Matchmaking in mornings/early afternoons is horrific

[Ledavi.1803]

@"Reaper Alim.4176" I appreciate your certainty on these things. I will point out that 4 of the 5 bullet points listed you give as Anet responsibility, and my post was about what the players/community could do - obviously, we can influence Anet but not control them. I'm pretty sure the "little we can do as players" doesn't include pessimism and hyperbole ("radioactive as chernobyl").

 

I clearly didn't make my point well enough: if a player wants there to be a better community of players, starting with a little ownership of the problem and adjusting the approach will help. No validated data on the amount of change, but simple logic would say that it could only help

[Reaper Alim.4176]

> @Ledavi.1803 said:

> @"Reaper Alim.4176" I appreciate your certainty on these things. I will point out that 4 of the 5 bullet points listed you give as Anet responsibility, and my post was about what the players/community could do - obviously, we can influence Anet but not control them. I'm pretty sure the "little we can do as players" doesn't include pessimism and hyperbole ("radioactive as chernobyl").

>

> I clearly didn't make my point well enough: if a player wants there to be a better community of players, starting with a little ownership of the problem and adjusting the approach will help. No validated data on the amount of change, but simple logic would say that it could only help

 

But am I right in my assessment or am I wrong?

 

Also it's realism and not pessimism. And the hyperbole got my point out in that right manner. Just because the truth hurts does not make it any less true. And until you face up to the truth. Then you can not move forward.

[Shaogin.2679]

> @Razor.6392 said:

> > @messiah.1908 said:

> > how do you know others rating?

>

> Friends list and check leaderboard filtered by 'friends and guild'.

>

> I had 2 matches today, won them both, opponents sucked for the most part. +6 each win, I'm good.

 

This works like once per day, and doesn't take into account how much rating was gained or lost if done after the match. It is also unreliable if the player has decay, does not have enough matches for his rating to update on the leader board, or if the player is still doing placement matches. Also, the majority of the players posting on the forums aren't even bothering to use this method, they are either asking the other players or just taking wild guesses.

 

> @"kim possible.9406" said:

> Guys maybe im just not able to figure this out myselfe, but how do i see / where can i read the rating/mmr/ranking of my team members or enemies ?

> i guess its as simple as hovering the mouse over something but i just dont get it.. could someone please be so kind and post a screen where you can actaully see it?

 

There is no reliable way to check another player's rating if they are not top 250.

[Ara.4569]

> @"rank eleven monk.9502" said:

> > @Ara.4569 said:

> > Future looks bright for PvP'ers. I can see all of them in top 250 in a season or 2.

> > No more gold vs plat, only legendary players. It will be awesome.

> Legendary =/= top250, not even close.

Fair enough. Top 250 are merciless legends though. ;)

[rank eleven monk.9502]

> @Mutaatti.2789 said:

> > @Morwath.9817 said:

> >

> > Quaggan would like to remind you that some people have studies, jobs, family etc and they don't have time to waste on waiting to do something, they would rather just do it in short time window they have.

>

> Then don't play PvP. Simple as that. :) There can't be split between ppl to queue fast or queue within range of rating (no more than 300 points imo)

>

> And now that you can queue from anywhere, you can play PvE or WvW while waiting.

>

> Think it this way: rather get match in 2 mins, against 4 plat players as a gold 1 player+teammates, and lose 200-500 wasting 12-15 mins, or Q 10 mins, play against same rating players 500-450 and feel like match isnt onesided and waste 20-25 mins?

So you are basing your facts on... what?

 

I'm working full time, have a family and tons of other stuff to do which means I'm playing like 5-6 matches per week. I only play PvP and I would definitely stop playing it if I had to wait 10-15 mins just because some people don't want to play against higher / lower skilled players. FYI I'm plat T2 at the moment. And there are a LOT of people like me out there. So no, you are simply wrong.

 

Also your mindset is totally wrong about playing against higher tiers. If you play with / against better players, you improve -> you get higher. The MM system is created to balance out teams, that means if you are Gold1 playing against Plat1 players, that most likely means your teammates are around Plat2 or higher. There have been exceptional high number of evidence of this.

[HeadCrowned.6834]

> @"rank eleven monk.9502" said:

> Also your mindset is totally wrong about playing against higher tiers. If you play with / against better players, you improve -> you get higher. The MM system is created to balance out teams, that means if you are Gold1 playing against Plat1 players, that most likely means your teammates are around Plat2 or higher. There have been exceptional high number of evidence of this.

 

Actually this is quite often not the case. This is one of the reasons that so many matches are one-sided these days.

[rank eleven monk.9502]

> @HeadCrowned.6834 said:

> > @"rank eleven monk.9502" said:

> > Also your mindset is totally wrong about playing against higher tiers. If you play with / against better players, you improve -> you get higher. The MM system is created to balance out teams, that means if you are Gold1 playing against Plat1 players, that most likely means your teammates are around Plat2 or higher. There have been exceptional high number of evidence of this.

>

> Actually this is quite often not the case. This is one of the reasons that so many matches are one-sided these days.

You are basing this on your own assumptions as you can't see the other players' MMR -s. This has been busted by facts provided by devs several times like I said.

 

'There are many matches one-sided' - this is also your observation, not a general trend. And even if it was, it is not necessarily connected - for example, team setups at certain ratings have a lot greater impact on this, which means the balance is obviously not ideal, but this is another topic

[HeadCrowned.6834]

So there are quite a lot of points of view on this matter. Its not easy to solve. I'd like to go further on about how to increase the playerbase, with this as starting point:

 

> @"Reaper Alim.4176" said:

> > @Ledavi.1803 said:

> > I think our job as part of the community is to openly welcome new PvPers - only way for queue times to shorten and MMR to do its best work

>

>

> Lol this is fallacy in itself. You just can't convince real competitive players to PvP in GW2. As for the reasons why, you can just look on page one of the PvP section on these forums.

>

> In order to get new PvPers to GW2 these things have to happen.

> - ANet would have to get serious about it's PvP mode.

> - The devs would have to start supporting PvP as it's own game mode.

> - PvP will have to be fun.

> - PvP will have to have balanced build diversity.

> - ANet would have to actively police, and remove trolls and griefers from the Ranked PvP pool.

>

> All of this would have to happen to convince players to compete in GW2's PvP. Why you ask me. Because these are the basic concepts that are upheld in other games PvP game modes, that's why. If ANet can't do these basic things that other can do. Then players will simply go to those games instead of trying to compete here. It's really as simple as that.

>

> And there is little we can do as players. In order to convince other to serious try PvP in GW2. If anyone does any bit of cursory research on GW2's PvP. They would instantly see PvP mode in GW2. Is just as radioactive as chernobyl, right after the meltdown. And they would naturally stay far away.

 

There are two types of people you can attract to start play PvP seriously: people from within GW2 itself, or people that never have played the game before. We need both groups to effectively increase the playerpool and with that the overall attractiveness of PvP itself.

 

So two questions raise:

1. How can we increase the pool of PvP-players by attracting GW2-players?

2. How can we increase the pool of PvP-players by attracting non-GW2-players?

 

Reaper Alim did some propositions to effect both groups, but those propositions are quite general and could be worked out a bit further. Theyre important however, because they touch the many issues that PvP has today.

 

**On the matter of Question 1:**

 

- I was thinking that PvP should get more attention by incorporating the game mode in the game itself. Heart of the Mists is a distinct zone, where still basically nothing is going on. People have to travel there to find themselves in a boring area, if they even could find the two little swords on top of the screen. Why not remove the whole HotM and extend for example Lions Arch with a PvP area? You can mingle then the non-PvP players with the PvP-players. It might make the non-PvP'ers more curious about the game mode, and push them to try it out.

 

- On the long term: one could think about adding race-specific skills to PvP. Its a long shot, and will cause balance issues, but not all racial skills have to be added. This might cause your play to feel more impactful on the game. This can also increase build diversity, which I think is necessary for attractive PvP.

 

- Create more PvP events and give more attention to them. Make for example a weekly AT, and give a pop-up or yellow-letter message on the screens of everyone that is online that that AT is about to start. Many games have this. And why not give this pop-up also for every daily AT? Also, Anet could introduce things like double-XP weekends/double reward-progress weekends.

 

- Fix the reward tracks into something more progressive, and with bigger loot the nearer you come to your goal. Currently I'm getting a box in another box that is stuffed in another box. When I open them I will have 12 green items and 1 yellow and thats it. I'd rather play 100 games to receive 1 bigger reward than receive 1 small reward for every game.

 

- I can imagine that GW2 PvP has quite a steep learning curve. Its an old discussion on how to introduce new players better to the game mode, but its still an important one. Are there for example possibilities to incorporate the Mentoring system into PvP ?

 

- ... Open for suggestions...

 

 

**On the matter of Question 2:**

 

- Investing in PvP might look like a waste of money to Anet, as it initially won't give anything in return. However, if they want more players (which actually gives money in return), then they will have to give PvP attention. All the big games out there right now are focused on PvP. Streams, videos, tournaments, brands, etc. are mostly focused on PvP. PvP is the competitive game mode, and therefore gets the most attention. So I don't really get why Anet puts such a low effort into it. Yet we already get a new living world season, with a new map, new story, etc. ''Yay!''. No one outside of the players of the game itself care. If you compare how much work they invest into new maps, stories, items, etc. to how much time they invest in pvp: its a bit ridiculous tbh.

 

- Anet should open up a bit more on the long term plans. Let people know what they can expect. If you can make outside people say ''wow!'' with those plans, you attract them into trying out the game. Take an example from Ashes of Creation.

 

- Giving the base game for free is a good step I think by Anet for luring new people into the game. However, these people will find PvP an unreachable game mode, as they can't use the elite specs. Would it be an idea to open up all elite specs in PvP only? New players can then immediately be as competitive as old players. One of the strong suits of GW2 PvP is that gear doesnt matter and doesnt influence the game mode. The Elite specs got rid of this strong selling point., which is such a pity.

 

- Anet will have to organize streamed PvP events again in order to get attention from Twitch viewers and such. Just don't make them so costly yet. Introduce a new ToL with for example $1000 for the winning team. If Anet organizes this and the stream, then they show that they actually care about the game mode as well.

 

- ... Open for suggestions...

[Abazigal.3679]

Concerning 1st question, the point is to have more " welcome " for beginners in eventually joining top level. It used to be ok pre-poF, but right now, a group of average players will get facerolled 500-50 at the first round of the daily tournament, and will be out of the AT without really having learned anything.

There should be a way to allow losing teams fight against other losing teams in order to get even matchs and learn stuff.

 

Also, i'd get rid of seasons. Top players are always the same and aren't playing much apart of AT's. Silver 3 till platinum 1 have to experience the yoyo effect every single season, and once people reach platinum, they don't play much anymore. Just have a big whole ladder, like it used to be

[Razor.6392]

> @Morwath.9817 said:

> > @Mutaatti.2789 said:

> > > @Ayrilana.1396 said:

> > > So you want to force everyone into long queues just because you want closer matches when it comes to player rating?

> > >

> > > They really just need to add a tick box when queuing so that players that want this can sit in their horrendously long queues and not complain about the lack of skills of their team. Actually, that won’t matter as they will still complain about it.

> >

> > Yes. Yes I do. I don't mind having to queue for 10 mins (now 4+ mins) for match that is more balanced than these matches where there is 1600+ players against 1300 rating players (happened to me many times) or when there's 1300,1400 and 1700 players vs 1500 players.

> >

> > FIX YOUR BROKEN MATCHMAKER!

> > And yes, you should also sit in queue for as long as its needed to get better team balance, or quit PvP. ^^

>

> Quaggan would like to remind you that some people have studies, jobs, family etc and they don't have time to waste on waiting to do something, they would rather just do it in short time window they have.

 

Find platinum players in this thread that are ok with getting matched with gold players. Your post doesn't even make sense lmao. Usually the casuals are the ones who want fast matches, and the casuals happen to be in bronze - gold.

[Morwath.9817]

> @Razor.6392 said:

> > @Morwath.9817 said:

> > > @Mutaatti.2789 said:

> > > > @Ayrilana.1396 said:

> > > > So you want to force everyone into long queues just because you want closer matches when it comes to player rating?

> > > >

> > > > They really just need to add a tick box when queuing so that players that want this can sit in their horrendously long queues and not complain about the lack of skills of their team. Actually, that won’t matter as they will still complain about it.

> > >

> > > Yes. Yes I do. I don't mind having to queue for 10 mins (now 4+ mins) for match that is more balanced than these matches where there is 1600+ players against 1300 rating players (happened to me many times) or when there's 1300,1400 and 1700 players vs 1500 players.

> > >

> > > FIX YOUR BROKEN MATCHMAKER!

> > > And yes, you should also sit in queue for as long as its needed to get better team balance, or quit PvP. ^^

> >

> > Quaggan would like to remind you that some people have studies, jobs, family etc and they don't have time to waste on waiting to do something, they would rather just do it in short time window they have.

>

> Find platinum players in this thread that are ok with getting matched with gold players. Your post doesn't even make sense lmao. Usually the casuals are the ones who want fast matches, and the casuals happen to be in bronze - gold.

 

Ooo, thats rather interesting point of view for Quaggan... but Quaggan remembers long queques and top players queing with bronzes in s1 to reduce que time, changes were made for a reason Quaggan think.

[HeadCrowned.6834]

> @Abazigal.3679 said:

> Concerning 1st question, the point is to have more " welcome " for beginners in eventually joining top level. It used to be ok pre-poF, but right now, a group of average players will get facerolled 500-50 at the first round of the daily tournament, and will be out of the AT without really having learned anything.

> There should be a way to allow losing teams fight against other losing teams in order to get even matchs and learn stuff.

>

> Also, i'd get rid of seasons. Top players are always the same and aren't playing much apart of AT's. Silver 3 till platinum 1 have to experience the yoyo effect every single season, and once people reach platinum, they don't play much anymore. Just have a big whole ladder, like it used to be

 

Some sort of losers bracket in AT's is a good idea. And what do we get instead of seasons then? An overall ladder?

[rank eleven monk.9502]

> @Razor.6392 said:

> > @Morwath.9817 said:

> > > @Mutaatti.2789 said:

> > > > @Ayrilana.1396 said:

> > > > So you want to force everyone into long queues just because you want closer matches when it comes to player rating?

> > > >

> > > > They really just need to add a tick box when queuing so that players that want this can sit in their horrendously long queues and not complain about the lack of skills of their team. Actually, that won’t matter as they will still complain about it.

> > >

> > > Yes. Yes I do. I don't mind having to queue for 10 mins (now 4+ mins) for match that is more balanced than these matches where there is 1600+ players against 1300 rating players (happened to me many times) or when there's 1300,1400 and 1700 players vs 1500 players.

> > >

> > > FIX YOUR BROKEN MATCHMAKER!

> > > And yes, you should also sit in queue for as long as its needed to get better team balance, or quit PvP. ^^

> >

> > Quaggan would like to remind you that some people have studies, jobs, family etc and they don't have time to waste on waiting to do something, they would rather just do it in short time window they have.

>

> Find platinum players in this thread that are ok with getting matched with gold players. Your post doesn't even make sense lmao. Usually the casuals are the ones who want fast matches, and the casuals happen to be in bronze - gold.

Funny you asked this without reading a few comments above.