Jump to content
Daruth

Opinions On A Ranking System?

Recommended Posts

dont put a ranking system, please it is the worst idea for squad, give us personal stats which are only viewable by yourself, no one else

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't you want other people to see your stats? I think it is a great idea, that way players can see if their commander/SL is a good leader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where to start!  :lol:

 

I came looking for this thread, I feel it could play a massive part in the success of SQUAD!

 

Why do I think this? I have spent 1000s of hours playing BF2 and PR for over the last 10 years, and it is what initially drew me in and kept me coming back day after day after day! Then when I went to PR it was simply Gametracker and knowing that my peers knew I was competent based on my accumulative score on a particular server.  Sure not everyone is the same, but everyone loves a reward! and stats well that's a bonus.

 

When I typed "Ranking system" I knew I was going to see some great arguments, for and against a ranking system. BF2 ultimately found success based on certain in-game accomplishments and the fact that millions of us who played checked our stats regularly on bf2s.com. But hey lets not get caught up in the idea of unlockable weapons and going down the exact same path, but instead focusing on the Badges... Ribbons... and Medals system.

 

raoE31K.jpg

 

Badges and ribbons were the easiest to obtain in BF2, while medals were typically much harder, requiring more extensive play. I would love to see a Squad leader badge ranking system - 10 hours as SL -50 hours -100 etc. but only achieving a SL ribbon when leading a squad in a victorious team, -10 wins as SL -50 wins as SL and so on as purely an example.

 

As far as a medal is concerned, one idea is this could be given from a Commander, SLs would follow orders and the commander would commend a squad on a job well done and earn so many points towards his medal. Or another would be objective based like on AAS earn medal points for flag capture. Insurgency Cache destroyed but this would again be accumulative and take a long time to achieve.

 

Furthermore I think admins should be first to put there hands up to be a Commander if the team doesn't have one. Who best to lead a team to victory and to overseer? I myself love to command but it is sometimes difficult to get true cohesiveness among the SLs. Some will argue that they wont have time to do both, but heres hoping there will be a strong admin presence. A ranking system would give a chance for others to become commanders and also line them up for possible admin roles.

 

So many possibilities but I think we all agree it has to be somewhat simple and straight forward, oh and please ad points for lazing targets! Plenty to talk about here! keep the thread going :)

 

Edit:

Imagine being a sniper and being able to target a higher ranking SL or player based on ribbons he was wearing... although I think they avoid this in real combat for this reason?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In every single video game I have seen that has such a stats-tracking system, it never works out the way devs intend it to:

 

If you record kills and deaths, then players will prioritize their KDR over helping their squad/team achieve victory.

If you record wins and losses, then players will begin to teamswitch to the winning team just before the round ends, or they will just quit the game if they think their team is going to lose.

If you record even just teamwork points, then players will find some cheap exploit (ex. driving a technical around in circles in the main base for 20 minutes) just to artificially boost that number.

 

Even normally good team-players will have their behavior altered just by knowing that their stats will be recorded.

 

The only harmless stat-tracking I can think of would be the number of hours played in Squad.

 

I HIGHLY agree with you there, pal.

Devs, this guy is completely right. This is what happens when you add any form of rank related stat/tracking.

Stat tracking outside of any rank system, is fine by me. If you can look up your own stats, just for personal interests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only ranking system I wouldnt mind seeing is by the number of hours played, and the number of bans issued by the game servers for non-ping reasons.

^This. Hours played is the true testimonial.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In every single video game I have seen that has such a stats-tracking system, it never works out the way devs intend it to:

 

If you record kills and deaths, then players will prioritize their KDR over helping their squad/team achieve victory.

If you record wins and losses, then players will begin to teamswitch to the winning team just before the round ends, or they will just quit the game if they think their team is going to lose.

If you record even just teamwork points, then players will find some cheap exploit (ex. driving a technical around in circles in the main base for 20 minutes) just to artificially boost that number.

 

Even normally good team-players will have their behavior altered just by knowing that their stats will be recorded.

 

The only harmless stat-tracking I can think of would be the number of hours played in Squad.

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

even in PR/BF2 we had the best squad showing off at the end of the rounds (loading screen)

 

people like to brag about it sometimes: LOOK, I WAS BEST SQUAD (like idiot nerds)

 

 

who cares at the end of the day? I want to see no ranking system, it does more harm than bringing benefits

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^This. Hours played is the true testimonial.  

Seen players that have no1-50 position of multiplayer time spend and still they are hopeless. (the time should also record by duty, ie. SL, Medic, Engineer, etc.)

 

If there isn't build in stats system there will be 3rd party one in no time. So better to have somesort of stats system in first place.

 

Then is always possible to make something odd like Leathality Ratio (which seems to have glitch, oh well it were just super quick mockup Nope it actually relates nicely to the amount of the deaths and kills, work accident) or something else number magic. edit. Name is wrong tho, should be something like action ratio more or less.

13703127.gif?e15e84d0e2dc9fb71ee4a9230a2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...what Nightingale said.

Show us some stats at the end of a round - nuff I`d say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there must be a ranking system for people to play as otherwise it will feel like a waste of time. I wouldn't mind it being based off of hours played but make it so you can't be afk for it to count. I would really like a ranking similar to cs go as that encourages you to perform better every match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In every single video game I have seen that has such a stats-tracking system, it never works out the way devs intend it to:

 

If you record kills and deaths, then players will prioritize their KDR over helping their squad/team achieve victory.

If you record wins and losses, then players will begin to teamswitch to the winning team just before the round ends, or they will just quit the game if they think their team is going to lose.

If you record even just teamwork points, then players will find some cheap exploit (ex. driving a technical around in circles in the main base for 20 minutes) just to artificially boost that number.

 

Even normally good team-players will have their behavior altered just by knowing that their stats will be recorded.

 

The only harmless stat-tracking I can think of would be the number of hours played in Squad.

There is clarity of thought here. +1 

The only harmless stat-tracking I can think of would be the number of hours played in Squad.

Now we're cooking with fire! This is the kind of stat tracking that should be implemented. It motivates people to play more often and longer the bragging rights become overall experience and matches reality. At 12 Wing Shearwater where I served for 18 years the saying is "I don't give a ____ what you do or think you can do, get some TI and TO and then we'll talk." TI means Time In and TO means Time Onboard (12 Wing supplies the CH124 SeaKing and support crew to the Navy for deployment). 

Nightingale you nailed it. Total playtime and perhaps playtime of each role, and MAYBE XP earned in each role would be all I would be interested in seeing tracked and/or used to develop some kind of rank system. 

I really cannot state strongly enough how much I agree with what you wrote back in November. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really cannot state strongly enough how much I agree with what you wrote back in November.

 

I'm glad you guys agree. :) Persistent (hell, even non-persistent) stat tracking incentivizes a lot of bad behaviour in PvP games, and provide almost no benefits. If seeing numbers go up-and-down is so fun, then people should just go play the stock markets instead of a video game.

 

Completed rounds ratio.

To recognize "those ones".

Take CAS, crash, go to next server...

 

Not sure if it's even possible to implement this (a video game can't differentiate between Crash-to-Desktop and ALT-F4), but in theory I absolutely love this idea. Too many times in PR I see Squad Leaders try some kind of over-the-top rushing strategy at the start, and then when it fails, they leave the server. The team is left crippled, with infantry scattered in useless positions, several vehicles destroyed, useful kits squandered, a lot of tickets wasted, and ultimately it causes the team to lose because only half the team is left to actually play the objectives.

 

Maybe it could be as simple as counting Matches completed, and Matches joined. Nobody will have a perfectly clean score (sometimes servers crash, or the house has a power outage), but the real asset-wasters ("those ones") will have an abnormally bad ratio compared to normal players. Maybe servers could even have filters that prevent players from joining if their "quitting ratio" is above a certain threshold?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I want this game to be as "Realistic" as a game should be. I don't think that there is any room in that for ranking, but could be wrong here. I am wrong every now and then :)

Realistic ?

 

lol no game i ever seen Realistic even arma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you record kills and deaths, then players will prioritize their KDR over helping their squad/team achieve victory.

inb4 KCIV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you want....Global Elite?!. Personally I'd say f that to ranks cus, in a clans server it does not matter one bit. but for wasteland or bloody pvp games sure why not but it wouldnt make anysence to have ranks. levels would be more suited, but then again there wouldnt be any genuine reason to level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This imo where it starts to be too realistic to be a game, games need something to unlock/achieve that rewards you to keep playing

edit: and since you guys want every detail to be realistic there isn't much room for rewards since custom gun skins, etc have been shut down because it doesn't happen in real life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This imo where it starts to be too realistic to be a game, games need something to unlock/achieve that rewards you to keep playing

edit: and since you guys want every detail to be realistic there isn't much room for rewards since custom gun skins, etc have been shut down because it doesn't happen in real life.

 

I wouldn't say it is too realistic by any means, there are people posting about making the game more authentic

 

You're correct, there won't be anything to work for; that you can statistically see anyways. It'll be a game about having fun and enjoying the people you're playing with. This game isn't for everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only stats I would sympathize with are those that will help serveradmins make more educated rulings.

I have always favored stats viewable by a Commander interested in calling in assets for the team.

"I can choose 2x Airdropped IFVs or an Apache" looks over his team's stats, notices there are no experienced Heli pilots "IFVs it is"

There are no doubt issues with this, but, if you made stats something of a player dossier, eyes-only, they become relevant to leadership, if leadership have any say in who does what (which by design they may or may not).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This imo where it starts to be too realistic to be a game, games need something to unlock/achieve that rewards you to keep playing

edit: and since you guys want every detail to be realistic there isn't much room for rewards since custom gun skins, etc have been shut down because it doesn't happen in real life.

 

hmmmmm.......this is why I gave up on most shooters because of silly unlock/achievement, leaderboard, kiddie crap.  I want a game in which players play to play.  Living the moment while in the round.  End of round lets have a beer and celebrate the win and cheer the opposition for a fun time!  Squad should do this for me.  If I want perks and shit then I will go back to Activision games or BF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want it to be like call of duty though. I do think the hours played would work well for everyone but I do think there should be something like achievement to get a random skin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always favored stats viewable by a Commander interested in calling in assets for the team.

"I can choose 2x Airdropped IFVs or an Apache" looks over his team's stats, notices there are no experienced Heli pilots "IFVs it is"

There are no doubt issues with this, but, if you made stats something of a player dossier, eyes-only, they become relevant to leadership, if leadership have any say in who does what (which by design they may or may not).

While I like the Commander having info, there is something to be said that he could gain this info by communication instead of looking at a menu. He could ask the SLs who they have, and the SLs could relay the info to him to choose from. This is the same thinking we use for not having 3D Spotting and the like. 

Also, while I'm probably going to be focusing on Medic, Grenadier, and some SL for the first while - once Helicopters are in the game I'm going to want to take up the role of CAS or Transport (either would be rewarding to me). I can imagine other people wanting to try new roles later on as well and finding it hard to get the opportunity to build experience because player X is the experienced guy who always gets the job. 

By having the Commander have to communicate instead of just look at previous records of performance he can (along with his SLs) make the choice to use the most experienced player on this mission or use this mission to help train a new pilot. 

Perhaps he can have info, but I wouldn't want him to have enough info that he could make a decision without communication with the SLs because that would be uncharacteristic for the game, and having him have to communicate gives another level of depth to the Commander's role. - he's got to develop people so that he is not just effective on this mission but can be effective on later missions as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×