PvP - Ranks ?

simonoldtwink

simonoldtwink

FlAsH
Maybe someone already posted about this suggestion but, i couldnt find one so i will request it or whatavahZ.

I see we finally got a good working arena ladder with loads of brackets ( thanks alot for this )
it seems to have really good working rating system aswell.

But let's get to the request. I was wondering will you have like diffrent seasons like, top 0.5% of the ladder of the season earns like a cool title on the website like " Gladiator " then so on and on like retail got ? Correct me if i'm wrong maybe 0.5% is abit to much but anyways i think you guys can see what i'm trying to say.

Cheers!
 
That would be sick ngl
 
simonoldtwink said:
Maybe someone already posted about this suggestion but, i couldnt find one so i will request it or whatavahZ.

I see we finally got a good working arena ladder with loads of brackets ( thanks alot for this )
it seems to have really good working rating system aswell.

But let's get to the request. I was wondering will you have like diffrent seasons like, top 0.5% of the ladder of the season earns like a cool title on the website like " Gladiator " then so on and on like retail got ? Correct me if i'm wrong maybe 0.5% is abit to much but anyways i think you guys can see what i'm trying to say.

Cheers!
Click to expand...

We have already been talking about this and something like that will come in the future, there is some things we will have to figure out and build before for this to happen, first of all, people will have to use battle.net integration in order for the ladder (in the future) to determine which chars are yours 110% and quite a lot of other things has to get done:p But ye deffinetly something we have and will look more into in the future.
 
Well imo, whoever runs the most overpowered comps will be "gladiator" and such. Moreover it should be like rank 1 warlock or things like that. Gives more incentive not to be a scum comp. Just a thought.
 
Caldalt said:
Well imo, whoever runs the most overpowered comps will be "gladiator" and such. Moreover it should be like rank 1 warlock or things like that. Gives more incentive not to be a scum comp. Just a thought.
Click to expand...

I agree. This should be how titles are given out. It makes sure that everyone who gets a R1 title truly deserves it.

For example, the 19 bracket could give out 10 R1 titles to the highest rated 2s player on each class. A single player could get 10 R1 titles in a season if they are the highest rated player on every class, ect.
 
Pizza said:
I agree. This should be how titles are given out. It makes sure that everyone who gets a R1 title truly deserves it.

For example, the 19 bracket could give out 10 R1 titles to the highest rated 2s player on each class. A single player could get 10 R1 titles in a season if they are the highest rated player on every class, ect.
Click to expand...
Yep didn't have enough time to explain exactly what I meant but Pizza is right. Maybe EU and US seperate. As EU apparently is much much easier which I would believe.
 
Can we get an update on pvp ranks and how they could work? It feels like no one is qing anymore around the top. Would be good to get some competition driven
 
It would be difficult to give titles out to a percentage of the player population - for example, with a 0.5% allocation of Gladiator titles, 1 player would get a title per every 200 players. That's unrealistic with our current population.

My opinion, for what it is worth, is to lay out the arena title rewards as the following:

#1 and #2 in US/EU get Title Gladiator. This allows for both members of a team to acquire the Title - or for opponents to attempt to steal away one of the Rank One spots without taking both (all or nothing).

#3 through #10 in each region get Gladiator. While this is a relatively larger number of players, (8 total), it reflects the competitiveness and skill that it takes to acquire a spot in the top 10. It also gives an incentive to players that are skilled enough to consistently prove themselves as truly excellent, but unable or unwilling to deal with the grind to secure the Title Gladiator spots.

#11 through #20 in each region get Duelist, which indicates some of the stronger players in each region. This isn't a very large gap in players from Gladiator (8 players versus 10 players), but any more players and the difference in skill between the highest and lowest rated players would start to make the title redundant.

#21 through #35 in each region would get Rival. Not much to say, except that the title starts to become more of a reward and less of an acknowledgment of skill.

#36 through #50 in each region would get Challenger. This would slot nicely into the current view of the Arena Ladder as the first page being the top 50 players.

Just my thoughts :) I've put a good deal into thinking about how to distribute the End of Season rewards throughout a bracket with a limited population, and this is the best way I've been able to come up with.

Edit: Oh, and every class should get a reward for the highest rated player in that class. That's a genuinely good idea, especially in brackets where certain classes really struggle to climb past a certain point.

Edit 2: Here is the current rating required to achieve Title Gladiator, Gladiator, Duelist, Rival, and Challenger in each Region, as well as Global Class Awards, in the 19s bracket based on the metric I used above.

US

Title Gladiator: 2135
Gladiator: 2028
Duelist: 1918
Rival: 1884
Challenger: 1841

EU

Title Gladiator: 2204
Gladiator: 2012
Duelist: 1935
Rival: 1847
Challenger: 1723

Class Awards (as of 3/2/2016)

Druid: Stubs (rank 29 world) - EU - 1964
Hunter: Boomie (rank 45 world) - US - 1913
Mage: Wizkidone (rank 3 world) - US - 2142
Monk: Paysz (rank 37 world) - EU - 1935
Paladin: Katyperryirl (rank 4 world) - EU - 2135
Priest: Druhflynn (rank 4 world) - US - 2135
Rogue: Dodge (rank 22 world) - EU - 2010
Shaman: Stickerz (rank 1 world) - EU - 2218
Warlock: Faelqt (rank 191 world) - US - 1685
Warrior: Sannchrendx (rank 2 world) - EU - 2204
 
Last edited:
I've been thinking about the distribution of awards relative to population size quite a bit recently. I still feel like the Percentage Ranking awards are balanced correctly, but the Class Rank awards might be too over-saturated. If you had 10 awards (1 for each class) for US and EU, you would have 20 people with a class reward. In fact, there would be duplicates of the same rank for the same class at the same level. There would be 20 awards per bracket, or 60 total awards going out for 19, 20, and 29 - the most active brackets. This seems like too many.

Instead, I suggest making class rewards non-region specific. In other words, the best rogue, whether in EU or US, would earn the Class award. I think this is a justifiable exception to the otherwise rigid separation between regions. The reason you separate Percentage Ranking awards is because one team in US cannot affect the rating of another team in EU, and vice-versa. That leads to an element of randomness, where your ranking isn't a product of your own skill but of the meta in a different region. This is solved quite easily by giving out different Title rewards for each region.

However, Class awards fill a different role. A certain class is going to have the same strengths and weaknesses regardless of which region it is in. A warlock, for example, if going to have a rough match-up versus a Feral regardless of whether they are in US or EU. While there are some imperfections in making this award non-regional, such as the different metas of each region affecting how likely a certain class is to rise in rank, it is important to remember what the purpose of a Class award would be. Percentage Ranking awards are supposed to be a reward that is directly associated with skill (the integrity of that metric based off of "cheap comps", aside). If your playstrength in 19s in EU is around 1900, for example, you should be able to grind games to get to that rating and keep that rating. The resulting title is therefore a reward for having achieved that ranking and demonstrating a resiliency to maintain it.

Class awards are an acknowledgment that our bracket is not perfect. Skill doesn't always outweigh the discrepancies between team compositions at this level (or really in recent history at any bracket in 2v2). Therefore, Class awards provide an incentive to queue on a favorite class, rather than on something that allows for a broken team composition. The reward may very easily be competitive, as two of a class compete to achieve that award, but it is not the main award for skillful play on the ladder. It is an acknowledgment of skill with a class, which I believe can be reflected with an acceptable degree of accuracy across regions.

TL;DR -

Class awards should not be region-specific.

EDIT: See my current Percentage Title and Class Award lists for the 19s bracket in my original post here.
 
Last edited:
Bop said:
I've been thinking about the distribution of awards relative to population size quite a bit recently. I still feel like the Percentage Ranking awards are balanced correctly, but the Class Rank awards might be too over-saturated. If you had 10 awards (1 for each class) for US and EU, you would have 20 people with a class reward. In fact, there would be duplicates of the same rank for the same class at the same level. There would be 20 awards per bracket, or 60 total awards going out for 19, 20, and 29 - the most active brackets. This seems like too many.

Instead, I suggest making class rewards non-region specific. In other words, the best rogue, whether in EU or US, would earn the Class award. I think this is a justifiable exception to the otherwise rigid separation between regions. The reason you separate Percentage Ranking awards is because one team in US cannot affect the rating of another team in EU, and vice-versa. That leads to an element of randomness, where your ranking isn't a product of your own skill but of the meta in a different region. This is solved quite easily by giving out different Title rewards for each region.

However, Class awards fill a different role. A certain class is going to have the same strengths and weaknesses regardless of which region it is in. A warlock, for example, if going to have a rough match-up versus a Feral regardless of whether they are in US or EU. While there are some imperfections in making this award non-regional, such as the different metas of each region affecting how likely a certain class is to rise in rank, it is important to remember what the purpose of a Class award would be. Percentage Ranking awards are supposed to be a reward that is directly associated with skill (the integrity of that metric based off of "cheap comps", aside). If your playstrength in 19s in EU is around 1900, for example, you should be able to grind games to get to that rating and keep that rating. The resulting title is therefore a reward for having achieved that ranking and demonstrating a resiliency to maintain it.

Class awards are an acknowledgment that our bracket is not perfect. Skill doesn't always outweigh the discrepancies between team compositions at this level (or really in recent history at any bracket in 2v2). Therefore, Class awards provide an incentive to queue on a favorite class, rather than on something that allows for a broken team composition. The reward may very easily be competitive, as two of a class compete to achieve that award, but it is not the main award for skillful play on the ladder. It is an acknowledgment of skill with a class, which I believe can be reflected with an acceptable degree of accuracy across regions.

TL;DR -

Class awards should not be region-specific.

EDIT: See my current Percentage Title and Class Award lists for the 19s bracket in my original post here.
Click to expand...

Sorry no. You aren't going to do that across reigons. The top of each class can't even compete to determine who is better. No. You aren't even taking into account that different comps are more popular in different reigons. In addition one region is much more competitive than another. Your logic doesn't make any sense.
 
pshiaxo said:
Sorry no. You aren't going to do that across reigons. The top of each class can't even compete to determine who is better. No. You aren't even taking into account that different comps are more popular in different reigons. In addition one region is much more competitive than another. Your logic doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure I addressed all of that in my post, but for the sake of going over it again:

1. The purpose of an arena ladder is to finish within a certain percentage to earn a certain reward. There isn't any hand-holding if your class isn't viable. Sorry, that's how arena ladders work.

2. The only reason to hand out a Class Award is because Blizzard doesn't balance low level arenas based off of classes. It's a "we acknowledge that you will never be able to climb the ladder competitively, so here is your award for being good with your class anyways." The only metric with which this is based off of is whether or not you are better than other people playing your class. So whether members of a certain class are constantly contesting other members of that class or not, the only reward is for where they end the season with their class. Whether they are facing their competition for their Class Award or not is irrelevant. Both brackets, whether or not one is more competitive than another (which I would highly dispute), have classes that are equally as strong. An Arms warrior is the same on US and EU, and an Affliction Warlock is the same as well. The only variable are the teams queuing in one region versus another, but I consider that benefit from Class Awards by region to be a very minimal (even hypothetical) one.

3. How are you possibly concluding that one region is more competitive than another? Which? One region has a tighter grouping of players at the top, but a looser one as rating descends - the other has larger gaps towards the top, but a much tighter grouping throughout the rest of the ladder. How are you making an objective statement of fact based off of that?

4. Awarding a Class award for each region, for each of the major brackets (19s, 20s, 29s) would result in 60 class awards being given out. Do we also just give out a participation award at that point? Maybe give out awards for each specialization? Would 180 awards be enough for something completely irrelevant to the focus of an arena ladder?
 
Bop said:
It would be difficult to give titles out to a percentage of the player population - for example, with a 0.5% allocation of Gladiator titles, 1 player would get a title per every 200 players. That's unrealistic with our current population.

My opinion, for what it is worth, is to lay out the arena title rewards as the following:

#1 and #2 in US/EU get Title Gladiator. This allows for both members of a team to acquire the Title - or for opponents to attempt to steal away one of the Rank One spots without taking both (all or nothing).

#3 through #10 in each region get Gladiator. While this is a relatively larger number of players, (8 total), it reflects the competitiveness and skill that it takes to acquire a spot in the top 10. It also gives an incentive to players that are skilled enough to consistently prove themselves as truly excellent, but unable or unwilling to deal with the grind to secure the Title Gladiator spots.

#11 through #20 in each region get Duelist, which indicates some of the stronger players in each region. This isn't a very large gap in players from Gladiator (8 players versus 10 players), but any more players and the difference in skill between the highest and lowest rated players would start to make the title redundant.

#21 through #35 in each region would get Rival. Not much to say, except that the title starts to become more of a reward and less of an acknowledgment of skill.

#36 through #50 in each region would get Challenger. This would slot nicely into the current view of the Arena Ladder as the first page being the top 50 players.

Just my thoughts :) I've put a good deal into thinking about how to distribute the End of Season rewards throughout a bracket with a limited population, and this is the best way I've been able to come up with.

Edit: Oh, and every class should get a reward for the highest rated player in that class. That's a genuinely good idea, especially in brackets where certain classes really struggle to climb past a certain point.

Edit 2: Here is the current rating required to achieve Title Gladiator, Gladiator, Duelist, Rival, and Challenger in each Region, as well as Global Class Awards, in the 19s bracket based on the metric I used above.

US

Title Gladiator: 2135
Gladiator: 2028
Duelist: 1918
Rival: 1884
Challenger: 1841

EU

Title Gladiator: 2204
Gladiator: 2012
Duelist: 1935
Rival: 1847
Challenger: 1723

Class Awards (as of 3/2/2016)

Druid: Stubs (rank 29 world) - EU - 1964
Hunter: Boomie (rank 45 world) - US - 1913
Mage: Wizkidone (rank 3 world) - US - 2142
Monk: Paysz (rank 37 world) - EU - 1935
Paladin: Katyperryirl (rank 4 world) - EU - 2135
Priest: Druhflynn (rank 4 world) - US - 2135
Rogue: Dodge (rank 22 world) - EU - 2010
Shaman: Stickerz (rank 1 world) - EU - 2218
Warlock: Faelqt (rank 191 world) - US - 1685
Warrior: Sannchrendx (rank 2 world) - EU - 2204
Click to expand...
<------------------------------- add this
 
Updating my list for April because I am bored.


US

(Top 2) Title Gladiator: 2135 (previously 2135, +0)
(Top 10) Gladiator: 2040 (previously 2029, +11)
(Top 20) Duelist: 1963 (previously 1918, +45)
(Top 35) Rival: 1900 (previously 1884, +16)
(Top 50) Challenger: 1852 (previously 1841, +11)

EU

(Top 2) Title Gladiator: 2218 (previously 2204, +14)
(Top 10) Gladiator: 2067 (previously 2012, +55)
(Top 20) Duelist: 1993 (previously 1935, +58)
(Top 35) Rival: 1902 (previously 1847, +55)
(Top 50) Challenger: 1770 (previously 1723, +47)

Class Awards (as of 4/22/2016)

Druid: Stubs (rank 42 world) - EU - 1966
Hunter: Boomie (rank 48 world) - US - 1952
Mage: Wizkidone (rank 4 world) - US - 2142
Monk: Pakgwn (rank 1 world) - EU - 2221
Paladin: Katyperryirl (rank 7 world) - EU - 2132
Priest: Druhflynn (rank 5 world) - US - 2135
Rogue: Originaal (rank 25 world) - US - 2025
Shaman: Stickerz (rank 2 world) - EU - 2218
Warlock: Faelqt (rank 195 world) - US - 1704
Warrior: Djsannchez (rank 3 world) - EU - 2204
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top