It's far too easy to rank up

Derank protection at rank borders is dumb. Why should losses at Platinum 3 count against you, but losses at Platinum 4 are ignored?

Streak bonus is dumb. Why should 3 losses followed by 3 wins be a net gain, but win-loss-win-loss-win-loss goes even? Why should consecutive wins net you bonuses, but consecutive losses do nothing?

Right now, the system's extreme upward tendencies make it substantially less accurate. A loose correlation between winrate and rank means more frustrating matchmaking; if the game can't accurately assemble even teams, one side will stomp, one side will get rolled over, and 10 people are forced to sit through a largely uninteresting game.

Treat every game the same, and let consistent winrate over time determine whether people rise or fall—not how long you're willing to grind until a streak shoves you over a rank border.

I assume the streak bonus is just a makeshift solution to MMR in a similar vein to where in Overwatch if you lose a match but perform well you lose less SR compared to losing a match but playing poorly, giving skilled players more of a chance to move upwards even if they get a streak of bad teams

Also, any rank below crystal is essentially just training/prep for the real ranking system when you get to crystal - which has no streak bonus.

Agreed. Sooner or later, most of the population will be in Crystal, which defeats the purpose of having tiers in the first place. Crystal match quality has already diminished substantially in just the last few days.

If they want people to take Ranked seriously, they're going to have to alter their approach.

The problem is there isn't any actual screening being done to ensure people are being matched against others of a relatively similar skill level.

Ranking up to crystal is largely rolling the dice and praying your teammates are competent regardless of your own skill evel.

Anytime someone says this game "respects your time", I shall refer to this ranking/matching system.

You guys have no clue what u are talking about and not the dev team intention. Tiers are just a progression mechanism here, because is similar to LoL doesn't mean it have the same intention.

The real ranking that you want is the Crystal Credit in the Crystal rank and is the same system as MMR in Dota2 ranking.

If you want a LoL comparison, is like the leveling, everyone level up to max and then rank as a separate system. Call it tutorial, call it whatever you want. Moving through Tiers is not the competitive mode, getting higher Crystal Credit is the competitive mode.

I think the opposite. Ranking is not too easy. It is too random.
If you are on a win streak (which is really random in lower ranks, with people of varying skill levels), good for you.
If you are on a lose streak, it just sucks IMO, as it doesn't say anything about your own skill level either, it is just about luck.
I actually think it would be better to prevent you from losing stars if you are on a 3+ lose streak, instead of making you win 2 stars on a win streak.

+ I agree with Raistlin. Competitive starts in Crystal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Velnora

Anytime someone says this game "respects your time", I shall refer to this ranking/matching system.

---

How is this an example of the game not respecting your time? You get showered with rewards whether you win or lose.
The only rewards you miss out on by playing casually or staying in Bronze are framer kits.
This is like saying PotD doesn't respect your time because Necromancer is a huge time sink and not achievable by everyone.
There are issues with the new PvP system, but this absurd anti-dev hyperbole doesn't help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raistlin

Moving through Tiers is not the competitive mode, getting higher Crystal Credit is the competitive mode.

---

This seems silly. Why handicap the matchmaking system for such a wide range of players? There are already plenty of complaints from people who feel like they're trapped in their low rank because of teammate variance—they're wrong, of course, and a good amount of their stress is literally mad cuz bad, but the fact remains that they're not enjoying unpredictably stacked games. Who is this supposed to benefit?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iyrnwaen

How is this an example of the game not respecting your time? You get showered with rewards whether you win or lose.
The only rewards you miss out on by playing casually or staying in Bronze are framer kits.
This is like saying PotD doesn't respect your time because Necromancer is a huge time sink and not achievable by everyone.
There are issues with the new PvP system, but this absurd anti-dev hyperbole doesn't help.

---

PotD is entirely tied to the persons skill level. Not random matchmaking. "Showered with rewards". What?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iyrnwaen

How is this an example of the game not respecting your time? You get showered with rewards whether you win or lose.
The only rewards you miss out on by playing casually or staying in Bronze are framer kits.
This is like saying PotD doesn't respect your time because Necromancer is a huge time sink and not achievable by everyone.
There are issues with the new PvP system, but this absurd anti-dev hyperbole doesn't help.

---

Even if the only rewards you miss out on is framer kits (and that's what it's like now, I worry that they're just gonna go back to locking cool mounts and stuff behind it) They're still gone after the season ends.
In contrast, yeah everyone can get Necromancer. Not everyone will, but everyone has the opportunity to work hard, get better, and eventually achieve it, even if it takes a long time. Because it's not time-gated.
That's always been my issue with the Feast, I've missed out on so many cool mounts because I can't seem to get better in time, and I just get dejected. I worry that they're going to just go back to that awful FOMO system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GayRobot

This seems silly. Why handicap the matchmaking system for such a wide range of players? There are already plenty of complaints from people who feel like they're trapped in their low rank because of teammate variance—they're wrong, of course, and a good amount of their stress is literally mad cuz bad, but the fact remains that they're not enjoying unpredictably stacked games. Who is this supposed to benefit?

---

It works for Dota, why will not here? Matchmaking by Crystal Credit and dynamic credit reward based on the credit difference is exactly how Dota MMR works. Just because you are not used to it doesn't mean is bad.

Tier progression is a way to involve no hard-core pvpers by giving a goal to reach Crystal, or at least to a higher tier than prev season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raistlin

It works for Dota, why will not here? Matchmaking by Crystal Credit and dynamic credit reward based on the credit difference is exactly how Dota MMR works. Just because you are not used to it doesn't mean is bad.

Tier progression is a way to involve no hard-core pvpers by giving a goal to reach Crystal, or at least to a higher tier than prev season.

---

I actually vastly prefer games that use raw MMR instead of abstracting it away—the DotA system is good. However, the DotA system would probably be a lot worse if you added 2x winstreak bonuses and derank protection until Immortal.

If you want to give players rewards for playing, add more stuff to the Malmstone system, or increase maximum PvP Rank and put some more achievement rewards behind it—you can do a lot of things without kneecapping the matchmaking system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GayRobot

This seems silly. Why handicap the matchmaking system for such a wide range of players? There are already plenty of complaints from people who feel like they're trapped in their low rank because of teammate variance—they're wrong, of course, and a good amount of their stress is literally mad cuz bad, but the fact remains that they're not enjoying unpredictably stacked games. Who is this supposed to benefit?

---

I wouldn't disagree that many really are just "mad cuz bad" but the variance is still large enough that you can work your ass off and play like a god and still lose. If the match is a faceroll, myself playing better wouldn't have changed the outcome. Nor would me sucking have prevented us from winning. It certainly feels like actually ranking up is a stroke of luck on the rng more than anything else.
That said, there's certainly some frustration speaking after being between one and three matches away from ranking up to platinum for the last three days consistently D:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Velnora

PotD is entirely tied to the persons skill level. Not random matchmaking. "Showered with rewards". What?

---

Yeah good luck with treasure rooms being second room on 187+ and the exit being there. Either you had good floors before which let you save time, or you're screwed/will use all your good pomanders. And then you have to hope there's nothing too nasty going forward. PotD is RNG at its peak, and it's always been how players deal with this RNG that made it compelling to those who run it. And the problem is that RNG only starts factoring in once you reach 160+, with a massive and boring grind before that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teno

Yeah good luck with treasure rooms being second room on 187+ and the exit being there. Either you had good floors before which let you save time, or you're screwed/will use all your good pomanders. And then you have to hope there's nothing too nasty going forward. PotD is RNG at its peak, and it's always been how players deal with this RNG that made it compelling to those who run it. And the problem is that RNG only starts factoring in once you reach 160+, with a massive and boring grind before that.

---

And yet it's still dependent on player skill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Velnora

And yet it's still dependent on player skill.

---

Not 100%. If the RNG is stacked against you, it is what it is. But you're not going to get dragged down by the mistakes of others either which is what counts I suppose.

No rating system in existence - graded, tiered, MMR, Elo, whatever - has ever not had people stressing themselves out and arguing that they are unfairly trapped below their "true" rating. If anything, this system is probably more favorable to them because all but the most quasi-AFK 'hardstuck in bronze' types stand a moderate chance of eventually landing on a lucky streak into the next rank and earning some kind of ephemeral validation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subtext

Not 100%. If the RNG is stacked against you, it is what it is. But you're not going to get dragged down by the mistakes of others either which is what counts I suppose.

---

Which is why bringing up potd is a dumb counter argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GayRobot

Derank protection at rank borders is dumb. Why should losses at Platinum 3 count against you, but losses at Platinum 4 are ignored?

Streak bonus is dumb. Why should 3 losses followed by 3 wins be a net gain, but win-loss-win-loss-win-loss goes even? Why should consecutive wins net you bonuses, but consecutive losses do nothing?

Right now, the system's extreme upward tendencies make it substantially less accurate. A loose correlation between winrate and rank means more frustrating matchmaking; if the game can't accurately assemble even teams, one side will stomp, one side will get rolled over, and 10 people are forced to sit through a largely uninteresting game.

Treat every game the same, and let consistent winrate over time determine whether people rise or fall—not how long you're willing to grind until a streak shoves you over a rank border.

---

you are wrong about ranking up you have been trade winning like the top 100 have been doing so why make this statement and/or this post this is a troll

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oldschoolegamer38

you are wrong about ranking up you have been trade winning like the top 100 have been doing so why make this statement and/or this post this is a troll

---

You can literally lose more games than you win and still rank up. Given a reasonable number of games, you have to be substantially worse than the players around you to not rank up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subtext

I wouldn't disagree that many really are just "mad cuz bad" but the variance is still large enough that you can work your ass off and play like a god and still lose. If the match is a faceroll, myself playing better wouldn't have changed the outcome. Nor would me sucking have prevented us from winning. It certainly feels like actually ranking up is a stroke of luck on the rng more than anything else.
That said, there's certainly some frustration speaking after being between one and three matches away from ranking up to platinum for the last three days consistently D:

---

Agreed that it can definitely feel this way sometimes—my time in Gold 4 was pretty hilarious. I never expected to see so many people spamming "Push the crystal! Nice job!" while running on our checkpoint 1v5 after a teamwipe. Please just let us reset, LMAO.

I think people typically underestimate their own agency in difficult games, though. I've checked my replays of games that felt like hopeless stomps, only to watch myself put a few GCDs into a poor target, respond to dives or burst just a little bit later than I could have, spend cooldowns on a kill that really wasn't going to happen in hindsight, all of that—and eliminating all of those errors would probably have turned a bunch of key fights, or at least stopped the bleeding for long enough to fish for a lucksack teamwipe OT win.

Some games really are "team sucks lmao go next", but even in this screwed-up environment, if you play better than the people around you, you'll climb given time.