Elosystem for the upcoming PvP battle zones

[Corona Lisa]

With the upcoming patch we will get PvP zones with leaderboards based on kills. That’s great because we will get some PvP back into the game, however this system has 2 major flaws in my opinion:

1.      All that counts are kills, so people who grind the most will inevitable get an advantage, no matter if they are better players or not

2.      Abuse with alt accounts is pretty effective

 

A lot of successful games like League of Legends (5v5), CSGO (5v5) or Arma 3 Battle Royal (60 players, last one standing wins) use an Elosystem to measure the skill of their players.

 

What is Elo? It’s a point system where every player starts with 1500 points. You get points for each win and lose points in case you get defeated. The amount of points you win or lose depends on the enemy you played against. If you win against players with a lower score, then you will get less points then average. And if you win against better player you will also get more or lose less points.

Examples:

- Player 1 has 1500 Elo and wins against Player 2 with 1500 Elo -> Player 1 has now 1525 Elo and Player 2 has 1475

-  Player 1 has 1700 Elo and wins against Player 2 with 1500 Elo -> Player 1 has now 1715 Elo and Player 2 has 1485

- Player 1 has 1700 Elo and loses against Player 2 with 1500 Elo -> Player 1 has now 1665 Elo and Player 2 has 1535

 

So how can this system be used in Naval Action?

You get points for each kill you make depending on the enemy you killed and you lose points depending on the enemy who killed you. Additionally it factors in:

1.       The ship you used compared to the ship your enemy has used.

2.       The Battlerating of your team compared to the enemy team.

 

Why is it good?

I think this system has these advantages:

1.       Player get rewarded depending on the circumstances

2.       Even fights are more rewarding and should occur more often because of this; also if you have to fight 4v20 and manage to sink one ship you get greatly rewarded

3.       While grinding still does matter, it can be compensated with skill

4.       Griefing with an alt account is much less viable, because you get less points each time you sink it

However, it is not perfect of course, so we have following new problems:

1.       Its complicated both to implement it into the game and to understand for the players

2.       People could get scared to play, because when they sink they will lose points

 

What do you think?

Edited November 26, 2016 by JonSnowLetsGo

[manuva85]

Elo is good for chess and 1vs1 competition. Personaly i dont like when it is being implemented into 2vs2 3vs3 and so on ...

[Rychu Karas]

Simple leaderboard seems to be a good start. Maybe something similar to zkillboard in eve. would be great and more that i even expect: ]

Edited November 26, 2016 by Rychu Karas

[Corona Lisa]

21 hours ago, manuva85 said:

Elo is good for chess and 1vs1 competition. Personaly i dont like when it is being implemented into 2vs2 3vs3 and so on ...

Yeah it originally was designed for chess, but its used in a lot of different games with success for a reason. 

What do you dislike about it?

 

Simple leaderboard seems to be a good start. 

Yes its better then nothing

Edited November 27, 2016 by JonSnowLetsGo

[manuva85]

Well the mos important is that elo is created to value your individual performance. As soon as you make it to value performance of more than you there might be problems. Even in lol (5 vs 5) elo is known not to be a perfect system, it's main fault is it treats team as if it would be one individual player, and that isnt true. If one player in team dont want to win, despite your good performance prepare for elo loss. And that is is more less stable 5 vs 5. Trying imagining this system implemented into 25 vs 25 ... well that wont work well, or it will justr create more rage.. I understand need for performance validation, a leaderboard might be a good start, but i realy dont think that elo system,would work in 25 vs 25

 

[vazco]

The goal of this system is not to create a 100% bulletproof ranking, but to create a zone where you can do PvP, and to distribute rewards not only to best players, but also those that will commit their time. People using alts and tactics is not harming those goals.

Elo system is nice. It's not critical for the game though, and simplier systems that are less skill based and more participation based would work better to motivate players for PvP. Elo will have problems in uneven encounters, it's complex to implement and to design well. It has to be decoupled from prizes as well, as participation should be rewarded more than skill. I think there are more important issues now...

Later Elo-like system could help with more fair encounters.

Edited November 28, 2016 by vazco

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Players, in the majority, are not willing to pursue fair, risky, and challenging encounters in a RvR based game.

That is why Battles are often abandoned. They are fair, risky and mostly challenging.

[Cornelis Evertsen de Oude]

I think based on scores, what Fellvred was doing with the small battles was promising. Higher scores for the lower ranked ships. It's been 3/4 days now and the way it seems to progress, in a week we have 4/5 1st rate fleets fighting eachother. With 15 players each. Lone wolfs are without changes. In that case I liked the small battle aswell. Fellvred did an awesome job imo. Devs should look into what he did.

 

And about alts, I got screenshots of a guy in a Reno making it into the leaderboards by killing a undercrewed Belle Poule, without guns(he apparantly forgot). Which is odd. In didn't add up. If those guys get into the leaderboards that way, there should be penalties.

 

 

 

Edited December 8, 2016 by Cornelis Evertsen de Oude