Originally posted by
UncomfortablePrawn
This doesn't really make sense as an explanation for why it happens the way people are saying it does. I don't understand why it's so difficult to 1) implement a system that is already tried and tested in League and 2) have more transparency about it.
League has a pretty fair and simple ranking system - every game you win earns you anywhere from 15-25 points, you get into promos when you reach 100 points. If you lose, you lose about the same amount, usually slightly less. That's the key idea. It means that if you maintain win rates about 50%, you will still improve.
Over time, as people play, they will end up where they're supposed to and hover around there. This also does ensure a normal distribution, because it still ends up with the majority of the playerbase falling within Silver to Plat, as is the intention.
What seems to be happening here is that games are being weighted very differently to an almost unfair level. If you can win 3 games and be demoted from losing 1 game, it means that the weightage of the 3 games is each less than 33% of the loss's points, which is pretty hard to justify. Unlike League, this means that you may essentially have to maintain a >75% win rate, in addition to solid KD every game, to gain ranks, which is rather ridiculous.
To address the series of comments; I'd be able to give much better insight if I had Match History screenshots to reference. It's incredibly difficult to explain the outcome of a situation that is determined by performance without specifics based on vague descriptions of what occurred.
One thing to keep in mind is that we currently show 3 levels of granularity for rank increase, but only 1 level for rank decrease. That doesn't mean you only ever lose small amounts of rank on a loss; you could be losing significant rank from sizable losses.
Another thing to keep in mind is that rank levels are a range, and not a binary climb. Meaning that a recent promotion could have you only on the cusp of being in that rank bracket, able to slide back out easily if you under perform in your future games. And equally a demotion doesn't mean you fell to the floor of that rank bracket, but could equally be on the cusp of getting back up again if you play well.
The last and most important thing to keep in mind, is the system is ultimately striving to place you where it considers you belong. If your match quality has been good (fewer stomps) and you're gravitating between the same rank brackets, it's likely that you're where you belong and aren't intended to continually promote indefinitely.
That all said we are evaluating our current implementation, and are digesting a lot of player feedback to consider how we can iterate on it to meet some of the expectations we're hearing. Please keep them coming!
Lastly I'm glad that you like the League system, but those comparisons aren't too applicable as we have wildly different approaches and are specifically trying to achieve different goals. At a foundation level League's rank system only considers win/lose and see's large seasonal rank resets to offset the gradual climb, both of which we're trying something different towards.
If nothing else let me assure you that you don't need anything close to a >75% winrate to gain ranks, and we've invested heavily in our data analytics to inform us of our KPIs across rank, queue and match quality to ensure we're meeting our aggressive competitive, fair and balanced targets. I hope if nothing else your match quality is indicative of this.
We hope we can achieve an approach that satisfies a majority of our audience (a ranked system will never please everyone, the same to be said of Leagues too) and hope you'll stick with us whilst we get there.