Honest question for you … ever heard of the Dunning-Kruger effect ?
Honest question for you… Ever heard of deflecting and its use in trolling?
Ok pal just move on
You’re the one who’s adamant about not wanting to show you understand the suggestion, yet criticising it with empty statements.
From what you’ve said thus far, it doesn’t even seem like you understand it to begin with. Thus the logical conclusion is to ask you to describe it in your own words, to demonstrate how much of it you do understand.
Then you bring up that effect as a response to that, for some really weird reason, in an attempt to deflect.
Like i said you ignore the things that dont aid your cause keep pointing out the incompetence of everyone around you in a rather arrogant way.
Start by answering the present questions and ill gladly answer yours
Did you miss that, or should I write it again?
The root cause for your comparison is because you don’t understand the concept of competition and you don’t understand the functionality of rating systems nor their purpose, as shown here:
The problem is that you dont understand that im not comparing such a system in the sense of being the same as a ladder system but comparing the pvp ladder as a system of character progression to a fictive pve progression system to point out that the ladder system as such might be flawed in itself in terms of being a way to play a mmorpg which is all about character progression.
Consider, for once, that you actually not being as smart as you think you are might be the problem.
Also again why hide your multi glad profile ?
Exactly what I said, which went above your head once again.
You don’t understand why competition is a thing, because you don’t understand the concept of competition, “in a game like this”.
You seem quite happy with the systems already present then.
Therefore i suggest you hopp into your own threads to discuss your iterational ideas there. 
Still amusing that you hide your profile
Ok, now let’s get into the nitty gritty of rating systems, since it seems to be completely beyond your level of understanding:
Rating systems are mathematical proofs designed to quantify something. In games, they’re typically used to quantify “skill”, i.e. the relative ability to play the game.
To accomplish this, people have created many different rating systems, all working in their own different ways.
But in the big picture, their purpose is to separate the good from the bad rating-wise (there’s not a single system that prevents people from playing with those much lower rated entirely, even online games tends to leave ways open for people to do so although different games tend to take different approaches to prohibiting boosting, smurfing etc.) and so rating systems needs in a mechanical fashion a way to separate them.
But there’s not a single rating system in the world that knows the skill of a player before they’ve participated. However, everyone has a “true rating” that matches their actual ability to play, even when they haven’t played the game itself a single time before.
So the rating systems all have ways to “identify” what a player’s true rating is, and bring that person closer to their true rating in that rating system. However, not all rating systems are the same in this.
There’s even differences in the mathematical proofs, with different rates of accuracy in how well they can accomplish it. For most systems, this goes deep into decimal points of 99.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
There’s not a single rating system created yet that can accurately claim that it can bring players to their 100% true rating though.
People also have different levels of ability in different times of their lives, for example a 3k rated player can drop to the level of a 2.2k player after a long break from the game itself, even when the game would remain exactly the same with no changes to it whatsoever over that lengthy break.
So for example, when your win rate is 80% in a rating system, that indicates that you’re below your “true rating” for that given moment. So your rating will naturally go up from winning that much.
So when the rating system reaches a win rate close to 50% at a certain rating range, then that means you’re where you belong relative to others.
However, if your win rate is below 50%, then that indicates you’re above your actual true rating. So by losing more than you win, you naturally keep going lower and lower in rating.
But that’s just a rough outline of the Elo rating system, which we don’t have. Right now we’re playing with a system that uses a deviation number to inflate and deflate MMR, which in turn determines the points won/lost, and so it’s a design that moves faster than the Elo rating system.
You lose rating quicker, and you gain rating quicker like this. While the rating system this is based on (Glicko/Glicko-2), Blizzard’s implementation doesn’t actually depict ability per se. There are too many unbalanced variables.
For example, in a proper rating system, the game is equal. Everyone plays with the same pieces, and everyone has the same ability to do things, with the largest difference in for example Chess being if you’re either starting as White or as Black, where White has the advantage of being 1 move ahead while Black has the advantage of being able to respond when already knowing what the opponent did (although this fades out the further into the moves as you go in Chess).
So what WoW’s rating system shows, is not only the ability of yourself. It’s the ability of the people you’ve chosen to play with, and the huge variable of the comp you’ve played and the comps you’ve played against, and their relative strengths & weaknesses vs. each other.
Anyway, so while WoW’s system is however still designed to bring the good ones up and the bad ones down, it’s the game’s design itself that brings in a wide variety of other variables too, such as your ability to pick who to play with, your ability to work together with the ones you’ve chosen to play with, as well as the ability to play the class/spec that you yourself play.
It’s like Pikaboo said, it’s not a given that you can climb from 1600-1800 with the same people you played from 1400-1600 with, and so on.
It’s messy, but there’s the deeper explanation of rating systems for you, and why your idea to remove rating losses will only lead to a massive inflation because nobody would lose rating anymore which dilutes the meaning of the rating system in the first place, and still doesn’t solve the problem with people leaving when it goes poorly, because when you can only compare gaining rating fast or slowly, then people will still display the same behavior as now and mostly want to play with people they can climb the rating quickly with.
As explained in simpler ways throughout this entire thread already, as well as in the suggestion that you don’t even understand the mechanisms of in the first place.
I still didn’t even explain the deeper mechanism of how accuracy is calculated in rating systems, which would make it even lengthier.
This is why you can’t ask for someone to explain things in detail all the time. It makes it messy like this. Some things you just need to understand without needing to be told, or just be quiet and not say anything about it.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.