They still track ratings on ESO servers and ratings are used for matchmaking.

[ URL Edited ]

This ss says 'search an opponent by HC level'. Besides that, if theres a 'hidden' rating the most wins still doesn't mean the best player....

And as far as I saw there isn't a ranking ladder

[Edit: Screenshot removed by request -Zen]

[This message has been edited by Zen (edited 10-07-2005 @ 02:19 PM).]

Ratings? remember ESO ratings? They are still tracked on the ESO servers (which not support the new ESO2 interface). I am talking about those ratings.

Actually, there will be two ratings in ESO2...an HC level (increased via XP from games) and a rating (something like the ratings from ESO1 in AoM, but we're told it's different) which will be increased by winning games. The two do not have to move in tandem.

Quoted from LiquidRed:

^ I think that's true for just about any game! The more time you put into it (practice), the better you'll get. I wouldn't have it any other way, even though I don't get a whole lot of time to play. What's the incentive of playing if you can't get better at the game?

Yes so that 'hidden rating' (yes I remember) will only be used for matchmaking. But the ladders don't do anything with that rating. They only use things like most wins. You can't jsut say that most wins is the skill. E.g. theres someone who played 100 games and won 90. And someone who played 200 games and won 100. He will be on top then.... So u will have to play a lot, and I mean really a lot to be #1 in that ladder. And it seems that it's the only ladder that really matters

I realize that it is too late to change the game now.

However I just wanted to mention that I would like to see a score system incorporated into AOE III where every player gets a score from 0 to 100 for every game he plays.
This way we can really know how well we play.
This can also help us match ourselves with other players when we play online.
I would even go further and suggest that when we play against the AI, instead of playing against ‘Hard’ or ‘Expert’, we can specify that we want to play against AI of level 85 or 90.
This will match the AI in better way to our current level.

In my opinion, adding a Score System to the game should not be too hard to do, as the principle for that is simple - calculate how many resources were collected, units created, buildings being built, upgrades, units killed, and so on, every few minutes or so, and calculate an average score based on that.

I think that would be something nice to have sometime in the future.

[This message has been edited by MosheLevi (edited 10-07-2005 @ 03:08 PM).]

Cool, so we still have ratings but they're hidden

Yeah that is a bit of a turn off for me as well. The "levelers" will be on the ladder not the good players.

Of course this might be an incentive for the skilled players to not try to smurf, using multiple cities and just play hard on their one main HC.

One other worry I have after checking out TGE's pics, what's up with the ladders for maps? I noticed that they had only Carribean, Carolina and the Great Plains. If they have ladders for maps, they should include all of the maps. Maybe I missed them in the pics, I don't know. One thing that would really piss me off, is if they dropped the ESO emphasis on being a versatile random map player. The last thing I want is another 3 years where everything takes place on "Green Arabia".

I always played random map and random God in AoM, and I think it upped my game considerably. I think the ladders may be filled up with losers who try and get just one ladder rating (I can just imagine two plaers trying to get the fastest age 5 time by playing eachother and not attacking until age 5)...but we'll always have the personal stats (at least, they'd better be in ESO2)...so if you wanna compare useful stats, use those.

As if screenshots really do much justice to the effectiveness of the system. Well considering many elements of ESOII are influenced from Battle.Net I don't think you'll have to worry too much about it not being competitive enough. Retrogressing isn't going to get you anywhere.

i'd say: don't worry that much...

eso has allways been competetive and if eso2 wont work as they have expected it to, they'll probably change it to the better...wait and see, there is something called patches u know...

I was wondering how many people would like to see a score system incorporated into AOE III where every player gets a score from 0 to 100 for every game he plays.
Based on that every player can have an average score over
a certain period of time.
This way, we know how skilled every person is.

[This message has been edited by MosheLevi (edited 10-07-2005 @ 03:46 PM).]

Or just the 1600 rating system?
It worked really well in ESO1, only negative thing was the number of smurfs but with 1 account per person this is solved right?

I am not sure how the 1600 rating works.
I played many AOM games online, but my rating never changed.

Quote:

Ur joking ^^? U played only advance games (not rated games)?

I am pretty sure there are ladders for best overall players.

Quote:

No, I never saw those rated games, I must have missed something.

Also, most players online have 1600 rating.

1600 is default rating... there more you win on a certain game type, the higher it will rise. The more you lose, the lower it goes.

My rating never rose above 1600. I usually lost more than won since I played team games where I was ALWAYS against some 1700 guy. I was never than serious of a player, though, and never did all the 1v1s that your rating should really be based off of.

Well that system worked very well, but the smurfs and self-rating system sucked.

PS. I was about 1760, just in the decay zone

Decay blowed...I came back a after a few months without time to play only to find that my rating had been nerfed over 200 points!

The only problem I found with the whole matchmaking system is that you really needed to have a buddy search at the same time as you if you wanted a 2 vs. 2 rated.

MosheLevi. That system is impossible to incorporate. Wouldn't be fair at all. So a definitive no.

I think people assume too much too early about ESO2. Competitive gameplay will be possible somehow no matter what. Nothing to worry about. In the end what matters is tourneys.

I love rr but I doubt ES has messed up so much that they made a ladder system based on time spent playing and not skill.

"In the end what matters is tourneys."
I agree. Ladder is nice to have and all, but it'll be real competition in leagues and tournaments that separate top players from the rest.

Quote:

With all due respect, such score system (as I mentioned earlier) can be written, I am sure of it, as I am a computer programmer myself.
It will be complex, but it can be done.
Can anyone suggest a better way than a score system (from 0 to 100) where every player is rated for every game, and also have an average score (for the last 20 or more games).
This way, each one of us will know how good he is compared to other players, and how well he plays in each and every game.
To me that would be the ultimate solution.

Quoted from LiquidRed:

What? Makes No Sense.

Quoted from MosheLevi:

In ESO1, you knew how good you did by how much your rating went up

What Was so bad about the original rating system? The only thing that screwed it up was smurfing, which has been fixed by the new CD Key thing. I don't see why they chose the number 1600, and I hated decay, but otherwise it was a good system.

[This message has been edited by ParCorn (edited 10-07-2005 @ 07:17 PM).]

Quote:

What was so good about that system?
When I started to play online I started with 1600 rating.
50 games later (with 30 wins) and I am still 1600.
So, does that mean that I did not get any better after 50 games online?

Besides, 80% of the players online have 1600 rating, so how can you tell between them?

No, we need an accurate score system. One that tells us how well we are playing in each and every game.
We need an AI type system for ratings.