Posted by Darklink

Lol I was 12th or 13th when I logged off, I get back on the next day and I'm number 40something. One guy has 1 win and over 1000 points...

I talked to a few of them and they said they never even sparred recently, no clue, I'm sure FP4 will figure it out  

It may be a different system but i see it still achieving the same result as the previous one. Except now the people near the top spots on the leaderboards are closer to convincing staff to give them prizes for it.  

Posted by Thallen

I talked to a few of them and they said they never even sparred recently, no clue, I'm sure FP4 will figure it out

Well I just checked again, and now the decimals are gone from their scores. Sooo I guess that's slightly better?  

Fixed the decimal problem.

Fixed the other problem with people showing up on the leaderboard when they shouldn't of. People's ratings were getting applied to the leaderboard instead of points which explains why there were so many people in the thousands.  

Posted by Elysium

It may be a different system but i see it still achieving the same result as the previous one. Except now the people near the top spots on the leaderboards are closer to convincing staff to give them prizes for it.

The results aren't entirely the same, for example:


Sarah spars so much and wins a ton so she is basically going to remain #1 as long as she does that, at least in this community. That isn't a problem because she was #1 on the last leaderboard 95% of the time, too. She regularly streaks 30+ multiple times per day and often gets 300-500 wins per day. No matter what model we use, I'm pretty sure she will remain #1 until people figure out how to beat her or she stops sparring so much.

I've been the equivalent of Sarah on the PC board for a long time. But now, I can't AFK for 2 weeks, come back, and spar 3 times then be back to #1 by 1000 points over #2.

Spoiler

Like this:

If I do that now then someone passes me, and I'm fine with that.

Without the new leaderboard, people like Blaze, Super, and Bob would rarely be seen at top spots. Not because they're bad, but because to maintain that spot they'd probably need to spar "carefully" and that's lame. So, they're sparring (and more importantly, winning) actively and contributing to the activity of the community, and they're high on leaderboards.

Positions 4-7 are really close, and the two ways to move up in that group is:

1. Spar a lot
2. Win a lot

On the last leaderboard, it was "spar extremely carefully and avoid sparrers who may be better than you," and although my opinion is probably biased, I like this new way a lot more. Be mindful that this isn't a "whoever spars the most gets the highest ranking" leaderboard. It's "whoever wins the most or wins actively against the best players gets the highest ranking."

Posted by fp4

Fixed the decimal problem.

Fixed the other problem with people showing up on the leaderboard when they shouldn't of. People's ratings were getting applied to the leaderboard instead of points which explains why there were so many people in the thousands.

Thanks!  

If its achieving the same results as the previous system with #1 places on the two leaderboards, then whats the point in it? It just appears that it creates a bigger gap between first place which is the only place with any significance and the rest of the places, as perfectly demonstrated by Sarah who already has more than a 3000 point difference on the closest person to her on the rankings, correct me if I'm wrong but the difference between #1 and #2 on the previous system was not as vast as it is now.

I don't see this system as being encouraging to new sparrers or those not as well known, sure enough you can't lose your points but their spar stats are still affected and they'll still be as hesitant as before to spar. How are they supposed to get any sort of respectable ranking once the season has begun, or if they don't have enough time to dedicate to sparring as others do?

This system for a few months will just give the illusion that more players are actively sparring, but after a few months the novelty will just ware off and they'll realize that they have even less chance of getting a dignify rank.  

Posted by Elysium

If its achieving the same results as the previous system with #1 places on the two leaderboards, then whats the point in it? It just appears that it creates a bigger gap between first place which is the only place with any significance and the rest of the places, as perfectly demonstrated by Sarah who already has more than a 3000 point difference on the closest person to her on the rankings, correct me if I'm wrong but the difference between #1 and #2 on the previous system was not as vast as it is now.

I don't see this system as being encouraging to new sparrers or those not as well known, sure enough you can't lose your points but their spar stats are still affected and they'll still be as hesitant as before to spar. How are they supposed to get any sort of respectable ranking once the season has begun, or if they don't have enough time to dedicate to sparring as others do?

This system for a few months will just give the illusion that more players are actively sparring, but after a few months the novelty will just ware off and they'll realize that they have even less chance of getting a dignify rank.

i think one of the points is that it helps stop non active sparrers from hogging the leader board and it gives active sparrers a chance to be on it.  

Not a fan. I loved the spar rating system because loses count against you. Ive wanted PK scores to account for deaths one way or another for awhile. Now spar loses dont affect you and getting on the board means sparring the most. The exact problem the PK boards have always had.  

Posted by Elysium

If its achieving the same results as the previous system with #1 places on the two leaderboards, then whats the point in it?

The new leaderboard isn't supposed to hold active, good sparrers back. How would that make sense or be fair at all? If players were #1 under both leaderboards, doesn't that mean they deserve that position?

Posted by Elysium

It just appears that it creates a bigger gap between first place which is the only place with any significance and the rest of the places, as perfectly demonstrated by Sarah who already has more than a 3000 point difference on the closest person to her on the rankings, correct me if I'm wrong but the difference between #1 and #2 on the previous system was not as vast as it is now.

The gap was that big. You're thinking in numbers, not percentages. Again though, you're treating the leaderboard change as if it was supposed to hold people back. It isn't. It's not a punishment for good sparrers, it's an encouragement for everyone to spar more actively and win against the best sparrers.

Posted by Elysium

I don't see this system as being encouraging to new sparrers or those not as well known, sure enough you can't lose your points but their spar stats are still affected and they'll still be as hesitant as before to spar. How are they supposed to get any sort of respectable ranking once the season has begun, or if they don't have enough time to dedicate to sparring as others do?

No change to a leaderboard will encourage new players to spar. Hats and other incentives will encourage new players to spar, and that's why I've also suggested those changes. The leaderboard change encourages sparrers to spar more.

Posted by twilit

Not a fan. I loved the spar rating system because loses count against you. Ive wanted PK scores to account for deaths one way or another for awhile. Now spar loses dont affect you and getting on the board means sparring the most. The exact problem the PK boards have always had.

You loved it so much that you literally never spar?!

Losing does count against you, in many ways:

1. You gain 0 points when you could have gained >0
2. You waste time, assuming you spar for ranks
3. You get a loss in your profile

"Now spar loses don't affect you and getting on the board means sparring the most," is completely inaccurate, because you can spar 1000 times in a day, and if you never win then you gain nothing. If you win against 1-10 players, you gain close to nothing. If you spar and win against good players, you gain a lot.

It's been 24 hours and IMO, as someone who is very active in sparring, the leaderboards already look a hell of a lot more healthier and refreshing. There are no alts, no horrible sparrers, no one who abused a glitch to achieve a rating, etc. Both leaderboards are a mix of very good and very active sparrers.  

this new leaderboard has gotten the spar community so much more active. most rooms are usually packed now unlike before with the old leaderboard.  

Posted by Thallen

The new leaderboard isn't supposed to hold active, good sparrers back. How would that make sense or be fair at all? If players were #1 under both leaderboards, doesn't that mean they deserve that position?

At least with the previous system the #1 spots were fought after more competitively. The previous leaderboard wasn't really holding anyone back it was the spar records that mostly phased people off because they were perfectly content with maintaining their good spar stats. Maybe you could make a somewhat of an argument about some of the top 10 ranked sparrers who were on those leaderboards being hesitant. However they only make up a small fraction of the sparring community and once again I think their spar records being affected had a large influence on their hesitancy.

Posted by Thallen

The gap was that big. You're thinking in numbers, not percentages. Again though, you're treating the leaderboard change as if it was supposed to hold people back. It isn't. It's not a punishment for good sparrers, it's an encouragement for everyone to spar more actively and win against the best sparrers.

3000+ point gap, really? Its already been a few days and Sarah has already run away with it, which to her credit showcases her ability but also how much time she has to spend sparring compared to everyone else. If I were someone new to sparring or someone who wanted to begin sparring again and saw that a player had already gotten such high points without the possibility of ever losing them I'd immediately be phased off because its unrealistic to be able to get anywhere near them, because of this I just see it reducing competition.

Posted by Thallen

No change to a leaderboard will encourage new players to spar. Hats and other incentives will encourage new players to spar, and that's why I've also suggested those changes. The leaderboard change encourages sparrers to spar more.

If hats were to be introduced they shouldn't be for ranked positions on the leaderboards, because the same people will just get them making the entire thing pointless for everyone else. Hats for sparring landmarks like a certain number of wins doesn't seem that bad though.  

Posted by Elysium

At least with the previous system the #1 spots were fought after more competitively.

They weren't. I've been #1 on the PC board for probably 90% of the last year. The only other two to hold it for a considerable amount of time were David and Dante. I'm not trying to inflate my own head, I'm just being completely honest with you.

The same goes to the iDevice leaderboard. For nearly a year, it's been Sarah, Abood, or Kevin. Occasionally, someone would glitch their points and hold it for a week.

Posted by Elysium

3000+ point gap, really? Its already been a few days and Sarah has already run away with it, which to her credit showcases her ability but also how much time she has to spend sparring compared to everyone else.

It's been 36 hours. Now what happens if Sarah decides, "Whoa, I've been winning spars too much lately, time to take a break?" A day or two later, she loses her spot. If she doesn't decide to do that, good. She spars more, and the sparring community is more active.

Before, she could make that same decision and never lose her #1 spot. As long as she spars 5 times a week, she is #1 forever. That just sucks. I was actually going to consider personally asking Sarah not to spar for a day or two, because I knew that she'd poop on the new leaderboard (just as she did the old one), and I wanted everyone to get a good first impression of the new format. But then I had to ask myself how much sense that actually makes, and how is that even fair to her? I mean, she delays badly and skips at times, sure. You can hate her for that if you choose to. But can you even deny that she spars and wins a whole lot? If not, then no one is right to try and stop her from being #1 by a million points.

Posted by Elysium

If hats were to be introduced they shouldn't be for ranked positions on the leaderboards, because the same people will just get them making the entire thing pointless for everyone else. Hats for sparring landmarks like a certain number of wins doesn't seem that bad though.

I don't care for rewards for the higher-ranked players, and that's coming from someone who would almost always receive it. If anything, a little statue that dynamically updates every time the #1 spot changes in the BA lobby.

I am 100% behind giving players some sort of reward for reaching milestone spar wins, because that (not this leaderboard) would encourage new players to spar.

With both in effect, we'd have a very active community of existing sparrers and a healthy amount of new players finding interest in sparring.  

Twist this post in whatever insane way you want, but here we go:
This system is complete garbage.
Here is a guide to getting on top of it:
Have a spar series against your professional sparring friends with high ratios. Probably best for (Alumni), since Thallen gives 100 points and it takes only 10 wins to get 1,000 points (for those who suck at math).
If you are not in (Alumni) and just spar casually, your average point output per spar will be somewhere between 8 and 14 points, since the ratios of most players in the game are around that area.
Here is some more math, if you spar someone with a 1-1 ratio, which should be the overall average because it makes sense, it will take 100 spars against them to get 1,000 points.
Obviously, Thallen and (Alumni) want it. For those people who actually have a life and don't want to spar 700 times to get to Sarah's rating, here is a MUCH better idea:
Wins per day/week/all time, or nothing.
The current leaderboard is basically a wins per season leaderboard that is extremely easy to manipulate. Just ask me to series you for a few hours, 20 wins = 1000 points!  

I honestly like this new system. It encourages actively sparring even if you lose whereas the old system pretty much had you selective spar in order to be on the top of the Leaderboards. Not only are the spar rooms packed but there's something even better, kids mad about the rating system changing.  

if u wanna encourage noobs to spar, let them hide their loses. im a noob, idc about pts system. all i care about is w-l.