Jump to content

Let's Discuss Ranked PvP Ideas...


MikeBradley

Recommended Posts

Why is it impossible? It comes down to the algorithm used. There are plenty of matches where players have similar ELO, but the matchmaking still stacks classes on one side instead of spreading them around.

 

I don’t think it’s impossible with the current player base. The algorithm just needs to be changed so it takes both into consideration when forming teams.

 

I tried to prove you wrong, but now I mostly agree with you.

 

Example.

 

Assuming I understand how ELO is matching players to begin with, then it only needs a little tweak to balance the teams based on Melee Vs. Range. It does have potential for uneven teams due to ELO, but I suppose it would be possible and a better option than what we currently have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 137
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Two minor quality of life changes that Bioware could make right now and would have little effect on those legitimately trying to climb ladder:

 

1) Apply a "Deserter" debuff for quitting matches. Cannot re-queue until player has completeled X number of games in another form of PvP: think regs or GSF. Restricting the player so ruining other peoples' play time happens less frequently.

 

2) Apply a lockout timer to Ranked/Granked after server transfers for X amount of time. Exactly the way Cartel Market items are restricted from being sold until the timer expires.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To fix backfills- Instead of being able to accept a match immediately, make it so that ALL 8 players need to accept the match so that it can start. If a healer/tank/dps backs out of a match, the match never starts. But whoever declines needs to lose points for declining the match. If a player leaves mid match, the team that had the leaver Loses 0 points for losing the match, and the leaver loses 25 points for leaving. It is not fair that 3 people lose rating because one dude leaves and makes it unfair. Would be nice to have a legacy ban of 2 hours to que ranked for that leaver. (this would directly effect those wintraders maybe?)

 

To stop bads from queing- Remove monumental crystals/ mats from weekly. There are so many people who que and would rather lose 50 games than do the VM queen to get their crystal and it hurts the teams they que with throughout the week. The only players that would be in que are the ones who actually care about rating. OR make it so that wins still give 5 points, but losses give you 0 points. So you can't just lose 50 games and get your crystal, you actually have to try to win. This is actually one of the main reasons I started a YT channel. To teach. I wanna see good players all around and if I can help I will.

 

Minimum requirement to play ranked- I don't really know if this is the answer but there are so many people who either, cant DPS/ Get globalled/ have 0 idea how to play the class/very undergeared, the list goes on and on. I would like to see at least a 248 gear rating requirement. Gear doesn't mean skill and bolster helps allot, but at least 248 fully augmented shows they care about that character. I cant tell you how many times I've seen low rating with blue/green level gear and no augments on my team. It gets frustrating. OR remove bolster from ranked completely, I think people who are competitive should be competing with the gear they have unbolstered. It makes people care and will actually put time into the character and hopefully know how to play it.

 

Rating decay- please do not do this. This is specifically for me. I'm in the military and soon I will not be able to play as often as I would like. So right now, I'm trying to play as much ranked and grind as much as I can before I leave. If the rating decays, all my hard work will be lost and I will be pretty disappointed.

 

Leaderboards and top 3- Leaderboard should show highest earned. Top 3 however should be current. Also, a minimum number of games played for top three should be at least 100. People get lucky and play 20 games and get 1600 ELO, nothing against those players, congratulations. But to earn top 3 I believe you should show that you really earned it by playing more games and proving that you can hold that rating on the top spots.

 

Thank you for your time. - Ragequitting

Youtube- Ragequitting Gaming

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to see a new ranked que.

Solo 1v1's class vs same class.

also Solo 1v1's Any class no restrictions.

Just some random thoughts. Anyone else like this?

 

As much as I like the idea it would never work in terms of wintrading, that would be totaly abused by the wintraders. I would like to see more formats, like 2v2 etc but with the current system it would not be viable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to see a new ranked que.

Solo 1v1's class vs same class.

also Solo 1v1's Any class no restrictions.

Just some random thoughts. Anyone else like this?

 

I have asked about this before and it's not going to happen. Would be neat but alas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes they were 5. A ranked match.

Thanks for bringing this up! Yes @Mike, it happens sometimes that Solo Ranked matches are 5v4. I don't see it very often, I'd guess 1 in 200 matches or even less, but the fact that it can happen means there is a fatal error in the system somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for bringing this up! Yes @Mike, it happens sometimes that Solo Ranked matches are 5v4. I don't see it very often, I'd guess 1 in 200 matches or even less, but the fact that it can happen means there is a fatal error in the system somewhere.

 

Ie, an exploit that makes the system think there are only 3 and it loads the 5th person in.

I’ve seen it happen and I’ve seen people giggle that they know how to make it happen on purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it's been said before in this thread, but I'm going to say it again...

 

Out of 7 matches so far today, 1 was them with a tank/healer/2DPS, us with 3 DPS. Another was them with 4 DPS and us with 2 DPS. This was from the start, and no one loaded in to our side and then left.

 

I'm playing ranked for competitive matches. These are not competitive matches and never should have even started. I'm not overly concerned about my ELO, but on behalf of the other people on my team who probably were, let me say it again... THOSE TWO MATCHES SHOULD NEVER HAVE STARTED. Match making is bad enough without having people completely missing from one side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it's been said before in this thread, but I'm going to say it again...

 

Out of 7 matches so far today, 1 was them with a tank/healer/2DPS, us with 3 DPS. Another was them with 4 DPS and us with 2 DPS. This was from the start, and no one loaded in to our side and then left.

 

I'm playing ranked for competitive matches. These are not competitive matches and never should have even started. I'm not overly concerned about my ELO, but on behalf of the other people on my team who probably were, let me say it again... THOSE TWO MATCHES SHOULD NEVER HAVE STARTED. Match making is bad enough without having people completely missing from one side.

 

You're definitely right. I think the uneven roles is a bigger problem, because at least in the case of the 4v2 (i was in that match on the 4 side), I know I got only 6 elo for the win, and I assume you lost a similar amount. But when it's 4 dps vs 3 dps 1 heal, the elo gain/loss is the same as if it was mirrored roles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it's been said before in this thread, but I'm going to say it again...

 

Out of 7 matches so far today, 1 was them with a tank/healer/2DPS, us with 3 DPS. Another was them with 4 DPS and us with 2 DPS. This was from the start, and no one loaded in to our side and then left.

 

I'm playing ranked for competitive matches. These are not competitive matches and never should have even started. I'm not overly concerned about my ELO, but on behalf of the other people on my team who probably were, let me say it again... THOSE TWO MATCHES SHOULD NEVER HAVE STARTED. Match making is bad enough without having people completely missing from one side.

 

That constantly happens in lowbies too.

 

When there are only 7 people in the queue, it constantly pops 4v3 matches instead of just limiting them to 3v3.

 

It should never pop more than 3v3 when it can see there are only 7 people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Remove class stacking in solo ranked

2. Make so that high elo players (1650+) aren't punished by being put into teams with 800-1000 rated newbies against 1300-1500 rated players

3.Return back old quests/mats for team ranked

4. Make so that if one team in solo ranked fight has no healer/tank and the other one has one - the team without healer or tank DOESNT LOOSE ANY ELO

 

= Ranked is mostly fixed.

 

Easy.

Edited by omaan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, I play 1 night per week and the entire evening I get 225-230 gear people on my team. They say gear is not needed you have bolster. They do 30k dmg and die. If I tell them they need gear they say if I dont like it I shouldnt que. So please, who is at fault here?

 

You need to do something against this

Edited by merovejec
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, I play 1 night per week and the entire evening I get 225-230 gear people on my team. They say gear is not needed you have bolster. They do 30k dmg and die. If I tell them they need gear they say if I dont like it I shouldnt que. So please, who is at fault here?

 

You need to do something against this

 

Yeah, it’s an easy fix. Make gearing faster for pvpers and not locked behind pve grind. The fault for this whole situation is Bioware’s, not the players.

 

In the mean time, the best you can do if you hate pve grind is min/max bolstered gear + 228 Augments and use a 258 main hand weapon.

Edited by TrixxieTriss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, I play 1 night per week and the entire evening I get 225-230 gear people on my team. They say gear is not needed you have bolster. They do 30k dmg and die. If I tell them they need gear they say if I dont like it I shouldnt que. So please, who is at fault here?

 

You need to do something against this

 

Their lack of good gear is not why they're doing 30k dmg and dying. If they had full 258 gear, they would do 40k dmg and die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, I play 1 night per week and the entire evening I get 225-230 gear people on my team. They say gear is not needed you have bolster. They do 30k dmg and die. If I tell them they need gear they say if I dont like it I shouldnt que. So please, who is at fault here?

 

You need to do something against this

 

Or you could make your own team, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some other Idea:

Introduce rewards for people who actively contribute to fairplay and legit gaming, e.g. with ELO gain, ranked tokens, cartel coins or whatever for each reported (with proof!) cheater, exploiter, trader, thrower etc.,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was talking about SR. As for TR.....I dont have any friends :(

 

Ideally, I think it's important to ENCOURAGE a lot of people to play ranked. That seems to be the opposite of what many (not all, ran across a very helpful operative the other day) "elite" players want to foment.

 

Why?

 

Well, with a larger amount of people in queue, player ratings would be able to do their stuff.

 

Ideally, again, there should end up being tiers. All newbs should end up getting queued together. Same for alright players and awesome players. That way you wouldn't have to complain about being stuck with "bads."

 

Also, and this isn't a dig at you personally by any means, I've noticed "elite" players get up in arms when someone on their team sucks, but they sure don't have any problems tunneling the same player on the opposite team. Would they prefer to fight someone of their own caliber in those matches? Nope, lets melt the newb, lol.

 

P.S. Was funny, ran into a guy earlier that was yelling at us because we sucked, and he might as well give up, yada, yada. I asked why and he said it was because none of us had gear or augments. So we said, "bolster." And he was swearing up and down how OP he was and that obviously bolster didn't work if you didn't have augments. Then he asked the other team to correct us, and they were like, "dude, you're wrong." Then he left the match. Classic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, with a larger amount of people in queue, player ratings would be able to do their stuff.

 

This is something I enjoyed on SF during Season 9. When I qued there it was only good players in que. The matches were really really good and it was a great time.

 

My issue later was the time ofc, I was only able to que before prime time (1 am my time) and then to the end of prime time (6 am my time). Later on the que died so I had to go back to DM, where it is as it is. Nevertheless I did experience a good ranked environment and it was fun! I just dont understand how the Devs can provide us something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is something I enjoyed on SF during Season 9. When I qued there it was only good players in que. The matches were really really good and it was a great time.

 

My issue later was the time ofc, I was only able to que before prime time (1 am my time) and then to the end of prime time (6 am my time). Later on the que died so I had to go back to DM, where it is as it is. Nevertheless I did experience a good ranked environment and it was fun! I just dont understand how the Devs can provide us something like that.

 

One possibility I can think of would be to enforce the ratings more stringently, and to form smaller groups if needed.

 

There would be three tiers (just for purpose of argument)

 

500-1000

1000-1400

1400-1800

 

If someone falls into the first tier, they would only ever be matched with players their tier.

Same for second and third groups. If there were only 4 players in queue for a minimum of time (7-10 mins), then they would be matched as 2v2, 3v3, etc. (never 1v1 however).

 

There would also be a check box (allow placement into mixed tier groups) that would allow players to decide whether to risk being put with lower caliber players or not.

 

The advantages of this system are the ability for "elite" players to play amongst themselves, a less toxic ranked community, which would hopefully increase PVP population and/or financial viability of ranked PVP.

 

Disadvantages I can see are reduced queue pops at higher tiers (should be addressed by allowing smaller groups) and an easier time for win traders to manipulate their score (again, due to smaller groups).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello everyone, I was hoping to contribute to the discussion with my latest PVP guide, about the situation after 5.10.1

 

It a 30 min video (1st 15mins its me explaining gear changes, quests and how it affects the community - 2nd part is other utubers and the situation in other games and how it came to be)

I know its very long and don't expect anyone to watch all of it especially here,

however, I wanted to point out a major problem of the current situation

 

'NO AGE information between interactions'

conversations can get heated up very quickly and sometimes you have no idea of the level of maturity/age of the other person.

While there are inherent dangers to 'tagging' minor accounts or limiting conversation interaction, which would be against privacy (as traceable by the community) I feel an answer lies also in this direction.

As a means to prevent an alternative similar to blizzards Heartsone where communication is removed alltogether.

 

ciao

Link to comment
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...