View Single Post
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
11-30-2011, 05:57 AM
Originally Posted by MustrumRidcully View Post
Total # of wins or win/loss ratio would be a decent way to get some match-making. Ratio may be "fairest" once you have a certain amount of total matches accrued, but even total wins can do okay, I think. The really good players will inevitably reach very high numbers here, so that the typical casual PvPer will not be close. And if you somehow manage to have 1000 wins and 10,000 losses and are fighting TSI with 1000 wins and 500 losses, well, that just sounds unlikely.
The point of my post was to put forth the question, " what do we measure to determine player skill and placement in a ranking system?"

In the end if it is just wins that determine a players rank and by defualt analysis those whom run premade teams will rise to the top and the casual player will not even come close to the same rank due to PuG inconsistancies, it may be better to just submit the names of those players whom are known to be at or near the top for thier own Ques as the number of mid level and lower level PvP'ers I think is greater in number.

What will happen is that those whom have shown themselves superior will play as often as their group allows while the PuG'ers will still be repleate with cries of "unfun" and "no fair" as those mid level not-quite-so-profficient PvP'ers will rise to the top in PuG and the cries of "seperate PuG and Premade" will continue.

At the same time you will haev those whom flub thier own records so they can remain the Big fish in the small pond, so to speak.

I think the system may need to be more than just who wins, number of won matches, etc, otherwise we may end up with the elite PvP'ers in a bracket all their own and the same level of angst, infighting and complaining in the ques below that we have now.