My suggestion is that the ranking system be more involved after initial placement. It seems a little lazy to only base your rank after placement on wins alone. The ranking system should acknowledge KDA, the rank of players on the other team, average life span, things like that.
Why do I want that? If we had a system like this then we could potentially give someone the value of 2 wins for one win. It just seems more logical to me. This still promotes teamwork and winning. The only difference is that if you win and do well, you have the chance of that win accounting for 2 wins towards your next rank up. It would have no affect on losing games.
Wouldn’t that promote more selfish gameplay though? If its just based on wins and losses the best option is to work as a team and win the game, I would think.
> 2560081931056311;2:
> Wouldn’t that promote more selfish gameplay though? If its just based on wins and losses the best option is to work as a team and win the game, I would think.
At times, of course, it would, but basing a RANKING amongst OTHER players based SOLEY off of wins isn’t exactly rocket science, or very accurate.
> 2560081931056311;2:
> Wouldn’t that promote more selfish gameplay though? If its just based on wins and losses the best option is to work as a team and win the game, I would think.
it would yes
> 2533274868600467;3:
> > 2560081931056311;2:
> > Wouldn’t that promote more selfish gameplay though? If its just based on wins and losses the best option is to work as a team and win the game, I would think.
>
>
> At times, of course, it would, but basing a RANKING amongst OTHER players based SOLEY off of wins isn’t exactly rocket science, or very accurate.
I think your ranking in a team game should reflect how good of a team player you are, so based on others is acceptable. I think its accurate because everyone is on the same scale.
I agree its not an accurate way to compare one individual to another, though.
> 2560081931056311;5:
> > 2533274868600467;3:
> > > 2560081931056311;2:
> > > Wouldn’t that promote more selfish gameplay though? If its just based on wins and losses the best option is to work as a team and win the game, I would think.
> >
> >
> > At times, of course, it would, but basing a RANKING amongst OTHER players based SOLEY off of wins isn’t exactly rocket science, or very accurate.
>
>
> I think your ranking in a team game should reflect how good of a team player you are, so based on others is acceptable. I think its accurate because everyone is on the same scale.
>
> I agree its not an accurate way to compare one individual to another, though.
And the game also takes into account personal performance. But it weighs kills to deaths much higher than other things that are more important at the higher tiers of gameplay, such as assists to deaths or objective work.
> 2533274847545000;6:
> > 2560081931056311;5:
> > > 2533274868600467;3:
> > > > 2560081931056311;2:
> > > > Wouldn’t that promote more selfish gameplay though? If its just based on wins and losses the best option is to work as a team and win the game, I would think.
> > >
> > >
> > > At times, of course, it would, but basing a RANKING amongst OTHER players based SOLEY off of wins isn’t exactly rocket science, or very accurate.
> >
> >
> > I think your ranking in a team game should reflect how good of a team player you are, so based on others is acceptable. I think its accurate because everyone is on the same scale.
> >
> > I agree its not an accurate way to compare one individual to another, though.
>
>
> And the game also takes into account personal performance. But it weighs kills to deaths much higher than other things that are more important at the higher tiers of gameplay, such as assists to deaths or objective work.
I thought that once you were ranked the only thing that could change your rank was winning and losing…
> 2560081931056311;5:
> > 2533274868600467;3:
> > > 2560081931056311;2:
> > > Wouldn’t that promote more selfish gameplay though? If its just based on wins and losses the best option is to work as a team and win the game, I would think.
> >
> >
> > At times, of course, it would, but basing a RANKING amongst OTHER players based SOLEY off of wins isn’t exactly rocket science, or very accurate.
>
>
> I think your ranking in a team game should reflect how good of a team player you are, so based on others is acceptable. I think its accurate because everyone is on the same scale.
>
> I agree its not an accurate way to compare one individual to another, though.
Keep in mind the other stats would only be affected for if you WIN. So technically it’s still promoting winning, the only difference is if you do well, you get 2 wins towards your next rank up.
> 2560081931056311;7:
> > 2533274847545000;6:
> > > 2560081931056311;5:
> > > > 2533274868600467;3:
> > > > > 2560081931056311;2:
> > > > > Wouldn’t that promote more selfish gameplay though? If its just based on wins and losses the best option is to work as a team and win the game, I would think.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > At times, of course, it would, but basing a RANKING amongst OTHER players based SOLEY off of wins isn’t exactly rocket science, or very accurate.
> > >
> > >
> > > I think your ranking in a team game should reflect how good of a team player you are, so based on others is acceptable. I think its accurate because everyone is on the same scale.
> > >
> > > I agree its not an accurate way to compare one individual to another, though.
> >
> >
> > And the game also takes into account personal performance. But it weighs kills to deaths much higher than other things that are more important at the higher tiers of gameplay, such as assists to deaths or objective work.
>
>
> I thought that once you were ranked the only thing that could change your rank was winning and losing…
This is also what I thought.
> 2533274868600467;9:
> > 2560081931056311;7:
> > > 2533274847545000;6:
> > > > 2560081931056311;5:
> > > > > 2533274868600467;3:
> > > > > > 2560081931056311;2:
> > > > > > Wouldn’t that promote more selfish gameplay though? If its just based on wins and losses the best option is to work as a team and win the game, I would think.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > At times, of course, it would, but basing a RANKING amongst OTHER players based SOLEY off of wins isn’t exactly rocket science, or very accurate.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think your ranking in a team game should reflect how good of a team player you are, so based on others is acceptable. I think its accurate because everyone is on the same scale.
> > > >
> > > > I agree its not an accurate way to compare one individual to another, though.
> > >
> > >
> > > And the game also takes into account personal performance. But it weighs kills to deaths much higher than other things that are more important at the higher tiers of gameplay, such as assists to deaths or objective work.
> >
> >
> > I thought that once you were ranked the only thing that could change your rank was winning and losing…
>
>
> This is also what I thought.
I think we’re right. Maybe he’s just thinking about the qualifying matches.
> 2533274868600467;8:
> > 2560081931056311;5:
> > > 2533274868600467;3:
> > > > 2560081931056311;2:
> > > > Wouldn’t that promote more selfish gameplay though? If its just based on wins and losses the best option is to work as a team and win the game, I would think.
> > >
> > >
> > > At times, of course, it would, but basing a RANKING amongst OTHER players based SOLEY off of wins isn’t exactly rocket science, or very accurate.
> >
> >
> > I think your ranking in a team game should reflect how good of a team player you are, so based on others is acceptable. I think its accurate because everyone is on the same scale.
> >
> > I agree its not an accurate way to compare one individual to another, though.
>
>
> Keep in mind the other stats would only be affected for if you WIN. So technically it’s still promoting winning, the only difference is if you do well, you get 2 wins towards your next rank up.
I still think that would lead to people playing selfishly, but maybe that would work.
The ranking system seems to be doing pretty well despite the complaints. Here is graph showing essentially a perfect bell curve for highest rank achieved during last season. Majority of the players fall right in the middle just like they should.
H5 Ranking Distributions
> 2533944968931010;12:
> The ranking system seems to be doing pretty well despite the complaints. Here is graph showing essentially a perfect bell curve for highest rank achieved during last season. Majority of the players fall right in the middle just like they should.
>
> H5 Ranking Distributions
I don’t see how that is relevant? I have heard people who lost all their placement matches + went negative at least half of them and got high gold or platinum. I have also heard the opposite where players win a lot and do well get ranked high bronze or low silver. Just because there is a near perfect bell curve doesn’t mean anything. Don’t you think that 343 is smart enough to weigh players as being “Average” more than very skilled or crappy? That’s partially why those weights in the middle are so high.
> 2533274868600467;13:
> > 2533944968931010;12:
> > The ranking system seems to be doing pretty well despite the complaints. Here is graph showing essentially a perfect bell curve for highest rank achieved during last season. Majority of the players fall right in the middle just like they should.
> >
> > H5 Ranking Distributions
>
>
> I don’t see how that is relevant? I have heard people who lost all their placement matches + went negative at least half of them and got high gold or platinum. I have also heard the opposite where players win a lot and do well get ranked high bronze or low silver. Just because there is a near perfect bell curve doesn’t mean anything. Don’t you think that 343 is smart enough to weigh players as being “Average” more than very skilled or crappy? That’s partially why those weights in the middle are so high.
That’s the point, the current system is mostly spot on.
> 2560081931056311;14:
> > 2533274868600467;13:
> > > 2533944968931010;12:
> > > The ranking system seems to be doing pretty well despite the complaints. Here is graph showing essentially a perfect bell curve for highest rank achieved during last season. Majority of the players fall right in the middle just like they should.
> > >
> > > H5 Ranking Distributions
> >
> >
> > I don’t see how that is relevant? I have heard people who lost all their placement matches + went negative at least half of them and got high gold or platinum. I have also heard the opposite where players win a lot and do well get ranked high bronze or low silver. Just because there is a near perfect bell curve doesn’t mean anything. Don’t you think that 343 is smart enough to weigh players as being “Average” more than very skilled or crappy? That’s partially why those weights in the middle are so high.
>
>
> That’s the point, the current system is mostly spot on.
It’s not mostly spot on though. I could team up with High Diamond or Low Onyx players and get carried to high plat or low diamond just by them being good.
Not really, no. If you don’t have a decent team you will lose the match. Its as simple as that. If I do good but I have a bad team, there shouldn’t be as much of a punishment as there would be if I played bad and had a bad team.
> 2533274868600467;15:
> > 2560081931056311;14:
> > > 2533274868600467;13:
> > > > 2533944968931010;12:
> > > > The ranking system seems to be doing pretty well despite the complaints. Here is graph showing essentially a perfect bell curve for highest rank achieved during last season. Majority of the players fall right in the middle just like they should.
> > > >
> > > > H5 Ranking Distributions
> > >
> > >
> > > I don’t see how that is relevant? I have heard people who lost all their placement matches + went negative at least half of them and got high gold or platinum. I have also heard the opposite where players win a lot and do well get ranked high bronze or low silver. Just because there is a near perfect bell curve doesn’t mean anything. Don’t you think that 343 is smart enough to weigh players as being “Average” more than very skilled or crappy? That’s partially why those weights in the middle are so high.
> >
> >
> > That’s the point, the current system is mostly spot on.
>
>
> It’s not mostly spot on though. I could team up with High Diamond or Low Onyx players and get carried to high plat or low diamond just by them being good.
That’s an issue with match making, not the ranking system though
> 2533274959913762;16:
> Not really, no. If you don’t have a decent team you will lose the match. Its as simple as that. If I do good but I have a bad team, there shouldn’t be as much of a punishment as there would be if I played bad and had a bad team.
Who are you responding to?
> 2560081931056311;17:
> > 2533274868600467;15:
> > > 2560081931056311;14:
> > > > 2533274868600467;13:
> > > > > 2533944968931010;12:
> > > > > The ranking system seems to be doing pretty well despite the complaints. Here is graph showing essentially a perfect bell curve for highest rank achieved during last season. Majority of the players fall right in the middle just like they should.
> > > > >
> > > > > H5 Ranking Distributions
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I don’t see how that is relevant? I have heard people who lost all their placement matches + went negative at least half of them and got high gold or platinum. I have also heard the opposite where players win a lot and do well get ranked high bronze or low silver. Just because there is a near perfect bell curve doesn’t mean anything. Don’t you think that 343 is smart enough to weigh players as being “Average” more than very skilled or crappy? That’s partially why those weights in the middle are so high.
> > >
> > >
> > > That’s the point, the current system is mostly spot on.
> >
> >
> > It’s not mostly spot on though. I could team up with High Diamond or Low Onyx players and get carried to high plat or low diamond just by them being good.
>
>
> That’s an issue with match making, not the ranking system though
But it could be helped/fixed by the ranking system accounting for more than wins. Shabang, now do you understand?
> 2533274868600467;19:
> > 2560081931056311;17:
> > > 2533274868600467;15:
> > > > 2560081931056311;14:
> > > > > 2533274868600467;13:
> > > > > > 2533944968931010;12:
> > > > > > The ranking system seems to be doing pretty well despite the complaints. Here is graph showing essentially a perfect bell curve for highest rank achieved during last season. Majority of the players fall right in the middle just like they should.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > H5 Ranking Distributions
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I don’t see how that is relevant? I have heard people who lost all their placement matches + went negative at least half of them and got high gold or platinum. I have also heard the opposite where players win a lot and do well get ranked high bronze or low silver. Just because there is a near perfect bell curve doesn’t mean anything. Don’t you think that 343 is smart enough to weigh players as being “Average” more than very skilled or crappy? That’s partially why those weights in the middle are so high.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That’s the point, the current system is mostly spot on.
> > >
> > >
> > > It’s not mostly spot on though. I could team up with High Diamond or Low Onyx players and get carried to high plat or low diamond just by them being good.
> >
> >
> > That’s an issue with match making, not the ranking system though
>
>
> But it could be helped/fixed by the ranking system accounting for more than wins. Shabang, now do you understand?
Not really…It makes more sense to fix the actual/bigger problem, the bad matching.
I get your point and all, I just don’t agree with it 100%