Brand new players should not be allowed into 4v4 Feast.

[Maddonious]

At least 20 matches in 8v8 should be mandatory to unlock 4v4 premade and solo both.

See the picture below. I did not edit those numbers up.

See, now thats a bad blm. While Iagain tries to say hes a good one (which obviously isnt the case due to severe, and I mean sevear lack of dps) by saying "theoretically" that the blm used alot of cc is just abserd. 6k damage isnt even 2 attacks. Did he only use scathe the whole time (but 5 mins of scathe should still be way way more)

[Maddonious]

So true, had great time previous week and manage to rank up silver rank without too much issue and had like 70% wins. Now what? My team are most of the time just horrible and I droped to a 40ish win rate (9% win today, rage quit it now, that's enough). It's simple, I didn't have any fun in any game I played this week because even if we managed to win, the game was just bad and the foe was worse.

Yeah. The system is fundementally broken with match making. I've had the same experience. First day I won 20 games in a row, was freaking awesome and this was before us blm could even cast anything. Now im getting the rejects, the outcasts, the casuals who only try it out of curiosity and free tomes that ruin every single match im in. If everyone on the team isnt on par then it ruins it for everyone. Im stuck at bronze and its slipping further and further each time I try and its eventually gonna get lost under the loses due to inexperienced players flooding a game mode they have no right to be in.

[Maddonious]

This mode is gonna die so fast with all the complaining already about new people when then the matches don't even count anyway atm. The queues have already started reaching 10 minutes and that's with new people still actually queuing lol. The PVP community is pathetically small compared to PVE and people wanna segregate them even further. I hate being paired up with useless players as much as the next guy but damn man its preaseason. That 8 v 8 mode is trash I've played it a couple times and it's way too easy to carry people in there.

You know we pvpers wouldnt be salty if the matchmaking paired us correctly right? Preseason or not it still hurts the ones actually trying to pvp rather then those coming to check it out twice. That excuse of "its only preseason" is not working on anyone.

[TiaHariberux3]

I mean, she only did 8k less than the enemy Dragoon, through 2 deaths. And she was the highest damage on her team - higher than a smn. That's a reasonable performance in context, even if it's not that great.

You want awful numbers? Here's some awful numbers:



I died at 3:30, team chased and died before I respawned. The excuse I got for why they did such terrible damage?

"The enemy healer was a Scholar."

Just pointing out that a random blm screenshot with this kind of dmg says not much about skill and if they break sleep its really bad even if he did dmg. I have matches with like 6-8k dmg and still get kills and win.

[RiceisNice]

Damage dealt isn't the full story; I've had 3-4 minute wins where I've dealt as little as 70k with a drg and war. 8k over five minutes though is extremely low and honestly that could have been damage dealt on the starting boxes. Even you do cc, you aren't doing it for that whole five minutes, esp with DR

[Petite]

Just pointing out that a random blm screenshot with this kind of dmg says not much about skill and if they break sleep its really bad even if he did dmg. I have matches with like 6-8k dmg and still get kills and win.

First off, I included what the BLM said at the end of the match. He probably heard somewhere that a BLM's job was to CC and only CC and I'm willing to bet money he took it to heart because of his lack of experience in PVP. The realization that BLMs are more than just CCers is not a hard one to get after a couple of matches.

Also, if you wanted to "point out" something to me, maybe calling me out on a supposed bad performance wasn't the best way to convey it.

[NessaWyvern]

I'd rather wait 15 minutes to guarantee similar healer quality, than 5 to have a quarter of my games be a complete mismatch in the pivotal role.

This, so much this. It's why I play healer myself (I have a 65% win rate as heals :') )

[Iagainsti]

See, now thats a bad blm. While Iagain tries to say hes a good one (which obviously isnt the case due to severe, and I mean sevear lack of dps) by saying "theoretically" that the blm used alot of cc is just abserd. 6k damage isnt even 2 attacks. Did he only use scathe the whole time (but 5 mins of scathe should still be way way more)

Reread, I never said the player did anything, I said according to the data given, my hypothetical interpretation is just as valid as saying "they're bad mmK". We actually had a few good games in 8v8 last night, and your CC skills were notch, but I know one of those games you didn't break 50k damage so does that make you bad? I assumed your critical thinking skills were better ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

[Iagainsti]

Back on point, the Individual player rating based on Win/loss is so archaic, and it will not prevail in such a small pvp community, let alone attract new players to the Den. I'm not a mathematician, or write algorithms for a living, but here goes....

The Revised PVP Player Rating!!!!!

So say we break actions up into 3 categories; A column would be raw damage/ healing actions(Heavy Swing, Split Shot, Fire IV, Royal Authority etc.) B would be Defensive(Thrill of War, Hallowed Ground, Manawall) and C would be enfeeble, crowd control(Sleep, Full Swing, Head Graze) with each of these columns having a different variable attached to them. Now each time a player inputs those actions, it's recorded, so at the end of the match, that player, for ex. used 300 A, 140 B, and 90 C. Then take that data over a 100-1000 matches from multiple players in each role(Tank, melee, ranged, healer) still taking a win/loss factor as a smaller variable. Theoretically, depending on the class, theses numbers would increase over the course of the matches, and level off the closer you came to the 100-1000 match mark(let's call it the Iggy Curve ;D) and then this is where the win/loss ratio would become more of a defining factor, not at the beginning of how your rating is evaluated. Please point out any holes in this, or constructive critiques on how to improve it, but something like this would allow for a true individual player rating, and still allow new and vetted players alike to be queued together(saving queue times, showing new players how to pvp through example), and your rating wouldn't be hindered by something as silly as just whether it was a win or a loss.

[Nidelia]

I just wonder, what SE are expecting with this ranking system? I even don't know how some people managed to be higher than silver in solo queue, because for my case, I m just stuck with a 50% win ratio in good days and 100% lose ration in bad days (not even kiding) since I m in silver (and it was at 70% or more win before.)
The matchmaking is just a joke, it seems that the average score of the 2 teams is the same. The issue is that you don't have the player base to manage that proprelly. When you are in silver rank, the game should put you with other silver rank, that's what commun sens says. But since the average player is bronze/unranked, the game take your 1000+ points and put you with 0 point player to average your score. But in the other side? Well you have 4 people with bronze rank who can at least manage to do something. A player CANNOT manage to carry any game in this kind of situation.
It's deeply unfun because that mean that if you re good, you have no way to enjoy to solo queue because your team will be in average, worse and worse. With the player base who is playing, I can only see one thing: Completly randomize queue. If you have a full team of platinium against newcomers? Well bad luck but the system will only give 10 points for this victory.