From 1 to 0 - should I stop competetive ToT?

Klingenlied

I am confused with no ends when it comes to competetive ToT.
I play on console and did start out at the end of the first season where I kinda learned the ropes. Went pretty fast, I did enjoy those kind of games in the past.
Now I did manage rather well, after some placement games I continued a perfect streak until rubedite. However, I wasn't really in the rubedite league when the game first told me so. Well, have had this issue before with my rank being completely different to what the game did display.
Anyway, some more games, some more wins, now I finally appeared in Rubedite on the ranked ladder. Yay!

Well, maybe not so much "yay!"? For some reason, I only got a single ranking point for my wins. With just having .. I guess it is 197 by now? - the way to the top is incredibly far when you only get a single point. But things got even crazier. The last victory only earned me 0 points oO

I mean what is this?
Is the game convinced I am sooo good that no other player should be able to ever beat me, thus I can no longer rank up? oO That's a joke, right? Reality is: I was pretty lucky for a lot of games. But luck is something that is going to run out. And when facing some decks I did not know of before, some games were really, really close. However, what will happen if I loose now? Will i get thrown out of rubedite into beginners league now because I did loose to some player with way lower ELO then mine? I really, really don't get this system >_> And I know a lot of those! Really good ones, like the ones in Warcraft III or Starcraft 2 for example who were really awesome.

Now I guess there might be some people having experienced similar issues? I mean I can't be the only affected by ESO bugs, those are designed to eventually appear for everyone. So .. if anyone got some advice - wether to continue with ranked or to better leave it be until it get fixed - please tell me. Furthermore, if others experienced similar issues .. please do tell. I am rather curios concerning this topic.

So thank you in advance for your responses :-)

Casdha

I don't have a clue how the scoring works on this game (PC). I finally made Rubedite Rank again tonight and I started out with 86 points and placed in the 260s. I then lost 3 games and was down I think in the 50s or thereabouts and placed in the 270s. I then won a game and I was over 1000 points and 74th place. Then I won the next two games and only got a point a piece and moved to 73rd place (at the time).

Again, I ain't got no clue how this works. I'm just glad I got the Rubedite in before the patch tonight.
(that is if they make changes, again I'm on PC)

Note: as of now (on PC) the only place the score is correct is the leader board page and once you look at it, it updates the queue page. It may be similar on console.

Edit: Side note - I wonder if deck usage has any meaning, the first game I won was played with the 4 original decks.

Veryamedliel

I don't expect the scoring system to differ between consoles and PC. That would make things too complicated. Usually devs adhere to the old " kiss" -or Keep It Simple Stupdid- principle. I know I would. At worst the PvE road to master might be slightly different, but I doubt they'd even make so much of a change.

As a former competitive chess player (and familiar with the system used there) it sounds to me like some sort of ELO system (or perhaps something simpler like win/loss ratio) determines your score and with that your rise/fall on the leaderboard once you hit Rubedite. I don't expect them to go into much details about it though. If only so that they can tweak the system later without raising the 9 hells on these forums.

Casdha wrote: »

Edit: Side note - I wonder if deck usage has any meaning, the first game I won was played with the 4 original decks.

I doubt it. We all started out with those 4 decks. Most likely most people won games with those 4 decks before the got the remaining 4 and people still with with only those 4 decks in play. I know I have. and it has not done much for my ranking that I can tell. Not should it in my opinion, as it has no effect on the PvE storyline scores on your way to the master rank either.

"Klingenlied wrote: »

"Well, maybe not so much "yay!"? For some reason, I only got a single ranking point for my wins. With just having .. I guess it is 197 by now? - the way to the top is incredibly far when you only get a single point. But things got even crazier. The last victory only earned me 0 points oO

What you have to keep into account is that there are players playing many more games than you have. And yes, As I was in the top 20% the first period I can tell you that raising your rank within the Rubedite rank is terribly difficult.

To put it bluntly, there's too many players like you with a similar ranking. As with competitive chess, winning against people with a similar rating, doesn't really improve your rating. That's why you see so many draws in (online) chess tournaments. It's fun and educational, but you don't gain very much. The only alternative would be to play and win more games. As you get past that "level" of players, your should see an increase in ranking until you hit the next group of people with similar ranking.

Not everyone can do this of course, but you might also want to try and change the time you're playing ToT. If you always play during prime time on your server, the people close to your ranking are much more available to challenge. if you change the time you play, you may find many of your closely rated players offline and might be pitted against a higher player. If you win that match you might just get past your "group".

Of course I'm assuming some ELO rating is being used to determine your ranking. If that turns out to be false my whole argument is also meaningless.

Klingenlied

So right now it kinda sounds like we only know for sure that we know nothing for sure.

Games where you could easily gauge the functionality of its system by just playing them - well, there have been plenty. What I gauge from the comments here is the following: I needa be lucky to find the one opponent that is higher rated then I am myself and beat him. That surely isn't impossible, But it does not really "feel" good I'd say? Anyway, I will try to get some games done after maintenance. I mean now that I know you do not really loose anything when not placing high in the leaderboards (just some gold), I couldn't care less anyway. So yea, maybe it is just for the best to try and casually enjoy the game for what it is then to be competetive about it.

Klingenlied

So, I guess I can give some really good update now.

I did go for some games after the game has been patched. All wins. Did climb from score 197 to 800'ish, rank 70'ish or so.
Did go for a break, another game, finally the first loss. My score instantly went from 800'ish to 1.

Of course I can not explain how exactly this did happened. Fact is after my winstreak did end, I did not loose a few placements but pretty much was thrown outta the ladder

Now the thing is: The current no1 on EU Playstation is a player I did play 3 times - without loosing a single time. So I do have a really hard time believing that whatever just is happening with my account is working "fine". Some accounts seem unaffected by loosing, others get moved out of the ladder immediately? oO That really is weird. Ah well, will keep trying some and see how further evaluation turns out. Still seems very, very strange to say the least.

Naomi_K

@Klingenlied

From what I've observed, the amount of points you score seems to be based on your MMR.

Playing against player with:

Similar ranking - Score and lose moderate amount of points.
Much lower ranking - Score very few points when winning, lose many points when losing.
Much higher ranking - Score many points when winning, lose few points for losing.

Klingenlied

Thanks Naomi. Did play some more games and I guess you are right to some degree.

I do however think that the "scaling" doesn't work properly. Or my account is bugged?
I did a lot of games and have had a lot of streaks and test out ... hella a lot of stuff.

I got those results:
You can get up to 1000 points in a single game.
You can, for a single loss, loose above 1000 points in a single game.
You can still get nothing from a win.
You will always loose points on a loss.

I would really love to see some official clarification on it. I mean the way it feels for me is a complete rollercoaster experience where it is not only about luck with cards but luck with opponents as well.

InvitationNotFound

Has anything changed since the last update respectively since the new season?
I made some notes of approximately 100 games from the last season and how much i won / lost with each one.

Seems like some sort of ELO system. Sometimes i noticed that the opponent was in the top 50 players on the leader board. A win gave quite a lot of points. A loss wasn't so bad in such a case. So it seems that it did depend on your and your opponents score.

muh

Ranking is as dog as it gets and a slap in anyones face actually trying to play competitive I suppose.

I did my placement matches and a few more when this current leaderboard started, was about 600 points.
Yesterday I found some time to waste on it again, climbed up to 1000 points. This morning I did one match which I lost.


If ToT would be a purely skilled based game, high swings in rating could be justified if you truly have a huge difference in score between two players. But it isn't. And you don't even know what rating anyone is at. You can be royally effed over by the tavern and there's only so much you can try by playing smart when you just don't get anything to begin with.

In my opinion, at least in Rubedite, streak bonuses should not exist and there should be upper bounds on rating changes for each match. The way it currently is implemented is laughable at best and I highly doubt it is using any of the established MMR systems available.

kevkj

muh wrote: »

@muh What addon is that?

Naomi_K

@kevkj The addon is called Tribute Improved Leaderboard

@muh, @Klingenlied
Risk losing 1000 points for a single loss. Need to win more than 10 games to make up for a single loss. That is if you even gain points for wining.



When I was playing on the test server, there were very few players and one could more easily observe what was going on, on the leaderboards. So if I played multiple matches against the same person and I was winning most games, the more often I won, the fewer points I scored for each subsequent win. And if they won, they would gain a large number of points and I would lose a large number of points. I might lose a 1000 while they gain a 1000.

If I had a bad losing streak, I would earn more points when I won.

kevkj

Naomi_K wrote: »

@kevkj The addon is called Tribute Improved Leaderboard

@Naomi_K Thank you.

Klingenlied

I can kinda confirm your findings Naomi. Did go for a lot of games during the recent days, and the system is just the worst there is. We play a game where luck is the decisive factor. That is not bad in itself, but in regards to ranking, we should rank or derank at a very steady pace. Your observation of being able to instantly loose 1000 points plus is right, happened to me more then a single time. On the other hand, not getting points has become a kinda rare concurrence, likely due to the ladder filling up more and more - playing on console btw, so it is less players as of yet.

Anyway, a semi-decent system would have caps on winning / loosing points and not "overdo" it with points.

Just a suggestion to maybe "make the whole system work" - this is for ranked only btw!

Win is always 10 points vs equal skill. Win can not be below 5 points. Win can be a max of 20 points.
Loss is always 10 points vs equal skill. Loss is max 20 points, but 5 at the lowest.

Now if the top player plays again the number 2 and looses, the system would compare both players. If the #1 has 2000 ranking points and the #2 has 1000, he would loose 20 points. Very obviously however, the #1 would have played a hella lotta games to even climb to this rank, including a lot of wins, so this would be fair.

Anyway, even if you multiplied my numbers by 10 - the basic that win / loss should have a cap so that people can progress smoothly - and furthermore that the cap should not even be exceedingly high due to the high component of luck involved - is incredibly important. Ranked play should be smooth sailing in regards to the outcome. And I don't mean I needa know where I land on the ladder exactly. I just want to steadily climb if I reliably win more games then I loose. The same with me accepting I will steadily drop down when I keep losing to my opponents. I do not want a single unlucky game to remove the progress of 20 games beforehand.

Psilent

The RNG can’t be that much of a factor. The top of the leaderboard in PC NA doesn’t seem to change to much. I see the same names up there daily. I assume that those types of people can win no matter how bad the tavern rng is for them.

The other day my opponent got 3 midnight raids in the first 3 turns. I had no idea how to even come back from that. The loss put me down to 117 points lol. Then I won the next game and jumped up to 1200 points.

Klingenlied

Hm, Psilent, how often have peopled whispered you to loose a match for gold or crowns? Its 2 times for me now. I don't really now how reliably I can say this, but it would seem that some portion of the playerbase tries to bribe for some wins. I don't think that is too bad actually, guess even has some kind of RP-aspect to it? Dunno, don't really care too much. But I really think that this has at least some effect on the top ranks.

Psilent

Klingenlied wrote: »

Hm, Psilent, how often have peopled whispered you to loose a match for gold or crowns? Its 2 times for me now. I don't really now how reliably I can say this, but it would seem that some portion of the playerbase tries to bribe for some wins. I don't think that is too bad actually, guess even has some kind of RP-aspect to it? Dunno, don't really care too much. But I really think that this has at least some effect on the top ranks.

I play ToT in offline mode. That might explain why it takes extra time for some opponents to make a first move. Trying to whisper me.

Tuonra2

I recently heard the theory that when you get your first win past rubidite, you jump up to 1001 rank points, and if you keep winning, you keep gaining from there, but if you lose, it takes an 'extra' couple 100 negative ranks, and it does this until the 1000 ranks that you got for free are gone. I can believe this theory, even though it's weird, because when I kept playing after a pretty long time of bad rank changes, it stabilized, and now I get about 75-90 rank for most wins, while losing 130-150 for a loss. This is imo totally reasonable since I'm top 10% and should be getting a much higher than 50% winrate to rank up at all.

Klingenlied

Tuonra2 wrote: »

I recently heard the theory that when you get your first win past rubedite, you jump up to 1001 rank points, and if you keep winning, you keep gaining from there, but if you lose, it takes an 'extra' couple 100 negative ranks, and it does this until the 1000 ranks that you got for free are gone. I can believe this theory, even though it's weird, because when I kept playing after a pretty long time of bad rank changes, it stabilized, and now I get about 75-90 rank for most wins, while losing 130-150 for a loss. This is imo totally reasonable since I'm top 10% and should be getting a much higher than 50% winrate to rank up at all.

Rest assured. That's a rumor. Nothing more. There have been quiet some 1001 point players. This very likely is due to one who jumps into ladder by playing a ranked player and gaining a lot of points while possibly - this is speculative on my part - destroying their opponents rank.

Why I am sure of this? First, I did not start with above 1000 points but with 180'ish. When I 3x defeated someone who was above 2k points (#1 EU PSN at that point), I hardly gained anything. So there might be something extremely strange for players newly entering the ladder. However, after I did loose my first ranked in Rubedite, I plunged back to a single ranking point. So quiet likely I did play someone who just ranked up and lost all points I did accumulate up to this point.
I don't care anymore, because this *** is too buggy and weird and luck based to be taken seriously. It is a decent way to pass time though.