The connection issues for the North American PC/Mac megaserver have been resolved at this time. If you continue to experience difficulties at login, please restart your client. Thank you for your patience!
Looking for Clarification on Competitive BG Leaderboard Ranking
ForumSavant
✭✭✭✭
In one of the most recent PTS patches, 10.2.2 it was stated that:
"Your MMR is derived from a combination of wins/losses and the rank of the opponents you've played against.”
It was also stated that this was always the case, and there was a misconception that Medal Score was what contributed to your MMR.
While this is great, and the way it should be, I am still curious as to what the leaderboard is based on, because we were initially told it was based on medal score. I tried looking for it in the latest two iterations of PTS notes and could not find any clarification as to what contributes to getting higher on the leaderboard and I am under the impression that it's still based on just medal score. Now, I could just be overlooking it and it's possible MMR is what it's based on, but I don't believe that is the case.
The prior problems with leaderboards based on medal score still persist if this is the case. Not only is it odd to have a leaderboard based on medal score, which basically boils down to whoever plays the most, but it can also be argued that players in higher MMR who have to play other players in higher MMR end up with less medal score per game, just based on the way those matches generally go, as opposed to lower MMR matches.
The leaderboard for Competitive BGs should just be the players with the highest MMR, as all other "competitive" games are. If you look at leaderboards for any other game with a solid esports scene, you will notice most top players don't boast a win/loss that is extremely high once they reach the highest MMR, which makes sense, since their opponents are also better players and often take games off them. For this reason, win rates above 70% are generally on the extremely high end of the spectrum and a win rate of 70% in the highest MMR is much more impressive than a 70% win rate over the first 10 games you que. With this being the case, where medal score is heavily based on time played, as well as skill of not only yourself but the other players you are matched against, it would be best to make the leaderboards based on the actual MMR of players, if it already isn't.
Edited by ForumSavant on October 9, 2024 9:13AM "Your MMR is derived from a combination of wins/losses and the rank of the opponents you've played against.”
It was also stated that this was always the case, and there was a misconception that Medal Score was what contributed to your MMR.
While this is great, and the way it should be, I am still curious as to what the leaderboard is based on, because we were initially told it was based on medal score. I tried looking for it in the latest two iterations of PTS notes and could not find any clarification as to what contributes to getting higher on the leaderboard and I am under the impression that it's still based on just medal score. Now, I could just be overlooking it and it's possible MMR is what it's based on, but I don't believe that is the case.
The prior problems with leaderboards based on medal score still persist if this is the case. Not only is it odd to have a leaderboard based on medal score, which basically boils down to whoever plays the most, but it can also be argued that players in higher MMR who have to play other players in higher MMR end up with less medal score per game, just based on the way those matches generally go, as opposed to lower MMR matches.
The leaderboard for Competitive BGs should just be the players with the highest MMR, as all other "competitive" games are. If you look at leaderboards for any other game with a solid esports scene, you will notice most top players don't boast a win/loss that is extremely high once they reach the highest MMR, which makes sense, since their opponents are also better players and often take games off them. For this reason, win rates above 70% are generally on the extremely high end of the spectrum and a win rate of 70% in the highest MMR is much more impressive than a 70% win rate over the first 10 games you que. With this being the case, where medal score is heavily based on time played, as well as skill of not only yourself but the other players you are matched against, it would be best to make the leaderboards based on the actual MMR of players, if it already isn't.
1
-
If leaderboards are still based off of medal score that's going to be really lame. It would be cool to be able to sort leaderboards by K/D and for it to be based off mmr1 -
CameraBeardThePirate✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭@ZOS_Kevin
We haven't had any comment on this the entire PTS cycle. If the leaderboards are still based on Medal Score in the new patch, it's basically a "screw you" to Necromancers and Shielder builds, as those classes/builds do not earn as much medal score as others due to the fact that Pet Damage, Pet Healing, and Shielding do not earn medal score.
It also means that Leaderboards will essentially amount to the # of games someone has played. They need to be based off of MMR or Win/Loss, not a cumulative score that never goes down.Edited by CameraBeardThePirate on October 9, 2024 4:04PM2 -
ZOS_KevinCommunity ManagerJust following up here. We see this and will check in with the PvP team to see if there is any additional clarity that can be provided at this time.Community Manager for ZeniMax Online Studio and Elder Scrolls OnlineDev Tracker | Service Alerts | ESO Twitter4 -
ForumSavant✭✭✭✭Just following up here. We see this and will check in with the PvP team to see if there is any additional clarity that can be provided at this time.
Appreciate the update.
I don't think it would be a hard fix, if it isn't the case already, to just make the leaderboards follow what the highest MMR is, since the system is apparently already in play.0 -
It was stated in the link below that the leaderboard is based off of scoring and medals earned which is what the entire competitive community does not want. It should, at the very least, be based off of W/L. I'm not sure why they are ignoring the community on this. A leaderboard based off of medal scores means there is no incentive to actually win the match. Just get good medals. So someone could be #1 on the leaderboard and have a 30% winrate in matches just because they spam a lot of heals.
There needs to be major incentive to actually WIN THE MATCH. Or else every match will devolve the way they currently do, where people just fight to kill or get medal scores and dont actually do any objectives to try and win.
I for the life of me cant figure out why they didnt just transfer the Tales of Tribute reward sytem that is based off of W/L to PvP. That would atleast give some reason to actually try to win a match.
My prediction with how things will go in update 44 is any match where a team is getting stomped, the losing players will just leave match. There is currently no reason to stay. Theres no comeback mechanic, no awesome reward to keep fighting for, no nothing.
The worst part about all of this for the PvP community is that this isnt just "A" pvp update, this is "THE" pvp update we have waiting 7 years for, so we wont see another for a long time, and they arent even listening to us. So who is this for then? More new players like usual? Short term gains? I have no idea who their audience is for this....
https://elderscrollsonline.com/en-us/news/post/66847?utm_medium=social&utm_source=discord&utm_campaign=dwemer_automatonEdited by SundarahFr3akinrican on October 19, 2024 8:06AM2 -
Aldoss✭✭✭✭✭
✭Here's what I will acknowledge:
This makes it sound like they did away with the individual lives. If true, at least that was addressed.
Medal scoring is so dumb though.
0 -
0
-
ruskiiiSoul Shriven@ZOS_Kevin while you are chasing up clarification, is there still going to be the under 50s and over 50s combined into one leaderboard in u44? This is already taken advantage of on live, and if the leaderboard rewards are getting better in u44, I can't see it getting better. People farming low level characters are going to exist, but it's wierd that there are a significant amount of them taking up the top spots on the bg leaderboard.
Seems like it would be a loss for better players trying to push leaderboard scores (if that becomes more relevant next patch), but also a loss for new players trying to get into the game. Again, not that these kind of people won't exist anyway, it just seems odd that they get rewarded for it as if they were competing in real battlegrounds.1 -
Aldoss✭✭✭✭✭
✭@ZOS_Kevin while you are chasing up clarification, is there still going to be the under 50s and over 50s combined into one leaderboard in u44? This is already taken advantage of on live, and if the leaderboard rewards are getting better in u44, I can't see it getting better. People farming low level characters are going to exist, but it's wierd that there are a significant amount of them taking up the top spots on the bg leaderboard.
Seems like it would be a loss for better players trying to push leaderboard scores (if that becomes more relevant next patch), but also a loss for new players trying to get into the game. Again, not that these kind of people won't exist anyway, it just seems odd that they get rewarded for it as if they were competing in real battlegrounds.
100%
I haven't made a new toon in a long time, but the last time I did, I was shocked to see how many of the twinks were at the top of the leaderboards.
I was even more shocked that I had never seen some of their account names in above 50 bgs and then further surprised when a lvl 48 stamden that went 44-0 suddenly turned into a lvl 15 stamden the following day who also went 30-0.
Take them off the leaderboard.1