step 0 of fixing global rating : rank instead of number

[surtsan]

Hello everyone,

Probably not the first time, probably not the last time there is a topic about globalrating (not ladder rating 1v1).

I was wondering.. I have read people talking about this and I've also seen this feedback, which makes me think people want it :
https://feedback.userreport.com/7a3715d ... dea/131161

The idea is simple : Instead of showing a number for your rating in team games, show a rank.

If this idea was ever implemented, would it be added ? Is it approved by the community and waiting for a dev to work on it ? yes/ no ? What is the state about this ?

And, what would be the names of the rank? what would be the point required to change to another rank ?
for example :
-10000 // 400 // 800 // 1200 // 1400 // 1600 // 1800 // 2000 // 2200 // 2300 // 2400 // 2500 // 2600


There should also be an indicator of the derivation, but what kind of indicator ? And what are the differents "ranks" for it ?

Cons :
-less competitive team games (you won't try to gain 50 points but instead to earn a rank, which, I guess for competitive players, is less interesting)

Advantages/why :
-less competitive team games (new players will be less likely to be afraid to play a game (oh, it is just a rank), may bring a bit more players, maybe, and also people just want to enjoy the game, I heard one saying he got a friend which went to steam instead of faf to get a "chill game")

-maybe (small chance ? ) of getting more different maps instead of the usual rohan/thermo/seton since they will be more willing to play maps they are not used too or haven't even played (I hope !).

-Global rating is, not really accurate for team games (I know it is not the goal of it, just a tool to help balance games, I'm more into hiding rating or not showing as much), so there is no meaning to be that precise by showing a difference between a 700 rated player and a 800 rated player, it feels like giving false information, of course there is derivation(deviation? dunno the term) to take into account too)

-from someone else : People will stop playing custom teamgames for points, it will allow to see more social mixity between good and less good player, and it will be more friendly to newcomers or returning people

In the end it would be the first step toward fixing rating in team games.

Not talking about the other ideas (team matchmaking, rating different depending on the map, team matchking with rating showed and "casual" games with hidden rating, % showed in team games differently (a text instead of a number))

[TheKoopa]

Or do what every other remotely competitive game does and unrank all custom games while introducing a team matchmaker?

[biass]

I don't think this helps the core issues behind player rating interactions that you speak of.

Just like in games such as CS:GO etc that implement a rank based system, players will still chase the rank instead of gaining the skill needed to deserve it, players who whore out a single map/stack games/cheese a strat such as corsairs will gain higher ranks regardless.

-maybe (small chance ? ) of getting more different maps instead of the usual rohan/thermo/seton since they will be more willing to play maps they are not used too or haven't even played (I hope !).

This is very irrelevant, i don't see how your change affects this because you haven't provided reasons

-Global rating is, not really accurate for team games (I know it is not the goal of it, just a tool to help balance games, I'm more into hiding rating or not showing as much), so there is no meaning to be that precise by showing a difference between a 700 rated player and a 800 rated player, it feels like giving false information, of course there is derivation(deviation? dunno the term) to take into account too)

According to your system, a 800 rated player and a 1200 rated player are the same rank, this is too much of a space especially at a level that cares a lot about grinding out rating (the tryhard zone..) similar to again cs:go you'll hit out a elo hell situation where a player could be stuck on the same rank for essentially forever, sapping away their motivation to play as they don't see any form of progression.

-from someone else : People will stop playing custom teamgames for points, it will allow to see more social mixity between good and less good player, and it will be more friendly to newcomers or returning people

Players will still chase the next rank, and attempt to play against players of the same rank as them, nothing will change here,

-less competitive team games (new players will be less likely to be afraid to play a game (oh, it is just a rank), may bring a bit more players, maybe, and also people just want to enjoy the game, I heard one saying he got a friend which went to steam instead of faf to get a "chill game")

People still chant "oh, its just a number (rating)" but people still chase it out regardless nothing will change here, except for maybe in the lowest of lower echelons where anyone from -10000 to 400 are the same rank, but this happens already with people displaying as 0 in some cases.
Competition doesn't really breed from rating as it does knowing the player and playing a fair test of skill with them, where rating breeds more of a grind, stacking games and whoring single maps.
Caring about rating is a cultural issue, and re-branding the system with no actual changes won't help anything.

Good luck in actually finishing your concept (don't ask us for your ideas!) but im not convinced it will change anything.

[JoonasTo]

One downside to this is that "losing" a rank is going to hurt more than losing 10 points.

In practice we are already using ranks, they're just numbers instead of pretty pictures. '1000' is the rank for people in 950-1049 rating range. So just start stamping unit icons ala old ladder rank style in the place of this number and we achieve it. No need to change the ranks to begin with.

EXPs for people over 2k
T3s for people over 1,5k
T2s for people over 1k
T1s for people over 500
Scouts for all the rest

[surtsan]

The problem is if you want unrank all custom games, people won't get balanced games (it would be even worse than right now)... You need rating, but hidden or something.
And a rank is a good compromise between hidden rating (not totally hidden) and still a bit competitive (since there won't be any team matchmaker anytime soon).


I was thinking it may bring a small chance of variety maps because maybe some people won't care as much of the rating (loosing/winning a few games won't change anything to their rating, unless they are at the border of a rank, that's why I was thinking they will chase a bit less rating). Of course the competitive ones will always chase the new rank, that's for sure. (these ones need this team matchmaking system but that's another story, not the goal of this topic)

The ranks and borders can be changed of course, it was just a random idea of the different ranks.

And yeah agreed for the rest. (not my idea at all btw but I liked it and it was a simple one to do, it is not like making a team matchmaking system)

Of course this change will affect a small portion of the playerbase (just step 0) but I feel like that making the game more appealing for beginners/newscomers is good (one of the goals of this idea), they won't see a number next to their name but just a icon or a rank name.

[Brutus5000]

Ranks already existed before, but just in terms of ladder 1v1 in forms of leagues & divisions. This rewards you with more games won regardless of your rating.

I tried to bring it back to the server but in the end I failed on testing it because I don't understand that python crap (code here). However I added it to the java server, so should we ever switch to that it will be back (code here).

Actually there are no developers who a) want and b) actually have the skills to work on the python server.

[surtsan]

Mmh I should have done a poll (yes/no, and if accepted then we could discuss how it is going to be made, if not accepted then end of topic) but the issue with a poll is not a lot of people will vote... so I don't know, I feel like this is going to go nowhere and I'll never know if the idea will be ever accepted or no[end goal of this topic] (I'm new to this kind of stuff on faf).



And Brutus5000, you're talking about ladder 1v1, but I'm only thinking of custom games, not 1v1. (another topic, like the team matchmaking and all his friends).

Unless you want that it is this system rank in custom games and redo the whole custom game rating (so instead of point we have this league & division system).
But it is a big change for something which could be done much more easier (the initial idea) + is it more "accurate"/much better than rating point trueskill system ? I don't know.

[Farmsletje]

"Less competitive teamgames for new players"

99% of games for new players are astro craters, dual gap, thermo, gap or all welcome games. I believe those are already the exact opposite of being competitive.

Also: People generally play online for a competitive experience. Otherwise you could play coop or vs the AI.

And even if that wasn't true, i don't believe your suggested change would do anything to help that. All the current ranking problems will remain.

[surtsan]

At least for now, the most interesting part of this game is to play against other humans, ai/aix are not as fun (at the beginning they are, but after a while..).

Yes agreed for the pack of maps.

Probably most of them want a competitive experience but it doesn't mean everyone want to play only rated games (I'm one of them obviously so..), for me it is two different things.

I don't think the same, I think it will change it a bit (not as much as a team matchmaking feature) but it will still improve it.


This idea had 47 likes,10th most liked idea (not as big as a team matchmakingwhich is 155 likes) so I'm quite surprised of all the responses.

[Brutus5000]

And Brutus5000, you're talking about ladder 1v1, but I'm only thinking of custom games, not 1v1. (another topic, like the team matchmaking and all his friends).

Unless you want that it is this system rank in custom games and redo the whole custom game rating (so instead of point we have this league & division system).
But it is a big change for something which could be done much more easier (the initial idea) + is it more "accurate"/much better than rating point trueskill system ? I don't know.

The system was an example as it adresses 2 issues:
1) Keep people playing rated games. You don't get forward if you sit on your rank and only play unrated
2) Be more abstract from concrete rating and also take the number of played games into account (especially in lower rating tiers a 1000 rated player with 1000 games stomps players with 100 games).

If we had that and get people playing, the game balancing would increase because the rating in the background could work it's magic without people complaining about the numbers.

But best it would work with a matchmakers of course, but as you said: different topic.