PDA

View Full Version : Ranked placement system is basically luck based



--Ram--
20th Oct 2015, 01:39
Just want to express my extreme disappointment with the accuracy of the ranked placement system

After 5 uphill games, 2 of which I auto lost due to leavers on my team, and 3 of which I carried to end up winning, I was placed in Bronze league 1.

I am not a bronze league player, I have 700 hours and over 1000 wins at 80% winrate. The system is atrocious. Stats need to be used to aid placement. If I go 25-10 in every game and double-triple the damage of players on my team, I should not be put in a basket with them where placement is concerned. This needs to be better.

Edit: Also the amount of grind that I would need to put in to rectify the dodgy placement is way over the top. Not enjoying the ranked experience at all.

TheDreamcrusher
20th Oct 2015, 01:46
Just want to express my extreme disappointment with the accuracy of the ranked placement system

After 5 uphill games, 2 of which I auto lost due to leavers on my team, and 3 of which I carried to end up winning, I was placed in Bronze league 1.

I am not a bronze league player, I have 700 hours and over 1000 wins at 80% winrate. The system is atrocious. Stats need to be used to aid placement. If I go 25-10 in every game and double-triple the damage of players on my team, I should not be put in a basket with them where placement is concerned. This needs to be better.

Psyonix does not have the will or intent to implement measuring personal metrics for calculating match making or rank placement. I'll say it again: they don't have the means to do so and it's very, very low on the list of priorities. No such tools exist.

--Ram--
20th Oct 2015, 07:07
Psyonix does not have the will or intent to implement measuring personal metrics for calculating match making or rank placement. I'll say it again: they don't have the means to do so and it's very, very low on the list of priorities. No such tools exist.

I'll say it again too then. The current system is plainly terrible and it will continue to frustrate people. I don't expect that anything will change, I've been around here long enough to know that getting your hopes up leads to disappointment. Just venting after my second irritating encounter with the league placement system.

akr0nym
20th Oct 2015, 08:21
Let's just say:

I know exactly how you feel. It was the same for me, was also placed in bronze (600h, about 60% w/l)
The unfair thing imo is that this only happened because of the mmr system which does not reall work for leagues at all.
When I play leagues I encounter the same players over 4 matches in a row over and over again. Needless to say that they are esl pros, all in eternal so you have to fight incredibly hard which is a good thing for normal TDM, but not for leagues. It's just pathetic. Why should I have to fight harder to climb up the ladder only because I have a better MMR?

You should only play against players within your divison. Logically they should have to enlarge the divsions by removing I,II,III. (so only four, eternal, gold, silver, bronze, which maybe could work with the current system already). Then only reward the first 100 players in eternal, no matter if the divison is bigger (if you really care about the prize money). And give the exclusive skin to all players in eternal only.

Also it's totally dumb to play 5 matches to get placed in a league.
I mean, 5 matches against esl guys? okay... :scratch:
5 machtes against newbie potatoes? easy win :D
yeah. feels right to place me like that Nosgoth :nut:

So basically I could do the following:
I create a new account that starts with zero mmr to play against noobs and crush them apart and win 5/5.
Then I continue playing until i reach the players that I am currently playing with/against. In the end I have better results (w/l ratio)... Seems logical and totally fair!

The problem is the small player base that makes it impossible to create fair and good games. You can have some, but they are pretty rare. Loads of matches (when it's not a crash or a 3vs4) are like:
1 guy in your team is a total newbie, so the other team will crush you apart (no teamplay, go in 1by1 as a vamp or run arround and hide in buildings solo as a human)

With my suggestion all new players would probaply never leave bronze. They can play against other new players and experienced ones can have fair matches. That being said you don't even have to ban new players from leagues (like some suggested) or set a level cap to participate.

Well, never mind :D

I assume they won't fix this at all.
We will surely have our current matchmaking system for a long time ^^

TheDreamcrusher
20th Oct 2015, 19:18
I'll say it again too then. The current system is plainly terrible and it will continue to frustrate people. I don't expect that anything will change, I've been around here long enough to know that getting your hopes up leads to disappointment. Just venting after my second irritating encounter with the league placement system.

Don't think I was trying to knock you for pointing it out. I'm paraphrasing an old dev response to someone's concern about the very same thing. I definitely think some metrics should be used, especially since the statistics for players are tracked in their play summary screen. If a new summary screen and tracking table were created for league matchmaking only, that would the place to start.

GenocidePete
20th Oct 2015, 22:23
Influencing placement based on previous league performance would be the only valid way to handle the matter. Your 80% W:L ratio seems impressive, but we really have no idea how you obtained it. If you achieved it by routinely grouping with high-end players in TDM, then it really tells us nothing about how competent you are as an individual.

League placement should CERTAINLY NOT be influenced by individual performance in a given game, as it would lead to outside factors impacting how the game is played (i.e., baiting teammates to achieve better stats and avoiding support skills because they don't increase your damage and K:D).

If you truly are 2-3 times better than your average placement teammate, you're very likely going to win regardless. We don't need gameplay-altering metrics added to that mix.

TheDreamcrusher
20th Oct 2015, 22:38
If you truly are 2-3 times better than your average placement teammate, you're very likely going to win regardless. We don't need gameplay-altering metrics added to that mix.

No, this is not the case. This is why these threads are being created.

--Ram--
21st Oct 2015, 03:04
@GenocidePete

Unfortunately I can't stop a guy from doing 3k total damage and going 2-17. When you have that guy on your team and the opposing team has half a brain, you have to basically go 17-2 just to even it out. That is difficult when the scenario is basically a 3v4.

I understand the reservations and down sides that having stats influence placement would create. However in almost all cases, the better players have much higher total damage dealt than lesser players. Killling blows are not a great indication as there is a good deal of luck involved as to who scores them. The most telling metric to me is damage dealt, and number of deaths. The ratio of average damage per game / deaths per game is a pretty good indicator of how influential a player is. If you do 2.5k/3k damage for every life, you are massively swinging the game in your teams favor.

You are right in saying that support is not directly indicated in those stats. If you land your bola on a good target in every engagement you are also massively helping the team, and that doesn't directly boost your stats. What it does however is make that engagement go well, so that you have an opportunity to deal damage and live. If you are accurate on top of this you will deal a lot of damage cleaning up the enemy team. So to me saying using support skills will not boost your damage and stats, well I don't really agree for many cases. If you are the vanguard spamming bulwark and making the vamps attempts to kill you a nightmare, well in that case you may be right.

I still think stats being a factor (not everything) would be an improvement over what we have now. And I don't think it would be gamed as much as some people seem to fear.

TheDreamcrusher
21st Oct 2015, 05:10
Just need to add weights to values like when you score damage or healing in the game. These weights will add up to a rating.

For instance:
Average disables per game and give 5 points per one.
Average damage per game and give 5 points per 1000.
Average staggers per game and give 3 points per one.
Average knockdowns per game and give 5 points per one.
Average healing per game and give 5 points per 500.
Average deaths per game and subtract 10 points per one. This is weighted more because the other actions occur more often.

Or whatever, just my thoughts. I believe something like this has a place in the game, though. Averaging final blows might be necessary, or not, but like Ram says it is quite a bit luck based so I would leave it out. Those who can make killing blows and not die are good players though, even if their total damage is low.