Ranked Point Awards Too Weighted

[SaucyJacky]

What I mean by this is the fighter you choose has no effect on how many points you will earn in a fight. There is literally no incentive to choose anyone other than champion level grapplers if you won't take a penalty for using them. My last fight was at Welterweight, and I was too preoccupied to notice I was in the character select screen. I ended up getting Akhmedov squaring against a Tyron Woodley. Now, I win the first, lose the second, and am on my way to a split decision when I knock him out in the third. Imagine my surprise when I get a paltry two (2) points for an upset bigger than Serra/St. Pierre. I don't care what the perceived skill differential is between two players, Akhmedov/Woodley is a tough fight to fight.

[UFCBlackbelt]

Re: Ranked Point Awards Too Weighted

yep. I dont know why thats the case.

[BARIK_]

Re: Ranked Point Awards Too Weighted

I agree, currently the points awarded are based on the rank of your opponent. Which is fine. But it should also be based on the stats of the fighters.

[The meticulous Esp]

Re: Ranked Point Awards Too Weighted

I agree, currently the points awarded are based on the rank of your opponent. Which is fine. But it should also be based on the stats of the fighters.

100% AGREE

[LarsP]

Re: Ranked Point Awards Too Weighted

This is one of my main reasons to stay away from ranked. Fighting the same fighters over and over just isn't fun for me.


Quick match has been great lately.

[RomeroXVII]

Re: Ranked Point Awards Too Weighted

I posted a suggestion to how the ranked system could probably be. But yes, agreed. If I'm beating TJ Dillashaws/Cody Garbrandts with Marlon Moraes/Aljamain Sterling I should be getting a bonus, not getting measly 2 points.

[UFCBlackbelt]

Re: Ranked Point Awards Too Weighted

I posted a suggestion to how the ranked system could probably be. But yes, agreed. If I'm beating TJ Dillashaws/Cody Garbrandts with Marlon Moraes/Aljamain Sterling I should be getting a bonus, not getting measly 2 points.

The best part is losing a close split decision against a top ten McGregor user playing as Jake Matthews and losing over 10 points in ranking.

[Lurch]

Re: Ranked Point Awards Too Weighted

Are we getting fix to ranked i hope so beacuse i face same guys to so dumb

[DaisukEasy]

Re: Ranked Point Awards Too Weighted

I don't care what the perceived skill differential is between two players, Akhmedov/Woodley is a tough fight to fight.

Not true at all. The gap between two players is quite often large enough to make the actual fighters used borderline irrelevant.

The only thing that should matier in ranked is who you beat.

It might be more fun to add bonuses because there will likely be more variety and maybe it's worth it to some people because of that. But bonuses guarantee that you'll see players who use low tier fighters outrank players that are better and have objectively better records and better wins.

If the point of ranked is to reflect who the best players are as accurately as possible bonuses aren't the way to go..

[UFCBlackbelt]

Re: Ranked Point Awards Too Weighted

Not true at all. The gap between two players is quite often large enough to make the actual fighters used borderline irrelevant.

The only thing that should matier in ranked is who you beat.

It might be more fun to add bonuses because there will likely be more variety and maybe it's worth it to some people because of that. But bonuses guarantee that you'll see players who use low tier fighters outrank players that are better and have objectively better records and better wins.

If the point of ranked is to reflect who the best players are as accurately as possible bonuses aren't the way to go..

Someone who can beat GSP with CM Punk is a better player.
Right now we are forced to pick certain characters because there is no incentive at all.

[Counter Punch]

Re: Ranked Point Awards Too Weighted

Not true at all. The gap between two players is quite often large enough to make the actual fighters used borderline irrelevant.

The only thing that should matier in ranked is who you beat.

It might be more fun to add bonuses because there will likely be more variety and maybe it's worth it to some people because of that. But bonuses guarantee that you'll see players who use low tier fighters outrank players that are better and have objectively better records and better wins.

If the point of ranked is to reflect who the best players are as accurately as possible bonuses aren't the way to go..

Ok so you’ve made several proclamations here and made no effort to argue their logical merits.

I think it would be obvious if you actually thought critically about what you’re saying that it makes no sense.

Also, it’s not a “bonus” if you get more points for beating GSP with CM Punk. It would be an appropriate reward based on a valuation of the skill involved.

[resscrowds]

Re: Ranked Point Awards Too Weighted

This and I think ranked matches should have a ban system. A system where you ban like 3-5 fighters for division, and you and your opponent cant use this fighters.

It should work only in non tittle matches, and champions should be able to use any fighter they want in non tittle matches too.


I think it would make people use a more varied range of fighters, and tittle fights would be a lot more fun because the champion would have a lot more to lose.

I dont think only giving more points would make people drop Cormier or Connor. Most people want to win, the ranking is just a system to show them how much they win...


Think how good it would be, to use the best fighters you would have to earn it!

[The meticulous Esp]

Re: Ranked Point Awards Too Weighted

This and I think ranked matches should have a ban system. A system where you ban like 3-5 fighters for division, and you and your opponent cant use this fighters.

It should work only in non tittle matches, and champions should be able to use any fighter they want in non tittle matches too.


I think it would make people use a more varied range of fighters, and tittle fights would be a lot more fun because the champion would have a lot more to lose.

I dont think only giving more points would make people drop Cormier or Connor. Most people want to win, the ranking is just a system to show them how much they win...


Think how good it would be, to use the best fighters you would have to earn it!

For me there's no debate; best players are those guys in Top 100 without a OP Champ fighter !!!!

[Solid_Altair]

Re: Ranked Point Awards Too Weighted

They vary too much by player skill, but not enough for fighter level.

[DaisukEasy]

Re: Ranked Point Awards Too Weighted

Someone who can beat GSP with CM Punk is a better player.

A better player than who?

Right now we are forced to pick certain characters because there is no incentive at all.

Which isn't really relevant to my point.

Ok so you’ve made several proclamations here and made no effort to argue their logical merits.

I made one real point and didn't elaborate because i thought it was obvious.

Also, it’s not a “bonus” if you get more points for beating GSP with CM Punk. It would be an appropriate reward based on a valuation of the skill involved.

That is literally what a bonus is.

Here's why I think it's a terrible idea.


Player A plays 18 people + Player B with GSP and beats all of them for 10 points per win.

Player B plays 18 people with CM Punk and beats all but player A for 11 points per win (cause, low tier).

Player A record. 19 wins, 0 losses 190 points.
Player B record. 18 wins, 1 loss 209 points.

Player B be would ranked higher even though player A beat the exact same players and won the head to head. I honestly don't see how that's fair or favorable.

These are obviously arbitrary numbers, but this is what inevitably happens when you increase rewards for using low tier fighters.

I care more about the integrity of the rankings than I do variety of the fighters used. If you dont, that's fine. I just want you to understand the consequences.