About Ranked Rule Design
About Ranked Rule Design
This post is written using AI-assisted translation.
I am an APEX player from Japan, and I always enjoy playing the game.
I would like to share an idea I had regarding the design of ranked rules.
This is just an amateur idea, so if it turns out to be a bad proposal or something that has already been discussed, please feel free to ignore it.
The three main rule changes I would like to propose are as follows.
Kill Points increase depending on the ring stage.
The ranked entry cost continues to increase without a fixed cap after reaching Master rank.
If the total points earned when winning as Champion are 80 points or less, the player is guaranteed 80 points.
Not only in the current season, but in general, one of the main problems in ranked matches is that full pre-made Predator squads tend to simply hunt solo Diamond players.
Various rule changes have been introduced to address this issue, but in my opinion, they have not been functioning very well.
To mitigate this problem, I believe rule (1) could be effective.
For example, Kill Points could be worth 4 points in Ring 1, 6 points in Ring 2, and 15 points in the final ring.
Under this system, wiping squads early in the match would not yield very strong results, and overall, the match would result in losses for many players.
This would apply pressure against early-game fighting and could help prevent situations where the number of squads is reduced by half before Ring 2.
Regarding full pre-made Predator squads, rule (2) would cause their entry cost to continue increasing.
If they aggressively wipe squads early, the total available Kill Points in the match would be insufficient to offset the high entry cost, leading to losses.
As a result, the current situation where Predator squads simply chase solo Diamond players could be alleviated.
On the other hand, Diamond players would find it relatively easier to initiate fights themselves.
A similar version of rule (2) has been implemented in the past, but at that time, it required unlimited Kill Points, which produced poor results.
With rule (1) in place, I believe those negative outcomes could be avoided.
Rule (3) is intended as a safety measure.
Because Kill Point acquisition depends heavily on other players’ behavior, it is possible to win as Champion but still earn very few points.
This rule aims to reduce dissatisfaction such as “I won the match, but gained almost no points.”
The guaranteed value should not be too high or too low.
Personally, I think a minimum of 50 and a maximum of 100 points would be reasonable.
However, if the entry cost truly increases without limit, Predator players would face extremely harsh conditions.
Therefore, it may be necessary to introduce either a soft cap or a system where the rate of entry cost increase gradually slows down.
With these rules, I believe it would be possible to prevent both excessive hiding-based rank climbing and unnecessary early-game fights.
I am not skilled in mathematics, so I cannot design precise point values.
However, my ideal balance would look something like this.
Up to Gold: Players can gain points even with early kills.
Platinum: Early squad wipes start to become risky.
Diamond: Early aggressive kill-focused play no longer yields positive results.
Master and above: Ranking up is only possible through late-game Kill Points.
I believe this system has three major issues.
The total points generated in a match are not fixed, making balance design difficult.
It may partially encourage team-like behavior (soft teaming).
It is unclear whether overall player satisfaction would improve.
For issue (1), this could potentially be resolved gradually after implementation.
However, with any rule set, it is impossible to predict how players will behave until it is actually tested.
This makes it difficult to determine what point values would result in a healthy rank balance.
Issue (2) is especially relevant in the early game.
In the worst case, all 60 players might simply wait in open areas until the final ring without engaging.
Given that conditions differ by rank and that APEX players are generally aggressive, I believe this situation is unlikely.
However, it cannot be ruled out without testing, and additional countermeasures may be necessary.
If behavior such as securing positions early and repeatedly crouch-spamming through windows is not considered healthy gameplay, then this system may not be acceptable.
Issue (3) is related to player psychology.
Because this system discourages early kill-focused play and emphasizes collective responsibility within a match, players who enjoy reckless or low-risk aggression may respond negatively.
This could potentially harm player retention.
That concludes my proposal.
As mentioned at the beginning, this is just an amateur idea, so if it is a bad one, please feel free to ignore it.
Thank you very much for your time.
