep happening!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Vlad Morbius.1759I agree, not everything is players, the WvW-system also has some flaws:

The 5-4-3 pts for skirmishes blinded the Glicko-System more than the players, resulting in very close Glicko-Scores (Even worser the Glicko of server that switched from minor to mayor-server are complete garbage), with the consequence that the old Glicko+Random matchmaking still used after relinks is now mostly Random-matches. Probably that is the problem of this weeks NA-matches.It's really surprising that ANet still uses Glicko, as the linking process produces a better number to make the post-relink matches now: the play-hours of servers. And the random part is not needed at all anymore since normal match-making is winner-up/looser-down. (It was once needed as the tiers where totally separated from each other.)

The second flaw is that transfer-limits (full)and costs are applied to server and not to the whole link. This way it's still possible and usually even very cheap (the minor servers of strong links is often medium) to transfer. to a link that already dominates a match.

The third flaw is that transfer have no immediate effect on server (better link) status, only in the longer run the transferred players add their newly played hours to the new instead of the old server. (But due to the necessary averaging this is much to slow.) This way such mass-transfers as yesterday from Kodash to Dzagonur are still possible with disastrous results on balance. Better would be that each transferring player immediately affects the status (subtract the hours a player played from source server and add them to destination server)

I hope that alliances will avoid these flaws. I am not sure if it makes sense to fix the old system, but now it's nearly 2 years after announcing alliances, how many years will it take to get them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the monochrome colour of EBG 3 hours before EU reset in my server's match-up, I have to say the problems of EU-WvW have been laid bare in spectacular fashion. Removal of the language restrictions for linking has done so very little towards fixing the population balance problem. Four of the five tiers were awfully one-sided match-ups this week. Glicko is part of that, so not going to hammer Anet too hard. But I have to get a few things off my chest.

As we approach the end of the week:

  • The unlinked servers have the lowest populations (Surprise? No. But the scale stands out.)
  • The spread between 1st and 15th is a factor of almost 3:1 (GH circa 110k and Kodash circa 40k) during EU timezones from the stats at wvwstats.com/timezones. It has stayed at this ratio for the whole week. So the standard deviation in population (see below) still remains rather large.
  • On NA servers, the NA-EST population spread between 1st and 12th is only 2:1 and NA-PST is only 3:2. So much less of a problem. On NA the issue seems to be sudden population shifts (that then mess-up the linkings).

Sorry to do this ... I know you guys work hard to try to make this situation better, but I am now wiser than I was when this was originally posted ...

@"Stephane Lo Presti.7258" said:We looked at this world linking and compared it to past ones, and we would like to share a few data points on how links have been improved:

  • The difference in play hours between the largest and smallest link has decreased by 37% from last linking.
  • The standard deviation on play hours between links has decreased by 39% from the last linking. This means that on average, links are much closer in play hours than before.

Methinks you were given misleading information to post (recall the famous quote: "Lies, damn lies and statistics"). A 39% lower standard deviation in play hours seems to be rather small, now that we are at the end of the week. I doubt you would have been provided with the actual standard deviations before and after, rather than the relative change; this would make the magnitude of the problem quite clear, I suspect.

The next step will have to be delivery of Alliances (and not in the long term) or removal of one tier from EU-WvW. I do not think "the next step" can wait another 3 months, if I may give my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...