what if ranked system was deleted?

[Allarius.5670]

A critical element of the game is the ability to adapt. I think part of the criticism stems from a concern that players will be discouraged from adapting and instead stick only to the prescribed elements of their role. It encourages players to do this because it minimizes their losses and/or maximizes their rewards. It might further encourage players to just blame and flame other players for not fulfilling their roles.

 

The suggestion attempts to account for these concerns by playing second fiddle to the primary measure of winning and losing. As great as that is, it may be ineffective at mitigating concerning behavior and actually increase toxicity.

 

So, here are some thoughts.

 

1) Having a better mechanism of instruction to teach players is identified as an issue. I'm not against queuing as a role, but I do agree with the others and think the game type is too dynamic to properly account for this by scoring.

 

2) The player base and developers appear to be in agreement that over performing builds need to be addressed directly through balance rather than artificial circumvention by additional enforced limitations such as: forced lower scoring, fixed professions, no profession stacking, etc.

 

3) With all of this in mind, I think they would better achieve your stated objectives by implementing an optional post match commendation vote. Each player gets 1 vote, cannot vote for themselves, and may vote for any other player on either team. Players on the losing team lose less rank for each vote they receive, and players on the winning team win more pips (but not rank) for each vote they receive.

 

Why this method?

 

It is an upvote without a downvote mechanism, training players to work hard and with their team rather than flame and give up.

 

There are no fast or hard rules as to who can be commended, allowing the players to reward behavior based on match dynamics or any other measure they feel is worthy.

 

It cannot be abused to gain rank, only lose less rank. This means a player may linger above their actual rating longer by slowing their descent, but only by the will of other players. In any case, they are still descending.

 

IF it were implemented alongside you role idea, it would encourage role fulfillment AND dynamic adaptation recognized by teammates. Even without role queuing, I think it would encourage improved role performance as players recognize the better performances among one another.

 

It does NOT solve the problem of mitigating your own losses in a solo queue setting, but does reinforce team work and learning when you start to see those commendations tick up for players in that match.

[Faux Play.6104]

> @"Kasdwer.3721" said:

> tbh i dont see anything good in it except you could just grind your way to the top without worrying about losing, but this is pvp where the system tries to place you in a rating where you most likely belong, not a pve grind

 

But the game player base is mostly PvE. They don't want a game mode that is based on winning. They want grind based awards.

[messiah.1908]

> @"Allarius.5670" said:

> A critical element of the game is the ability to adapt. I think part of the criticism stems from a concern that players will be discouraged from adapting and instead stick only to the prescribed elements of their role. It encourages players to do this because it minimizes their losses and/or maximizes their rewards. It might further encourage players to just blame and flame other players for not fulfilling their roles.

>

in theory you right "ability to adapt" but

 

can you see necro doing rotations or FB support?

they have role cause they choose a curtain build.

 

mesmer and thief is +1 and rotations

 

engi/warrior far cap and team fight

 

ranger bunker/support

 

also you still get more points by winning and not doing your role ... so the incentive is to win.

 

but you gonna lose it will be better for you and your team so start co-op

 

also you have nothing to blame as the role is individual by your choice.

 

i get that with every system something can be hacked or go around it.

 

 

regarding voting i also though so to. but the community is just too toxic/apathetic atm to believe they will vote for someone unless he is a friend and also can lead to pay for vote.