Ranked Potentially needs changes

(Patches04) #1

With Dirty Bomb having a small competitive player pool (at least from what I’ve experienced with searching for ranked matches and constantly being matched with the same players), and considering the fact that the skill pool would look something like an hour glass, determining someone’s rank based on win-loss is not optimal. Similar to League of Legends, Dirty Bomb is intensely determined by ability of the team as a whole. One bad player could mean the game, one person who has a bad connection and constantly disconnects could mean the game, one rage quitty teammate again, could be the game.

I’m not 100% sure how Dirty Bomb determines your rank. I’m going to assume it’s based on win-loss since I just played two games which I lost (one due to a teammate that was shooting walls on his own time and didn’t know where to go), however I got the best score overall with a decent KDA, and yet got deranked. For lack of a better phrase, this just does not seem fair. I don’t think losses should be rewarded but I think strong performances should be rewarded/tolerated. Theoretically I could play the next 10 games amazingly with godlike KDA’s, lose them all, and get demoted to the absolute bottom. I know I probably seem whiny and salty but I just feel that success and skill shouldn’t be punished as that discourages players from wanting to do ranked at all.

Thoughts/Opinions?

(Dawnlazy) #2

On one hand it would be nice if performance was taken into account rather than just W/L now that they made it so it’s impossible to win unless you and 1 other person can kill 5 people every 25 seconds.

On the other hand, if score affected ranks it would cause 3/42 KD Auras that get upwards of 20k XP with health insurance to disproportionally rank up as well so maybe they’d want to look at how score is acquired first.

(N8o) #3

It’s safe to say that DB uses an Elo-based system.
If you want to get away from crappy team mates, I would have suggested to get into a premade of five… but… well… Uh… Not anymore.
I would highly suggest getting into what you can do now, a duo.
Other teams are also relying on duos, so you wont face any 5 man premades anymore. It ends up becoming which duo is better than the other.

And, theoretically, if you got Godlikes for 10 games straight, you wont be losing. It takes a severe unbalance or complete lack of team coordination to be able to achieve a Godlike and still lose.

(Patches04) #4

[quote=“Dawnrazor;155208”]On one hand it would be nice if performance was taken into account rather than just W/L now that they made it so it’s impossible to win unless you and 1 other person can kill 5 people every 25 seconds.

On the other hand, if score affected ranks it would cause 3/42 KD Auras that get upwards of 20k XP with health insurance to disproportionally rank up as well so maybe they’d want to look at how score is acquired first.[/quote]

I agree with that but that also brings into account the value of those aspects. A healer could go 2/20 but that could be because they were spending more time picking people up/healing and just less time shooting. Similar situation, a Proxy gets a bad KDA but because she kept putting her body on the line to push the EV forward as often as she could so that her team could win more quickly.

There would definitely need to be some kind of control in that aspect surely, but again, those things in of themselves are important to a team win.

(dnbradio) #5

Posted a topic already about this stuff today…

(kibloy) #6

You’re now going into the terrain of philosophy… there is no definite answer to who or what won the game, especially not by looking at simple numbers like K/D or score.
I’d prefer the game to not take a stance at all. Whatever wins the game wins the game. It also keeps players from farming kills or score XP just to influence their ranking.

Something important to keep in mind as well: a loss HAS to be penalized, no matter how good your individual performance was. Otherwise you could easily exploit the system until everyone is Elite.

What I would like to see though is that your rank/ELO change after a game is influenced by how close it was, e.g. by comparing the completion times. With that system you could actually penalize Elites who just barely eek out a win against Golds because the system would expect them to win decisively. In CS:GO it’s based on rounds won if I’m not mistaken, you can rank up after really close losses against much better players.

(Dawnlazy) #7

How about… 33% based on win/loss, 33% based on KD (or just gross kill count, maybe KPM) and 33% overall score?

(SzGamer227) #8

No, I definitely don’t think K:D is should not be a part of rank analysis. As a squishy engineer, you would be discouraged from trying to complete an objective if it meant dying, and it would definitely encourage players to play certain mercs coughVassilicough to try to get a high K:D at the cost of playing more reserved and not actually getting anything done. If it were to be divided up, it should be 66.7% score and 33.3% win/lose, so that engineers aren’t penalized for taking risks for objectives, and medics aren’t penalized for focusing on team support rather than K:D or kill count.

(Dawnlazy) #9

No, I definitely don’t think K:D is should not be a part of rank analysis. As a squishy engineer, you would be discouraged from trying to complete an objective if it meant dying, and it would definitely encourage players to play certain mercs coughVassilicough to try to get a high K:D at the cost of playing more reserved and not actually getting anything done. If it were to be divided up, it should be 66.7% score and 33.3% win/lose, so that engineers aren’t penalized for taking risks for objectives, and medics aren’t penalized for focusing on team support rather than K:D or kill count.[/quote]

You will get good points if you do the engie job well enough though. Maybe just Kills Per Minute then, I agree, deaths don’t matter much in a game where there is friendly fire, kill-revives and people suiciding on shortspawn to avoid getting longed or to resupply on ammo.

(gloomyRequirement) #10

Im agreeing with Dawnrazor and the OP simultaneously. The game’s ranking system should have more depth than it currently has - yet I don’t think flat out “score” would do it any justice. Mercs like Vassili or Thunder have a really hard time getting score generally. Vassili for all the xp he ever gets is from kills, and Thunder because his Concussion grenade only grants assists in a REALLY small timewindow(as goes for Vassili’s “spotted assist”). Medics always end up at the top of the scoreboard given equal skill.

I’d actually like to see some suggestions concerning the topic neverthless.

(gloomyRequirement) #11

No, I definitely don’t think K:D is should not be a part of rank analysis. As a squishy engineer, you would be discouraged from trying to complete an objective if it meant dying, and it would definitely encourage players to play certain mercs coughVassilicough to try to get a high K:D at the cost of playing more reserved and not actually getting anything done. If it were to be divided up, it should be 66.7% score and 33.3% win/lose, so that engineers aren’t penalized for taking risks for objectives, and medics aren’t penalized for focusing on team support rather than K:D or kill count.[/quote]

Vassili is one of the relative hardest heroes to get score with. So there’s balancing around that.

(Szakalot) #12

pls for love of all thats holy in fps dont call these characters ‘heroes’

(Pacmikey) #13

What about villains?

(x3mytiz) #14

Or pokemons?

(Patches04) #15

[quote=“kibloy;155242”]You’re now going into the terrain of philosophy… there is no definite answer to who or what won the game, especially not by looking at simple numbers like K/D or score.
I’d prefer the game to not take a stance at all. Whatever wins the game wins the game. It also keeps players from farming kills or score XP just to influence their ranking.

Something important to keep in mind as well: a loss HAS to be penalized, no matter how good your individual performance was. Otherwise you could easily exploit the system until everyone is Elite.

What I would like to see though is that your rank/ELO change after a game is influenced by how close it was, e.g. by comparing the completion times. With that system you could actually penalize Elites who just barely eek out a win against Golds because the system would expect them to win decisively. In CS:GO it’s based on rounds won if I’m not mistaken, you can rank up after really close losses against much better players.[/quote]

I can definitely see where you’re coming from. Obviously a system based on score could be abused. But if someone sits in the back and farms then they probably won’t win. Which leads me to my next point, I understand why loses shouldn’t be rewarded but if you played well, contributed to the progress of the game in a positive manner, you shouldn’t be punished or at least punished severely. It’s discouraging. After I had finished my provisionals, I played two games and got demoted, losing one because one player on our team was wandering aimlessly around the map not knowing what was going on and the other because three different teammates disconnected at different times. I didn’t play perfectly but I certainly did a lot and based on my score, KDA, and the fact that I completed two objectives essentially on my own, I put in my part. If you play well enough you should be minimally penalized.

It’s outrageous that one person on the team could quite literally troll and throw your hard work in the trash and you have suffer from it. Yes there is kicking but for some reason people fail to understand the F1 button exists and I’ve had times where I call a vote and it immediately gets declined somehow.

I do think the CS:GO formula would be a great concept to apply to dirty bomb

(Patches04) #16

[quote=“N8o;155214”]It’s safe to say that DB uses an Elo-based system.
If you want to get away from crappy team mates, I would have suggested to get into a premade of five… but… well… Uh… Not anymore.
I would highly suggest getting into what you can do now, a duo.
Other teams are also relying on duos, so you wont face any 5 man premades anymore. It ends up becoming which duo is better than the other.

And, theoretically, if you got Godlikes for 10 games straight, you wont be losing. It takes a severe unbalance or complete lack of team coordination to be able to achieve a Godlike and still lose.[/quote]

I’ll definitely try the duo concept. I just need friends who play the game :smiley:

As for the godlike concept. I was being a bit dramatic but still theoretically you could still lose. You could have the best game of your life but you still be punished for a loss caused by a stroke of bad luck or a crap teammate. Sure it’s unlikely but one bad teammate could mean the game. In my last game the bomb was just a few seconds away from going off and the only teammate alive/left with ammo was facing our spawn shooting a brick wall and no I’m not exaggerating. Obviously I could probably get better myself, but it’s discouraging to see your hard work and achievement get punished.

(Szakalot) #17

if mercs can have transformation tiers - ILL call them pokemons