First ever post: let's talk about the new ranking system

I wanted to start by mentioning this is my first time posting on this forum. I’ve followed and read topics on this forum for a long time but never felt the need to post anything because even in its worst state, pvp in GOW4 and GOW5 has been the most enjoyable multiplayer experience for me compared to other games existing concurrently. Even though I’ve had major gripes like the rest of you, gameplay wise I was able to adapt, and cosmetics are not a major concern for me as long as they’re adequate. However, the current state of the pvp experience in terms of the ranking system, ranked modes, and matchmaking is the worst it has ever been in a TC gears game in my opinion, so I felt an exigency to discuss this matter.

To outline my concerns:

  1. The ranking system is no longer a measure of skill.
    A. In the lower ranks, it is simply a reflection of who plays the most. This is partly because it takes a lot of matches and time to get out of bronze and silver even if you win and mvp every single game. More importantly, this is because pretty much everyone on each team receives a very similar amount of GP in each game because of the arbitrary cap on GP. This is especially true for long KOTH matches as most competent players will hit 40 elims and 10 caps. Therefore, because the skilled/productive player with far more kills, assists, etc. earns a very similar amount of GP as the player on the same team who was carried, the awarded GP does not distinguish between who is more skilled on each team but rather who won the match. It should be mentioned that removing the cap on GP would not easily resolve this issue because of the oversimplification of the GP scoring system. It is quite easy to abuse the GP awarded for elims since tickling someone with a lancer/snub before they are taken out counts the same in terms of GP as a gnasher gib. The previous scoring system within a match (which I imagine was a massive contributor to rank) accrued points awarded for elims based on amount of damage inflicted which was far more reasonable. I’m fairly certain it used to be so nuanced that in the background you were getting a different rank boost for even killing with different weapons, such as more points for longshot headshots, but this is impossible to confirm.
    B. In the higher ranks, all of that still holds true, but ranks also become a reflection of who plays in stacks versus who is solo queuing. This is because the entry cost of GP makes winning even more important for rank. Therefore, players in stacks will have a way easier time ranking up because it is much harder to lose when playing in a stack in this game. This creates two problems. First, this makes solo queuing a massive disadvantage in terms of ranking up because you are risking more in each match (since you have a higher chance of losing than if you were in a stack). Second, because it is so much easier to rank up in a stack even the worst players can rank up to diamond or even masters if they get on a winning team. Previously you would never see an unskilled or new player in masters, but now it is far too easy if you have a squad of good teammates and you will see it happen.

  2. The transparency of the new ranking system is not a positive: this is farcical. The most obvious issue this creates is that people are incentivized and even encouraged to grind ranks within a match instead of focusing on winning, when the two are most certainly not one and the same. One very simple example is waiting to cap a dead hill for GP instead of rotating in KOTH, and that is just scratching the surface. Even though winning is the number one determinant for rank, everyone knows that most players are still obsessing over small additions to GP over helping the team win in order to get mvp, The second issue the transparency of the new ranking system created is an oversimplification of how a player ranks up which I touched on earlier.

  3. There is no variety in terms of 5v5 ranked playlists. Gridiron and KOTH are simply not enough for players like me who enjoy playing a variety of game modes with friends. The immediate counterargument for this would be to go play TDM and guardian in social but there is zero challenge in playing social with a squad of veteran players which makes for an extremely boring experience. The second counterargument would be that the playerbase is too small to support more ranked modes, which is somewhat true. However, the fact of the matter is that if you think of the timing, most ranked modes were removed to support gridiron because it is TC’s invention (harsh reality). I’m sure if guardian and exe were kept gridiron would have been dead quite fast. One has to believe that TDM and esca were removed for the same reason. Also, I understand TC’s intention is to restore TDM once certain “gameplay improvements” have been made, but they could just as easily cop out and claim a positive community response to its removal or that it was unpopulated in social, so it has to be included as part of the problem here.

  4. I didn’t think it was possible, but matchmaking has gotten even worse. First off, matchmaking should not be solely based on the individual in the party with the highest rank because this leads to scenarios where a stack of golds match against a stack with one gold and four bronze players. The counterargument here is that now players with distant ranks do not match up against each other, but in fact they still do if they are in a party with a higher rank individual. The issue of players with distant ranks not matching up together can easily be resolved without this element of matchmaking where you are matched up based on the rank of the individual with the highest rank in the party. Furthermore, as I outlined in the last three points ranks mean next to nothing now so there is terrible match quality. Usually one team will dominate because it so unbalanced, and this is boring for both teams. To be perfectly honest, I’m not very concerned about my personal rank but the terrible match quality (a byproduct of ranks being meaningless) actively discourages me from wanting to play.

The combination of all these factors greatly reduces the enjoyability of pvp, and makes ranking up feel like a grind and meaningless chore akin to the Tour of Duty.

A major reason why I felt the need to make this post is that to my bewilderment, there appears to be a somewhat positive response to the new ranking system. I presume many of these people who like it are those who were clamoring for more transparency in the ranking system because they were struggling to rank up. The truth is that it was always fairly transparent how to rank up, but now it has simply become oversimplified, easy to abuse, and unrepresentative of skill. I also wanted to touch on the fact that based on the massive gameplay improvements which have been steadily made since Gears 5 dropped, it appears that TC is currently listening to a lot of feedback from content creators and professional players instead of so-called “casuals.” From what I gather, a lot of professional players barely even play ranked and most didn’t even care that esca was removed, so I don’t think their input is the most valuable in this scenario. I presume a lot of content creators like the current state of ranked because it rewards playing a ton and playing in stacks, which most of them do. However, in this specific case I think that TC should be listening to the average ranked player, as they are most of the playerbase, and like me, are probably discontented at the lack of variety in terms of ranked playlists and the lack of incentive to strive for higher ranks because they are no longer reflective of skill. In this regard, to provide perspective and out of fear of being discredited as a “casual” because I don’t play GOW to make montages or earn money (not that there’s anything wrong with being a casual, creating content, or playing professionally), I wanted to mention that I hit masters in every ranked mode as a console player last operation and have played through every GOW game when they came out, including pvp since GOW4 dropped. Sorry if that comes across as a boast or high-falutin, but too often the response or even assumption to criticism is that the concerned individual must be new or bad at the game, so I wanted to somewhat dispel that outcome.

I wanted to conclude by saying that I fully understand this is only a ranked “preseason” and improvements are coming, but for me this is no excuse for the current state of ranked because this update took many steps backward instead of forward. An improved ranking system would have simply focused on reducing inexplicable results such as when 0 points are awarded for a match, improving matchmaking so that groups of solo queue players do not match up against stacks as often, and so that masters/diamond players do not play with or against new bronze players which has been the central issue since the first TC-designed ranking system in GOW4.

However, hopefully feedback like this does not go unnoticed as I imagine TC is planning on utilizing constructive feedback like this (one can hope) in order to develop and launch an improved ranked experience when the “preseason” is over. I’m curious how others who peruse the forum feel about these points so feel free to criticize or discuss.

TL;DR: Not a fan of the current ranked experience, how do y’all feel?

8 Likes

Yeah but surely winning is the best measure of skill is it not? No longer is just chasing enemies down into spawn going to get you tons of points, its almost 100% focused on wins versus individual performance now.

Gears is a team based game though, although I sorta wish they had a playlist exclusively for solo players, I’m aware that the games small population (relatively speaking) makes this likely impractical, This is moreso a population problem than a ranking system problem in my eyes, Also FFA/2v2’s are still a thing.

If your team consisting of 5 really good players losing to a team of 4 really good players then doesn’t that just imply that the team of 5 great players wasn’t that good to begin with?

I hit Master in OP3, took a long freaking time but finally got it, the system was previously massively skewed towards individual performance, which sounds great in theory, but when you consider stuff like spawn killing or just recklessly breaking hills gives you far more points than actually winning does then you can sort of see the problem in it. I’m only like Gold 3 in Gears 5’s new GP system though, I’m seeing tons of sharks in Ranked KOTH, I like the competition :smiling_imp:

95% of the criticism for the old ranking system was that it was extremely confusing, you could win 30 matches in a row and not go up any rank, really bizarre stuff, the new ranking system is extremely simple to understand, and is almost entirely focused on who wins and who loses, individual skill doesn’t really factor in but if your team does drastically better (elims, caps, breaks, etc.) than the other team and they still won then you kinda deserved to go down in my opinion.

The real issue I have with the current ranking system (as a KOTH player) is that it doesn’t take into consideration some basic nuances, like if my team wins a match within 10 or so minutes, it should have some kind of idea that my team was drastically better than the other team, thus it should give you extra GP. Other stuff like whether you win rounds (which is extremely important because it encourages people to quit out of seemingly impossible to win games) or the ridiculous 10 expected breaks per match (which just encourages your team to give them the hill) is all stuff that needs to be fixed/changed in my opinion.

Summary: Y’all wanted simplicity and you got it.

Edit: I really liked your post because it sorta explains why most people don’t like the new system, I also can’t speak to the GP system in FFA/2v2/Gridiron, I’m a KOTH kitty :cat2:

2 Likes

Gears has always been a team based game, since 2006. That is irrelevant. With the way they are changing this franchise they might as well make it mandatory to have a full stack before you can even begin matchmaking. Nonsense.

2 Likes

FFA exists for a reason. 2v2’s are also fine for solo player’s.

The only other solution I could see them doing would be removing skill based ranking system completely (ala Gears 2/3) which I doubt they’ll do.

  • sigh * …another one
  1. The previous ranking system was not a measure of skill either.
    a) It takes 500 GP to move from Bronze 1 to Bronze 2. With 100 Personal GP & a win which nets you 150 GP… It would take you 2 games. It takes 750 GP additional to move from Bronze 2 to Bronze 3, that’s 3 more games. And then the same amount to get you to Silver 1… That’s 8 games. 8 games is too much? :sweat_smile: Sounds like that you’re really saying is, “I hate that I have to work for my rank now, I should be able to play 5 placement matches like in the old ranking system, boost my score as much as possible, & automatically be given an onyx or diamond rank right away”. In addition the previous scoring system did not base eliminations on the amount of damage inflicted. If I took 80% of an opponents health with a lancer, for example, they ducked into cover, then you came around the side & gibbed them with a gnasher, you would receive 150+ points for the kill, while I would get less than 20 for an “assist”. Even downing an opponent previously only gave you 50 points, while the kill would give you 100… Which is why kill stealing was so rampant in gears.
    b) If the “worst players” rank up, isn’t that a benefit for you? :thinking: What you’re saying here doesn’t make sense to me. I’ve actually played several matches recently, as a gold rank, & completely obliterated the other team. If they were indeed “worst players” who ranked up, I’m very grateful because that only gave me more easy GP, & they lost a significant amount themselves, lol…

  2. As explained above, “grinding” & boosting score is the same thing that would happen in the old system as well, then only difference now is that a) there is a visible cap on how much you can actually earn per game & b) You aren’t ‘placed’ in the higher ranked from the placement matches.

  3. Is it that you want to play “a variety of game modes” or that you want to play TDM? Bcuz it sounds like the latter.

  4. If you’re a bronze & you’re in a party with a gold… You’re aware you’re going to be playing gold players on the other team, no? :thinking: So… What is it that you want to happen here? Four bronze players & One gold, so you all should play against, who? …Bronze players? I don’t really understand how that makes sense. In that scenario the gold ‘should’ tear the other team apart, with the assumption he’s the best player on the field.

I loved the previous TOD, never considered it a “meaningless chore” & only dislike the current version because you’re awarded coins constantly instead of exclusive skins & executions. The way that you phrases this, however, only further enforces your mindset that you should be “placed” & earning your rank is what’s frustrating you.

The only thing this new ranking system does is shows who was boosting previously & “thrown” into ranks they didn’t deserve due to placement match boosting. Good Riddance, I say… Smh

3 Likes

First off, I appreciate that you took the time to read through my post and I think you have a valuable perspective on this as well.

Yes, winning is a major measure of skill but not the only measure. The best measure of skill would incorporate both winning and individual performance. I thought the previous ranking system struck a fairly reasonable balance between these two factors, with individual performance being weighted more and justly because often poor matchmaking makes winning very difficult. I would agree with you on this if every single game was between full stacks, but this is not the case.

It’s pretty clear this game has a shrinking playerbase. Not everyone has a squad of four friends ready every time they play, and not to mention not everyone wants to play with other people all the time. With this logic it should not even be an option to queue without a 5 stack. I enjoy playing 2v2 and FFA, mostly for the sake of variety. This doesn’t mean I prefer it over classic modes such as KOTH or other 5v5 modes even when I’m solo queuing, however.

I never wanted simplicity, nor transparency. I enjoyed the nuance and complexity of the previous ranking system which was truly ambitious in that it sought to balance and incorporate many factors so that skilled players would end up at the top, not just people who never play without a 5 stack.

3 Likes

FFA does exist for a reason. Thats besides the point.

Why were good players consistently Masters? Must be luck :roll_eyes:

1 Like

:joy: If they’re"good players" why would they not make it to Masters now? Based on your logic, it means the new system is ALSO a measure of skill, no? Therefore, I don’t understand what your argument is here, good sir.

1 Like

I didn’t say they wouldn’t reach Masters now…

I didn’t say the current one isn’t skill based to some degree. If a solo player reaches Masters, they’re probably an incredible player. But the current system is more about playing with a group and being competent rather than your individual skill.

The only point I was making was that good players were Masters consistently in the last system. You disagreed. I would assume because you’re the type that lancers, but doesn’t have any individual skill, so the old system didn’t work for you , so you disliked it.

3 Likes

A) So then we agree, the new system makes sense, since the “good players” end up where they’re supposed to.

B) The point of a team game type IS playing with a group & being competent rather than individual skill. So, basically… What you’re saying is, the new system is doing what it’s supposed to?

C) I never disgreed that good players were consistently Masters in the last system, I lamented that if the new system is not a measure of skill, neither was the old one. However, since we both agree that the new system is feasible, doing what it’s supposed to & the “good players” are getting where they are supposed to… Then no on can say it’s not a measure of skill, correct?

In addition, you really shouldn’t assume, it makes you look dumb. I consider myself a versatile player who fills the roles that need to be filled within the squad. Sometimes I support with my lancer from a corner, sometimes I’m in the ring with my gnasher. The fact, however, that I see that the old system was specifically engineered for one type of playstyle & you cannot only lends credence to what I’m saying. :wink:

Why so dismissive? Thought I made a pretty logical post here

Yes, 8 wins in a row with max GP is in fact too much to progress out of bronze. This creates a pointless grind and also stalls the ranks of most people. What this creates is an environment where almost everyone is bronze/silver/gold for quite a long a time leading to matchmaking that can place two groups of players against each other just because both are bronze/silver/gold when in fact their actual skill levels are massively different.

What are you basing this off of? Also you neglected the entire discussion about how the cap on GP ensures that most everyone progresses out of these early ranks in nearly the same manner.

So much is blatantly false here. If someone is 80% damaged by a lancer then gibbed by a gnasher, then the person who lancered would receive 80 points, and the person who finished the kill would receive 95 points. Pretty fair considering the person who lancered risked much less in terms of their own life. Kill stealing is far more encouraged with the new ranking system actually, because if you steal a kill you will receive 2 GP for doing next to nothing. 50 score pales in comparison.

This is untrue. Boosting score is encouraged more by the new ranking system because you know exactly what you need to do in order to rank up the most. Let’s take the example I used about how someone is encouraged to cap a dead hill for GP right now. In the previous ranking system that same person, if he actually knows how to improve his rank, would leave the hill and rotate because he would know that kills far outweigh caps for rank, as does winning faster. The person who would choose to stay and cap the dead hill to “boost” would in the long run hurt his rank and hurt his chance to win. Definitely not “the same thing” as you describe. I explained earlier why placement matches reduce pointless grinding and improve the ranked experience.

Why does it sound like that? Because I explained why I am including it in the discussion? I would be more than happy if guardian, esca, or exe were returned into the lineup, not just TDM. I mention later in my post that I hit masters in every ranked playlist last season; does that sound like someone who is obsessed with TDM?

Since you don’t understand, let me explain. No, a team of one gold and four bronze players should not be matched against a team of bronze players or a team of gold players. It should be matched against another team of one gold and four bronze players or another mix close to that in terms of overall ranks i.e. two silver three bronze etc.

I mention earlier in my post that I am not too worried about cosmetics, did you miss that? That is why completing arbitrary tasks for cosmetics rewards instead of just playing ranked and enjoying myself seems like a meaningless chore for me. Never said it had to feel that way for you. The analogy is that I think achieving high ranks is just as meaningless as those cosmetic rewards for me now because it is a pointless grind, knowing how unrepresentative ranks are of actual skill. Never said I should be rewarded for doing nothing.

Placement match boosting? Seems like you keep bringing this up but I did not mention placement matches a single time in my post dude. Pretty much all the masters players could have started bronze 1 and they still would have made it to masters just as fast because the earlier ranks were filled with people who actually belonged there from the start. Because the ranking system functioned correctly, if everyone started Bronze 1 in the previous ranking system (no placement matches) they still would have made it to masters, there would just be kind of a weird state very early on because everyone is around the same rank. This is actually how it was in operation 1 and 2 I believe. It was changed because people complained, personally it wasn’t a huge deal to me. Not to mention the highest you could place was in onyx? For masters players reaching onyx is like drinking water. Previously you just had to drink a glass, now you have to drink a gallon for no reason. Just as easy but only takes longer. No one is asking to be “thrown” into masters, but a pointless grind where the players who play the most are the most rewarded is not necessary either.

2 Likes

Agree and disagree. I think for stacks it’s a better system and for solo’s, depending on mode, it’s a worse system. I think they could fix it within the confines of the new system, though. As is, it needs improvement.

There is an element of personal skill that the new system just doesn’t take into account. It’s a team game, but there are people within a team that are simply better and that should be reflected.

Stacks are. Solo queue…probably gonna be a bit of a grind under this system. My personal experience in KOTH is I keep having quitters and AFK teammates. I personally do well, but since my performance is capped, it doesn’t matter. So eventually, but I think it’s a bit too grindy atm for solo queue. Just my opinion.

Assume? You were complaining about being on the bottom of your team with 99 elims…you literally thought you were mvp because you lancerered people with a couple bullets to get them down…I know what kind of player you are lol

2 Likes

I thought these were some really great points btw; agree completely

1 Like
  1. Not dismissive, however, there are a ton of posts about the same thing on the forums.
  2. As the devs said in the live stream “it’s a journey” to get to Masters, playing different types of teams and opponents. How is that a “pointless grind”?
  3. The cap ensures that boosting doesn’t get out of hand.
  4. Clearly you’re making wild assumptions on how the scoreboard works. Please feel free to join a quickplay deathmatch, which still uses the old scoreboard & test that theory, sir. In addition, kill stealing was encouraged more in the old system since you got TWICE the amount of points for stealing a kill. Everyone getting the same points for hitting the same target is unfair how? And you sneak shotting someone who’s hiding in cover from someone else isn’t “risking your life” :joy:
  5. Boosting score was more encouraged in the old system because there was no cap, you could literally not capture a ring & mindlessly kill opponents increasing your score exponentially. How does knowing a limit encourage ppl to cheat to get to it? That doesn’t even make sense.
  6. That’s fair
  7. But that would require the lobbies to have the correct amount of ranks in order to incorporate that. At present it’s hard enough finding matches at certain ranks. In addition, you can’t even see the ranks of the opponents anyways, so what’s the difference? It should matter how they play & not their rank.
  8. But if all of the best players are at Masters anyway, is it not worth the “meaningless grind”?
  9. You didn’t need to mention placement match boosting, but it’s a relevant part of the issue that needed to be address, which is one of the reasons why the system was changed. In addition, players who “play the most” are never going to get to Masters, so that point is invalid.

Hear me out, I get where you’re coming from it’s really grindy getting to the top… You sound like an informed knowledge guy, however, let’s not pretend the old scoring system did not have ALOT of flaws as well. There are reasons it was changed, and hopefully the devs are able to find a middle ground between the two.

1 Like
  1. Mmm… I can agree to this, definitely favours stacked teams & it does need improvement in some areas
  2. There are merits to what you’re saying, however, how do the devs balance this to still place emphasis on playing as a team? Maybe the top player on both sides gets an extra 50 GP? And not the top player at cap, perhaps the top player if there was no cap. Therefore, even if two people are at the 100 GP cap, the one who did better would get additional points.
  3. I agree with this.
  4. Again, assuming & making yourself look dumb. And here I thought we were about to make amends… :man_facepalming:t4:
    4a) I never claimed I should have been MVP
    4b) It wasn’t “a couple bullets”, I literally had more downs than almost all the other players on my team combined. I was the one dropping bodies, they were cleaning up, and as I explained higher up, you get 50 points for a down & 100 for killing a downed player. If you could do math, which it’s obvious to me now that you cannot, you would see how the top player had twice the points I had, despite me constantly damaging the opponents attempting to get to the ring.
    4c) The only thing you “know” is how to gnasher, and unfortunately there are other skills required in this game. If you put aside your pride for a bit I can teach you, just let me know when you’re ready, ok?
1 Like

Stacks need to die, or you need to be severely punished if you lose a game when you are stacking. More so than you already do.

2 Likes

Because the system was broken lol. Masters didn’t matter at least it resembles some skill now.

Huh? I have no problem with you lol

What rank did you get to?

1 Like