Curse

kedde · Jan 16, 2011, 05:27 PM // 17:27

It's not so much caring about the ladder. Noone's done that for the past 3 - soon 4 years. But it's caring about the game enough to want to still be able to play it. If me caring enough to vote in some random poll can help in some way I'm all for it regardless of the retardedly low odds.

Div · Jan 16, 2011, 11:11 PM // 23:11

On first glance, it might seem like resetting the ladder would make new guilds come in because they can be more "competitive" on the ladder. The problem is, that's not how it works. Besides the fact there aren't anywhere near 1000 active guilds, it's actually harder for the new guilds to get rating when ladder is reset. In the old system, if they beat a team with "top 20" players, they'll get 13-14 rating, and losses only penalize them -1 or -2. With the reset, they're hit hard and lose 5-7 rating against teams with players who are much more experienced.

Having the public vote on something like this is really pointless. Less than 10% of the players actually participate regularly in GvG and know enough to make good decisions. Just look at the NBA. The public is voting Yao Ming into the all-star game this year. Unfortunately, some things can't be decided by the general public.

Archiving should involve the peak rating of each guild that's been on the ladder, as "archiving" the current top 100 means nothing since most guilds historically are off the ladder or like eF have tanked their rating after their legacy was over.

Terrible Surgeon · Jan 17, 2011, 03:53 AM // 03:53

reset it and implement a daily rating loss for inactivity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Div

Having the public vote on something like this is really pointless. Less than 10% of the players actually participate regularly in GvG and know enough to make good decisions. Just look at the NBA. The public is voting Yao Ming into the all-star game this year. Unfortunately, some things can't be decided by the general public.

We use the same system to vote for a person called the president...i think it can be said that it will work for a game and that the gvg community will be the people taking the most interest in the discussion. If the gvg community speaks up they will get what they want.

Lord Mip · Jan 17, 2011, 04:25 AM // 04:25

Indeed. The argument may be valid but it is simply the way elections and polls are being held in this world. Just imagine if voting for the president would require an IQ of 130 or over.. The whole country would rage over you.

Missing HB · Jan 17, 2011, 07:57 AM // 07:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terrible Surgeon

reset it and implement a daily rating loss for inactivity.

I'm pretty sure most of actual top100 guilds ( i.e mat players ) could afford not getting champ pts. However , i don't know if it would be really fair to implement an auto points lose system as long as it doesn't rely on 1 player only. You lose Kurzic /luxon points daily , but anyone is able to bring back points , whereas in GvG it does involve 6-8 players.

Maybe eventually if it was like -1/2 per day it would be fine ....

Corporeal Ghost · Jan 18, 2011, 05:51 AM // 05:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Div

On first glance, it might seem like resetting the ladder would make new guilds come in because they can be more "competitive" on the ladder.

Seems pretty likely to me that that influx will actually occur, but that they will all (or near enough) leave almost immediately when they realize that "even footing" doesn't mean quite what they think it does.

However, if the bottom end of the soon-to-be ladder hits critical mass, this becomes self-correcting. I don't think a ladder reset is enough to do that alone, but if enough new/mediocre players can be enticed to start via some other means, the reset will help incentivize them to stay (if they're interested in ladder climbing).

I have no idea what would bring that number of people in at this point. It probably involves the investment of more real capital than ANet/NCSoft is willing to put into the system, particularly on a 5-year-old game, particularly involving a market segment they have seemingly chosen to all-but-abandon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by superraptors

reason why people still gvg is for the trims and rp's, if there were no trims or rp's gvg would be 99% dead, that says something about the motivation to gvg, looks like majority of the people dont find it fun when theres no reward.

This is obviously not true. Most guilds don't have a prayer of getting either outside of an AT with a bunch of empty guilds registered just to hit 8. Why do you think the better players smurf so much?

Div · Jan 20, 2011, 04:10 AM // 04:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terrible Surgeon

We use the same system to vote for a person called the president...i think it can be said that it will work for a game and that the gvg community will be the people taking the most interest in the discussion. If the gvg community speaks up they will get what they want.

I was going to bring that up, but decided not to because the average literacy rate on the internet is pretty low. Since you raised it again...

If you're going to talk about decision making, it's more like the public votes for the senators and representatives. They, in turn, are the "knowledgeable ones" who take into account your opinion to an extent, but use their own best judgment (and the judgment of their advisers) to make the final decision. With the exceptions of a few propositions here and there that's relevant to just about everyone, most laws are made and voted on by a small group of people, Congress.

diabiosx · Jan 20, 2011, 02:20 PM // 14:20

Well apparently Anet live team has a budget on GW1. So if they are going to reset ladder, they better do it right and not just do it so they can burn their budget up on just a reset with no thought put into it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Div

I was going to bring that up, but decided not to because the average literacy rate on the internet is pretty low. Since you raised it again...

If you're going to talk about decision making, it's more like the public votes for the senators and representatives. They, in turn, are the "knowledgeable ones" who take into account your opinion to an extent, but use their own best judgment (and the judgment of their advisers) to make the final decision. With the exceptions of a few propositions here and there that's relevant to just about everyone, most laws are made and voted on by a small group of people, Congress.

Well no one voted anyone from Anet to be the public's voice. If any analogy is to be said, Anet is more like a dictatorship, where this stumme guy is the dictator. And from what I heard in test krewe Anet makes bad decisions and doesnt really listen to most of the concern brought about there(aka censorship). But then again the past 2pvp updates are definitely better than when this izzy guy was in charge lawl.

Iotan · Jan 22, 2011, 04:14 AM // 04:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by KPEATOP

And ........ the more i play GW1, the more i feel that i`m being used as a BETA TESTER for GW2. Random ideas fall upon us and they observe how we are all going to react. Anyone else feels like .....

I can only hope this is the case.

Anet really only gets 1 chance to make PvP in GW2 work. The top PvPers will move onto other things if the game isn't good upon release. Granted, a ladder reset isn't that important of an issue... I'd love to see more drastic updates to PvP if they are tests for GW2; I might even start GvGing again!

On topic: There isn't a drive to do well on the ladder anymore, so I can't see this decision helping much. Tournaments are how guilds are ranked, and there isn't a large enough community to even make a decent ladder now.

Div · Jan 22, 2011, 10:16 PM // 22:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by diabiosx

Well apparently Anet live team has a budget on GW1. So if they are going to reset ladder, they better do it right and not just do it so they can burn their budget up on just a reset with no thought put into it.

Well no one voted anyone from Anet to be the public's voice. If any analogy is to be said, Anet is more like a dictatorship, where this stumme guy is the dictator. And from what I heard in test krewe Anet makes bad decisions and doesnt really listen to most of the concern brought about there(aka censorship). But then again the past 2pvp updates are definitely better than when this izzy guy was in charge lawl.

I'm not necessarily referring to what Anet is doing (dictatorship and censorship). I'm referring to what Anet should do if they actually had a clue (carefully appointed + voted decision makers).

Regardless, using public voice is the worst idea and stupidest thing Anet could do (unless they're just doing it for the PR and not caring too much about the results) when compared to how decisions are done in the real world. It's just like a nuclear physicist asking the clueless general public how he/she should conduct the lab.

Zawk Tirson · Jan 25, 2011, 11:47 PM // 23:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iotan

I can only hope this is the case.

Anet really only gets 1 chance to make PvP in GW2 work. The top PvPers will move onto other things if the game isn't good upon release.

And new ones will take their place.

kedde · Jan 26, 2011, 03:20 PM // 15:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zawk Tirson

And new ones will take their place.

Might be entirely wishful thinking.
Why else are there wait times above 30 seconds for any format in this game?

Fulgenzio · Jan 27, 2011, 11:47 AM // 11:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by diabiosx

But then again the past 2pvp updates are definitely better than when this izzy guy was in charge lawl.

Agreed, that's why I really have concerns about GW2's PvP, as it is still izzy leading things.
About ladder reset, well it will only raise GvG's activity for about 2/3 days, then we'll be back to the same situation : nobody's playing the game.

However, if they don't reset the ladder, they'll do nothing about GvG. So what's the best between nothing and something that will change nothing ?

tealspikes · Jan 27, 2011, 06:39 PM // 18:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fulgenzio

So what's the best between nothing and something that will change nothing ?

Nothing since it's less time and resources expended, and avoiding unforseen problems that the something could create. On the other side of the coin, you could aurgue that it can't get much worse than it is now.

Missing HB · Jan 28, 2011, 10:19 AM // 10:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by tealspikes

Nothing since it's less time and resources expended, and avoiding unforseen problems that the something could create. On the other side of the coin, you could aurgue that it can't get much worse than it is now.

I don't believe we can talk about saving time for update. Too much time was saved in my opinion and the result isn't a lot diferent.Just watch yesterday's update for example . Where are the dervish update and the HA map. Even the 7 hero stuff in addition.. Are we only going to have 1 big ( *cough * ) update every year now ??

Now i kinda changed my mind a bit , i do think doing any update in PvP , even if i'm sure it will have no result , is better than doing nothing. Even , GvG tournaments look a bit more active for a few days ...

Jeydra · Jan 28, 2011, 12:03 PM // 12:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by kedde

Might be entirely wishful thinking.
Why else are there wait times above 30 seconds for any format in this game?

The game is 6 years old ...

I'd rather ANet do something instead of nothing. However, I also think soliciting opinion via a public poll that reaches only a small quantity of the GW population (including people who don't play GvG) is quite silly. Would be much better to simply poll, say, all the players who played the last mAT (or who made top 16 last mAT, etc).

Essence Snow · Jan 28, 2011, 05:35 PM // 17:35

Read through this thread a bit and all I can say is wow! I know the poll is closed and all but, still wow!

Hey I know you paid for the game like everyone else, but since you are new to GvG your opinion shouldn't be heard......<----utter bs mentality that resounds through this thread

Everyone that paid for this game has/had a right to have their opinions be heard via this poll.

That would be like me saying "If you don't have 10k+ hours invested in this game your opinions/thoughts don't hold weight and should not be counted". It makes me ashamed to say, I am a part of a game community that would think in such a way.

Missing HB · Jan 28, 2011, 06:13 PM // 18:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Essence Snow

Read through this thread a bit and all I can say is wow! I know the poll is closed and all but, still wow!

Hey I know you paid for the game like everyone else, but since you are new to GvG your opinion shouldn't be heard......<----utter bs mentality that resounds through this thread

Everyone that paid for this game has/had a right to have their opinions be heard via this poll.

That would be like me saying "If you don't have 10k+ hours invested in this game your opinions/thoughts don't hold weight and should not be counted". It makes me ashamed to say, I am a part of a game community that would think in such a way.

The problem with this is the fact that GvG community is very small. On one hand , everyone should have the right to vote , but on the other hand , it's going to be most likely people who don't GvG at all and who probably will never who will decide for top GvG'ers( if all top GvG'ers decided to say NO , and others , which do not care said Yes , then Yes is taken...)....
So yes , it's hard to know , but as long as it's a game and it's 5 year old , i think top gvg'ers should decide themselves....

Winterclaw · Jan 28, 2011, 07:03 PM // 19:03

IMO there should be regular resets. Good to stir things up, give people a break, etc. Personally I'd go with after every mat or 4 times a year with a one or two week break before the ladder restarts (give gvgers a down time for trying things and training new people).

If there was one for this, it won't bother me.

*lemming* · Jan 28, 2011, 07:55 PM // 19:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Essence Snow

Hey I know you paid for the game like everyone else, but since you are new to GvG your opinion shouldn't be heard......<----utter bs mentality that resounds through this thread

Everyone that paid for this game has/had a right to have their opinions be heard via this poll.

That would be like me saying "If you don't have 10k+ hours invested in this game your opinions/thoughts don't hold weight and should not be counted". It makes me ashamed to say, I am a part of a game community that would think in such a way.

Are you also ashamed because political campaigns don't hire hobos as consultants?