Now we can also do things like find out the average score for each W/L ratio and spread of W/L ratios among a range of scores! Neat.

Data is Cool

Not getting the Claymore because of a stupid system would devestate me more than any election. :-p

If that's your entire worry I have good news for you! The average amount you'll gain will go up when the changes take place! Disagreement resolved!

No bruh, I wanna get it for realz, not the pussy way yo. Freaking casuals man. :-p

Not getting the Claymore because of a stupid system would devestate me more than any election. :-p

If that's your entire worry I have good news for you! The average amount you'll gain will go up when the changes take place! Disagreement resolved!

In my lifetime I’ve witnessed two men become president who had fewer votes then their opponents. That’s because nobody cared about edge cases.

Comparing a mountain to a molehill there a just a tiny bit.

Not getting the Claymore because of a stupid system would devestate me more than any election. :-p

I’m already 70% of the way there baby.

The fact that WWWWWLLLLL can give you a really different point ranking than WLWLWLWLWL should have been evidence enough. For the record, I don't think win streaks are 'fair' either, but nothing about them penalizes winning.

What you're really upset about then is the presence of streaks at all. WWLLWWLLWL under your system gives a different outcome than WLWLWLWLWL.

This is a legitimate critique of a ranking system in competitive play. Should we have streaks at all? This is a line of inquiry that could be explored.

Then you'd have to try to determine the intent of the competitive playlist. Who does it serve? What does a rank mean (especially if it can be reset)? Is the design goal for people to have steady progress or is it for people to stack themselves up against each other?

Except that:

• The current system
  
• A system with only a Win streak and no Loss streak
  
• EVEN a Loss streak and no Win streak

...are ALL more fair than the new proposed system.

Regarding fairness? You are correct. But is that the design goal? Because if the design goal is a feeling of progress for players than this is the most beneficial system to the player.

I think when Bungie said they aimed progressing to the top 40% of crucible players, they’ve already entered the realm of exclusionary fairness.

In my lifetime I’ve witnessed two men become president who had fewer votes then their opponents. That’s because nobody cared about edge cases.

Comparing a mountain to a molehill there a just a tiny bit.

Though the data is in support of my position, you actually didn't do it correctly. The streak resets after 5 no matter what, so it'd actually be:

LLLLWLLLLL = -85
LLLLLLLLLL = -110

It doesn't actually, with the new system all streaks will no longer reset after 5 but stay at the value it was at 5.

The fact that WWWWWLLLLL can give you a really different point ranking than WLWLWLWLWL should have been evidence enough. For the record, I don't think win streaks are 'fair' either, but nothing about them penalizes winning.

What you're really upset about then is the presence of streaks at all. WWLLWWLLWL under your system gives a different outcome than WLWLWLWLWL.

This is a legitimate critique of a ranking system in competitive play. Should we have streaks at all? This is a line of inquiry that could be explored.

Then you'd have to try to determine the intent of the competitive playlist. Who does it serve? What does a rank mean (especially if it can be reset)? Is the design goal for people to have steady progress or is it for people to stack themselves up against each other?

Except that:

• The current system
  
• A system with only a Win streak and no Loss streak
  
• EVEN a Loss streak and no Win streak

...are ALL more fair than the new proposed system.

Regarding fairness? You are correct. But is that the design goal? Because if the design goal is a feeling of progress for players than this is the most beneficial system to the player.

It's entirely subjective what's "better," but frankly it's a factual statement that a Win that interrupts a losing streak is less beneficial long term than not winning at all.

Amazingly (to me), this is true:

Win += 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 50, 50
Loss -= 20, 15, 10, 05, 05, 05, 05

LLLLWLLLLL = -85
LLLLLLLLLL = -80

Yeah... that's sort of broken. :)

Though the data is in support of my position, you actually didn't do it correctly. The streak resets after 5 no matter what, so it'd actually be:

LLLLWLLLLL = -85
LLLLLLLLLL = -110

Like I said, it's definitely not a perfect system, but it still stings less than the current system. The argument seems to be on how much each of us feels it's a problem.

The fact that WWWWWLLLLL can give you a really different point ranking than WLWLWLWLWL should have been evidence enough. For the record, I don't think win streaks are 'fair' either, but nothing about them penalizes winning.

What you're really upset about then is the presence of streaks at all. WWLLWWLLWL under your system gives a different outcome than WLWLWLWLWL.

This is a legitimate critique of a ranking system in competitive play. Should we have streaks at all? This is a line of inquiry that could be explored.

Then you'd have to try to determine the intent of the competitive playlist. Who does it serve? What does a rank mean (especially if it can be reset)? Is the design goal for people to have steady progress or is it for people to stack themselves up against each other?

Except that:

• The current system
  
• A system with only a Win streak and no Loss streak
  
• EVEN a Loss streak and no Win streak

...are ALL more fair than the new proposed system.