Idea: WvW leaderboards (for players)

[raist.6207]

Well, we already have a 250 top in sPvP now. Why Anet can´t implement something similar in WvW?For example, by kills. A250 top of player with the biggest amount of kills, maybe every month or 3 months it resets like a sPvP season Anet actually has this information about kills, we can chek our personak k/d with a comand and also we have the server k/d at the WvW panel. Imo this ranking could bring us some more competition.Some of you will say: "People Will bandwagon to leech kills" but… players and guilds are already bandwagoning so what :) Some players/guilds could transfer to lower tiers in order to get easier kills idk..Maybe some players will farm each other and manipulate the system, Anet can avoid this... for example when you kill someone u have to wait (10 min idk) to have a +1 in your count or so..

Whats your opinion? Do you have any similar ideas or improvement for this one?

Ty for Reading and sorry, my english is not really good.. ;)

[Turk.5460]

No, leaderboards lead to nothing but more toxicity. And there are far too many ways you can participate effectively in WvW for there to be a leaderboard based on any one aspect.

[Strider Pj.2193]

How would you define 'kill'? Currently the server defines kills as a hit on a player that dies. So, 10 people reach a certain level of damage equates a kill. Not really a good way to define a personal k/d ratio.

And is 5 kills and logged out for the month with no deaths better than 15 kills and 5 deaths? In a single night?

Where will that threshold be?

And number of kills is misleading as well, just simply in the way the server calculates kills.

[dynomite.5834]

How would this make the game more enjoyable for the player base? I see it only for the ego-strokers

[Sovereign.1093]

guild ranking would be nice. =) ones with most contribution.

=)

[DeadlySynz.3471]

It still favors larger servers, and those who insist on only engaging when they outnumber. Unless Anet implements something that severely punishes both bandwagoning and engaging groups with smaller numbers, it shouldn't be implemented.

The same goes with adding "guild rankings". Many guilds still persist only pushing groups smaller than them. These same guilds when engaged with even numbers get vaporized. So unless rankings include things like "Outnumbering kills/deaths" "Even kills/deaths" and "outnumbered kills/deaths", it shouldn't be implemented. If something like that was implemented, it would paint a good picture of which guilds can fight vs those that can't fight without numbers on their side.

[Dawdler.8521]

@"DeadlySynz.3471" said:It still favors larger servers, and those who insist on only engaging when they outnumber. Unless Anet implements something that severely punishes both bandwagoning and engaging groups with smaller numbers, it shouldn't be implemented.

The same goes with adding "guild rankings". Many guilds still persist only pushing groups smaller than them. These same guilds when engaged with even numbers get vaporized. So unless rankings include things like "Outnumbering kills/deaths" "Even kills/deaths" and "outnumbered kills/deaths", it shouldn't be implemented. If something like that was implemented, it would paint a good picture of which guilds can fight vs those that can't fight without numbers on their side.

Numbers doesnt even matter, its worse than that. Imagine if over a timespan of 5 minutes, one player sees a camp under attack and spends the next 5 minutes fighting for his life against an equally skilled player on a roaming build, trying to defend it. Eventually he kill the enemy and hold the camp.

In the same timespan two equal 50 man zergs clash but one of them eventually gets a good hit in, the fight quickly shifts and a random backline necro gets credit for 15 kills by tapping each. At least half of them where credited when the enemy zerg was already disengaging.

So, one guy with a 1:0 kdr and another with 15:0 kdr.

One of them is clearly the superior player when we look at the stats. I mean 15 kills in 5 minutes, thats hardcore solo player dueling.

[Shroud.2307]

https://gw2efficiency.com/

This site has all of those statistics. If you connect your account to it you can see where you rank.

[Aeolus.3615]

Ladderboard for the stack aoe and spam thing? LOOOL

Zerg small groups and make it count btw LOOOOL.

Puurrfect lamerwars2 ladderboard.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

Instead of total kills or k:d, what if the OP had suggested things that actually contributed towards a team's success? And what if leaderboards were on a per-world basis?

• Dolyaks sniped this week.
• Camps claimed
• Towers returned to their rightful owner
• Ruins capped and held

If there are no rewards associated with this (just bragging rights), then I'm ambivalent. On the one hand, it never hurts "our side" to have more camps claimed. On the other, it encourages the individual to go off on their own, rather than working as a team.

If this were free to set up (which of course, it's not), then I'd say, sure, make it happen for a month and let's see what happens. But that's because I love the idea of ANet throwing out stuff to try during this interregnum between the status quo (same old worlds, same uneven matches) and the new regime (worlds created on the fly to balance each match up). Anything that's quick for them to throw together (e.g. skip the downstate, change the range or damage of siege, etc), yeah, let's try it.

[Aeolus.3615]

@"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:Instead of total kills or k:d, what if the OP had suggested things that actually contributed towards a team's success? And what if leaderboards were on a per-world basis?

• Dolyaks sniped this week.
• Camps claimed
• Towers returned to their rightful owner
• Ruins capped and held

If there are no rewards associated with this (just bragging rights), then I'm ambivalent. On the one hand, it never hurts "our side" to have more camps claimed. On the other, it encourages the individual to go off on their own, rather than working as a team.

If this were free to set up (which of course, it's not), then I'd say, sure, make it happen for a month and let's see what happens. But that's because I love the idea of ANet throwing out stuff to try during this interregnum between the status quo (same old worlds, same uneven matches) and the new regime (worlds created on the fly to balance each match up). Anything that's quick for them to throw together (e.g. skip the downstate, change the range or damage of siege, etc), yeah, let's try it.

Most ofpeak PPT and lowest as well plus server player peak and lowest, those would be not like a ladder but a statistic UI to add.

That would be really decent to add.

[Sovereign.1093]

i wouldnt mind daily repeatable guild missions.

we'll fight to the death to protect that yak

[Stand The Wall.6987]

@Sovereign.1093 said:guild ranking would be nice. =) ones with most contribution.

=)

this

[Tiawal.2351]

One never can have enough stats. You never know what motivates to play better. Fun has a different meaning to everyone. More reasons to play the game mode is a win for all of us.