Why is pvp ranked rating so punishing for win-streaks?

[DeadlyBanana.3841]

So I am a new player and recently got into ranked pvp to get my wings of ascension. At first I wasn't doing so good but after a couple of games I got the hang of it. At first I was gaining around 20 points for wins and lost around 13 points for loses. Now I am on an 11 winstreak after "getting good" and I only get 8 points from victories and will probably loose around 20 points from defeat. This is completely unfair. I am practically being punished for playing well and winning games. Will I have to constantly go on win-streaks if I ever wish to climb higher in the ladder? (as in 3 wins 1 loss) Can anyone explain to me why the system is structured like that?

[Conscript.3657]

Because in competitive environments consistency is the definition of being better

[DeadlyBanana.3841]

> @"Conscript.3657" said:

> Because in competitive environments consistency is the definition of being better

 

I can understand this and agree with it. But what exactly win/loss ration do I need to raise my rank? By the looks of it, if it continues like this I will need more than 2 wins for every loss that I have. Also if consistency in a competitive environment is the definition, why are the leaderboards dominated by people with less than 100 games, hell less than 30 games many times. It seems to me like the game is contradicting itself.

[Conscript.3657]

> @"DeadlyBanana.3841" said:

> > @"Conscript.3657" said:

> > Because in competitive environments consistency is the definition of being better

>

> I can understand this and agree with it. But what exactly win/loss ration do I need to raise my rank? By the looks of it, if it continues like this I will need more than 2 wins for every loss that I have. Also if consistency in a competitive environment is the definition, why are the leaderboards dominated by people with less than 100 games, hell less than 30 games many times. It seems to me like the game is contradicting itself.

 

I just answered the question why the system is structured like that. It has nothing to do with the state of the game, population, or players - that's a different topic entirely.

[Bonefighter.1029]

Those players have played pvp for years and have thousands of games. Also if you scored high last season, its easy to get high rating in the next one.

[DeadlyBanana.3841]

You didn't understand what I said. You said that in order for the game to accurately judge your skill (rating) you need to constantly perform well. However the top players in the leader-boards (again rating, nothing to do with player population) have way to few games.

[Chilli.2976]

25 win streak should give you a nuke and you can use it in a match where you have brainless people and win the match.

[BlaqueFyre.5678]

> @"DeadlyBanana.3841" said:

> You didn't understand what I said. You said that in order for the game to accurately judge your skill (rating) you need to constantly perform well. However the top players in the leader-boards (again rating, nothing to do with player population) have way to few games.

 

The game looks at overall how many Ranked games played over the life of the acct* not just per season to account for rating volatility* also the more games you play a season will lower your volatility and the less deviation you get per win/loss.

 

High rating is not based on W/L ratio it is based who you win/lose against and the enemy teams avg rating vs your skill rating.

 

When season starts there is a Soft reset of skill rating, so when the new season begins if you were rated higher in the previous season you will have a higher base rating in the new season.

 

Again games played doesn’t have any effect on rating and neither does w/l ratio outside of having to win more than you lose if you want a decent rating.