RANK POINT SYSTEM CLARITY!!!!!!!

Lunatearz

DEVS i cant understand that this has not been noticed by any devs or game developers as it has been brought up many times... when are we getting clarity on the point system in the ranked matches? AS of now, they seem unequal.. PLEASE shine a light on this so we, the players dont feel that we have just been thrown a dead bird when it comes to ranked matches

NeKryXe

Lunatearz wrote: »

DEVS i cant understand that this has not been noticed by any devs or game developers as it has been brought up many times... when are we getting clarity on the point system in the ranked matches? AS of now, they seem unequal.. PLEASE shine a light on this so we, the players dont feel that we have just been thrown a dead bird when it comes to ranked matches

Funny to see this post here right now. I just came to the forum to ask AGAIN why we keep getting 0 points in almost ALL matches we win. It doesn't make any sense. They need to fix this pathetic ranking system quickly! Every single month we ask why we get 0 points on victories and 150 points on losses and we get no answers. It's stupid, it's making the ranking game awful to play. We shouldn't ever be matched with a player that will result as a 0 points award. FIX IT!

I should be only matched with players of my level. If I get 0 points because the game matched me with a lower-level player, it's because the game was incompetently designed. That shouldn't ever happen. I'm in the ranking, I should be matched with players in the same ranking, and everyone should receive points when winning a match. The game always knows how to steal 150 points when we lose, why the hell then do we get 0 points on a win?

This must be the worst ranking system ever seen in any kind of game. Really, really, really hideous!

Lunatearz

NeKryXe wrote: »

I should be only matched with players of my level. If I get 0 points because the game matched me with a lower-level player, it's because the game was incompetently designed. That shouldn't ever happen. I'm in the ranking, I should be matched with players in the same ranking, and everyone should receive points when winning a match. The game always knows how to steal 150 points when we lose, why the hell then do we get 0 points on a win?

This must be the worst ranking system ever seen in any kind of game. Really, really, really hideous!

I understand they can not match us only with ppl within our ranking because simply there are not enough ppl on at all times that play ToT at the same time let alone in the same rank reach.

AND

The game is based on chance more then just skill...you can lose against the worst player solely cause of chance.. rng and you can be the worst player to win against the best...

THIS is why the ranking system is flawed

rauyran

Does it use an ELO system like chess?

SilverBride

Lunatearz wrote: »

I understand they can not match us only with ppl within our ranking because simply there are not enough ppl on at all times that play ToT at the same time let alone in the same rank reach.

Maybe there would be more people playing if they fixed the ranking system. That was the biggest reason I stopped playing.

Lunatearz

rauyran wrote: »

Does it use an ELO system like chess?

your guess is as good as mine but it seems like it...

SilverBride

@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_Kevin

May we please get an explanation of what the scoring system is and how it works? I know several players, myself included, who stopped playing ToT because of how frustrating it is and how unfair it seems.

And please consider a simplified and clearly understood system moving forward.

Personofsecrets

It is aggravating that I can beat the same player 5 times in a row and then lose the rank that I earned for those matches in one more game against them where they get a great first pick and win mostly because of that reason alone.

redspecter23

Personofsecrets wrote: »

It is aggravating that I can beat the same player 5 times in a row and then lose the rank that I earned for those matches in one more game against them where they get a great first pick and win mostly because of that reason alone.

That is what I would consider a MASSIVE flaw in what is supposed to be a competitive game. While I enjoy Tribute from a casual perspective, things like this keep me from taking it even remotely seriously as a competitive game. The silence concerning the scoring structure doesn't make things any better.

NeKryXe

Lunatearz wrote: »

I understand they can not match us only with ppl within our ranking because simply there are not enough ppl on at all times that play ToT at the same time let alone in the same rank reach.

In that case don't match me with anyone. They can just display a message informing that and we'll decide if we want to play for a fantastic reward of 0 points or not.

It's basically stupid to create a ranking system and then match players of that rank with players out of the rank because there's not enough players. Just let us know and I'll gladly pick a casual match. It's not competitive at all to play in rank for 0 points. It's stupid and unacceptable.

NeKryXe

rauyran wrote: »

Does it use an ELO system like chess?

I don't remember ever getting 0 points for a win in a ranked chess match. But I haven't played competitive chess for many years. Maybe ranked stuff has gotten dumber these days and I didn't know it yet.

Personofsecrets

redspecter23 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

It is aggravating that I can beat the same player 5 times in a row and then lose the rank that I earned for those matches in one more game against them where they get a great first pick and win mostly because of that reason alone.

That is what I would consider a MASSIVE flaw in what is supposed to be a competitive game. While I enjoy Tribute from a casual perspective, things like this keep me from taking it even remotely seriously as a competitive game. The silence concerning the scoring structure doesn't make things any better.

Some really good players seemed to have moved on for this reason alone.

Lunatearz

I am ranked 7 at the moment of this writing on the Xbox Na server. And I just won a match I checked my score and had 812 points and ranked 7. The other player left when it was 33 to 24 and I have a way better stack build-up. I check my score. I have 812 points and I am ranked 7. I checked the top 100 and this player was not in the top 100.

I have lost plenty of matches against this same player on other days. So this is not just a skill issue. The scoring is unfair. I only played for a chance for THEM to win points. There were no score points for me in it. Only the match bag reward and one win of the day.

I want to know how many I would have lost when I could NOT win anything. THESE MATCHES WHERE ONE PLAYER CAN NOT SCORE POINTS SHOULD BE GOING TO THE RANKED CASUAL MATCHES.


When are the devs going to reply to this?

spartaxoxo

I understand if they can't give us matches against only others same rank. I also understand of these matches must be worth less. But 0 points is absurd and the reason I don't try to leaderboard at all. I do my placements purely for my coins and trophy and then quit playing ranked.

Lunatearz

I just decided to quit playing ranked at all its not worth my time to get a 10 min penalty when the match doesn't start even and I lose 140 points.. or when I play a 30 min lasting ranked game and get 0 points for my win or with one game I lose more then I can gain with 8. I'm done. Even the devs don't care or they would have responded by now.

I am a streamer but I can't sell this to my viewers.

spartaxoxo

I also want to say that I don't think encouraging Rubedite players to spend all their time in casual queue is good for the game.

I remember that when I first started playing more often in casual queue, many other high skill players were doing the same thing. And there were threads and complaints from newer players about being crushed in the queues. I was also easily finishing my dailies. Many times I would finish "win 3 games" in only 3 games. On a bad day, it would be 5 games. That's above a 50/50 win rate. Competitive was a different story. I'd go on losing streaks more often in comp.

This was NOT because I was so amazing. It was because at that point, more players of Rubedite rank were in comp. And more newer and casual players were in casual queue. This is the way things should be. It's not a feat of skill to worth bragging about to win against someone who doesn't even know how to use the Treasury yet. That's not what I'm saying. I was pretty low tier Rubedite. I am far better at the game now than I was back then. But, even a low tier one is gonna generally outperform a brand new player.

As more and more players quit comp, my easy casual win days became fewer and fewer. And my matches in casual got tougher and tougher. I started noticing I would more often be matched against players at the top of the leaderboard. This was more fun for me, but it was a disaster for queue times and for keeping more casual players interested in the game.

It's just not fun for anyone when the best players spend all their time in casual queue because they are basically actively punished for playing comp, even when they perform well. And when the game isn't fun anymore, most people aren't gonna come here and complain. They are just going to quit. And the less people to match against, the worse this problem gets.

NeKryXe

Lunatearz wrote: »

I just decided to quit playing ranked at all its not worth my time to get a 10 min penalty when the match doesn't start even and I lose 140 points.. or when I play a 30 min lasting ranked game and get 0 points for my win or with one game I lose more then I can gain with 8. I'm done. Even the devs don't care or they would have responded by now.

I am a streamer but I can't sell this to my viewers.

Yeah! You are absolutely right about the penalties from bugs and the 8 matches result...

A couple of days ago I won 3 matches in a row and got 0 points in each, then I lost one match and the game, as usual, took me -150 points. Today I tried again. I lost the first game, again it took me -150 points, I won the following one and got 0 points and on the third match got +24, on the forth I lost again and the game took me -128 points (weird, I don't know why they didn't stole me 150 points on this one).

So... 5 wins +24 points and 3 losses -428 points.

This is too stupid. I'm not an expert on math, but I think that in a rational world 5 wins in 8 matches should have a positive result and not this insane result of 428 negative points.

But we continue here with no answers about this mess.

At this moment on PC EU there's only 640 players on the competitive ToT. If their idea is to demotivate players to participate, then they are doing a great job.

SilverBride

This is why it should just be based on how many wins and how many losses. A skilled player is going to win more and will continue to advance up in rank and a less skilled player won't. There will always be some RNG involved but in general this makes way more sense.

They could still apply points for each to make keeping score easier, but it should be the same amount each time. 100 gained for a win, 100 lost for a loss.

NeKryXe

SilverBride wrote: »

This is why it should just be based on how many wins and how many losses. A skilled player is going to win more and will continue to advance up in rank and a less skilled player won't. There will always be some RNG involved but in general this makes way more sense.

They could still apply points for each to make keeping score easier, but it should be the same amount each time. 100 gained for a win, 100 lost for a loss.

I'm afraid that giving the same for a loss or a victory could benefit players who play more matches. It's not very fair also. I'm not at all against the flexible point system they seem to want, I just think it's badly implemented at the moment: taking 150 points on a loss is insanely high and 0 points on a winning is totally offensive. The 0 points thing on a win is an insult to players who spend more than 20 minutes in a ranked match for nothing!

Maybe if they put the minimum winning points at 10 points (NEVER 0 points), and the maximum loss around 50 points, it would be more balanced and more competitive. I believe that the game would be more organic. Probably more players would return because, we would all take more risks, play more and it wouldn't be so frustrating, we wouldn't feel so cheated.

At the moment, winning 0 points or losing 150 points, are both unfair and very frustrating. I've been playing way less ranked matches because I already know that the highest probability is to get 0 points or lose 150 points, so, there's nothing there for me, it's just plain stupid.

SilverBride

It is definitely unfair and I no longer play except for an occasional NPC game because of it.

NeKryXe

How do you think we can get our complaints to reach Zos regarding the current absurd ranking system? What can we do? Could it help if we open a poll asking players to vote and give their opinion about the rank system?

Lots of threads have already been opened with players discussing this. It seems unanimous that most players (at least on frorum) hates the ranking system as it is now and no one considers it fair, but nothing has ever been said by Zos in its justification. What do you think we can do in order to get an answer?

SilverBride

NeKryXe wrote: »

How do you think we can get our complaints to reach Zos regarding the current absurd ranking system? What can we do? Could it help if we open a poll asking players to vote and give their opinion about the rank system?

Lots of threads have already been opened with players discussing this. It seems unanimous that most players (at least on frorum) hates the ranking system as it is now and no one considers it fair, but nothing has ever been said by Zos in its justification. What do you think we can do in order to get an answer?

I don't know if a poll would help but it sure wouldn't hurt. I know several people who stopped playing because of it.

Lunatearz

NeKryXe wrote: »

How do you think we can get our complaints to reach Zos regarding the current absurd ranking system? What can we do? Could it help if we open a poll asking players to vote and give their opinion about the rank system?

Lots of threads have already been opened with players discussing this. It seems unanimous that most players (at least on frorum) hates the ranking system as it is now and no one considers it fair, but nothing has ever been said by Zos in its justification. What do you think we can do in order to get an answer?

Storm the headquarters and demand justice!! STRIKE!!!!! XD XD XD

Lunatearz

Is IM not sure if I would go back if they changed it now cause why not change it while we are still supporting it? [snip] I don't think this would be a very difficult fix tbh.

[edited for bashing]

WitchyKiki

All I know is I was #50 on the ranking system, conceded one match and I got knocked down to 122. I'd rather play unranked, although I don't care much for the ranking system, its still annoying.

NeKryXe

WitchyKiki wrote: »

All I know is I was #50 on the ranking system, conceded one match and I got knocked down to 122. I'd rather play unranked, although I don't care much for the ranking system, its still annoying.

I was #12 yesterday. It took dozens and dozens of consecutive victories (winning 0 to 20 points) to reach that place. Just in 2 losses got 300 points stolen from my score and dropped below #100. It's so pathetic!

Glantir

I just started with ToT and just want to get the rubedite Rank for the achievement. But since i get to voidsteel i find myself in a ELO/RNG hell.

I'am just level 4 so i didnt finished the tournament quest, but i keep playing against players with all decks, wich means they played much more ToT than me....

I would appreciate if i get kicked out of the queue if there are no players at my level or have the option. Or maybe a system were in the first 2 minutes in the queue, it search for players at you skill level/elo/mmr or whatever you want to call it. After 2 minutes it search for every player regardless of the skill level

Rooatouille

rauyran wrote: »

Does it use an ELO system like chess?

Based on my observations, it seems to, yes.

To respond to the post in general:

I think the system as it stands only really needs one minor tweak: a base point gain per win that's then increased a variable amount based on the current determining factors (I assume an ELO-esque system).

Something like a base +25/+35 would be more than sufficient in my opinion. I think the +/-150 cap was a fantastic solution to the major swings we used to have. However, the main issue I have with the system as it stands is how I can win 2/3 games in ranked matches and still end up at a loss. I understand how and why this happens as I've seen it happen where I've played the same player three times in a row, winning the first two and losing the third. That pretty clearly tells me there was a significant enough data differential where the system expected me to win each game, so the gains were small and the loss was maxed. Adding a base gain amount would alleviate this phenomenon as well as the +0 that happens on occasion. I don't think anybody with at least a 66% win rate should be at an overall loss of points and it is a serious feel bad moment when you finish a game and get an actual +0 (not referring to the end of game report bug, but the actual, factual point change).

The feel bad part is probably the more important part for me as I realize that new players who are just getting into ranked or may not have a fantastic W/L record will see the +0 more often and become demoralized.

fleetingyouth_ESO

I downloaded the addon that shows more ranking info like how much you gain or lose, plus your percentile at every level.

I noticed at the end of a match I win or lose when it says 0 the add-on shows the actual numbers I gained and lost and how my position in the rank changed. Ive seen the game screen say 0 and the addon say +150 with the 150 being the accurate change in score.

sekou_trayvond

No. Just no. This would simply benefit those who can play ToT all day long, relatively speaking. This is what the Emp and BG leaderboards are- more a recognition of time played than skill applied.

Look, I don't like the zero point phenomenon. Like @Rooatouille above, a bare minimum points gained for a win needs to be implemented. The 150 point loss setup is fine. There needs to be some risk factor in this system.

Implement a minimum point gain is necessary. But more importantly, ZoS needs to open up ToT to everyone. If you follow the number of qualified ranked players per season, and I do to an extent, it is trending downward. We had ~1400 qualified about 4 seasons ago. Then down to around ~1200 and, if memory serves, below that last season. We are close to seeing less than 1k qualified ranked players in a season and that's going to become a problem. Obviously, the rank system appears to have set some off the game but keeping the potential player pool tightly restricted atm isn't helping anything either.

SilverBride wrote: »

This is why it should just be based on how many wins and how many losses. A skilled player is going to win more and will continue to advance up in rank and a less skilled player won't. There will always be some RNG involved but in general this makes way more sense.

They could still apply points for each to make keeping score easier, but it should be the same amount each time. 100 gained for a win, 100 lost for a loss.

NeKryXe

sekou_trayvond wrote: »

No. Just no. This would simply benefit those who can play ToT all day long, relatively speaking. This is what the Emp and BG leaderboards are- more a recognition of time played than skill applied.

Look, I don't like the zero point phenomenon. Like @Rooatouille above, a bare minimum points gained for a win needs to be implemented. The 150 point loss setup is fine. There needs to be some risk factor in this system.

Implement a minimum point gain is necessary. But more importantly, ZoS needs to open up ToT to everyone. If you follow the number of qualified ranked players per season, and I do to an extent, it is trending downward. We had ~1400 qualified about 4 seasons ago. Then down to around ~1200 and, if memory serves, below that last season. We are close to seeing less than 1k qualified ranked players in a season and that's going to become a problem. Obviously, the rank system appears to have set some off the game but keeping the potential player pool tightly restricted atm isn't helping anything either.

SilverBride wrote: »

This is why it should just be based on how many wins and how many losses. A skilled player is going to win more and will continue to advance up in rank and a less skilled player won't. There will always be some RNG involved but in general this makes way more sense.

They could still apply points for each to make keeping score easier, but it should be the same amount each time. 100 gained for a win, 100 lost for a loss.

"The 150 point loss setup is fine" if it's guaranteed that we'll earn at least 50 points in each game we win. Very frequently I lose a match with one player, I get 150 points stolen from my score, then I'm matched with that same player a couple of times, and even if I win all the following matches I can't get more than 20 points. So, yes, it's absolutely ok to lose 150 points on a loss, if we win at least 50 points on a match victory.