ATTN Treyarch - ranking and stats system suggestions

[Chopper]

Hey Guys, there have been a multitude of threads on here regarding the ranking system.

I thought I would start a new thread to post my personal ideas on how you can improve this system.

1 - weekly, monthly and lifetime stats. This should be fairly easy as it's already been in MP for what, 3 games now.

2 - statistics per gun. You can't get headshots realistically with ray gun, sallies or the war machine. If I play first room challenges, my headshots are close to 90%. If I do a high run attempt, my headshots are close to 0%.

These are in MP already, and should be easy enough to implement.

[Mr. Jay]

I know keeping stats is a lot of fun for most people, especially in America. Americans love things manufactured by stats. Fantasy football, sudoku, are among the many things we love due we our hunger for statistical analysis.

I actually like the old system in which you are given three numbers; rounds, points, and kills. The added fun of exploring the mystery of new randoms is watered down by "other" stats like miles traveled and bullets fired.

One stat I like to see is disconnection. Much easier to spot a rage quitter.

[Edward Richtofen]

I definitely agree with Jay, disconnection percentage really needs to be added. Especially since rounds won't count once someone leaves...However this would require us to actually be able to see a lobby members stats :| Which leads us to...

They desperately need to bring back some form of a lobby leaderboard. I mean come on, stats are nice but don't take away the lobby leaderboard!!!!

I would love to have a solution to making the ranking system more balanced in a way that didn't rely on k/d. Really worrying about k/d has no place in zombies. Unfortunately, after giving this much thought, I have yet to come up with another system that would be any fairer or less prone to boosting. I don't see a magic solution at this time.

You could base it off high rounds, but then people get carried to high ranks and others moan about it. Barrier glitchers boost their ranks just as easy as they boost their k/ds. And really you're only slightly better off. Challenges no longer hurt your rank but you lose the dynamic aspects since now you can't de-rank.

An interesting concept I have been thinking over, is basing it off average round per game. I mean it's just as accurate a judge of a good player as k/d would be correct?

Now challenges hurt less, but still hurt slightly if you end very early. Those very concerned with their rank wouldn't be caught dead in a random lobby (Better than them dashboarding as soon as they go down, I guess?). Still this idea makes me a little nervous for some reason, maybe it's all the pressure that's put on each game. And versus modes would surely have to be ranked differently.

But now what's really amazing about this ranking system is that it promotes ultimate team play. How do you get to the highest round possible? Being a co-operative team player that's how! Revive your team, get each others backs! This is how the game is meant to be played.

And that really is the root of my displeasure with the current ranking system. K/D based systems promote selfish play styles. Why risk a down to get your teammate up when you can just take all his kills now? Why ever play like a team player? It's about kills and downs. Get lots of kills and don't go down, that's all. There's so much more here that's missing!

So in conclusion, anyone still reading? , if treyarch is determined to stick with k/d dominated ranking system then please, please, pleasssseee increase the weight on the revive/down statistic in whatever wacky formula they use. It really needs to be adjusted to promote team play.

[MysteryMachineX]

Great post Edward! But the thing is, you say your idea has its disadvantage with challenges.

You're wrong!

If you want to do a challenge, just play Custom Games. The Rounds you get in there don't even count! People who love challenges will not be penalized. Especially since their high rounds would be without challenges anyway. Your idea of doing average high rounds is probably the best thing I imagine there being.

I do have to say however that I think there should be a minimum round limit so you can't play one game and have shotguns because the one game was good. Also, Grief games should not count because Grief encourages you to win early on rather than later on.

[InfestLithium]

I do have to say however that I think there should be a minimum round limit so you can't play one game and have shotguns because the one game was good. Also, Grief games should not count because Grief encourages you to win early on rather than later on.

What if you have the placement limitation similar to the League Play in Multiplayer? Regardless if you're great or novice, the moment you begin the mode you must completely play through five matches. Once you do, all of your averages will place you in a rank that the system sees fit. From there, the only way to rank up and reach another set (Iron, Gold, Master, etc.) is to continuously have great games. If you don't prove your worth, then you will downgrade.

[Chopper]

Couldn't agree more with the selfishness caused by this ranking system.

I kinda wish they would heavily penalise you if you allow someone to bleed out, if you are in a certain proximity to them.

TBH I realised that my thread title is somewhat misleading from my personal opinion, as I don't care about ranks! But I do like stats, even if the stats are only seen by me and my friends, that would be great!

Leave game/ disconnect are good things for those that play in random lobbies. Someone told me today that they will leave almost all games immediately the second they get cornered, to ensure they don't get the down on their stats. WTF.

[Edward Richtofen]

Great post Edward! But the thing is, you say your idea has its disadvantage with challenges.

You're wrong!

If you want to do a challenge, just play Custom Games. The Rounds you get in there don't even count! People who love challenges will not be penalized. Especially since their high rounds would be without challenges anyway. Your idea of doing average high rounds is probably the best thing I imagine there being.

I do have to say however that I think there should be a minimum round limit so you can't play one game and have shotguns because the one game was good. Also, Grief games should not count because Grief encourages you to win early on rather than later on.

Oh my, that completely slipped right by me!!

Yeah that actually adds quite a bit of benefit to this system. Now only the games you want to count actually do count towards your rank and you can goof off as much as want without worrying about anything. Making this system actually quite more feasible and fair.

Yeah, to further flush this out, a minimum number of games would be required to rank up at each level. Like bone and double bone having low thresholds while it steadily increases until you reach a minimum number of counted games played to achieve shotties.

Also the versus modes (turned and grief) don't work in this system, as you pointed out, so you would need either a separate ranking system completely, or a way of judging those stats differently and weighting them into your final rank (most likely w/l).

Don't mean to make another long and extended post , but I actually just came up with a tweak to the current system that would help promote team play. The formula is quite simple and only uses the 3 main stats: kills (k), downs (d), and revives ®.

The rank formula is: Rank = (k*r)/(d^2) or can be read as (k/d)*(r/d). Really this has some benefits, especially for promoting team play. Now your revive to down is acting as a multiplier to help balance out k/d for team players.

For instance, if you have a r/d of 2 (which I would consider as a really good reviver) it actually would double your k/d, for all that hard work. So if Player A has k/d=100 and r/d=2, then their final score comes out to 200.

On the flip side, player B has k/d=400 and r/d=0.5 (he's selfish ). His final score also comes out to 200!

Now profit? Yes, now revives are on equal footing, promoting team play once and for all. Better get there quick, before someone else takes that revive!

This system has one crucial, crucial, flaw. Which I'll include for completeness. It would be an extremely easy system to boost rank in. Go into co-op split screen and just boost revives on round one.

But since k/d can be boosted almost as easy, I really don't have much problem with it, boosters will boost, not my job to stop them.

So that's now 2 ranking systems better than the current one. I'm accepting job offers Treyarch

EDIT: I forgot to mention, that this doesn't actually hurt solo players as much as it might seem. In fact, it balances it! A solo-only player would probably have a r/d around 0.75, so this would lower their score when calculating rank. However, I believe, and I believe that the general consensus is, that k/d is naturally higher when playing solo. Hence it acts as a sort of balance for solo vs co-op players! A good solo player should be able to maintain a higher k/d to counteract the lower multiplier, hence maintaining a good rank where deserved.

[Rickety Cricket]

I think it's all about ratios. You get those right, you rank up. This guy has a pretty good theory on it.

http://community.callofduty.com/thread/ ... ?tstart=30

[MysteryMachineX]

@Edward: That idea could work. It would be quite beneficial to all modes of play. Hm. And lol at the last line. Clever.

@Infest:Yes yes. That would be a good implementation in that case.

@ChopperNator: I played a game of TranZit where I got to Round 30 with four people. 6 hours. These guys had shotguns. They meant well, but they were concerned about their rank. Time and time again I gave them reasons throughout the game where had they been willing to risk their score (not the game) then we would've been better off. For example, one person was at Diner in the high 20's without Juggernog and wasn't going to last long without it. I said try to cross the lava pit. If you go down, I'll get you because I'm on the other side. Wouldn't do it. Went down anyway though... Btw, that is awful that someone would leave games like that.

@Rickety: ??? I was under the impression nothing good EVER was on that site's forums. But that post looks highly formatted and informational. I wonder, is it true?

[Mr. Jay]

I actually have one simple idea for BO2 leaderboards that I hope get implemented, user rating.

On PS3 there are options in which you could mute the player, check profile, and report. Maybe an option to rate.

A simple yet effective way to identify lousy players, and promote good behavior.

[Nasdaq401]

What challenges are you guys talking about in zombies? Oh and to comment on treyarch. I think it's funny that they wan to talk about "we are really trying to get people to use teamwork" and blah blah blah with the introduction of tranzit style gameplay. But they base ranking on pretty much only your k/d. I totally agree with one of the first posters. Completely stupid.