PDA

View Full Version : GvG ladder



Siriusbg
16-10-2007, 22:21
Have been thinking over this, how many think anet should go on with not restarting the ladder, or should they restart the ladder again and keep doing it?

and say why pls =)

Yue
16-10-2007, 23:15
No, because then no more champ pt farming for a while.

woot im a warrior
17-10-2007, 02:50
No they should not reset the ladder, but they should clean it up of all the dead guilds.

All they should do is implement a system so if a guild doesn't GvG for 30 days they keep their rating, but are taken off of the ladder until they GvG again.

Siriusbg
17-10-2007, 19:37
No they should not reset the ladder, but they should clean it up of all the dead guilds.

All they should do is implement a system so if a guild doesn't GvG for 30 days they keep their rating, but are taken off of the ladder until they GvG again.

see that i can agree with, like Team everfrost still is around the 30 without playing>< that just sucks they can stay there for so long without playing.

nebuchanezzar
17-10-2007, 23:02
Both options are fine with me actually but something needs to be done.
Restarts are not a bad option and the only downside is the first few weeks where anyone can face anyone really. QQ about champ point farming but good guilds get back to the same places rather quickly.
An option to clean out the ladder may be more work on the part of Anet but would probably make more people happy. I'm not sure about when a guild should be purged or for how long or how they can re-enter the ladder. I've heard many say one month of inactivity but most active teams play daily or at the very least weekly.
However, we know Anet can do the first option. We do not know that they can(or lets be honest, would) take the time necessary to write new code to enable "purging" of the ladder. I'm a bit of a realist so I would have to say..ask for resets now and implore for a system to purge the ladder later...

shardfenix
18-10-2007, 12:31
Arenanet took the one thing in PvP that actually had meaning, and they took that meaning away with ATs. They need to revert GW pvp to the way it was in the first few months of release.

Nazpharoz
18-10-2007, 17:13
agrees with shardfenix.

their are now more gold trim caped guilds then silver trims also, kinda wonders what makes a guild better. getting a golden once and unable to loose it, or get up to silver and hold it for ages by playing for it.


their was a while ago an update note where they posted that GvG ladder won't be reset anymore. that was already at the start off this year, or even just before.

The Avatar
18-10-2007, 19:02
the gw ladder is pretty much dead. on the first page still going on.

Wet One
18-10-2007, 19:09
their are now more gold trim caped guilds then silver trims also, kinda wonders what makes a guild better. getting a golden once and unable to loose it, or get up to silver and hold it for ages by playing for it.

Well the thing that i think is stupid is that it was mentioned by the devs (i believe, unless it was just hearsay) that the guilds that had won 'real' championships... eg. the championship in Taepai, Germany, etc (basicaly everyone that had gold trim before AT's started) would recieve somethingthing different from their origonal gold capes... and that the winners of the monthly AT's get a gold cape or whatever but it is not the same cape as the guilds which had won a real championship.

Siriusbg
18-10-2007, 19:17
and that the winners of the monthly AT's get a gold cape or whatever but it is not the same cape as the guilds which had won a real championship.


or maybe a gold cape for a month something, then they just need to win the next tournament to keep it =)

shardfenix
20-10-2007, 12:03
or maybe a gold cape for a month something, then they just need to win the next tournament to keep it =)

Or maybe they should be forced to defend their trims after the skills actually get balanced (never). I don't keep up with cape trims anymore because half the guilds who have them are horrendously bad.

Aiiane
20-10-2007, 14:18
Arenanet took the one thing in PvP that actually had meaning, and they took that meaning away with ATs. They need to revert GW pvp to the way it was in the first few months of release.

Unfortunately, that is by definition impossible - people didn't have nearly as much of a knowledge base to work off of then as they do now.

So unless you're proposing taking over the world, imposing a totalitarian state, and brainwashing players... :huh:

Dogbert
21-10-2007, 12:41
What's irritating me is that guilds like Erotic Wimps [WIMP] (121-2 record) who probably haven't played for over a year are still in top 100.
I don't like that they can hold that position for so long without even playing.

It's just too many dead guilds on the ladder that need to be kicked out in my opinion.

David Holtzman
21-10-2007, 13:03
I don't like that they can hold that position for so long without even playing.

I can't for the life of me understand why an active guild's inability to surpass a dead guild should be a cause of concern for me.

Ranger Nietzsche
21-10-2007, 21:54
I can't for the life of me understand why an active guild's inability to surpass a dead guild should be a cause of concern for me.

That's definitely a good point.

Xunlai Agent
21-10-2007, 22:00
well in theory one could argue that potentially some of the dead guilds could have farmed with builds or gimmicks that no longer exist due to skill balances or played when the ladder populated with less skilled player or that the ladder was very different that their rank is no longer "fair" or what not. but I agree with David...

Siriusbg
21-10-2007, 22:54
I can't for the life of me understand why an active guild's inability to surpass a dead guild should be a cause of concern for me.

i see the point in that as someone else did, but still, it would make a more clear wiev what the rank was for the guilds for real,

David Holtzman
21-10-2007, 23:52
i see the point in that as someone else did, but still, it would make a more clear wiev what the rank was for the guilds for real,

For real? What do you mean, that is their rank "for real."

Yue
22-10-2007, 01:02
He means that when you take off the inactive guilds, they'll have an idea of where they stand in comparison to the other active guilds.

David Holtzman
22-10-2007, 01:33
He means that when you take off the inactive guilds, they'll have an idea of where they stand in comparison to the other active guilds.

That's certainly true to an extent, but it's not a particularly compelling reason to change the ladder. I think people are misunderstanding what the current ladder is for. It's not designed to rank only the active guilds. It's like a hall of fame, it is designed to rank every guild in history.

against
22-10-2007, 03:14
Don't they already have another hall of fame? The list of "notable guilds"? Why don't they treat the guild ladder as a traditional ladder? You know, as it was before.

David Holtzman
22-10-2007, 05:32
Don't they already have another hall of fame? The list of "notable guilds"? Why don't they treat the guild ladder as a traditional ladder? You know, as it was before.

Because Anet decided they wanted it this way.

Siriusbg
22-10-2007, 14:47
He means that when you take off the inactive guilds, they'll have an idea of where they stand in comparison to the other active guilds.

hehe yeah i did, was a little tirred, and english isn't my mother language, so it was more direct from danish to english :)

Dogbert
23-10-2007, 22:55
Well if i use [WIMP] in my example they haven't played for ages and are still in top 100. Does that tell us anything about the quality of the top 100 guilds or that wimp are just so good they don't need to play for a year and still be in the top.

But i guess the ladder is more like a hall of fame now.

Nazpharoz
24-10-2007, 17:21
But i guess the ladder is more like a hall of fame now.

Hall of Fame or Hall of Blame? :huh:

ArichValtrahn
24-10-2007, 17:24
The 1200 point champ point requirement was set up in a time when there werent many guilds who could reach that point because the ladder kept getting reset. Now you have guilds forming champ-possible guilds and selling them.

Reset the ladder, or change the champ requirements.

Also, increase inactivity decay to get rid of the idle guilds.

If you want a "historic" system, then make their highest rank permanent on some other listing. If guilds get pushed out due to inactivity then its hardly a historic system in the first place.

Wet One
24-10-2007, 19:14
The 1200 point champ point requirement was set up in a time when there werent many guilds who could reach that point because the ladder kept getting reset. Now you have guilds forming champ-possible guilds and selling them.

Reset the ladder, or change the champ requirements.

Also, increase inactivity decay to get rid of the idle guilds.

If you want a "historic" system, then make their highest rank permanent on some other listing. If guilds get pushed out due to inactivity then its hardly a historic system in the first place.

wtf does it matter if more people can get champ points now or not? They already screwed it up when they had stupid stuff like double champ point weekends etc... so no point in fixing it now....

Here is a perfect example: Marauders is either R4 or r5 champ... that is all that needs to be said about that.

happy feet
24-10-2007, 21:35
Well if i use [WIMP] in my example they haven't played for ages and are still in top 100. Does that tell us anything about the quality of the top 100 guilds or that wimp are just so good they don't need to play for a year and still be in the top.

But i guess the ladder is more like a hall of fame now.


It they were to make a hall of fame, it would be a shame not to include old guilds such as EviL, WM, Te, etc.

Tucks
24-10-2007, 21:59
They should keep everyones ratings the same, but guilds inactive for 2 months or so should be removed from the main ladder, but have an inactive one or somthing.

Why? Then guilds that reform can jump back in to the ladder, but also inactive ones stay out. This means less ladder grind to get a decent placing, and would also force the guilds that used gimmicks to climb the ladder then go afk to move out or slide down, loss by loss.

Deaths
02-12-2007, 11:01
Erotic Wimps is the smurf of Erotic Warriors.

Their are not just inaktive Guilds in the TOP 100. At least half of the Ladder is inactive.

New guilds with new players are fighting each other below the Ladder. At Least they could join the Ladder and would have more fun with showing it off. Thouse Guilds are still aktive and should take a chance to join the Ladder instead off hundreads of dead Guilds. Nobody cares about the dead guilds.

Alot of GvG players moved to PvE. Because they got stucked at the Ladder. Thouse would be forced to play more frequently GvG or a loss in Ladder.

If Guilds are inaktive and kicked out of the Ladder, thouse guilds would be forced to be active or forgotten.

The rating system would be in move again. Alot of Guilds gain their rating and it doesnt come back into the Ladder. The bad Guilds are forced to play below the Ladder and will never get the chance to progress and beat an low ranked Guild. It is hard for a Guild of midline class to rejoin GvG and win at the same time. If they want to stay in the Ladder they would be forced to maintain the pace or they would lose the oportunity to stay in the ladder.

For TOP 100 guilds.

It would be more clear which guild is still aktive. If u guys watch the GvGs. Their are arround just 20 TOP 100 Guilds who are still aktive (smurfs included).

PvE players would reconsidre if they would by a guild for rating just to show of. (Not everyone is buying a Guild for champ point farm). It would force TOP 100 guilds to stay in their guilds instead of selling it for gold or ecto.

Xunlai Agent
02-12-2007, 15:25
pretty sure it's Esoteric Warriors...

Vela
03-12-2007, 14:37
ATs = Monthly. vs. Gold Cape = Forever?

What kind of logic is that? With present system, Trimming should be monthly basis. You get trimmed this month; next month shave again and get trimmed again! Simple.

Xunlai Agent
03-12-2007, 15:17
certain gold trims were earned in one off championships and thus stay forever...

glorentson
06-12-2007, 03:13
Im fine with the permanent Gold trims. I mean, Those who did get there trims off of a Tourny, did win it didnt they? They deserve the right to be able to show that they were good enough to do that. Whether or not they are still good shouldnt matter.