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.
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
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? 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? 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…
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.
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.
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? 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
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.
FFA does exist for a reason. Thats besides the point.
Why were good players consistently Masters? Must be luck
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
I thought these were some really great points btw; agree completely
- Not dismissive, however, there are a ton of posts about the same thing on the forums.
- 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”?
- The cap ensures that boosting doesn’t get out of hand.
- 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”
- 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.
- That’s fair
- 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.
- But if all of the best players are at Masters anyway, is it not worth the “meaningless grind”?
- 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.
- Mmm… I can agree to this, definitely favours stacked teams & it does need improvement in some areas
- 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.
- I agree with this.
- Again, assuming & making yourself look dumb. And here I thought we were about to make amends…
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?
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.
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?
I stopped playing half way through but I hit diamond. I think most peeps stopped playing on the old ranking system lol.
New combined feedback thread here