Really, really wish you could still see peoples ranks...
[QUOTE=OzzyCockroach;50916676][URL="http://us.battle.net/forums/en/overwatch/topic/20748576296"]PTR ranks are getting reset apparently[/URL]
[IMG]https://i.gyazo.com/7f857eb655d90f72409428a0e0efa9f0.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
So did this already happen or did it get pushed back? Because I still have my rank in PTR.
[QUOTE=HappyHead;50916009][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/bNsZ7qB.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
If we could read correctly on his glasses, does that mean his screen is horizontally flipped?
Found a great gif summing up PTR
[vid]https://giant.gfycat.com/DrearyHighIndusriverdolphin.webm[/vid]
i cant wait until PTR actually goes live. anytime in the real game that its a genji episode, i just straight up leave.
I want a POTG where Symmetra is doing her "Take a seat" emote while her enemies die right behind her by her turrets.
So I went ahead and made myself a new avatar, I think it turned out rather well.
Playing a bunch of hog zarya and Winston made me forget how to aim as zenyatta. Need to do that ana practice thing again soon.
[QUOTE=redBadger;50917675]Playing a bunch of hog zarya and Winston made me forget how to aim as zenyatta. Need to do that ana practice thing again soon.[/QUOTE]
I feel like you should just practice aim in quick play (especially with projectiles) since bots don't strafe or move at all like real people.
That's true. I'll probably just have to spend more hours on him again
[QUOTE=JoonazL;50916964][url]http://www.sirlin.net/posts/overwatchs-ranking-point-system[/url]
[quote=part of the blog post]In Overwatch, I think what players generally need in these situations is [I]"babysitting."[/I] What I mean is, it's probably more important to have few deaths and to generally be on the payload than it is to achieve impressive stats that "in theory" allow your teammates to be on the payload. You have to carry them, so you'll have to refrain from strategies that, at higher rank, are very good, so that you can provide for the most basic needs of your team. You don't have to do that in the exact way I said, but the point is if you play in the (sometimes pathetic) way that your team needs, you can contribute more to your team's win rate than if you play in an incredibly impressive way that they are unable to capitalize on, because they suck. Yeah that's frustrating, but THAT is the way out of Elo hell. Having the system give you a ranking boost for strategies that aren't resulting in a positive win rate isn't a good solution.[/quote]
this is a good read even though it's a bit old[/QUOTE]
I don't quite agree with the reasoning here. You have to use inferior strategy, because your team mates suck, just to gain rank? Whose to say staying on the payload and "babysitting" your team is any better at contributing to a win than flanking and killing people as Reaper in the situation the article describes? Reaper is a flanker, he's great picking off unaware separated players, so by killing three players as Reaper you are contributing and doing the job as your class and it's not your fault your team mates didn't capitalize on that, so why should the Reaper be punished? He's doing his job, what his class is supposed to do, and he's doing it well and its his team mates who are fucking it up, so it makes no sense to base a ranking system solely on wins/losses. A player shouldn't be wholly responsible for making his shit teammates get in line, all that's going to do is encourage armchair commanders and toxicity.
A player that is individually skilled and doing well is kinda hard to construe as contributing to a loss. If a healer is healing a lot, reviving players, amping damage, doing everything right and being an above average player in the match compared to other players in the match, but the team loses because none of the other attack classes on the team could aim for shit and the tank went afk halfway through the match, how could the healer have contributed to the loss and thus deserve to lose rank? "He could have done better" isn't that good of an excuse is the player was exceptional, and at a certain point you have to focus the reasons for loss on other players rather than mark them all as shitty. A player getting a shitload of kills as an attack class is being useful regardless of a loss because by killing players he is directly helping his team by giving them less resistance to complete the objective, so if the rest of the team drops the ball then it's not really that player's fault, especially if that character is designed to flank and thus is away from the objective.
The best way to rank players is to measure individual skill and compare that across the team and the enemy team's similar classes, and the best way to do that and factor in character differences, stomps, maps/time played, etc. is to use multiple metrics per character rather than a flat measurement per player. For instance, simply measuring a support by how much they healed is flawed like the linked article says, because if your team isn't taking much damage then you aren't healing as much and if measured that way you would not be a "good healer" due to low heals. But if you instead measured how much damage your team took total, measured how much of that damage you healed as a healer, and added points for moments where you healed someone who would have died otherwise (taking more damage in a short time that your heal prevented from going to 0HP), you could get a good idea how well a player did as a healer. Adding (not subtracting) additional points for specific milestones per match per character, like how many players in your team died and how many did you revive as Mercy, Sound Barriers provided that saved the life of a team mate, defensive assists compared to total team eliminations, amount of tranquilized enemies, amount of ulting players tranquilized, damage amps that contributed to a kill, etc, could build up a point score that could be compared to points gained on similar maps by other players using the same class. The benefit of this is that the bulk of points gained are measured in comparison to the team's overall performance but not reliant on a simple win/loss, so if your team was amazing, never got hurt and you didn't really heal much, then you wouldn't be ranked lower unless you yourself were playing shit, because it would measure your teams performance as well as the enemy's and compare that to both you and the average on that map. If you contributed in ways other than healing like damage amping, tranquilizing, etc. you gain points that would make you stand out compared to the average. And if you were doing the best you can but still lost, it could be shown via the statistics that you were doing well because compared to the other team and average teams you did well, so losing wouldn't drag you down because it wasn't your fault.
For classes that excel at killing and doing damage, the core metric would be how many eliminations you got, how much damage total dealt, and compare that to the killing classes on the other team. If you killed more than the other team's killing classes did individually, and you got a large amount of the total eliminations your team got, you'd be ranked well, but if you barely contributed at all by not getting many eliminations and you didn't deal much damage and compared to how the other team did you just sucked, you wouldn't be ranked well. You could add points based of percentage of support deaths you contributed to, bonus points for each time you "saved" a teammate by killing an enemy attacking them while they were low on health, added points based on character like percentage of damage you healed teammates as Soldier: 76 compared to total damage taken, environmental kills, flashbangs that resulted in an elimination, flashbanged ults, damage deflected, deflect kills, etc. you could get a numerical score and compare that to the average on the same map by the same character. Tanks could have metrics based on damage blocked versus total damage done, damage protected against that would have otherwise hit a player, total damage "tanked" without dying, specific measurements per character like flankers/supports killed as Winston, shields that saved players lives as Zarya, ults that contributed to eliminations, ult damage blocked versus total ult damage done, etc. This scoring system could have additional points based on map, for instance bonus points for finishing a map with a lot of time left on the clock, difference in percentage on the KoTH point ownership meter, distance in percentage of how far the enemy pushed the payload out of the total path, etc.
[B]tl;dr[/B] My point is that there are better ways to measure skill than simple win/loss that factor in player skill in a fair way. None of these calculations or statistic gathering would be hard at all because most of this stuff the game measures anyways with POTG, cards at the end, and other games have measured similar statistics for things like achievements, etc.
jesus did not really how much of a wall i made with the discussion here, sorry
i think they fixed ana AI anyway so that kinda practice is out the window, it runs and hides instead of strafing around like an idiot now
Figured I would share this.
[t]https://i.imgur.com/quXUq6d.jpg[/t]
[QUOTE]"22 heroes. Blizzard is already working on more, like cryogenesis expert Liao." Playstation magazine no. 222, Y18 (Brazil)
The reporter who wrote the article is Jen Simpkins - not much info on her aside from her twitter (@itsjensim)[/QUOTE]
[url]https://www.reddit.com/r/Overwatch/comments/4yn6gj/22_heroes_blizzard_is_already_working_on_more/[/url]
[QUOTE=PsycheClops;50917530]If we could read correctly on his glasses, does that mean his screen is horizontally flipped?[/QUOTE]
Obviously it's written in secret backwards code on the screen to prevent terrorists from finding dangerous tactical memes.
[QUOTE=MissingGlitch;50917726]Figured I would share this.
[t]https://i.imgur.com/quXUq6d.jpg[/t]
[url]https://www.reddit.com/r/Overwatch/comments/4yn6gj/22_heroes_blizzard_is_already_working_on_more/[/url][/QUOTE]
So was Liao part of Mei's team? Is this gonna be another person that everyone thought was dead that ends up coming back?
[QUOTE=ClauAmericano;50917717][video=youtube;M4H9iFbSY6Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4H9iFbSY6Q[/video][/QUOTE]
If you're gonna play healer, you best drop what you're doing to look for the call.
When you combine all your Qs
[vid]https://my.mixtape.moe/nhumtm.webm[/vid]
spray bug fix when
[QUOTE=PsycheClops;50917598]I want a POTG where Symmetra is doing her "Take a seat" emote while her enemies die right behind her by her turrets.[/QUOTE]
That would require someone to get killed exclusively by Symmetras turrets.
And we all know the universe is gonna die from heath death before that ever happens.
[QUOTE=Ryu-Gi;50917727]OSo was Liao part of Mei's team? Is this gonna be another person that everyone thought was dead that ends up coming back?[/QUOTE]
Seems kinda odd, if this isn't a fluke, that we would be getting another person that specializes in ice considering how much people hate the current hero we have.
[video]https://youtu.be/TXcvMi7VQEs[/video]
hehe look at that lil citty... :v:
[QUOTE=redBadger;50917732]If you're gonna play healer, you best drop what you're doing to look for the call.[/QUOTE]
On the opposite end of the spectrum, when I'm playing Ana my teammates don't call out for heals and I try to heal them but they won't hold still for the 2 seconds it takes me to shoot them with my delicious juices.
[QUOTE=SleepyAl;50917699]
jesus did not really how much of a wall i made with the discussion here, sorry[/QUOTE]
anyways, as it currently is healers are getting less rank from games which is in my opinion way worse than just basing it off win/loss.
a ranking system based off win/loss is probably way more accurate than one that tries to take everything into account. there is no way blizzard is going to make a ranking system that rates stuff like "flashbanged ults" well enough to base a ranking off of.
[t]http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/161/163/c57.png[/t]
[URL]http://singularmanlytear.tumblr.com/post/149142441804[/URL]
On a Reaper-related note, I was playing as him for the first time in ages when I came across a McCree player. I knew immediately he was gonna try the flash+fan combo, so I used Wraith mode. Sure enough, he attempted the combo, but seeing as how I was all ghostly it didn't do shit and I was able to give him a few hearty blasts before he ran away dejected.
[QUOTE=kestner;50917473]So did this already happen or did it get pushed back? Because I still have my rank in PTR.[/QUOTE]
It just updated.
Rip my diamond rank on PTR.
[QUOTE=JoonazL;50917786]anyways, as it currently is healers are getting less rank from games which is in my opinion way worse than just basing it off win/loss.
[/QUOTE]
Has this been proven? I still don't buy it since I think it takes quick match mmr in to account or last seasons mmr. I've known people that played a lot of healer and got ranked high.
I don't know why everyone's complaining about Quick Play. It's improved for me since the season ended. I haven't run into one salty player, everyone's either neutral or supportive. Win/loss rate is roughly 50/50, as per usual, but most of the games haven't been absolute stomps so I'm not too bothered.
Maybe I'm just super lucky.
[QUOTE=MissingGlitch;50917726]Figured I would share this.
[t]https://i.imgur.com/quXUq6d.jpg[/t]
[url]https://www.reddit.com/r/Overwatch/comments/4yn6gj/22_heroes_blizzard_is_already_working_on_more/[/url][/QUOTE]
Oh god.
Just imagine two small characters in fluffy parka coats that deal with ice and snow in different ways/abilities?
ICE CLIMBERS.
[QUOTE=SleepyAl;50917699]I don't quite agree with the reasoning here. You have to use inferior strategy, because your team mates suck, just to gain rank? Whose to say staying on the payload and "babysitting" your team is any better at contributing to a win than flanking and killing people as Reaper in the situation the article describes? Reaper is a flanker, he's great picking off unaware separated players, so by killing three players as Reaper you are contributing and doing the job as your class and it's not your fault your team mates didn't capitalize on that, so why should the Reaper be punished? He's doing his job, what his class is supposed to do, and he's doing it well and its his team mates who are fucking it up, so it makes no sense to base a ranking system solely on wins/losses. A player shouldn't be wholly responsible for making his shit teammates get in line, all that's going to do is encourage armchair commanders and toxicity.
A player that is individually skilled and doing well is kinda hard to construe as contributing to a loss. If a healer is healing a lot, reviving players, amping damage, doing everything right and being an above average player in the match compared to other players in the match, but the team loses because none of the other attack classes on the team could aim for shit and the tank went afk halfway through the match, how could the healer have contributed to the loss and thus deserve to lose rank? "He could have done better" isn't that good of an excuse is the player was exceptional, and at a certain point you have to focus the reasons for loss on other players rather than mark them all as shitty. A player getting a shitload of kills as an attack class is being useful regardless of a loss because by killing players he is directly helping his team by giving them less resistance to complete the objective, so if the rest of the team drops the ball then it's not really that player's fault, especially if that character is designed to flank and thus is away from the objective.
The best way to rank players is to measure individual skill and compare that across the team and the enemy team's similar classes, and the best way to do that and factor in character differences, stomps, maps/time played, etc. is to use multiple metrics per character rather than a flat measurement per player. For instance, simply measuring a support by how much they healed is flawed like the linked article says, because if your team isn't taking much damage then you aren't healing as much and if measured that way you would not be a "good healer" due to low heals. But if you instead measured how much damage your team took total, measured how much of that damage you healed as a healer, and added points for moments where you healed someone who would have died otherwise (taking more damage in a short time that your heal prevented from going to 0HP), you could get a good idea how well a player did as a healer. Adding (not subtracting) additional points for specific milestones per match per character, like how many players in your team died and how many did you revive as Mercy, Sound Barriers provided that saved the life of a team mate, defensive assists compared to total team eliminations, amount of tranquilized enemies, amount of ulting players tranquilized, damage amps that contributed to a kill, etc, could build up a point score that could be compared to points gained on similar maps by other players using the same class. The benefit of this is that the bulk of points gained are measured in comparison to the team's overall performance but not reliant on a simple win/loss, so if your team was amazing, never got hurt and you didn't really heal much, then you wouldn't be ranked lower unless you yourself were playing shit, because it would measure your teams performance as well as the enemy's and compare that to both you and the average on that map. If you contributed in ways other than healing like damage amping, tranquilizing, etc. you gain points that would make you stand out compared to the average. And if you were doing the best you can but still lost, it could be shown via the statistics that you were doing well because compared to the other team and average teams you did well, so losing wouldn't drag you down because it wasn't your fault.
For classes that excel at killing and doing damage, the core metric would be how many eliminations you got, how much damage total dealt, and compare that to the killing classes on the other team. If you killed more than the other team's killing classes did individually, and you got a large amount of the total eliminations your team got, you'd be ranked well, but if you barely contributed at all by not getting many eliminations and you didn't deal much damage and compared to how the other team did you just sucked, you wouldn't be ranked well. You could add points based of percentage of support deaths you contributed to, bonus points for each time you "saved" a teammate by killing an enemy attacking them while they were low on health, added points based on character like percentage of damage you healed teammates as Soldier: 76 compared to total damage taken, environmental kills, flashbangs that resulted in an elimination, flashbanged ults, damage deflected, deflect kills, etc. you could get a numerical score and compare that to the average on the same map by the same character. Tanks could have metrics based on damage blocked versus total damage done, damage protected against that would have otherwise hit a player, total damage "tanked" without dying, specific measurements per character like flankers/supports killed as Winston, shields that saved players lives as Zarya, ults that contributed to eliminations, ult damage blocked versus total ult damage done, etc. This scoring system could have additional points based on map, for instance bonus points for finishing a map with a lot of time left on the clock, difference in percentage on the KoTH point ownership meter, distance in percentage of how far the enemy pushed the payload out of the total path, etc.
[B]tl;dr[/B] My point is that there are better ways to measure skill than simple win/loss that factor in player skill in a fair way. None of these calculations or statistic gathering would be hard at all because most of this stuff the game measures anyways with POTG, cards at the end, and other games have measured similar statistics for things like achievements, etc.
jesus did not really how much of a wall i made with the discussion here, sorry[/QUOTE]
These are all very flawed, because incentivising something with comp ranks that is not, in every situation, the best option to help your team win, will encourage people to do things that won't help their team win. Lemme break this down.
[QUOTE]For classes that excel at killing and doing damage, the core metric would be how many eliminations you got, how much damage total dealt, and compare that to the killing classes on the other team. If you killed more than the other team's killing classes did individually, and you got a large amount of the total eliminations your team got, you'd be ranked well, but if you barely contributed at all by not getting many eliminations and you didn't deal much damage and compared to how the other team did you just sucked, you wouldn't be ranked well.You could add points based of percentage of support deaths you contributed to, bonus points for each time you "saved" a teammate by killing an enemy attacking them while they were low on health, added points based on character like percentage of damage you healed teammates as Soldier: 76 compared to total damage taken, environmental kills, flashbangs that resulted in an elimination, flashbanged ults, damage deflected, deflect kills, etc. you could get a numerical score and compare that to the average on the same map by the same character. [/QUOTE]
This means that if, say, mid on KOTH is undefended, and you're the only person alive on your team, but you see some easy picks that you can go take out as reaper, the game is actively encouraging you to go kill those people instead of actually capping and winning the game. That's an extreme example, but for literally every situation you described there's cases where doing that action is not the best choice as far as actually winning goes.
Maybe you can save Torbjorn by killing the enemy attacking him at low health, but what if it's more important to stop a cap right now? Then you're incentivising an action that won't help you win the game. You could argue that the best solution there would be to simply make defending control points give you more comp rank, but THEN what if you run into a situation where the control point is going to get capped anyways, and defending it for a while will only result in you AND torb dying, and the enemy pushing easily into the next point?
What I'm getting at here is that in a game with as many systems in it as Overwatch, it's impossible to draw up blanket numbers for what actions are most important for all situations, because actions that will help you win in one match are often a bad idea in another match. There's no good way to divvy up points that encourages specific actions because no algorithm is smart enough to be able to determine exactly what the best action is for any given situation, and you're inevitably going to end up encouraging actions that are bad for your team, at the very least in edge cases.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
