Ranked puts too much emphasis on win vs loss

(Serious Sam) #1

I topscore 9 out of every 10 games that I play in competitive, and at least 15 games after getting my rank placed, I’m still stuck where I was originally placed. Somehow, the topscoring on the losing teams is actually counteracting the topscoring on the winning teams. Is it supposed to be like this? Am I supposed to be able to win the game for the useless teammates that I automatically get placed with before I move up to the next rank? I honestly can’t fathom the logic behind making overall team performance more important than personal performance.

On another note, anyone interested in teaming up with me so I don’t have to topscore the losing team constantly anymore?

(capriciousParsely) #2

this is exactly why competitive should pool people into 2 groups: parties and solo queue.

(litheJacket) #3

we need more information about rank system

(B_Montiel) #4

Generally, pretty much all ranking systems emphasizes WIN/LOSS upon individual scores. All the ranking systems I encountered did this in the same way (Lol, CS:GO, Survarium to mention a few). That’s rather logical. You can be the top player of your team or even from the server, but if you don’t play the objective, support your team (put together, CARRY YOUR TEAM) your game is basically meaningless. There’s no reason a lonewolf sniper randomly picking heads who does not give a dare about his team and let it lose can possibly benefit from being the top player on the scoreboard sheet. I hope this sounds pretty clear for an explanation.

Now, if you want to maximize your chances of winning, as the matchmaking system is set right now, you better play matchmaking games with friends. 1 friend is already highering your chances of winning by a good margin. But having 4 is still the best way to do :p. The matchmaking still don’t put N players parties against each other, keep that in mind. So, if you go alone, you can end up with terrible walls of vets going bezerk mowing down mm players. Since the open beta release (02/06/15), I did quite a few matchmaking evenings with friends, and I never encountered other 3/4/5 players parties against us. Just to tell you how bad it is. So, as an advice, better get friends to play with you, or wait for a proper soloqueue system.

(scrub_lord) #5

Any game with a ranking system puts wins as priority. I think this is a retarded way of ranking players, but it’s what the developers have always decided to go with.

(Serious Sam) #6

But what if there was some sort of statistic that tracks how much you play the objective and how much you support your team. Some sort of xp for support and doing objectives. Hmmm, support xp and objective xp, what an interesting idea. :stuck_out_tongue:

Sarcasm aside, I think emphasis should be put more on support / obj xp rather than wins vs losses. Combat xp and W / L would still play a role in determining ranks and such, but being a team player is more important than how good you are at ignoring teammates and shooting enemies and how good your teammates are compared to your enemies. Therefore, obj / support xp should be more heavily weighted in the ranking calculations.

(B_Montiel) #7

The thing is, if the game is pretty balanced skill-wise(one day, maybe…), the enemy team would have to cooperate more than you do to beat you. But I do understand what you’re thinking about. I don’t really know the calculation, but this could be an interesting idea : winning team : UP in ranking following the scoreboard. Losing team : Down in ranking inverted from the obj/support score. That would do something like this in a team of 5 : best support/obj player : -1 pts or even 0. Worse support/obj player : -5 (and everything in between). But, thinking about it, this would stigmatize assault classes which have only one purpose : to do kills…

(eruditeDiamond) #8

[quote=“Serious Sam;12315”]I topscore 9 out of every 10 games that I play in competitive, and at least 15 games after getting my rank placed, I’m still stuck where I was originally placed. Somehow, the topscoring on the losing teams is actually counteracting the topscoring on the winning teams. Is it supposed to be like this? Am I supposed to be able to win the game for the useless teammates that I automatically get placed with before I move up to the next rank? I honestly can’t fathom the logic behind making overall team performance more important than personal performance.

On another note, anyone interested in teaming up with me so I don’t have to topscore the losing team constantly anymore?[/quote]I agree. If the competitive match making was better balanced and you didn’t have widely different skill sets matching onto the same team it wouldn’t be a big deal. However when you’re on a team with people far below your (and the other team’s skill level) you get boned no matter how well you perform.