Long time player here, I tryharded on ranking up to legend exactly once, way back during season 2 with control warrior. I made it to 1 star away from legend 3 different times that season but ultimately would lose, tilt, lose a few more before taking a break, then climbing again to repeat the pattern. So I never did make it to legend and I got nothing for the effort.
After that negative experience, I never again put in the work to rank up or even care much about my rank in general, never even bothered to reach 5 again for the epic season reward.
With this new system though ranking actually feels fun and enticing, seeing all those stars pop, the bonuses, win streaks, and the reward packs for first-time rank tiers, for the first time I'm excited to push myself for higher levels and maybe even finally go for that legendary status.
I think Blizzard did a great job with the changes, maybe the casual and the hardcore won't like it, but for players like me who are in between and needed more incentive to log in and queue up, this is perfect and I know I'll be playing a lot more games this season.
It has its flaws, IMO; being only matched with those with bonus stars and legend players seems like a needless, bad, change (what happens with someone casual who has a few ranked games a few weeks in? Do they get matched exclusively with legend players? Because that's how the system sounds), particularly with how the MMR seems to be based on overall performance with slow adjustments (Oh, you used to play better decks, having hit legend before, and now play jank? Have a high MMR!) - the prevalence of winstreaks in a system that should push towards 50% WR implies it's not a good tool, or not being used right (probably to do with initialization of MMR). Don't see why the grinders and hardcore would dislike the system, though.
It definitely improves your initial experience every season with the star bonuses. Gaining 8-11 stars for a single win without even starting a win streak is gonna make most players' (definitely including me... I know myself, and it feels good when it happens!) brains dump dopamine like crazy, regardless of it being in bronze where you can't lose rank anyways.
Getting a start that doesn't punish you will help people who start off on a bad foot to not give up on ladder so quickly, since all it can take is 4-5 losses in a row to misplays or draw rng, or even a ridiculous discovery string that swings against you, and suddenly Hearthstone is the worst game ever and why did you ever think you could enjoy this stupid pile of garbage.
Getting some initial boosters can mitigate those feelings with "at least I'm not tanking my rank" and "just one win netted me X stars!" It's mind games, but it works.
Also, the MMR seems to feel extremely fair, and anyone who complains about it seems to say the same thing: "They're just as good as me!" which is the stupidest argument I've ever seen. It's complaining about an even playing field.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Rage quitting: the best way to ensure your opponent knows they beat a giant baby.
Also, the MMR seems to feel extremely fair, and anyone who complains about it seems to say the same thing: "They're just as good as me!" which is the stupidest argument I've ever seen. It's complaining about an even playing field.
You could argue that it's fair alright, but not really intuitive. I recently leveled up to Platinum 10 (Diamond 10 is where my bonus will run out) and the most difficult rank was Bronze 10. I have lost like 3 or 4 games on my climb, but nothing felt as bad as losing several games back to back on Bronze 10. I had a similar experience on my EU account, where I started with a 6 star bonus.
With the MMR, you are supposedly never at a disadvantage or an advantage, but in return, your rank feels quite meaningless. If there's no difference in matchups between the lowest and the highest ranks, if you in fact could end up playing against legend players while you are still in the starting zone, it makes the league system kind of superfluous. The system is only evened out when everyone has played out their star bonus, and is on the level they should be.
I agree that the new system is relatively well designed and certainly more fun to play than the old one. At least for someone who has a high multiplier. I wouldn't want to grind 40-50 ranks with a no star bonus. But having only top level opponents from game 1 onwards is kinda stupid. I mean, if I'm supposed to play against those players anyway, and have no other choice but doing so, what's the point of a 50 rank system then?
I think the MMR has to be slightly tweaked. It's probably too unfair for low rank players to put everyone against players of the same league, but maybe try to match players who are in a similar position, like having the same multiplier, and not the same potential rank. At the very least, they should stop matching up legend players with non-legend players. Aside from the weird occurence that you can still have a multiplier when reaching legend, it should speak for itself that you are playing against the top level players once you reached legend. And it's silly that you might play against some guy from Gold 3, even if that guy has a multiplier that could get him to legend.
Also, the MMR seems to feel extremely fair, and anyone who complains about it seems to say the same thing: "They're just as good as me!" which is the stupidest argument I've ever seen. It's complaining about an even playing field.
Here's a counterpoint for you :P Been playing jank for a good many seasons, but not heavily, after being relatively focussed and hardcore previously (highest rank in standard would depend on if it counts pre-standard being a thing :P). In standard, the same jank deck I've been using casually for the last few seasons has been utterly destroyed every game. How many concedes must I do to get a lower MMR? In Wild, the meta shifted and so was unfavourable, hard to tell how much of that is the meta and how much is MMR. Certainly felt significantly harder than R10-8, which is where I usually got in wild, with the odd streak to 5. I suspect it's basing initial MMR on all games played and it is very slow to lose rating; only really an issue for those, like me, who ground before and enjoy jank more now.
Pooling legend and star bonuses into one pool is also bad, IMHO, because it treats casual players fo a format - like me and STD - to a potential situation where your main opponents... are legend players. Because you're late to the party, you get shafted - that's how it reads to me. It might be that MMR matchmaking gets disabled if there would be a big enough difference, but I am usually skeptical of Blizz' ability to catch loopholes like this.
I agree with you on it being an overall improvement, and an overall good system with a few flaws, mainly tied to matchmaking and outliers (because, honestly, I probably am an outlier here :P).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Long time player here, I tryharded on ranking up to legend exactly once, way back during season 2 with control warrior. I made it to 1 star away from legend 3 different times that season but ultimately would lose, tilt, lose a few more before taking a break, then climbing again to repeat the pattern. So I never did make it to legend and I got nothing for the effort.
After that negative experience, I never again put in the work to rank up or even care much about my rank in general, never even bothered to reach 5 again for the epic season reward.
With this new system though ranking actually feels fun and enticing, seeing all those stars pop, the bonuses, win streaks, and the reward packs for first-time rank tiers, for the first time I'm excited to push myself for higher levels and maybe even finally go for that legendary status.
I think Blizzard did a great job with the changes, maybe the casual and the hardcore won't like it, but for players like me who are in between and needed more incentive to log in and queue up, this is perfect and I know I'll be playing a lot more games this season.
What do you think?
It has its flaws, IMO; being only matched with those with bonus stars and legend players seems like a needless, bad, change (what happens with someone casual who has a few ranked games a few weeks in? Do they get matched exclusively with legend players? Because that's how the system sounds), particularly with how the MMR seems to be based on overall performance with slow adjustments (Oh, you used to play better decks, having hit legend before, and now play jank? Have a high MMR!) - the prevalence of winstreaks in a system that should push towards 50% WR implies it's not a good tool, or not being used right (probably to do with initialization of MMR). Don't see why the grinders and hardcore would dislike the system, though.
Overall it's a decent new system.
Not perfect, but an improvement for sure, imo.
It definitely improves your initial experience every season with the star bonuses. Gaining 8-11 stars for a single win without even starting a win streak is gonna make most players' (definitely including me... I know myself, and it feels good when it happens!) brains dump dopamine like crazy, regardless of it being in bronze where you can't lose rank anyways.
Getting a start that doesn't punish you will help people who start off on a bad foot to not give up on ladder so quickly, since all it can take is 4-5 losses in a row to misplays or draw rng, or even a ridiculous discovery string that swings against you, and suddenly Hearthstone is the worst game ever and why did you ever think you could enjoy this stupid pile of garbage.
Getting some initial boosters can mitigate those feelings with "at least I'm not tanking my rank" and "just one win netted me X stars!" It's mind games, but it works.
Also, the MMR seems to feel extremely fair, and anyone who complains about it seems to say the same thing: "They're just as good as me!" which is the stupidest argument I've ever seen. It's complaining about an even playing field.
Rage quitting: the best way to ensure your opponent knows they beat a giant baby.
You could argue that it's fair alright, but not really intuitive. I recently leveled up to Platinum 10 (Diamond 10 is where my bonus will run out) and the most difficult rank was Bronze 10. I have lost like 3 or 4 games on my climb, but nothing felt as bad as losing several games back to back on Bronze 10. I had a similar experience on my EU account, where I started with a 6 star bonus.
With the MMR, you are supposedly never at a disadvantage or an advantage, but in return, your rank feels quite meaningless. If there's no difference in matchups between the lowest and the highest ranks, if you in fact could end up playing against legend players while you are still in the starting zone, it makes the league system kind of superfluous. The system is only evened out when everyone has played out their star bonus, and is on the level they should be.
I agree that the new system is relatively well designed and certainly more fun to play than the old one. At least for someone who has a high multiplier. I wouldn't want to grind 40-50 ranks with a no star bonus. But having only top level opponents from game 1 onwards is kinda stupid. I mean, if I'm supposed to play against those players anyway, and have no other choice but doing so, what's the point of a 50 rank system then?
I think the MMR has to be slightly tweaked. It's probably too unfair for low rank players to put everyone against players of the same league, but maybe try to match players who are in a similar position, like having the same multiplier, and not the same potential rank. At the very least, they should stop matching up legend players with non-legend players. Aside from the weird occurence that you can still have a multiplier when reaching legend, it should speak for itself that you are playing against the top level players once you reached legend. And it's silly that you might play against some guy from Gold 3, even if that guy has a multiplier that could get him to legend.
Just wait when the star bonus ends.....
Here's a counterpoint for you :P Been playing jank for a good many seasons, but not heavily, after being relatively focussed and hardcore previously (highest rank in standard would depend on if it counts pre-standard being a thing :P). In standard, the same jank deck I've been using casually for the last few seasons has been utterly destroyed every game. How many concedes must I do to get a lower MMR? In Wild, the meta shifted and so was unfavourable, hard to tell how much of that is the meta and how much is MMR. Certainly felt significantly harder than R10-8, which is where I usually got in wild, with the odd streak to 5. I suspect it's basing initial MMR on all games played and it is very slow to lose rating; only really an issue for those, like me, who ground before and enjoy jank more now.
Pooling legend and star bonuses into one pool is also bad, IMHO, because it treats casual players fo a format - like me and STD - to a potential situation where your main opponents... are legend players. Because you're late to the party, you get shafted - that's how it reads to me. It might be that MMR matchmaking gets disabled if there would be a big enough difference, but I am usually skeptical of Blizz' ability to catch loopholes like this.
I agree with you on it being an overall improvement, and an overall good system with a few flaws, mainly tied to matchmaking and outliers (because, honestly, I probably am an outlier here :P).