View player statistics - global rating bug

[Horkemosjer]

He guys, I think the global rating shown in the rating analysis (view player statistics), at least in my case, is incorrect. For three weeks in a row my global rating is 1377. Last week I played three ranked games, all of which I won, but still my global rating remains 1377, which doesn't make sense to me

Using the rating analysis tool I checked my global rating:
minimum = 1528
maximim = 1679
leaderboard = 1377

global min=1528 and max=1679.gif (37.87 KiB) Viewed 1617 times

But when I check the global rating evolution for the past 90 days my ratings have been updated on a weekly basis:
minimum = 1540
maximim = 1691
leaderboard = not shown here, but should be somewhere between 1385 and 1395 now

min 1540.gif (32.93 KiB) Viewed 1617 times

max 1691.gif (32.41 KiB) Viewed 1617 times

About three weeks ago it was 1528 van 1679 according to the evolution tab.

Does anyone else experience the rating not being updated in the global tab, but being updated in the global rating evolution tab? Could someone please fix this bug or am I missing something here?

[BlackReaper]

You are not alone, I think i got the same problem... my rating hasnt changed since weeks but i played a lot of games.

[Xinnony]

The rating system is not clear and I will not practical.
I would prefer a system like Battlefield 3 with a grades.

Because the current system is a rating according to the team that also.
As with grades, it is the experience, and adding the number of part we could get an idea of the people in front of us.

[Ze_PilOt]

The rating system is not clear and I will not practical.
I would prefer a system like Battlefield 3 with a grades.

Because the current system is a rating according to the team that also.
As with grades, it is the experience, and adding the number of part we could get an idea of the people in front of us.

That's exactly what rating is.

Divide your rating per 100, and you have your personal grade, from 0 to 25.

To answer the OP : It's not a bug. Ranking is rounded and not updated in real time from everywhere else than global overview.

[Xinnony]

Yes, but you win level only if we win the game.
Not following the experience lead during the game ?

[Horkemosjer]

Apparently someone fixed this issue, or my rating was only updated this afternoon instead of yesterday. My new global rating is now 1398, even better than I estimated

1398.gif (37.39 KiB) Viewed 1549 times

Thx anyways guys!

[Ze_PilOt]

Yes, but you win level only if we win the game.
Not following the experience lead during the game ?

I don't understand what you are trying to say.

If you are saying that the "rating" should change depending not only from victory but also what you are doing inside the game, it's not possible.

There is viable criteria that allow that.

Ie. you can have the best eco every teamgame you play without producing any unit, and lose all your games because of that. That shouldn't make you "more experienced".

Only victory counts, it MUST be like this, and it won't change. Unless you have a great argument, but I doubt it.

In BF3, it's far more easier. You are a medic. You heal soldiers. You win experience.
You are a recon, you tell your teammate about enemies and lock tanks with the laser, you win experience.
Logic.
In FA, there is no "little role" like that.

[Ze_PilOt]

I must also point out than even you play like shit in BF3, you will gain rank no matter what.
Your skill will make that slower or faster, that's all.

It's not because you are general in BF3 that you play well. It only means you've played the amount of time necessary to reach that level accordingly to your skill.

That's why it's a rank system, not a rating system.

Actually it's more like a cookie they give to the player to keep them addicted, nothing more. A stupid system if you want my opinion, as it's also tied to weapon and vehicles upgrades.
It's like restricting new player to T1 only in FA. Only 1800+ can build experimental!

And FAF has a rank system, but it's reserved for the ladder.

And BF3 has a rating system, but it never worked very well/at all.
Basically, each time you kill someone is like the result of a 1v1, but as BF3 can be highly random, it's biased in every way possible.
To make it work, they should have done a rating system based not based on 1v1 (it's stupid for a team game to begin with), but team vs team. Hey, exactly what FAF is doing!