Quick Match Ranking/Score from September onwards

[Gondorian]

I think rating should start from 250 for everyone

Then it might as well be zero. The whole point of not resetting is so the pairings are more evenly matched from the outset.

[Spartan]

My previous sugestion about rating reset gives much advantage to top players imo.

This seems abit more fair:

250+ to 250 and from there and below
200+ to 200
150+ to 150
.......
25 should be even more fair than 50 point of rating
eg 250, 225, 200,....

[Kolodi]

Then it might as well be zero. The whole point of not resetting is so the pairings are more evenly matched from the outset.

It's hard to find opponent when starting playing late in the season as there are no other with rating 0. But even when you are finally paired with someone, that someone would probably be some beginner player with low rating, and for the next couple of games too, so if your usual rating is 300+, you will be paired with several non well experienced players... Somebody, I'm sure, even exploit that.

[Gondorian]

It's hard to find opponent when starting playing late in the season as there are no other with rating 0. But even when you are finally paired with someone, that someone would probably be some beginner player with low rating, and for the next couple of games too, so if your usual rating is 300+, you will be paired with several non well experienced players... Somebody, I'm sure, even exploit that.

Oh you mean have new players at 0 but still everyone who already played go to 250? What about people who didn't reach 250?

Still, I don't think all should go to same rating as that will mean initial pairings aren't as suitable.

Rating range for pairing is now 150 for folks below 100 now btw.

[Kolodi]

Well maybe 250 is not the right number, I was proposing it because it is the middle point of rating system, but as nobody can physically reach rating 500, rather 380 is Max, then maybe 380/2 = 190 would be real avarage rating to start with

[DuaMall]

In my view the problem is the rating and not the score. People play for rating, not for score. You only play for score if you need crystals. I suggest only one lather. With several tiers. Wins give points, draws give fewer points and losses give 0 points. Like in any sport. Therefore you are not camping.

Secondly, a player should have different ratings to each hero, like in level up*. You avoid meta: the real problem with game competitiveness.

* what does level up do anyway?

Those are my 2cents on this. 1 ranking only per hero, several tiers.

Good initiative nonetheless, because how it is is not good.

Cheers

[Demnchi]

In my view the problem is the rating and not the score. People play for rating, not for score. You only play for score if you need crystals. I suggest only one lather. With several tiers. Wins give points, draws give fewer points and losses give 0 points. Like in any sport. Therefore you are not camping.

Secondly, a player should have different ratings to each hero, like in level up*. You avoid meta: the real problem with game competitiveness.

* what does level up do anyway?

Those are my 2cents on this. 1 ranking only per hero, several tiers.

Good initiative nonetheless, because how it is is not good.

Cheers

The hero level is a representation of how much you've used that hero. You gain 25 Shadow Crystals when you level a hero. Besides from that, it doesn't do anything practical, just for bragging rights.

[WolfCyr]

Hi, it would be a good thing if when you launch a game, you can choose if this game will count for rating or no. The fact is that you are forced to choose if you want to play for fun or competivity, but not the 2 at the same time.
I only play for fun because I can do only a few games per day, but the new system give me incitive to play competitively. But I don't want to sacrifice one for the other.

Thanks.

[Gondorian]

Hi, it would be a good thing if when you launch a game, you can choose if this game will count for rating or no. The fact is that you are forced to choose if you want to play for fun or competivity, but not the 2 at the same time.
I only play for fun because I can do only a few games per day, but the new system give me incitive to play competitively. But I don't want to sacrifice one for the other.

Thanks.

So the Fun option would mean the game didn't count as one of your 50, right?

You'd need to be paired with someone else who wanted it not to count for Score either. It's certainly something that could be added in future but it may limit active competitive players and lead to long wait times for them so it's not something we'd want to do straight away.

[Spartan]

So the Fun option would mean the game didn't count as one of your 50, right?

You'd need to be paired with someone else who wanted it not to count for Score either. It's certainly something that could be added in future but it may limit active competitive players and lead to long wait times for them so it's not something we'd want to do straight away.

You dont nessesarily need to be paired with someone who dont cares either.

I dont know if it possible to implement, but if a player has the choice to not be rated or scored for his games that should not affect his opponent who might care.
The opponent could still be scored by his win or loss vs a player who dont care.

So in the same ladder the two modes might be able to coexist without affecting one another.

I say again....i have no idea if such thing is possible, but if it is i would use it for fun puproses or decktesting without the fear of wrecking my rating with doing it.

A seperate mode would be the best choice of course, but for now this idea of WolfCyrs seems awesome!