He's rehearsing his lines for the next live stream.

I'm trying to remember clearly, but I believe the old champion bags were like this. You could buy them before you hit lvl 50, but couldn't open them until you did ding lvl 50.

Hey thanks! ..after all, this is just pleasant fiction... I mean, thinking that Eric and Alex might actually be considering a change to our ranked system.

Link in my sig. Check it out.

I'd love to see a new ratings and token rewards system for ranked. That way players could aquire what they wanted Link to the proposed system thread is in my signature.

Well you mentioned that 7000 players tried ranked this season. So if the 3000 people who've seen this thread played ranked, then that's almost half who haven't quit or taken a break from the game. Not sure if the lack of positive suggestions represents the fact this thread actually has decent ideas to develop and present to the devs, and people simply agree with it. I know I'd prefer more positive feedback for there is always room for improvement. That said, I'm sure the developers saw the initial proposition and calculated how the initial fixed rating loss wasn't conducive to accurately representing win/loss ratios. There were a couple fellows that pointed out dispite the need for participation incentives, we still need a system that punishes for a loss. That is why I revamped the original proposed system for the new one that includes tiers, that you can see on the first page. On that note, I feel we have been making progress, for the original skeptics have dropped all disagreements.

Excellent Point. Investing in PvP will save the game. We need to keep trying to clue the developers in to this fact. The ironic thing is that PvP'ers don't need tons of software development every update like pve'ers do. Look at how we can continue to play the same maps over and over again. It's the thrill from pvp that keeps us coming back. The dev team needs to keep working on balancing class variables and introducing more platforms of pvp combat. If they announced one update regarding the quality of pvp, or announced a new platform for competition...boom...hundreds of pvper's would scurry back, in a heartbeat.

I think there is a lot of room for a new platform of 8vs8 ranked in the future. I think if they revamped the Arena Ratings System and included a Token System they would be able to retain all of the arena maps and still offer deathmatch as a form of pvp. Population would increase ten-fold and they would keep queing to earn tokens for their desired gear/items. Many of us actually like Arenas, so keeping that as an entertainment option in important. That said, regular warzones are the bread and butter of all players leveling up. Regs still provide great entertainment for level 60's as they group with friends. We do need a new form of ranked 8vs8, which would need to be introduced within new maps that cater to the new 3.0 class meta. The old 8vs8 ranked warzones were great in the 2.0 era, but classes at level 60 now possess unique utilities that have overgrown those old maps. We would need new challenging maps for 8vs8.

The Tokens would be used to buy cosmetic gear, and items such as stronghold decorations/pets/mounts, etc. I'd prefer to see the current commendations used to purchase pvp gear remain as is. Good suggestions you have, however If we were to create more tiers of functional gear in addition to the two we already have in place...we'd have a lot of confusion, and would be asking too much from the developers I'd suspect.

The 2.0 era of ranked 8vs8 is legendary within the context of the class' abilities of that timeline. 8vs8 ranked wouldn't work now in the 3.0 class meta. The classes all have too many unique utilities that would override the base design of the original objective based warzones, and the developers keep complicating things on a daily basis(Hello 3.0 Huttball:D). They need to develop new maps exclusive to a new 8vs8, 3.0 class meta and beyond. Additionally, they need this new series of objective based maps to augment the current battlefields we have in place. Removing anymore pvp content or placing more restrictions AND failing to add more content soon, will undoubtedly kill the game. Like...nail in the coffin...dead.

Guys... I need some experienced input over in another thread, to help refine a proposed system that would assist all players in ranked, regardless of skill level. I'm looking at at a system that will be able to sustain a large population base in a healthy and competitive way. Check the link in my sig. Thanks.

The. Entry. Level. Tier. Name. Is. Arbitrary....call it what you want. Call it the noble competitor tier ffs. I'm becoming amused by your obsession with the name of the proposed system's entry level tier. Trust me, just for you I'll rename it. You. Are. Failing. To. Realize. That. Trolls. Won't. Exist. In. The. New. System. Trolling ambitions will be stifled and rendered completely useless. Trolling will become a fruitless endeavor in the new system. Players will be recongnized by their skills and their commitment to the SWTOR Ranked end game. If you are unable to do the simple math on that basic concept, I'm not sure what to tell you. Edit: Grunt Tier has been renamed to Recruit Tier, and the Tiered ratings values has been reduced.

Let's have a little fun with this new system. I invite everyone to insert their first 10 games performance this season, and compute what their ratings/tokens earned would be on the first day of the new season. My Jug. Four wins. Six losses. 4 wins = 40GR/4 tokens 1 DTW(daily three win mission) = 10GR/3 tokens 1 TCW(three consecutive wins mission) = 30GR/3 tokens Now, the ratings in the first 4 matches would add up to 80GR. Therefore I'd still be in the Grunt Tier, for 100GR is required to elevate to the next Tier, so I would have not suffered any rating loss for the next 6 losses. On top of that I would have earned 10 tokens. My Powertech. 8 wins. 2 losses. I won 4, lost one, won 4, lost one. 4 wins = 40GR/4 tokens 1 DTW(daily three win mission) = 10GR/3 tokens 1 TCW(three consecutive wins mission) = 30GR/3 tokens The first loss(fifth game) didn't affect my rating for I was only at 80GR. 4 wins = 40GR/4 tokens 1 TCW(three consecutive wins mission) = 30GR/3 tokens So now we'd see a -10GR for my loss(tenth game), for my continued winning streak had pushed me into the next Tier. Total GR/Tokens earned on my PT was (150-10)= 140GR, with 17 tokens. Perhaps reducing the numbers of tiers could be examined as well. I'm starting to lean towards 3 tiers - Grunt/Intermediate/Elite...but I'll need more feedback from all of you before I switch the proposed system on the first page.

Currently....People roll the dice on their first 10 games and their willingness to continue queing depends on that first 10 game outcome. A large number of players do stop queing, for they are primarily seeking rating just for the rewards. It is only the true competitors that continue queing because they like the action. That said, Bioware deliberately withholds from announcing the end of season rewards...look what happened this season. The awards were announced and ranked...died.... Hmm...7000 players tried ranked this season? Damn! Imagine how many thousands more would try the new system, and furthermore remain queing to earn tokens!!! I have an honest question, How is including an entry level ranked tier, in a new Tiered System hurting new players? They lose no rating for a loss but retain generic rating for each win(up to 10 wins) They earn coms and credits win or lose to buy pvp gear. They earn tokens to purchase desired items/gear from a new Ranked Vendor.

The New System encourages players to try to Win by creating Tiers of competition, and also fosters new players, while protecting the serious competitors. Ranked Arenas are considered "End Game PvP". On that note, catering to brand new players is important, for we all have to start somewhere. Some would say it shouldn't be our primary focus. Either way, having an entry level tier will accomplish many things. It will foster the new player as he/she gets their feet wet with arenas, which is a healthy thing, for the first Tier in this new system, will protect their progress as they earn experience and coms to purchase better gear. The second biggest asset of the first tier is that it will trap all trolls and will ultimately protect the serious competitors once they enter the Bronze Tier. NOW.....wait while I point something incredibly interesting to you regarding trolls. 50% of the trolls are actually pvp'ers who throw matches on the opposite faction for their initial guildies(or are pve'ers who get paid to throw games). 25% of the trolls are actually throwing games because they feel they earn coms faster by forcing a loss. 25% of the remaining "trolls" aren't actually trolls at all, they are new players who haven't a clue what they are doing. The real beauty here, is that by introducing the new Ranked Arena Ratings and Token Rewards System........you won't see ANY trolls, for the proposed system prevents trolls from flourishing! In other words, the trolls have absolutely no one they can hurt, so they are wasting their time. By those projected numbers, we'll automatically see 50% of all the trolls disappear over night. Now for the "loss-pushers", they will have to earn Tokens to aquire the rewards, so they are doing themselves a great injustice by wasting their time throwing matches simply to earn coms for gear.....might I add that Group Ranked earns double the coms... Maybe players will be spending alot more time trying to find groups to que up with and try to win in this new system...Hmm? Disregard the failures of the past seasons (especially this one) and open your mind to these possibilities. The new proposed system is a million times better than what we currently have in place. It is also still a work in progress, so let's focus on re-evaluating the tiers in our next replies!

Ahh, but it is the competitive nature of pvp combat that attracts a certain type of player. People who spend time developing their class enjoy a fresh and unique challenge every time they press the que button. How is it that players, since launch, can compete over and over again on the same maps? Is it because they like the scenery? No... It is because they like the action, the chaotic energy from an unpredictable source of entertainment. Look at how many threads have been created on pvp in this game alone, compared to flashpoints/etc. PvP is an invigorating thing, and despite it's flaws PvP will always make or break a game. If there is a fairly even playfield between class abilities with enough offensive and defensive similarities while retaining a special uniqueness, then the ground works for good pvp will be in place. That is the developer's job, and is not part of my discussion at hand per-se. If we were to cast a poll about what disappoints players the most about ranked in SWTOR, I'm quite sure the list would include class balance, population and most definitely trolls. The "holding pen" as you say, would be a great way to offer protection to the players who are successful enough to attain wins, and thus elevate their characters to a higher Tier, which ultimately means better quality pvp gameplay. If you are worried that someone will quit ranked because they continually lose, remember that they won't suffer negative rating until they enter the Bronze Tier. Again, I'd love to discuss the Tiered rating loss values with you and absolutely everyone. What values would be fair to honest competitors, and how would they properly represent the "expected" skill cap for players currently in game? Also, there currently is no protection provided for serious ranked players with the current system, despite the fact that many still become successful. We aren't including group ranked in these discussions, for group ranked is fair game. The only variables at hand are your team's and the opponent's and that is probably why the grouped scene is so small. No one wants to suffer huge rating losses while learning how to play together as a team, and that is why solo que and group ranked would both benefit from the new proposed "Grunt Tier"(which you seem to be inappropriately concerned about).

My replies in blue.

The issues that plague ranked become blurry if there's hundreds of players in que everyday. Different story when it's a fight just to get 7 other players to que for one match...that's when you know ranked is dead. Hell, I remeber campaigning for ranked participation in preseason... There are legitimate concerns with the way the current ranked system isn't providing quality protection for its end-game pvp'ers. I mean it's been stated again and again, how anyone can enter ranked with no gear requirements. It's an insult to the other players who've invested a lot of time aquiring appropriate gear. This is just one example. That's why if we keep hounding the developers, they'll implement a system that actually rewards and protects the players in ranked, by instituting tiers for different levels of competitiveness.

Interesting. A new rating system would triple those numbers. Easily.

I like competitive pvp. Close matches.

I saw the furious sabre and wanted it pretty bad last season. I came into the third season a bit late from a break from the game, but had crappy luck on my main. I had to level an alt(which was almost 55), and restart my first 10 games. I rolled the dice and got lucky with a class that was previously nothing other than a novelty. I'm sorry for your frustration, but many people here do understand where you're coming from.

This game needs a new ratings/rewards system. Check the link in my sig for the suggestion thread.

Ok, get weaponmaster earpiece and implants. Get relics focused retribution and serendipitous assault. Get full vindicator set. Swap mods and enhancements....profit.

Nah, it's true. I've been doing ranked exclusively up until the last week and have instead been developing alts in regs. I must say, I haven't witnessed this pathetic level of derp in warzones ever. Leveling alts in the +50 brackets this weekend has unveiled the most comical and frustrating comedy of errors I've ever seen. You would never find this level of incompetence pre2.0, back when warzones where "thee" main event. Now it just seems like an awful waste of time. Sigh, might have to take up coaching again.

Let's take another look at the suggested Tiers, which of course could be switched around; Grunt tier 0-10 wins = -0 rating per loss (desired rating to achieve next level is 100). Bronze tier 10-25 wins = -10 rating per loss (desired rating to achieve next level is 250). Silver tier 25-75 wins = -15 rating per loss (desired rating to achieve next level is 750). Gold tier 75+ wins = -20 rating per loss What could we tweak the numbers to, as far as rating goes? If we switched it to more attainable levels, maybe the rating losses per tier would work itself out better...maybe it to something like this? Grunt tier 0-10 wins = -0 rating per loss (desired rating to achieve next level is 100). Bronze tier 10-15 wins = -10 rating per loss (desired rating to achieve next level is 150). Silver tier 15-25 wins = -15 rating per loss (desired rating to achieve next level is 250). Gold tier 25+ wins = -20 rating per loss The reason it looks daunting originally, is because at first glance you'll forget about the "Three Win Consecutives", which add generously to your rating(plus extra tokens). However, it's a safe bet, that if a new rating system was introduced, the Ranked Population would be ten times larger than it is. People would keep queing to earn their tokens, regardless of what the tiers were. Having said that, we would want to keep the tiers closer together as far a wins required are concerned, for like you say, we could see things get lonely at the top. I'll wait for a couple comments on this prediction of yours before I switch the Tier Values.