Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help

Arena Inactivity: Incentive Suggestions


  • Please log in to reply
145 replies to this topic

Poll: Options (327 member(s) have cast votes)

Options

  1. Rating Decay (208 votes [63.61%])

    Percentage of vote: 63.61%

  2. Gold Reward (65 votes [19.88%])

    Percentage of vote: 19.88%

  3. Higher Gear Requirements (25 votes [7.65%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.65%

  4. Other (specify) (29 votes [8.87%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.87%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#121 Lieto

Lieto
  • Junkies
  • Night Elfclass_name
  • EU-Arthas
  • Glutsturm / Emberstorm
  • Posts: 1940
  • Talents: Subtlety
  • LocationKyiv. Ukraine.

Posted 04 June 2010 - 05:44 PM

Quote

Yeah it may not get the people who can get to 3k in a weekend to Q....but it will get all the others who can't, you seem to assume that this discussion is only about the rank 1 team for some reason.
Can you give a single reason why people who had time to push to glad in the start of the season need to be punished for not doing it at the end of the season?

Your demand can work both ways — if you insist that all teams should play in the end of the season to get titles other people will insist that all teams should play since the week 1 to get titles, and that means that if you started to play late you are not even getting anything How do you like this suggestion?

Not that my care factor is too big on this topic but its simply astonishing how some people want it easy way no matter what. Like "oh, its kinda harder to push past 2500, no one is queuing, so unexpected... How do i catch those 2900 rated guys? hmm-hmm.. gunna go to forums, and try to change the way this system works so it suites ME. Who cares that those 2900 rated people worked hard to get it."
Shadowmelding since 2007.

#122 Methyline

Methyline
  • Members
  • Undeadclass_name
  • EU-Archimonde
  • Cataclysme / Cataclysm
  • Posts: 421
  • Talents:

Posted 04 June 2010 - 05:55 PM

Lieto said:

Can you give a single reason why people who had time to push to glad in the start of the season need to be punished for not doing it at the end of the season?

Your demand can work both ways — if you insist that all teams should play in the end of the season to get titles other people will insist that all teams should play since the week 1 to get titles, and that means that if you started to play late you are not even getting anything How do you like this suggestion?

Not that my care factor is too big on this topic but its simply astonishing how some people want it easy way no matter what. Like "oh, its kinda harder to push past 2500, no one is queuing, so unexpected... How do i catch those 2900 rated guys? hmm-hmm.. gunna go to forums, and try to change the way this system works so it suites ME. Who cares that those 2900 rated people worked hard to get it."

Yeah read the thread.

All I'm asking for is something that would keep the ladder competitive, ie have people Q more often than once in 6 months :rolleyes:

But sure if you think it's fun to steamroll 2200 back-peddlers up to 2900 and stay there for several months then good for you I guess

#123 vard

vard
  • Premium Junkies
  • Curse Premium
  • Goblinclass_name
  • EU-Sunstrider
  • Blackout
  • Posts: 353
  • Talents: Discipline

Posted 04 June 2010 - 06:03 PM

Methyline said:

No offense I really respect that you work hard and all, but the vast vast vast majority of the people playing WoW are not in your situation.

.

You're most likely right

But, you really can't disagree with me when I say that people don't like to be - in essence - told when they can play.

And, I'd rather say that the 'vast majority' of POTENTIAL customers are in - if not exactly - a very similar situation to myself.

With any company that wants to thrive they obviously need to appeal to potential customers.

We're already signed on.

#124 Spiders

Spiders
  • Members
  • Taurenclass_name
  • US-Black Dragonflight
  • Stormstrike
  • Posts: 1285
  • Talents:

Posted 04 June 2010 - 06:06 PM

Lieto said:

Not that my care factor is too big on this topic but its simply astonishing how some people want it easy way no matter what. Like "oh, its kinda harder to push past 2500, no one is queuing, so unexpected... How do i catch those 2900 rated guys? hmm-hmm.. gunna go to forums, and try to change the way this system works so it suites ME. Who cares that those 2900 rated people worked hard to get it."
I'm pretty sure i just want people around my rating to que instead of having to farm 5-1 point games for ever.

#125 Fatflufybird

Fatflufybird
  • Fatflufycow
  • Taurenclass_name
  • US-Frostmourne
  • Bloodlust
  • Posts: 395
  • Talents: Restoration

Posted 04 June 2010 - 06:21 PM

vard said:

You're most likely right

But, you really can't disagree with me when I say that people don't like to be - in essence - told when they can play.

And, I'd rather say that the 'vast majority' of POTENTIAL customers are in - if not exactly - a very similar situation to myself.

With any company that wants to thrive they obviously need to appeal to potential customers.

We're already signed on.

no one is in your situation. stop posting.
Posted Image

#126 Fatflufybird

Fatflufybird
  • Fatflufycow
  • Taurenclass_name
  • US-Frostmourne
  • Bloodlust
  • Posts: 395
  • Talents: Restoration

Posted 04 June 2010 - 06:21 PM

Spiders said:

I'm pretty sure i just want people around my rating to que instead of having to farm 5-1 point games for ever.

^

just rerolled team, and its going to be fucking gross once pr catches up to mmr. not looking forward to +2 +1 +3
Posted Image

#127 Eliaegl

Eliaegl
  • Junkies
  • Blood Elfclass_name
  • US-Darkspear
  • Cyclone
  • Posts: 84
  • Talents: Frost
  • RBG: 576

Posted 04 June 2010 - 06:26 PM

Que each week or lose 12 points / week.  If you lose a player, better find another person.  It's silly for people to camp their rating anyway.  Play the game!

Anyone can get 1000 games played and have 1000 wins.  Just tank MMR, grind it back to 1800, leave team with 2 members, tank MMR, rinse repeat.  Win ratio doesn't matter... unless we're talking win ratio in the statistics page.

ELO doesn't care about win ratio.

#128 Ctuhlu

Ctuhlu
  • Junkies
  • Draeneiclass_name
  • US-Sargeras
  • Shadowburn
  • Posts: 2730
  • Talents: Restoration

Posted 04 June 2010 - 06:40 PM

This might be really dumb, but what about "Arena Holiday Weekends" or days. Give a marginal points bonus when teams queue on those days, and it could spark a lot of competition on those days. It's a bit out there, but could be interesting. And to those saying that this would reward people based on play schedule and not on skill -- that already happens with those who raid and get DFO's/DBW's/Shadowmourne and get high ratings.

I kind of like rating decay too. And if you think it's unfair that since you go on vacation or get hacked or something else that prevents you from playing, then just think about what that means. An NHL season(or any other season in pro sports) is 82 games over the course of over half a year. It's not a bunch of games in the first month, and then the star player is injured so the team takes a break for the next 5 months with no consequence. Same with pro Tennis. If Federer chills out in Hawaii for the next 5 months, he's going to lose his #1 ranking. No shit.

Rating decay is fine.

#129 vard

vard
  • Premium Junkies
  • Curse Premium
  • Goblinclass_name
  • EU-Sunstrider
  • Blackout
  • Posts: 353
  • Talents: Discipline

Posted 04 June 2010 - 07:10 PM

Fatflufybird said:

no one is in your situation. stop posting.

I wouldn't expect someone as dim as you seem to be to really consider or appreciate the situations of any other person; But, erhm... thanks for caring, I guess?

The recent wave of 'dork' hostility here, or whatever people call it these days, is getting beyond pathetic.

If you want to act the tit then please do it on the official forums. Your missing the point of these ones. Your sort will at least be in the majority there, so feel free to club together with their like.

Whatever about situations - don't worry your little head about that.

I'll simplify it - specifically for you.

Nobody wants - OR SHOULD BE forced to play.


____

Quote

An NHL season(or any other season in pro sports) is 82 games over the course of over half a year. It's not a bunch of games in the first month, and then the star player is injured so the team takes a break for the next 5 months with no consequence. Same with pro Tennis. If Federer chills out in Hawaii for the next 5 months, he's going to lose his #1 ranking. No shit.

I spent longer than is healthy debating whether or not you were being serious.... I hate to sound generic here, but this IS a computer game. Not a professional international major tournament. I know we're all about difference of opinion here - and please, don't give me the 'sponsorship' bull - but how can you write that without cringing.

Mouse sports? Finger gymnastics? - Lets get over ourselves here. It's a computer game.

If you're good at it - brilliant. Get your title IN YOUR OWN TIME and move on to more important things.

#130 Cendrid

Cendrid
  • Members
  • Curse Premium
  • Night Elfclass_name
  • US-Kil'jaeden
  • Bloodlust
  • Posts: 427
  • Talents:

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.

#131 Buddha

Buddha
  • Junkies
  • Posts: 1251

Posted 04 June 2010 - 08:05 PM

bad sugestion overall, where is the option for "wtf is this shit?"

+ you shouldnt be forced to queue/play the game more than what you want

edit:

Cendrid said:

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.
this ^^^

+rep

#132 inhume

inhume
  • Junkies
  • Humanclass_name
  • US-Eredar
  • Vindication
  • Posts: 1046
  • Talents: Combat

Posted 04 June 2010 - 08:41 PM

vard said:

I spent longer than is healthy debating whether or not you were being serious.... I hate to sound generic here, but this IS a computer game.
then you really shouldn't care if you lose points really.  after all if you can't play it shouldn't matter because you'll just regain the points anyways.  and if you can't get the points again, you don't deserve to be the position you currently are now because the game has changed since you played.  sports analogies are the best comparison because they have such long seasons.

#133 lassira

lassira
  • Members
  • Draeneiclass_name
  • US-Scilla
  • Stormstrike
  • Posts: 2074
  • Talents:

Posted 04 June 2010 - 08:48 PM

I can't think of a game besides arena with a competitive ladder that encourages not playing.
that's all I have to say.

#134 Spiders

Spiders
  • Members
  • Taurenclass_name
  • US-Black Dragonflight
  • Stormstrike
  • Posts: 1285
  • Talents:

Posted 04 June 2010 - 08:56 PM

Maybe we could make it so teams go inactive for not playing? So they would be forced to play at least in the final 2 weeks of the season

#135 Seekay

Seekay
  • Members
  • Blood Elfclass_name
  • US-Turalyon
  • Stormstrike
  • Posts: 645
  • Talents: Holy

Posted 04 June 2010 - 09:10 PM

Cendrid said:

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.

QFT, great post.

#136

  • Premium Junkies
  • Curse Premium
  • Humanclass_name
  • US-Fenris
  • Whirlwind
  • Talents: Unholy

Posted 04 June 2010 - 09:50 PM

Lieto said:

Quite frankly i dont see any problem there. Its exactly the same for everyone.
Your team has 251-100 with 72% win ratio and is rank10.
Rank1 on your bg is 320-47 with nearly 90% win ratio.

My partners ran dispelcleave prior to me joining. We're 188-51 79%.

We queue primetime, and since we leveled the team, we've gotten 3 teams higher than us, 2 of which we've only gotten once and are now done queuing sitting tied for rank 1.

I understand not everyone agrees with the decay system, which is why players need to drop their hostility towards a suggestion and give some constructive feedback themselves.

I don't believe the player who plays the most should be the one most rewarded, but at the same time a team shouldn't be allowed to get a good string of a queues one week, and be fine to camp the rest of the season without defending their rank.

This may be a bad example, but think of it like a poker tournament. The longer you stay in, the better your chances are. For this reason, you can't just sit out the whole tournament. You're forced to play with an anti/blinds - to defend your position.

#137 ragzdog

ragzdog
  • Junkies
  • Humanclass_name
  • US-Korgath
  • Vengeance
  • Posts: 2865
  • Talents: Affliction
  • RBG: 2667

Posted 04 June 2010 - 10:04 PM

making people play because of rating "decay" is inherently bad game design.

WoW casual game model with little risk high reward is pretty much proof of that (punishing players isn't popular).

It's also why rating decay will never happen.
Posted Image

#138 fant0m8

fant0m8
  • Junkies
  • Blood Elfclass_name
  • US-Eredar
  • Vindication
  • Posts: 4336
  • Talents: Marksmanship

Posted 10 February 2013 - 09:46 AM

View Postragzdog, on 04 June 2010 - 10:04 PM, said:

making people play because of rating "decay" is inherently bad game design.

WoW casual game model with little risk high reward is pretty much proof of that (punishing players isn't popular).

It's also why rating decay will never happen.

It happened.
Bye again! This game isn't fun when you don't know anyone else that still plays.

#139 Absoqt

Absoqt
  • Junkies
  • Undeadclass_name
  • EU-Burning Legion
  • Cataclysme / Cataclysm
  • Posts: 289
  • Talents: Discipline 1/2/1/1/1/2
  • RBG: 1905

Posted 10 February 2013 - 10:53 AM

View Postfant0m8, on 10 February 2013 - 09:46 AM, said:

It happened.

Not true. They will reward playing which is the opposite of this idea - and a much better one.
Gooby pls

#140 Superkåre

Superkåre
  • Junkies
  • Undeadclass_name
  • EU-Kor'gall
  • Cruelty / Crueldad
  • Posts: 322
  • Talents: Affliction

Posted 10 February 2013 - 12:27 PM

I think the best incentive for playing arena is that it's fun. Too bad arena isn't fun anymore.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

<