MrMadguy, on 02 February 2016 - 06:54 AM, said:
Do you realize, that your Tiers have different stabilization avg Match Score levels? Do you understand, that stabilization level - is avg Match Score, you are allowed to have without further advancement? Different stabilization levels - players will be allowed to have different avg Match Scores in different Tiers. Tier, you will settle in - depends on your skill. Is it fair, that players with different skill levels will be allowed to have different avg Match Scores? I don't think so.
Do you realize that your scheme is completely broken?
If you play in balanced matches which is the GOAL of this process correct? i.e. The matchmaker selects players of the same skill level in order to create a match in which either team has exactly a 50% chance of winning. That is what balanced means.
However, if a player does not average 325 match score between both a win and a loss they will drop. Depending on how you implement the change it would be 250 to 400 ... though if the amount of change is linear then you need to hit the 325 average to stay even.
In losses, the usual outcome is 12:2,3,4 mucjh of the time because the game snowballs. If someone is out of position or the other team pushes at the right time then you will lose. In losses, there is often FAR less opportunity to do damage and build up match score (unless the two teams agree to snipe at each other for a while to pad their damage stats). This means that match scores on a loss tend to be much lower.
Now consider the following, on a team, when folks work together, ALL of the match scores are lower since the damage is usually spread among all the players. I've seen great games where the entire team had a match score under 300 since the damage was well focused and distributed. In your example, after this great performance, the players score would at best stay even and the folks under 250 would drop.
Finally, the goal of the game is WINNING. It isn't doing damage. It isn't cheering for your team. IT IS WINNING. If you don't win then you FAILED no matter what damage you did in the match. I've seen team mates rack up damage and kills as the last one alive ... they got a high match score but were totally incompetent in terms of actually helping their team when it was needed and winning the game. They had NO SKILL and yet the suggestion you have made would consider them the best player and reward them with a higher tier. (To be honest, I'd be glad to foist folks like that off on another group of players).
Similarly, I have seen pilots drop a critical UAV that high lights the entire opposing force and results in their team defeating a planned ambush. The team won due to that UAV but unfortunately, the pilot who dropped it didn't get away. In your model, he would be greatly penalized as an under performing pilot ... as it was he still didn't get any increase in PSR but at least it didn't drop. Similarly, the mechs that lead a push are often at high risk but that push at the right time will win the match.
There are dozens more situations in which the actions of a player will change the odds of WINNING at the expense of their personal match score. These are the reason why WINNING is a factor in PSR calculations ... it is impossible to try to add up all the situational elements that contribute to a win (even saying the right thing in chat or on coms can often make a difference) ... having someone organize is even better. Team work is OP and there is NO way to award a match score to the guy who died during the push but organized the plan that won the game.
For all these reasons, your perfectly even win/loss stabilization chart is totally meaningless and has no real way to separate players by "skill".
P.S. Add to the fact that certain weapons like LRMs are very good at padding damage and match score and you have a situation where the LRM boaters or the ones driving OP mechs will be considered the "skilled" players ... LOL.
3
