Ranked PVP Change that would increase pops and encourage play

[Raansu]

Quote: Originally Posted by Andrellma View Post

 

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

 

You listened to the players on daracrons.

 

You listened to the players on legacy storage costs.

 

Listen to the players on this.

 

Eric: No

[Savej]

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

 

Well, that's encouraging at least.

[uaintjak]

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

 

You have zero credibility at this point. I don't say this with anger or malice. We've all - pvpers, pvers, rpers...we've all heard the same old "aren't ready to discuss the specifics" song and dance over...and over...and over. Why should people "rest assured" when you have given them absolutely no reason to do so?

[Vildiil]

You have zero credibility at this point. I don't say this with anger or malice. We've all - pvpers, pvers, rpers...we've all heard the same old "aren't ready to discuss the specifics" song and dance over...and over...and over. Why should people "rest assured" when you have given them absolutely no reason to do so?

 

Sad but true, one of the biggest ways to improve would be cross server and this game will be shut down before that will ever be implemented.

[Liquor]

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

 

Concealment viable??

 

[chillshock]

Sad but true, one of the biggest ways to improve would be cross server and this game will be shut down before that will ever be implemented.

 

Also some players would leave if cross-server would poison this game.

 

Yes, queue times are one part of the problem. But they are only a symptom: Ranked right not is PUNISHING for regular player who just want to have a little higher-gameplay style level of fun. It needs to be rewarding to try and/or participate.

 

=> you get more players => you get shorter queue times.

 

The need to decide if they want to focus on group or solo ranked.

Groups:

- No matchmaking lottery

- Tactics

- Leaderboards for groups

- Classes are kind of balanced for being in a predetermines group of 4 anyways.

 

Advantages.

Solo:

- Anyone can play at any time

- Like in unranked, the communication of the team seems optional.

[Neothanos]

Ranked players need to feel less special, Im all for op suggestion. It needs fine tuning but it encourages more people to queue and play which is more importan than the huge ego of the too good few.

Im sick of no matches and the rampant abuse by everyone of the lack of players.

[ilifus]

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

 

I red that promise log ago somewhere..

[Huez]

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

 

 

My rank went from 1150 to the pitiful 900's in ONE day due to these trolls/ afk's/ undergeared and to add to the insult I am being called a bad by baddies who can't focus target while I am being 3v1. PT class has a good burst but cd's arent as impressive as a juggs.

[DarthOvertone]

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

 

It's good to hear there is still some dedication to Ranked PvP on the Dev side. For a moment there, I really thought you guys were working on PvP housing or some such trash. Although I guess it would be kind of fun to own a house in Hypergate and watch as peeps get sap-capped.

Edited August 9, 2014 by DarthOvertone

[Technohic]

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

 

We surely hope EA delivers.

 

 

LOL Yeah, I was just thinking the next answer would be 2 on 2 arenas so they could have an easier time pulling from the number of players Qed. Would be in line with the last attempt to fix ranked.

Edited August 9, 2014 by Technohic

[HaLeX]

#1 The claim that 1500+ ELO is equal to the top 5% of PvPers who actually que up for solo more than say 2-3 times a week is completely false. Every single rated match I have ever done has at least 3 1500+ toons and usually 1-2 2000+. Really 1500 is average among the rated elites

 

2# most of the rating inflation comes from the elites farming new players and pvers and mediocre players who usually quit in short order. Add to that the unfairness(and exploiting) inherent in the system they devised makes people even more frustrated with the experience, among them many of the best players on the server who refuse to do them.

 

3# Whatever system they come up with needs to be sure to take care of the most important thing to a PVPer, their EGO. You cannot stomp on the manliness of 99% of the player base in favor of the 1% and expect people to line up for more humiliation. Whatever system replaces the current one needs to be sure not to alienate average to good players who are probably the great majority of PVPrs. Even the best players will stop queing if they lose continually or feel they are getting short ended. If you match a 2000 rated player vs a 1300 rated 100 times, in the end one guy is going to have a 3000 rating and the other a 500. That needs to be fixed.

 

It's also why I think cross server will absolutely not work. There would still not be enough people for proper matchmaking. The top players will farm the very good players who think their tops until they eventually quit as well. You need a really large player base for that to work and this game simply doesn't have it.

Edited August 9, 2014 by HaLeX

[Technohic]

#1 The claim that 1500+ ELO is equal to the top 5% of PvPers who actually que up for solo more than say 2-3 times a week is completely false. Every single rated match I have ever done has at least 3 1500+ toons and usually 1-2 2000+. Really 1500 is average among the rated elites

 

2# most of the rating inflation comes from the elites farming new players and pvers and mediocre players who usually quit in short order. Add to that the unfairness(and exploiting) inherent in the system they devised makes people even more frustrated with the experience, among them many of the best players on the server who refuse to do them.

 

3# Whatever system they come up with needs to be sure to take care of the most important thing to a PVPer, their EGO. You cannot stomp on the manliness of 99% of the player base in favor of the 1% and expect people to line up for more humiliation. Whatever system replaces the current one needs to be sure not to alienate average to good players who are probably the great majority of PVPrs. Even the best players will stop queing if they lose continually or feel they are getting short ended. If you match a 2000 rated player vs a 1300 rated 100 times, in the end one guy is going to have a 3000 rating and the other a 500. That needs to be fixed.

 

It's also why I think cross server will absolutely not work. There would still not be enough people for proper matchmaking. The top players will farm the very good players who think their tops until they eventually quit as well. You need a really large player base for that to work and this game simply doesn't have it.

 

So basically any ranked system would fail here. I mean, the entire point is to find out who better than who, right? So maybe they should focus on making PvP that everyone enjoys in stead of to the top few in a casual game, using a venue that the minority prefer.

[HaLeX]

So basically any ranked system would fail here. I mean, the entire point is to find out who better than who, right? So maybe they should focus on making PvP that everyone enjoys in stead of to the top few in a casual game, using a venue that the minority prefer.

 

I think a rating system is needed, just not this particular one. For example a percentile rating would work 20x better than the current system. When you take a standardized exam you know exactly how "good" you are compared to your peers, there is absolutely no guess work involved. The benefit of using a percentile system is that by definition half the players who participate will have above average ratings in relation to their peers. In the current system the ratings are way out of wack and not accurate because you have a handful of players who are two steps above everyone else and it leaves no room for anything in between. Too much disparity in skill level between 2 different teams and even within the team itself for elo to work properly. As I said the result is the elite players end up simply farming and the population bleeds until no one is left queing besides the elitist going for a top rating and the rest who are just doing it for the comms or are new or those who just don't give a crap. Then you get an abundance of these 28k players who get global-led and ruin it for their team. It all spirals downward because the system as it is cannot work with this population. Fear not, with a percentile system you would absolutely know who the best players are because the number of players participating and the number of matches would be much much higher. just my 2 cents.

Edited August 9, 2014 by HaLeX

[Neothanos]

So basically any ranked system would fail here. I mean, the entire point is to find out who better than who, right? So maybe they should focus on making PvP that everyone enjoys in stead of to the top few in a casual game, using a venue that the minority prefer.

 

A fairer sysyem would help but take in consideration that most players the good and the bad think they are too good to lose and for some mysterious reason half the teams that play ranked lose, perharps they can make a ranked where both teams win ?

[Master-Nala]

#1 The claim that 1500+ ELO is equal to the top 5% of PvPers who actually que up for solo more than say 2-3 times a week is completely false. Every single rated match I have ever done has at least 3 1500+ toons and usually 1-2 2000+. Really 1500 is average among the rated elites

 

2# most of the rating inflation comes from the elites farming new players and pvers and mediocre players who usually quit in short order. Add to that the unfairness(and exploiting) inherent in the system they devised makes people even more frustrated with the experience, among them many of the best players on the server who refuse to do them.

 

3# Whatever system they come up with needs to be sure to take care of the most important thing to a PVPer, their EGO. You cannot stomp on the manliness of 99% of the player base in favor of the 1% and expect people to line up for more humiliation. Whatever system replaces the current one needs to be sure not to alienate average to good players who are probably the great majority of PVPrs. Even the best players will stop queing if they lose continually or feel they are getting short ended. If you match a 2000 rated player vs a 1300 rated 100 times, in the end one guy is going to have a 3000 rating and the other a 500. That needs to be fixed.

 

It's also why I think cross server will absolutely not work. There would still not be enough people for proper matchmaking. The top players will farm the very good players who think their tops until they eventually quit as well. You need a really large player base for that to work and this game simply doesn't have it.

 

This is spot on. I don't know why people keep asking for cross server queues as all it would do is hasten this game's ranked death spiral.

 

The devs made a critical error in the beginning. They prioritized queue pops over a fair game. That was a major mistake. The 1300 rating player should NEVER fight the 2000 rating player. Even if that means that no game pops at all. It is much more important that people feel they have a fair shot than for them to be placed into a no-win scenario.

 

But the damage is done now. Ranked will not recover absent very major changes that are not likely.

[Necroscop]

I have been watching a lot what will happen in new UT game and they trying to bring better ranking system. For example what they saying if you are join in match as a solo you should never be awarded point for team as your team can suck while you are very good player and its not fair that you would lose your rank just because you have join bad group. So you will gain rank point even if your team lost as long as you did well.

 

I have seen in this game matches where one dps do more damage than his team combine but if they lose he still lose point. This bring lots of anger to forums as good players are angry that they have been place in wz with bad group and they loosing points.

System which UT will bring looks like more fair and people would more likely queue for ranked if system would score them base on their own skill.

[JaingSkiratapwns]

I'm not sure anything can revive interest in pvp, specifically ranked pvp, in this game. The pvp servers are at an all time low from a population standpoint, and you can go for extended periods of time without getting a queue for an arena. Bioware has ignored pvp to the point that I'm not sure what could bring people back. Edited August 9, 2014 by JaingSkiratapwns

[uaintjak]

What about a system where your ranking didn't go down? Say everyone starts at zero. You gain points based on your performance (medals) and it's multiplied by some amount if you win. That way people aren't penalized if they do a good job but still end up on a crap team. At the end of a season, people who are above a certain threshold start to get rewards. People below that threshold don't get anything ( or maybe they get one of the crap rewards from this season).

 

I know this sounds a lot like regs, but at least this way people don't get penalized for trying.

[Shevaresh]

Once upon a time there was a very creative and progressive game-developing company. They released one hit title after another and were the heroes of gamers everywhere and the envy of other game-developers, simply becaurse they dared to be different. Then one day, a big publisher came along and offered them allot of money to get to publish their games. In return they only had to stop being progressive and creative in their approach to game-developing, so that other developers would stop looking so bad in comparison...

 

This silly story aside, looking through some of the various suggestions made in this post through the eyes of a casual pvp'er, it seems that the discussion might be "missing the forest for all the trees". At the heart of it, is SWToR pvp really anything more than a generic-point-grinding-mmo pvp-scene? A collection of various warzones and arenas, that serves no other real purpose than grinding points so ones toon can buy new gear and do marginally better in same warzones and arenas? A.k.a. same thing you can get in pretty much every other mmo. No metagame to engage players in a greater conflict, little sense of achievement, no real point in committing to it to any larger degree. You que, you play, you're done. Rinse and repeat.

 

Don't get me wrong, I do like pvp even in this game, but lets face the facts: No amount of fancy rewards or well-designed rating systems are going to magically make pvp broadly appealling in SWToR, as anything other than a "mini-game" in the game atleast. To make pvp appealing to "the masses" Bioware really has to stop peddeling the same generic pvp content continuoesly and start being bold (again). Instead of just generic arena content and a new warzone map every other year, they really need to start thinking "outside the box" and start making content that makes pvp matter more than just silly points and e-peen for the most dedicated. Make us fight over planets and resources for the war between reps and imps, fight battles that matters on a grander scale, add options to make custom tournaments/matchmaking, Huttball-leagues, tie GSF-content in with "normal-pvp" content and so on.

 

The star wars universe has the narrative framework to truely carry and make people care about it's "base-conflict" of good and evil, but as long as it presented in a "soulless generic-point-grinding" warzone/arena that matters f... all in the end, I really doubt pvp will be anything other than a mini-game in SWToR.

[Anyakaschala]

So basically any ranked system would fail here. I mean, the entire point is to find out who better than who, right? So maybe they should focus on making PvP that everyone enjoys in stead of to the top few in a casual game, using a venue that the minority prefer.

 

The problem is that when you throw together a solo ranked, it doesn't really engender itself for finding out who the best of the best is. The best player in the world queued with 3 trolls will still loss 99.999% of the time. And the .0001 is because the other team dc'ed.

 

Thus the current system fails it doesn't allow for that to happen because rewards are only determined on the outcome of the match and the performance of said team, and not on the individual who is queueing as an individual.

 

Add that you can probably guarantee that most of the people who are at the top of solo queues are queue syncing with their friends and if they all don't get a pop, then they don't take the queue.

[chillshock]

This should help a lot:

 

solo ranked => removed (you need arena-teams to queue, now - legacy bound)

solo random pvp => improved (so many ideas, so few time)

[JediMasterSLC]

Solo ranked rating would mean a lot more if there was cross-faction matchmaking (the system forms up balanced teams regardless of the players' factions). This would severely hinder one's ability queue synch. As it is, it is highly beneficial to check what good and bad players are queuing on each faction before deciding what faction to queue on, so as to get the best teammates/worst opponents. Until the ability to do this goes away, solo rating will continue to be a poor indication of skill.

 

If you have a problem with pubs and imps playing on the same team: 1) Baron Deathmark literally says "2 teams, selected by random draw" or something like that. The Hutts don't give a crap about which government their gladiators swear allegiance to. They are just people placed there to kill and die for their amusement. 2) Practicality > quality of immersion.

Edited August 11, 2014 by JediMasterSLC

[Anubiran]

The problem is that when you throw together a solo ranked, it doesn't really engender itself for finding out who the best of the best is. The best player in the world queued with 3 trolls will still loss 99.999% of the time. And the .0001 is because the other team dc'ed.

 

Thus the current system fails it doesn't allow for that to happen because rewards are only determined on the outcome of the match and the performance of said team, and not on the individual who is queueing as an individual.

 

Add that you can probably guarantee that most of the people who are at the top of solo queues are queue syncing with their friends and if they all don't get a pop, then they don't take the queue.

 

True.

 

There were already a lot of suggestions how to improve solo ranked based on individual performance.

This is one of my favorites if i remember correctly:

 

Like adding all numbers and divide through 3 or so (dmg+prot+heal/3=rank in your team) and then have something like that (probably there should be some more numbers taken in account - succesfull interupts or ccs)

 

1. WINNER TEAM - Name01 - 54034 Battle Points - +15

2. WINNER TEAM - Name02 - 45034 Battle Points - +10

3. LOSER TEAM - Name03 - 34034 Battle Points - +0

4. WINNER TEAM - Name04 - 30050 Battle Points - +9

5. LOSER TEAM - Name05 - 28034 Battle Points - -2

6. WINNER TEAM - Name06 - 25034 Battle Points - +6

7. LOSER TEAM - Name07 - 20034 Battle Points - -6

8. LOSER TEAM - Name08 - 12034 Battle Points - -10

 

So the best player who got unlucky of the loser team dont lose points or just less.

 

You could say "oh thats so unfair for the undergeared and unskilled people then they will never make it out of swamp" - Guess what? Gear up and skill up or play in a group.

 

 

But i highly doubt this will ever come.

Before they will improve it they will trash solo ranked.

R.I.P 8v8.

Edited August 11, 2014 by Anubiran

[JediMasterSLC]

True.

 

There were already a lot of suggestions how to improve solo ranked based on individual performance.

This is one of my favorites if i remember correctly:

 

Like adding all numbers and divide through 3 or so (dmg+prot+heal/3=rank in your team) and then have something like that (probably there should be some more numbers taken in account - succesfull interupts or ccs)

 

1. WINNER TEAM - Name01 - 54034 Battle Points - +15

2. WINNER TEAM - Name02 - 45034 Battle Points - +10

3. LOSER TEAM - Name03 - 34034 Battle Points - +0

4. WINNER TEAM - Name04 - 30050 Battle Points - +9

5. LOSER TEAM - Name05 - 28034 Battle Points - -2

6. WINNER TEAM - Name06 - 25034 Battle Points - +6

7. LOSER TEAM - Name07 - 20034 Battle Points - -6

8. LOSER TEAM - Name08 - 12034 Battle Points - -10

 

So the best player who got unlucky of the loser team dont lose points or just less.

 

You could say "oh thats so unfair for the undergeared and unskilled people then they will never make it out of swamp" - Guess what? Gear up and skill up or play in a group.

 

 

But i highly doubt this will ever come.

Before they will improve it they will trash solo ranked.

R.I.P 8v8.

 

Bad idea, encourages stat farming. A win should be a win and a loss should be a loss.