Jump to content
  • Sign Up


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well that's interesting...I just happen to be a roamer that could not care less about private tags. And "content creators" you say? Like "job creators" then? Then what of everyone else that is not a commander? Are they merely the "consumers" of said content?
  2. They can tag off then! That or just go private. What?..Is the simple act of following a player "entitlement" then?
  3. Oh but it IS crumpets and tea! At least where pugs are concerned, anyway. Hardcore guilds, no matter their differences, all agree on their divine "right" to herd pugs and roamers along in their zergs.
  4. I remember the days of 8v8. Those were fun. Then some kitten decided to make it 5v5 😞
  5. By qualitative and social, yes. A human approach. A more critical approach that does not rely on and is independent of statistics, AI, parameters and algorithms. Because although statistics and parameters are technically correct given their input and expected output, they don't tell the whole truth. Only a critical approach by a human can do that. Machines just calculate what they're given, they don't have the ability to deduce or judge qualities of matches even with more parameters that you give them. Basically, yes...a final judge, devs being more hands-on with pvp matchmaking systems. Chang
  6. Doesn't seem to be. There is simply no restraint on guilds with this system. Instead of server-stacking, most likely there will be alliance-stacking across worlds and time-zones. Alliances can bypass the 500 player limit by creating another affiliated or sister guild and coordinate and play politics to not fight each other when they're matched up. Roamers, pugs, etc are simply along for the ride, it seems. Yeah...I'm not "all in" on this "hype"...
  7. @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 I'm going to take another point of contention here: what is an "exact" theory of player skill? To the extent that such a thing exists and can actually be implemented, it would be already used today if there was one. I don't see it. Player skill is not a completely tangible metric for it to be analyzed and measured. In the context of spvp, skill is much more than just wins/losses, caps, healing. It's the intangibles: movement, it's keeping an eye on the minimap, it's having a backup plan if a fight at mid or home goes south, it's stalling the opposing team off-poin
  8. @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 Thanks for clarifying further. Fair enough, then. Based on your systematic breakdown above, I concede and agree on the central problem. From your perspective, you are trying to get at the root of the problem: Elo. Here's the thing, though. Plenty of online multiplayer games use Elo or variations of it. They have the exact same problems as gw2. Elo is applied to these team-based games and fails. It is also as you say, an algorithm meant to be used in 1v1 games. It's not an issue there. It's only a massive problem in team games, in which the vast majority of on
  9. @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 Mostly agree, but...three objections. 1.) Glicko is absolutely relevant since it's what the game runs on. It should be tackled directly. 2.) Volatility has a huge impact on rating in the long-term. It is NOT minor. If you take a break, come back, lose a big chunk of rating due to high volatility and deviation, it becomes more and more difficult to climb the ladder with each game you play because the system gets more information each time and says that's where you "should" be due to the algorithm, thus you struggle to climb. In that scenario, a player can
  10. Apparently not kissing the feet of gaming community thought-leaders (streamers) really rubs people the wrong way lmao!
  11. Restating a disingenuous question is not going to get an answer. I give direct, concise opposition to ranked pvp as is.This was your initial point up above: "The only thing "locking" you or anyone else to whatever tier you feel you're locked to, is your own ability. " (posted 11-14-21 4:03pm - edited 4:12 pm) Why not be direct and just admit that ranked is fine as is then?
  12. I did address the point, you just didn't like the answer. And yes, I stand by my position. Rankings are completely meaningless when cheaters run amok. It invalidates and goes against the basic idea of competition. Your turn...
  13. Ridiculous. The Olympics is a multi-generational sporting event with lineage to the ancient times. To even contemplate comparing them to this disaster is the height of delusion.
  14. Ok cool..start. We all start off with good will, that's easy. But the REAL challenge is ENDING with good will, which you clearly seem to lack!
  15. Streamers...THAT'S your evidence?...."Some people say..." What is silly is pretending that ratings even matter when it comes to skill. They don't. The matchmaking and leaderboard are a joke. It's the same people playing each other! There are people CHEATING. I don't know why people are still invested in this farce. It defies logic.
  • Create New...