I generally like the idea of a Leaderboard in Bleeding Edge, even in a "casual" playlist - it's just an extra little incentive to keep playing. But right now there's a lot of problems with it in my opinion, and it has resulted in negatively affecting my experience with the game.
It has never been made clear what exactly the Top 100 Leaderboard score is based off? Is it a combination of win rate and performance? How does the game determine whether you've had a good performance or a bad one? Is it in comparison to other stats from players in the lobby, or is it simply passing a certain number based off game duration. It's difficult measuring player performance simply from stats, because you could pump all your damage into a full health Makutu all game, but still perform well according to the game?
Rank Decay. Right now, rank decay is not updated live, therefore you can play 10 games, win them all, and place high up in the Top 100. Alternatively, there are players who haven't played since March in the Top 100. Once they play a match, their rank will then change. But they are just taking up spots they shouldn't be because rank decay does not update until you've played a match.
Rank Decay. The first game I play everyday, win or lose, I go down around 20 ranks. That shouldn't happen at all, especially after just 1 day.
Groups. Nothing wrong with playing in a stack, in fact I encourage it, but there's simply not enough groups in the game right now for them to match each other consistently, therefore there is a huge advantage and it's no coincidence that nearly every player in the Top 100 play in a stack. Perhaps there should be separate Leaderboards for groups and solos?
Lack of punishment for multiple players in the Top 100 Leaderboard for dodging players/teams that they know they will lose to.
I don't expect to be number 1 but I generally expect to go up when I win, and down when I lose. That's absolutely not what's happening right now. I played 40 games on Tuesday, winning 35 of them, and I went from 39 to 45. I can maintain a nearly 80% win rate solo q'ing yet I still move downwards, whilst people who haven't played for months, smurfs, players who dodge q etc, all are in front and it's just frustrating. It does also seem that - the more you play, the more you'll go down. Which should not happen either.
BACKFILLING!!!!! Backfills count towards leaderboards. I played 5 games in a row the other day where I backfilled into huge snowball loses. What's even worse is, if you do make the miraculous comeback, you still lose rank because the game judges you if you had been in the game for its entire duration.
Leaderboards for each specific fighter would be nice. Right now it's just for cumulative score or highest score, both of which are (and have been) easily farmed and isn't a true representation of anything.
Higher MMR solo q experience is generally worse off because I consistently match with 4 stacks who are abusing mechanics such as Azrael's Teleport glitch, Makutu's cell cheese, and it's just boring, unbalanced, and the added misery of seeing your rank plummet afterwards when all of the above is a problem can be frustrating.
There's currently a "win rate" leaderboard, yet it's filled with 5 players who have played 1 match with a 100% win rate. There should be a certain amount of games played, or games played to wins ratio, or something.
I second all of this. Would also like to add to the point of rank decay...last I checked, Gunked solidly holds 2 spots in the top 10 in the overall leaderboard. Something's wrong when a player can reach top 10 with a smurf while their main account remains more or less static. Decay I reckon should be more severe the higher rank you are. Don't give the top players time to rank up on a smurf with almost no expense to their main. Like fair play to them for getting the spot in the first place but they should be trying as hard as anyone else to stay there.
Also I'd like to add that the other day, I played one match, won it, proceeded to drop 200 ranks. So yeah, 100% with @x-AmberPrice on this one, NT.
I think the main problem, despite everything you two brought up being true and worth NT considering, is that I have no clue what the leader board is based on. Genuninely no idea. It couldn't be more confusing. The only reason I can think of NT not telling us the algorithm for determing our rank is that they are afraid people will be able to exploit it.
Yesterday I grouped for the first time in the game. Prior to this my rank while solo queuing, and playing at least a few games everyday, jumped between 60 and 180. Rarely did I go above 130 but hey, trying to be honest so I might as well give the full range. While 4 stacked though my rank went from 90ish to mid 30's. We only lost 2 games out of the about 20.
Why I explained that is because while playing in a 4 stack, and winning, we all went consistently up in the leaderboard. This is a good thing. It shows that there is SOME consistency. Why doesn't solo queue do the same? No idea. Must have to do with a four stack near your rank winning a game as well so instead of going up a few ranks you are immediately unseated by four people passing your rank.
It is also important to note that 4 stack causes your rank to sky rocket. 3 of us 4 were either within the 90's or just over 100 when we started. The 4th was in the 200's. In the time 3 of us went from 100ish to mid 30's, the fourth, starting from 200 or above, managed to get into the top 100. That player was jumping up the leaderboard faster than the rest of us. I feel like that makes sense but until we know exactly what the leader board tracks I can't say for certain.
The leader boards are a good edition but I fear without clarity/consistency people will likely stop caring about them and go back to bothering NT for a ranked mode.
@x-AmberPrice said in Leaderboards Feedback:
I can maintain a nearly 80% win rate solo
*hysterical giggle * And in this number there were at least 10 matches against a full party teams from the top with three 5-12 lvl randoms in your team? Or with people who take Zero and don't heal anyone or block you with a wall so that the red team will kill you. Or just riding around the train. Or riding the train with a second player. Or lazily play and chat with friends in the red team without resisting them.
And you won all those 80% matches against four guys in solo or two? Without healer or half team?
I noticed that for some players there is a special matchmaking, when others are forced to close the game after one or two hours of this mess.
The leaderboards at the moment are completely useless.
In my opinion the game needs two separate competitive mode, for solo players and for teams, where the leaderboards are based on the rank of the players in the relative competitive mode. In this way I think we can play more balanced matches, where players with similar MMR can be matched. At the moment is a little bit frustrating to be forced playing with low level players versus experienced team (I can't remember how many games I've played with me and three guys below level 10 versus 4 player over level 50 or worse 4 players grouped).
In addition, if you would like to learn a new carachter or do the daily quest sometimes is impossible because you have to choose if you want win the game or if you want do the quest.
If separate competitive modes are not created in a brief period, unfortunately I think that a lot of good players will be quit the game.
Thanks for taking the time to post such a detailed break down of your experiences with the leader boards, there's a lot of interesting information here and it's all helpful.
I've already shared a link to this thread with the rest of the team so we can go over the points raised.
Thanks again for your continued support!
"Higher MMR solo q experience is generally worse off because I consistently match with 4 stacks who are abusing mechanics such as Azrael's Teleport glitch, Makutu's cell cheese, and it's just boring, unbalanced, and the added misery of seeing your rank plummet afterwards when all of the above is a problem can be frustrating".
Another thing regarding this is the fact that there are not enough high mmr players online at a given time so matchmaking can create balanced matches. What this xbox trueskill matchmaking does in this situation is that instead of having two full teams of the same skill level it creates matches by looking at team averages.
1 high trueskill player is going to be put with 3 average to low trueskill players while the enemy team will get all decent to even it out.
Matches are balanced because both averages on paper but that translates to 1 team which is really underskilled compared to the other resulting in really draining and pointless games to play. You can solo but after hitting that sweet spot of trueskill your matches will get balanced out like this and your only option to have a decent experience is to play in a group with people who you can rely on.
I agree with all the points you mentioned Amber. I suggested a lot of similar points on the discord but it appears the discord functions only as a medium for the community to rage about soloq rather than a medium to provide feedback even if its critical feedback.
I very much agree there needs to be separate solo and stacked leaderboards. I also really don't understand how the ranks are calculated, and it makes almost no sense. The first day ranked came out I was around rank 80, played one game with Azrael and lost. This caused me to drop to around 300 instantly. In almost the 2 weeks since with almost a 60-70% win rate in all solo Q I have not been able to get any closer then rank 140. Over the last 2 days, I won almost 15-20 straight games and I still could not get any lower than around 180. I also over the 2 weeks increased my win percentage from around 53% to over 55%, which has been hard in all solo Q. As it stands I'm sitting at a rank over 200 and not sure why. I know I'm not the best in the game, but I've looked at stats for other players in the top 100 and my stats are higher than around 10-20% of them. At this point, it's made me start to just ignore ranking entirely because no matter how well I do it doesn't' seem to matter. It seems to be punishing for people who play solo, and better for people who played stacked. I hope NT takes all of Amberprice's thoughts and consider alot of them, and I know they will.
Not to pile on, but I feel compelled to share just so everyone knows they're not crazy:
I'm a pretty mediocre player, and I normally wouldn't even be the type to focus on leaderboards, bc I'm just not that good and I don't expect to be. But I have been paying attention on BE just because I've been reading so much about the leaderboard here on the forums. I've consistently come in around 12700 in the rankings for the last week.
Well, I just played one game, solo queue as always, and LOST... and then I jumped to 744 on the leaderboard.
Neither of those numbers are typos. 12700, and then 744. I went up nearly 12000 places after one game - one LOSS.
So.... yeah. Something is a little wacky? I won't complain about it if I'm actually that good somehow. Maybe I was just in newb purgatory somehow until the system could rank me. That would be cool with me. Lol. But it definitely doesn't make sense. Not unless 12000 people bailed on the game during my playtime. Was there a mass exodus I didn't hear about? Maybe it's a glitch?? The same usual suspects seem to be up at the top of the board, so it doesn't seem to be a system-wide thing. I'll fill everyone in if it reverts back somehow. I can only expect that it will at some point.