Shadowlands

 

And it's not a matter of Bads or Goods. Some folks hit a certain mark, 1500, 1600 and just stop. We need to stop that. My plan puts a stop to that. ALL PVP should be ranked. If you pvp, you are ranked. If you pvp enough you get rewards, if you pvp enough well, you'll get better rewards. There is a separation. Why cant folks see this?

 

Thats not the issue at all. The problems with Ranked PvP is certainly not those who stop queuing due to reaching a certain score. Its more so that people stop queuing because of people coming into the queue that don't belong there, such as pve players seeking to gain their relics and don't care about the outcome.

 

I'll even admit I stopped solo queue pvp because I was tired of seeing 25k players. I stopped because I got tired of seeing 40k sorcs/sages. When asked, they admit straight up, "I'm here for the relics. Thats all I care about."

 

Placing restrictions on queues would increase pops, imo, because those who queue know for certain that they wont be queued with people who can't contribute to the fight.

 

This post describes it very well.

I've given this a lot of thought and i'm curious what the rest of the community thinks:

 

In our current system, if you win you can get anywhere from +8-+14,15 points per win. Where as if you lose in that same game it would be -10 -20 points loss. This has been a big detractor for a lot of folks. So what I was thinking was this:

 

Win = +10 - +15 points

Lose = +1 - +2 points.

 

Now before you go saying "Well ANYBODY could get the rewards"... Not necessarily. Assuming we start out with a base of 1200. With gold rewards required a rating of 1600. Even if a "bad" lost every single game, they would have to lose 200 games to hit gold. Now I would be perfectly fine if they raised Gold to 2000 points requirement meaning a "bad" would have to lose apx 400 games to get "gold/top tier"

 

Now if we had a system like this in place, the people that dont want to queue because they were losing points and going backwards would be more inclined to play. That would mean more continuous ranked pops. In fact, I would go as far as saying the ranked would outweigh the un-ranked as far as pops are concerned.

 

/flamesuit

/discuss

 

 

Sorry dude this will never work. Even with how the rank is in place now. There is a reason why being in the top bracket is the top 5% of players. For every 100 players only 5 of them are on that level. It should not be EASY to get to the top bracket. The reason people can't get out of elo hell is because they are not good enough period.

 

The thing is this only benefits the people who play 8 hours a day. My solo q record is 126-30 and the person you were talking about is 99-and who knows will probably have a better rank than me. How can you justify that a person with 4-1 w/l ratio is going to have worse rating than someone who's ratio 1-4. Do you get a raise at work even if you never do your job well, do coaches who lose majority of there games keep there job, do you get an A in school even if you fail majority of your test?

anybody else?

i agree with OP , there should be a point for every ranked pvp, lose get some point or no point and win get bigger point

thus encourage pvp

they would have to prevent any gear modifications once in the Warzones,

 

No. ™

I wish people who have no idea how rating in games work would stop posting. The rating system is not the problem- it's the lack of people and afk/leaver penalty. Edited August 7, 2014 by JediMasterSLC

lack of people, definately. And the leavers... And I have a possible solution, but this would require:

Careing about it by Bio

Coding by Bio

Promotion and Effort by Bio

Patience by the Players

 

Solution Copy from Success (again):

- remove solo ranked

- remove bolster from ranked

- create arena-teams

- max one team per account

- remove negative rating (psychologically important!)

- create a ranking reward system:

Best team > Second place > 3-10 > 11-50 > among top 50% > participation

Participation (what everyone gets for playing 'actively') means:

either number of games played (like an average of 3 per week for the entire season)

or completed weeklies (remember, some people go on vacation! - if the season lasts 12 weeks, 7 played would be enough).

- work really REALLY hard against queue sync and wintrade!

 

Comments

 

• Make that leaderboard public. Create an ingame hype about it. Take it to the webpage... whatever.
  
• A website leaderboard where you can search for your character - it's RANKED pvp, it's all about ranking.
  
• Give an explanation why there will be no such things as "reusable stims" or anything that gives those already successfull an edge over potential adversaries (new tier gear speed, because actually gear matters in highest ranked pvp where errors are really really rare!). If I write it people will just hate it/me!
  

 

 

Rewards

Remember: I am trying to not give rewards that give the winners an edge over the others in the next season: So no "reusables" that save tons of comms, no free comms, no stat-boosts, ... The reason seems obvious.

 

1. First Place:
   Throne Mount with a seasons symbol in gold.
   Gold Trophy Cup (big and golden!) for the Personal PvP-Trophy-Case in the Stronghold
   Black Gold colored version of the Seasons PvP set (BoP)
   Quest Cert for a legacy bound weapon of the ones used in the season.
   
2. Second Place:
   Smaller Throne Mount with a seasons symbol in silver.
   Silver Trophy (slightliy smaller and silver) for the Personal PvP-Trophy-Case in the Stronghold
   Black Silver colored version of the Seasons PvP set
   Quest Cert for a legacy bound weapon of the ones used in the season.
   
3. "Third Place" (3-10) :
   Simple, small throne mount with season symbol in bronze.
   Bronze Trophy (smaller and bronze) for the Personal PvP-Trophy-Case in the Stronghold
   Black Bronze colored version of the Seasons PvP set
   Quest Cert for a legacy bound weapon of the ones used in the season.
   
4. 11-50: (only if that many teams played)
   Simple "Flying Chair" with seasons symbol in faction color.
   Quest Cert for a legacy bound weapon of the ones used in the season.
   
5. Top Half:
   A billboard showing the top 10 in the fleets and as a deco for the stronghold...
   => that would be a 'participation reward' for instance - refundable for a uni-prefab if you already have it?
   => goes to all participants in the top 50% of the ranked teams.
   
6. Participation:
   A Trophycase for the pvp-trophies to be placed i.e. in you persoanl room in the stronghold - refundable for a uni-prefab, if you already have it.
   => goes to all participants.
   

 

 

One also could determine Rank 1 and 2 via a finale. With anouncement, (live-stream) and ingame bets and such... make it a bit of a show! Even PvE players could ingame bet in Nar Shadarr on their fav pvp team and hope for a win. Make a spectacle out of drawing the showdown arena... Reinvent what football is for the TOP teams, but also reward participation adequately!

Ranked PvP needs improvements on multiple fronts and we are working diligently to address the issues. We aren’t ready to discuss the specifics but rest assured we are not satisfied with the Ranked PvP experience and are going to improve upon it. As soon as I am able to share details I will and y’all will be the first to know.

 

Are you crazy man? RUN!!!

 

I give you props for bravery posting today.

Ranked PvP needs improvements on multiple fronts and we are working diligently to address the issues. We aren’t ready to discuss the specifics but rest assured we are not satisfied with the Ranked PvP experience and are going to improve upon it. As soon as I am able to share details I will and y’all will be the first to know.

 

With respect, Alex, you made that promise 4 months ago with the guise that you wanted our suggestions for rewards and you've failed absolutely miserably.

 

A couple of questions:

 

1) Other than you, how many people are on the 'PvP team'?

 

2) When you made these rewards were you honestly aware of what kind of reaction they were going to bring?

 

3) Can you understand our opinion that you guys really don't care after we've put up with 2 years of disappointment after disappointment and all you can do is 'promise' improvements in the 'future', seeing how it took you about a year to create the Quesh Hutball warzone?

 

I'm afraid that right now your promises hold about as much weight as a promise from a porter in a third world country that he won't run off with my luggage.

I'm afraid that right now your promises hold about as much weight as a promise from a porter in a third world country that he won't run off with my luggage.

 

*********** dying right now. You just made my sig

Edited August 8, 2014 by Jimmajamma

Ranked PvP needs improvements on multiple fronts and we are working diligently to address the issues. We aren’t ready to discuss the specifics but rest assured we are not satisfied with the Ranked PvP experience and are going to improve upon it. As soon as I am able to share details I will and y’all will be the first to know.

 

Im sure we'd all love trusting you, but seeing as you post infrequently as all hell, and you literally never follow up on a thread, your promises are as good as Nothematic stated above me.

Ranked PvP needs improvements on multiple fronts and we are working diligently to address the issues. We aren’t ready to discuss the specifics but rest assured we are not satisfied with the Ranked PvP experience and are going to improve upon it. As soon as I am able to share details I will and y’all will be the first to know.

How nice of you to stop by, the solution is cross server and/or cross faction queues. Good-day.

Why in the hell should the bads be in Silver?

 

Your system would reward persistence, not victory, which entirely negates the point of ranked. Rewards are for winners.

 

on the one hand I do agree with you, however, it really is dependent on where you set the reward level at. Start at 0 and have to get to 2000, would encourage people to play, and continue playing, which, let's face it, is what BioWare should want. But let's face it, the current system, doesn't encourage people to play once they get their ranking. Once you get it, done and over, park the toon, walk away.

 

I also would agree with someone else on 1st page, there needs to be pre-requisites to enter. 2018 expertise, and I really like the valor idea. It ensures that people have played a lot of wz's. I would suggest, 60+ or higher valor ranking. 40 valor is just enough to be able to get ranked comms.

 

Again though, this kind of system, not only encourages play, but it encourages a continuous play, and would allow for player growth, and if you added in the pre-reqs it would help to keep out the trollers.

Well I guess we just have a difference concept of what ranked actually is, or should be. I don't think persistence should be rewarded in ranked, I think winning should. Just like the dailies and weekly. This would essentially turn 'getting gold' into a grind, not a thing that only "skilled" (ignoring Q-syncing and win trading for a minute) players can achieve. If they continue to suck, and don't learn, they'll get the rating they deserve, and be rewarded appropriately. Your system could turn "Tier 1 players" into whoever plays the most.

 

And if you think "no one has time for that" is a line to use in an MMO, you must be new to MMOs?

 

Anyway, we'd go back and forth on this forever. I'm all for changing the way ranked works, this just isn't what I'd like to see done, but whatever. To each his own.

 

While I kind of agree, i do disagree. winning should be rewarded, however, and esp in terms of a solo queue, you are really at the mercy of the game and how it matches you up. Thus while you might be the best player on the field in 10 straight matches, you could easily lose 10 straight matches due to bad random match-ups. And that is nothing against the good player, just solo queueing just has a massive, massive rng factor that can't be ignored.

on the one hand I do agree with you, however, it really is dependent on where you set the reward level at. Start at 0 and have to get to 2000, would encourage people to play, and continue playing, which, let's face it, is what BioWare should want. But let's face it, the current system, doesn't encourage people to play once they get their ranking. Once you get it, done and over, park the toon, walk away.

 

I also would agree with someone else on 1st page, there needs to be pre-requisites to enter. 2018 expertise, and I really like the valor idea. It ensures that people have played a lot of wz's. I would suggest, 60+ or higher valor ranking. 40 valor is just enough to be able to get ranked comms.

 

Again though, this kind of system, not only encourages play, but it encourages a continuous play, and would allow for player growth, and if you added in the pre-reqs it would help to keep out the trollers.

 

Starting at 0 by its very nature won't work, because the ELO is designed this way.

2018 expertise is a good idea, in addition, I think a slight decrease of ELO over time could be a good idea to keep people playing because a lot of people reach 1500 after the first ten games and stop playing afterwards!

if you added in the pre-reqs it would help to keep out the trollers.

This is important, it's too easy for griefers to play ranked, a valor and gear requirement would mitigate the troll plague. It should also be possible for people to get banned from ranked, or at least get locked-out for a period of time and have their rating reset if they are boosting.

Edited August 8, 2014 by LeglessChair

Starting at 0 by its very nature won't work, because the ELO is designed this way.

2018 expertise is a good idea, in addition, I think a slight decrease of ELO over time could be a good idea to keep people playing because a lot of people reach 1500 after the first ten games and stop playing afterwards!

 

well, I was dovetailing off of OP's idea of points, thus a 0 rating at the beginning makes sense. IMO, ELO is part of the problem, especially in solo ranked. You are too much at the mercy of the random queue for it to be completely effective. add that in the ELO system you can win your 1st 10 games, and you get your ranking, and you're done. but if you go 8/10 then you're gonna have to do about 20 more games to make up for it. And if it goes beyond that, then you start losing 30-50 pts a match and only gaining like 20 if you win. that's not an effective or a good system.

 

Scrap the whole thing. Go with something like OP suggested. And while I agree that wins need to matter, persistence should as well. Persistence means someone is playing, playing a lot and is dedicated. All the things that should matter to BioWare. And while there might be an anomaly or 5 at the end of the season, guaranteed at the end of the season, the majority of the best will be there at the end. Besides, the best still got there rewards, so what if a random not-so-good got the reward, because, in the end of it, the best did it in 100 games, and the no-so-good did it in 1000 games. That's dedication.

Edited August 8, 2014 by Anyakaschala

Ranked PvP needs improvements on multiple fronts and we are working diligently to address the issues. We aren’t ready to discuss the specifics but rest assured we are not satisfied with the Ranked PvP experience and are going to improve upon it. As soon as I am able to share details I will and y’all will be the first to know.

 

Yeah Alex, we've heard this line since 2012.

 

We surely hope EA delivers.

 

Ranked PvP needs improvements on multiple fronts and we are working diligently to address the issues. We aren’t ready to discuss the specifics but rest assured we are not satisfied with the Ranked PvP experience and are going to improve upon it. As soon as I am able to share details I will and y’all will be the first to know.

 

Lol this should be good. I'm definitely getting my hopes up for this.

Ranked PvP needs improvements on multiple fronts and we are working diligently to address the issues. We aren’t ready to discuss the specifics but rest assured we are not satisfied with the Ranked PvP experience and are going to improve upon it. As soon as I am able to share details I will and y’all will be the first to know.

One BIG improvement would be to implement a gametype that actually caters to a wide playerbase. Not sure what you were thinking when you picked LMS. It might come off as a somewhat of success in WoW but that's because they atleast used to have 10M players. How many % were actually playing it? Look at the shooters instead, LMS is undeniably the least popular gametype, most likely because people don't enjoy watching a respawn screen for what could be several minutes. And that's in games where they don't even have to be concerned about class balance. Throw class balance into the mix and you're instantly cutting the potential population in half because some classes will require much more and a lot of people arent interested in re-rolling. Yeah, you can call them casuals but the truth is that few games have a competitive player base big enough to stand on its own. You need ""the casuals" and the only way of bringing them in is to crate gametypes they are willing to play.

 

Also, people always say that "8vs8 failed". 8 vs 8 didnt have solo queue. Make that (or even better, duo-queue) happen and see what happens.

Edited August 9, 2014 by MidichIorian

Ranked PvP needs improvements on multiple fronts and we are working diligently to address the issues. We aren’t ready to discuss the specifics but rest assured we are not satisfied with the Ranked PvP experience and are going to improve upon it. As soon as I am able to share details I will and y’all will be the first to know.

 

Well, Hopefully you guys will take some of the ideas in this thread and have a better understanding of what pvpers want. There are many many things that can be improved upon, but I'm sure you guys know that.

One thing is for sure..... If you guys don't announce season 3 rewards at THE BEGINNING of the season and they are not AMAZING then ranked pvp will be gone and will never make it in this game.

 

Mark my words!....and I love this game.

Ranked PvP needs improvements on multiple fronts and we are working diligently to address the issues. We aren’t ready to discuss the specifics but rest assured we are not satisfied with the Ranked PvP experience and are going to improve upon it. As soon as I am able to share details I will and y’all will be the first to know.

 

Now if only you guys would pop in like this more often....Seriously, just for an example there is a thread discussing undying rage. No one expects anything crazy, but to see a developer pop into a discussion about a thread like that more often would be really nice. Especially since that thread is having a fairly good discussion right now outside of a few minor trolls in it.

Quote: Originally Posted by Andrellma View Post

 

Honestly, I'm not a PVPer. I dabble from time to time, but always in unranked...but I hope they make this right. Every single post I've seen on this has been negative, and I would hope that Bioware takes this opportunity to listen to the players, and add -something- that would make the PVP crowd happy. I know you can't please everyone every time, but seriously, when you offer rewards for the PVPers....it should be something that at least -some- of them want. Not a single person I've seen post on any of these threads, or talk about it in game, is happy with this.

 

You listened to the players on daracrons.

 

You listened to the players on legacy storage costs.

 

Listen to the players on this.