Why are we letting people with negative winrates climb ?

[Marked]

I dont get it devs. Why are there people in my plat lobbies climbing with 60 wins and 80 losses? Does that make sense to you devs? Do you understand what climbing is supposed to entail?

[sevensided]

Someone apparently doesn't understand the concept of "Improvement".

[XelNigma]

The point of ranked is about finding the players skill level and putting them there.
So win/lose in a team game shouldnt reflect that players individual skill and thus shouldnt affect his rank.

That being said, unlike in overwatch where you could lose and still gain rank points for doing well. it looks like rivals only cares about win/lose. but you gain more from a win than you lose from a loss.

I guess they realized players dont care about finding their skill level and more about "making number go up".

[Marked]

Originally posted by sevensided:

Someone apparently doesn't understand the concept of "Improvement".

You think someone is improving when they lose more than they win? Are you okay?

[XelNigma]

Originally posted by Marked:

Originally posted by sevensided:

Someone apparently doesn't understand the concept of "Improvement".

You think someone is improving when they lose more than they win? Are you okay?

Yes, infact losing is the best way to improve. "You learn more from failure than success."

[OMEGA]

Originally posted by Marked:

Originally posted by sevensided:

Someone apparently doesn't understand the concept of "Improvement".

You think someone is improving when they lose more than they win? Are you okay?

they could have tried comp been really bad and then gotten better in quick play and started winning games in comp again

[Sotanaht]

Originally posted by XelNigma:

The point of ranked is about finding the players skill level and putting them there.
So win/lose in a team game shouldnt reflect that players individual skill and thus shouldnt affect his rank.

That being said, unlike in overwatch where you could lose and still gain rank points for doing well. it looks like rivals only cares about win/lose. but you gain more from a win than you lose from a loss.

I guess they realized players dont care about finding their skill level and more about "making number go up".

That should be the point, but rank resets say otherwise. If you've gotten people to the rank they are "supposed" to be based on their skill, you absolutely do not want to move them down to the bottom every 3 months and make them climb again. That's why Overwatch had placements, to try and put everyone as close to their skill level as possible at the start of the season.

[sevensided]

Originally posted by OMEGA:

Originally posted by Marked:

You think someone is improving when they lose more than they win? Are you okay?

they could have tried comp been really bad and then gotten better in quick play and started winning games in comp again

Thank you for understanding that an overall winrate is not necessarily indicative of a players current success or ability. Wish the stats had a last 10 or 20 result on the statistics page.

Originally posted by Marked:

You think someone is improving when they lose more than they win? Are you okay?

Do you not understand that not everyone comes in winning 60%+ when they start first playing, and that those slew of losses while learning the game (or a new character) will persist on the over all win/loss record? That someone could accrue a (using your example) a 4 and 20 record at the start, then level out with a more reasonable 6-12, and since have been 50- 48 since? I understand it might take more effort to extrapolate from statistics than the simple 'hurdurr you have more losses than wins you suck' take.

[Sotanaht]

Originally posted by OMEGA:

Originally posted by Marked:

You think someone is improving when they lose more than they win? Are you okay?

they could have tried comp been really bad and then gotten better in quick play and started winning games in comp again

Chrono shield is equivalent to a 20-25% point loss reduction (activates roughly every 5th loss, maybe even 4th), meaning that even if you earn the same number of points on a win that you lose on a loss, you'll still climb at a 40% win rate. From what I've seen, only the upper ranks (diamond+) have a chance to lose more points than they gain. For everyone else, if you maintain a 40-50% win rate you'll inevitably keep climbing. At bronze/silver, you only need about a 25-30% win due wins being worth far more than losses subtract

They've structured ranks in Rivals more as a grind rather than a skill check. I really think they need to rework the system.

[OMEGA]

Originally posted by Sotanaht:

Originally posted by OMEGA:

they could have tried comp been really bad and then gotten better in quick play and started winning games in comp again

Chrono shield is equivalent to a 20-25% point loss reduction (activates roughly every 5th loss, maybe even 4th), meaning that even if you earn the same number of points on a win that you lose on a loss, you'll still climb at a 40% win rate. From what I've seen, only the upper ranks (diamond+) have a chance to lose more points than they gain. For everyone else, if you maintain a 40-50% win rate you'll inevitably keep climbing. At bronze/silver, you only need about a 25-30% win due wins being worth far more than losses subtract

They've structured ranks in Rivals more as a grind rather than a skill check. I really think they need to rework the system.

that is true

[Ðëprávèd•Mïšçréånt]

Originally posted by Marked:

I dont get it devs. Why are there people in my plat lobbies climbing with 60 wins and 80 losses? Does that make sense to you devs? Do you understand what climbing is supposed to entail?

Be the same reason why low IQ people are not late stage life aborted, we give them a chance to change.

[Chris]

Tbh this is all just game terminology being misused by dozens of companies so The real definition has been watered down to the point of pointlessness.

Its like a season pass. What defines a season? its never tied to direct seasons that people can relate to its just arbitrary caps on dlc bundling.

Same with the competitive game mode, At first competitive had player ranking based on peer to peer fights and interactions. Slowly climbing up ranks by overtaking others.

Now its almost more like a highscore. Just look at some of the top players especially on a fresh wipe. Allot have pretty subpar stats but have just been playing non stop. It becomes a quantity of games rather than quality of players

[Marked]

Originally posted by sevensided:

Originally posted by OMEGA:

they could have tried comp been really bad and then gotten better in quick play and started winning games in comp again

Thank you for understanding that an overall winrate is not necessarily indicative of a players current success or ability. Wish the stats had a last 10 or 20 result on the statistics page.

Originally posted by Marked:

You think someone is improving when they lose more than they win? Are you okay?

Do you not understand that not everyone comes in winning 60%+ when they start first playing, and that those slew of losses while learning the game (or a new character) will persist on the over all win/loss record? That someone could accrue a (using your example) a 4 and 20 record at the start, then level out with a more reasonable 6-12, and since have been 50- 48 since? I understand it might take more effort to extrapolate from statistics than the simple 'hurdurr you have more losses than wins you suck' take.

Why are you low elos coping so hard? You think im talking about negative winrate players and I go on their match history and they have 10 winstreaks right now ? THEIR MATCH IS ALL GREY BECAUSE THEY ARE NEGATIVE THATS HOW YOU GET NEGATIVE.... My god steam forums users cannot think.

[Chris]

Originally posted by Marked:

Originally posted by sevensided:

Thank you for understanding that an overall winrate is not necessarily indicative of a players current success or ability. Wish the stats had a last 10 or 20 result on the statistics page.





Do you not understand that not everyone comes in winning 60%+ when they start first playing, and that those slew of losses while learning the game (or a new character) will persist on the over all win/loss record? That someone could accrue a (using your example) a 4 and 20 record at the start, then level out with a more reasonable 6-12, and since have been 50- 48 since? I understand it might take more effort to extrapolate from statistics than the simple 'hurdurr you have more losses than wins you suck' take.

Why are you low elos coping so hard? You think im talking about negative winrate players and I go on their match history and they have 10 winstreaks right now ? THEIR MATCH IS ALL GREY BECAUSE THEY ARE NEGATIVE THATS HOW YOU GET NEGATIVE.... My god steam forums users cannot think.

My guy if you bought the scam that is warhammer 3 and its dlc you have no place to talk about steam users ability to think.

[John Hunter]

The ranking system is designed so everyone increases in rank the longer they play.

They do this to keep player retention by making everyone feel like they are doing well.

If it was a proper ranking system, a lot of people would stop playing because they get stuck in low ranks.

[Ninja-star]

you improve from failure more than you do from success.