25 is way too low. Too many trolls, hackers, throwers, win traders, etc. and a 10 min deserter debuff pls. Valor should be 60-70. 25 is just a joke.

What you fail to understand is that valor is just a number that has nothing to do with player skill..... There might be people who played lots of regs and have gone up to 70 valor, but that doesn't mean that they gonna be good in ranked.

Valor 25 is fine. Frequent pops, more people can que for ranked.

The population is pretty low.. why do you want to make it even lower ?

Even with valor 100 required these problems would not get solved.

Most of these things will never go away.

The only thing they could do is make the rewards not worth it for people that have no business in ranked besides trying to gewr.

Even with valor 100 required these problems would not get solved.

 

Most of these things will never go away.

The only thing they could do is make the rewards not worth it for people that have no business in ranked besides trying to gewr.

Yep, Gearing should be done in regs so that people are properly geared for Ranked. I understand they want to incentivise people to do Ranked, but there must be a better way than making it the best way to min max pve gear.

In a podcast I listened too (worst ever), Eric said they may consider increasing the gearing requirement again to enter Ranked. But that just seems illogical if they keep it as the best way to gear. If you already have the best gear or close to it for Ranked, why would you even need to grind more in Ranked.

I like the idea of increasing Valor and actually make it worth something. I know it's not a silver bullet to fix the issues, but it would be a start. Then they could look at other things to gate Ranked a bit more for the more experienced. I think rewards for Ranked should be more cosmetic, but really good rewards, not crappy ones. Things people would really want to try for. They would also need to change the way the rating system works and how the rewards are tied to it. Overhauling the medal system and incorporating it into rating system would be a good start.

You are right though, it still wouldn't fix the problems 100%. People would still troll, throw games and so on.

valor 100.

I think this would need to be legacy. So when one toon reaches 100, it unlocks it in the legacy. Either that or lower it to say 85 because people who pvp will be Valor 70 when they hit lvl 70 and it's only 15 lvls of Valor for them to get to 85. Most pve nubs will be zero Valor when they hit lvl 70.

Or another would be how much Valor you earn at lower lvls considering how you only need to do 2-3 matches per lvl in lowbies to stay at that lvls Valor. It should take a minimum of 10 matches per lvl to increase Valor. I'd actually prefer a proper gradient scale as you lvl. As an example you would start at 10 matches at lvl 10 and by the time you got to lvl 70 it would take 70 matches to go up a lvl in Valor. Then you set the Ranked gate at Valor 75 and add rewards linked to every Valor lvl over that if done in Ranked.

This would also incentives people to play lowbies because they wouldn't need to do 70 matches for each lvl of Valor as if they'd waited till lvl 70 to pvp. It would actually be faster to do it as they lvl up up their toons. I think this would even improve lvl 70 regs because more people would be learning to pvp in lowbies where they should be and not in end game Pvp. The only thing I can't figure out is what you do with people rolling instant lvl 60-65s?

Well Valor is easy to get, after all we have double Valor gain week now

Valor is the most useless stat in the game and they made it an event.....LMAO good job bioware. way to think outside the box.

Valor is the most useless stat in the game and they made it an event.....LMAO good job bioware. way to think outside the box.

I dont see the point of that either.

valor 100.

And The Founder title, no less. Yeah. That will work!

Valor is the most useless stat in the game and they made it an event.....LMAO good job bioware. way to think outside the box.

Even OPS leader role is not tied to valor itself but to Valor percentage. So if you have Valor 100 i.e. 0%... then you are out of luck by definition. That's just pathetic.

Yep, Gearing should be done in regs so....

If gearing should be done in regs then why would ranked pay with UCs, by then the person should be fully geared and not need UCs.

In vanilla the ranked gear was earned in ranked and even had a rank requirement.

And The Founder title, no less. Yeah. That will work!

Hahahahaha Yesssss!

If gearing should be done in regs then why would ranked pay with UCs, by then the person should be fully geared and not need UCs.

 

In vanilla the ranked gear was earned in ranked and even had a rank requirement.

Why you ask? 'cause I said so, lmao.

But no, in all seriousness, there used to be a gateway to Ranked and it was full expertise, which meant you had all pvp gear on. On top of that, there was only a minute difference between reg and Ranked gear.

So now we have this huge discrepancy between the lowest gear and the highest and no gate way at all to entering Ranked.

There needs to be some form of gateway in Ranked while ever there is such a major difference in gear lvl and no pvp gear to seperate the people who might have a clue from those who should only gear in regs.

I have 2 characters which can still craft republic PvP armor which has or had a Valor requirement, the highest was 70. You could not equip this armor below that number.

Yeah, same here.

I understand they want to incentivise people to do Ranked

Remove gear and UC from the equation and have good end of season rewards announced before the season goes live?

Nah, that'll never happen, it's BioWare. Their idea of ranked has been a mess since they removed 8v8.

high valor can resolve some problems.

i love the idea of elite warlord only. fotm and troll and no gear player 99% solved. and maybe others..

It should never have been tied to Valor.

They put a min gear requirement for the latest HM FP, Ranked should also be gated behind a min gear level. My opinion is 246.

Remove gear and UC from the equation and have good end of season rewards announced before the season goes live?

 

Nah, that'll never happen, it's BioWare. Their idea of ranked has been a mess since they removed 8v8.

Agreed, removal of 8v8 without even trying a solo queue system or even making the queuing the same as how regs are (maximum 4 in a premades), was a major mistake. Their lame arse excuse saying participation was low doesn't have legs because they added a solo queue for 4 v4. They knew teams wouldnt be as popular in 4v4 either, otherwise why add a solo queue. 4v4 would have ended up with similar participation if they hadn't added solo. Plus we never had any 8v8 seasons, it was only preseason. The other excuse I've heard is there were too many maps for 8v8 to work as it would reduce the people queuing in other forms of pvp. The simple solution would be to reduce 8v8 Ranked to 1 of each of the types of maps per week (3) and then rotate the others through. Example, 1 Hutt Ball, one capture the node, on attack type (Void Star/Hypergates). They could even make the ranked solo queue combined with 4v4 and 8v8. Bioware could still impliment this now and have little affect on queues because skilled objective pvpers would flock to 8 Ranked and the new pvpers would have an easier time in regs, making it more enjoyable and fun for them, which would likely make them want to play more pvp. Let's face it, most of them are only pvping for unassembled components to play pve. If it was actually fun for them, they may learn to like pvp and continue after they've geared up. This current incentive system is flawed because once those people are geared up, they will return to pve and never pvp again unless forced to.

valor requirement is stupid and shouldn't exist at all. Its just a number of reg warzones u played and has nothing to do with how good u are, or are going to be. I can afk in 25 warzones and get 25 valor boom gg easy now time to q ranked and throw or something. If you want a requirement it should be gear or something but that would be cancer too because the gearing system is terrible. Tbh theres no possible requirement you can have that would stop throwers, wintraders, and trolls.

the idea that you would raise valor to 60 or something, and make someone like me do a ton of regs just to make a 65 token new alt to play on another server with, is disgusting

Agreed, removal of 8v8 without even trying a solo queue system or even making the queuing the same as how regs are (maximum 4 in a premades), was a major mistake. Their lame arse excuse saying participation was low doesn't have legs because they added a solo queue for 4 v4. They knew teams wouldnt be as popular in 4v4 either, otherwise why add a solo queue. 4v4 would have ended up with similar participation if they hadn't added solo. Plus we never had any 8v8 seasons, it was only preseason. The other excuse I've heard is there were too many maps for 8v8 to work as it would reduce the people queuing in other forms of pvp. The simple solution would be to reduce 8v8 Ranked to 1 of each of the types of maps per week (3) and then rotate the others through. Example, 1 Hutt Ball, one capture the node, on attack type (Void Star/Hypergates). They could even make the ranked solo queue combined with 4v4 and 8v8. Bioware could still impliment this now and have little affect on queues because skilled objective pvpers would flock to 8 Ranked and the new pvpers would have an easier time in regs, making it more enjoyable and fun for them, which would likely make them want to play more pvp. Let's face it, most of them are only pvping for unassembled components to play pve. If it was actually fun for them, they may learn to like pvp and continue after they've geared up. This current incentive system is flawed because once those people are geared up, they will return to pve and never pvp again unless forced to.

Forget 8 vs 8 ranked please as fast as possible.. It didn't work and it will never work. There isn't enough population to support it and who the hell would stay in the match if it's a loss for the other team ? Ragequits would kill it in an instant.. because nobody will stay for 13 mins in a match just to lose the game.

If 4vs4 is toxic how trash would 8 vs 8 be ?

Yes 4vs4 is a joke... but at the moment it's the only thing viable for the current state of game.

You want skill vs skill ? 1 vs 1 ranked would be the only choice for that but it would eliminate healers.... so that isn't an option too.

Enjoy 4vs4.. dont' care for the rating, farm enough components to buy the rewards and move on to the next season. This is what you should do. Play for the sake of playing.. not for the sake for a stupid elo number that the next guy will get by cheating.