Variable ranking. True Skill



  • Variable ranking. I am posting this here since it was a comment on general forums and I wasn’t the right place to start a discussion of the subject.

    Man that sucks… I genuinely thought that ranks weren’t static. I would really like to see a ranking system that had the ability to change instead of just a dumb ever increasing number.

    I was really excited because I thought the rank was changing depending on how well you were playing and not just increasing the more (more kills etc.) you played.

    Anyone else here likes the idea of a dynamic ranking system? I see that it might be a bit more challenging to develop and implement, but the possibility of having a system that shows the “current” (However the timeframe should be defined) skill of a player seems much more interesting.

    Current ranking system is more of a grind. In time people will reach the hight ranks just as in e.g. The battlefield series.

    Also as a last note, if people want to keep this current ever increasing ranking it could also be a possibility to create the dynamic rank as a supplement.

    What do you think?

    Ever increasing rank is more of an indication of long-term play (We can see that on steam pages) rather than actual upholding skill.

    I know that skill is not just k/d and we have several gameplay modes, but that is surely fixable by having variable rank that includes more than just k/d.

    So what do you think? And dev would it be possible?



  • utter rubbish. I lost 5 Ranks because of the patch btw. stolen of me by the developers not even consulted or warned about rank loss.

    The players who earned that rank should not have been punished that way by the developers on a whim. We earned it and purchased the game.
    imo The Ranks that were stolen/reduced should be given back.

    Does this mean every time a new patch comes along we will lose more Rank? Loyal players who put in the time to play and earn the Rank, being punished this way is just disgusting.

    It was earned and my usage paid for, by me to earn it on internet. Leave the Ranks alone. If your haveing a bad week why should your rank suffer even more? People who Earn the Rank are skilled in some way.



  • They made a new calculations for the rank system, so basically everyone’s rank got decreased, but despite of that, IF you had a high rank back then, then your current one can also be defined “high” just that it takes a little bit longer to rank up. I went from 35 to 30, one of my friends went from 32 to 27 I think, so in the end I was afterall still higher than him, I didn’t exactly feel like it was a lose. Try to figure out what happend before you post something, they didn’t “take” our ranks, they made a new ranking calculations for everyone.



  • Sorry double post



  • Wtf are you talking about? I was talking about a variable ranking system. I don’t care about having a rank 100 since everyone will eventually get it too if they play enough.

    @loin:

    People who Earn the Rank are skilled in some way.

    No they do not have to be at all… See bf2-3. You can have 10 players with the highest ranks, but their skill is waaay different.



  • yes indeed hehe. when I brought a pint of milk and found half missing next day the supermarket manager said " oh yes we dropped in and took back half of your pint "
    To add now I have to walk twice as far to get more?

    Its a gimmick to keep players hooked longer.I as a player did not ask for the Ranking system to be changed, did you? Let alone my existing Rank to be reduced.
    Players should be consulted or warned at least about these matters wouldn’t you agree?



  • sbt I don’t know what bf2?3 is. I have quake1 and 3 still . You prob have a valid point about Variable ranking to be considered, I was just annoyed at have my former Rank edited hehe.
    If this variable thing is a good idea why not.



  • @loin:

    Its a gimmick to keep players hooked longer.I as a player did not ask for the Ranking system to be changed, did you? Let alone my existing Rank to be reduced.
    Players should be consulted or warned at least about these matters wouldn’t you agree?

    I am asking it to be changed right now. I don’t care for the current ranking system since it doesn’t represent actual skill. I kinda got it the first time around that you didn’t like loosing a rank, but that is not my point here.

    Now back to the topic: Do you find a ranking system that changes depending on your skill AND not on the time you have been playing appealing?

    Edit: Refrased



  • What if your on a losing team being slaughtered? Would your rank decrease after that loss in your suggested Variable ranking system? I don’t see how this could be done atm fairly.



  • @loin:

    What if your on a losing team being slaughtered? Would your rank decrease after that loss in your suggested Variable ranking system? I don’t see how this could be done atm fairly.

    Yes it is the basic behind it being variable. I see the complication of you feeling that your gameplay is hampered because of other players, but then again you could say the reverse for when you play with a good team. It also depends on the variables included in the calculation. Also remember that a system should work as a rolling rank in the sense that i will calculate your rank withing a rolling month worth of days. (Whatever the time frame).

    Again this is not necessarily a replacement of the current ranking system and could work as a additional system. The idea spawned from another discussion of having a website with stats.



  • A variable ranking system would destroy my rank because, lately, I have been going into FFA games and fisting everyone. My k/d are usually negative unless I get lucky. It’s all in good fun, I don’t take it too seriously… But, I would hate to lose ranks because I don’t want to play 100% serious.



  • I really never liked these rank things either, it just goes up and never goes down.
    In all games where you have this kind of thing, withing 6 month you end up seeing battles fought by armies composed only of colonels and generals.
    Even if the rank don’t have names in Chivalry, it’s still a dumb thing and I really don’t get why people are attached to it.



  • @The:

    I really never liked these rank things either, it just goes up and never goes down.
    In all games where you have this kind of thing, withing 6 month you end up seeing battles fought by armies composed only of colonels and generals.
    Even if the rank don’t have names in Chivalry, it’s still a dumb thing and I really don’t get why people are attached to it.

    My point exactly. I don’t see why this kind of ranking is implemented at all. But what about adding a variable ranking system, maybe as an addition. As I see it, it would be easier to implement than creating a whole stat page per player-kind-of-solution.



  • I would be in favor of a score per time or another score based system replacing k/d however the rankings for long term play should still remain imo.



  • The point of the Rank is not to fit into the vision of what StiffWood and The Algerian think it should be
    and which players have or haven’t earned it in their vision.
    It might be dumb to you The Algerian but it has purpose.
    Who’s true skill are you seeking? why? A player has a bad week and you then seek to undermine his Rank/skill because you killed him in battles?

    I agree with Slaughtervomit tbh.
    imo the Rank system is ok.



  • @loin:

    The point of the Rank is not to fit into the vision of what StiffWood and The Algerian think it should be
    and which players have or haven’t earned it in their vision.
    It might be dumb to you The Algerian but it has purpose.
    Who’s true skill are you seeking? why? A player has a bad week and you then seek to undermine his Rank/skill because you killed him in battles?

    I agree with Slaughtervomit tbh.
    imo the Rank system is ok.

    But its not really a ranking system is it? I mean its not ranking anyone since its just dependent on how long you have been playing.

    If you see I also added the idea that it should NOT overtake the current system, but complement it.



  • @StiffWood:

    @loin:

    The point of the Rank is not to fit into the vision of what StiffWood and The Algerian think it should be
    and which players have or haven’t earned it in their vision.
    It might be dumb to you The Algerian but it has purpose.
    Who’s true skill are you seeking? why? A player has a bad week and you then seek to undermine his Rank/skill because you killed him in battles?

    I agree with Slaughtervomit tbh.
    imo the Rank system is ok.

    But its not really a ranking system is it? I mean its not ranking anyone since its just dependent on how long you have been playing.

    If you see I also added the idea that it should NOT overtake the current system, but complement it.

    Like I said make it overtake the pure k/d ratio instead.



  • I would love a vairable ranking system. As you point out, what we have now is just a grind, or for a casual player, a track on how many players they have killed. It doesn’t matter if you’ve team killed a million players and died 10 million times, as long as you’ve reached the necessary total of enemy kills, you’ll be X high rank. It’s too simplistic.

    A rank that factors in damage done // damage taken ratio at the end of the match, as well as how many team kills done (maybe team damage) and K/D ratio, as well (if playing the objective) your score… that would be much more fun. Then if you saw a rank 40 in the game, you know he will be a real challenge to fight.



  • You come across a high ranked player and take him/her down easily, then think he can’t be that good or have earned his rank perhaps? It is also possible that player might have just finished killing other players or has been shot by an archer etc, thus will be in a weakened state but you would not see that.

    A system of variable rankings reminded me of the old ctf leagues and pickup games/stats sites tbh.
    Why not consider that system of ranking in clans/leagues of chivalry ? its still a young but very good game, with lots of potential for leagues and stats sites etc.
    clans/matches/leagues, picking good players from recruitment pages via stats judging and tryouts.

    imo the pubbs are players who just want to win some games or do well and also gain a Rank sometimes
    just to feel ok hehe. I do enjoy grinding and btw you have go be a good grinder to keep the metal sharp. Last point a Rank 25 player for example decides to tryout another class unfamiliar to them,
    the new learning process of that class is could cost them some of the Rank under a variable Ranking system imo.
    Just some thoughts.



  • Are you actually playing the game to get your rank higher :?


Log in to reply