Jump to content

Let's Discuss Ranked PvP Ideas...


MikeBradley

Recommended Posts

  • Dev Post

Hey All,

 

First off, thank you all for your participation in the broader PvP thread talking about win trading. I appreciate all of the feedback that was given and hope that I was able to shed some light on the topic. The goal of this new thread is to specifically focus on gathering ideas for potential systemic changes to Ranked PvP systems.

 

To start, I’d like to share the high-level goals for any ideas gathered in this thread:

 

 


  •  
  • Change rating distribution to better encourage prolonged, honest play throughout the season
  • Reduce or eliminate mechanics that incentivize exploitative behavior
  • Make matchmaking feel more balanced

 

There have been a lot of specific ideas posted on the forums and discussed internally about how we could improve our current rating system, our matchmaking system, and to better deter exploitative behavior throughout. Please know that I have gathered (and continue to look for) as many of those ideas as I can find, and have been sharing them with the broader team in order to build some sense of how viable they each may be.

 

Before we dig too deep into any of these ideas, I need to clearly set expectations. These are early steps in an effort to build a broad consensus towards as many of these ideas as make sense to potentially pursue. Depending on what we discuss here, follow up conversations will need to be had with our dev team to figure out exactly how much time each of the ideas would take to implement. With that information we'd need to find them a place on our schedule. Fair warning, this is not necessarily a short process.

 

With all of that in mind, here are some of the specific ideas that we feel would best work towards the goals stated above:

 

 


  •  
  • Reduce both the rating gained from a win and removed from a loss
  • Adding minimum requirements for games played to achieve each rank
  • Adding a rating decay over time
  • Adjusting the matchmaking system to better prevent large class imbalances between teams

 

We understand that there are obvious sensitivities to changing the rules of the game in a season that is already underway. For that reason, and the logistical hurdles mentioned above, I cannot promise that any of these changes will go live in season 11. It is possible that some ideas may be easier to implement than we expect or that obtaining one may lessen the need for another, but I want to be as transparent as possible regarding timelines.

 

I realize that some of you may have previously put forth suggestions that are not captured in the list above. If anyone has a proposal that you feel is not covered by any of the above ideas, please share it in this thread (or link to where you have explained it elsewhere), and we can all discuss the pros and cons. I’m looking forward to digging in here. Thanks for making it through this mountain of text!

 

Until next time…

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 137
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

In regards to rating decay I hope you consider that with the small population of team ranked players this could actually be used to attack players by simply refusing to queue into them; queue dodging is already an issue and with rating decay it could become more of an issue (or, it could help address it).

 

I also think that rating decay should only count for top 3 titles, it should not affect your ability to obtain a tier (gold/silver/bronze) since many people enjoy playing multiple classes (the game has been punishing alt play way to much since 5.0 released).

 

In regards to adjusting point gained/lost I think you should concentrate on reducing points lost for a loss and consider not adjusting points earned for a win; currently it feels like you need to win 1.5-2 games to make up a loss, this needs to be re-tuned so that you can (generally) make up a loss with a win.

 

For solo ranked I would suggest significantly reducing points gained//lost for matches with support classes (healer/tank matches):

-These roles have such a huge impact on your ability to win or lose

-The discrepancy in skill is often-times mind blowing, which often leads to tank/healer roulette

-This prevents people from swapping to tank/healer to farm "bad" tanks/healers for easy rating

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Mike,

 

Thanks for posting this. Given BW's track record with promises in this game, I won't get excited until I see something more concrete from you guys. But it is good to see that the ranked system is finally being talked about.

 

My two creds are;

 


  •  
  • Reduce both the rating gained from a win and removed from a loss
     

 

 

Maybe look at just reducing rating losses. For example, +10 for a win, -8 for a loss. Make it so that you always gain more for winning than losing. As it stands right now, once you get over ~1500 rating you gain less for wins and lose a lot more for losses. Its very frustrating as you can win 8 games and lose 5 and still be at the same rating. This is further exacerbated by the poor matchmaking, which you have already acknowledged.

 


  •  
  • Adding minimum requirements for games played to achieve each rank
  • Adding a rating decay over time
  • Adjusting the matchmaking system to better prevent large class imbalances between teams

 

 

These are all good suggestions and I think if all were implemented correctly, the ranked ecosystem will be significantly improved. However, I can still see ways for people to game the system.

 

Perhaps the question you should be asking the dev team internally is what system will require the least amount of monitoring and policing. Wouldn't it be nice if you didn't have to spend precious few resources on sifting through all the win trading or throwing reports and then spending two weeks after every season making sure everything is legit and still not getting it right?

 

There are a number of systems that can be implemented that will free up a lot of time for you guys to do other stuff. A lot of these have already been proposed and I'm sure you will get reminded of them in the following comments.

 

Whatever "systemic change" you make needs to be as simple as possible with little to no room for "funny business".

Don't turn it into another convoluted system that no one likes (eg. current gearing system).

 

I look forward to hearing your more detailed proposals with regards to revamping the ranked system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm talking mostly from Solo Ranked perspective here, but some points apply for Team Ranked as well.

 


  • Change rating distribution to better encourage prolonged, honest play throughout the season
  • Reduce or eliminate mechanics that incentivize exploitative behavior

 

Three important things, that should and can be applied no matter how the "new rating system" looks like in the end are:

 

Remove the fact that your first 5/10/20/40 matches on a character per season are more important in terms of rating gain/loss than the matches after!

 

Fix Backfills! Right now if a healer or a tank declines the pop or leaves the match early, it's completely random what role gets the backfill, even though a player of that role is in queue.

 

Punish leaving matches (especially leaving before start) and declining pops (both actively and afking) legacy wide!

 

Another problem right now is that people going for top 3s are not incentivized to keep playing their high rated character and try "camping" their rating instead and hope it would hold till season end. How to fix that?

 

Make also Top 3s given for "highest earned", not current rating.

 

Problem here is that highest earned is not shown on the leaderboards. This could be added easily though. But even if not, players would still be incentivized to play their main characters to push for a higher "highest earned" when they don't know where the competition is.

BUT I can also see this being against player's consensus as the fact that current rating counts makes Top 3s somewhat special.

 

Don't hinder high rated players by not only making them wait longer for invites but also teaming them up with the lowest rated players by default to "compensate". This is the reason why season 10 ratings were so incredibly low compared to all seasons before!

 

This combined with my first point (the first 5/10/20/40 matches) made Top 3 positions for solo ranked in season 10 somewhat random and thus frustrating and even insulting. Well.. this kinda goes against

 


  • Make matchmaking feel more balanced

 

BUT here is a solution:

 

1. Make pots sorted by elo.

2. The 8 highest rated players in queue will get into the same match, the players 9-16 into the next one, ... as far as roles (T/D/H) allow it.

3. AND NOW: For every "pot" don't balance by elo, but by classes. Step 1: Range/Melee, Step 2: Offheal/Offguard capability, Step 3: Mirror respective classes. 2 Snipers, so put one into each team. 2 Maras, so put one into each team.

 

If this can't be implemented it should be completely random instead. Because the systems we had before either put all high elo players into one team to faceroll over the other (S1 - S9) or "balance" the teams out so the highest rated player would have a higher chance to have the 900 elo guy that gets globalled in his team (S10, S11). And both systems create situations that feel unfair. If it's completely random, everyone knows it's completely random.

 


  • Adding minimum requirements for games played to achieve each rank

 

YES! Get rid of the "10 games" thing. Show elo from the first game on. I'd suggest following minimum requirements:

- at least 30 games played for Bronze

- at least 50 games played for Silver

- at least 100 games played for Gold and Top 3

 

  • Adding a rating decay over time

 

I say NO to this. There need to be other incentives for keeping the solo ranked queue active in general (like CXP/components in S8, monumental crystals in S11) but also people playing their main characters. Rating decay is not a solution.

 

Thanks for reading this. I hope it helps. Also thanks for working on Ranked PvP!

 

Edit: More ideas:

 

Change the ranked weeklies again: Total points to achieve should be 30. Give 3 points per win, 1 point per loss.

 

The 50 points change effectively killed Team Ranked. For "farmers" 30 losses is still punishing enough while teams that lose more than they win would have more incentive to queue than they have right now.

 

Get rid of rating gain/loss determined by your elo compared to other people's elo in the respective match. Just have fix values like "10" for it.

Edited by Sertar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Losing should be less significant in solo ranked than in team ranked. Same with winning, really.

 

"Solo" ranking should be based almost entirely on how you perform regardless of your teammates. If you perform well in a loss, you should still be able to gain, just not as much as in a win.

 

Finally, rating gained per match needs to factor in the quality or performance of the opponent If you look at professional bull riding, you can have an easy ride on a weak bull and end up with a low score because the bull didn't present a challenge.

 

I'm not sure if any of my thoughts are feasible, but I feel if they could be implemented somehow, it would encourage more participation and discourage actual win-trading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just had a quick read over the thred and the early replies here.

 

Adjust the rating gain / loss: No, it's perfectly fine. The ratings in season 10 have been low because matchmaking actually worked. If there were 40 people in queue, the matchmaking tried to match the 8 highest rated players in one match, the 8 second-highest rated players in one, etc. and the lowest rated people in a match. About the suggestion to match highest and lowest rated player together, which compensate each other, is complete ********.

 

Have a look at yourself: Play 100 games in solo ranked on a class that you can play best, then do 100 games in solo ranked on a class that you can't really play / don't even know. The class you can't play will end up at low elo, the class you can play will end up at high elo. Accordingly to this statement, matchmaking works perfectly fine.

 

Of course there are those exceptions of people who are simply lucky and get 1650 elo after 20 matches, but also they will drop again after 100 more matches, just because their skill can't maintain the elo over the matches. Which could be addressed by reducing the elo gained / lost in the first 5 / 10 / 20 games. But not overall.

 

- Adding minimum requirements for games played to achieve each rank

Yes, please! And not only 10 games for gold. Make it 50 or 100. Or even more, since you gain a lot in the first 10 / 20 / etc matches, make it 150 maybe.

 

- Adding a rating decay over time

I'm not sure whether I like this, but wouldn't this favour people who play the season a few weeks before it ends compared to the ones playing it since day 1 of the season?

 

- Adjusting the matchmaking system to better prevent large class imbalances between teams

Don't overdo this, or people who can't play the game will end up at 2000 elo due to matchmaking.

 

- For solo ranked I would suggest significantly reducing points gained//lost for matches with support classes (healer/tank matches)

Have a look at the leaderboards. The high rated players in the healer classes (Mercenary, Sorcerer, Operative) aren't playing heals, mostly. They are queuing as damage dealer. I personally queued 3 sorcs and a sage to roughly 1550 elo each in this season so far, as lightning, not as healer. DD has a higher carry potential than support classes IMO, but also that is different for each matchup.

 

- Reduce both the rating gained from a win and removed from a loss

NOOOO please no. Read again what I wrote in the first 100 sentences in my reply here, just don't do this!

 

- Fix Backfills! Right now if a healer or a tank declines the pop or leaves the match early, it's completely random what role gets the backfill, even though a player of that role is in queue.

That's not true, if a role of the missing spot is in queue, it gets the pop, in most cases.

 

- Make also Top 3s given for "highest earned", not current rating.

No, that would simplify the effort people would have to take in order to achieve top3. They will just keep queuing, and they don't even have to care about winning at some point, if their highest rating counts for top3. You get lucky first 20 games with 1700 rating, but you're super bad at your class. Accordingly to your skill, you drop down to 1300 after 100 games. But you get top3 because you got lucky in the first 20 games? Really?

 

- Don't hinder high rated players by not only making them wait longer for invites but also teaming them up with the lowest rated players by default to "compensate". This is the reason why season 10 ratings were so incredibly low compared to all seasons before!

NO. Just. NOOOO. The reason for the "low ratings" in season 10 is because there were enough people in queue to make the matchmaking system work properly.

 

A few other suggestions:

- Make the weeklies easier again, as well for team ranked. Team ranked has died since the weeklies were changed (that's another discussion tho).

 

- Get rid of rating gain/loss determined by your elo compared to other people's elo in the respective match. Just have fix values like "10" for it.

No, I really like the way they already do it.

 

- "Solo" ranking should be based almost entirely on how you perform regardless of your teammates. If you perform well in a loss, you should still be able to gain, just not as much as in a win.

That's a not, it's ******** to gain elo if you loose. It's just wrong, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybs if rating gained was partly dependant on damage taken and damage or heals or protection dealt it would encourage legit playing.

 

 

You can't really fake damage taken and usually that tells most of the story if someone takes a lot but still managed to put out some dps or heals or protection.

Edited by RACATW
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My suggestion would be to completely revamp the rating system in solo ranked so players would only earn what they do, i.e. badges. Wins and losses could perhaps account for 20%-30% of the points gained or lost.

 

For example, if I was able to earn 14 medals for my stellar performance as a DPS, tank or heals, I would receive 7 rank points. If my team also won, I would get 2-3 additional points, for a total of ten.

 

If my team lost, I would get the 7 points, minus 2-3 for the loss, giving me a net gain of 4. In this way, skilled solo players will increase with games played depending on their performance as the key factor, not the other team. I believe this discourages win trading and thrown matches in solo ranked, since I wouldn't be rewarded as much as currently unless I actually played the match.

 

As for group ranked, I think it's important to motivate players that are in Discord speaking to each other to actually queue for group ranked instead of trying to queue sync solo ranked. I think group ranked should reward larger total gains (and losses) than presently, since team skill is a larger factor here. In other words, queuing grouped would offer a faster path to victory and high scores for teams, but would also carry more significant risk. Losses would be more punishing, but a win streak capable of great things for total score.

 

How to prevent abusing group ranked through win trading? By forcing players to register groups prior to the start of the season. Toon A signs up for group Belsavis Crushers, and must stick with this group all season. If Belsavis Crushers is shown to be win trading/hacking, all group members take the punishment together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My suggestion would be to completely revamp the rating system in solo ranked so players would only earn what they do, i.e. badges. Wins and losses could perhaps account for 20%-30% of the points gained or lost.

 

For example, if I was able to earn 14 medals for my stellar performance as a DPS, tank or heals, I would receive 7 rank points. If my team also won, I would get 2-3 additional points, for a total of ten.

 

If my team lost, I would get the 7 points, minus 2-3 for the loss, giving me a net gain of 4. In this way, skilled solo players will increase with games played depending on their performance as the key factor, not the other team. I believe this discourages win trading and thrown matches in solo ranked, since I wouldn't be rewarded as much as currently unless I actually played the match.

 

As for group ranked, I think it's important to motivate players that are in Discord speaking to each other to actually queue for group ranked instead of trying to queue sync solo ranked. I think group ranked should reward larger total gains (and losses) than presently, since team skill is a larger factor here. In other words, queuing grouped would offer a faster path to victory and high scores for teams, but would also carry more significant risk. Losses would be more punishing, but a win streak capable of great things for total score.

 

How to prevent abusing group ranked through win trading? By forcing players to register groups prior to the start of the season. Toon A signs up for group Belsavis Crushers, and must stick with this group all season. If Belsavis Crushers is shown to be win trading/hacking, all group members take the punishment together.

 

I dont like the medals idea because they're super easy to farm on say a jugg skank tank but not so easy on a mara.

 

I like the idea of it being earned on what you did in the match though. In my opinion rewarding people who take a lot of focus and still do what they're supposed to do (heals, tanking or dps) is better since it indicates both skill and legit effort. They didn't throw the match etc etc.

Edited by RACATW
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Abolishing the dysfunctional ELO-system would be a WELCOME change indeed.

 

I see 2 types of point systems, the simple and the complex and in neither system will you ever loss points.

 

The Simple

Every character starts each season with 0 points, and gains 2-3 point for winning and 0 for losing. Combining this with a minimum of matches played for bronze, silver and gold (and platinum?) and you have an easily implemented system, that will cause a lot less grief and toxicity than the current. The down side is that mediocre or even bad players could reach the number 1 spot by simply playing an excessive amount of matches, but even that is preferably to the current wintrading.

 

The Complex

A point system that rewards better players based on winning streaks by using an Accumulation Counter. All characters still starts at 0 points, and if you lose a match you still get 0 points. But the more matches you win in a row, the more points you are rewarded for each match. When you eventually lose a match, your streak counter is simply put back to 1, but you never lose the points you have gained so far. You could put a hard cap on the Accumulation Counter at 3 points.

 

Example 1 (good player):

Win: 1 point

Win: 2 points

Win: 3 points

Win: 3 points

Win: 3 points

Lost: 0 points

This player now have 12 points after 6 matches.

 

Example 2 (Mediocre player):

Win: 1 point

Win: 2 points

Lost: 0 points

Win: 1 point

Lost: 0 points

Win: 1 point

This player now have 5 points after 6 matches.

 

The player doesn't lose the points won, but the Accumulation Counter is back to 1 each time a player losses a match. This system would benefit better players, and it would be harder for mediocre / bad players to climb high based on numbers alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Abolishing the dysfunctional ELO-system would be a WELCOME change indeed.

 

I see 2 types of point systems, the simple and the complex and in neither system will you ever loss points.

 

The Simple

Every character starts each season with 0 points, and gains 2-3 point for winning and 0 for losing. Combining this with a minimum of matches played for bronze, silver and gold (and platinum?) and you have an easily implemented system, that will cause a lot less grief and toxicity than the current. The down side is that mediocre or even bad players could reach the number 1 spot by simply playing an excessive amount of matches, but even that is preferably to the current wintrading.

 

The Complex

A point system that rewards better players based on winning streaks by using an Accumulation Counter. All characters still starts at 0 points, and if you lose a match you still get 0 points. But the more matches you win in a row, the more points you are rewarded for each match. When you eventually lose a match, your streak counter is simply put back to 1, but you never lose the points you have gained so far. You could put a hard cap on the Accumulation Counter at 3 points.

 

Example 1 (good player):

Win: 1 point

Win: 2 points

Win: 3 points

Win: 3 points

Win: 3 points

Lost: 0 points

This player now have 12 points after 6 matches.

 

Example 2 (Mediocre player):

Win: 1 point

Win: 2 points

Lost: 0 points

Win: 1 point

Lost: 0 points

Win: 1 point

This player now have 5 points after 6 matches.

 

The player doesn't lose the points won, but the Accumulation Counter is back to 1 each time a player losses a match. This system would benefit better players, and it would be harder for mediocre / bad players to climb high based on numbers alone.

 

I really like your complex idea. You obviously spent some time thinking it through :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Mike,

 

first of all thank you for this opportunity and for your work on this!

 

Now, I like all of your points:


  • Change rating distribution to better encourage prolonged, honest play throughout the season
  • Reduce both the rating gained from a win and removed from a loss
  • Adding a rating decay over time

 

The key thing here is the first matches, like it was already mentioned here, give a TON of rating compared to the matches played after 20th match. This is the key exploit the people use to get high on the leaderboards. You need to deal with this. If you frame the first matches you can end up with 1750 rating in 10 matches, then the next 10 matches still give you 20+ rating. So one wintraded evening gives you extreme rating.

 

After 20th match you start getting +10 for win but also -13/-15 for loss. This is punishing players due to unstable que, matchmaking and class balance. So yes, it has to be less punishing if you que with 1700 rating, you cant be losing -15 or more elo just because you got 1 VG in your group and are against a all rdps team.

 

The rating decay is a great idea, but you do have to be careful here. Still the scheme for a long time was that a person got high rating and then stopped playing. On the other hand you have the so called "last minute top 3" so yes there has to be a change that will ensure a steady play of ranked over the whole season and hinder the exploitable methods by which you quickly gain high rating.

 

A thing also is the rating gain based on how many players you face. Even if you have 2000 rating and you rig a match where the 3 people on your team decline que and you win 1v4 (where the 4 enemies dont fight you ofc) you still gain 20+ rating. This also needs to be fixed cause it again helps people gain rating fast with little matches. On the otherhand you have to consider matches where 1 or more people leave, out of whatever reasons, and the reduced team faces an obvious loss. In such a case their rating loss should be minimal due to things being "out of their hand".

 

 


  • Reduce or eliminate mechanics that incentivize exploitative behavior

 

Yes, I just mentioned one such mechanic above. One more which I would like to see is time brackets for when people can que ranked. Sure, this might be a bit too much, but I like this system in World of Tanks. There are times when you simply cant que ranked cause at those times people just dont play in that time zone and it leaves room for "exploitative behavior".

 

This point is pretty broad. What Devs need to consider is that there is a group of people framing matches in their favor. These people sometimes even stream to show they play legit and make fun of the wintrading. All this just to rid themselves of suspision. Its no rocket science to play at 50% of your performance in a match where you are against you friend and play at 120% when you are on same team. This is very hard to prove, but it sadly happens.

 

Things like acid wins, leaving the map have been successfully fixed it seems and I have to give Bioware credit for that (remind me to buy a few more CC). There are no hacks in ranked so this seems to be pretty much fixed. Bots are used only rarely and only to leave que in case of healer or tank so that is something to address. You could have some tool to monitor a frequent que decline by a specific toon. Its too easy to wintrade a tank or healer at later times when no other is in que for example.

 


  • Make matchmaking feel more balanced
  • Adding minimum requirements for games played to achieve each rank
  • Adjusting the matchmaking system to better prevent large class imbalances between teams

 

I can imagine this will be a difficult thing to do as there are not so many people in que. On DM you can literraly sabotage the que if the "PVP community" does not que. This also involves other parts of the game like Class and Spec balance. As you know for 2 seasons now we have this "rdps vs mdps" class stacking. Even yesterday I had a match with this setup. You can be top 3, top 2, top 1 you wont win against such a system. Players tend to play the classes that give them wins and that forces them away from classes they like to play. When you see all mercs in que you stop to que yourself for example as its nonsence.

 

There is also the fact with the requirements to que ranked. There is no gear requirement, just valor 25, which is fairly easy to get. A typical strategy for a "bots player" was to boost toons using Team Ranked, as TR has no Valor requirement. Then after you gain Valor 25 with TR and boosted like 2-3 toons you go over to SR. Its just too simple. You need to increase the Valor needed for SR and also add another criteria, like that internal PVP rank you said is hidden, or at least give some minimal gear requirement cause people que in 230 rating which serves their "cover" as that they are noobs, but in reality they are throwing friends. When they get on team with their friend they swap gear for 258 and win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would prefer a grind-friendly way of earning rating, rolling back to the previous matchmaking (before s10) would be the best option.

 

The down side is that mediocre or even bad players could reach the number 1 spot by simply playing an excessive amount of matches, but even that is preferably to the current wintrading.

 

I would really like to avoid a method which gains you rating just by playing a LOT of matches, this would be exploitable too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would really like to avoid a method which gains you rating just by playing a LOT of matches, this would be exploitable too.

 

The ELO-system had its chance, and it is clearly not working.

 

Functional ELO requires:

 

 

  • Mirror classes and specs and not just DPS vs. DPS e.g. 3 mercs vs. 2 sorcs and 1 oper
  • All 8 players are within a very small rating margin (10 - 20 points)
  • Games don't start when imbalanced e.g. if one side have a tank and the other does not
  • Glitches and bugs are nearly non-existing
  • Cheaters, trolls etc. are dealt with in-game, which means mods and game admins
  • Gear has no influence, only skill

 

Ranked in SWTOR will never be remotely close to any type of competitive esport. It is a pvp sideshow, and the only focus should be to make it fun and less toxic. I strongly believe that a more "grindy" point system would remove a great deal of toxicity, as players wouldn't rage quite as much when they lose. Yes it can still be exploited, but so will any system they come up with.

Edited by Lundorff
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Change rating distribution to better encourage prolonged, honest play throughout the season
  • Make matchmaking feel more balanced

 

Dear Mike,

 

people already provide good feedback so ill leave it at that, but just do not forget one thing: rewards for daily/weekly. This was a source of issues in the past. On one side you can fix matchmaking, class balance, etc but keep in mind that if you overdo it with the rewards for ranked PVP like crafting mats, Unassembled components etc people will que for ranked messing up all that you have worked for.

 

So if you manage to pull all these changes and ranked becomes good again, please also focus on this aspect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Mike,

 

people already provide good feedback so ill leave it at that, but just do not forget one thing: rewards for daily/weekly. This was a source of issues in the past. On one side you can fix matchmaking, class balance, etc but keep in mind that if you overdo it with the rewards for ranked PVP like crafting mats, Unassembled components etc people will que for ranked messing up all that you have worked for.

 

So if you manage to pull all these changes and ranked becomes good again, please also focus on this aspect.

 

Well, my opinion and experience only, but I think rewards being the straw that gets people to queue is not necessarily a bad thing. I think it's a bad thing if the rewards are there, and **ALSO** it's easy to get them even if you lose a lot. I'm only going by the bit of ranked play I've done so far (after about 100 games this season), but in solo right now it seems to me that almost everyone there is trying. We might not be all be good at it, but I've seen very little afk'ing type behavior (not zero, but close).

 

I attribute that to the fact that you'd have to sit through 5 times as many matches to finish the weekly if you just lose lose lose lose. Which is why I also don't favor a previous suggestion to change the win/loss point count to 3/1 (and the weekly to 30). Well, for team ranked I guess I don't have that strong of an opinion. If I were in team ranked I'm not sure I would want to gain elo because the other team was mat farmers that just stood there, but that's just me. (And I can see the point that team ranked is not popping at all right now, so, yeah, there's that.) But for sure in solo ranked, even though I'm not great at it, I don't want people on either team who are there just to lose-their-way-through-the-weekly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, my opinion and experience only, but I think rewards being the straw that gets people to queue is not necessarily a bad thing. I think it's a bad thing if the rewards are there, and **ALSO** it's easy to get them even if you lose a lot. I'm only going by the bit of ranked play I've done so far (after about 100 games this season), but in solo right now it seems to me that almost everyone there is trying. We might not be all be good at it, but I've seen very little afk'ing type behavior (not zero, but close).

 

The problem in the past was that people just came for the rewards and really didnt care about anything else. When they annouced rewards people would que for ranked just to earn PVP coms cause for example the Black Crystals were for like 3000 PVP coms. These people didnt want to really take part in ranked, just came for rewards. The same was with Team Ranked and mats, people qued just to lose and get mats.

 

This kind of play is not fun. Its not fun if I am in a group where 1 person doesnt participate cause he came for rewards. This isnt cheating but it is messing with the experience of others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey All,

 

First off, thank you all for your participation in the broader PvP thread talking about win trading. I appreciate all of the feedback that was given and hope that I was able to shed some light on the topic. The goal of this new thread is to specifically focus on gathering ideas for potential systemic changes to Ranked PvP systems.

 

To start, I’d like to share the high-level goals for any ideas gathered in this thread:

 

 


  •  
  • Change rating distribution to better encourage prolonged, honest play throughout the season
  • Reduce or eliminate mechanics that incentivize exploitative behavior
  • Make matchmaking feel more balanced

 

There have been a lot of specific ideas posted on the forums and discussed internally about how we could improve our current rating system, our matchmaking system, and to better deter exploitative behavior throughout. Please know that I have gathered (and continue to look for) as many of those ideas as I can find, and have been sharing them with the broader team in order to build some sense of how viable they each may be.

 

Before we dig too deep into any of these ideas, I need to clearly set expectations. These are early steps in an effort to build a broad consensus towards as many of these ideas as make sense to potentially pursue. Depending on what we discuss here, follow up conversations will need to be had with our dev team to figure out exactly how much time each of the ideas would take to implement. With that information we'd need to find them a place on our schedule. Fair warning, this is not necessarily a short process.

 

With all of that in mind, here are some of the specific ideas that we feel would best work towards the goals stated above:

 

 


  •  
  • Reduce both the rating gained from a win and removed from a loss
  • Adding minimum requirements for games played to achieve each rank
  • Adding a rating decay over time
  • Adjusting the matchmaking system to better prevent large class imbalances between teams

 

We understand that there are obvious sensitivities to changing the rules of the game in a season that is already underway. For that reason, and the logistical hurdles mentioned above, I cannot promise that any of these changes will go live in season 11. It is possible that some ideas may be easier to implement than we expect or that obtaining one may lessen the need for another, but I want to be as transparent as possible regarding timelines.

 

I realize that some of you may have previously put forth suggestions that are not captured in the list above. If anyone has a proposal that you feel is not covered by any of the above ideas, please share it in this thread (or link to where you have explained it elsewhere), and we can all discuss the pros and cons. I’m looking forward to digging in here. Thanks for making it through this mountain of text!

 

Until next time…

 

 

Dont make a system basing on quantity of wins without any losses for loosing. It will kill competition and will change ranked from skill based activity to grind, time consuming mindless slaughter. I should remind that ranked pvp is all about QUALITY of playing not quantity. Those who has more time to grind and mindless queue must never receive better rewards than those who has SKILL. I wont participate in a ranked system where gold or top 96 can be gained just for non-stop queuing and grinding.

 

ALL you need to do is to advance current system stop punishing highrated players with giving them worst and the lowest rated team mates. Rating must not be the criteria of what team player will get and remove class stacking. If two mercs are in queue they MUST BE PUT IN DIFFERENT TEAMS against each other but NOT AGAINST TWO MARAUDERS.

 

It is not that hard is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Reduce both the rating gained from a win and removed from a loss

Adding minimum requirements for games played to achieve each rank

Adding a rating decay over time"

 

Uh, what?

 

Genuinely, you people have some of the *******st ideas going. Ranked already sucks big time because of how ****ed up the rating system is, for solo, at least. Now you want to make life harder by adding game # requirements and a nonsensical decay to try and force me to play more than I need to so you don't take away what I've already earned? Are you trying to drive people away?

 

Seriously how can your ideas be so bad? Ranked is nightmarish enough as it is, stop trying to make it even worse :mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont like the medals idea because they're super easy to farm on say a jugg skank tank but not so easy on a mara.

 

I like the idea of it being earned on what you did in the match though. In my opinion rewarding people who take a lot of focus and still do what they're supposed to do (heals, tanking or dps) is better since it indicates both skill and legit effort. They didn't throw the match etc etc.

 

I can see where you're coming from. After all, certain classes are more likely to be targeted first, thus reducing the total damage/healing they can do (and medals they can earn).

 

That really comes down to two things that the devs would need to look at:

 

1. The design of the medals or personal scoring system

 

Adding "Focus target" medals/points (for damage taken from multiple sources simultaneously).

 

2. Class design

 

The fact that certain classes have terrible DCDs isn't really an argument against implementing this system. It just means that the devs need to throw PTs a bone when it comes to DCDs, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Reduce both the rating gained from a win and removed from a loss

Adding minimum requirements for games played to achieve each rank

Adding a rating decay over time"

 

Uh, what?

 

Genuinely, you people have some of the *******st ideas going. Ranked already sucks big time because of how ****ed up the rating system is, for solo, at least. Now you want to make life harder by adding game # requirements and a nonsensical decay to try and force me to play more than I need to so you don't take away what I've already earned? Are you trying to drive people away?

 

Seriously how can your ideas be so bad? Ranked is nightmarish enough as it is, stop trying to make it even worse :mad:

 

Rating decay over time and focusing on quantity of the games are horrible ideas which will make ranked dead and not worth any time. As a skilled player i can reach gold tier in few days (weeks if talking about classes i play worse than main classes). Why should i sit all season in this badly surveyed, toxic, dsynced ranked system if i can get the needed tier fast and clearly? Why should loosers who cant get enough skill to reach gold tier get it only because they sit all dwy in their basement without any job and queueing non-stop 24/7. Of course such loosers will get gold tier sooner or later thanks to carry by real ranked players.

Edited by omaan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont make a system basing on quantity of wins without any losses for loosing. It will kill competition and will change ranked from skill based activity to grind, time consuming mindless slaughter. I should remind that ranked pvp is all about QUALITY of playing not quantity. Those who has more time to grind and mindless queue must never receive better rewards than those who has SKILL. I wont participate in a ranked system where gold or top 96 can be gained just for non-stop queuing and grinding.

 

ALL you need to do is to advance current system stop punishing highrated players with giving them worst and the lowest rated team mates. Rating must not be the criteria of what team player will get and remove class stacking. If two mercs are in queue they MUST BE PUT IN DIFFERENT TEAMS against each other but NOT AGAINST TWO MARAUDERS.

 

It is not that hard is it?

 

You're talking about skill in a system that is completely about RNG at the moment.

 

You want 100% skill, group ranked is the way to go. How can solo ranked, where you're put with 3 other totally random people, possibly be about skill? Unless you can 1 v. 4 your way to victory, of course.

 

In solo ranked, the devs need to focus on rewarding players individually, with less focus on ALL points related to the win/loss of the match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rating decay over time and focusing on quantity of the games are horrible ideas which will make ranked dead and not worth any time. As a skilled player i can reach gold tier in few days (weeks if talking about classes i play worse than main classes). Why should i sit all season in this badly surveyed, toxic, dsynced ranked system if i can get the needed tier fast and clearly? Why should loosers who cant get enough skill to reach gold tier get it only because they sit all dwy in their basement without any job and queueing non-stop 24/7. Of course such loosers will get gold tier sooner or later thanks to carry by real ranked players.

 

So you're OK with getting max score in under 20 games played, and you think that this person should receive the same rewards as someone who has boosted queues and actually participated all season long in 200+ games? OK.

 

TBH, I disagree with the rating decay, because if you're comfortable with your score, you shouldn't be artificially forced to keep risking it just because you choose to play a different character for a while.

 

But I do support setting minimum games played (a reasonable amount) and removing the wonky idea that your first 20 games should somehow be more important than the rest, lol. That and the idea that losses should punish higher rating players harder is just weird.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ALL you need to do is to advance current system stop punishing highrated players with giving them worst and the lowest rated team mates. Rating must not be the criteria of what team player will get and remove class stacking. If two mercs are in queue they MUST BE PUT IN DIFFERENT TEAMS against each other but NOT AGAINST TWO MARAUDERS.

 

It is not that hard is it?

 

Wait... you just wrote two different and possibly/probably conflicting requirements in one paragraph, and then said "it's not that hard". I can put "it's not that hard" after anything. If there are two mercs that are high rated in the match, and two maras that are low rated... exactly how are they supposed to split that up so that the high rated mercs don't get "punished" with low rated maras, and yet at the same time make sure that both mercs don't end up against both maras?

 

Or are you saying they should not pop a match at all in a case where the ratings are so different, even if they have 8 in queue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, the matchmaking is a problem.

 

If I am a bronze level player, I shouldn't be going against high tiered players until I've "earned" that right through my own performance and ranking increase. If I'm in a match with someone in gold tier, or multiple gold tier people, that just brings the quality of the match down and hurts my team. Granted, could I play well enough? Sure. Could I improve with matches against better players? Absolutely. So the argument can be made that yes me going against better players is a benefit to me no matter if I win or I lose that match. It doesn't seem completely fair though to the higher level people.

 

All in all, if that means that multiple bronze level matches are going on then that's what I'd advocate for. If it means that the higher tier players have to wait a bit I think that actually becomes better for the health of the community. Everyone gets better games overall.

 

Maybe..and this is just a terrible idea at the sound of it but could be said anyway just for discussion purposes, is to say there's time restrictions to it. Maybe, in a completely arbitrary sense here, 7-8pm it's recommended for bronze to que, 8-9 silver, 9-10 gold and above. It semi segregates the player base. But, at the end of the day do gold players want to really be in matches with bronze? I know it's a crap idea, but I'm looking for ways to get more even matches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...