Perk for top leaderboards?

[Aeruner]

I don't think it's a good Idea because when you do that only more people are going to log if they lose a fight or if they get a bad start.

Ranks are based on wins, not points.

 

[bart]

you got points rank 2

 

[OMGjustin]

I am against the tournament for top 12 idea, because I'm sure there's a lot of others, but I personally started playing later than the top 12s, but am easily better than quite a few of them. I suggest a top 48 tournament. (2 games of 24 or 1 big game of 48) to include those who don't spend 5 hours a day every day playing this, but are worthy of the top spots.

 

[crozekilla]

I was wondering (because I am getting close there myself) about giving people in like, the top 10 of the leaderboards a perk. It would kind of give people drive to get there? And be rewarding for people that do actually get there. Maybe they could either get basic donor status just as soon as they get within top ten and keep it while in top ten? Idk something would be kinda neat I think. Would give me more drive to get there myself! And would just be a nice way to have a way to achieve donor perk without having to spend money. You know, earn it.
Or maybe it could auto promote the top ten to their own, new rank. Like its a different color than donors and it has some kinda perk with it. Or even no perk... just a different colored name. Idk anything would be neat...

If you are in the top 10, then they already are better than everyone else, they don't need the extra help. Perhaps in game perks after a certain amount of kills or for surviving a certain amount of time like a certain item will be put into your inventory or a potion of some sort (As you already know Nate, I'm a little obsessive with keeping this to the book =P) Possibly a way to implement sponsors?

 

[cameron224]

If you are in the top 10, then they already are better than everyone else, they don't need the extra help. Perhaps in game perks after a certain amount of kills or for surviving a certain amount of time like a certain item will be put into your inventory or a potion of some sort (As you already know Nate, I'm a little obsessive with keeping this to the book =P) Possibly a way to implement sponsors?

I would disagree. Its not that they are "definitively" better but instead are good and play very often. I couldn't maintain at top 10 spot for over a week because i'd go to school and come back to be 10th or 11th again. People play ALL the time.

 

[OMGjustin]

I would disagree. Its not that they are "definitively" better but instead are good and play very often. I couldn't maintain at top 10 spot for over a week because i'd go to school and come back to be 10th or 11th again. People play ALL the time.

Exactly. Top 10 isn't necessarily skill, but the will to stay indoors every day and avoiding contact with any other human being.

 

[Kanachi]

I’ve only just started but to me it sounds as if the scoreboard is made up of your total accumulated points, wins etc...

Is this not a flawed system? It rewards longevity not ability. A farer system would be to calculate a player’s average points once they have played 10 or more games. Before you have played 10 games your score fluctuates too much to draw an accurate average and thus do not appear on the leader board.

Who is more skilled the guy who has played a million games and won 10 or the guy who has played 11 games and won 9?

 

[nate252]

Who is more skilled the guy who has played a million games and won 10 or the guy who has played 11 games and won 9?

9 guy is more skilled. But if they both play a few more games he will catch up and surpass 10. He just needs to keep playing. So.. patience?
Cuz it shouldnt take long at that rate to pass the other guy.

 

[Kanachi]

9 guy is more skilled. But if they both play a few more games he will catch up and surpass 10. He just needs to keep playing. So.. patience?
Cuz it shouldnt take long at that rate to pass the other guy.

Sorry I think you miss my point. I was giving a heavily exagerated example here.

My point is that if you intend to mesure something acurately over time you cant use a running total, you use an average. Its just basic mathematic logic really.

So lets say our million game guy had won 100 games... would the other guy really hve to win 101 games to surpass him? Thats just wonky maths my friend and serves no one.

The guy million game guys win % is less than 1%... in other words he sucks.

The other guys win % is 81% at the moment, so hes obviously the better player and should not have to win another 90+ games to prove that.

 

[Fin_Craftmaster]

i am that million games guy ecept i haven't won once. jk i havn't but i haven't played that many games eather, i have a life. i like the idea for a colored name though.

 

[cameron224]

9 guy is more skilled. But if they both play a few more games he will catch up and surpass 10. He just needs to keep playing. So.. patience?
Cuz it shouldnt take long at that rate to pass the other guy.

its different when then Leader has 70+ wins and the "flawless" player has maybe 14 or 15... its a long way to go.

 

[Awopcxet]

Sorry I think you miss my point. I was giving a heavily exagerated example here.

My point is that if you intend to mesure something acurately over time you cant use a running total, you use an average. Its just basic mathematic logic really.

So lets say our million game guy had won 100 games... would the other guy really hve to win 101 games to surpass him? Thats just wonky maths my friend and serves no one.

The guy million game guys win % is less than 1%... in other words he sucks.

The other guys win % is 81% at the moment, so hes obviously the better player and should not have to win another 90+ games to prove that.

a problem with that could be hackers