How many games have you played and what's your solo rating?

[EvenHardNiner]

64 wins

65 losses

 

1020 rating.

 

I've had incredibly bad luck when it comes to the rest of the team, such as people not in PVP gear, new people to the game etc. Because solo rating is mainly based on luck. Most of the wins came from me carrying the team.

Edited October 16, 2014 by EvenHardNiner

[K_osss]

Solo queue is nuts - clueless folks, i've seen people is Recruit gear, champion gear, etc... Then there are the intentionally bad folks just trolling. I haven't played much solo this season. Seems like I was in a similar ballpark last i checked - 20 and 18 or so - 1050-1100 or some such.

[Zoom_VI]

64 wins

65 losses

 

1020 rating.

 

I've had incredibly bad luck when it comes to the rest of the team, such as people not in PVP gear, new people to the game etc. Because solo rating is mainly based on luck. Most of the wins came from me carrying the team.

 

so a effectively 50% win rate means it must be bad pugs? Really?

[Nothematic]

Haven't played at all. Fed up being matched with people in PvE gear, playing against hybrids that the matchmaking system can't deal with and trolls.

[Zoom_VI]

Haven't played at all. Fed up being matched with people in PvE gear, playing against hybrids that the matchmaking system can't deal with and trolls.

 

Well you won't have to deal with hybrids in 3.0

[teclado]

I haven't done any ranked since season 1. I only have a single character that I feel is geared sufficiently for it (VG with Brut ear, implants, relics, rest obroan, 14 augments). I've been thinking about doing some, and have spent some time in queue, but eventually leave queue when nothing pops and do regular instead.

 

Basically, I'll do ranked when everybody is excited about the rewards. I like going for the armor set, don't really care about the mount.

[LeglessChair]

Well you won't have to deal with hybrids in 3.0

 

There will probably be no walker mount rewards 3.0 either.

Edited October 16, 2014 by LeglessChair

[EvenHardNiner]

so a effectively 50% win rate means it must be bad pugs? Really?

 

Pretty much yes. This includes warzone leavers, people who deliberately troll and type /stuck, AFKers...

Edited October 16, 2014 by EvenHardNiner

[cjwestlake]

No reason to play ranked until the rating system is more indicative of a players individual skill level IMO.

[Zoom_VI]

Pretty much yes. This includes warzone leavers, people who deliberately troll and type /stuck, AFKers...

 

I hate to break it to you, but everyone deals with bad pugs in solo ranked. So no excuses.

[foxmob]

No reason to play ranked until the rating system is more indicative of a players individual skill level IMO.

 

I suppose there's a grain of truth to this, but it sounds pretty silly. the only way elo could ever truly be that is in duels, which is what the system, as I take it, was originally designed to do (1v1 chess match). you can carry a bad in your grp Q as easily as yolo...well...you could if anyone queued grp. it's a team game. even with registered teams, your rating is only ever going to reflect team performance.

 

I'm 59 and 40-something for a 1356 rating (yolo) for whatever we're posting this for.

 

for the guy who's .500 "because of pugs" -- what zoom was trying to subtly say is, "I don't know where you get your delusions, laser brain." you have yourself quite a few wins thanks to baddies on your opponents' teams as well. is it balanced? maybe not. but it sure as hell isn't the difference between .750 and .500

[Charlaay]

Ranked play in this game is riddled with problems. There are badly geared players, bad players in general, and trolls. The system is broken.

 

None of that means you can't gain rating. The advanced class you play does matter, but your skill at playing it effectively matters more. As a sorcerer, it's pretty much guaranteed that I will obtain a higher rating than if I were to play my marauder. Since I'm decent enough at playing both classes, however, I have managed to push past the imperfections of solo ranked and obtain higher elo.

 

Play smart and don't suck. That's the best advice you will get.

It's that, or play a better game.

[foxmob]

Ranked play in this game is riddled with problems. There are badly geared players, bad players in general, and trolls. The system is broken.

 

None of that means you can't gain rating. The advanced class you play does matter, but your skill at playing it effectively matters more. As a sorcerer, it's pretty much guaranteed that I will obtain a higher rating than if I were to play my marauder. Since I'm decent enough at playing both classes, however, I have managed to push past the imperfections of solo ranked and obtain higher elo.

 

Play smart and don't suck. That's the best advice you will get.

It's that, or play a better game.

 

LOL <3 that sig!

[Banderal]

for the guy who's .500 "because of pugs" -- what zoom was trying to subtly say is, "I don't know where you get your delusions, laser brain." you have yourself quite a few wins thanks to baddies on your opponents' teams as well. is it balanced? maybe not. but it sure as hell isn't the difference between .750 and .500

 

“The one thing that unites all human beings, regardless of age, gender, religion, economic status, or ethnic background, is that, deep down inside, we all believe that we are above-average drivers.” - Dave Barry

 

Applies to this game as well. But I like the logic that a lot of people seem to bring to solo ranked. I had a rating of 900-ish, but it's not that I suck! It's that I had really bad luck, and was always teamed with really bad players. Totally not my fault.

[Coloneli]

1750 rating

94 loss

165 win

 

Yes, i have been lazy

[Odyseus]

Once I learned people were que syncing I completely given up on Ranked. I always end up with clueless players who don't know how to peel, cc, or focus fire. Warzones are good enough for me so I'm just sticking with that.

[EvenHardNiner]

I hate to break it to you, but everyone deals with bad pugs in solo ranked. So no excuses.

 

Hate to break it to YOU, but it's actually based on luck. Some people get good teams, some people don't, some people are against good teams, some people aren't.

 

Solo rating is actually based on team rating.

Edited October 17, 2014 by EvenHardNiner

[maverickmatt]

Hate to break it to YOU, but it's actually based on luck. Some people get good teams, some people don't, some people are against good teams, some people aren't.

 

Solo rating is actually based on team rating.

 

It's the theorem of large numbers, which basically says the average of the results obtained from a large number of trials should be close to the expected value, and will tend to become closer as more trials are performed.

 

Translation: Your experience is relatively representative of the experiences of the entire playerbase.

 

That means everyone has to deal with the same set of circumstances. Luck does not play a factor.

Edited October 17, 2014 by maverickmatt

[cjwestlake]

"I suppose there's a grain of truth to this, but it sounds pretty silly"

 

Assigning a rank to an individual player based on 8 players total performance is "silly". The question now becomes is this the best system BW can come up with? The answer is obvious.

 

1v1 ranking (when they occur in wzs) and a team ranking (currently being used for individual rankings) system would be nice. By the way 4v4 gets old fast.

[SOULCASTER]

I have a few toons over 1450 rating at the moment, but my main/highest for solo ranked is: 1529 (current) (1542 best) with 52 wins 22 losses. But that was when S3 started. I haven't done rateds in about 3 or 4 weeks now.

 

Guess i'll have to get back into them to finish off a 1600 rating. I'm sure that will be the new mount for T1.

Edited October 17, 2014 by SOULCASTER

[shadowopsx]

Solo Ranked PvP is a complete and utter joke. I cannot tell you the amount of people who I have seen sub 20 valor, in green hear, with no clue. To make it worse with the addition of conquest to the game there have been more people queue just to get the conquest points. That being said; I currently have 35 wins and 10 losses with a 1712 rating.

[maverickmatt]

Solo Ranked PvP is a complete and utter joke. I cannot tell you the amount of people who I have seen sub 20 valor, in green hear, with no clue. To make it worse with the addition of conquest to the game there have been more people queue just to get the conquest points. That being said; I currently have 35 wins and 10 losses with a 1712 rating.

 

This exemplifies my point.

 

Crying foul when the chips don't fall your way is a convenient way to place blame on someone else. We are all subject to the same environment.

 

That means that if we are all disadvantaged, then nobody is.

 

 

Hmm. As it turns out, solo rating isn't much of a joke at all.

[CaptainApop]

Around 220 played I think.

Won about 150 of them.

 

2112 rating but I peaked to 2150 or so.

 

Not quoting figures these are from memory. Haven't been logged in for about a week or two.

[shadowopsx]

This exemplifies my point.

 

Crying foul when the chips don't fall your way is a convenient way to place blame on someone else. We are all subject to the same environment.

 

That means that if we are all disadvantaged, then nobody is.

 

 

Hmm. As it turns out, solo rating isn't much of a joke at all.

 

Who said that the person with green gear is on my team every time? Solo ranked is complete RNG. To your statement about disadvantages I disagree. Its not an even play field is what I'm trying to get across. I could have 4 extremely good players on my team and the other team have 3 good players and someone without a clue; who will win. It is not fair, and solo ranked is a joke.

[EvenHardNiner]

That means everyone has to deal with the same set of circumstances. Luck does not play a factor.

 

Wrong. In solo ranked you are matched up with random people. Therefore it's purely luck that your team may be a good set up or your opponents may have a bad set up.