Yeah, the ranked system is really flawed. I won 4 games in a row earlier, lost the next match, and lost ALL of the points I earned from those games. This has happened multiple times before. How is that balanced? It's so confusing. Makes it extremely difficult to stay in the top 100.

Bat wrote: »

Honestly this ranking system feels like it's bugged. I was ranked 163, then played one match that I won... ranked down to 223 for winning. I lost rank for winning. ZOS what am I missing here.

It means others earned more points than you while you were in your match. You don't lose points for a win. You might not gain any (which sucks imo) but you don't lose any either. If you fell in placement then others earned more than you did.

the 0-0 you posted has been a known bug forever now. I still get it every now and then. As for the ranking system it sucks, so just play unranked if it bothers you that much.

HalfDragoness wrote: »

I have no idea if this is correct or not, but I believe the ranking system is also affected by how many people have earned their rubidite trophy. For example if you were the first person in the season to get to Rubidite level your place in the ranking would be 1 as there is literally only 1 person on the leaderboard. But There must be some sort of calculation that takes place to stop you holding 1st place otherwise if you logged on day 1 of a new season, got the first spot on the leaderboard and then just didn't play agains for the rest of the season that would be extremely unfair.

I assume that the reason you go up and dwn the leaderboards by hundreds of places within several games has something to do with how many other people are currently on the leaderboard and maybe their win/loss ration vs yours. I've noticed that my leaderboard ranking does get lower the longer the season goes on and I believe it's because at the start of the season there are less than 500 people on the leaderboard but by the end there are thousands...

I could very well be wrong though, would be good for some confirmation.

Once you get to ranked play it is a point based system. If you look at the top ranked list they are listed from 1-100 based on points acquired. If you were 1st and more players joined after you but you didn't earn any more points you will quickly fall in rank.

The only mystery is in how points on a win condition are calculated. As sometimes a win results in 0 points. This must have something to do with a hidden performance-based system like battlegrounds as well as maybe other factors.

Also, there does seem to be a bug that when winning, the results screen can list 0 points gained but if you look at your overall point total it has gone up.

As mentioned above it is misleading to think gaining points means you will rise in the leader board as it doesnt take into account how many other players are rising in points while you are either not playing or in an actual game. theoretically, dozens of players are winning and gaining points in the time span of each game you play. This can lead to drastic swings in rank positions.

Like other card games, though this is not confirmed, Winning the most games will probably not lead to the highest ranked position. Playing opponents that are either ranked higher than yourself or are higher on the hidden mmr system will result in more points. So theoretically you can continue to win but not be matched with players that provide high point gains. If this is the case then a lower overall population and the times that you play at could be a disadvantage. A problem more popular games dont run into as much.

Just Google Elo rating system. It's fairly clear this is the bedrock of the ToT ranked system that ZoS employs. Once you read that the griping over ranked scoring should lessen (in theory).

I lose 2 games against the same player in a row. -150, -150. You would think that the algorhythm would adjust, but I am such a god that I just always lose 150 points for letting a a pitiful mortal beat me.