Ranked points : too hard to earn ?

(Nail) #61

and yet no one signed up for the last DBNation cup, seems no one wants serious

(Sorotia) #62

@Nail said:
and yet no one signed up for the last DBNation cup, seems no one wants serious

Always kinda thought about signing up for stuff like that, just don’t feel I’m good enough.

(Nail) #63

@Sorotia said:

@Nail said:
and yet no one signed up for the last DBNation cup, seems no one wants serious

Always kinda thought about signing up for stuff like that, just don’t feel I’m good enough.

everyone cries about balanced games, but when they’re offered no one shows up

easier to whine I guess

(neverplayseriou) #64

@Nail said:

@Sorotia said:

@Nail said:
and yet no one signed up for the last DBNation cup, seems no one wants serious

Always kinda thought about signing up for stuff like that, just don’t feel I’m good enough.

everyone cries about balanced games, but when they’re offered no one shows up

easier to whine I guess

You clearly never watched a dbn cup.

(bgyoshi) #65

I think the one thing everyone is missing is that Ranked games can be up to 30 minutes long

Fuck that

There isn’t enough in the world to force me to sit through 30 minutes of steamroll. It’s boring and I have other things to do with my life. Maybe try shortening matches so that steamrolls only last 10 minutes at most, like in Objective. I already feel like playing objective mode twice (switching attack/defense after a round) would make SW a million times better, but this just makes too much sense.

Shorten the games first, that’ll alleviate a lot of the salt that comes with getting 10 points for wasting half an hour on a trash match.

Then, see how it alters the grind. I feel like giving a -75% points penalty for the surrendering team would fix the issue of surrendering for points. I also don’t really see the point of giving more ranked points to the winner and less to the loser. You don’t give less credits to the losing side in casual, so why give less here?

Time based points seem like the best solution as well. I’d even bump the earnings up to a universal 100 points per full round. Meaning you earn 0 - 100 points where 0 is the start of the match and 100 is where both teams run the timers down all the way. I expect the average match would earn 50 to 60 points for both teams. The winners get more EV to rank up and the losers don’t, that’s the incentive to win.

(znuund) #66

@Nail said:
and yet no one signed up for the last DBNation cup, seems no one wants serious

there are a few facts, why this cannot be compared directly

  • people always go the way of least resistance
  • people will always think their way is the bomb as long as there is nothing better

last point is even contradictory in itself, but it works like that.

more would sign up, if the serious business of ranked would go only through DBNation. As long as people can queue up for ranked and tell themselves that they are pro because of that, nothing else will work.

Redesign ranked for season 5 or 6!

  • make ranked a separate menu with a clan registering page. No solo ranked!
  • make different leagues/ladders as much as you want 3on3, 5on5, 6on6 or what you want.
  • every team in a league starts at 1000 points
  • allow teams to challenge each other with a date, time and server location
  • once both teams agree to the challenge, SD could start a server.
  • server could load a spectator into the match (e.g. twitch and the like, serves for external control of the match)
  • winner wins ladder points (and ‘ranked’ money) loser loses points

This process can be automated. This can be very fast or very slow, depending on quickness of each team to react and on the feature to prepare a server.

The very high skilled bracket will find a game much quicker than queuing for 2h+.

Don’t waste time on finding a good balancing algorithm to make a queue viable if you are going to make community servers anyway. People want to play, not to queue.

(Your worst knifemare.) #67

@znuund
A majority of the players on ranked have only been solo quenes (at least for me), so not allowing them to solo would largely reduce the playerbase in ranked.

more would sign up, if the serious business of ranked would go only through DBNation. As long as people can queue up for ranked and tell themselves that they are pro because of that, nothing else will work.
That can be said about any game.

  • make ranked a separate menu with a clan registering page. No solo ranked!
    Already explained why not.
  • make different leagues/ladders as much as you want 3on3, 5on5, 6on6 or what you want.
    Seperates the remaining ranked playerbase.
  • every team in a league starts at 1000 points
    Current show of ranked is good if they rely less on W/L.
  • allow teams to challenge each other with a date, time and server location
  • once both teams agree to the challenge, SD could start a server.
  • server could load a spectator into the match (e.g. twitch and the like, serves for external control of the match)
  • winner wins ladder points (and ‘ranked’ money) loser loses points

This process can be automated. This can be very fast or very slow, depending on quickness of each team to react and on the feature to prepare a server.

The very high skilled bracket will find a game much quicker than queuing for 2h+.
The whole process of challenging and finding a server could take much longer than a few minutes of searching.

.

(znuund) #68

@Lord_Coctus
A majority of the players on ranked have only been solo quenes (at least for me), so not allowing them to solo would largely reduce the playerbase in ranked.
People who are interested in ranked are interested in ranked. If there is only one option to play ranked it doesn’t reduce playerbase at all.

And the ladders and leagues would not separate any playerbase, you can be in all the ladders at once, you just have to schedule the games that they don’t conflict for you. Not that hard.

Current show of ranked is good if they rely less on W/L.
the points are only here to calculate your place in the ladder… just real ranked, not ranked credits and stuff, but a real measure of how good you are versus all the teams in the world.

The whole process of challenging and finding a server could take much longer than a few minutes of searching.
It can but only on purpose. This new way needs more active participation of the player to work, not just press a button.
You can have the situation, where one team challenges the other and once the other reads the challenge it may lead to a match another day. But you can also have both teams online, talking over irc or steam and challenge right away. Limiting factor here is the server start up and spectator initialization. Something like the almost 3h queue of @Melinder shows that ranked queue is retarded in the higher brackets. It’s just a bandaid for a broad audience rather than a competitive system.

Let’s be honest here:

  • For CMM, you press a button and it tries to find a balanced game with players from your skill bracket.
  • For Ranked, you press a button and it tries to find a balanced game with players from your skill bracket.

This style of ranked is just an illusion, produced by the player who has an inflated view of the same thing.
If anything separates the player base then it is this.

It is mind blowing to me, why SD would want to invent the wheel again.

(neverplayseriou) #69

He’s got a 3 hour queue because he’s playing in a dead region…

(Melinder) #70

@neverplayseriou said:
He’s got a 3 hour queue because he’s playing in a dead region…

To be fair other players already have 50-100 games in Asia, whereas i’ve been on 10 games since last Friday.