New Point Allocation System is a Disaster: Elo Ratings plz!!

It's a team game. There is no "I " in team nor there are lone wolves in a pack. Cooperation is the name of the game. This is a step forward but is by no means perfect.

Well you win and lose as a team. Or maybe you failed to notice that. Play as a team player and you might win more.

Actually league based systems have a wide base of use too and have their own merits and ELO has it's own draw backs.

An ELO system is designed for individual (1V1 or team V team) style pay, ELO also assumes that all competing players are attempting to play to their best it has no way to deal with people intentionally gaming the system. Why are they gaming the system? Because the rewards they are after are outside of the league reward system ELO has no way to account for the ulterior motive of a player seeking a monetary reward outside of the scope of their Score/ranking. All these systems are designed assuming that the ultimate goal of everyone involved is to climb the board and reach the top spot, any person operating outside of that assumption throws a monkey wrench in things. Now as for your stated issue of "can never play solo and always need to play with my clan to have a chance at winning" your proposed ELO system doesn't fix this - as you stated points would still be allocated solely to the winners and those points would come from you too even if you had "garbage teammates" in fact if you were beat by a team with lower ranked players you would lose even more points remember ELO rewards and penalizes based on the difference in ranking. Now how do you plan to deal with the "usual ELO ratings updates" by which I assume you mean the adjusted points distribution? In an ELO match between a high rated player and a low rated player a win by the high rated player gives few points were a win by the low rated player gives many - so in your system you added up and averaged the ELO of each team then what, use that average to determine the adjusted points distribution? So let's say we do that and you are a high rated player on the losing team with lower rated players and you were beat by a team of evenly mixed individuals so we know from your system what the total points distributed should be then we have to look at where they come from so now we look at your team this is something ELO doesn't do but if we follow the logic of the system seeing you have a higher rating then other members on your team we can infer under ELO theory most of those points would come from you. This is were you proposed leaving ELO behind and going back to a predetermined merit system (like the league system does now).

Now in the current system you do lose points based on your performance - perform better you lose fewer points, if you win you are rewarded based on that too, which is exactly what you seem to be advocating a system that punishes you less if you are grouped with poor performing players (which ELO doesn't do).

So is your issue match making rather then how points are awarded? The league system attempts to group players of similar skill together and then draw from those pools first when attempting to create a match now you have to realize that this means they will sacrifice ideal matches for speed in match making (few people would be ok waiting for an hour for an ideal match not to mention the logistics of a wait like that in match making) this is an issue that plagues all online games like this, as there are no scheduled matches (like chess) you are constantly trying to create matches based on available players. Now, ELO would make matches even faster as it allows low level players to play higher level players and then attempts to adjust the reward based on the match made (though it has it's own issues when you want to provide individual ratings adjustments to members of a team as this isn't what it was designed for). So while ELO has it merits I don't see them in terms of the this game environment. Could we do better then the current system? Sure there is always room for improvement. What trade off are we willing to make between quality of matches made and speed of matches made?

If we want to really address the issues with the current match making then I suggest we remove AU from the post match rewards then adjust the points system to account for a bonus in league points for beacons etc.. rather then Au. We would then need to adjust Au cost or come up with another way to earn Au to continue to allow progression with bots and weapons.

The fact that Pixo is changing league points on the fly just confirms the points system is arbitrary with little to no testing involved.

A ranking system that uses arbitrary values to reward individual contributions to winning or losing a match is NOT a REAL skill ranking and is doomed to fail.

My thoughts exactly.

After squadding with my gold 2-diamond clan mates for the last 2 days my win % has dropped to 58% which is the first time in weeks its been below 60.

I like the new point distribution. I turn in a 75k performance because that is what was needs to win on a regular basis. Not because I'm tanking but because I wanna win. I also get my share of top 2 damage but it's not as common. The problem was that even winning 2/3 of my matches I would go backwards when we lost a close one. Now I can actually go forward. I hope that in a week or so others figure out winning is more important than damage now and I can actually get help doing the small things that keep me from getting damage (already seeing early signs). Though playing a 7/7.5 hanger in silver 1 doesn't really make me a damage dealing machine and its gonna be even worse when I get to gold league.

They aren't getting any useful info out of me, I can assure you that.

Neat idea.  I also like the idea of being able to nominate teammates for various "teamwork awards" with maybe some sort of small Ag reward attached.