aaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
You used Tennis as an example when it doesn’t use the ranking system you propose is the best. Im not trying to misrepresent your example, just pointing it out to not be particularly valid. Especially given the quote below
I was pointing out that wasn’t the case in sporting competitions unless they met certain conditions, which Gears doesn’t. You never refuted any of those points either.
But even when losing teams can still improve their average score versus and against if they were below parity.
If two teams are at 2 wins and 5 losses for example, both lose another match each but one scores more goals and has a narrow loss they can actually jump AHEAD of the other team.
Similarly, two teams that are high up can swap places when both win (or lose) on any given weekend due to their score for and against.
Its kind of weird that you are using Gears 4 as an example of a failed ranking model, when what you are asking for is the ranking system in Gears 4. You can’t rank up without winning.
aaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Its a ranking system for matchmaking not a competition. If you want to compete in Gears. You need to go join a tournament. There only Wins-Losses matter. That is Gears competition. Online Ranked is a matchmaking system to try and maintain a competitive environment, but it doesnt represent Gears Esports.
1 Like
aaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
You too bud 
You got this twisted. Team based sports have a team ranking and an individual ranking. Just because a team is loosing doesnt make the individual’s rank go down if they are performing
2 Likes
It doesnt matter what the ranking system is. There will always be someone complaining about it lol. If it matches equal teams against each other (or close to it) then it accomplished its job.
1 Like
Every ranking system will have its flaws, I fully accept that.
Wins versus losses though is far too simplistic as it assumes all wins and all losses are equals. Losing to A Diamond tier stack isn’t the same as losing to a bunch of solo queued silvers.
1 Like
Like you said it works when you have a fixed season with semi fixed teams. With rosters and trading rules. I wouldnt mind if Gears had a mode where you could set something like this up. Buts its not what Ranked mode is about. Its not about one fixed team against another. Its about where an individual ranks in a pool of people. Assuming they might play on different or no teams depending on the day.
1 Like
Would be pretty cool to have some online tournaments for this kind of thing.
1 Like
Yeah even if you could set up a season where you had to play x amount of games then afterwards you had playoffs.
1 Like
aaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Its not a team game. I believe if the stats were revealed you would find most people are solo queuing. In sports that you are comparing to you always have a full team coordinating. If you had a list with squads only then I could agree with what you are saying. But i bet you would find that someone playing Gears online with a full 5 member squad is actually the minority.
1 Like
aaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
I understand what you are saying, but if you strictly based the leaderboards on Wins/Losses you would end up with a lot of people towards the top that dont belong there, and a lot of people at the bottom that dont belong there. So if i get 80 kills and i am MVP every match but matchmaking puts me with 4 bronze that get 4 kills a match and i lose. I should remain a bronze?
Then you never get the opportunity to see how you perform on a good team equally as skilled as you.
aaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Yeah but ping and internet speed dont matter on the Lakers. This is a video game over the internet. Gears has a competitive scene where only wins and losses matter. You can even find leagues throughout the web where people play based on wins and losses. Noone in Gears online is going to say im Diamond 5 look at this bronze lets pick him
Up for our random squad.