Anyone else doesn't like how fast climbing the ladder is?

+
Anyone else doesn't like how fast climbing the ladder is?

When latest changes to MMR distribution were made during last season, I was already rank 19 or 20, and so I didn't get to taste how it works in the lower tiers. But now I see how ridiculously fast anyone can climb, since win gets you ~+60 MMR and loss is ~-8 MMR (at least between ranks 9-14). I gained more than 1000 MMR in one day and it doesn't feel right.
 
I think it's alright, this way people with less time to play can climb to rank ~18/19, where the real ladder starts, so they can try going for better rewards.
 
It's wrong because you can never play an opponent roughly of your skill level unless you reach level 19, but at this point the MMR are so closed that everyone is packed together.
So it completely fails at ranking lower level players, whihc is not fun for them since they all rank up to play people who are way better than them (or have decks that are better than theirs).
 
LDiCesare;n9412341 said:
It's wrong because you can never play an opponent roughly of your skill level unless you reach level 19, but at this point the MMR are so closed that everyone is packed together.
So it completely fails at ranking lower level players, whihc is not fun for them since they all rank up to play people who are way better than them (or have decks that are better than theirs).


And how to you come to that conclusion ?

Couldnt it be that the ladder just used a soft reset ? Decreased everybodies shown rank but still uses kinda the old MMR for matchmaking. Like 95% of my games are against Master or Grandmaster enemies. Ofcourse I should receive a lot for winning against them and lose next to nothing as long as I am at a lower rank. Would be completely broken if I would receive as little points as someone who plays against way worse enemies but therefore has an even higher winning chance than I have. Actually SUCH a system would be broken. The current system is totally fine. It helps Grandmasters and Masters from previous seasons to rank up fast. If you were at a low rank last season you wont be boosted to rank 20 in the new season. Thats simply not happening. All the system seems to do is to place people as fast as possible where they REALY belong, so games and rewards are fair as fast as possible for everybody.
 
LDiCesare;n9412341 said:
It's wrong because you can never play an opponent roughly of your skill level unless you reach level 19, but at this point the MMR are so closed that everyone is packed together.
So it completely fails at ranking lower level players, whihc is not fun for them since they all rank up to play people who are way better than them (or have decks that are better than theirs).

So, you prefer stay on low MMR longer and sometimes get opponent of your skill rather than getting faster to high MMR and play your skill opponents?

So it would be fun to them, if skilled players sticks around low ranks longer to bully them?
 
Reaching 4k with the current system is just a matter of time. If you didnt get at least the "master" title in the last season, its because:

A) You didn´t play ranked at all.

B) You are blind.


Yeah yeah, i get it CDPR has to appeal the masses, everybody is a winner, blahblahblah. But most of the people i´ve played against in ranks 17-18 in my way to 19 would´ve been rank 11-12 in the closed beta ladder.

It is how it is.
 
Sheva007;n9414051 said:
[...]


Yeah yeah, i get it CDPR has to appeal the masses, everybody is a winner, blahblahblah. But most of the people i´ve played against in ranks 17-18 in my way to 19 would´ve been rank 11-12 in the closed beta ladder.

It is how it is. [...]


Rank 11/12 out of 15 ranks is kind of rank 17/18 out of 21 ranks.
 
Ramcius;n9411931 said:
why it's wrong? You prefer stay at low MMR for long time and against "easy" opponents?
Well, I do get easy matchups, because with that kind of point distribution it's nearly impossible to not rank up fast, even for 'easy opponents', so I witnessed quite a bit of misplays today. What's the point of all the ranks if anyone who puts little effort into playing will eventually end up near high tier ranks? I mean, it just feels that CDPR made it this way so nobody would feel left out.
 
I like the way ranked is now. Being able to get to rank 18 without playing several hours per day, or using meta (net)decks is certainly encouraging for casual players like myself. :)
 
NlelithZ44;n9415091 said:
Well, I do get easy matchups, because with that kind of point distribution it's nearly impossible to not rank up fast, even for 'easy opponents', so I witnessed quite a bit of misplays today. What's the point of all the ranks if anyone who puts little effort into playing will eventually end up near high tier ranks? I mean, it just feels that CDPR made it this way so nobody would feel left out.

And what is your problem with it? Does that newer/less skilled people gets more rewards after season than you think they deserve affect your gameplay in any way, shape or form? Gwent is a game after all, also don't forget that this ladder on 1st will be demoted to "casual", you will get pro ladder for competition
 
I like how optics change. When it was hard to get to high rank people complained that it is too hard and it's not fair. Now because it's easier people complain that it is too easy and it is not fair.
 
I feel its painfully slow to climb. I played 4 games last season ( it was horrifying ). Didnt reach Grandmaster.
Won all 4 games. Then I stopped playing rank - Didnt want to loose my 100% win ratio.
 
How about we add login bonus? Just like in other games, when you login daily you get goods. Looking at this ranked i think that +30 points for 3 days streak sounds fair.

How can i enjoy climbing rank if i get just -1 point per lose and over 20 by win? I feel like i would have to play x amount of games in order to be taken seriously as player.
 
Ramcius;n9415791 said:
And what is your problem with it? Does that newer/less skilled people gets more rewards after season than you think they deserve affect your gameplay in any way, shape or form?


Not the gameplay, but it does affect the way people see the game. Achievements, titles and borders are positional goods. The less people has them, the more valuable they are for the ones who have them, and more desirable for the ones that dont have them.

Furthermore, adding more ranks to the ladder should mean that the players are better distributed. I bet it is not the case, and the % of players up until 17 is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay lower than it should, and of course, way lower than the number of players under rank 10 in CB, for example. I would love to see the figures of the distribution of player among the ranks, CDPR could release them.

As i said, i met players with the "master" title in ladder with 40 cards decks that couldnt make heads or tails of their decks. Thats just bonkers.



Anyway, as i said before, i understan the philosophy behind this "everybodys a master/grandmaster!!!oneon!eleven!" thing. I´ve played a lot of Blizzard games, and this pilosophy is quite Blizzard-ish, isnt it?


 
Sheva007;n9418361 said:
Not the gameplay, but it does affect the way people see the game. Achievements, titles and borders are positional goods. The less people has them, the more valuable they are for the ones who have them, and more desirable for the ones that dont have them.

Furthermore, adding more ranks to the ladder should mean that the players are better distributed. I bet it is not the case, and the % of players up until 17 is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay lower than it should, and of course, way lower than the number of players under rank 10 in CB, for example. I would love to see the figures of the distribution of player among the ranks, CDPR could release them.

As i said, i met players with the "master" title in ladder with 40 cards decks that couldnt make heads or tails of their decks. Thats just bonkers.



Anyway, as i said before, i understan the philosophy behind this "everybodys a master/grandmaster!!!oneon!eleven!" thing. I´ve played a lot of Blizzard games, and this pilosophy is quite Blizzard-ish, isnt it?

good that you mention blizzard, hs players have what you asking - insane grind to legend ranks, do they happy with it?

you met people trying make their own decks? i find that a good thing, or you want everybody run netdecks? You can't know if he got to that rank with his current deck or he used dorfs for example and tried something new at rank 18

yes, everybody is a winner, that's why tomorrow opens pro ladder which required 4200 MMR in last season to get in, i admire your logic

also i admire your "less skilled people don't deserve couple borders and tittles, because they are not good as me"
 
Top Bottom