Dear Regina: is this ladder manipulation?
DreamWind
Tight thread. This simply exposes yet another problem with Anet...they only paid attention to Rawr's draw last month (which I still argue wasn't illegal) because there was an uproar over it, not because they gave a shit with a silly PvP matter. The OP simply points out that the ladder and AT's have been abused since their existence (in far more situations than the OP lists) and Anet does nothing. I wouldn't doubt that the underlying motive of this thread was to expose this fact and not actually because they care much about the ladder manupulation in itself....they win just about every month regardless.
scruffy
heres my view on the matter
*reset the ladder every once in a while so that dead guilds no longer take up the space where other guilds could be filling up obs mode, I've had enough of this historical ladder BS, we don't have GW2 yet put some god damn effort into keeping GW1 fun for the players who payed for it.
*change it so that ladder matches give the same rating as tournament games, so that it actually has some kind of reward other than practise. Why would a high rank guild waste 30 minutes waiting for a match that will just give them +2
*i dont care about blood spikers but any team that resigns to eachother to farm champ points deserves to have their rating reset to 1000
*reset the ladder every once in a while so that dead guilds no longer take up the space where other guilds could be filling up obs mode, I've had enough of this historical ladder BS, we don't have GW2 yet put some god damn effort into keeping GW1 fun for the players who payed for it.
*change it so that ladder matches give the same rating as tournament games, so that it actually has some kind of reward other than practise. Why would a high rank guild waste 30 minutes waiting for a match that will just give them +2
*i dont care about blood spikers but any team that resigns to eachother to farm champ points deserves to have their rating reset to 1000
I D E L E T E D I
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DreamWind
Tight thread. This simply exposes yet another problem with Anet...they only paid attention to Rawr's draw last month (which I still argue wasn't illegal) because there was an uproar over it, not because they gave a shit with a silly PvP matter. The OP simply points out that the ladder and AT's have been abused since their existence (in far more situations than the OP lists) and Anet does nothing. I wouldn't doubt that the underlying motive of this thread was to expose this fact and not actually because they care much about the ladder manupulation in itself....they win just about every month regardless.
|
But the abuse of the AT system isn't really the problem here, its only done so that higher ranked guilds can play ladder matches without having to wait 1 hour for a match. And while I agree with Jatt that something should be done, making any changes to the AT system probably won't happen. And Polly's suggestion of lowering the rating change from -25 to -5 won't make the problem go away. But his suggestion on increasing rating gain on ladder will make a difference.
A reset of the ladder would also be a nice thing to do, but the change in system has to occur otherwise in a year from now we will be back here again.
Ate of DK
I've been saying it for months and see other people mention it again as well:
Ladder reset.
The top of the ladder will be more active because many would leave the smurfing and play with their top ranked guild. Yesterday someone on our SV who is with [NOW] said they only play on their smurf [BOSS] because there is nothing more to achieve for them with [NOW]. Once you have a goldcape it's done and apparently they have no motivation to try and get rank 1 because [rawr] has this weird server advantage with their spikes...
It would also get rid of several guilds who play 1 match every 3 months to remain in the top rankings.
What about the champ title?
Change the whole concept, you receive 1 champ point for every match you win in an AT. I bet more and more guilds would try the AT's. The 1.200 rating might become a problem when you reset the ladder every 4 months.
Ladder reset.
The top of the ladder will be more active because many would leave the smurfing and play with their top ranked guild. Yesterday someone on our SV who is with [NOW] said they only play on their smurf [BOSS] because there is nothing more to achieve for them with [NOW]. Once you have a goldcape it's done and apparently they have no motivation to try and get rank 1 because [rawr] has this weird server advantage with their spikes...
It would also get rid of several guilds who play 1 match every 3 months to remain in the top rankings.
What about the champ title?
Change the whole concept, you receive 1 champ point for every match you win in an AT. I bet more and more guilds would try the AT's. The 1.200 rating might become a problem when you reset the ladder every 4 months.
rohara
imo...
- ladder reset every 4 months: clean slate for everybody, dead guilds removed, improved ladder matching.
- -5 for forfeiting a daily AT: enough to discourage fake guilds, but not so much that it is a free tank for higher ranked guilds.
- champ points: this is the most ridiculous title in the game, and there aren't enough active competitive guilds in the game for this system to work anymore. if the much needed regular ladder reset were implemented, lowering the stipulation to 1100 rating and removing the duality completely would be a nice solution. (ie. 1050 team beats 1100 team, they get a champ point). i'd even go as far as to say champ points should be rewarded in AT's for a win (not a forfeit win, or a bye), regardless of rating. i think this would breathe new life into the daily ATs.
- ladder reset every 4 months: clean slate for everybody, dead guilds removed, improved ladder matching.
- -5 for forfeiting a daily AT: enough to discourage fake guilds, but not so much that it is a free tank for higher ranked guilds.
- champ points: this is the most ridiculous title in the game, and there aren't enough active competitive guilds in the game for this system to work anymore. if the much needed regular ladder reset were implemented, lowering the stipulation to 1100 rating and removing the duality completely would be a nice solution. (ie. 1050 team beats 1100 team, they get a champ point). i'd even go as far as to say champ points should be rewarded in AT's for a win (not a forfeit win, or a bye), regardless of rating. i think this would breathe new life into the daily ATs.
pigdestroyer
changing champs to ATs would be an interesting change, and would make it harder for those champ point farmers, also ladder reset.
Ate of DK
It's sad when you look at the ladder and see so many inactive guilds.
Some of these guilds disbanded and aren't removed from the ladder yet, but there is also enough of them who play 1 match every 3 months to stay on the ladder. No wonder that top teams tell us that they wait forever for a match.
I don't know that much on most guilds but... I bolded the active ones.
1. Rebel Rising - gather QP for mAT but smurf the rest?
2. We want cookies now - Inactive, play with r8 [BOSS]
3. Delta Formation - Inactive for ages
4. What's going on - Inactive play with r10 [BADV]
5. The cape is a lie - Inactive, sold [rawr] smurf?
6. Dark Alley - Inactive a long time
7. Dangerous and Moving - Inactive
8. On ne plaisant pas avec patrons - Active, r2 [NOW] smurf.
9. there is a new sheriff in town - inactive for ages
10. One build wonder - active, r4 [SUP] smurf
11. United herobattle players - inactive for ages
12. Sepo hovi action team - active
13. Disposable heroes - inactive
14. International district - inactive
15. Steel Phoenix - gather QP for mAT but smurf the rest
16. Panda's for world domination - inactive, disbanded
17. Final thrust - inactive for ages
18. the evernight - inactive
19. ink allstars - inactive
20. team ehrgeiz - inactive
21. fette wammo's braucht das - active
22. she left with half my - inactive and smurf now, keep the one day fly alive?
23. wiping as intended - inactive
24. anonymous amateus - active
25. noob gladiators - inactive
26. straight outta kamadan - active
27. team welsh - inactive
28. no honor - active
29. virtual escape - inactive
30. Percy pirates - inactive
That's 9 out of 30 guilds that play.
Anet doesn't care. Many players don't care.
And those who do care are ignored. Sad.
Some of these guilds disbanded and aren't removed from the ladder yet, but there is also enough of them who play 1 match every 3 months to stay on the ladder. No wonder that top teams tell us that they wait forever for a match.
I don't know that much on most guilds but... I bolded the active ones.
1. Rebel Rising - gather QP for mAT but smurf the rest?
2. We want cookies now - Inactive, play with r8 [BOSS]
3. Delta Formation - Inactive for ages
4. What's going on - Inactive play with r10 [BADV]
5. The cape is a lie - Inactive, sold [rawr] smurf?
6. Dark Alley - Inactive a long time
7. Dangerous and Moving - Inactive
8. On ne plaisant pas avec patrons - Active, r2 [NOW] smurf.
9. there is a new sheriff in town - inactive for ages
10. One build wonder - active, r4 [SUP] smurf
11. United herobattle players - inactive for ages
12. Sepo hovi action team - active
13. Disposable heroes - inactive
14. International district - inactive
15. Steel Phoenix - gather QP for mAT but smurf the rest
16. Panda's for world domination - inactive, disbanded
17. Final thrust - inactive for ages
18. the evernight - inactive
19. ink allstars - inactive
20. team ehrgeiz - inactive
21. fette wammo's braucht das - active
22. she left with half my - inactive and smurf now, keep the one day fly alive?
23. wiping as intended - inactive
24. anonymous amateus - active
25. noob gladiators - inactive
26. straight outta kamadan - active
27. team welsh - inactive
28. no honor - active
29. virtual escape - inactive
30. Percy pirates - inactive
That's 9 out of 30 guilds that play.
Anet doesn't care. Many players don't care.
And those who do care are ignored. Sad.
I D E L E T E D I
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ate of DK
Many players don't care.
|
Also nice list, now if only Regina would look at this thread.
Massive Impulsa
Well if you however remove the inactive guilds, and put some someone else there, the top guilds wont need to tank At's to get games,since the top100 ladder then is only whit active guilds :>
Earth
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fril Estelin
I have the feeling this is never going to happen in PvP, due to the inherent nature of this part of the game: it's (almost) you versus me (YvM) and there can only be one winner. Unless the PvP community gets together and finds a way to make the "state of their game" better (IMHO through "teaching", I bet there're a lot of new blood that could come to PvP but that are put off by the current state of the game, including mindset of players, like pansy malfoy said), this is going to get worse and the doors to PvP will soon close, because PvPers didn't want them to be open. If you, elite/high-end PvPers, want to have a worthy competition in the future that ensures you'll have a continued fun until GW2 comes, you should seriously consider that.
|
That's actually a program with a lot of high end PvPers from different guilds.
Burton2000
As already been said guilds tank rating to get matches faster on ladder. The only advantage to having high ladder rank is as the last tie breaker in AT's and by tanking rating they aren't actually hurting anyone in tournament play.
Regina Buenaobra
To make a judgment call on that, our team would have to pull documentation, conduct an investigation, and based upon that, make a decision. If you would like to report them for a rules infraction, please contact our Support team.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jatt
Players/guilds are expected to not participate in any form of ladder or match manipulation. Ladder or match manipulation is defined as any actions taken to (i) fix or manipulate the outcome of a match or (ii) alter or manipulate the rankings or ratings of the tournament ladder, which deviates from guilds actually playing and completing battles in good faith. Throwing matches or getting your opponent's to throw them to you are examples of ladder manipulation because ratings and rankings are changed without actual game play taking place.
This brings me to a problem which has been going on for MONTHS, and has resulted in a complete rating decrease of nearly every active guild on the ladder, essentially ruining the historic integrity the ladder was made for. Guilds are signing up for Automated Tournaments with the intention of recieving the -25. If this only happened occasionally I would believe that it may not be intentional manipulation, but upon inspecting some of the guilds that consistently manipulate the ladder, It becomes clear that they are guilty. a quick glance at their guild history would show that they have a large history of taking rating out of the ladder. Now while it may seem that guilds tanking themselves has no effect on others, but that would be incorrect. Since these guilds are so active, they constantly play and win over other teams with their tanked rating, which in turn effects other guilds rating more than it should. What ends up happening is every active guild loses rating. The effects of this can be seen when you notice that 7 of the top 8 guilds on the ladder don't actually play anymore, and that everyone below has been tanked to oblivion. It is not just them that tank however, there is a much larger demographic that does it less frequently. I can name several off the top of my head which i have seen manipulating AT's. My question is this: Are these guilds in violation of those stated rules, or is there some exception that I am not aware of that enables guilds to manipulate the ladder? As I see it, these teams are manipulating the rankings and ratings of the ladder, while not competing or completing battles in good faith. This is not even to mention the Blood-spike guilds which have been plastered on observer mode for weeks, in which teams are going in with heroes and resigning to each other to farm champ points, but I would prefer if that discussion were moved to another thread as to not detract from my initial topic. |
Inde
Everyone, I've deleted out some guild names from this thread as its asking for some flamewars and is more accusatory then helpful.
Billiard
Regina,
I think the point of Jatt's post is less about calling out specific guilds for punishment and more about pointing to problems in the system that leads to abuse of in game mechanics in order to circumvent the problems. Once teams get fairly high rating on the ladder, the match system takes a long time to pair them up with another team so they can play. To deal with this some teams smurf, and other teams tank rating down to get faster matches. The net effect of both of these is that teams of higher skill end up with lower rating, therefore cost teams that they beat more rating, or rewarding teams that beat them with less rating than should be the case.
The current perpetual ladder was put into play because it was thought that a permanent ladder would allow teams to eventually reach their "true" rating, and the current matching system was put into place in order to protect lower tier guilds from gross mismatches. As it is though, neither of these objects are met when ladder rating can be manipulated easily with losses in daily ATs, or teams can easily play on smurf guilds. The proposal of an increased K value back to what it used to be for ladder matches, plus a much looser rating system could actually do a lot of good as it would allow for faster matches, but when there is a gross mismatch it would only cost the lower tier guild a relatively small amount of rating relative to the current system. As it stands now, a low tier guild will typically gain +2 or +3 in ladder matches, but also lose 2 or 1 when playing higher level guilds. With a k value of say 25, lower tier guilds will still lose 3-5 rating playing much higher guilds, but be able to gain 12-15 playing guilds more their level.
I think going back to this sort of system would also help attract more players back into PvP as it seems more like you are getting somewhere on a daily basis. Perhaps we could try it for a time and see how it works? The old ladder seasons were 3 months, and I would expect that it would be good for comparison purposes to do something similar to that. You could keep the dAT and mAT as they are as things are tested out.
I think the point of Jatt's post is less about calling out specific guilds for punishment and more about pointing to problems in the system that leads to abuse of in game mechanics in order to circumvent the problems. Once teams get fairly high rating on the ladder, the match system takes a long time to pair them up with another team so they can play. To deal with this some teams smurf, and other teams tank rating down to get faster matches. The net effect of both of these is that teams of higher skill end up with lower rating, therefore cost teams that they beat more rating, or rewarding teams that beat them with less rating than should be the case.
The current perpetual ladder was put into play because it was thought that a permanent ladder would allow teams to eventually reach their "true" rating, and the current matching system was put into place in order to protect lower tier guilds from gross mismatches. As it is though, neither of these objects are met when ladder rating can be manipulated easily with losses in daily ATs, or teams can easily play on smurf guilds. The proposal of an increased K value back to what it used to be for ladder matches, plus a much looser rating system could actually do a lot of good as it would allow for faster matches, but when there is a gross mismatch it would only cost the lower tier guild a relatively small amount of rating relative to the current system. As it stands now, a low tier guild will typically gain +2 or +3 in ladder matches, but also lose 2 or 1 when playing higher level guilds. With a k value of say 25, lower tier guilds will still lose 3-5 rating playing much higher guilds, but be able to gain 12-15 playing guilds more their level.
I think going back to this sort of system would also help attract more players back into PvP as it seems more like you are getting somewhere on a daily basis. Perhaps we could try it for a time and see how it works? The old ladder seasons were 3 months, and I would expect that it would be good for comparison purposes to do something similar to that. You could keep the dAT and mAT as they are as things are tested out.
just call me jimmy
Regina, with all do respect. Do any of you at Anet even observe Guild wars anymore?
A 5 year old can figure out, everything that has been stated in this thread is going on in abundance. I am very troubled that your only response so far to this thread is "please contact the support team with Guild names" I would venture a guess that most people are sick and tired of reporting, only to see everything get worse day by day.Can you please explain why it is up to any Guildwars player to report that every night for the past 2 weeks the same 4 teams have been champ point farming/syncing (I will not explain because everyone here knows what I am talking about). Why are Anet employees not, keeping an eye the game "You" created.
This thread has nothing to do with punishing or banning players, and has everything to do with saying lets change the systems that are allowing all this. Nobody expects things to be fixed over night, but people do expect that a games creators care about how aspects of their game are being abused. If Anet is happy about how PvP is being played then say so, if you are not then at least attempt to fix it.
People have given you some very good ideas, that are talked about by numerous PVP players. I think you should listen!!!
A 5 year old can figure out, everything that has been stated in this thread is going on in abundance. I am very troubled that your only response so far to this thread is "please contact the support team with Guild names" I would venture a guess that most people are sick and tired of reporting, only to see everything get worse day by day.Can you please explain why it is up to any Guildwars player to report that every night for the past 2 weeks the same 4 teams have been champ point farming/syncing (I will not explain because everyone here knows what I am talking about). Why are Anet employees not, keeping an eye the game "You" created.
This thread has nothing to do with punishing or banning players, and has everything to do with saying lets change the systems that are allowing all this. Nobody expects things to be fixed over night, but people do expect that a games creators care about how aspects of their game are being abused. If Anet is happy about how PvP is being played then say so, if you are not then at least attempt to fix it.
People have given you some very good ideas, that are talked about by numerous PVP players. I think you should listen!!!
I D E L E T E D I
It is rather sad to see that you, Regina, have not read this thread at all and completly misunderstood of what the rather small pvp community want. No one really wants bans for it simply to continue after they culprits have been unbanned again. A change in the system is needed.
dusanyu
Brake down of the Problems So you don't have to read the whole thread
in short
Game BROKEN FIX Please!!!!!
- THE LADDER IS A JOKE
- the Current Perma Ladder is a Failure time to start resetting it!
- No one Ladder plays from the Top any more one becuse they don't have to
- Smal l Rewards from ladder Detracts new players to GvG. Make GvG enticing that ladder should be bouncing around like a Jackrabbit on Crack! - THE MATCH SYSTEM IS A JOKE
- the system still allows rank 3000 Guilds to face rank 200 guilds - the conga incident showed us that THE GVG END GAME IS A JOKE!
- A-Net reacted to Incident in the wrong way instead of Fixing lets remove capes. and Change GvG in such a way to lead to
- Ties are still Passable and this new Gank meta initiated by the most recent changes to GvG is the Pits.
in short
Game BROKEN FIX Please!!!!!
WhiteWasabi
^Maybe if you bold and capslock more of what you say people will listen more?
There are many people that enjoy the historical nature of the ladder that don't get on the forums and yell and rant about how the ladder should be reset. The ladder is fine... What is needed is a change in the match system and amount of rating per win. Increased K value sounds good but leave the ladder historical.
There are many people that enjoy the historical nature of the ladder that don't get on the forums and yell and rant about how the ladder should be reset. The ladder is fine... What is needed is a change in the match system and amount of rating per win. Increased K value sounds good but leave the ladder historical.
MMSDome
If you have already looked at the first post please go on and read the others Regina. Why should he report the issue to the support team that will only send an automated message which is useless? You have already started looking at the thread and now you can read the responses and even you can figure the problems. Now go to the people that can resolve the issue and talk to them about it.
In other words please do your job and work for the players.
In other words please do your job and work for the players.
.defekt
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WhiteWasabi
^Maybe if you bold and capslock more of what you say people will listen more?
There are many people that enjoy the historical nature of the ladder that don't get on the forums and yell and rant about how the ladder should be reset. The ladder is fine... What is needed is a change in the match system and amount of rating per win. Increased K value sounds good but leave the ladder historical. |
owait lolz you probably bought DF right and you dont want it kicked off the ladder? nice joke
fenix
The ladder definitely needs to be reset, there's no reason NOT to. Changing the K Value for various aspects of GvG would also be beneficial, ie AT forfeits down to ~10, match wins up slightly.
Regina Buenaobra
I did read the thread. I'm sorry that I don't have any concrete answers for you at the moment. These issues have been persistent in the community, but there are a host of issues we need to discuss internally before we even decide to change things. We'd need to discuss whether we have the resources to change anything (considering we are in active development for the April content update, and that is a fairly heavy workload as it is for our two-person Live Team), what we can change (for example, there may be other options than adjusting the k values, options that you haven't considered, but which we have knowledge and information on), and how to change them. And that is provided we come to a consensus on whatever changes are on the table, and you all know that game decisions aren't made by just one, two, or three people. Decisions are made with input from a lot of people and all departments that a change like this would affect (for instance, these issues also affect Customer Support). There's little information that I can give you on the work we are doing except that we are examining the issues raised here and on other threads.
Billiard
Thanks for reading and thanks for the feedback Regina. I know there is a lot going on for you all now - I was just trying to clarify that Jatt's point was not reporting specific guilds but more addressing a specific problem. I glad you all understand that and are working on it.
Lycan Nibbler
Seems to be quite a few for a ladder reset - not sure Ive seen any strong reasons not to.. "History"? historically the ladder has been reset before, "skill> time?" time moves on, no skills in playing once every three months to stay in a place gained by previous owners.
I do wish/hope some of the top end guilds would use their smurfs to attempt some training or assistance of inexperienced players. I know GW is Srs Bsns, but when on a smurf you could still have fun and know you were helping one or two others? (Im speaking as a Gvg "scrub" with zero champ points ^.^)
Good work Ate by the way - knowing the trend probably follows for quite a way down too through all the sold "champ range guilds".
I do wish/hope some of the top end guilds would use their smurfs to attempt some training or assistance of inexperienced players. I know GW is Srs Bsns, but when on a smurf you could still have fun and know you were helping one or two others? (Im speaking as a Gvg "scrub" with zero champ points ^.^)
Good work Ate by the way - knowing the trend probably follows for quite a way down too through all the sold "champ range guilds".
scruffy
a ladder reset would rock, it would make all the dead guilds no longer take up space on the ladder
making ladder matches worth more rating would rock, it would make playing ladder more worth while
but i think were still missing something
imo there needs to be a reward for being high ranked on the ladder, otherwise people wont fight for the top spot and the ladder will become dull, like it is right now
making ladder matches worth more rating would rock, it would make playing ladder more worth while
but i think were still missing something
imo there needs to be a reward for being high ranked on the ladder, otherwise people wont fight for the top spot and the ladder will become dull, like it is right now
![Ec]-[oMaN](/static/static/../Img/avatar8384_2.gif){kind=avatar}
Ec]-[oMaN
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by scruffy
a ladder reset would rock, it would make all the dead guilds no longer take up space on the ladder
making ladder matches worth more rating would rock, it would make playing ladder more worth while but i think were still missing something imo there needs to be a reward for being high ranked on the ladder, otherwise people wont fight for the top spot and the ladder will become dull, like it is right now |
The reward for being high ranked is first page on the ladder, and rank giving you the better spot in ATs and MATs.
Game needs an influx of middle ranged guilds, that's what's lacking. Tweaking the game or ladder or current ladder mechanics to promote the middle level really needs to be encouraged more than anything.
ChopChop
The thing is, the ladder is *not* historical, old guilds are removed after 3 months, the ladder is however abuse able in that inactive guilds which got sold can stay on the ladder by just playing 1 game every 3 months.
Increasing the k-value for ladder play would attack this problem on 2 fronts, first the average rating would increase so many of the sold guilds would get passed in rating, and secondly when a sold guild plays (and likely loses) they will more quickly drop down in rating.
It would also have 2 other very significant benefits
As Billiard pointed out, very low ranked guilds would basically get a 'freebie' vs. very high ranked guilds in that it would cost them much less rating loss compared to possible gain from playing guilds of equal rating, thus, the system could match up guilds more quickly and lower ranked guilds wont lose as much.
Secondly it would solve the issue of ladder tanking as there would be a much higher intake of rating on the ladder compared to the possible tanking.
A ladder with a k-value of 5 is a joke, its so much a joke and a bad idea that I cannot even in words express the lack of thought and consideration it would take to implement it. Its not just stupid, its hurting the game.
There is no sane person who would not be for a increase back to a k-value of 25 for 'free play' as you so eloquently call it in your new rules, in fact the only people who haven't been able to realize this for 2 years now work for Arenanet.
The fact that you, Regina, just completely ignore the post and call for people to report what has been going on for over a year instead of making a statement on the issue, which I will not believe arena net is aware of (you do actually look to see what happens in the game right?) is what really worries me.
Ignore this thread or respond properly to this thread, but that was almost an insult.
(edit: this was posted before I read your 2. response, though I have still to actually read it)
Increasing the k-value for ladder play would attack this problem on 2 fronts, first the average rating would increase so many of the sold guilds would get passed in rating, and secondly when a sold guild plays (and likely loses) they will more quickly drop down in rating.
It would also have 2 other very significant benefits
As Billiard pointed out, very low ranked guilds would basically get a 'freebie' vs. very high ranked guilds in that it would cost them much less rating loss compared to possible gain from playing guilds of equal rating, thus, the system could match up guilds more quickly and lower ranked guilds wont lose as much.
Secondly it would solve the issue of ladder tanking as there would be a much higher intake of rating on the ladder compared to the possible tanking.
A ladder with a k-value of 5 is a joke, its so much a joke and a bad idea that I cannot even in words express the lack of thought and consideration it would take to implement it. Its not just stupid, its hurting the game.
There is no sane person who would not be for a increase back to a k-value of 25 for 'free play' as you so eloquently call it in your new rules, in fact the only people who haven't been able to realize this for 2 years now work for Arenanet.
The fact that you, Regina, just completely ignore the post and call for people to report what has been going on for over a year instead of making a statement on the issue, which I will not believe arena net is aware of (you do actually look to see what happens in the game right?) is what really worries me.
Ignore this thread or respond properly to this thread, but that was almost an insult.
(edit: this was posted before I read your 2. response, though I have still to actually read it)
Lycan Nibbler
I personally think even with the "k" changes, it would still takeup to a year for a guild to drop down the ladder significantly.
I ask this of the GvG experts here, would it seem a reasonable suggestion to have to play 1 match a month rather than the 3 months currently to stay on the ladder?
This to go along with the K change.
Considering many of the active guilds take part in AT's during a month, then this shouldnt have a negative impact I think?
I ask this of the GvG experts here, would it seem a reasonable suggestion to have to play 1 match a month rather than the 3 months currently to stay on the ladder?
This to go along with the K change.
Considering many of the active guilds take part in AT's during a month, then this shouldnt have a negative impact I think?
I D E L E T E D I
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Regina
I did read the thread. I'm sorry that I don't have any concrete answers for you at the moment. These issues have been persistent in the community, but there are a host of issues we need to discuss internally before we even decide to change things. We'd need to discuss whether we have the resources to change anything (considering we are in active development for the April content update, and that is a fairly heavy workload as it is for our two-person Live Team), what we can change (for example, there may be other options than adjusting the k values, options that you haven't considered, but which we have knowledge and information on), and how to change them. And that is provided we come to a consensus on whatever changes are on the table, and you all know that game decisions aren't made by just one, two, or three people. Decisions are made with input from a lot of people and all departments that a change like this would affect (for instance, these issues also affect Customer Support). There's little information that I can give you on the work we are doing except that we are examining the issues raised here and on other threads.
|
DreamWind
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WhiteWasabi
^Maybe if you bold and capslock more of what you say people will listen more?
There are many people that enjoy the historical nature of the ladder that don't get on the forums and yell and rant about how the ladder should be reset. The ladder is fine... What is needed is a change in the match system and amount of rating per win. Increased K value sounds good but leave the ladder historical. |
Lycan Nibbler
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DreamWind
There is no historical value to the ladder anymore. If there was WM and Evil would still be 1 and 2.
|
you'll know when something is about to happen when you see DF being sold...
Ate of DK
ANET can't be that ignorant. But since they don't see the problem I will help.
For Regina, all screenshots taken from last nights observermode (Europe 3-3-09), I removed all player names but I left all guild tags in place. Gaile Gray says they can speed up investigation on problems when they have guildnames.
1. VR vs NRF
http://img166.imageshack.us/my.php?image=gw00511.jpg
2. NRF vs uNk
http://img291.imageshack.us/my.php?image=gw00611.jpg
3. NRF vs aa
http://img166.imageshack.us/my.php?image=gw00711.jpg
4. ?? vs EvIL
http://img291.imageshack.us/my.php?image=gw00811.jpg
5. EvIL vs iQ
http://img166.imageshack.us/my.php?image=gw00911.jpg
See how a player of EvIL is in the winning team when his own guild resigns!
Common, you can't be that blind?
Do they really expect I buy GW2 when they watch how their baby dies?'
Sorry, I had no money to buy milk, so I let my baby die... (Read: We only got 2 people for GW1, we have priorities, moar storage is needed!)
Ate.
For Regina, all screenshots taken from last nights observermode (Europe 3-3-09), I removed all player names but I left all guild tags in place. Gaile Gray says they can speed up investigation on problems when they have guildnames.
1. VR vs NRF
http://img166.imageshack.us/my.php?image=gw00511.jpg
2. NRF vs uNk
http://img291.imageshack.us/my.php?image=gw00611.jpg
3. NRF vs aa
http://img166.imageshack.us/my.php?image=gw00711.jpg
4. ?? vs EvIL
http://img291.imageshack.us/my.php?image=gw00811.jpg
5. EvIL vs iQ
http://img166.imageshack.us/my.php?image=gw00911.jpg
See how a player of EvIL is in the winning team when his own guild resigns!
Common, you can't be that blind?
Do they really expect I buy GW2 when they watch how their baby dies?'
Sorry, I had no money to buy milk, so I let my baby die... (Read: We only got 2 people for GW1, we have priorities, moar storage is needed!)
Ate.
Jensy
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Miss Drops Az
Exactly what I thought.. they had ladder resets for a reason and this seems just as good a reason.
you'll know when something is about to happen when you see DF being sold... |
I lol'd. People wearing gold capes they didn't earn just make me go /point /laugh. Actually play in the mAT and earn it, ffs -_- I'd be too embarrassed for having a bought trim to even contemplate doing it. Ugh.
If it's really not historical at this point, I can't see why anyone other than lame gold cape buyers, and even more lame champion point sellers wouldn't want it reset.
imnotyourmother
Who cares. We can all start over when GW2 comes out.
Just join the guild that is at the top of the ladder and quit your guild.
There your in the top guild WOOT
Just join the guild that is at the top of the ladder and quit your guild.
There your in the top guild WOOT
Killed u man
Is there still people playing GvG?
Yeah, you got a point, it's a minor issue with Guild Wars, but there is far worse matters.
I don't think anyone, besides the 3-4 active guilds in GW remaining really cares anymore.
What will prevent teams from simply doing this after the reset? What can be done against the tanking? (Besides perm banning?)
I'm really sorry, this is in an issue with your playerbase, and not the GW System.
Yeah, you got a point, it's a minor issue with Guild Wars, but there is far worse matters.
I don't think anyone, besides the 3-4 active guilds in GW remaining really cares anymore.
What will prevent teams from simply doing this after the reset? What can be done against the tanking? (Besides perm banning?)
I'm really sorry, this is in an issue with your playerbase, and not the GW System.
Massive Impulsa
Well still some time until GW2 is released and i did actually pay for all the campaigns, so it would be nice to get something back (Since i dont play PvE at all:P)
Dr.Jones
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WhiteWasabi
^Maybe if you bold and capslock more of what you say people will listen more?
There are many people that enjoy the historical nature of the ladder that don't get on the forums and yell and rant about how the ladder should be reset. The ladder is fine... What is needed is a change in the match system and amount of rating per win. Increased K value sounds good but leave the ladder historical. |
WhiteWasabi
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dr.Jones
i am sorry but no. the ladder needs a reset. when people are able to farm champ points http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...php?t=10353978 is when the latter needs to be reset.
|
Dr.Jones
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WhiteWasabi
A ladder reset is a temporary solution. They will be farming champ points within 2 months easy.
|
Sweet Mystery
LOL... the sad state of PvP where pure cheating crops up to infate a guilds rating....
I remember the good old days where ladder resets happened quite often. Indeed I thought they were done so that over a period of time a new top level of guilds could be formed and hold the top of said ladder. If now all that needs to happen is play now and again it's become a joke and ridicules the need for Guild vs Guild... the whole idea of the game in the first place....
Maybe should become Guild Maybe Wars
I remember the good old days where ladder resets happened quite often. Indeed I thought they were done so that over a period of time a new top level of guilds could be formed and hold the top of said ladder. If now all that needs to happen is play now and again it's become a joke and ridicules the need for Guild vs Guild... the whole idea of the game in the first place....
Maybe should become Guild Maybe Wars