Ranked system

User avatar
Ragga
First Sergeant
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu 5 Jan 2012 05:08
Contact:

Re: Ranked system

Postby Ragga » Sun 15 Jan 2012 16:27

Gronank:

That is exactly what CoH and other good MP RTS games do... if you are pitted against a player that out ranks you, you earn more points for the victory, but also lose less points for a loss.

Furtheremore, if the Vet base isn't that populated, that is good... a majority of player should be middle ranked players. When a MP population gets loopsided (this reminds me of TW's MP where almost half the MP are Level 10's), it become intimitating and the longeveity of the game will die when new players have difficulty accessing and enjoying the MP experience.

The Ranking should be played out as a Bell Curve.


PS - And not to conflict to thouse who played the Beta with a NDA, but a quick question... Was there an AutoMatch System already implaced???

User avatar
Gronank
Colonel
Posts: 2516
Joined: Tue 8 Nov 2011 23:40
Contact:

Re: Ranked system

Postby Gronank » Sun 15 Jan 2012 18:31

Ragga wrote:Gronank:
Furtheremore, if the Vet base isn't that populated, that is good... a majority of player should be middle ranked players. When a MP population gets loopsided (this reminds me of TW's MP where almost half the MP are Level 10's), it become intimitating and the longeveity of the game will die when new players have difficulty accessing and enjoying the MP experience.

The Ranking should be played out as a Bell Curve.

The veteran players that needs to wait half an hour just to play the damn game would disagree with you. What they do then is just to make sure they loose a lot of games just so they loose rank so that they're able to play at all, something that is not very fun for the rest of the community.

With an auto-handicap system, the relative skill or experience of the players only matters on the leaderboards. A begginer that only played a week can give a seasoned master a good match.

The ranking wouldn't necessarily be a bell curve but it should have a constant mean.
Image

Tigga
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2446
Joined: Tue 5 Jul 2011 02:46
Contact:

Re: Ranked system

Postby Tigga » Mon 16 Jan 2012 03:00

Auto-handicap system sounds interesting, though very tricky to make balanced such that you don't have the worse player constantly winning.

I think CoH does it by slowly widening the allowed skill difference with time. RUSE did the same I think. The main problem with RUSE was that there was very little feedback to the player about anything in particular. All you could do was watch the "waiting for players" screen until connected. In CoH it tells you how many players are currently searching, so you know that you'll have a match if you wait long enough. While this may also have been the case in RUSE, there was no feedback, so having waited 30 seconds people get bored and move on. This only makes the problem worse.

User avatar
Tac Error
Captain
Posts: 1567
Joined: Thu 30 Jun 2011 20:55
Location: Berdansk
Contact:

Re: Ranked system

Postby Tac Error » Mon 16 Jan 2012 03:29

My experience with a fluctuating up/down ranking system in another game (Metal Gear Online) was that there were too many issues with "serious business" and assholery from the terrible North American community. I don't know...I never played other MP RTS games with similar ranking systems so I don't know if such issues are a problem in those games...
SLONIK MARSHAL

"Large mechanized forces always defeat small mechanized forces." - M. N. Tukhachevsky

Tigga
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2446
Joined: Tue 5 Jul 2011 02:46
Contact:

Re: Ranked system

Postby Tigga » Mon 16 Jan 2012 04:01

Well RUSE technically has a fluctuating up/down ranking system, it's just not easily viewable in game. It was also quite glitchy. I'm not quite sure what's wrong with it, but it seems like the more games you play, the higher you rise. Due to this the only competative scene left in RUSE now is the weekly 1v1 and 2v2 tournaments.

Assholery is there in every game, though was quite low in RUSE compared to other games in my experience. There are a few I am aware of, but my time zone rarely clashes with them. I'd imagine this is because the game is slower than most RTS games, so tends to attract more mature players. I know a few people in their teens who play RUSE, but most are 20+. I'm hoping W:EE will be the same. I guess it depends a bit on the size of the community. Larger community - less places to hide. RUSE is quite small, so if people start playing up they'll soon find it hard to get games.

Back to ranking - I guess one other problem is game exploitation. There are some people that will go to extremes for a win, and there are more that'll do it for a ranked win. All games have bugs, glitches and exploits which can be used to gain a competative advantage. Only the devs can really do anything about this (except for private tourneys with house rules), so post-release support is crucial for a ranking system to stay healthy.

ikalugin
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 10430
Joined: Sun 6 Nov 2011 01:00
Contact:

Re: Ranked system

Postby ikalugin » Mon 16 Jan 2012 12:46

Tac Error wrote:My experience with a fluctuating up/down ranking system in another game (Metal Gear Online) was that there were too many issues with "serious business" and assholery from the terrible North American community. I don't know...I never played other MP RTS games with similar ranking systems so I don't know if such issues are a problem in those games...

you havent played eve....
Image
Spoiler : :
We need more missilez code for the missilez god.
Praslovan:
"Tactical Ikalugin inbound on this position in 10... 9..."
Image

User avatar
Gronank
Colonel
Posts: 2516
Joined: Tue 8 Nov 2011 23:40
Contact:

Re: Ranked system

Postby Gronank » Mon 16 Jan 2012 13:26

Tigga wrote:Auto-handicap system sounds interesting, though very tricky to make balanced such that you don't have the worse player constantly winning.

But if one player is constantly winning, the system obviously needs to reevaluate that players handicap. The problem arises when players don't play very often, it then becomes very difficult for the system to "get" how well the players are.
Image

tankmajor
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed 19 Oct 2011 17:59

Re: Ranked system

Postby tankmajor » Mon 16 Jan 2012 13:32

;) why dont they do it like football leuge i mean ist division for good players and 2nd division for learners etc

gottimw
Master Sergeant
Posts: 178
Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011 21:14
Contact:

Re: Ranked system

Postby gottimw » Mon 16 Jan 2012 15:24

Gronank wrote:
Tigga wrote:Auto-handicap system sounds interesting, though very tricky to make balanced such that you don't have the worse player constantly winning.

But if one player is constantly winning, the system obviously needs to reevaluate that players handicap. The problem arises when players don't play very often, it then becomes very difficult for the system to "get" how well the players are.


That sounds broken idea to me. If you are bad player you should play vs bad players. Its like saying that best F1 drivers needs to ride bicycles because they are too fast in comparison with slowest drivers.

In a pub there should be an option to add a handicap to the other team, but that should be manual not automatic.

I hate to admit it, but maybe Alcarin was right all of this time.
I love GREEN font!
_____________.,,_ ______
____________o''___)~ ___
______________'''' ______

User avatar
Ragga
First Sergeant
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu 5 Jan 2012 05:08
Contact:

Re: Ranked system

Postby Ragga » Mon 16 Jan 2012 15:50

handicap isnt the solution... if you haven't played a game with a rank system that goes up and down, i do understand that it would be hard to understand. the only handicap needed is that if a higher rank player playes - because of wait time - a lower rank player, the higher rank player will only gain a few points, while the lower rank player will gain much more with a victory.

however, wait times are greatly affected by how well a MP RankSystem is created. i can still go and play CoH right now and get a game in a few seconds on AutoMatch. Why? because the system was awesome...

if i go to RUSE and go to automatch... it may be minutes and/or not at all! Why? ppl lost interest in the RankSystem... it was vague, more based on time spent than skill, and they made too many leagues for too little people.

To Clarify for those who said RUSE had a Rank System that went up and down... YES, it did, however you have to spend a buttload of time to get to that top league before the ELO started!!! Most players found that climbing a pretty steep mountain... strickly based on time spent... to get to the actualy Ranked Part of the Game lame. The gap between top tier and bottom tier was just too big for a mp population that got less and less as time went on.

Solutions:

1. Automatch System is only way to Gain Rank
2. RankSystem goes up and down
3. Ranks 1-10 or 1-15 only!!! If the gap is reduced, the wait times go down while the excitement of moving up a rank increases! Everyone would quickly understand that a Level 3 or 4 are noobs and a Level 14 or 15 are very skilled... you dont need level 243252039 is ok while a level 20430294823748329 is better :) Simplify... Clarify

If these three things are implemented, I can only assure that the MP would be awesome!

Return to “Wargame : European Escalation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests