66 replies to this topic

[Supersmacky]

So, how about this (and please forgive my naivete' if this is already how it works):

Winning team: +1
Losing team: 0

Top Third of Your Team (Match Score): +1
Middle Third of Your Team (Match Score): 0
Bottom Third of You Team (Match Score): -1

If you are on the winning team and were in the top third, you get two points.
If you are on the losing team, but in the top third for your team, you get one point.
If you are on the winning team and in the middle third, you get one point.
If you are on the losing team and in the middle third, you get no points.
If you are on the winning team and the bottom third, you get nothing.
If you are on the losing team and the bottom third, you lose 1 point.

Now, the point scale for the PSR would be a little more complex because you have to some how establish what qualifies as a T5, T4, T3, T2 and T1. But once you do that you can just assign a number of points (range) that encompass a tier and there you go.

Alternatively, the idea of group players in tier based on active player base has some merit. Put 20% into each tier and allow it to be dynamic based on how many people are actually playing. This would also remove the 'tier' ranking from being a front end thing because someone that is a marginal T2 during certain hours might end up as an upper T4 during other traffic hours. The total points for an individual player keeps going up (if they are consistently winning/in the upper or middle third of their team). This would keep players within their grouping fairly consistently (winning/top third players would be rising at a greater rate than others). PGI could annually or semi-annually proportionally reduce each players points (or 0 them out completely) to allow a fresh start for players that have gotten better over time, but find themselves trapped consistently with lower 'tier' players.

Groups drops will be queued based on the average skill rating of the group (all player scores in group added together, divided by number of players in group and the result compared against the existing skill of other groups in queue at the time).

Additionally, T1 players (or average for groups) should only be playing against T1 or T2. Likewise, T5 should only be playing against T5 or T4. For T2 through T4, then one tier up or one tier down should work (ie, T2 can be matched up against/with T1, T2 or T3, while T3 against/with T2, T3 or T4, and so one).

If there is a very low player base at the time a given player (or group) is trying to drop so that a full 12 v 12 can be launched, have the server automatically reduce the minimum match level to 10 v 10 or 8 v 8 or 6 v 6 (or whatever). Same can happen with forming groups. If there is too small of player base of a given skill (PSR) ranking for a 12 man (or 10 man, etc), have the server notify the group creator and disable dropping of that 12 man until 1) player base increases or 2) they reduce/adjust the group appropriately.

Consistently bad players will end up going down.
Consistently good players will end up going up.
When I player reaches their peak skill level, they will bounce up and down a little, but will basically end up in their tier range (going up with higher skill player group and they will perform badly which means they will not go up in PSR or, if on the losing team, will go down).

Yes, it is a little weighted towards moving up, but it is counter-balanced so that once a player reaches their skill peak they will pretty much remain in that skill group (unless the point adjustment/reset). Flukes will also be weeded out statistically because, over time, they will not do well enough to be included in an upper tier grouping.

Again, if I am just stating how it supposedly works now (and is broken) I apologize. However, based on my understanding the tier system is static and based on arbitrary number ranges for each skill as well as weighted to much for people to move up. The above would allow high skill players to pull ahead and low skill players to stay within a player grouping that is more appropriate for them.

Cheers!

[KHETTI]

Actually i think displaying the Tiers of players on both teams at the beginning of the match could be quite helpful.
It would let me make a quick assessment of my team, identify strengths and weaknesses, and i can play accordingly to maximize my teams composition.
Unfortunately it will never happen simply because it will result in players being abused by others for being simply a lower tier.
#can'thavenicethings

[smokytehbear]

justcallme A S H, on 06 September 2016 - 05:12 AM, said:

And just did 270 damage in an assault, one kill - and a WIN.

PSR up. Should've gone down IMO.

Very much unrelated to damage and all about the win, for the most part it seems.

It's based on two things, whether you won or lost, then how much match score you got.

http://mwomercs.com/...-tiers-and-psr/

The most dominant factors in match score are all bulk damage related and it has nothing to do with your class. 200 points of damage in a LCT gets the same match score as 200 points of damage in a KDK.

It's not like damage isn't important, the whole point is just that if you used a stochastic method it doesn't have to be nearly perfect, whereas something like what they have does need to be nearly perfect. If you're counting net wins/losses over a long period, the errors in that method will wash out eventually. Counting damage doesn't work the same way, and if people really think they can rank up as fast in a LCT as pilot that contributes equally to the team does in a KDK, they're just plainly wrong.

[Ghostrider0067]

The MM is utterly terrible and there's just no getting around that fact.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Ghostrider0067, on 06 September 2016 - 05:18 PM, said:

The MM is utterly terrible and there's just no getting around that fact.

yep, my psr keeps rising closer to tier 1 Something is definitely wrong with the game

[Chuck Jager]

The absolute worst thing you can do is reward the Fnnn coward fat kids never picked for real sports in the back scamming damage in an assault or running around in a sniper light. It is a ton easier to PAD damage while hiding than it is to share armor while contributing for a win.

Somebody has to create the hole for the team to follow and they usually die, but they need to it in a way that works for their team. In most online games this person goes down as a lesser player in real life they get the medal of honor (US).

Damage is completely a secondary stat unless you win, BECAUSE if an individual sees their results as secondary to the team they deserve to lose every time. A team is a team period even if that means learning to respect the losses as much as the wins.

Edited by Chuck Jager, 06 September 2016 - 11:31 PM.

[Ghostrider0067]

BLOOD WOLF, on 06 September 2016 - 06:33 PM, said:

yep, my psr keeps rising closer to tier 1 Something is definitely wrong with the game

PSR isn't nearly as much a measure of matchmaking OR even skill, for that matter. You play long enough and decently enough, you will inevitably get to T1. That's is also a fact. But, hey... believe what you wish.