Everyone knows the feeling of playing a game in which everyone is significantly better or worse at the game than you. You don't have a good time because either you get crushed without hope of victory or you crush without hope of a challenge. Cubecraft Java does not have enough players for this, but on Bedrock edition, it would be amazing if there was a system to divide players based on their skill level.
This should include a new statistic called "skill rating". When joining a game, only people whose ratings are close enough to yours can join the game. This allows better matchups in exchange for games starting a little slower. If you're not good at a game, your skill rating will go down and you will be matched with people your level. If you are amazing at the game, your skill rating will go up and you will be matched with people your level.
When winning a game, your skill rating for that game would go up. If you lose, it will go down. Your skill rating will go up significantly on victory and potentially slightly if you get second place. The worse your position, the more your skill rating will go down, but every game, the total skill rating of all players should at the beginning of the game should be the same as at the end of the game. Everyone should start with a low skill rating, but for their first few games until they lose, their skill rating will go up substantially if they win without affecting everyone else's skill rating more than it otherwise would be affected.
For team games, skill rating should be affected not only by position but also by how well you played as an individual. It sucks when my teammates are trash and I lose despite being the best player in the lobby. Depending on the game, things like kills, deaths, and egg breaks may contribute to skill rating. Players cannot quickly gain skill rating by carrying their team. Also, players whose skill ratings are lower than the average skill rating of the lobby will gain more or lose less skill rating than they otherwise would and vice versa.
Players in a party whose skill ratings are different enough that the players in the party could not normally get into a game together will receive a warning before they go into their game that one or more players in the party has a low skill rating and will likely be matched against opponents who are too skilled for them. Giving this warning to the more skilled players that they will be against noobs will prevent those noobs from having fun because their opponent is too skilled. For team games, the average skill rating of the partied players will be taken and that will be the average skill rating of the entire lobby.
Another related idea to consider is to simply not count team games if the game can also be played solo, and solo games will affect skill rating. However, this makes it too easy for annoying players to throw games, drop their skill rating, and play against noobs in unrated games.
In case anyone wonders why I said that the total skill rating should remain the same from beginning to end of a game, it is because if the total rating decreased, average rating worldwide would eventually drop below zero, and if it increased, win rate would be partially based on how much a player has played, so the nerds who play ten times as much as anyone else will have huge skill ratings (for the record, there is someone I will not name in one of Cubecraft's games that fits this description perfectly but I beat them more than they beat me).
I would be eager to hear any arguments against mine or to hear comments on how this is a good idea but could be worked differently.
This should include a new statistic called "skill rating". When joining a game, only people whose ratings are close enough to yours can join the game. This allows better matchups in exchange for games starting a little slower. If you're not good at a game, your skill rating will go down and you will be matched with people your level. If you are amazing at the game, your skill rating will go up and you will be matched with people your level.
When winning a game, your skill rating for that game would go up. If you lose, it will go down. Your skill rating will go up significantly on victory and potentially slightly if you get second place. The worse your position, the more your skill rating will go down, but every game, the total skill rating of all players should at the beginning of the game should be the same as at the end of the game. Everyone should start with a low skill rating, but for their first few games until they lose, their skill rating will go up substantially if they win without affecting everyone else's skill rating more than it otherwise would be affected.
For team games, skill rating should be affected not only by position but also by how well you played as an individual. It sucks when my teammates are trash and I lose despite being the best player in the lobby. Depending on the game, things like kills, deaths, and egg breaks may contribute to skill rating. Players cannot quickly gain skill rating by carrying their team. Also, players whose skill ratings are lower than the average skill rating of the lobby will gain more or lose less skill rating than they otherwise would and vice versa.
Players in a party whose skill ratings are different enough that the players in the party could not normally get into a game together will receive a warning before they go into their game that one or more players in the party has a low skill rating and will likely be matched against opponents who are too skilled for them. Giving this warning to the more skilled players that they will be against noobs will prevent those noobs from having fun because their opponent is too skilled. For team games, the average skill rating of the partied players will be taken and that will be the average skill rating of the entire lobby.
Another related idea to consider is to simply not count team games if the game can also be played solo, and solo games will affect skill rating. However, this makes it too easy for annoying players to throw games, drop their skill rating, and play against noobs in unrated games.
In case anyone wonders why I said that the total skill rating should remain the same from beginning to end of a game, it is because if the total rating decreased, average rating worldwide would eventually drop below zero, and if it increased, win rate would be partially based on how much a player has played, so the nerds who play ten times as much as anyone else will have huge skill ratings (for the record, there is someone I will not name in one of Cubecraft's games that fits this description perfectly but I beat them more than they beat me).
I would be eager to hear any arguments against mine or to hear comments on how this is a good idea but could be worked differently.
