More Insanity In The Ranking System

RCubed1967 · June 2023

I have played 9 games against one player this month, and won 6 of those games. Yup - 67% win rate against them. Still, I have LOST a net total of 127 points.

How is this a ranking system? Beat a player 6/9, yet lose rank.

If ZOS doesn't want to change our ranking system, perhaps they should make the other battlegrounds have the same randomness we have. Imagine doing battlegrounds where you get to pick your class and alliance, yet all your gear and spells will be random.

Recognize the RNG of our game and design the system appropriately using series matches as the baseline.

Personofsecrets · June 2023

What's interesting to me is that there is a player I usually lose to and they always seem to get 100 points or more. By the record I SHOULD lose and that would mean to me that they SHOULDNT get that many points for doing something that they SHOULD do. But they do.

When I beat someone that I SHOULD beat, I get 50 points to 0 points. Yes, even after all of our feedback, some games still reward 0 points. Thanks devs.

RCubed1967 · June 2023

I think we basically agree, but I need to apply some specifics.

First, the points you win or lose are based on the delta score to a maximum of 150 points. The system is that based on chess, and that works for "SHOULD beat someone" in the context of ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL. Chess is a game where all things are equal as the pieces are not randomly set and each player gets the same amount of pieces. The only thing close to being random is who starts first. Again, CHESS is a game that is of strategy where all things ARE equal.

Tales of Tribute is NOT a game where all things are equal. There is SIGNIFICANT RNG in who gets which card. There is a significant first mover advantage to some improperly balanced cards. Further, there is significant RNG in the cards you draw in your turn (i.e., you might have 6 Crows out of 20 cards but can never get more than 2 in any turn...and those 2 don't give you a huge combo).

To see who is better given the RNG requires multiple games against the same player. Only then will statistically you be able to prove who is the better player. The ranking should NEVER be based on single games nor should it be based on how many total games you play in a season. Ranking needs to look at who beats who statistically.

You and I have played 2 games in the past 3 months (both this month). I have won one and you have won one. Our two game match up has us equal in points (one of the very few matchups like this). I don't know who is better. I can't look at our combined scores as they are meaningless due to the amount of games we have played total, the level of competitors each of us have played, and how much of a factor RNG played in those games.

ZOS - fix the ranking system!!!!!!!!!!!