Ranking System: Yes or No, thanks?

[jackstar7]

Tyroman asks, and I deliver:

Do you think the proposed ranking system for Organized Play is something you want, or something you do not want?

No caveats, yes or no based only on the little we know!



Click and be heard!

[charlesx]

Nope. Don't want it and am not interested in it. Maybe if I were an uber-competitive power player I may feel otherwise, but go figure.

[jackstar7]

I voted in my own poll with a "No" vote because I think the game will not pick up players with a ranking system. I think it will discourage new players from trying to get into the game.


I suppose I could be wrong, but I just don't see it helping expand the player base or making tournaments more fun.

[weaponizedsoul]

the choices are a bit lopsided don't you think?

i would go for ranking if they actually did it right even if i don't care what my rank is.

PS

i voted NO

[Gambit]

Good to see that it's 100% no. It's a game that should be played for fun. It's also a comic releated game so why would I want to see a Teen Team of Bucky and the Legion discourage players from playing the Super Buddies?

I'm all for having fun with the game, not who's the best.

[jackstar7]

the choices are a bit lopsided don't you think?

i would go for ranking if they actually did it right even if i don't care what my rank is.

PS

i voted NO



I'm not the Pew Reasearch Group, all right?

Anyways... what would be involved in them doing it "right"? I just don't see how a ranking system of any kind will be beneficial.

Help me out here... if you even come back to this thread.

[hair10]

A fig FAT NO to rankings. Why?

- Don't need more competativeness in the local scene... keep it friendly.
- It'll be prone to abuse and will be essentially worthless.
- It'll mean the end to house rules and judge created scenarios.
- It'll mean more 9 to 11 weeks of "WK provided" events. :rolleyes:

[The Mattador]

I'm all for it, but I think you should have the choice of whether or not you want to be ranked for people who aren't uber-power players.

[Deadpool55]

As a judge I just see it as more I would have to enter into wizkids system.

Also we already had one little jerk at our M&M pre-release who was going on about ranking and how he was going to be number 1 then he lost the first round and dropped out, he then proceeded to stick around and annoy the rest of the players. If that is what ranking is going to turn people into no thanks.

[chrisstar]

Screw that ranking garbage!! Leave my game alone WizKids, allow the players to absorb the new changes and get used to them before shoving more down our throats!!!!!

*pants heavily*


Thank you.

[Webslinger92]

RANKING!!:grin:

[supremepontiff]

I voted yes, but only because I'm the best player in my area and it feeds my ego to see that on paper (or screen) as well as on my LE shelf...lol.

-R

[Gambit]

I voted yes, but only because I'm the best player in my area and it feeds my ego to see that on paper (or screen) as well as on my LE shelf...lol.

-R

At least you're honest about it...lol.

[Lofcutus]

I am 100% opposed to ranking in HeroClix events at a local venue level....Frankly, almost no one in my area that cares about the game has told me that they WANT rankings. Ranking the game is a foolish choice that will promote competitiveness at the expense of fun. Sounds trite, but fun is what sells this game....continues to sell this game 5 years after it was released. Ranking the game will not enhance game play, it will not bring new players that will help grow the game, it will do NO good at all!

[Bubblehead]

I want rankings. Just so I can lord them over people I know. Because.....obviously if I'm ranked I'm cool and better!


This post is brought to you by the good people at SARCASM.

Of course I voted yes but that's only because I'm skewing the demographics. Take that , pollsters!!!!!!

[rwint1968]

Are we getting paid to play heroclix? Didn't think so. No thank you to the ranking system. I voted NO by the way.

Thanks,
:cool:

[Metal]

Ranking is just a way for the arrogant annoying power gamers to throw something up in your face.
If anyone here has experience with Magics DCI ranking system they would know that rankings cause several problems and they take FUN out of the gaming equation.

[Granite Moose]

I voted "No" because there was no option for "I could care less". ;)

[W.I.T]

Nope. Don't want it and am not interested in it. Maybe if I were an uber-competitive power player I may feel otherwise, but go figure.

QFT. Though I rarely play in competitive tournaments, I think this is a bad idea that will lead to more abusive min/max power gaming, and would do more harm than good overall. You think it's competitive now? Just wait until some jerk wants to be #1 :tired:

[Bubblehead]

The thing is that being #1 in this game system is arbitrary. And there aren't enough "official" tournaments to justify who would actually be #1 against the world. Unlike the ATP, PGA, so on , so forth. So logistically it's not a good thing just because there really wouldn't be a #1.


I'm just saying.

Ok. Bye.

[invisibo]

They really need to have more regional events, national events, and world events if they want to turn heroclix into a truly competitive game (which costs a lot of money that I don't think they'll spend). Otherwise it's just going to feed egos and make the game really cutthroat for no reason, since there's no real prize on the line other than bragging rights.

I voted yes anyway and I'm pretending they're actually trying to make the game a competitive one.

[Miraclo]

I'm indifferent to it, so for now I haven't voted for either extreme. I have no interest in it - I have no interest in anything to do with competitive play - which would lean my preference towards "no", but on the other hand if ranking satisfies the egos of some players who are already in the game... why should I care?

I do have to laugh at the notion that ranking is a bad idea because people should just be playing for fun. Oh, I agree they should be playing for fun, but much of that notion was out the door and across the state line as soon as prizes were brought into tournaments.

Edit: I ultimately went with "no" because of the prospective impact it'll have on venues being able to control at least some of their events. Really, though, it will depend on how Wizkids approaches it. Still, either way I'm either indifferent or opposed to it.

[supremepontiff]

You guys comment on this game like it's not cutthroat to begin with. I can;t recall the times someone at one of the three local venues has called a judge for rulings on things and then became visibly agitated when the ruling didn't go in his/her favor. I for one play the game because it's fun and lets me relax while still thinking, unlike the mindless drones that are my freinds who -prefer television all weekend, but winning is still the reason you play the game at a tournament, or else you'd just play casual games at home with freinds, which i also do and lose horribly in them (stupid wrecking crew is 0 for the century). But if Wizkids is going to start a system that further rewards good players (ala M:TG or Vs. or LOTR or Just about any other orginized play system) then I'm all for it and i see it as incentive to play at OTHER venues outside of the two i regularly play at to keep my "rating" high.

That's just my fraction of a dollar.

-R

[elfholme]

A fig FAT NO to rankings. Why?

- Don't need more competativeness in the local scene... keep it friendly.
- It'll be prone to abuse and will be essentially worthless.
- It'll mean the end to house rules and judge created scenarios.
- It'll mean more 9 to 11 weeks of "WK provided" events. :rolleyes:

Quoted for truth. They can't really do rankings that will have any meaning if the envoys retain any autonomy with events.

I wouldn't care what my ranking would be in this sort of system, so I'd be indifferent, but I suspect that it will just negatively impact local events. WK already hands down too much "structure" with AP as it is...the last thing we need is more.

[techdog]

I voted no against it, but I would be ok with Rankings if they were only for the Wizard World Events, or major Regional Events. keep them out of the local events where fun should be the key. But, if you want to rank the people shelling out big money to attend the cons and things, I think that would be ok. And that way, it could be easier to be monitored and less abused by local players who need their egos stroked.

[Ignatz_Mouse]

Based on what I know, no.

Based on what I hope, yes, as an optional thing.

[W.I.T]

You guys comment on this game like it's not cutthroat to begin with. I can't recall the times someone at one of the three local venues has called a judge for rulings on things and then became visibly agitated when the ruling didn't go in his/her favor. I for one play the game because it's fun and lets me relax while still thinking, unlike the mindless drones that are my friends who -prefer television all weekend, but winning is still the reason you play the game at a tournament, or else you'd just play casual games at home with friends, which I also do and lose horribly in them (stupid wrecking crew is 0 for the century). But if Wizkids is going to start a system that further rewards good players (ala M:TG or Vs. or LOTR or Just about any other organized play system) then I'm all for it and I see it as incentive to play at OTHER venues outside of the two I regularly play at to keep my "rating" high.

That's just my fraction of a dollar.

-R

So tell me how making a ranking system is going to help the game, or make it any less (as you put it) 'cutthroat'?

No all people go to tournaments to win, some go to have fun ;)

Now looking at your post, there is one of the big reasons to not add a ranking system. The last part of your paragraph:

' But if Wizkids is going to start a system that further rewards good players (ala M:TG or Vs. or LOTR or Just about any other organized play system) then I'm all for it and I see it as incentive to play at OTHER venues outside of the two I regularly play at to keep my "rating" high.'

Great, so now venues that maybe have a more laid back, and non-competitive atmosphere, have to worry about some guy showing up every week with a min/max power team, beating on all the local regulars, just so this guy can keep his ranking high :tired: Yeah...............

[AngrySalad]

A fig FAT NO to rankings. Why?

- Don't need more competativeness in the local scene... keep it friendly.
- It'll be prone to abuse and will be essentially worthless.
- It'll mean the end to house rules and judge created scenarios.
- It'll mean more 9 to 11 weeks of "WK provided" events. :rolleyes:

A big FAT YES for me.

- It can still be just as friendly on the local scene. I've played plenty of friendly competitive games. Even if you lose, it is just a game. And nothing says you can't have a pick-up game at the local venue with judge rules.
- If you don't care about the rankings, then don't follow them. The rankings will be there for the people who care about them, and like to be judged, measured, and validated. I like to compare my stats against other players. I like to see who's winning the most, who's coming out on top.
- Different events could have different ranking weights. A judge created scenario might not be worth as many ranking points as a Marquee. Also, the amount of people that show up to a particular tourney might also affect the rank weight. So, I don't think it will necessarily be the end of judge created scenarios, I just don't think they will be weighted the same as WK enforced ones.
- A ranking system might bring more competitve players to the game, but more players means more product purchased. More product purchased means more money for WK, and potentially more money for them to pump back into the game, or offer as prizes at larger tourneys.
- Maybe they have "ranked" and "unranked" weeks, but still offer prize support across all weeks.

I'm for the ranking system, but everything is just speculation right now.

Maybe if they ever came out with a document outlining their plans... :rolleyes:

[hair10]

- It can still be just as friendly on the local scene. I've played plenty of friendly competitive games. Even if you lose, it is just a game. And nothing says you can't have a pick-up game at the local venue with judge rules.
As an ideal, yes. But the reality is that won't happen.

- If you don't care about the rankings, then don't follow them. The rankings will be there for the people who care about them, and like to be judged, measured, and validated. I like to compare my stats against other players. I like to see who's winning the most, who's coming out on top.
While I may not follow them, I will be impacted by them when Jim Powergamer starts showing up with his min/maxed teams week in and week out just so he can pad his e-wang... er, ranking.

- Different events could have different ranking weights. A judge created scenario might not be worth as many ranking points as a Marquee. Also, the amount of people that show up to a particular tourney might also affect the rank weight. So, I don't think it will necessarily be the end of judge created scenarios, I just don't think they will be weighted the same as WK enforced ones.
So? That doesn't change anything. The guy gunning for high rankings is still going to min/max EVERY game to boost his rank.

- A ranking system might bring more competitve players to the game, but more players means more product purchased. More product purchased means more money for WK, and potentially more money for them to pump back into the game, or offer as prizes at larger tourneys.
Will these mythical "more players" offset the ones that leave the tourney scene altogether because they're sick of Jim Powergamer? Not likely.

Maybe if they ever came out with a document outlining their plans... :rolleyes:
Heh... now you're dreaming. ;)

[Granite Moose]

Great, so now venues that maybe have a more laid back, and non-competitive atmosphere, have to worry about some guy showing up every week with a min/max power team, beating on all the local regulars, just so this guy can keep his ranking high :tired: Yeah...............

QFT, my man, QFT.

[supremepontiff]

Great, so now venues that maybe have a more laid back, and non-competitive atmosphere, have to worry about some guy showing up every week with a min/max power team, beating on all the local regulars, just so this guy can keep his ranking high :tired: Yeah...............

First off, i don't min/max powergame. if i did that i'm sure i would get bored winning easily as most of the former "cheese" players around here did. I took a Hellfire club team to a pre-release in ohio and barely missed top 8 with it. the field was FULL of ye old black adam and borg cube teams. I think Gacy was there. I'm just a good player.:p

Second off, like i said, you don't play in tournaments if you're not there to win the LE/prize. if you're just there to have a good time with your freinds, then why complain that some "min/max" guy is coming to win? Just have fun with your freinds and let it go to him, in fact, if you really wanna stick it to them, just concede to him instead of maybe challenging yourself to beat a good (aka cheese,min/max, whatever etc.) team. :tired:

Third and lastly, I also hope that a more orginized play structure brings about more limited type tournaments. I happen to prefer and enjoy booster and booster draft tournaments and there isn't enough of them.
That is where the people who know how to play the game itself and not just some schmoe who hits the ebay button 4 or five times shine. Some of the best matches i've ever had are from limited format games. See also: Royale with cheese.

[Monkey Joe]

How about "I don't care"?

[hair10]

I happen to prefer and enjoy booster and booster draft tournaments and there isn't enough of them.
WK needs to produce more boosters first. ;)

[AngrySalad]

Third and lastly, I also hope that a more orginized play structure brings about more limited type tournaments. I happen to prefer and enjoy booster and booster draft tournaments and there isn't enough of them.
That is where the people who know how to play the game itself and not just some schmoe who hits the ebay button 4 or five times shine. Some of the best matches i've ever had are from limited format games. See also: Royale with cheese.

Agreed. I love Booster Draft tourneys which there are NONE of for any WK sanctioned events. Yes, we had TOO MUCH sealed for Avengers and JL, but one a month (or one every two months even) isn't too much to ask. It really gets my juices flowing when I have a limited amount of resources available to create a winning team, and everyone is on the same playing field (as far as blind resources go).

[ccs]

You didn't include "I don't care" as an option.

Sure, you imply that with the "No". But saying no isn't quite the same as what I intend. Just as with Magics DCI ranking system I simply don't care. Let WK rank or don't rank me as they please. Let others contemplate thier position #, stroke thier own egos etc etc etc. Me? Not worried about it.

[rorschachknew]

borg cube teams.

whuzzat?



.

[supremepontiff]

whuzzat?
.

At the time it consisted of:

V Unleashed Green Lantern 165
+ trick shot 20

9 pogs (usually mary jane 45

le Zatana Zatara (to team copy the mystics with Mary Jane) 35

265 base point cost. 35 to fool around with.

-R

[rorschachknew]

hmm, that sounds like the opposite of fun,
thanks for explaining

[hair10]

At the time it consisted of:

V Unleashed Green Lantern 165
+ trick shot 20

9 pogs (usually mary jane 45

le Zatana Zatara (to team copy the mystics with Mary Jane) 35

265 base point cost. 35 to fool around with.

-R
You forgot the Alfred pog to wild card Batman Ally.

[supremepontiff]

Oh yeah. and the alfred pog.... =( after tbolts feat came into play it dropped the zatanna and ran frickin alfred AND jarvis.

-R

[supremepontiff]

hmm, that sounds like the opposite of fun,


well, unless your team has energy explosion or pulse wave it is kinda borking to play against it.

yeah i said borking.

-R

[Heathcliff]

Like my fellow nerds I voted "No on 15"


and no on rankings too. :classic:

[Gentlegamer]

I'm not in favor of a ranking system, but venues that want to participate in ranked play ought to be given the option. By the same token, venues that don't want to be ranked ought to be allowed to play the way they want (house rules, etc.).

[Answerman]

I'm not in favor of a ranking system, but venues that want to participate in ranked play ought to be given the option. By the same token, venues that don't want to be ranked ought to be allowed to play the way they want (house rules, etc.).

I couldn't agree more.
WK obviously doesn't feel the same way...

[W.I.T]

1) First off, i don't min/max powergame. if i did that i'm sure i would get bored winning easily as most of the former "cheese" players around here did. I took a Hellfire club team to a pre-release in ohio and barely missed top 8 with it. the field was FULL of ye old black adam and borg cube teams. I think Gacy was there. I'm just a good player.:p

2) Second off, like i said, you don't play in tournaments if you're not there to win the LE/prize. if you're just there to have a good time with your friends, then why complain that some "min/max" guy is coming to win? Just have fun with your friends and let it go to him, in fact, if you really wanna stick it to them, just concede to him instead of maybe challenging yourself to beat a good (aka cheese,min/max, whatever etc.) team. :tired:

3) Third and lastly, I also hope that a more orginized play structure brings about more limited type tournaments. I happen to prefer and enjoy booster and booster draft tournaments and there isn't enough of them.
That is where the people who know how to play the game itself and not just some schmoe who hits the ebay button 4 or five times shine. Some of the best matches i've ever had are from limited format games. See also: Royale with cheese.

1) Not pointing fingers at you specifically, but it will happen. Which is not a good thing.

2) Contrary to your belief, many many people actually go to venues to.....get ready for it......have fun. Or maybe they just don't have a group of friends that play the game, so the venue is the only place they can go to play. It's not always about the prizes.

3) There isn't enough booster draft tournaments? Did you really just say that? There has been pretty much nothing but sealed play for the last, what, 6 months? JL, M&M, Crisis. I don't play many tournaments, but even I am sick of hearing the whining about them.

[supremepontiff]

3) There isn't enough booster draft tournaments? Did you really just say that? There has been pretty much nothing but sealed play for the last, what, 6 months? JL, M&M, Crisis. I don't play many tournaments, but even I am sick of hearing the whining about them.

The only whining i ever hear is about the floor events and how restrictive they are. Around here everyone is very pro-booster events as it makes a level playing feild between the newer player and the "elder statesman" of our play groups.

-R

[GreenMonster]

They would never balance it correctly:

Assuming it is points based, It could go:

10 hero pts for a win
2 hero pts for a loss

5 hero pts for winning a tournament

Additional factors:
2 hero pts for not using a theme team
1 hero point for not using a BFC
1 hero point for not using a bystander
2 hero pts for not using a FEAT
1 hero point for not using a special item
1 hero point for not having any T/As

No more than 3 games+1 tournament /wk may be submitted.

They really should build a database so you could input your team and it would spit out the hero point total, then the Judge could match the teams/rounds.

[Darth Sabre]

I do not think there is a need for Heroclix to become a ranked game. It would also split the Heroclix community between the ultra-competitve and those who just want something to do, to escape their lives once a week.

[Gentlegamer]

I do not think there is a need for Heroclix to become a ranked game. It would also split the Heroclix community between the ultra-competitve and those who just want something to do, to escape their lives once a week.I think that split already exists.

[Darth Sabre]

I think that split already exists.

Nationally, I don't really care. Locally, I do. We have a good (albeit small) group of palyers now, and the uber-competitiveness has been gone for some time. I'd hate to see it return.

[tyroman]

If there's going to be ranking I want to be a commander. :cool:

[Tollas]

I see several problems with this, not the least of which is improper reporting. I could quite easily start up a venue out in BFE somewhere and have my friend win every week. The number of uninformed players startles me sometimes.
Also, I see a rise in attendance in a bad way. Currently, I play once a week at a venue just down the road from me. If there were good incentives to winning more (highly rare LEs, etc.) I see people playing more to win rather than to have fun. I wouldn't be able to play my Flash Rogues, Sinister Six, Classic X-Men teams and stay competitive if every week KC Supes showed up.