Healers still #1 on BG Competitive Leaderboard - 893k points? Seriously??

SkaraMinoc

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/668104/hotfix-for-nov-1-2024-fixing-some-battlegrounds-bugs-region-crash-issues-cryodiil-repair-kits

Resolving the issue with Battlegrounds Competitive Leaderboards not working as intended.

@ZOS_Kevin @ZOS_GinaBruno This is not fixed.

185k healing on a losing team should not reward 3500 points.



893k points is ridiculous.

RomanRex

I support cumulative medal score for leadership board. System encourages more play time, but could be more balanced.

SkaraMinoc

RomanRex wrote: »

System encourages more play time

I played 10+ hours of 4v4 battlegrounds this weekend and I didn't even get a rank.

Thumbless_Bot

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

System encourages more play time

I played 10-15 hours of nothing but Battlegrounds this weekend and I didn't even get a rank.

That's because you weren't a healer. Medal score is imbalanced. It makes negative sense that you get points for healing in a bg but not for... you know... doing damage.. damage should count for twice as mich as healing in medal score.

Medal score is tie break when objective score is tied. So, heal more and win.... seriously...

The fact that they went live with a format that has a death match where one team could win by completely ignoring doing damage and just healing is a real head scratcher to say the least

Think about that.. really let that soak in.

You can win a death batch by completely ignoring the objective of killing your opponent and just out healing their damage. If the fight ends zero zero, or 45-45, they win even though you were the team actively trying to complete the objective and they just stood in a ball and healed each other.

Just keep in mind that it's just a game and either they'll fix it or not.

Welcome to the new era of bgs.

chessalavakia_ESO

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

System encourages more play time

I played 10-15 hours of nothing but Battlegrounds this weekend and I didn't even get a rank.

That's because you weren't a healer. Medal score is imbalanced. It makes negative sense that you get points for healing in a bg but not for... you know... doing damage.. damage should count for twice as mich as healing in medal score.

Medal score is tie break when objective score is tied. So, heal more and win.... seriously...

The fact that they went live with a format that has a death match where one team could win by completely ignoring doing damage and just healing is a real head scratcher to say the least

Think about that.. really let that soak in.

You can win a death batch by completely ignoring the objective of killing your opponent and just out healing their damage. If the fight ends zero zero, or 45-45, they win even though you were the team actively trying to complete the objective and they just stood in a ball and healed each other.

Just keep in mind that it's just a game and either they'll fix it or not.

Welcome to the new era of bgs.

The purpose of rewarding healing is to get people to do it.

Five of the eight people in the match didn't bother to heal their teammates at all.

You get 600 points if you do a measly 37.5k healing while defending an objective. A DPS build can easily manage to do that if they want to do so.

Yeah, the burst heal reward probably needs a cooldown or to be reduced but, you do want to give people something to get them to actually do it.

If you want to maximize your points you want to do both damage and healing and you want your healing to be in big bursts so you get the score boost. If I remember correctly, healing doesn't actually reward you with anything more besides on burst heals when you get above 375k.

RomanRex

i am in the top 10 each week so far.

the person with that score may not win more than you, but they deserve their rank. they are healing, yes, but also are always doing objective and getting non-healing medals.

Thumbless_Bot

chessalavakia_ESO wrote: »

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

System encourages more play time

I played 10-15 hours of nothing but Battlegrounds this weekend and I didn't even get a rank.

That's because you weren't a healer. Medal score is imbalanced. It makes negative sense that you get points for healing in a bg but not for... you know... doing damage.. damage should count for twice as mich as healing in medal score.

Medal score is tie break when objective score is tied. So, heal more and win.... seriously...

The fact that they went live with a format that has a death match where one team could win by completely ignoring doing damage and just healing is a real head scratcher to say the least

Think about that.. really let that soak in.

You can win a death batch by completely ignoring the objective of killing your opponent and just out healing their damage. If the fight ends zero zero, or 45-45, they win even though you were the team actively trying to complete the objective and they just stood in a ball and healed each other.

Just keep in mind that it's just a game and either they'll fix it or not.

Welcome to the new era of bgs.

The purpose of rewarding healing is to get people to do it.

Five of the eight people in the match didn't bother to heal their teammates at all.

You get 600 points if you do a measly 37.5k healing while defending an objective. A DPS build can easily manage to do that if they want to do so.

Yeah, the burst heal reward probably needs a cooldown or to be reduced but, you do want to give people something to get them to actually do it.

If you want to maximize your points you want to do both damage and healing and you want your healing to be in big bursts so you get the score boost. If I remember correctly, healing doesn't actually reward you with anything more besides on burst heals when you get above 375k.

I said damage should count for twice as much medal score as healing. Not that healing shouldn't give medal score.

Currently Healing counts toward medal score while doing damage does not. You get zero points for doing 10 million damage. This is broken. I dont think this is even up for debate when you can walk into to a death match and win be doing nothing, literally nothing but healing.

We need to reward all players for participating in combat.

As such, I dont disagree that healing should give the healer points. But doing damage should reward more points, at least in dm where that is the objective. I feel damage should reward more in other formats as well because if everyone stands on flags and heals, no one wins. Damage must be first or competitive bgs make no sense.

SkaraMinoc

Medal score doesn't accurately represent impact and it never will.

CameraBeardThePirate

A cumulative score that never goes down is asinine for a leaderboard. This isn't a "competitive BG queue" as advertised. It's a joke.

Stafford197

RomanRex wrote: »

i am in the top 10 each week so far.

the person with that score may not win more than you, but they deserve their rank. they are healing, yes, but also are always doing objective and getting non-healing medals.

If you don’t mind, could you tell us your score in the first week and/or in other weeks? Also how much time are you clocking in to reach that score?

Thumbless_Bot

CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »

A cumulative score that never goes down is asinine for a leaderboard. This isn't a "competitive BG queue" as advertised. It's a joke.

KDR.

These are BATTLEgrounds where killing your enemy and not dying equate to or directly contribute to success/failure in every single format.

There is no better or more appropriate metric than this.

To elaborate a bit, everyone can deal damage, heal and block. If everyone just blocked and healed there would be endless stalemates.

When we add damage into the mix, all three objectives, together end with one side dying and the other side living to take the game objective. Therefore this is the best metric we will ever have for ranking players.

RomanRex

i am around 200k atm for this week, putting me in top 10. previous weeks were similar.

i play more than most people. i see all those names in the top ranks when i play. they all certainly earn their spots.

Djennku

You do realize hat that person withthe 800k score (assuming PCNA) plays all day every day doing nothing but BGs to get there right?

Jierdanit

Djennku wrote: »

You do realize hat that person withthe 800k score (assuming PCNA) plays all day every day doing nothing but BGs to get there right?

The point is that if they would be playing a DD instead of healer they would barely get a quarter of those points, even if they play all day every day.

The scoring for healers in comparison to DDs is completely unbalanced.

Also besides that the position on the leaderboard should never be depending on how much time you have to play.

RomanRex wrote: »

i am around 200k atm for this week, putting me in top 10. previous weeks were similar.

i play more than most people. i see all those names in the top ranks when i play. they all certainly earn their spots.

As someone who also plays a lot and met basically everyone high on the PC/EU leaderboards I can tell you that from what I have seen very few of the people at the top actually deserve to be there gameplay wise.

Its very easy to say people deserve being high on the leaderboards if you are also benefiting from the leaderboards being the way they are.

RomanRex

i play PC/NA.

not all of the top 100 (even top 10) are healers and they all earned their spot.

Major_Mangle

RomanRex wrote: »

i play PC/NA.

not all of the top 100 (even top 10) are healers and they all earned their spot.

Yes they "earned" the spot according to the current ruleset, no one is arguing about that. People have however been asking for a complete rework of the ranking system to actually be somewhat meaningful and not just a accumulative score system that only reflects playtime + how much you can abuse a bugged medal that gives 20x times the amount of points it´s intended to give (according to in-game descriptions).

A leaderboard that´s supposed to be competitive should be based primarily on win/loss ratio and reflect how good/skilled a player is. I´m not against having medal score being taken into the equation as a part of a ranking/mmr system, but it should not be the main aspect that determines your leaderboard status.

RomanRex

Major_Mangle wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

i play PC/NA.

not all of the top 100 (even top 10) are healers and they all earned their spot.

Yes they "earned" the spot according to the current ruleset, no one is arguing about that. People have however been asking for a complete rework of the ranking system to actually be somewhat meaningful and not just a accumulative score system that only reflects playtime + how much you can abuse a bugged medal that gives 20x times the amount of points it´s intended to give (according to in-game descriptions).

A leaderboard that´s supposed to be competitive should be based primarily on win/loss ratio and reflect how good/skilled a player is. I´m not against having medal score being taken into the equation as a part of a ranking/mmr system, but it should not be the main aspect that determines your leaderboard status.

i disagree.

rewarding effort over outcome is wonderful because it:

1. increases the number of players (of many skill levels)
2. increases playtime for those playing bg’s
3. doesn’t exclude anyone from the possibility of getting rewards (if you work hard you can rank even if you aren’t the best)

Thumbless_Bot

RomanRex wrote: »

Major_Mangle wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

i play PC/NA.

not all of the top 100 (even top 10) are healers and they all earned their spot.

Yes they "earned" the spot according to the current ruleset, no one is arguing about that. People have however been asking for a complete rework of the ranking system to actually be somewhat meaningful and not just a accumulative score system that only reflects playtime + how much you can abuse a bugged medal that gives 20x times the amount of points it´s intended to give (according to in-game descriptions).

A leaderboard that´s supposed to be competitive should be based primarily on win/loss ratio and reflect how good/skilled a player is. I´m not against having medal score being taken into the equation as a part of a ranking/mmr system, but it should not be the main aspect that determines your leaderboard status.

i disagree.

rewarding effort over outcome is wonderful because it:

1. increases the number of players (of many skill levels)
2. increases playtime for those playing bg’s
3. doesn’t exclude anyone from the possibility of getting rewards (if you work hard you can rank even if you aren’t the best)

K
D
R
=
Effort

SkaraMinoc

RomanRex wrote: »

Major_Mangle wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

i play PC/NA.

not all of the top 100 (even top 10) are healers and they all earned their spot.

Yes they "earned" the spot according to the current ruleset, no one is arguing about that. People have however been asking for a complete rework of the ranking system to actually be somewhat meaningful and not just a accumulative score system that only reflects playtime + how much you can abuse a bugged medal that gives 20x times the amount of points it´s intended to give (according to in-game descriptions).

A leaderboard that´s supposed to be competitive should be based primarily on win/loss ratio and reflect how good/skilled a player is. I´m not against having medal score being taken into the equation as a part of a ranking/mmr system, but it should not be the main aspect that determines your leaderboard status.

i disagree.

rewarding effort over outcome is wonderful because it:

1. increases the number of players (of many skill levels)
2. increases playtime for those playing bg’s
3. doesn’t exclude anyone from the possibility of getting rewards (if you work hard you can rank even if you aren’t the best)

This is conjecture. You don't have data to back up this claim. A leaderboard based on medal score might result in less engagement than a leaderboard based on win/loss.

Urzigurumash

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

Major_Mangle wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

i play PC/NA.

not all of the top 100 (even top 10) are healers and they all earned their spot.

Yes they "earned" the spot according to the current ruleset, no one is arguing about that. People have however been asking for a complete rework of the ranking system to actually be somewhat meaningful and not just a accumulative score system that only reflects playtime + how much you can abuse a bugged medal that gives 20x times the amount of points it´s intended to give (according to in-game descriptions).

A leaderboard that´s supposed to be competitive should be based primarily on win/loss ratio and reflect how good/skilled a player is. I´m not against having medal score being taken into the equation as a part of a ranking/mmr system, but it should not be the main aspect that determines your leaderboard status.

i disagree.

rewarding effort over outcome is wonderful because it:

1. increases the number of players (of many skill levels)
2. increases playtime for those playing bg’s
3. doesn’t exclude anyone from the possibility of getting rewards (if you work hard you can rank even if you aren’t the best)

K
D
R
=
Effort

No it absolutely does not, not when mSorc and mPlar are superior ranged executioners, Damage and Assists should be scored.

Thumbless_Bot

Urzigurumash wrote: »

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

Major_Mangle wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

i play PC/NA.

not all of the top 100 (even top 10) are healers and they all earned their spot.

Yes they "earned" the spot according to the current ruleset, no one is arguing about that. People have however been asking for a complete rework of the ranking system to actually be somewhat meaningful and not just a accumulative score system that only reflects playtime + how much you can abuse a bugged medal that gives 20x times the amount of points it´s intended to give (according to in-game descriptions).

A leaderboard that´s supposed to be competitive should be based primarily on win/loss ratio and reflect how good/skilled a player is. I´m not against having medal score being taken into the equation as a part of a ranking/mmr system, but it should not be the main aspect that determines your leaderboard status.

i disagree.

rewarding effort over outcome is wonderful because it:

1. increases the number of players (of many skill levels)
2. increases playtime for those playing bg’s
3. doesn’t exclude anyone from the possibility of getting rewards (if you work hard you can rank even if you aren’t the best)

K
D
R
=
Effort

No it absolutely does not, not when mSorc and mPlar are superior ranged executioners, Damage and Assists should be scored.

Balance arguments are valid in the abstract but do nothing to counter my argument that KDR is the best and only real way to separate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak, in bgs.

CameraBeardThePirate

Urzigurumash wrote: »

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

Major_Mangle wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

i play PC/NA.

not all of the top 100 (even top 10) are healers and they all earned their spot.

Yes they "earned" the spot according to the current ruleset, no one is arguing about that. People have however been asking for a complete rework of the ranking system to actually be somewhat meaningful and not just a accumulative score system that only reflects playtime + how much you can abuse a bugged medal that gives 20x times the amount of points it´s intended to give (according to in-game descriptions).

A leaderboard that´s supposed to be competitive should be based primarily on win/loss ratio and reflect how good/skilled a player is. I´m not against having medal score being taken into the equation as a part of a ranking/mmr system, but it should not be the main aspect that determines your leaderboard status.

i disagree.

rewarding effort over outcome is wonderful because it:

1. increases the number of players (of many skill levels)
2. increases playtime for those playing bg’s
3. doesn’t exclude anyone from the possibility of getting rewards (if you work hard you can rank even if you aren’t the best)

K
D
R
=
Effort

No it absolutely does not, not when mSorc and mPlar are superior ranged executioners, Damage and Assists should be scored.

That's kind of semantics to be honest. KDR is used more or less interchangeably with KDA, and most people are referring to the latter when they say the former.

CameraBeardThePirate

RomanRex wrote: »

Major_Mangle wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

i play PC/NA.

not all of the top 100 (even top 10) are healers and they all earned their spot.

Yes they "earned" the spot according to the current ruleset, no one is arguing about that. People have however been asking for a complete rework of the ranking system to actually be somewhat meaningful and not just a accumulative score system that only reflects playtime + how much you can abuse a bugged medal that gives 20x times the amount of points it´s intended to give (according to in-game descriptions).

A leaderboard that´s supposed to be competitive should be based primarily on win/loss ratio and reflect how good/skilled a player is. I´m not against having medal score being taken into the equation as a part of a ranking/mmr system, but it should not be the main aspect that determines your leaderboard status.

i disagree.

rewarding effort over outcome is wonderful because it:

1. increases the number of players (of many skill levels)
2. increases playtime for those playing bg’s
3. doesn’t exclude anyone from the possibility of getting rewards (if you work hard you can rank even if you aren’t the best)

1) This is a completely baseless claim with no data to support it.

2) There are countless of examples of games displaying the opposite - lots of competitive games with extremely healthy playerbases at all skill levels with rankings and leaderboards that track win/loss, not time played.

Thumbless_Bot

CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »

Urzigurumash wrote: »

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

Major_Mangle wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

i play PC/NA.

not all of the top 100 (even top 10) are healers and they all earned their spot.

Yes they "earned" the spot according to the current ruleset, no one is arguing about that. People have however been asking for a complete rework of the ranking system to actually be somewhat meaningful and not just a accumulative score system that only reflects playtime + how much you can abuse a bugged medal that gives 20x times the amount of points it´s intended to give (according to in-game descriptions).

A leaderboard that´s supposed to be competitive should be based primarily on win/loss ratio and reflect how good/skilled a player is. I´m not against having medal score being taken into the equation as a part of a ranking/mmr system, but it should not be the main aspect that determines your leaderboard status.

i disagree.

rewarding effort over outcome is wonderful because it:

1. increases the number of players (of many skill levels)
2. increases playtime for those playing bg’s
3. doesn’t exclude anyone from the possibility of getting rewards (if you work hard you can rank even if you aren’t the best)

K
D
R
=
Effort

No it absolutely does not, not when mSorc and mPlar are superior ranged executioners, Damage and Assists should be scored.

That's kind of semantics to be honest. KDR is used more or less interchangeably with KDA, and most people are referring to the latter when they say the former.

Yeop. Zos should also 'fix' their order of operations in kill calculations because I often seem to get my kills stolen by sorcs. But we should calculate Assists into the metric as well.