Huge drop in number of high ranked players playing games

**Calmdown** · 04-01-2011, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by Kyle

You should rename this thread:
Huge jump in quality of high ranked players playing games

Would have much preferred that that link was a graph showing me that I was completely wrong

Now stop deflecting and fix the cheat ratings.

**Duze** · 04-01-2011, 11:32 AM

You should stop using rating as something to show off:S Just make it invisible and be done with the problem

**Raverbasher** · 04-01-2011, 11:36 AM

Originally Posted by Calmdown

Not doing something that is right just because some people will get upset over it doesn't make it less right. Gaming PR history is littered with incidents of companies making mistake after mistake and not fixing them because they were too scared to after the previous mistake. It's also full of examples where they stuck to their guns, and their fanbase loved them all the more for it.

Make the right decision based on what's right for the game, not on what will give you less grief personally.

Having something like decay is the right decision, and sounds like it may be done. Wiping the rating system? That's just going to upset the MAJORITY of people, not some, especially after the database wipe. They won't be understanding about it and will stop playing, which may have an adverse affect on the future of this game. I'd rather have as many people playing in this game rather than a committed core who stuck with it at the beginning. Alienating a bunch of people with a rating wipe so soon after the database one, who won't come back, is probably not the best way to go for a new game. And yeah, it's new. There will, well are, be bugs, which will be fixed over time. Decaying will have the same effect as a wipe eventually, without losing gamers. You're just being impatient if you want a wipe asap. Calm down maybe? The main problems been fixed.

Originally Posted by Padawan Pete

I rowed with Kyle about customer service as well. I think we just have to get used to it.

I think the customer service has been great. After the database wipe, and being ignored for a couple of days, then sending a 2nd rather impatient and less polite email, i was dealt with very well, quickly and politely by the main man himself. That's pretty good customer service to me. Sure, i had to wait, but guy was probably swamped...

**Drakkon** · 04-01-2011, 12:27 PM

Rating decay is a terrible move for competitive play. After a few months wipe the ranking give some crystals to top 20 and start season 2. You don't see arena players rating decay in wow. You don't see elo decay in hon or lol. You definitely don't see rating/ranking decay in YGO or mtg.

**QuincasBorba** · 04-01-2011, 12:56 PM

Why not implement a minimum difference for gain / loss of ranking?
For example: If the difference in ranking between the players is greater than X nobody would gain or lose ranking.

**Calmdown** · 04-01-2011, 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by Drakkon

Rating decay is a terrible move for competitive play. After a few months wipe the ranking give some crystals to top 20 and start season 2. You don't see arena players rating decay in wow. You don't see elo decay in hon or lol. You definitely don't see rating/ranking decay in YGO or mtg.

Seasons is another viable option, absolutely.

But giving how against wiping they are even once, I'm pretty sure the idea of wiping every 3 months will not be well received

in any case, you need one or the other, else people get to the top and quit/refuse to play which reduces the pool of available people worth any points for the lower ranks, and eventually leads to a system where rating gain is nigh impossible.

**Fry** · 04-01-2011, 02:21 PM

Originally Posted by Kyle

I really don't need to deal with 500,000 support emails of "WHAT HAPPENED TO MY RATING??!!"

OK guys, you heard the man, we need to start sending support emails of "WHY WON'T YOU RESET THE RATINGS??!!"

**Hatts** · 04-01-2011, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by Calmdown

Seasons is another viable option, absolutely.

But giving how against wiping they are even once, I'm pretty sure the idea of wiping every 3 months will not be well received

in any case, you need one or the other, else people get to the top and quit/refuse to play which reduces the pool of available people worth any points for the lower ranks, and eventually leads to a system where rating gain is nigh impossible.

You are completely missing the point of the rating system. It's goal is to rank you with similarly skilled players. If the people who used the quit exploit stop playing the game to keep their high rating, they are not depriving you of similarly skilled players.

If you're at a point where everyone you play is lower ranked than you and you aren't getting rating increases, there is nothing wrong with that. You are just living up to the skill rating that the system has assigned to you. Additionally, your losses will raise the rating of those skilled enough to beat you, so you should hopefully see them more often.

**Calmdown** · 04-01-2011, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by Hatts

You are completely missing the point of the rating system. It's goal is to rank you with similarly skilled players. If the people who used the quit exploit stop playing the game to keep their high rating, they are not depriving you of similarly skilled players.

If you're at a point where everyone you play is lower ranked than you and you aren't getting rating increases, there is nothing wrong with that. You are just living up to the skill rating that the system has assigned to you. Additionally, your losses will raise the rating of those skilled enough to beat you, so you should hopefully see them more often.

I think you're missing the point, actually. The point of a rating system is not SOLELY to matchmake you; the point is to rank you. To decide who is number 1, who is number 2, etc. We have rankings in sports and games to show level of competitiveness; matching people against eachother by ranking is a byproduct of the system, not the system's purpose.

What you're saying is that I'm in the top bracket. Everyone I play below me gives me very little and loses me a lot, rightly so. But I can't play anyone above me, since most of them have quit, and the rating gain from playing against people below me is so small that I can't really go up at all. THis describes the situation of someone that is at the top of the game; can't really go up, can only go down.

And yet, because rankings aren't wiped and there is no decay, the hundreds of people above me, I cannot pass. So despite the fact that I could be the best player currently playing, with the highest win ratio, I can never get on to a leaderboard.

Of course it isn't quite that extreme, with massive time investiture I could eventually claw my way up higher via the 0.1-0.5 points I get per win and the odd 1-2 points from the odd higher ranked guy. But getting, and maintaining, a 500+ score is essentially impossible with this system and was only possible by cheating. Since those guys at the top can simply choose not to play, they cannot be knocked off a leaderboard purely because their starting position is so high.

**Killtrend** · 04-01-2011, 02:35 PM

Why don't they do it strictly by win loss? A disconnect or quit is auto loss.

Rank should be a win/loss record rather then anything else. If you win more games, you'll play people who win more games.

Pretty simple really. In the NFL you're 14-2 or you're 13-3. Either way 14-2 is always better.

If your worried about rank being lost due to shottu connection, reset win loss every 2 weeks. This gives more people a chance to be at the top, purges whiney high level players from camping the top and stimulates more gameplay.

Sadly the deck variation would be more limited. But oh well. I'm sure it is already rather limited at the top