LUST.7241

They just don't have 120 ranked games played yet. This thread comes up every week. lol

They already have/had this with [Courtyard ](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Courtyard "Courtyard ")and [Hall of the Mists.](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Hall_of_the_Mists "Hall of the Mists.")

Given how one-sided [Dragonball ](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Dragon_Ball "Dragonball ") can be with a defined set of skills...just imagine one-sided how it would be with Core/HoT/PoF specs.

Other games separate Ranked Solo and Ranked Team (Duo, 3, & 5), while unranked modes don't have that restriction.

This game has a PvP Algorithm designed for pure Solo, but included the option to have Duo in that same Ranked setting.

Ranked Season 1-4 with full premades was as much of a joke as getting Legendary through Stronghold. Solo/Duo Leaderboard was added, but 3+ had no option other than Custom Games and Unranked. Automated Tournaments were added, now full 5s are happy. Now we are at the point where we need to split Solo and Duo.

Many forget how exciting it was getting on the solo leaderboard long time ago.

Like others have suggested **time and time** again:

* Solo Leaderboard/Queue - 1

* Team Leaderboard/Queue - Parties of 2, 3, 5

* Automated Tournaments - 5

* Unranked - Anything

* Custom Games - Anything

**Worried about population, queue times, and match quality this way?**

Well, like any other game, Solo Queue would be significantly faster and match quality will be way better. Solo Queue is almost always the most popular mode in any game.

Team Queue will be dependent on how many teams actually queue. In almost every game with Team Queue (no matter how "popular" you think it is), this has noticeably longer queue time and lesser match quality than Solo. The voice of it's popularity almost always is exaggerated and many devs in popular games have pointed this put. Doesn't mean the Team Queue is dead, it just means in comparison to Solo, there are less overall players. Competitive teams don't really Public Team Queue either, they have their own Custom sessions/scrims and just do Tournaments (but here that option is lessened ofc).

Anet even said Scourge was overtuned, not even sure why people argue against it.

>Sorry – it is NOT intended that stacking multiple shades compounds their effects. We’re going to make changes while keeping a close eye on the power of the Scourge across game modes and adjust it over time accordingly. Frankly, the Sand Shades were one of the most controversial (and dangerous!) mechanics we added with the Path of Fire Elite Specs.

> @Boysenberry.1869 said:

> If people try to test things and learn how to "game" the system then Anet will probably just change it.

Exactly.

Alternatively, they can just say what it takes instead of making it a Hidden ~~Mount~~...~~Achievement~~...feature. It's just the forums, leave the theory-crafting for the game!

It seems like you need to be "Promoted" to unlock Signatures.

Which seems like over 10 Helpful and 20 Thumbs Ups on a **single ** post. Only way to really test this theory (unnaturally) for science is a asking for Helpful/Thumbs Up and seeing when it actually triggers. Which I don't want to encourage...

Can't confirm, but looking at [Gaile Gray](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/profile/reactions/Gaile%20Gray.6029?reaction=promote "Gaile Gray")'s Promote, it kind of leads to that?

Regina Buenaobra also has a promotion, but it doesn't link to the specific posts which triggered it...but there are [two posts that fall into that criteria](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/profile/reactions/Regina%20Buenaobra.6193?reaction=insightful "two posts that fall into that criteria") that were done before the forum maintenance.

Can confirm most, I got power bottomed by most.

Scourge probably only considered S atm because even Anet basically said they are over-performing due to bugs. Literally haven't seen any Herald/Renegade Revs in PvP since PoF hit...

Not including any Core builds and assuming very-skilled players...Probably something like:

* **S :** Daredevil (Carry/DPS), Scourge (DPS/Carry), Spellbreaker (Carry)

* **A :** Mirage (DPS), Chronomancer (Carry/DPS), Scrapper (Support), Holosmith (DPS/Support), Weaver (DPS/Support), Tempest (DPS/Support), Druid (Support), Soulbeast (DPS/Support), Dragonhunter (Support)

* **B :** Reaper (Support), Firebrand (Support), Deadeye (Carry/DPS)

* **C :** Renegade, Herald, Berserker, ... anything else.

----

DPS being: Lots of damage

Carry being: Play maker

Support being: Bunker, tank, healing, etc.

Not losing rating due to disconnect is currently set to 90s.

If they rejoin at 89s, you take the loss.

Pretty long time, imo. Should be some sort of "outnumbered" buff for the time you are down a player which goes away if they comeback or 90s have gone by. Being down a player is pretty huge...

> @Drekor.5217 said:

> Are we just forgetting resistance just makes people immune to condi damage entirely?

I'm forgetting how rare it is to see [resistance ](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Resistance "resistance ")at all.

I don't know why he said "It isn't possible."

They made kits exotic later, didn't they?

Damage shouldn't be capped to blues when we are at level 80 and 2 specializations in...and then nerfed by 20% in PvP because it did too much damage, no combo finishers, combo fields, useless exceed skills, terrible sword main hand, long-cooldown shield...

"It isn't possible."

> @Lincolnbeard.1735 said:

> Always wondered why ANet didn't put a cap on condis, like the degen in GW1.

> In GW1 the max amount of degen was iirc 10 pips, 20 dps, but if you had regen, the damage above the threshold would negate some of it or the total of it.

> Same thing could be done in GW2, of course they would have to shave a lot of resistance and condi cleanse to make up for this.

Problem is a lot of the old condi cleanse was designed around 2012 and haven't been touched since around June 23, 2015 when Resistance was added. If those old condi cleanse (even some newer ones) gave some Resistance or cleanse cooldowns shortened, I think there would be way less complaints about Condi in PvP.

Usually that's how counter-arguments go when Scouge/Spellbreaker cheese mains see "nerf my cheese" posts. The template for their reply is here:

"As [your class here], the way to counter [my class here] is to completely build to counter [my class here]. Other classes need not be considered when changing build, only build to counter [my class here] and you can see why it is weak."

> @Shirlias.8104 said:

> You laugh but i am afraid that we are going to see some other moba try. This time with mounts.

>

>

Heroes of the Storm already uses mounts. Difference is, they actually have balanced objective-based gameplay, actual split between Solo/Duo, a working matchmaking system, and barely is considered called a MOBA... Okay, I see what you mean...Carry on.

Celestial is back. Have mercy...

There are threads and replies...but more "players" rather be salty or just deliberately ignore feedback threads/replies.

About your developer comment, there was literally a reply 6 hours before your post: https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/171103/#Comment_171103 . Not saying they are SUPER DUPER ACTIVE with the PvP community, but they did talk about it and it seems like they are talking about stuff we discuss behind closed doors (for better or worse). Some things do warrant some dev-and-community discussion...while others shouldn't expect "okay, xXScourgeBreakerXx.1337 we are listening to you and just you and here is our confirmation." That just won't happen because that may lead to empty promises.

Remember, they have the data on their end too to essentially "fact check" claims.

> @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:

> Queue times went up a bit for the first 3 days after PoF launch. But have steady decreased since. Yesterday, 75.39% of the time, people were in matches in 2 minutes or less.

I don't mind longer queues if it means better quality matches, but at the current state waiting in a longer queue usually just means even lower quality matches...

There needs to be changes to the PvP Algorithm or the decrease will just continue. It's not worth huge rating gaps between players, duo-party combo wombos, stacking 2 professions (each class has core, 2 specializations, and a number of builds off that...very hit or miss if your not getting the two Scourges), etc.

Plus, I think we extinguished the value of the use of rewards in PvP and how the YotA essentially requires "no experience, just show up" multiple-profession-play to get a legendary backpack. There's so much that factors into PvP quality that need more attention than just "this season we'll have one change then wait a few months for the next."

A good place to get an idea for PvE DPS: https://qtfy.eu/guildwars/benchmarks/

WvW can vary (almost anything is possible there).

PvP varies.

Let's sum up some of the complaints of PvP this season so far with respect to your suggestion...

* Balance: As long as AoEs cover entire caps...no.

* Balance: As long as there are so many professions/traits/skills that need re-tuning...no.

* Conquest: As long as there is hardly any room around caps to kite opponents...no.

* Conquest: As long as decapping a point takes significantly shorter time than full capping...no.

* PvP Algorithm: As long as 2 of the same profession is still allowed even though every class has 2 specializations, core, and a number of possible builds each...no

* PvP Algorithm: As long as duo is still a thing...no.

* PvP Algorithm: As long as match making quality is low...no.

See where we are going? There are far more problems with higher priorities than this. I'm fine with making the circle smaller, but a lot of other changes must be discussed if this is literally the only topic of discussion going into Season 9.

As for the distance issue... this comes with map design. A lot of the spawn locations for maps need to be rethought. Like Kyhlo and Capricorn...why do you start so far from the gate? On Coliseum/Capricorn, why is there a side path to the closest point but it actually takes longer?

Curious...Why would you have to re-upload them? It's seems just an incorrect call to the wrong source file (as mentioned day 1):

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/871/low-resolution-quality-on-forum-avatars-in-posts-is-because-of-the-upscaling-on-the-40x40-version

In any case, if it gets resolved...who am I to care about the process... x)

While there are better times in the day to queue...There are actually lot of players queuing, but the system gives up way too quickly because of the current setup folding over itself because of how higher ratings and duos play in. The [algorithm ](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/PvP_Matchmaking_Algorithm#Matchmaking "algorithm ")gives up at 30 seconds and then starts padding players rating so all players have a chance to get a game (at the expense of match quality). Personally, for Ranked...match quality is way more important to me. Learn more from really close games rather than full-stomps.

In the code, they'd just have to change the roster size to max="1" and there would be way more players in the pool with similar rating to choose from (since it doesn't have to account for duos). Then change potentials max maybe 200 (so you wouldn't verse players almost a full division ahead of you, but rather at most a tier). While some people may push against removing duos, it's an opportunity to open up an actual Team Queue (parties of 2,3,5) with it's own system, leaderboard, and maybe unique badges. Other games do this with success. Think of the bigger picture.

Current code is this for reference:

> Arena name="Ranked Arena"

> Queue

> RosterSize min="1" max="2"

> Iteration interval="30s" rosters="100" limit="250ms"

> Potentials min="20" max="500" falloff="0.375" start="1m" end="3m"

> Rating start="5m" end="10m" max="1200" min="25"

> Power curve="1" percent="1"

> Rank min="20"

> Queue

> ...

Another reference...

> The first phase, called filtering, gathers players based on their current MMR. The primary purpose of this phase is to both reduce the number of players being considered for a match, and to ensure that the match is appropriate given each player's skill level. Over time, padding is added to your player rating. While this may decrease match quality, it helps ensure that outliers still receive matches.

I rather have a longer wait time because the filtering/padding system is easily abused as a duo off-hours in current state. Top players will still be at the top, there's no doubt on that...but if anything, their stats wouldn't be as padded on the leaderboard but they actually make gains more than +4 for winning and take way less drops for losing. Leaderboard would be way more competitive when everyone at the same solo opportunity.

Thief isn't terrible but you have to learn how Thief contributes to games. Exploit your high mobility, sitting in one place like Deadeye is usually the opposite of what you should be doing. There's more to thief than just running into a fight and just doing damage, especially in Conquest where objectives matter too. Deadeye is way too situational for Conquest. While Daredevil can help you keep the other team from getting too many points.

This can help you with the build and a guide how to play it (Daredevil): https://metabattle.com/wiki/Build:Daredevil_-_Dagger/Pistol

Learn from : Sindrener - [Twitch ](

> @Duelight.7198 said:

> Now we need wyvern. Tyrians the ultimate champions of the dragons.

We're gonna ride Aurene soon. :)

> @shadowthejedi.3089 said:

> I lost about 100. All from decay. I'm not touching ranked until the stealth bug that Frostbll and Vallun are abusing to climb the ladder is fixed. Not out of fear of encountering it, but I doubt my teammates can match my incredible performances against such cowardice.

[At the time of your post, it has been fixed for almost 20 hours.](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/158083/#Comment_158083 "At the time of your post it has been fixed for almost 20 hours.")

Don't fight glass cannon with glass cannon. Bunker Ele poops on Holosmith.