Posted 04 June 2010 - 07:12 PM
I am pretty sure it should just be fine to sit on rating, no matter if they're in first place or not. Some of the less active BGs have Rank 1, 2 or 3 teams with over 100-150 rating below them rest of the pack. Why should teams near the 3000 rating range be forced to keep queueing into a bunch of barely 2600 teams? One disconnect and you have to win another 10-20 matches just to get those points back and that is without losing another one.
The real problem is that the WoW arena population is decreasing, and as seen in other MMOs, they need to start merging servers into fewer Battle groups and reducing the amount of Battle groups people have to hit a high rating and camp it.
Some of the BGs are, as it sits, a total joke. When a couple of teams transfer to a "low-end" BG and go 95%+ Win/Loss to sky rocket to Ranks 1-10, then that BG should just be compacted somewhere else and disposed of. If those Glad level players are really that good, then they'll still succeed.
World PvP is dead, there is no reason to have a BG primarily composed of PvE servers anymore (Emberstorm). If they want to arena seriously, then they can come compete with the rest of us. If they don't want to take arena seriously, then don't expect high ratings.
I think the vast majority of you are trying to take this in the entirely wrong direction.
You cannot take a system like we have now and just expect people to constatly play because "you want to catch up to them." You can do it like they did it, farming 1-5 points at a time. Not trying to get your shot at hitting them for 19-24+ points for a win and losing virtually nothing when you lose. You all just sound like a bunch of Tier 2 players begging to convince "the system" to allow to you try and farm up Tier 1 players with little risk or consequence (to you).
I understand people wanting to sustain healthy competition for the duration of the season. A vast majority of the really good players in BG9 are constantly shifting comps and teammates. I have queued into Hoodrych playing WLD, TSG and Arms War/Balance Druid/Holy Paladin in nearly the same week.
You guys want variety, come and get it. It's right here on BG9.
[another edit] And don't complain that you don't want to transfer servers just to arena. If arena isn't that important to you, then you have no business complaining about this particular topic.
[last edit, I promise] I just realized that the arguement may pop up, "Well if high rated teams HAVE to queue, then they're still going to be competing with high rated teams, also." You're right and that is a pretty valid point, however, that also just encourages what Blizzard would define as arranging matches or win trading. If you KNOW that your team absolutely MUST play 10 games a week and so does everyone else, why not just wait until you also KNOW that the OTHER high rated guys are going to queue? You don't even have to talk to them, I can tell you right now that Reckful's team hit 3000 on 04/19/2010 6:59:42 AM. So from there, I could "study" his team's normal play times by figuring out what days of the week and times he generally plays at and queue during those same time frames. Is it a lot of extra work? Sure. I would bet that the people at that high of ratings have the extra time to put that kind of effort into marketing themselves as professional WoW players, whether they want to actually do it or not would solely be up to them.
Also look at the options for the high rated teams to keep queueing based on "what you can earn" per week with just playing 10 games. Let's use 4 teams in this scenario; now I don't know the exact math behind all of this and I am pretty much using match history from my last pmferal team that was around 2600-2675 MMR and making all of these numbers up.
Team A - 2800 rated with a 2951 MMR
Team B - 2700 rated with a 2724 MMR
Team C - 2400 rated with a 2701 MMR
Team D - 2389 rated with a 2498 MMR
The majority of the whining seems to be coming from the group of players in the "C" bracket.
So, let's say that all 4 teams, because they have to, need to play 10 games for the week.
Team C ends up playing Team D (4) times and plays Teams A & B (3) times each.
Team C goes 2-2 with Team D, resulting in +8, +7, -13, -11 = -9 points
Team C goes 0-3 with Team B, resulting in -2, -1, -1 = -4 points
Team C goes 1-2 with Team A, resulting in +22, -1, -1 = +20 points
Team C ends the week at 2407 (+7) rating, moving up 6 spots on the ladder with a 3-7 record.
Now let's talk about poor team A. Team A... while Team C thought they got all tactical and buffalo beast chopped them up... actually just had the pro mode elemental shaman that is carrying the team disconnect half-way into the match.
Team A ends up playing team B (4) times and plays teams C & D (3) times each.
Team A goes 4-0 with Team B, resulting in +5, +4, +3, +3 = +15 points
Team A goes 2-1 with Team C, resulting in +1, +1, -20 = -18 points
Team A goes 3-0 with Team D, resulting in +1, +1, +0 = +2 points
Team A ends the week at 2799 (-1) rating, moving down 2 spot on the ladder with a 9-1 record.
If they didn't have that unfortunate, unexplainable disconnect, then they would have been up 20 points and moved up 3 spots on the ladder.
Basically, sometimes you have to weigh out risk versus reward. The risk of going 9-1 as a high rated team is not worth the reward of going 10-0, unless you're at the end of season and you're aiming for Rank One. If you're forced to play 10 games a week, it would be more or less expected that "shit will happen." So that leaves those players with the complaint of having to queue for absolutely no reason, except because "they have to" in order to stay competetive.
So, if those players are out of town because they're currently at some Live Sponsored 3v3 Tournament and dropped from Rank 1 to Rank 3 "just because," then that is pretty much bullshit.