So you want a system like OVERWATCH… Where your team can carry you even if your performance is at level of a bronze-silver.
In overwatch you can play Lucio or Mercy then the other 5 people can do everything to carry you cuz that only matters about WIN-RATIO.
In Gears is everything about you and your SKILLS. So even if you are getting carried by a team u can still losing point to me is a good system.
yes, we might want this little tweak or that other tweak but at the end of the day it is to help the matchmaking find you a balanced match that will be worth your time.
aaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
If this is how its working, I dont think its how its intended. You shouldn’t gain Skill Points unless you are performing better than people above you in the leaderboards. It should be all Skill based and have nothing to do with how much you play. In my experience play time didnt matter. I mean sure playing more should make you better to a degree. But you dont go up just by playing.
I dont know why people would stress over losing a position. As much as its easier to drop in rank its equally as easy to move back up. The system is just more fluid. This is a good thing it gives more people opportunity and doesnt reward getting a rank then not playing the rest of the season.
Yes, i have the same concern as you do. There are pros and cons to this ranking system.
It is a mixture of skill, play time and luck.
Skill - how you are performing in the match
play time - you definitely can kinda cheat the system by playing a lot like I’ve been saying and like you said. Someone can have not so good performances and results but they can get scraps towards the leaderboard, that is how it happened a lot in madden and fifa. There are people with mediocre records in madden and fifa but they sit high on the leaderboard. My records in those games were always efficient, which allowed me to also be placed high. I would play those people above me and blow them out easily as they were one trick ponies and really not reflective of their leaderboard position. The difference is that those games are 1v1s and Gears is a team game.
luck - who will you get on your team and play against? will they quit on your team or the other? those things affect the bottom line for your skill points.
Here is a topic I made a few days ago if you want to check it out:
I dont really get this. You dont get points for playing. You get points for out performing your immediate competition.
Yes, it is something that comes with the system.
Players have to earn their points but like @senda91 pointed out, someone who isn’t performing and winning like you can surpass you via playing time. It is very unlikely a noob will get to masters rank but someone could get around the ranking system by simply playing a lot and collecting scraps.
You can drive a lambo and it will take you 4 days to complete the trip but someone in a nearly broken down car can get there in 2.5 days because they brought their mattress and toilet with them in the car.
Lambo>broken down car in every aspect but the time put into driving gets you to your destination faster.
People who were always diamond 5 in gears 4 might struggle to get into masters and stay there as they simply won’t have that much playing time. People who never made diamond 5 or even diamond in gears 4 could potentially scrap their way into masters in gears 5.
It is a little flaw that comes with this system. Not that big of a deal but it is something to point out.
Yeah i dont agree. You are basing this on a small sample size from the tech test. Once data is compiled on everyone. One or two matches isnt going to make huge shifts. Its definitely more fluid than Gears 4, but the ranking system basis in essence is the same. And this system encourages people to play the game rather than sit on their rank. Which makes the game a lot more healthy and makes it so when people get to Diamond 5/Master they dont just stop playing until next season. The ranking system if it works as intended is great the way it is.
It is like this here in Gears 5 but the points need to be tweaked so there aren’t as many shifts. Yes, it is only a small sample size but we have seen it happen in other games. I agree with you overall that is a fluid system that will encourage people to keep playing but it has room for improvement.
Once the game comes out and things settle, it will be like you said about having a more concrete leaderboard placement for everyone.
Will there be people who suffer because they don’t put that much time into the game? Yes. Will people be placed ahead of their “real” rank because of their play time? Yes, we saw that clearly in the tech test and we have observed that in other games.
They just gotta find a good balance between performance and result and it will all be fine.
Im clearly just not getting how the play time makes an impact. You have to out perform the leaderboards to move up. If you play and dont out perform you go down or remain the same.
Playing more has no positive impact and in the long run is actually going to make it harder to move up. Once the system has historical data on you it becomes more difficult to change your historical stats.
Let me first add this real quick. I like this system more than the one in Gears 4 because in Gears 4 everyone was scared to play solo or without a 5 man. This will make it better for those of us who not always play with a 5 man as we can gain points even if we lose. That is actually something different between this system and the one in madden/fifa, which comes down to 1v1 game vs team game.
Okay, you know how your points were getting cut if someone quit on the other team? If that happens to you 5 out of 8 matches you play then you will gain let’s say 81 pts. Someone who plays 15 matches and has the luck to not get his/her points cut down will absolutely surpass you on the leaderboard by tallying up 148 pts.
That is what I’m hoping they get right, but I’m curious as to how it will work. They have to set parameters for points awarded or deducted based on performance and result.
It will be interesting to see how it plays out because 5 mans will win a lot but be favored a lot, therefore not get a lot of skill points. People not in a 5 man can perform better, not be favored, lose more but possibly gain more skill points.
If they balance it out properly then the significance of play time will decrease. It will still factor in though. For example, between two equally skilled players, the one who plays more will be ahead.
If they are equally skilled then play time will have an impact. But overall they will still most likely be in the same tier. The quitting issue TC acknowledged as a bug. So it isnt intended to be that way in the final game. The big movement in ranks in the tech test was more people placing high out of placements. Which will quickly be adjusted once they then have to face people at the rank they placed. They will either still be able to play at that level consistently or they will go down in rank.
The ranking system in essence is the same as Gears 4. You had a skill rating that you didn’t see which impacted your movement in the Ranking system. Now you just see that Skill rating and that rating is how you rank. The only major difference is that you dont need to Win to go up, which places a smaller impact on your team makeup, and more weight on personal performance. Sure if you have a good team it makes it easier to perform well, but that is the case in any team based game. But like you said the system also recognizes that you are in a squad or not and compensates accordingly.
So in Summary. I think play time will matter the most in the Top 100 Masters list. But this a good thing, and these are the people that typically play the game the most to begin with. These will be a lot of D5’s from Gears 4 that got their D5 Rank and then moved on to other games. Because they had no reason to keep playing once they got D5 for the season. This made matchmaking impossible for higher ranks. This ranking system is a major improvement in every way from the Gears 4 ranking system.
I actually think this ranking system will make the game more competitive, which is what you want in a competitive versus game. The best of the best wont just move on to other games. They will stick around to try and hold their ranks, or move into the Top 100 Masters List.
Ok, i knew all of that except for TC acknowledging the quitting issue as a bug for the rankings. I thought it was a way of the system saying, “Okay, someone quit on the other team and you don’t deserve full credit.” Will it give full credit for even for a 5v3 win? Will it depend on when the opponent/s quit? That is interesting to me.
The top 100 Masters list will shift a lot, but I think that other ranks will too. The difference will be that in all other ranks there is a way out of them but Masters is obviously the highest, meaning that the fight will be to remain in Masters.
In the end, it is great that this system is more reflective of individual performance to go along with results. It was terrible to see people getting lazy wins and performances and still ranking up in Gears 4. Best of all, it will reward consistency and not allow those “fake” diamonds from Gears 4 who could only wreck on their terms.
Equally skilled or similarly skilled, playing time will have a role and people will complain about it. The community will not like logging on and seeing they have dropped rank. I still think there will be some anomalies but for the most part people will be more accurately placed than in Gears 4.
I agree some people arent going to like logging on and seeing they dropped in Rank. Especially if they enjoyed getting their rank and moving on. But that wasnt best for the game and for getting people to transition into Esports. They got their rank, moved on, and some of them didnt deserve it. I know people that achieved Diamond without ever beating a Diamond. That system at times, particularly late in the season, prevented people more deserving from going to the next Tier. Because each tier had a fixed population, and it was much more difficult to Rank up then rank down. No system is going to make everyone happy.
I dont know if the new system will be better or worse for me. But i do think the system is better for the Gears gaming community as a whole. Now the real question is will enough people transition from Gears 4 to Gears 5 based on gameplay changes.
Also im skeptical about “Leaderboard” and you need play a lot to rank up let me explain.
During the two beta weekends i put 4 hours at day finishing with level 90. My rank was jumping between Gold to Onyx sometimes even going to Silver. Good stats + Win is more important than just “play a lot”.
My friend playing 2 hours at day ending on lv 42. He got placed on Onyx 3 and could archieve diamond 1 during a day because he have better K/D ratio than me.
Personal “STATS” = 60%
Win = 25%
Play a lot = 15% or less
Yeah playing a lot will only help against equal skill. If you are playing a lot more than someone equal skill you might be higher rank. But thats because people will keep getting better than the person playing less. And thats the way it should be.
In the grand scheme of things the overall system won’t be much different than Gears 4. Its just more transparent.