38 replies to this topic

[Captain Stiffy]

And why not?

[John1352]

Because some very experienced players would choose to play with newbies and abuse the system, probably earning 250k credits a game, so they would have plenty of reason to do it.

[Kanatta Jing]

And a lot of long standing players that aren't all that good wouldn't be able to accept that they are infact sub-par let alone deciding that they belong in in a 2100 ranking

[Impyrium]

Too much exploitation potential. Though it's an interesting idea nonetheless. I think simply being able to view our elo in the first place is a better option.

[Alek Ituin]

AUSwarrior24, on 09 November 2014 - 03:53 AM, said:

Too much exploitation potential. Though it's an interesting idea nonetheless. I think simply being able to view our elo in the first place is a better option.

Definitely agree.

I, for one, want to see exactly how bad I am... Although it would be nice if they also told you what the brackets were, and what they meant for your skill-level. Just saying "1200 ELO" or "2100 ELO" is pretty vague, ya know?

[Willard Phule]

Hell, just join the Solo queue. Elo doesn't matter other than "the better you are, the more you have to carry." You get to play with all levels of skill and experience, every single match.

[Walluh]

If you could freely change your elo, there would be no point in having it. The system would only be a detriment.

[Reitrix]

AUSwarrior24, on 09 November 2014 - 03:53 AM, said:

Too much exploitation potential. Though it's an interesting idea nonetheless. I think simply being able to view our elo in the first place is a better option.

A better option would be to go with the Starcraft system. Obviously, flavor it to Battletech but the general idea is as follows:
-Ranking from Bronze -> Silver -> Gold -> Diamond -> Grandmaster (Havent played in a while, may have forgotten one)
-Numerical rank indicator within your color rank (eg; Gold: 55)

When you just start out in a season, or for the first time, the MatchMaker sets up several matches to "test" your skills by pitting you against opponents from various ranks. The outcome of those matches, win or lose, determines your starting rank.

When you win a match against a better opponent, your rank goes up. When you lose a match against a lower ranked opponent, your rank goes down. Basically, the closer to 1 you get within the color, the better you are and the closer you are to advancement to a new color.

The MatchMaker will generally only pit Bronze against Bronze, or the bottom of the barrel Silvers. When the MatchMaker feels you're ready for advancement, it pits you against a much higher ranked player, and the outcome (Win or loss) determines whether you advance.

We could use something similar here. Where the MatchMaker assigns ranks to players from Cadet up to Commander, etc. Make this a visible rank to all players. Maybe even have it reflected in our nametags within a match, so you would always know if the other team is balanced on skill.

Maybe even set up a 1v1 game mode that will kick in and grab 2 people ready for advancement and pit them against each other. But much like the Starcraft system, its the performance within the match rather than the Win that determines whether you go up.
So even if a Locust Pilot was matched against an Atlas, by amassing hit and Runs, Flanks etc he could 'score' well enough to advance, even f the Atlas got lucky and legged him.
But, if that Atlas Pilot was a crackshot with a Gauss Rifle and headshots the poor locust 30 seconds in .. Well, the Locust needs more practice, and probably isn't ready for advancement.

TL;DR, just some wishful thinking on my part.

[Alek Ituin]

Reitrix, on 09 November 2014 - 06:45 AM, said:

A better option would be to go with the Starcraft system. Obviously, flavor it to Battletech but the general idea is as follows:
-Ranking from Bronze -> Silver -> Gold -> Diamond -> Grandmaster (Havent played in a while, may have forgotten one)
-Numerical rank indicator within your color rank (eg; Gold: 55)

When you just start out in a season, or for the first time, the MatchMaker sets up several matches to "test" your skills by pitting you against opponents from various ranks. The outcome of those matches, win or lose, determines your starting rank.

When you win a match against a better opponent, your rank goes up. When you lose a match against a lower ranked opponent, your rank goes down. Basically, the closer to 1 you get within the color, the better you are and the closer you are to advancement to a new color.

The MatchMaker will generally only pit Bronze against Bronze, or the bottom of the barrel Silvers. When the MatchMaker feels you're ready for advancement, it pits you against a much higher ranked player, and the outcome (Win or loss) determines whether you advance.

We could use something similar here. Where the MatchMaker assigns ranks to players from Cadet up to Commander, etc. Make this a visible rank to all players. Maybe even have it reflected in our nametags within a match, so you would always know if the other team is balanced on skill.

Maybe even set up a 1v1 game mode that will kick in and grab 2 people ready for advancement and pit them against each other. But much like the Starcraft system, its the performance within the match rather than the Win that determines whether you go up.
So even if a Locust Pilot was matched against an Atlas, by amassing hit and Runs, Flanks etc he could 'score' well enough to advance, even f the Atlas got lucky and legged him.
But, if that Atlas Pilot was a crackshot with a Gauss Rifle and headshots the poor locust 30 seconds in .. Well, the Locust needs more practice, and probably isn't ready for advancement.

TL;DR, just some wishful thinking on my part.

Hmmm. Fairly workable in general, but I can see one problem:

Visibly displaying rankings would result in an e-peen display of unprecedented proportions. It would be the E-Peen-ocolypse, with equally horrible e-peen aftershocks. These forums are already bad enough, we do NOT need to make them worse.

But it seems like a more intuitive and simplistic system than ELO, right off the bat. So that's a major plus either way, and actually knowing where you stand rank wise would be so nice.

+1 from me!

[Burktross]

Captain Stiffy, on 09 November 2014 - 03:22 AM, said:

And why not?

I can't emphasize how horrible of an idea this is.
Have you ever played Counter-Strike: Global Offensive? You can't even choose and it's still a problem with s00pR pr0z "smurfing" and ******* wrecking low levels.

[Cerlin]

A terrible idea to be honest. It is better to have no elo balance at that point.

Btw you do choose your elo already; it is done by winning and getting better over time.

[Angel of Annihilation]

John1352, on 09 November 2014 - 03:29 AM, said:

Because some very experienced players would choose to play with newbies and abuse the system, probably earning 250k credits a game, so they would have plenty of reason to do it.

This.

Honestly, I like to win and while I don't like total walk overs with no challenge, I would probably drop at least one ELO bracket just to make sure I was winning more often than not.

Personally though, I just wish they would drop ELO all together and just randomize it. Sometimes you would get matches where you were the top player, others you would get dominated but the random nature of things would mean matches could be a hell of alot more exciting. Also unless you get the opportunity to play against players better than yourself, your really never going to improve all that much. Also, we could actually have true leaderboards and really find out who is the best players. Right now you might be ranked in the top 5 on any tourney but all that could mean is that you happen to be the best player in the lowest ELO bracket, not that your a top ranked competitive player.

[Reitrix]

Alek Ituin, on 09 November 2014 - 06:59 AM, said:

Hmmm. Fairly workable in general, but I can see one problem:

Visibly displaying rankings would result in an e-peen display of unprecedented proportions. It would be the E-Peen-ocolypse, with equally horrible e-peen aftershocks. These forums are already bad enough, we do NOT need to make them worse.

But it seems like a more intuitive and simplistic system than ELO, right off the bat. So that's a major plus either way, and actually knowing where you stand rank wise would be so nice.

+1 from me!

To be fair, I don't see a lot of general epeenery on the SC forums.
We get epeen stroking already on the GDs.
it'd be bad initially to be sure. But i think it'd die down after a time.

[InspectorG]

Prone to manipulation.

A. most will be prone to thinking they are better players than they are...butthurt ensues and cries to the Nerf Goddess will be rampant

B. smart players will farm at a lower elo, and tank at a higher elo

C. epeen measurement displays...not the biggest problem, mind you, i view it as entertainment.

Do we want these affecting how PGI tweaks the game to make it 'fair'?

[Jman5]

Because if everyone was picking and choosing what Elo they wanted, it would completely undermine the entire point of having an Elo in the first place.

Edited by Jman5, 09 November 2014 - 08:18 AM.

[Mystere]

Considering that CW is supposed to be the "meat" of MWO, I think any more time spent on the public queue is better spent on the former.

[FupDup]

I for one welcome the opportunity to ravage the Underhive™.

[Glythe]

Reitrix, on 09 November 2014 - 06:45 AM, said:

A better option would be to go with the Starcraft system.

Hated starcraft but my friends told me all about that Elo system. You log in fresh for a season, throw all the games in a horrific manner and you're set to pub stomp for a long long time.

This game had the highest population with the most satisfied players when there was no Elo.

[gregsolidus]

Captain Stiffy, on 09 November 2014 - 03:22 AM, said:

And why not?

Stop drunk posting.

Edited by gregsolidus, 09 November 2014 - 09:32 AM.

[Project_Mercy]

Elo, SC, all those systems; they're designed around a single-player game. Elo would work fine if we were in a single player game and/or the MM tried to match people of similar Elo around. The issue is, in an attempt to make matchmaking fast, Elo is just used a vauge hint as to who should be matched up with who. In solo queue it means that if youre Elo goes up, when MM decides to make the next match it's going to shuffle the terrrible people onto your team to balance. When there's a lot of people playing, it does an OK job in general, but since that's a rare case for MWO, MM throws off the constraints faster than a drunk co-ed clothes, which is why you see huge stomps with 5 assault/heavy games with horribly imbalanced Elo. MM only cares about speed, it gives quality the finger.