Outsider's perspective: PvP additions that Cryptic should consider
View Single Post
Join Date: Dec 2007
11-30-2011, 07:04 AM
Originally Posted by
I am not sure I can follow you here. I think the main issue people have is that they fight the same Premade again and again and don't see a way to win. That's why they want the Premades gone. If they don't keep fighting a Premade because the premade is just rated so much higher, their concern is addressed. If they keep fighting it, they are either better than they think (and remember, every time you lose, your opponents rating rises and your own does not or get worse, so if it is requally an unequal match, you should stop seeing them.), or there are just you and the Premade in the queues and seperating the queues would lead to neither of you playing.
In a perfect world, maybe. I thinkt he reality will be the same we have now as those Premades not good enough to be in the upper eschalon will be the new target of angst in the pugs and the cries for the ability to not play premades while PuGing will continue.
But can he? How can you be a "Big Fish in the small pond" if you have to intentionally lose matches? I don't think this is really something people can pull off well.
You scores say you suck while in reality you have the skills to be in a higher PvP bracket?
It doesn't take much to lose a match and do so enough to keep oneself in the range of PuGing. Players will do this to massage thier own egoes or just for kicks.
A good system may be more complex than just a single number. But if it's just one single number with no mathematical tricks, it has to be match wins. No other single value is more representative.
A better system with more numbers taking into account should probably consider #matches and the ratio of win/losses.
Say, people that have played 100 matches or less are in their own "league" compared to people that played 1000 matches. It may also require to cut off after a certain amount of time. It makes sense to me to track win/losses for your entire career, but actually accounting for match-making should probably be limited to something like the last 100 matches or the last 30 days.
Relevant Matches for Win/Loss Ratio: Last 100 matches or all matches in the last 30 days, whichever number is higher.
RATIO Rating: 10 Wins to 0 Losses = 10; 9 to 1 = 9; [...] 0 to 10 = 0;
Rating Adjustment based on experience: +1 per 100 matches played.
Team Rating is: Sum of all Adjusted RATIOs across all team members.
Now we need a match-making algorith that actually creates sensible matches without locking people out of play forever because no match can be found, or ignoring ratings because it only looks for wait time. Maybe it's best to classify players into categories based on how long they are queued when considering teams.
The point is the system had best be set to work well or the cries of seperation will not go away, players will continue to complain, OPness will still be a cry we hear and the status quo will be unchanged.