PVP Ranking Idea

[Wintersandman]

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.

[Trinket]

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?

[Mirch]

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.

[Canadane]

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?

First place could still be out of all four groups.

[ThirdChild_ZKI]

If my memory serves, we got an official no on top 100 per role in a recent interview

[Giglamesh]

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.

[Korihu]

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.

That 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.

[SuperZay]

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.

You 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.

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?

[LalaRu]

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.

[Mofafafa]

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