WvW World Restructuring Beta Feedback and Future

[Swoo.5079]

The wvw population couldn't support 5 tiers on EU, so let's add a 6th tier so there are no queues during prime time...

 

[Crystalreves.3965]

same on NA its dead except NA prime time, NA should be 3 tiers, what we need is more maps not more tiers.

[Chaba.5410]

5 hours ago, Crystalreves.3965 said:

same on NA its dead except NA prime time, NA should be 3 tiers, what we need is more maps not more tiers.

No one would ever get into a map during NA primetime skirmish again.  And more maps would just be more places for players to spread out and hide from each other during off-hours skirmishes.

Edited Monday at 10:45 PM by Chaba.5410

[Crystalreves.3965]

u can chase ppl on diff map but u cant chase ppl on diff tier

[Saepio.7980]

So this has been a total f'n cluster, no balance of pop, just red blobbing 24/7 against empty maps outside of NA prime - terrible, terrible, terrible. Go back to the old WvW cuz this is garbage.

[Riba.3271]

One-up-one-down does not work with restructuring

After first week, losers will fight winners and matchups will be even lopsided on 2nd week. This continues for 3rd and 4th week. It might reach decent matchmaking by 5th week, which is already after new team creation.

Solution: Replace One-up-one-down with winners facing each other. It is also possible to go system like sports league where winner gets 3 points, 2nd place 2 points, and 3rd place 1 point, and keep continuously adjusting next week matchups according to that.... Or just a tournament mode. Otherwise 4 weeks won't be enough to decide best server or reach good matchmaking: Currently if you start from T5 or below, you would never get to play T1 matchup

Edited Wednesday at 05:13 PM by Riba.3271

[Dawdler.8521]

2 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

Solution: Replace One-up-one-down with winners facing each other.

While I agree on the whole that 1-up-1-down may be "too slow" for WR, this method is ill thought out and have an obvious flaw:

What happens when someone in the "loosers" matchup win and someone in the "winners" matchup loose? 

If winners meet winners, 2nd place meet 2nd place and loosers meet loosers... it only works a first random week and then the "assigned" week. The next week after that, whoever wins a 3x looser matchup would be a winner... but that doesnt really make them better, does it? And they could meet 2x of the best winners. Vice versa a previous team matched enough to be a winner yet lost would suddenly fight 2x loosers.

Going back to glicko ratings and adjusting up/down based point differences would probably be a better way.

[joneirikb.7506]

I think there's an argument for moving away from 1up1down, but I also think it's a bit too early to say. Largely because once they beaten out the biggest problems, they could go back to 2 or even 3 months Teams, and then the 1up1down would work well again. So it has the potential of just being extra effort slowing the entire thing down further only to be undone in the long run. Considering how little resources the WvW department gets in the first place, that could potentially hurt us a lot down the line.

[XenesisII.1540]

The system sucks now because there's too little time for a world to settle in it's appropriate tier. When it was 8 weeks but 4 tiers it allowed worlds to use the first month to get to the tier they belong to, and then the next month to play matches around that tier.

When you have a situation of 4 weeks but 5 tiers, now you may see worlds not even reach the tier they're suppose to be in and then it all resets.

In any case, if WR worked properly and all the worlds were set up to be close to each other in power, then they could at least go back to the tournament style format of preset matches for seasonal play.

Bottom line though, the season needs to last longer than the amount of tiers available.

Bottom bottom line, anet doesn't give two kittens and we all have to deal with it, you only get to be happy if you're blobbing around for 2 hours a night not giving a kitten about anything else.

[Mabi black.1824]

I still think that this whole development thing resembles a big '' down grad ''. the impression is that of a halfway work, and given the limited communication, we also have the impression that there is no bigger picture of where wvw is and where we want to take it. not to mention epic matches. but how are the games in your area? in terms of playing evenly and up until the last 2 hours who wins or loses the week. I forgot no one cares about a kitten anymore. okay let's leave it alone, it's better.

[Crystalreves.3965]

when u have 5 sea guild allianced together and no one to fight except ppting lol  its a good thing the real alliance was canceled otherwise we would have just few blob shards fighting no one

Edited Thursday at 02:47 PM by Crystalreves.3965

[Riba.3271]

22 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

 

If winners meet winners, 2nd place meet 2nd place and loosers meet loosers... it only works a first random week and then the "assigned" week. The next week after that, whoever wins a 3x looser matchup would be a winner... but that doesnt really make them better, does it? And they could meet 2x of the best winners. Vice versa a previous team matched enough to be a winner yet lost would suddenly fight 2x loosers.

Idea would be to use point system (3 points for winner,  2 points 2nd, 1 point for loser)

if 5 tiers: 

After 1st week

5 Teams 3 points

5 teams 2 points

5 teams 1 point

-> Make matchups like this (3x first place, 2x first place 1x 2nd place, 3x 2nd place, etc.)

After 2nd week

Points COULD look like this (with most probable variation that winner wins again)

2 Teams 6 points

4 Teams 5 Points

3 Team 4 Points

4 Teams 3 Points

2 Teams 2 points

-> Make matchups according to this point distribution

 

Now as you can see by 3rd week, teams that have peformed well  (5 or more points) would face each other, mediocre servers (4 points) would fight each other, and badly performing servers would have fairer matchups.

Now I do admit that even this system wouldn't be able to make perfect matchups based off 2 weeks of matchups. For example in 3rd week will winner of the losers be as strong as loser of the winners (4 points)? Most likely not. But we know they are both not strongest or weakest servers and they should have better matchup than with current system.

Further improvements: You can slightly improve this system by having 1st week be 9/5/1 point distribution, 2nd week be 7/4/1 point distribution and 3rd week 5/3/1 points. The matchups will be more stale, but it should give better matchmaking at midtiers since winner against losers is not going to be as strong of a server as loser against winners.

Edited Thursday at 06:06 PM by Riba.3271

[RisingDawn.5796]

Six tiers for 6 weeks, seems way too long at this point of time, on the EU.

Of course, things should get more balanced over time, but idk I'm skeptical, especially after 7 years of Server linkings, which lasted 8 weeks, despite the changes they brought to scoring over the years.

Replacing warscore and glicko years, during the WvW season tournaments, with skirmishes, victory points and one up and one down.

Then it will just be 4 weeks reshuffles, with five tiers I presume, but will that be any more balanced? 

Edited 22 hours ago by RisingDawn.5796