There is no reward for playing well.

[Valence]

You guys realize PvP is a TEAM based game, right? ofc you are gonna lose if your team does poorly, cant win a 1v5 or a frontline when you team just spread out in the map and ignore the objectives. It is like basic gaming.

What i do think they should add is allowing players to queue with friends, that way you can avoid players that doesnt have a clue/doesnt care about the game.

No, seriously? I never understood that it's a team based game, but this makes so much more sense now. For real.

I think people are more annoyed at the fact that yes, solo rankings on a team based game is always kind of ironic by essence to begin with, but more than that, getting clueless players that crumble under the smallest breeze, or play like clowns in high ranking games in your team makes you wonder how they got there in the first place, on top of ruining your game.

[Gserpent]

No, seriously? I never understood that it's a team based game, but this makes so much more sense now. For real.

I think people are more annoyed at the fact that yes, solo rankings on a team based game is always kind of ironic by essence to begin with, but more than that, getting clueless players that crumble under the smallest breeze, or play like clowns in high ranking games in your team makes you wonder how they got there in the first place, on top of ruining your game.

I mean, I think it's clear that Square-Enix didn't really approach ranked mode from a true "competitive game" standpoint - I refuse to believe that there's no one on the team that actually understands the basics of a competitive ladder system. I think they just tried to provide a Diet Coke solution to the problem, because XIV is a game that tends to go out of its way to avoid putting its players in any kind of "you failed cuz you suck" situation unless they more or less explicitly ask for it (ultimates.) That's mutually exclusive with proper ladder systems for obvious reasons. There may also be concerns about breeding toxicity? But you can just look at your average Frontlines game chat and see that they aren't exactly avoiding that kind of thing with the game's PvP, to say nothing of chatwheel spammers present even in unranked CC games.

My firm belief is that they should have hit the ground running with two options: unranked mode, where you may queue with one friend; and formal ranked PvP Teams mode, which would launch a one or two weeks after the initial debut of the mode, so that players have time to get used to things first. I, personally, also would not have released the new PvP mode at the same time as a new savage tier - to me, PvP (particularly "serious" PvP) is something that should be held back for "in-between" patches, since a new savage tier tends to bogart the majority of "hardcore" players for weeks at a time anyway. And the ranked mode would use a typical Elo- or TrueSkill-derived system like everyone else uses.

If that would have resulted in ranked queue "dying"... then that's fine, it's proving that there isn't enough of a "hardcore PvPer" playerbase to support such a thing. At that point, split the queue into "solo" and "play with up to a full team of friends" and be done with it.

[Valence]

I mean, I think it's clear that Square-Enix didn't really approach ranked mode from a true "competitive game" standpoint - I refuse to believe that there's no one on the team that actually understands the basics of a competitive ladder system. I think they just tried to provide a Diet Coke solution to the problem, because XIV is a game that tends to go out of its way to avoid putting its players in any kind of "you failed cuz you suck" situation unless they more or less explicitly ask for it (ultimates.) That's mutually exclusive with proper ladder systems for obvious reasons. There may also be concerns about breeding toxicity? But you can just look at your average Frontlines game chat and see that they aren't exactly avoiding that kind of thing with the game's PvP, to say nothing of chatwheel spammers present even in unranked CC games.

My firm belief is that they should have hit the ground running with two options: unranked mode, where you may queue with one friend; and formal ranked PvP Teams mode, which would launch a one or two weeks after the initial debut of the mode, so that players have time to get used to things first. I, personally, also would not have released the new PvP mode at the same time as a new savage tier - to me, PvP (particularly "serious" PvP) is something that should be held back for "in-between" patches, since a new savage tier tends to bogart the majority of "hardcore" players for weeks at a time anyway. And the ranked mode would use a typical Elo- or TrueSkill-derived system like everyone else uses.

If that would have resulted in ranked queue "dying"... then that's fine, it's proving that there isn't enough of a "hardcore PvPer" playerbase to support such a thing. At that point, split the queue into "solo" and "play with up to a full team of friends" and be done with it.

I kinda agree on the principle but I just think that if a mode is already barely meeting the number requirements for basic solo ranked, I have no idea how a team ranked or any other mode requiring people to actually get together and set up times would even work tbh. Honestly at this point, ranked and casual are already competing for numbers and queues...

And team ranked is legit my biggest wish and has always been. I could also settle for a team casual to play with my casual friendos.

[Gserpent]

I kinda agree on the principle but I just think that if a mode is already barely meeting the number requirements for basic solo ranked, I have no idea how a team ranked or any other mode requiring people to actually get together and set up times would even work tbh. Honestly at this point, ranked and casual are already competing for numbers and queues...

And team ranked is legit my biggest wish and has always been. I could also settle for a team casual to play with my casual friendos.

I mean, if there are actual rewards and incentives to participate in ranked, and the developer actually takes an active hand against cheating... it should be fine. We've seen countless times that mounts, cosmetic gear, etc are all things the playerbase values and so they make obvious examples of the kinds of rewards you could tie to Team Ranked to incentivize participation.

People argue against FOMO, but they need to understand that you probably cannot have a meaningful ladder in a game like this without it. "The game is fun" is not by itself enough in MMOs like this, players typically need a carrot to chase. That doesn't mean you never hand out that mount or armor set in the future, but it does mean that the rank reward is an exclusive version of it - compare the default gray Construct VII mount versus the red painted version from Unreal, for example. Same mount, but you could assign an exclusive paint job to it for people who finished top 100 or top 10 or something in Team Ranked for a season.

But I don't think Square-Enix ever intended to devote the amount of effort and active participation necessary to really keep a competitive circuit alive. Maybe they shouldn't have bothered with ranked mode at all - just do solo and play with friends queues from the start. Instead of assigning the adventurer plate rewards to top 1 or whatever, instead make them X wins during the season. If you won 1,000 games during a single season, you were probably going to be near the top of players anyway, right?

Riot, Valve, and Blizzard all have a larger pvp playerbase which lets them mix things up easier, and they also don't have a pvp system where it's "winning = +1 point" and "losing = -1 point". It's usually more like "Okay, you lost, but we put you on a team with people who are all ranked lower than you, so you won't lose quite as many points this time." Granted, all of these companies have their own pvp issues, which they are handling in their own ways, but these forums are for FFXIV.

Also, this does not excuse the "WELL IT'S NEVER BEEN DONE SO IT CANT BE DONE" argument.

Yes, Riot and the others all use Elo-derived or TrueSkill-derived systems. That's what the whole "gains and losses are scaled according to rating" thing is.

And there's a *reason* it hasn't been done before. Have you considered what that reason, or reasons, might be? These companies with enormous playerbases (many magnitudes larger than the "dedicated PvPer" playerbase in XIV) to test things with, with several tens of millions of dollars in budget allowances for staffing and design, and a vested interest in running an effective and addictive laddering system haven't figured out how to define a meaningful and fair "personal performance" automated system.

And you think Square-Enix, with a shoestring budget for things like PvP and a tiny "dedicated" PvP playerbase and no real interest in a competitive and addictive laddering system will, or can? Come on, dude. Let's be reasonable here.

[Valence]

I mean, if there are actual rewards and incentives to participate in ranked, and the developer actually takes an active hand against cheating... it should be fine. We've seen countless times that mounts, cosmetic gear, etc are all things the playerbase values and so they make obvious examples of the kinds of rewards you could tie to Team Ranked to incentivize participation.

People argue against FOMO, but they need to understand that you probably cannot have a meaningful ladder in a game like this without it. "The game is fun" is not by itself enough in MMOs like this, players typically need a carrot to chase. That doesn't mean you never hand out that mount or armor set in the future, but it does mean that the rank reward is an exclusive version of it - compare the default gray Construct VII mount versus the red painted version from Unreal, for example. Same mount, but you could assign an exclusive paint job to it for people who finished top 100 or top 10 or something in Team Ranked for a season.

I never believed in rewards as a reliable tool for anything, but I won't deny that some of them, the core ones in the game, work well: xp and tomes. The rest of the rewards are just trying to plug a leak in a kitchen sink by pouring more water into it. It's forging ahead brainlessly. Introducing rewards every time for ranked means FOMO. One can try mitigating it by releasing them in the next seasons for everybody to get their hands on, which is a decent solution, but will piss off veterans to no end because they'll lose their bragging rights.

The idea that one cannot have a meaningful ladder without rewards is a ludicrous at best. Many games with a true ladder system don't rely on those, and they work fine (especially RTS games). I won't deny that them having rewards probably helps though. If the statement is that MMO players need rewards and carrots to go, then maybe they do, I haven't done any surveys on the matter. I just know I don't.

Either way it doesn't address the core issue of regular rewards to pour into the game, which means dev resources, new items in the database constantly, and oversaturating the pvp vendors over time (unless it's exclusive FOMO which everybody hates when they miss the season for whatever reason, and I do believe it's a legit reason to hate on it).

The wolf mark system is a better system, but it's a casual currency. Maybe they should start by adding a ranked ladder currency that could allow to farm for specific items, much like we have savage currencies or the silver coins in the latest criterion system for the challenging modes of the basic casual experience. If you add on top of it very expensive items (like the prestige mounts in hunts or the golden ones, or like the relic weapons) it can take a long time to get them or work on them. Especially if they also are class specific. The pvp achievements are also another way to go about it.

[Claustrum]

Yes, Riot and the others all use Elo-derived or TrueSkill-derived systems. That's what the whole "gains and losses are scaled according to rating" thing is.

And there's a *reason* it hasn't been done before. Have you considered what that reason, or reasons, might be? These companies with enormous playerbases (many magnitudes larger than the "dedicated PvPer" playerbase in XIV) to test things with, with several tens of millions of dollars in budget allowances for staffing and design, and a vested interest in running an effective and addictive laddering system haven't figured out how to define a meaningful and fair "personal performance" automated system.

And you think Square-Enix, with a shoestring budget for things like PvP and a tiny "dedicated" PvP playerbase and no real interest in a competitive and addictive laddering system will, or can? Come on, dude. Let's be reasonable here.

Ah, so that's why there's never the ability to make pvp matchmaking better. So why do they adjust pvp balance on a shoestring budget? Why do they make pvp-exclusive rewards on a shoestring budget? Why do they bother with pvp seasons? Why did they make CC? Come on, man. Do you think they have the budget to do that stuff they did?

They are constantly adjusting pvp, their budget allows for adjusting pvp.