@IGuruDevI wrote:pls add rank system. i m level 160+ and i get teammates like 20 to 30lvl. what are you gonna do with them in match?. make rank system in next update
Level rank has nothing to do with skill. Skill rank/an elo based system is what is needed.
@TheeRealist wrote:
@IGuruDevI wrote:pls add rank system. i m level 160+ and i get teammates like 20 to 30lvl. what are you gonna do with them in match?. make rank system in next update
Level rank has nothing to do with skill. Skill rank/an elo based system is what is needed.
yes exactly. Base it on wins. or average placement imo. I really liked how the code red and faceit tourneys showed avg placement for each team. Would be nice if apex had a stat like that.
Wouah, 101xp gained from this topic. I think it's pretty damm clear that something needs to happen!
I'm personally not a fan of skill-based matchmaking, as it eliminates much of the reward of improving.
However I think the game will probably need it in some form if it's to maintain a healthy community that isn't so elitist that it alienates new players.
Though that doesn't address the issue of *how* you judge skill in a BR.
K : D?
wins : losses?
damage dealt : damage received?
Moreover, should the ranking be per player, or per legend?
There's no simple solution.
Perhaps Respawn are hoping that Apex being a free to play will mean there's no need for skill-based matchmaking, instead relying upon the steady flow of fresh meat to offset the ever-increasing skill barrier to entry.
@TheJumpingJawa wrote:I'm personally not a fan of skill-based matchmaking, as it eliminates much of the reward of improving.
However I think the game will probably need it in some form if it's to maintain a healthy community that isn't so elitist that it alienates new players.
Though that doesn't address the issue of *how* you judge skill in a BR.
K : D?
wins : losses?
damage dealt : damage received?
Moreover, should the ranking be per player, or per legend?
There's no simple solution.
Perhaps Respawn are hoping that Apex being a free to play will mean there's no need for skill-based matchmaking, instead relying upon the steady flow of fresh meat to offset the ever-increasing skill barrier to entry.
imo by top 3 or just wins with an elo system. And per legend since thats how respawn already does it. Other games do this. Need to make sure there is a seperate unranked queue for practice.
And tell athletic sports in real life they have been doing it wrong for 100s of years. The reward is moving up in rank.
@TheJumpingJawa wrote:I'm personally not a fan of skill-based matchmaking, as it eliminates much of the reward of improving.
However I think the game will probably need it in some form if it's to maintain a healthy community that isn't so elitist that it alienates new players.
Though that doesn't address the issue of *how* you judge skill in a BR.
K : D?
wins : losses?
damage dealt : damage received?
Moreover, should the ranking be per player, or per legend?
There's no simple solution.
Perhaps Respawn are hoping that Apex being a free to play will mean there's no need for skill-based matchmaking, instead relying upon the steady flow of fresh meat to offset the ever-increasing skill barrier to entry.
A simple mmr or ranking system based on kill per death ratio would be totally fine and sufficient. I would bet that players with a high kill per death ratio have clearly more wins than players with a lower ratio. At the end of the day you have to fight and kill the opponents. Sure there are multiple scenarios where you also need luck. Join a fight of other squads and snack them etc. But on average good players will have a higher kill per death ratio, no doubt about that.
Just seperate high skilled players from the newbies and weaker players. I think three ranks are enough to make the game enjoyable for every type of player.
I mentioned my idea in a former post in this thread:
Like this for example:
Bronze 0 - 1.5 kills per game
Silver > 1.5 - 3 kills per game
Gold > 3 kills per game.
Constantly adjust the mmr, rank players up and down. Premade Squads go with the highest Player in the Squad.
This would help for the beginning. Better than nothing.
@Ayes80 wrote:
@TheJumpingJawa wrote:I'm personally not a fan of skill-based matchmaking, as it eliminates much of the reward of improving.
However I think the game will probably need it in some form if it's to maintain a healthy community that isn't so elitist that it alienates new players.
Though that doesn't address the issue of *how* you judge skill in a BR.
K : D?
wins : losses?
damage dealt : damage received?
Moreover, should the ranking be per player, or per legend?
There's no simple solution.
Perhaps Respawn are hoping that Apex being a free to play will mean there's no need for skill-based matchmaking, instead relying upon the steady flow of fresh meat to offset the ever-increasing skill barrier to entry.
A simple mmr or ranking system based on kill per death ratio would be totally fine and sufficient. I would bet that players with a high kill per death ratio have clearly more wins than players with a lower ratio. At the end of the day you have to fight and kill the opponents. Sure there are multiple scenarios where you also need luck. Join a fight of other squads and snack them etc. But on average good players will have a higher kill per death ratio, no doubt about that.
Just seperate high skilled players from the newbies and weaker players. I think three ranks are enough to make the game enjoyable for every type of player.
I mentioned my idea in a former post in this thread:
Like this for example:
Bronze 0 - 1.5 kills per game
Silver > 1.5 - 3 kills per game
Gold > 3 kills per game.
Constantly adjust the mmr, rank players up and down. Premade Squads go with the highest Player in the Squad.
This would help for the beginning. Better than nothing.
I'd rather it be based on avg placement, wins or top3. The game is about winning to me. not hot dropping and padding my kill stats, which is not practical with even skilled teams. Kills come with wins. And I want to be placed in matches with other people who play to win.
EA...How bout some BETTER MATCHMAKING??? I've read a lot of this thread tonight. I am fed up with the matchmaking process with this game. I am continually placed on a team of Noobs and practically lose Every Single Fricking game I play a night in Hero's VS. Villains. I consider myself to be a decent player and all of my power cards are maxed...no run and chop here...try to play with balance and skill and not being rewarded with a 'W' at least once in a while is aggravating. Alright my * session is done. Fricking Lame.
I think ranking should be based on : KDA + number of win + survival time ( or placement)
Something like this:
1 win : 500 points
KDA: 10 points for every 0.1 . Kda below 1 will be counted as 1
Placement ( survival time): top 2 is 200 pts, top 3 is 175 , lowest placement to have point is top 10: 100 pt
So, for a person with 2 wins, KDA: 3.0 , and total 2 times top 2, 4 times top 3
Ranking points = 1000 + 300 + 400 + 700 = 2400
A person with 0 win, KDA: 7, total 6 times top 3
Ranking pts = 0 + 700 + 1050 = 1750
And the ranking points should be reset every new season to prevent point accumulating.
This is not how things should work. This still would consider time played over everything else and not skill.
I think alot of people are under false impressions from watching twitch streamers who claim anyone can camp and hide a whole match and win consistently. That just doesn't happen. You have to know how to fight to survive top 3 battles, or just to get past 4th place. Especially with equal ranked opponents, which many are against due to the fact it would hurt their streams entertainment value. and although Kills naturally come with wins, they don't dictate a win.
Hot dropping kill stat padders who lose way more often then should are not someone I want on my team.
Ranking should be be an elo system based on wins or top 3 or placements. in that order. The game doesn't count kills as points towards a win. Just wins toward a win. There is no need to change the game design to suit individual playstyles. This is a BR you must adapt your play depending on the situation. Or go play a tdm or ffa game if thats more entertaining for you.
The only thing thats hard is how accurate a rating in random team game would be, but it would be better then nothing.
It would be better then simply matching up people by number of wins, without an elo, which would just be time played as therealist states. And without placement ranking for people without wins would keep teamates very lopsided.
