Ranking system definitely needs a change
This shouldnt even be possible at rank 3.
Im really sorry for players getting on high rank if they dont belong there.
I just wanted to see how im playing with the worst killer with no perks (just fire up 1 for the memes) or addons. I didnt tunnel or camp because i just wanted to test how many surviors i get with playing "fair". I didnt expect to even get a kill but I was really surprised by the outcome. Before this match i played 4 matches with the same setup and nearly the same outcome (in one match one escaped through hatch).
Is there anyone else thinking the ranking system should be skill based and not playtime based.
my suggestion would be to remove safe pips (black pips), Killer and survivors need atleast 2 iridescent emblems to get a pip.
From my point of view this would be a good change because i think its boring to just crush noobs and also i hate playing survivor on rank 1 with teammates like this.
(i dont have screenshots of the other matches because i didnt plan to make a forum post)
Also still waiting for Freddy rework 
Fire up is op 
Comments
-
If the ranking system worked properly, then it should be basically impossible to become rank 1 as freddy
The problem with the idea of making the ranking system actually a skillbased rank system is that then the wholel game would fall apart due to balance problems. Now they are kinda hidden besides all the potato players at rank 1
3 -
@Master said:
If the ranking system worked properly, then it should be basically impossible to become rank 1 as freddyThe problem with the idea of making the ranking system actually a skillbased rank system is that then the wholel game would fall apart due to balance problems. Now they are kinda hidden besides all the potato players at rank 1
Do you mean balance problems among killers specifically, among killer-vs-survivors or else?
0 -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@Master said:
If the ranking system worked properly, then it should be basically impossible to become rank 1 as freddyThe problem with the idea of making the ranking system actually a skill based rank system is that then the whole game would fall apart due to balance problems. Now they are kinda hidden besides all the potato players at rank 1
Do you mean balance problems among killers specifically, among killer-vs-survivors or else?
If the ranking system was solely based on skill no one would reach rank 1 but Nurses and genrush SWF teams. As of right now you can rank up playing a killer like Legion without even killing anyone! The devs refuse to deal with the major balance issues. Their ranking system is more a measure of how much hours you've spent into DbD than anything. It only really means anything once you get to ranks 5-10 and then the meta and killer tier list will decided if you rank up or not.
1 -
@Okapi said:
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@Master said:
If the ranking system worked properly, then it should be basically impossible to become rank 1 as freddyThe problem with the idea of making the ranking system actually a skill based rank system is that then the whole game would fall apart due to balance problems. Now they are kinda hidden besides all the potato players at rank 1
Do you mean balance problems among killers specifically, among killer-vs-survivors or else?
If the ranking system was solely based on skill no one would reach rank 1 but Nurses and genrush SWF teams. As of right now you can rank up playing a killer like Legion without even killing anyone! The devs refuse to deal with the major balance issues. Their ranking system is more a measure of how much hours you've spent into DbD than anything. It only really means anything once you get to ranks 5-10 and then the meta and killer tier list will decided if you rank up or not.
I mean I agree that DBD has more of a grinding system than a ranking system. I just asked, because
then it should be basically impossible to become rank 1 as freddy
no one would reach rank 1 but Nurses and genrush SWF teamsare false statements depending on how you do your ranking systems and depending on how my question is answered.
0 -
The ranking system is obsolete as of now. But how can you separate new players from more experienced players? Maybe give the option to choose a certain type of difficulty based on played hours? I don't know...
0 -
I mean to make the Ranking System truly meaningful you'd have to make Survivors rank up solely for if they Survive or not, and Killers would only Rank up if they got 2+ kills. Remove the hatch at Rank 5+
That way, high rank matches become more interesting as you will be forced to be more helpful to your team, otherwise you have to work for your victory.
But this kind of meaningful ranking system would make all the people who don't match the age rating for the game quit. Which is a good thing anyway.
0 -
@weirdkid5 said:
I mean to make the Ranking System truly meaningful you'd have to make Survivors rank up solely for if they Survive or not, and Killers would only Rank up if they got 2+ kills. Remove the hatch at Rank 5+That way, high rank matches become more interesting as you will be forced to be more helpful to your team, otherwise you have to work for your victory.
But this kind of meaningful ranking system would make all the people who don't match the age rating for the game quit. Which is a good thing anyway.
A ranking system based on survive/death ratio wouldn't be bad
0 -
The issue are the lobby times... it is easier imo to become a good killer against mediocre survivors than it is to become a good survivor against mediocre killers, so you won’t have that many good survivors at rank 1.
0 -
Getting to Rank 1 is easy because both sides have players that don't deserve their rank. You have SWF who stomp nooby Killers and carry each other, then you have the fail Squads that try to stomp, but end up getting slaughtered because they're ######### at the game.Kind_Lemon said:The issue are the lobby times... it is easier imo to become a good killer against mediocre survivors than it is to become a good survivor against mediocre killers, so you won’t have that many good survivors at rank 1.
0
