We are taking feedback from Season 1 into consideration on where we divide the tiers and still working out where the tiers will be. We don't have an announcement on this yet but will make one after Season 2 starts.

Please don't tell us the ratings. This will make players try to reach it and stop playing it immediatly once they reach it.

IF you're going to tell us something tell us the %s, not the actual rating.

Please.

::EDIT::

We are taking this into consideration. Not saying yes, not saying no, just saying you have been heard and we are discussing it. Cheers!

Just saw this.

You're discussing whether you want people to play or not to play? Hmmm.

I stop queuing for that character and then do ranked on another character. What you say is true for those with only one character they do competitive PvP with, but that's becoming a minority these days.

 

I toon swap once I'm geared so why wouldn't I with rating?

I play ranked on all the classes and personally appreciated being able to get 1500 on one toon and then move on to the next, but my suggestion would be better for the game as a whole.

We are taking this into consideration. Not saying yes, not saying no, just saying you have been heard and we are discussing it. Cheers!

Consider it stronkly plox.

Alex, please do not release the literal ratings required to be placed in each tier. Only release the required percentiles (i.e. top 1%, 5%, and 15%), so people don't stop queuing once they hit a certain rating, and will have reason to go to the leaderboards to check their relative progress.

I think this change would be counter-productive. You basically want to hold on to players who really arent all that interested in Arena as a gametype but play it anyway for the sake of the rewards. First, are those the type of players you like to play with? Second, you don't think it's possible, plausible even, that this group of players wont queue at all when they're being forced to constantly keep track of how they're currently placed, (again) in a game niche they dont have any real interest in? There comes a point when the rewards arent worth the time and effort anymore.

Also, a change like this would allow cheaters, queue syncers and late night guild arrangements to be specific, to affect other peoples ratings. In the season 1 system they've only been able to cheat the system and themselves by getting rewards they werent entitled too. With tiers based on % they'll ultimately bump down a few people a tier. Fair?

If you want to increase population you'll have to cater to those who don't play because they think they're not good enough to reach a high rating anyway. This could be done by adding a bonus through games played. So let's say that you played 400 games but only reached a highest rating of 1370, those 400 games would result in a 1.X coefficient that possibly could bump you above 1500. Would be really helpful for the few who still hang in there on the weaker faction on really lopsided servers too. And yes, I'm aware that this could result in AFK'ing but it's significally easier to track that than what some guilds are doing in the middle of the night when no one els is on. People will report AFK'ing but they can't report something they're not aware of.

Edit: No idea why I initially used "contra". I'm going to blame the time here when I posted it.

I think this change would be contra-productive. You basically want to hold on to players who really arent all that interested in Arena as a gametype but play it anyway for the sake of the rewards. First, are those the type of players you like to play with? Second, you don't think it's possible, plausible even, that this group of players wont queue at all when they're being forced to constantly keep track of how they're currently placed, (again) in a game niche they dont have any real interest in? There comes a point when the rewards arent worth the time and effort anymore.

*Counter-productive*. The same could be said of anything that provides rewards, like the upcoming ranked quests. Pointing this out is silly. What matters is that the ranked population is low and needs all the help it can get. As for your second point here, I would think making leaderboard tracking more relevant would make things more exciting and engaging for players. The people who are prone to play until they hit the required elo and then be done (the people that the system I'm suggesting would address) are probably more numerous than the people that would be fine with queuing if there's a specific elo target, but for some weird reason would get too frustrated to play if they have to keep track of the leaderboards periodically (what you're saying might happen). I would prefer everyone to just Q up for the sake of competition and pride. But unfortunately, in order for the population to remain somewhat adequate, other incentives are required.

Also, a change like this would allow cheaters, queue syncers and late night guild arrangements to be specific, to affect other peoples ratings. In the season 1 system they've only been able to cheat the system and themselves by getting rewards they werent entitled too. With tiers based on % they'll ultimately bump down a few people a tier. Fair?

This is your only actual point. I suppose our suggested system (that is also used in other games) could do with some effort from BW in prosecuting win traders. BW's excuse that "it's hard to tell who's win trading" is pretty lame. Show me BW's metrics and I'll tell you who's win trading. L2Math.

Also, remember that BW set the target elo at 1500 last season because that was apparently the top 5% mark 15 weeks or so into season 1. Some win trading obviously happened before this, meaning that this potentially inflated the declared "top 5% elo" in season 1(as you claim might happen next season if our suggestion is implemented). In debate terms: your disad is non-unique. Also, during win trading, one team still wins and the other still loses.... so while win trading will inflate the top 5% elo mark, there's some built-in resistance to this effect. Also, people are probably more likely to win trade if the reward requirement is a set elo rating, as opposed to top percentile that requires periodic checking of the leaderboards to ensure one is still eligible for. Meh, I'll stop now.

If you want to increase population you'll have to cater to those who don't play because they think they're not good enough to reach a high rating anyway. This could be done by adding a bonus through games played. So let's say that you played 400 games but only reached a highest rating of 1370, those 400 games would result in a 1.X coefficient that possibly could bump you above 1500. Would be really helpful for the few who still hang in there on the weaker faction on really lopsided servers too. And yes, I'm aware that this could result in AFK'ing but it's significally easier to track that than what some guilds are doing in the middle of the night when no one els is on. People will report AFK'ing but they can't report something they're not aware of.

NO.

WHY DO YOU WANT TO MAKE THIS GAME EVEN MORE CASUAL. I don't even....

We are taking feedback from Season 1 into consideration on where we divide the tiers and still working out where the tiers will be. We don't have an announcement on this yet but will make one after Season 2 starts.

We are taking this into consideration. Not saying yes, not saying no, just saying you have been heard and we are discussing it. Cheers!

With all this looking at feedback and taking things into consideration, is there also a chance that the stance on cross server queues might also be reconsidered? I mean I think plenty of players were under the impression that BioWare is working on cross server tech before the PvP FAQ revealed that it is not even on the to do list. And now with all the people asking for it in various threads, shouldn't that also tell you guys that many PvP players want that?

If your idea were to be implemented, though, I would like to see, on the leaderboards, in which top percentage my characters are without having to do the math for myself.

That would be fine.

(what if people with a lot of alts tried to do those 10 warzones trying to get a low rating just to increase the amount of characters on the ladder so that top 1% is a thousand characters instead of a hundred, giving more chance to their main to be up there?).

If everyone did this, yes that'd be a problem, but as there will be hardly any effect if only a small group of people do this, they will have little incentive to do so.

I also believe it would discourage people who are looking forward to one of the rewards and who wouldn't do warzones otherwise: sure, with the fixed rating they would stop doing warzones right after reaching the set goal but if such goal is not clear (if it is a percentage of a changing number) people who won't have the opportunity to play much or at all during the last period of the season may just give up before even starting.

One last note I've just thought of: right now you can't get access to the top percentage in which you fall into since the leaderboards rank based on current rating whereas the rewards were given out based on maximum rating earned (which means that this system would require either adding a "top rating earned ladder" or at least a way to tell in which top percentage you are, giving the rewards based on current rating or, third, not letting players know if they are eligible for the reward at all.

People that are willing to do something they might not otherwise do to get a reward would probably not be so easily discouraged under this system, relative to the season 1 system.

The people who are prone to play until they hit the required elo and then be done (the people that the system I'm suggesting would address) are probably more numerous than the people that would be fine with queuing if there's a specific elo target, but for some weird reason would get too frustrated to play if they have to keep track of the leaderboards periodically (what you're saying might happen). I would prefer everyone to just Q up for the sake of competition and pride. But unfortunately, in order for the population to remain somewhat adequate, other incentives are required.

NO.

 

WHY DO YOU WANT TO MAKE THIS GAME EVEN MORE CASUAL. I don't even....

Making it more casual or simply catering to the masses? I went from some high-end compettive gaming to this game for the sake of playing something casual for a change and the game has always been casual. In all the other games I've played I would have been totally against catering to the casual player or balancing classes around them (I havent really played a game before where balancing came into play) but this game has time and time again proven that it can never move forward if the top 1 % has their way or is being catered too. And that's how I see it, there's no spectrum of skill in this game, there's one small good click and then the rest..and they mix like water and oil. It would have been significally easier to pull something as Arena off in a game where there had been a fairly big population close to the top tier followed by the rest of the population. Don't trust me? Look at the tank situation, possibly the determining factor in Arena. If you don't have a good tank you'll never be able to compete. The thing is just that there are only.....hmm...five decent PvP tanks per server. Good luck getting a bunch of teams queueing under those circumstances. It doesnt matter if you're the 20th best DPS on the server, you'll still not be able to find a tank your own skill to play with and no one wants to queue with people they beleive are significally worse than themselves.

Just get rid of ELO rating and calculate it like:

Team Leaderboards

1. 3 Points per win
   
2. 0 for a loss
   

Solo Leaderboards

1. 3 Points per win
   
2. 3 Points for being Top Player of your team based on all Stats:
   Prot score, dps, heal depending on your class, would require some new formular tho to make this balanced
   
3. 0 for a loss
   

something like that, I don't think it's fair that you lose 20 points vs. another team and gain only 5 - 13 for the next win...

There's no evidence supporting either side on this so for all I know you might be right. I think we'll lose a big chunk if it happens though.

Your rationale?

It is however well established that people aren't playing Arena for the sake of competition , just look at how few teams there are and how, on some servers, non-existent the solo queues became once those with a reasonable shot at dinging 1500 had reached their goal.

Proves my point?

Making it more casual or simply catering to the masses?

Catering to bads is bad. You also just can't add elo gain modifiers based on games played- that screws with the whole system.

this game has time and time again proven that it can never move forward if the top 1 % has their way or is being catered [to]

How in the world has this game proven that? This game has never (unfortunately) catered to the 1%. If anything it's given evidence to the contrary.

And that's how I see it, here's no spectrum of skill in this game, there's one small good click and then the rest..and they mix like water and oil. It would have been significally easier to pull something as Arena off in a game where there had been a fairly big population close to the top tier followed by the rest of the population. Don't trust me? Look at the tank situation, possibly the determining factor in Arena. If you don't have a good tank you'll never be able to compete. The thing is just that there are only.....hmm...five decent PvP tanks per server. Good luck getting a bunch of teams queueing under those circumstances. It doesnt matter if you're the 20th best DPS on the server, you'll still not be able to find a tank your own skill to play with and no one wants to queue with people they beleive are significally worse than themselves.

*Clique*. Do I have to respond to this; seems like a rant. Honestly I don't get what you're trying to say in the post as a whole either.

Just get rid of ELO rating and calculate it like:

 

Team Leaderboards

 

1. 3 Points per win
   
2. 0 for a loss
   

 

Solo Leaderboards

 

1. 3 Points per win
   
2. 3 Points for being Top Player of your team based on all Stats:
   Prot score, dps, heal depending on your class, would require some new formular tho to make this balanced
   
3. 0 for a loss
   

 

something like that, I don't think it's fair that you lose 20 points vs. another team and gain only 5 - 13 for the next win...

Then again, there are also numerous games in which one DD will do 3 times the damage of the next DD and single handedly end the game through a 1 vs 2. It would have made a difference in those games.

Either way, I would have been much more inclined to queue if it felt like my rating wasnt merely the outcome of my luck with team mates, which for the most part it is since games rarely are balanced enough for one person to be the determing factor.

Just get rid of ELO rating and calculate it like:

 

Team Leaderboards

 

1. 3 Points per win
   
2. 0 for a loss
   

 

Solo Leaderboards

 

1. 3 Points per win
   
2. 3 Points for being Top Player of your team based on all Stats:
   Prot score, dps, heal depending on your class, would require some new formular tho to make this balanced
   
3. 0 for a loss
   

 

something like that, I don't think it's fair that you lose 20 points vs. another team and gain only 5 - 13 for the next win...

No no no... no. No. No? No.

The elo system is fine, it just needs more people in order to function correctly. While your idea would be good for me personally, it would be terrible for the overall system. It would also heavily favor certain classes/specs. Getting bad teammates sucks, but a win needs to be a win and a loss needs to be a loss. Just gotta suck it up and keep queuing.

Just get rid of ELO rating and calculate it like:

 

Team Leaderboards

 

1. 3 Points per win
   
2. 0 for a loss
   

 

Solo Leaderboards

 

1. 3 Points per win
   
2. 3 Points for being Top Player of your team based on all Stats:
   Prot score, dps, heal depending on your class, would require some new formular tho to make this balanced
   
3. 0 for a loss
   

 

something like that, I don't think it's fair that you lose 20 points vs. another team and gain only 5 - 13 for the next win...

On the team rating I have to disagree, the ELO system is useful there, otherwise it would just mean groups who will just play a lot will end up on top, even if they are not that good and lose quite a few matches...

On the solo rating, yes, there should be looked on individual performance and not at the team, since you cannot choose your team, so one shouldn't get punished just for being put into a team with bad players.

No no no... no. No. No? No.

 

The elo system is fine, it just needs more people in order to function correctly.

TOFN has 133 pages with listed players.

94 of these pages contain people with ten or less than ten wins. I think it's reasonable to assume that these people had no interest in Arena or the rating, they were simply checking it out. These people would be even less inclined to play a season where they continuously had to play throughout the entire season. Bonus opinion, there's a good chance/risk that the next season will be 94 pages short because I don't see why these players would return. Throw a couple of releases into the mix and the total for season 2 might stop at 30 pages.

So now we're left with 39 pages. A lot of those pages contain people who also didnt play much and/or managed to break into the higher tiers. I don't see why players who couldnt or didnt care enough to be placed in a high tier in season 1 would play more when they have to put even more time and effort into it. For the sake of argument I'm not going to subtract any pages here but my personal estimate would be atleast 10, possibly 20.

Back to the 39 pages, how many are alts? I would say that the vast majority of high tier players also played on atleast one alt. There goes another couple of pages. The alts would have even more incentive to queue in a % system because they are the ones you made it easier for and not the guy who has to put in houndreds of games for a rating.

Another factor, online time. Even if 40 pages, which in reality would be more like 15-20, full of individual players all would play during the same week we'd still have to deal with the fact that they're not all going to be on at the same time. ELO will never work under these curcumstances, people will get steamrolled by players way out of their ELO leagues and ultimately stop queueing. Hence, there needs to be some other form of incentive where a player can feel like he/she is progressing despite all the flaws in the system.

Or to make it even more basic, I played 18 games, got a crap rating and still ended up as ranked 5200 across all servers (in the 400 range on TOFN). So there's basically not more than 400'ish per server that cared more than me and I didnt care at all ( I probably just queued for the ranked comms for some gear). ELO wouldnt even work if those 400 were queued at the same time.

These people would be even less inclined to play a season where they continuously had to play throughout the entire season.

Anyone with common sense will know that they don't have to play throughout the entire season to get a reward just because the elo requirement doesn't get announced. For example, some people got over 1500 rating in the beginning of season 1 (long before 1500 became the announced cutoff), then stopped. They remained in the top 5% from when they got their highest rating all the way through till the end of the season. Doing this will still be possible.

So now we're left with 39 pages. A lot of those pages contain people who also didnt play much and/or managed to break into the higher tiers. I don't see why players who couldnt or didnt care enough to be placed in a high tier in season 1 would play more when they have to put even more time and effort into it. For the sake of argument I'm not going to subtract any pages here but my personal estimate would be atleast 10, possibly 20.

Yeah I really don't think you get how this works. It doesn't require more time and effort, unless you're considering glancing at the leaderboards every once in a while. I don't want people who are too lazy to even do that in my game anyway. Your actual required number of games/performance will not be different.

Back to the 39 pages, how many are alts? I would say that the vast majority of high tier players also played on atleast one alt. There goes another couple of pages.

Another factor, online time. Even if 40 pages, which in reality would be more like 15-20, full of individual players all would play during the same week we'd still have to deal with the fact that they're not all going to be on at the same time. ELO will never work under these [circumstances], people will get steamrolled by players way out of their ELO leagues and ultimately stop queueing. Hence, there needs to be some other form of incentive where a player can feel like he/she is progressing despite all the flaws in the system.

No there doesn't. The flaws are not with the system- they are with the population level. "ELO will never work under these circumstances"? No, NO system will work under these circumstances. If there aren't enough people in queue to match everyone up with/against people in their range of skill, there just aren't enough people. We can fault BW for driving away their ranked playerbase ever since ranked didn't come in 1.2, but faulting them for using the solid Elo system is stupid. I'm aware that there have potentially been in-game misapplications of this system in the form of one team's combined Elo being unnecessarily higher than the other's (in a same faction match), but other that...

On the team rating I have to disagree, the ELO system is useful there, otherwise it would just mean groups who will just play a lot will end up on top, even if they are not that good and lose quite a few matches...

 

On the solo rating, yes, there should be looked on individual performance and not at the team, since you cannot choose your team, so one shouldn't get punished just for being put into a team with bad players.

The problem with ELO in general is that if you have a good team all you need is to win a certain number of games and then stop and whine that it's all too easy.

Also there is no real ELO in team sports, there's leagues (or tiers).

This would work in SWTOR as well, but BW has told me for my Huttball league that it won't happen in the near future.

Maybe my ideas need some tweaks tho, but the ELO system is definately ruining my erm... playtime or experience.

Ima put my solo ranked experience for S1 in the spoiler below in for those who would like to see my detailed reasons behind my ideas.

Now for the short version:

You could think of special timeframes for teams to queue up or a max games per week. Like Football games in Germany are on Weekends only, so they HAVE TO play. ^^ Just a thought.

For solo ranked we really need to work something new out, but I fear BW wouldn't care at all, like they completely ignored my Huttball League thread up to this day...

I always feel like working stuff out which could make the PVP experience or schedule stuff better, with those of the community who feel like it and not have the devs just tell us how to play or what not, as they have shown they don't know much about their PVP systems....

TL/DR: Solo Rating needs to be calculated on something else than just ELO, I've seen too many people throwing games and what not to get their friends rating up. Also ELO will always cause people to just play few games. So this wouldn't even count as a "season".

The problem with ELO in general is that if you have a good team all you need is to win a certain number of games and then stop and whine that it's all too easy.

 

Also there is no real ELO in team sports, there's leagues (or tiers).

 

This would work in SWTOR as well, but BW has told me for my Huttball league that it won't happen in the near future.

 

Maybe my ideas need some tweaks tho, but the ELO system is definately ruining my erm... playtime or experience.

 

Ima put my solo ranked experience for S1 in the spoiler below in for those who would like to see my detailed reasons behind my ideas.

 

 

First off, I'm a german playing on an US EAST server because of friends / personal reasons such as night shift.

 

Now at the start of S1 many people were playing and I had no problems getting pobs. For ranked arena play in general I was still inexperienced, but could still play my class well and win or lose like 50% / 50%. After like max 7 days most people stopped playing and I got to play vs. the same Repubs (I'm imp mainly) over and over and lost and lost many games with the few imps left playing.

 

So when they announced the shiny rancor reward my rating was at 1kish maybe 1100 max.

 

I'm mainly playing my Tank / hybrid tank jugg.

 

Then I ended up in groups with like 3 Sorcs and no healers which sucked pre 2.7.

It's a bit better on hybrid tank Jugg now bc of the buffed enraged defense.

 

Or what we all know is when you end up with the 26k hp guys in RANKED arena and everyone knows it will be very rare that you win those games. Also we've had certain people throw our games over and over for their friends... BW told such people won't get rewards, yet I'm sure they did as always.

 

My rating went down to 850 and when I managed to get it up to 950 (which is like 1100 - 1500 in that range believe me) hardly people were playing anymore so the "new" ranked teammates drained it to 900 again, ofc it's my fault too sometimes when frustration is added or I do mistakes, we all do and that's fine in sport.

 

The good thing is my interface and playing skill improved, but I've played like the whole season, there were months when I wouldn't get a single pop to work on my rating at all...

 

 

 

Now for the short version:

 

You could think of special timeframes for teams to queue up or a max games per week. Like Football games in Germany are on Weekends only, so they HAVE TO play. ^^ Just a thought.

 

For solo ranked we really need to work something new out, but I fear BW wouldn't care at all, like they completely ignored my Huttball League thread up to this day...

 

I always feel like working stuff out which could make the PVP experience or schedule stuff better, with those of the community who feel like it and not have the devs just tell us how to play or what not, as they have shown they don't know much about their PVP systems....

 

TL/DR: Solo Rating needs to be calculated on something else than just ELO, I've seen too many people throwing games and what not to get their friends rating up. Also ELO will always cause people to just play few games. So this wouldn't even count as a "season".

I would really love a huttball league, but I doubt that most servers could get enough teams together to make that viable. So, we would need cross server queues and maybe a few more huttball maps, but that will take time (especially since BioWare is still not working on cross server tech in the first place).

On a league in general, my server (the german PvP server) has almost no guilds that can provide teams for arena, man even solo ranked takes forever to get a game. And this is on a PvP server, I don't wanna know how much more terrible the situation must be on most PvE or RP servers.

Also I like it when there is a chance for a team that forms later in the season to still have a chance to get going. Otherwise you won't see even less games at the end of the season, since when a guild has missed a few games they probaby just drop out altogether.

Sure, most sports don't use ELO, but that doesn't mean ELO is a bad system, Chess often uses it, since it is good for a more open structure outside of a league format, which we have here regarding the arena PvP.

Like I said, my only complaint is that si solo performance in solo ranked is not really taken into account, and that people get punished there for things outside there control.

There is plenty in this game that is catering to casual play, why would the only portion of PvP that is meant to be somewhat competitive make changes for the casual player? Any system that rewards for wins and does not penalize losses is a breeding ground for mediocrity. Play enough games and all the sudden you have the best rating in the game! I'd love some 700 elo kid being in the top 3 because all they do is play SWTOR for 15 hours a day.

The queues need more people, but probably not the people already playing this game to be honest. We need pieces implemented that will make the game appealing to somewhat competitive players from other games. You could easily get more people queueing if you made the reward some super OP weapon that was BiS for PvE, but why would you want those people in the queue when they aren't interested in the actual content?

If you implement cross-server, a custom arena mode with no rewards, and listen to the top players on how to balance classes, you'll end up with an arena system that is somewhat balanced and offers the features that gamers expect. The gameplay is already fun, that's why most of us continue PvPing in this game to begin with, now you need to make the competitive part actually competitive. Dailies, rewards, etc. will only get more players in the queue (for limited times), not make the matches more fun.

As it is right now, nothing can make Solo Ranked more fun but the honest PVPers. I for example just play to play and ofc I want to win my games or I wouldn't play them.

edit: but all the "queue syncing" and the stuff like throwing games by some people just ruins it and is no pvp at all, it's bs...

There is plenty in this game that is catering to casual play, why would the only portion of PvP that is meant to be somewhat competitive make changes for the casual player? Any system that rewards for wins and does not penalize losses is a breeding ground for mediocrity. Play enough games and all the sudden you have the best rating in the game! I'd love some 700 elo kid being in the top 3 because all they do is play SWTOR for 15 hours a day.

 

The queues need more people, but probably not the people already playing this game to be honest. We need pieces implemented that will make the game appealing to somewhat competitive players from other games. You could easily get more people queueing if you made the reward some super OP weapon that was BiS for PvE, but why would you want those people in the queue when they aren't interested in the actual content?

 

If you implement cross-server, a custom arena mode with no rewards, and listen to the top players on how to balance classes, you'll end up with an arena system that is somewhat balanced and offers the features that gamers expect. The gameplay is already fun, that's why most of us continue PvPing in this game to begin with, now you need to make the competitive part actually competitive. Dailies, rewards, etc. will only get more players in the queue (for limited times), not make the matches more fun.

I like you, let's be friends

The queues need more people, but probably not the people already playing this game to be honest. We need pieces implemented that will make the game appealing to somewhat competitive players from other games.

The only serious problem we have with ranked WZ is not enough players (e.g. season 1 when folks stopped queuing).

While it would be good to increase the population of good players , it is never bad if more players queue for ranked, no matter how unskilled / casual they are. If you have a large enough population then match making works, you develop better players organically (some n00bs become good) and attract more good players from other games.

With an Elo rating system and match making the problem is never "there are too many bads queuing". The only problem (assuming you want a challenging match rather than a 1 sided affair) "there are not enough players around my rating queuing).

As for Elo vs some other system: Elo is fine. The only problem with it is when BW says they are going to compare ratings across isolated player pools and there is no rating system that will give the intended result (i.e. make rating from isolated player pools meaningfully comparable).

The only serious problem we have with ranked WZ is not enough players (e.g. season 1 when folks stopped queuing).

 

While it would be good to increase the population of good players , it is never bad if more players queue for ranked, no matter how unskilled / casual they are. If you have a large enough population then match making works, you develop better players organically (some n00bs become good) and attract more good players from other games.

 

With an Elo rating system and match making the problem is never "there are too many bads queuing". The only problem (assuming you want a challenging match rather than a 1 sided affair) "there are not enough players around my rating queuing).

 

As for Elo vs some other system: Elo is fine. The only problem with it is when BW says they are going to compare ratings across isolated player pools and there is no rating system that will give the intended result (i.e. make rating from isolated player pools meaningfully comparable).

Casual players do not build a ranked scene. They queue up as often as needed for obtainable rewards (ranked gear, lower tier end of season rewards, etc.). If you want a scene that's competitive, that people would actually watch streamed, that you could actually have a tournament built around, then you need players who are willing to work at being good. The casual, lower elo player base will come on its own if you have a thriving scene at the top.

Cross server is an absolute necessity for ranked to ever mean anything in this game. So we're at least 1-2 years out from it even being remotely possible. For now, they should focus on balancing classes, coming up with new maps, updating the format to what they would ultimately like, and taking feedback from high rated players on how to improve. When/if cross server is ever available, they can implement better matchmaking logic and remove some of the casual friendly features from ranked like bolster.

This is not entirely correct. What is being added is a single daily and a single weekly quest for ranked play. Now, you can play either solo or group to complete the quest, but there is not a separate quest for each queue. This is something the team would like to add at some point in the future but it is not being implemented currently.

 

Sorry for any confusion, the blog has been updated to remove the confusing part about "both flavors."

 

-eric

This is very disappointing news Eric.

Hey folks,

 

Quick update on the blog. We noticed a piece of information in the blog which was not correct and I wanted to clarify. Currently the blog says this:

 

 

This is not entirely correct. What is being added is a single daily and a single weekly quest for ranked play. Now, you can play either solo or group to complete the quest, but there is not a separate quest for each queue. This is something the team would like to add at some point in the future but it is not being implemented currently.

 

Sorry for any confusion, the blog has been updated to remove the confusing part about "both flavors."

 

-eric

Thanks for clarifying that. Out of interest, what is the reasoning behind delaying the addition of separate missions for solo and group ranked?