Elitist Jerks - View Single Post

• Digo · 04/29/07, 8:27 PM

Allow me to preface this thread by saying that I love Arenas. For all their imbalances and quirks, it's completely revitalized WoW PVP for me. However, I still feel that there are some aspects of the incentive and matching system that could be improved. I'd like for this thread to remain constructive.

1. There should be a cooldown on quitting one team and joining another. Currently, players from very high rated teams will leave their team, join a new team, and "smurf" their way up the ladder till they start playing other high-rated teams. This way, players of equal skill can attempt to destroy the rating of a very high-rated team with little to no risk to themselves.

For example, I could leave my 2150 3v3 team right now and go start a 1500 team. After a couple hours, we'd start playing the 2100 teams. If we win, we destroy their rating, but if we lose, we risk almost nothing. Maybe 5 rating at the worst. When I'm done trashing my competition's rating, I leave the new team, then rejoin my high-rated team and earn my points for the week.

A one-week cooldown on earning points from a new team after you have previously been on another team that week would prevent players from abusing this aspect of the ladder. In other words, if I leave my 2150 team to go smurfing, if I rejoin my 2150 team later that week, I cannot receive points from it till the following week. In fact, this may not even be enough, as one member of the team can still "take the hit" for his team.

2. Rating loss should have some kind of normalized rate. It's very frustrating to play against a team that nets 0 points and risk losing nearly 30 rating if some kind of force majeur event happens, like going linkdead in the middle of a match. If there are no other highly rated teams playing, then I'm better off NOT playing at all. This is not a good incentive structure.

My next point is more of a question, because I can't tell yet if this has any validity, and I'd like to hear people's opinions.

3. Should 2v2 and 3v3 really have reduced earning potential? Having achieved a 2v2 rating of over 2050, 3v3 over 2150, and a 5v5 of over 1750, and numerous discussions with people on very highly rated 5v5 teams, I'm not really sure that 2v2 is any more prone to "super combos" than 5v5. Therefore, I'm not convinced that 2v2s should only receive 60% of the points of a 5v5 team.

04/29/07, 8:27 PM	#1 (permalink)
• Digo King Hippo Rahm Human Death Knight <Casual> Hyjal	Arena Issues Discussion Allow me to preface this thread by saying that I love Arenas. For all their imbalances and quirks, it's completely revitalized WoW PVP for me. However, I still feel that there are some aspects of the incentive and matching system that could be improved. I'd like for this thread to remain constructive. 1. There should be a cooldown on quitting one team and joining another. Currently, players from very high rated teams will leave their team, join a new team, and "smurf" their way up the ladder till they start playing other high-rated teams. This way, players of equal skill can attempt to destroy the rating of a very high-rated team with little to no risk to themselves. For example, I could leave my 2150 3v3 team right now and go start a 1500 team. After a couple hours, we'd start playing the 2100 teams. If we win, we destroy their rating, but if we lose, we risk almost nothing. Maybe 5 rating at the worst. When I'm done trashing my competition's rating, I leave the new team, then rejoin my high-rated team and earn my points for the week. A one-week cooldown on earning points from a new team after you have previously been on another team that week would prevent players from abusing this aspect of the ladder. In other words, if I leave my 2150 team to go smurfing, if I rejoin my 2150 team later that week, I cannot receive points from it till the following week. In fact, this may not even be enough, as one member of the team can still "take the hit" for his team. 2. Rating loss should have some kind of normalized rate. It's very frustrating to play against a team that nets 0 points and risk losing nearly 30 rating if some kind of force majeur event happens, like going linkdead in the middle of a match. If there are no other highly rated teams playing, then I'm better off NOT playing at all. This is not a good incentive structure. My next point is more of a question, because I can't tell yet if this has any validity, and I'd like to hear people's opinions. 3. Should 2v2 and 3v3 really have reduced earning potential? Having achieved a 2v2 rating of over 2050, 3v3 over 2150, and a 5v5 of over 1750, and numerous discussions with people on very highly rated 5v5 teams, I'm not really sure that 2v2 is any more prone to "super combos" than 5v5. Therefore, I'm not convinced that 2v2s should only receive 60% of the points of a 5v5 team.