I want to get to gold so I want to fill in the gaps I’m missing.
So I had a wild swing in LP over the weekend and was able to look at how the rankings are distributed compared to LP. At 1000 LP, you will be around rank 100,000. By 1300 LP, you will be 70,000 and by the time you cross into ultra bronze you will be nearing 50,000. That tells you that the top 50,000 players in the world are ultra bronze or better, and everyone else is worse.
To me the ranking system makes no sense. I play battle lounges a lot and I only try to play ultra bronze and silvers cause I’m new to fighter but also want to improve. There are some silvers that are terrible and some ultra bronze that I think are really good. I even played a super silver that I thought wasn’t very good.
From my experience rank doesnt mean anything at this point. From bronze to plat if you just know how to meaty on wakeup you will auto win 90% of your matches.
A huge issue i find is that you litereally always have to be winning 5x more than your lossing in order to go up. The issue with this is only .00001% will ever make it to platinum. And the fact of the matter is, if i say hit super bronze at 1000 points then lose to a bronze player at 999 i lose 65-75ish points but if i beat that player i only win 35 points which makes zero sense at all since hes only 1 point away from me. This issue early on is not at all an issue really. But once the guys who are stuck on platinum literally cant go up because thats where the average tournament serious player/pro gets stuck due to being in a fair equal skill braket they say are going 1-1 and if they run into someone who is good but below their braket they start losing way more points that they are winning. Art lost to a silver player and lost 256 points or something lawl… That i can see being fair. A platinum skilled player should never lose to a silver player on paper but currently gold players can be just as good as platinum players yet the plat players are really struggling to move up because the net loss/gain is too sever. Id like to see i tighter system that works better. If anyone played halo2 they had a ranking system that suffered the same fate but it was level 1-50 the average tournament level player would get stuck at around 30-38 while the paid pros sat around 40-45 but the system was wonky in that you needed 5 wins to rank up in a row and 2 losses would rank you down sometiems 2 levels. This made match making a nightmare since when you sit around 40 you are running into other top players which just made winning 5 in a row neigh impossible for 99% of the community. I feel sf4-5 are suffering the sake fate. Now i know ranked points mean jack shit but it is fun to collect those meaningless points… Hell i dont see why someone who has 11000 points can even be matched vs someone who has 800… Thats not a match… Thats a Masacre. I would really like the system to be tightened up.
I’m an Ultra Gold Nash player. From my own experiences, I feel like Silver is the average player akin to around 2000 PP in USFIV. Players that are Gold rank are similar to the 3000 PP players.
Edit: I’m almost always matched against other Gold ranked players and rarely silver ranked players. I never get matched against Bronze players except maybe in Casual and even that’s rare. I’ll only ever connect with a Bronze ranked player when I create a Battle Lounge. I prefer this system.
^ even on the gold ranks you will have trouble to lvl up your points if you are a legit player, sometimes I can’t believe how many legit / rly good players Ive played in the 1-3k LP range these days
if you lose 150 LP at most are gone, if you win, you gain 10-35 LP
since the majority of gold and platinum players will RQ anyway, you won’t get any points from these
the whole current situation
its sad and capcom doesn’t do anything
Hello Lianghubb, I’m a big fan of your videos. Keep it up. Did you ever get your account back?
I don’t get a lot of rage quitters anymore and when I do, I can’t be bothered to upload them anymore.
Eh, the complaints about lp win / loss are unfounded. If you beat a person who is 1000 points below you in rank, you don’t deserve a lot of points. If they beat you they do.
If that doesn’t make sense to you, then you really gotta approach this subject with some logical analysis. The match is unfair, you’re supposed to win. If you win, you get what the match was worth to you. If they win, and you’re 1000 points higher than them… maybe you suck or maybe they are really good. Either way, further matches will evaluate you.
The situation is exactly reversed too. If you beat a person who is 1000 points above you, you will be greatly rewarded… and I doubt you would complain about them losing 100 points, or that you only lose 20-30 when you lose to them either…
you have to realize that many 4-5k PP USF4 players just started grinding ranked in SFV
that does actually mean, if you had 4-5k PP in USF4 back then you know that these players are good in SFV even if they have like 1-2k LP
so speaking about deserving to lose points in such situations is kinda wrong.
Alioune Sensei for instance hasn’t even played one ranked match yet ( he is ranked 156000 atm )
what if he plays 3/3 ranked matches vs you and you lose over 500 LP because you are at 4k LP now, are you supposed to win?
does that mean you don’t deserve the points?
there is no logic behind this
Ironic you ask me where the logic is, when you caste a logical fallacy yourself. Even as you cherry pick an very specific outcome to try and prove your point, you actually fail to do so logically.
Not every match is going to be a sleeper pro on a new account. Sure you may possibly lose a lot of lp because you’re gold+ and a rookie takes a win. Sure every single person you win against may rage quit…
But how much would that truly distort your rank? Simply adding up how many people have RQ against you does not give you a value for how many points you are below your “real rank,” as other wins may not have been worth as many points if you had won those original ones. The truth is your rank does reflect where you belong. Same in this situation.
If my entire account were reset, it would not take long for me to regain exactly where I left off, not nearly as many as I’ve actually played. This is because the system is based off of skill. After a point, it doesn’t matter how many fights you play, it only matters at what skill you play.
If a player is ranked rookie and takes a win from you, at 5000+ LP and lose a few hundred points…
… and that rookie player’s skill level would put them at 8000 lp… Then they did deserve that win, and those points.
If you deserve your 5000+ lp rank, you will win those points back through other matches. It is a minor bump in the road.
The problem is in perception - people THINK they have lose progression… but the lp system is based off of skill. You will gain points when you get better. If you have the skill, no rage quitter will prevent your progression as long as there are people who don’t rage quit. A RQ player primarily effects only their own lp score and the leaderboard rankings. They do sour the experience of others, but they do not actually hold you back anything more than the time it takes to play a few more matches.
No, liang is correct. Yeah not everyone is going to be a sleeper pro. But you don’t have to be a sleeper pro to be ranked low and not in your true rankings:
I’m no pro but I played the game on ranked for like 3 days when it came out. Got to around 1800 lp. Then took mucho time off from the game, and also only ran casuals the few times I did play. Got tired of meeting bad casuals at 1800 lp so decided I’d increase my LP a bit so I jumped on again for a day… Got to 2800 LP. Did all the people I beat on the way deserve to lose all the points that I took from them? In my mind, no. I beat a couple of 5200 LP players as well.
Then I stopped again, played some casuals, and decided I want to be higher ranked. I’m now at a semi comfy 3400 LP. I’m going to stop at 4000 assuming I can get there.
On my way to 3400 I played against a 1200 LP player. He beat me. It was VERY obvious he didn’t belong at that ranking. Felt like playing a player at 35-4000 LP. But that’s what happens when good players come in off of casuals/battle lounge.
To me, a player should have to play a mandatory 20 games to get their skill level evaluated before starting to acquire points. And if they don’t play ranked for a long time then they should have to go back through the process depending on how long they’ve been gone. Over a month should be 20 games. A week should be 5 etc etc etc
Otherwise you get situations like I was in, and will probably be put in again where I lose to some guy that isn’t at his consistent rank and lose a ton of points, or beat someone that I’m currently ranked below, yet who’s skill is approximate.
They hold you back a lot actually since people who play a lot of ranked have had thousands of points taken from them because of cheaters. Especially when you hit the new thousand point mark and win 4 matches and lose one and then you’re further off behind only to beat a higher level player and they quit.
This is the worst designed ranked system I’ve ever seen and it doesn’t even penalize cheating. No list is legit when the majority of players gold and up just cheat whenever they lose. Ranked was never the ideal place for skilled matches in any game. You have fewer options and it’s FT1 which encourages gimmick play and shenanigans which don’t work in longer sets or even tournament settings. Thankfully you can do a rematch, but many won’t accept after a close one because their shenanigans won’t work.
Many people play locally, do lounges, have dummy accounts, or just play casuals and don’t do ranked that often and are much better than their score would lead you to believe. I’ve had some of my best matches against silver and bronze players and I’ve beaten more platinums than I’ve lost to. Gold is hit and miss so it’s very wonky. If you’re platinum there’s no reason to play since you get barely any points if you win and you lose a lot. I got about 200 off of a platinum Birdie player this morning. I beat a platinum Necalli for 200 and he beat me the next time for… 25 points. Why would he want to continue? I don’t blame him for leaving. It’s so godawful that I’ve had to sandbag and lose on purpose just to get myself back to high silver to face fewer cheaters and not wait 5+ minutes for each match. Which is a pain when grinding for titles which is already a pain enough. I’ve never seen a system that encourages losing just to have a decent match experience.
If you play a Gief and lose a ton of points because you ran into a bunch of Birdie, Dhalsim, Nash, and Ryu players, does that make you less skilled? If your opponent lags a lot does that make you less skilled? If a bad player picks Dhalsim and teleport, jabs, and slides his way to gold and beyond (many have and recommend picking Dhalsim for easy ranks) does that mean the player is actually good? They’d often lose in long sets and I’ve had people admit they felt like they didn’t deserve gold because they exploited a gimmick. Some styles work better in FT1 settings.
Not to mention you get more options in lobbies, longer sets, and the ability to practice troublesome matchups and apply skills or new tech in a more productive manner since you aren’t trying to win first to one. I think one of the main problems that hurts people’s progress is that people keep associating their skill with points. Don’t worry about the points and just strive to improve and you’ll be better off in the long run.
What I really hate is that titles have to be unlocked there. Which is a pain since I have to grind in my most hated mode for 300 or so wins just to get a yellow one. It would be much better if it could be done in any mode, there aren’t even any guides or requirements. I can’t even see my total win/loss record which is puzzling.
The system needs to be reworked for sure.
I think we should leave this rank/skill relevance discussion to a later time when capcom finally does something about rq.
it’s really pointless atm. it seems like most players who grinded pp in sf4 lost the desire to go on grinding. I’m not playing ranked for two weeks and I dont plan on playing any ranked games soon.
also there’s an inflation in LP economy cos of the rq issue.
think rqers as counterfeiters. they are counterfeiting money and feeding it to the market. current ranks doesnt reflect the value due to that inflation.
You realise that you bitch about the ranking system but you are part of the problem, decreasing your points on purpose to get titles?
If people are not where they should be because they don’t play a lot or because they ragequit or because they loose on purpose it’s not the ranked system fault. If you put a 5K5 MMR player of Dota 2 after is placement games in 4k, he will destroy them all too.
Not really since otherwise you end up with the same 2-3 people to play against on end for hours. My points hover mostly around the same spot. High silver-solid gold. The way the system goes down if you lose, you go down a ton of points so it only takes a handful of losses. Otherwise that would be even more unproductive. I don’t go down to bronze but if I keep not getting any wins because people cheat then the matches are pointless.
Otherwise I’d get one match per hour since the other three quit when I can have a constant stream of matches. With the rematch option and people coming back on this is less of a problem.
I don’t agree with your assessment either because most of the good matches I face are in the high silver category. There are some good ones above but that tends to happen in a loop and most of them quit.
It’s the ranked systems fault for having horrible matchmaking, long load times, and not penalizing cheating. You’re under the assumption that the rank I have actually means anything. The ranks are pointless until the system is fixed. You can make me bronze all I care. It’s a grind fest at this point anyways and I’ll be long finished with ranked after I get what I’m after which will hopefully be tonight. I’m after one title not multiple ones. No way am I doing this again, lol.
I don’t just drop my controller btw, but I will take it easier on some matches. I’ve noticed if I win by too large a margin or finish with a super, people quit then too. If the system is broken all I can do is work within it. Why would I want to play matches where 50-60% of the wins don’t even count? It’s a waste of time. I don’t just beat players I assume to be worse without letting them have a chance or else they get frustrated.
I played a bronze person and what’s funny was I fell from silver I was denied my silver 5 times in a row to rage quit then I went on tilt and started losing now I’m mid low ultra bronze I got ques up with a bronze felt bad for the guy so I kept it entertaining even through a match and made it down to the wire he rematched me. But the second time I gave him the first game and edged him out. He was happy I was happy. Then a few matches later I fought a smurf who put me on tilt because he was so low. Later I looked at the same guy and he has not lost a match and is almost gold. At the time I played him I lost damn near 100 points.
I find that the ranks in this game are seven out of eight times consistent with the players skill. Silver ranked players are consistently easier to beat than gold ranked players. Bronze ranked players are consistently easier to beat than silver ranked player.
I’m very agree. This systems has some kind of “gravity” attaching players to the borders or each category. In order to jump to a upper class you need to gain significant boost of your skills.