A thrower paralyzed sr queue but devs ignoring this

[merovejec]

I guess he will be in the next URC tournament

 

Commando entry

[Lhancelot]

Im not defending their actions, im defending their right to do it, which gives people a pvp match to join.

 

I'd say a large percentage of ranked players would rather the queues not pop if they know for a fact a thrower is going to be on their team.

 

I have experienced this myself, and the anger it fills you with is quite substantial. You enter the match thinking you are competing with a 4v4 only to have one person either drop match or simply run forward into the other team to die as fast as possible. It's really frustrating.

 

I see people "throw" matches either because they are farming mats, or boosting rating for someone on the opposing team.

 

I hope the devs add other ways to gather the highest tier crafting mats other than in the only competitive facet of PVP. Put mats in regs where people already queue lackadaisically and where some already don't care of the outcome.

 

Rewarding "mat farmers" with 1.5mil tier 10 crafting mats as well as ranked comms and more for this behavior that ruins the entire match and robs it of any dignity isn't the way to do it.

 

As for rating getting thrown to pals on the opposite team, the devs would have to consider a new system of reward for rating.

 

I suggest instead of the ladder system they have now that grants rating, instead they ought to just give rating points for matches won/loss. Make it so you need a certain amount of points from wins/losses to achieve certain rewards.

 

It's so clear that BW can't monitor or control the cheating involving mat throwers/win traders, why continue using the present rating system to determine top rated titles and rewards this way?

 

It's not fair for honest players to have to wade through this awful system of trying to win rating properly when so many ways to abuse the system exist and many use these methods to get their coveted almighty rating.

Edited September 28, 2018 by Lhancelot

[olagatonjedi]

I'd say a large percentage of ranked players would rather the queues not pop if they know for a fact a thrower is going to be on their team.

I agree with you, regarding many players. But you do have players who log in and queue, and wait, and wait, and wait until no pops occur and finally their playtime is up and its a wasted venture. You dont think that players would want a pop, even if a thrower (which, btw, doesnt have to be a 100% thrower, but could also just be a very unskilled player) was queued? At least they have a chance the thrower would be on the other team. 50% chance is better than 0 chance to raise your rank.

 

I have experienced this myself, and the anger it fills you with is quite substantial. You enter the match thinking you are competing with a 4v4 only to have one person either drop match or simply run forward into the other team to die as fast as possible. It's really frustrating.

I have been there, and admit to having that response at one point, but then i took a step back and realized the nature of a random queuing system, and the fact that I was willingly subjecting myself to random draw matches. I also realized that no matter what aspect of any MMO, i cant control others actions, only mine. And if i get upset or mad, or even burst out at those specific players who are contributing to a drop in my rank, they are likely going to continue doing it in spite of my response. So i rarely talk in pvp matches unless its to provide feedback thats requested, or direction if no one else provides it, but i never expect my team to play the way i want them to, follow a strat i provide, or even try to win. If they do, great! If they dont, they are paying to do what they do, and thats their decision.

 

I see people "throw" matches either because they are farming mats, or boosting rating for someone on the opposing team.

Again, not all throwers are as obvious as some, so there are more in your presence that may seem like they are playing, but they are disguising it better. You have to consider those as well.

 

Rewarding "mat farmers" with 1.5mil tier 10 crafting mats as well as ranked comms and more for this behavior that ruins the entire match and robs it of any dignity isn't the way to do it.

The population of participants would, and has, plummeted when rewards were not worth the time spent. Its not like PvE, where the variables are known, and success is solely the responsibility of your own team. The rewards have to have more incentive than PVE because of that element.

 

I suggest instead of the ladder system they have now that grants rating, instead they ought to just give rating points for matches won/loss. Make it so you need a certain amount of points from wins/losses to achieve certain rewards.

There would be pros/cons to that type of system as well, and elements that could be thrown or compromised also.

Edited September 28, 2018 by olagatonjedi

[Darevsool]

One area of this game I've never been any good at is PVP. Especially arenas. I think the last one I got put in, I was on my sniper, and was the first focus target of the other team. Died without getting a shot off. The second round, I managed to put out 2-3k damage before I got killed.

 

Not even a ranked match, just a non ranked queue that happened to pop an arena.

 

I think what they need to do, which might help fix this to a small degree, is make it a requirement for EVERYONE to have at least valor level 25. Right now you only need one person on a team with 25, as the leader, and they can get the whole team in.

 

It won't solve the problem, but anyone who works their way up to Valor 25 might actually find it enjoyable, and try to compete the way the matches were designed.

 

The people who play ranked should absolutely be able to get rewards just like every other play style in the game. Making the rewards "cool" and exclusive to ranked would only get more people doing it JUST for the rewards. Besides, that is what the end of season rewards are for anyway.

[Lhancelot]

 

There would be pros/cons to that type of system as well, and elements that could be thrown or compromised also.

 

Perhaps but I think it would be much harder to "cheat" a high rating if it was determined by a rating that only could be gained via a points system.

 

For instance, if a win was 5 points, and a loss 1, and to reach bronze level you needed 500 points it would be hard to cheat your way there. If you queued and did nothing, fine. it will take you a long time to get the 500 points needed so this behavior would not be rewarded. However if a player was good and tried, they would get 5 points meaning it would take much less time to get the 500 points for the bronze tier rewards.

 

For silver and gold, obviously more points would be needed. I don't see how this type of system could be taken advantage of, not as easily as the present one is.

[olagatonjedi]

Perhaps but I think it would be much harder to "cheat" a high rating if it was determined by a rating that only could be gained via a points system.

 

For instance, if a win was 5 points, and a loss 1, and to reach bronze level you needed 500 points it would be hard to cheat your way there. If you queued and did nothing, fine. it will take you a long time to get the 500 points needed so this behavior would not be rewarded. However if a player was good and tried, they would get 5 points meaning it would take much less time to get the 500 points for the bronze tier rewards.

 

For silver and gold, obviously more points would be needed. I don't see how this type of system could be taken advantage of, not as easily as the present one is.

Perhaps if there was a limit on how many matches one could participate in per week (like conquest! Hey, see how that works!) Thats one of the ways the ELO system prevents playtime differences from widening the gap, is people people can lose a lot of rating if they play a lot by lose one time to a poor team. We could really dissect every type of pvp system if we really want, but like i said, there are so many elements that can be compromised or abused even by the good players. Would the majority of pvpers be ok with a limited number of matches eligible for increasing rank? Doubtful.

Edited September 28, 2018 by olagatonjedi

[Lhancelot]

Perhaps if there was a limit on how many matches one could participate in per week (like conquest! Hey, see how that works!) Thats one of the ways the ELO system prevents playtime differences from widening the gap, is people people can lose a lot of rating if they play a lot by lose one time to a poor team. We could really dissect every type of pvp system if we really want, but like i said, there are so many elements that can be compromised or abused even by the good players. Would the majority of pvpers be ok with a limited number of matches eligible for increasing rank? Doubtful.

 

Right. There should be no limit to how much or how often people queue for ranked. Even in the system I propose.

 

Even now, according to the experts regarding ranked, they proclaim that if you simply keep queing eventually over time with enough matches under one's belt a better rating can be gotten just by playing the odds.

 

In essence, if you got the time to queue in the present ranked system no matter how bad you are you should be able to at least get bronze in ranked as well as gain a monster amount of ranked comms.

 

So as it stands there is no limit on how often someone queues ranked yet frequency of queing does play a part in gaining rating. If a points system was added to ranked, then by no means should a queue limit be added either.

[olagatonjedi]

Right. There should be no limit to how much or how often people queue for ranked. Even in the system I propose.

 

Even now, according to the experts regarding ranked, they proclaim that if you simply keep queing eventually over time with enough matches under one's belt a better rating can be gotten just by playing the odds.

 

In essence, if you got the time to queue in the present ranked system no matter how bad you are you should be able to at least get bronze in ranked as well as gain a monster amount of ranked comms.

 

So as it stands there is no limit on how often someone queues ranked yet frequency of queing does play a part in gaining rating. If a points system was added to ranked, then by no means should a queue limit be added either.

The new system would be abused and/or cater to players who can queue more frequently, which is unfair.

[AlrikFassbauer]

What I actually do not understand, is this :

 

Why did no-one come up with this solution ? :

 

If there is 1 group member doing nothing,

then 1 member of the other group should also do nothing.

 

Then, both sides would be equal again.

 

*facepalm*

Edited September 29, 2018 by AlrikFassbauer

[Kiesu]

What I actually do not understand, is this :

 

Why did no-one come up with this solution ? :

 

If there is 1 group member doing nothing,

then 1 member of the other group should also do nothing.

 

Then, both sides would be equal again.

 

*facepalm*

Because it's not technically possible to make sure someone from the enemy team stands afk as well. And it's not their fault there is a griefer on one team so why should they be forced to respect the griefer? The griefer deserves the loss, the rest of his team doesn't. If in 3v3 the griefers side wins, the griefes just got rewarded for being a bad sport. Who would want to reward that guy?

[DavidAtkinson]

Right. There should be no limit to how much or how often people queue for ranked. Even in the system I propose.

 

Even now, according to the experts regarding ranked, they proclaim that if you simply keep queing eventually over time with enough matches under one's belt a better rating can be gotten just by playing the odds.

 

In essence, if you got the time to queue in the present ranked system no matter how bad you are you should be able to at least get bronze in ranked as well as gain a monster amount of ranked comms.

 

So as it stands there is no limit on how often someone queues ranked yet frequency of queing does play a part in gaining rating. If a points system was added to ranked, then by no means should a queue limit be added either.

 

Wrong on all aspects... If you pick wrong que times and lose 6 in a row, you will never recover from that.... And it can very easily happen. If you get below a certain rating, you're climbing up will be total nightmare if you play a dps class...

[Lhancelot]

Wrong on all aspects... If you pick wrong que times and lose 6 in a row, you will never recover from that.... And it can very easily happen. If you get below a certain rating, you're climbing up will be total nightmare if you play a dps class...

 

Well explain that to people that seem to live in ranked. I am just passing what info they have said on these very forums. Basically even if you lose 6 matches in a row, if you have the time to queue, you can and will wipe those losses out with enough wins to gain elo/rating.

 

This is not my theory this is what people have said ad nauseum on these forums and so I am going to take their word on it. If it's wrong, then that's fine too because at this point I don't even do solo ranked enough to test this theory out now. I lack the patience.

 

If BW chooses to not make changes to how you gain rating for ranked it will have zero impact on me. I only propose this as a couple others have too on how to change ranked so that it's not so easy to destroy people's rating/elo by griefers.

 

I personally find solo ranked far too frustrating to take part in now, literally 80% of the matches were bad matches due to throwers, trolls, and angry manchildren that left after a first round death when I played at the end of last season.

 

The only way to counter such abysmal behavior is to make ELO gained via participation. Team ranked offers more of a chance to gain ELO properly, but I am willing to bet solo ranked is far more active and so the way they calculate ELO is catering to the PVP meta least played of all of them, that being group ranked. Of course numbers might not prove this though seeing team ranked does have a substantial number of mat farmers who simply queue up and die for the sole purpose of gathering mats.

 

My point is, of people actually queing for real competitive ranked fights I am sure more queue solo ranked than group ranked only because people seem to prefer solo platforms with less obligation involved and less preparation. Solo ranked affords that.

 

Anyway, if people want to debate and shoot down this way of gaining ELO/rating in ranked, as I said that's fine. You can keep on enjoying the system we got now that is plagued with mat farmers, throwers, griefers, and *******s. It only gets worse as time goes on with the present ELO system.

 

I am almost at the point of not caring now. In fact I doubt I will bother responding anymore here I think I expressed everything I wanted to regarding the state of ranked, a meta I rarely even take part in now.

 

I should mention we all know who the best PVPers are, the titles people gain from top ELO mean nothing. We know which ones earned it and deserve them while we also know the ones who cheated and got them. Pretending this ELO rating system indicates who has skill by these titles is a total joke and we know that too. Gaining ELO/rating by points from wins/losses wouldn't make titles any less worthy or indicative of skill.

 

I think many wouldn't want a change because the present system is so easy to manipulate and game. They enjoy reaping all these great rewards with no real effort and making rating gained via points from wins/losses would mean actual time and effort would have to be applied.

 

As it stands right now, with a little nefarious planning a player can milk ranked with less than 20 matches and get top ELO I bet. Who wants to give that up?

Edited September 29, 2018 by Lhancelot

[DavidAtkinson]

Well explain that to people that seem to live in ranked. I am just passing what info they have said on these very forums. Basically even if you lose 6 matches in a row, if you have the time to queue, you can and will wipe those losses out with enough wins to gain elo/rating.

 

This is not my theory this is what people have said ad nauseum on these forums and so I am going to take their word on it. If it's wrong, then that's fine too because at this point I don't even do solo ranked enough to test this theory out now. I lack the patience.

 

If BW chooses to not make changes to how you gain rating for ranked it will have zero impact on me. I only propose this as a couple others have too on how to change ranked so that it's not so easy to destroy people's rating/elo by griefers.

 

I personally find solo ranked far too frustrating to take part in now, literally 80% of the matches were bad matches due to throwers, trolls, and angry manchildren that left after a first round death when I played at the end of last season.

 

The only way to counter such abysmal behavior is to make ELO gained via participation. Team ranked offers more of a chance to gain ELO properly, but I am willing to bet solo ranked is far more active and so the way they calculate ELO is catering to the PVP meta least played of all of them, that being group ranked. Of course numbers might not prove this though seeing team ranked does have a substantial number of mat farmers who simply queue up and die for the sole purpose of gathering mats.

 

My point is, of people actually queing for real competitive ranked fights I am sure more queue solo ranked than group ranked only because people seem to prefer solo platforms with less obligation involved and less preparation. Solo ranked affords that.

 

Anyway, if people want to debate and shoot down this way of gaining ELO/rating in ranked, as I said that's fine. You can keep on enjoying the system we got now that is plagued with mat farmers, throwers, griefers, and *******s. It only gets worse as time goes on with the present ELO system.

 

I am almost at the point of not caring now. In fact I doubt I will bother responding anymore here I think I expressed everything I wanted to regarding the state of ranked, a meta I rarely even take part in now.

 

I should mention we all know who the best PVPers are, the titles people gain from top ELO mean nothing. We know which ones earned it and deserve them while we also know the ones who cheated and got them. Pretending this ELO rating system indicates who has skill by these titles is a total joke and we know that too. Gaining ELO/rating by points from wins/losses wouldn't make titles any less worthy or indicative of skill.

 

I think many wouldn't want a change because the present system is so easy to manipulate and game. They enjoy reaping all these great rewards with no real effort and making rating gained via points from wins/losses would mean actual time and effort would have to be applied.

 

As it stands right now, with a little nefarious planning a player can milk ranked with less than 20 matches and get top ELO I bet. Who wants to give that up?

 

I meant that losing 6 games in a row might not be a one time situation only.. You can lose 6 today.. and another 3 tomorrow and not have enough wins to have a positive climb.

 

Ranked today is win one lose one.... Win 2, lose 2.. and you find yourself stagnating at the end of the week.

 

Don't believe the bull ranked people tell you on the forums. Just watch their behavior in game. They are gone after 2 losses in a row, 3 max. If you are a healer-tank, you have better chance of climbing due to how elo matchmaking works, another possibility is if you play one of the " I WIN" classes. You have a better chance. Otherwise, if you don't have a good rating after 50 games, queing will be pointless.

 

I agree on the it's frustrating thing. Yes, it pretty much is and that is why the que is dead or dying on most servers. Toxic community is the other reason. We play this game of enjoyment and not because we are looking to get more frustration.

[Friend-Referral]

Im not defending their actions, im defending their right to do it, which gives people a pvp match to join.

Arrogant PvE'er detected

[olagatonjedi]

Arrogant PvE'er detected

Who is?