With 4v4 being required to have one ranged, one melee, one healer, and one tank and the skewed win rates between DPS, Tanks, and Healers. Would it be better to take the top 100 and turn it into the top 25 for each role. This would single out the top performers for each role being filled and would allow melee and ranged dps be on an even playing field with healers for the items.
PVP Ranking Idea
Printable View
-
09-08-2017, 08:18 AMWintersandmanPVP Ranking Idea
-
09-08-2017, 08:31 AMTrinket
This seems like a sound idea in distributing the rewards, considering healers are always at the top. But then how would the top 10 rewards work? Top 2-3 people per role? And how about the 1st Place work?
-
09-08-2017, 08:31 AMMirch
That would require a lock on the role/job someone will be using before queueing on his first ranked match of the season. I don't think is good idea.
-
09-08-2017, 08:43 AMCanadaneFirst place could still be out of all four groups.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trinket
-
09-08-2017, 08:59 AMThirdChild_ZKI
If my memory serves, we got an official no on top 100 per role in a recent interview :(
-
09-08-2017, 09:37 AMGiglamesh
I think points should be determined based on the rank of your team. If you're platinum and lose with 3 silvers, your loss of points should be minimal. However, if you're platinum and win with 3 silvers, your points gain should be great.
Just my idea anyway. -
09-08-2017, 10:40 AMKorihuThat actually already happens. You gain more for winning with a lesser ranked team and lose more if you lose vs a lower ranked team and vice versa. The difference is slight though like between +19 to +26 in Diamond.Quote:
Originally Posted by Giglamesh
-
09-08-2017, 03:12 PMSuperZayYou are assuming that rank = skill. Which is far from truth. Especially when many experienced players or alts start season late and climb with 80-90% wr. Why? They are silver-gold with diamond level skills, but the game 'thinks' they are weak because of low rank and balances them with platinum/diamond players, making their team even more overpowered. Such a flawed matchmaking system which doesn't take in consideration win rate or previous seasons history.Quote:
Originally Posted by Giglamesh
Ranks/promotions make no sense either. If you won every game till promotion qualifiers but lost 3 qualifiers, you are denied next rank. Why? What's the logic behind that decision? Why these 3 games are more important than all before them? -
09-08-2017, 08:04 PMLalaRu
As long as you queue solo for a match and in a given role, I think it is correct have rankings separated by role. Healer, Tank, melee, and ranged dps. 4 roles, 4 rankings. Making all roles together as it is now, dominant roles problem is what happens next.
I don't think healer need nerfs, because healer role always had been key for any pvp. How deal the healer is one of the basics of any team discussing tactics. Let the healers battle for ranking between them.
Role separation is also more fair, because we can see a player on which role s/he is good at. Godlike players will be on top 10 of each role, kudos to them, but a great healer may also be a shitty dps player and it is correct s/he stay only on healer rankings. -
09-08-2017, 08:09 PMMofafafa
just start by increasing points loss for each rank to:
Bronze = - 10
Silver = - 15
Gold = - 20
Platinum = - 25
Diamond = Scales from 25 ~ 40 depending on team total ratings
you will start seeing proper players playing on the rank they deserve.
or
just plagiarize the league of legend system again by implementing "Challenger" system
Where it will decay and each loss takes up -30 minimum and + 25 each win -
09-08-2017, 09:17 PMKorihuThat is how it used to be in Season 1. Gold ranked players were actually decent and good, plat players were great, and diamond players were gods. Then for some godforsaken reason they made rank so stupid to gain in season 3, with Gold and even platinum being achieved by horrible players even with a 30% winrate and a 2 rank above and below system that made games memey and unfun even if you got Diamond.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mofafafa
I still cannot fathom why they made the rank point gain/loss so entirely ridiculous. Is it to make bad players feel good about themselves when they get a shiny rank? -
09-08-2017, 09:54 PMSuperZay
Maybe because there was only 1 Diamond in the world across all datacenters in Season 2 which didn't meet their quota.
-
09-08-2017, 11:04 PMKorihuThat was because the matchmaking in season 2 was terrible. You could get matched across all ranks. They tried to balance matches to be like plat/gold/silver/unranked. The higher rank you got, the higher chance yiu got to get someone completely new and unranked in your team. This made climbing that high impossible as you will lose with complete newbies on the team. Which made even the best people stuck around a certain rank, as them being the best meant notbing when stuck with a first-time-in-feast newbie.Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperZay
They should have just gone back to the season 1 point gain/loss but the season 3s 2 ranks above and below system for queues. With the ridiculously n easy rank gain AND 2 ranks above and below it makes matchmaking mean nothing at all. At least Golds in the season 1 system weren't memes. -
09-09-2017, 01:51 AMWintersandmanI said top 25 per role which would also be locked into 100 people as it is currently.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThirdChild_ZKI
No it wouldn't. It would have the player commit to a role they were best in. You could do your first 12 matches as the various jobs to find out what you were best at. Then at some point yes you would commit. But aren't most people committed to their roles?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirch
-
09-09-2017, 06:24 AMCynricWhat he means I think is that we'd have to lock the role/job you start playing as, ie. when I started this season I queued as Samurai, if for some reason I wanted to switch to monk/bard, I'd be locked out of switching.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wintersandman
And no, actually, a lot of people switch quite a bit, quite a bit of the healers on the board(aether) actually aren't healer main. That's just the role that they had most luck with this season.
If the system was changed to what you say, it's actually likely that the amount of healers currently on the board would go down.
While not likely to happen, I would agree that if this were to happen, a role lock/job lock would be a requirement. Otherwise we'd run into a situation down the road where say, Player A has 2000 Melee/Ranged/Healer rating and is number 1 on every board on one character. It'd be similar to the current alt situation but worse.
I also feel like Top 25 per role is very different than Top 100 in general.
For example, many players currently queue as ranged DPS, while less players queue as melee DPS, The melee boards would be far easier to climb than the ranged boards.
While Top 100 in it's current iteration is far from perfect, I don't think this is a proper deviation from the formula and likely why we were told no. -
09-09-2017, 06:36 AMWintersandmanI never said Job/Role Lock. That would be ridiculous. If you found out you weren't ranking up among the melee group you can switch to healer. You would have to start from 0 but you could still switch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynric
When I said people committed to their jobs. Generally if you start feast as a Monk, you're typically not going to switch to Dragoon in the middle of the season. TYPICALLY being the keyword. -
09-09-2017, 06:41 AMSunako
What if some person like to play multiple different role? Then there should be separated rating between each role like if you have 1000 rating your healer and you wanna change for tank, rating should start from zero and if you change to healer again you should carry on from 1000 rating where your healer left.
-
09-09-2017, 06:45 AMWintersandmanThat is exactly what I was suggesting. With awards only being for the top 25 for each role.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunako
-
09-09-2017, 08:00 AMCynricNo one is saying you said the thing about locking, You're misunderstanding. The person you originally quoted said it would have to be that way, and I agreed with them. There should be some type of lock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wintersandman
People will definitely switch if nerfs/buffs happen mid season as they are currently. It happens in every competitive game. It's actually quite common to switch things up if your job/character/role are nerfed or another is buffed heavily.
That said, however, if you were to start from zero every time you switched that wouldn't be very different than a lock honestly, and would fix the ability to be on multiple boards being a problem.
Conversely if you were able to keep your rating, the issue would still stand.
I can't really think of a way to make a Top 25 per role similar to the Top 100 players overall at this time.
If player A were to attain 2000 Rating as Healer/Melee/Ranged, you'd have One player effectively taking up 3 slots out of a Top "100" and one slot of each Top 25, It would only take 10 well versed players to Turn a Top 25 into a Top 15 (ish) per role. -
09-11-2017, 05:37 AMRalLamora
Wouldn't this have a big impact on queue times? If right now healers are the least played role, then making a change that incentivizes people to play healers less would likely be quite bad overall for feast.
I know for me personally queue times are by far the biggest problem i have with feast, and anything that would make that worse would be a bad change even if it did make the system fairer for people. -
09-12-2017, 02:14 AMWintersandmanI would respond and say that if one person really took up multiple spots then the other people should get good. If you have one person focusing on just one role then they should out perform someone who is constantly switching. The odds are in that persons favor to have a higher rating by sticking to the role.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynric
-
09-12-2017, 08:00 PMGallusYep.Quote:
Originally Posted by RalLamora
/10char