Let your rank mean something!

There have been some issues with the divisions in SC2. The most common complaint is that divisions create an artificial sense of reward. For instance, you might be number one in your Silver league division, but then there are hundreds of other divisions in Silver league, plus hundreds more in other leagues. Anyone halfway perceptive will feel something is lacking here.

Then there are those who feel leagues in general are useless, and it rewards people with ranks that are meaningless.

Let me begin by saying I feel both parties have a point. I remember the first time I gained a rank in TFT. It was so awesome! Out of tens of thousands of players in Europe, I was part of the best 1500, or wherever it started. That felt pretty good.

With the league system in SC2, this feeling of euphoria has been replaced by the feeling of achievement when I did quite well in Platinum. It meant I was better at this game than anyone in Gold, Silver etc. That was also a pretty cool realisation. However, I had no idea where I stood compared to other Platinum players. In a way, my ranking felt irrelevant.


I propose to have a mixed system in Bnet 2.0. I think leagues are really rather useful in having people lumped together with players of a similar skill level. It's also reminiscent of the leagues you have in professional sports: of course a football player in the UEFA Champions League (the Europe-wide football competition, for North-Amurrkans) is not going be in the team of your hometown football team. It only makes sense.

At the same time, I think divisions are quite useless. They only dilute the level of competition, and it really doesn't add anything to a sense of accomplishment. It only adds to a sense of being fooled into thinking you're doing well.

The most sensible way to go about rankings would be to retain the league system, for its usefulness in bringing together players of a similar skill level. The divisions should be dropped, however, so it really means something when you are number 1 in your league. The top APM cracks from Korea could compete for the number one spot in Diamond, the casual gamer will feel he's the best among his peers in Bronze.

As an addition, a global ranking system should be added. This should be based on a general rating players get by winning or losing, much like you had in TFT. Of course, I'll leave the specifics to Blizzard so it will be a balanced system. With this rating, you'll be ranked among the tens, if not hundreds of thousands other players in the world.
If this would make players feel lost, you could also narrow it down to the best five or ten thousands players, like you have a top thousand in tennis.

I think this will bring together the best of both worlds.

Any thoughts?

Relating to the subject and what i posted in the terribly derailed sc1 retail replays/gateways thread last night; a new post:

I think the general idea of competing within divisions is a sound one, generally speaking; to visualize competition among player - 100 by 100. it could be a good system - at least for lower tiers of play. but that would require building upon what makes it good; a ranking between 1 and 100 is easily identifiable by the player, and can hypothetically be viewed as meaning more than ranks in numbers of 10-thousands... it creates this localized feeling right? ... i dont think we should build the system on "feeling of rank" being better if the numers are lower though :

... if the system would force or encourage some interaction within the divisions, players would start learning who they were ranked amongst and thereby developing a sense of personal achievement over time as they bypassed these players in rank!

players within the same division should be matched against each other more frequently - if you played against those ranked closed to you more often - and if the game notified you of this - it would surely feel like it meant more! (and it would; a derby against someone your in competition means if you win, you gain points and your opponent loses points) ...

Another way to go would be to arrange for some form of monthly or weekly automated tournaments, with low rewards to discourage any form of rigging; rewards could be bonus points and achievements (im sceptical to league promotion as tournament rewards due to possible rigging, but maybe that problem can be built around?)


As for the highest levels of play, it all comes down to the size and success of the supposed "pro league" ... i dont think we even have to nag about the importance of this one being a 1-division league.. question is if it will leave out a bunch of top tier diamond players who'll still find no challenge in going for their #1 spot in diamond and low motivation to stay on top, knowing they're a fish in the sea and that pro-league invitations are personal... depending on these circumstances, it might be best to restrict diamond to fewer divisions - possibly even just one.

I agree, the number of divisions should be depending on which leauge forming a "pyramid" system where the ones in the bottom can feel that they can be in the "top" of the "room" while those in the higher wants to really have the hierarky and wants to be *the* top.

I think it's shock value that hits most people.

I agree it was great when you play and achieved a high rank in platinum, only to later realize you're part of division 127 and that there are that many players the same rank you are somewhere out there. You kind of feel demoralized after that.

But with that realization, you start to see the scope of what the divisions are, and what the ranks mean. Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum etc are simply rough skill level indicators. It's the same as saying 'New' 'Beginner' 'Moderate' and 'Advanced' players. The ranks are not 1:1 with every player in the game, but when we're talking about millions of players as SC2 will get, why would you want to know you're Gold player #723,473? Also consider that with numbers so great, you could be gaining and losing -+5,000 depending on a win or loss. Stop playing for a couple days and you might drop 30,000 ranks. Would that even make sense?

For sake of a more realistic example, I'm rank 8 on Silver league 1v1, Division 136. I stop playing for 2 days and I drop 6 ranks down.

Now, all divisions are removed. Lets say 136 was the last division created. The amount of players in this league went from 100/division X 136 divisions to 1 division X 13,600 players. I may have been between Silver rank 952-1088; and for 2 days drop ~816 ranks. Does that look very appealing?

That is true, good point were only in the beta test an playerbase will rise ALOT.
But I mean 100 players per division? well atleast 1000 players in each division....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twilice

That is true, good point were only in the beta test an playerbase will rise ALOT.
But I mean 100 players per division? well atleast 1000 players in each division....

---

I'd like to see the divisions grow a bit in Phase 2. Has 100 per been said to be final?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dragoonx

I'd like to see the divisions grow a bit in Phase 2. Has 100 per been said to be final?

---

No I don't think so, not what I know of. But I hope (and suspect) it's just temporarely. But as triceron stated you don't have to many players in the same place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twilice

No I don't think so, not what I know of. But I hope (and suspect) it's just temporarely. But as triceron stated you don't have to many players in the same place.

---

Eh I think its 100 now simply because of the Beta player pool size. There would be too many divisions at retail with millions of people playing ladder being divided into 100.

There is a simple solution. Add global ranking and make it optionally to view.

So you know you are 5th in platinum division 20, but you can now also check your global ranking based purely on total accumulated points. So you are not for example 2157th in the global rank.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlickR

There is a simple solution. Add global ranking and make it optionally to view.

So you know you are 5th in platinum division 20, but you can now also check your global ranking based purely on total accumulated points. So you are not for example 2157th in the global rank.

---

How would that matter any at all since the end goal in both systems is the Pro league more or less?

I just watched the Fansite Q&A videos again and they did say there will be an in game way of finding out "the best of the best" a type of ranking. They also went on to say that it will be generally only meant for the higher league players but I do not remember them saying they were not gonna have it for everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dragoonx

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlickR

There is a simple solution. Add global ranking and make it optionally to view.

So you know you are 5th in platinum division 20, but you can now also check your global ranking based purely on total accumulated points. So you are not for example 2157th in the global rank.

---

How would that matter any at all since the end goal in both systems is the Pro league more or less?

---

It does not matter really except to the person who just wants to know. It is true to say that when the end of ladder season tournaments start and the top 8 battle it out only one will be the best. But some people just like knowing exactly what rank they are compared to everyone else. I think SlickR's idea is perfect for both the people who want to know, and the people that leagues are set up for. To put it simply the leagues are for people that would get disheartened if they knew that they were rank 2,057,987 instead of 37 in their division.

Confidence is a big part of ladder matches and the new people starting out will just flat out not have the confidence that the people who have been playing in beta or have been playing RTS for years have. The ladder system is like newbie blinders, keeping them focused on one thing so they do not lose faith in themselves or get distracted. Or they are like newbie bowling bumpers. They are meant to help them, not us. So technically the ladder does not have a point right now for most of us, so let us just ignore it and let the people who need the bumpers use it.

The ranks aren't entirely meaningless. If there are 100 silver divisions, and you're at position 1, you're among the best 100 silver players, so the position is a clear indication of the skill level. At least if the system works right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sietsh-Tenk

I think leagues are really rather useful in having people lumped together with players of a similar skill level. It's also reminiscent of the leagues you have in professional sports: of course a football player in the UEFA Champions League (the Europe-wide football competition, for North-Amurrkans) is not going be in the team of your hometown football team. It only makes sense.

---

Alright, here's my question: if you belong to Silver division 1, do you play more games against other Silver division 1 players than against other Silver players (players from Silver division 2, division 3, etc.), or do you have roughly an equal chance to play against any Silver player? (With occasional matches against players from other leagues mixed in, of course.)

I've never read anything to indicate that ladder play takes place primarily within one's own division; this is understandable, because it could be problematic if you always had to have other players from your own division online in order to play. Notice, though, that this is part of what makes divisions truly worthless. There is a disanalogy between professional sports divisions and Bnet 2.0 divisions, because what's crucial in a pro sports division is that a given team typically plays a majority of its games against other teams from within its own division. In the MLB, for instance, a team from the AL East will play most of its games against other teams from the AL East; it would be pointless to have divisions within the MLB if every team had an equal number of games against every other team. This is what makes one's ranking within a particular division meaningful.

So I would dispute the claim that divisions group players in any really useful way. Unless ladder play is made to center around intra-divisional play (and it's not even clear that this is feasible), there's no practical difference between (1) the present system, and (2) simply looking at one's rank in a global ladder and arbitrarily considering 50 players above and below one's place. The most that could be said of the divisions system is that it gives you a very broad idea of your skill level; but a global ladder obviously does this too, and in general it seems like there's nothing that a divisions system does that a global ladder doesn't do better (except for making inexperienced players feel good about themselves, I guess).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Norfindel

The ranks aren't entirely meaningless. If there are 100 silver divisions, and you're at position 1, you're among the best 100 silver players, so the position is a clear indication of the skill level. At least if the system works right.

---

IMO being rank 1 doesnt say you are just as good as anyone in same league but different division taht is also #1 ... not with any real acuracy. not comparable to how close the #1 and #2 would be on a 1-division ladder.

as is, what makes you close is the AMM's assessment of your skills and the amount of points gathered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todie

IMO being rank 1 doesnt say you are just as good as anyone in same league but different division taht is also #1 ... not with any real acuracy. not comparable to how close the #1 and #2 would be on a 1-division ladder.

as is, what makes you close is the AMM's assessment of your skills and the amount of points gathered.

---

There are 100 silver leagues, so there are 100 top-1 silver players, and you're among them. That's why you're one of the 100 best silver players.

If there are 354 silver leagues, and you're top-1, you're one of the best 354 silver players. Like in "position 1 = one of the top 354 silver players", from a total of 100*354 = 35400 silver players.

Now, when the game launches, there will be probably a lot of people playing, which means that there are maybe 967849 bronze divisions, but there would be a lot less diamond divisions, because there are much more low-skilled players that high-skilled players.

Same league, different league, doesn't matters at all, because you're matched against any player, not only the ones on your league.

Wrong there is 100 players in each division not 100 divisions. (I have been in divisions numbered more then 100 alot of times)

I think we can all agree Leagues are cool and division need a rework. And i say a rework, not an abolition.

If we check the top platinium/diamond league, the division system is a step back. You want to know your overall ranking at this lvl. If there is 10 000 player in diamond, you want to know if you are 1045th or 256th, it matter.

But if we check at the lower division, the number of player are very very higher, maybe more than a million in the bronze league. Do you want a one million person ladder? not me. But the 100 player division are pointless, there is 10 000 divisions... So for bronze to gold, i propose an implementation of 5 subdivision, e.g. bronze soldier, bronze lieutenant, bronze captain, etc. Or any other name, it don't really matter.

So here's my idea in picture:
http://sclegacy.com/forums/attachmen...1&d=1276788341

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Norfindel

There are 100 silver leagues, so there are 100 top-1 silver players, and you're among them. That's why you're one of the 100 best silver players.

If there are 354 silver leagues, and you're top-1, you're one of the best 354 silver players. Like in "position 1 = one of the top 354 silver players", from a total of 100*354 = 35400 silver players.

Now, when the game launches, there will be probably a lot of people playing, which means that there are maybe 967849 bronze divisions, but there would be a lot less diamond divisions, because there are much more low-skilled players that high-skilled players.

Same league, different league, doesn't matters at all, because you're matched against any player, not only the ones on your league.

---

ye, i know waht you mean. im just point out taht if you and i are both ranked #1 in our respective divisions within the same leagues, that doesnt necesarily mean alot.

#1 in your division might require a hundred more points than it does in my division - its all relative to who ends up randomized into what division.
.. now im not saying division rank is meaningless. it just cant be entierly accurate as an objective measurement of skill - to be compared between divisions.

IMO the Bronze to Diamond league should be for casual players.

Upon enough wins/other factors in your league, you can opt to rank up in the casual league or go into the Pro League into a respective rank.
Essentially Pro League will have Pro - Alpha Beta Gamma, as merely a word identifier of your general rank range.Except there won't be divisions and you will have a numbered rank. With this in mind, losses and etc will be much more severe and if your performance is low enough , you can get kicked out of the pro league.

And to be honest, Pro league should only have 1v1, 2v2 random, and 2v2 arranged.

Rank means nothing because of the division divide. However, your rating is everything. Saying I'm #1 diamond in league delta tetra five means nothing. Saying that I have a rating of 800 in diamond gives much more information.

For example, Bob is #1 in his gold division with a rating of 500. His friend, Joe, is #1 in another gold division with a rating of 900. Are Bob and Joe equal in measured skill? No. Bob may be #1 in his division, but it means nothing because in another division, he would be ranked 15 or 20. I've seen this happen. I got into a division with many active players, such that my paltry rating of ~400 barely got me into the top 20. However, in several of my friends' divisions, a rating of 400 would put in the top 5.

TL;DR version -> Rank is worthless, rating is everything.

I think a Global Ranking System is really only useful in a ProLeague... they should have that on top of the diamond league 1000 to 10,000 players with no divisions (or perhaps Diamond Players in the top 8 of their division are automatically part of the Proleague...they have global ratings.)

Since it is only the top of the diamond league that it really would matter to anyways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gt2slurp

But if we check at the lower division, the number of player are very very higher, maybe more than a million in the bronze league. Do you want a one million person ladder? not me. But the 100 player division are pointless, there is 10 000 divisions... So for bronze to gold, i propose an implementation of 5 subdivision, e.g. bronze soldier, bronze lieutenant, bronze captain, etc. Or any other name, it don't really matter.

---

I believe this is the same as adding more leagues to fill in the gaps. I think I am fine with the current system, because it satisfy the casual player, which Blizzard loves to please. If they just added a "Overall Ranking" within Leagues, Locally, and/or Globally. This can satisfy everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnUcrazy

I believe this is the same as adding more leagues to fill in the gaps. I think I am fine with the current system, because it satisfy the casual player, which Blizzard loves to please. If they just added a "Overall Ranking" within Leagues, Locally, and/or Globally. This can satisfy everyone.

---

You are probably right. I was trying to be fancy ^^.

But maybe the overall rating should be active only in platinium diamond. When you are in silver you don't give a f.. about your overall rating.

Really, I think they just need to have fewer divisions in the higher leagues. Fine, have your 10^5 divisions in Bronze. Just give us only 10 divisions in Diamond.

How about 100 people per division in the bronze league, 200 people per division in silver, 300 in gold, 400 in platinium and 500 people per division for diamond league?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Perfecttear

How about 100 people per division in the bronze league, 200 people per division in silver, 300 in gold, 400 in platinium and 500 people per division for diamond league?

---

Actually, I'm wondering if it would be better to have a fixed number of divisions rather than a fixed number of people per division. Have a division filled to a certain point before it makes a new one, but once it reaches a certain number of divisions, start placing people back into the existing divisions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todie

ye, i know waht you mean. im just point out taht if you and i are both ranked #1 in our respective divisions within the same leagues, that doesnt necesarily mean alot.

#1 in your division might require a hundred more points than it does in my division - its all relative to who ends up randomized into what division.
.. now im not saying division rank is meaningless. it just cant be entierly accurate as an objective measurement of skill - to be compared between divisions.

---

I'm assuming that the ranking system uses the same equations, so that skill "bounds" are the same for every silver division, and that separating divisions is just for the sake of not showing the player that he's at rank 9679567969567 of the silver division, that would discourage everyone.
It would be stupid if the skill required to be in one silver division was different somehow from another silver division. That would suck balls.

Unfortunately, as Blizzard is applying the "keep garbage under the carpet" system, instead of showing everyone exactly how the system works, it's difficult to tell what's happening under the carpet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by n00bonicPlague

Really, I think they just need to have fewer divisions in the higher leagues. Fine, have your 10^5 divisions in Bronze. Just give us only 10 divisions in Diamond.

---

There will be no divisions in the pro league. Which incidentally is a target to strive for. (That gets lost in the clouds of rage though.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kimera757

There will be no divisions in the pro league. Which incidentally is a target to strive for. (That gets lost in the clouds of rage though.)

---

Yeah, I heard that, but they should pyramid the lower leagues up to that so it's not a big shock to people (and so the hardcore people can have their way somewhat).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kimera757

There will be no divisions in the pro league. Which incidentally is a target to strive for. (That gets lost in the clouds of rage though.)

---

Where is your proof of that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skyze

Where is your proof of that?

---

Well, I went here and then followed the link to here where it said this:

Quote:

---

In the future, there will be a "Pro League" composed of the top players in the ladder. Players will be invited to the "Pro League" using the same methods that determine current promotions between leagues. This league will not be divided by divisions and will have a set number of participants each ladder season. For the best players, this will be where they can see exactly how they compare to the other top competitors.

---

Emphasis added by me.

(Of course, the quote is also on the wiki page, because said forum post will inevitably vanish at some point. You can also see that stored at SC2pod, since they have a massive stack of blue posts there, automatically cataloged by computer.)

Blizzard is a really poor communicator. I remember how ticked off I was by them when they made StarCraft: Ghost, since I thought (and much of the community thought) it was delaying StarCraft II. Of course, I didn't spew rage and write useless petitions...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Norfindel

I'm assuming that the ranking system uses the same equations, so that skill "bounds" are the same for every silver division, and that separating divisions is just for the sake of not showing the player that he's at rank 9679567969567 of the silver division, that would discourage everyone.
It would be stupid if the skill required to be in one silver division was different somehow from another silver division. That would suck balls.

Unfortunately, as Blizzard is applying the "keep garbage under the carpet" system, instead of showing everyone exactly how the system works, it's difficult to tell what's happening under the carpet.

---

what they arnt keeping under the carpet is what the ranking within divisions goes by: it goes by number of points gathered up.
now all im telling you is that there is no way the same position in any division will require the same exact number of points - for the same points you may get a quite different position in other divisions.

the only thing keeping lower level divisions somewhat even amongst each-other is the algorithms that make sure players that dont belong get promoted or demoted...

dont get me wrong: divisions within the same leagues will probably be roughly equally competitive, but not to the point where division rank translates with precision. we cant achieve that when its all made out of individuals who play different amounts and change/improve on their game differently. especially not when initial division placement is randomized.

even at lower levels #points earned is a more reliable skill measurement than rank. (i find it confusing to call points earned "rating" as someone did above)


there is still merit to the idea behind the system, but i think divisions could use a twist, to make us know each other within them - you might be stuck for a month among the same players in a division, -players with similar skill level - similar experiences from the game. yet, you'll never know them unless you initiate personal contact....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlickR

There is a simple solution. Add global ranking and make it optionally to view.

So you know you are 5th in platinum division 20, but you can now also check your global ranking based purely on total accumulated points. So you are not for example 2157th in the global rank.

---

Why not just make it two-ways.
divisions still stand, which is good and I like it, but also have global position for those of us who like to see out global position.

I'm not a really great player, since I don't play so much, at least not for the last few years, but for my playing time I'm better than most gold players.
So I'd like to see how I rank overall and not just in my division.

It doesn't mean anything to me if I'm 10th out of 100, but if I'm 5000th and with more playing I come down to 4000th than it means I'm advancing.

Going from 10th to at least 3rd in your division is not that hard and you really have no idea of how good or bad you really are, compared to all other players.

With that many players, you get way more fluxuation.

Sure, you know your progress if you're 5000th and you slowly climb to 4000th, you're advancing. The reality of it however is that you're going to be bouncing around ranks depending on how many games you win/lose and how much time you DON'T spend playing. You'd going to be dropping 200 ranks per day of idling, 100 from losses, gain 200 from wins, etc.

It's even harder to gauge your skill or rank because you're not going to be 4000, 3994, 3986 etc. You're going to be 4000, 3725, 3443 etc.