Posted by Thallen

Not a single new player looks at a leaderboard that tops at 800k and bottoms at 140k and says "I'll have a shot at competing with that sometime soon"

For #1 all-time, yeah. I wouldn't bother, but if you go for #1 without at least being in top 100, of course you wouldn't want to try.

Yet, why do people still pk? Because, they can at least be #1 in daily/weekly, without having to wait 3 months.

Posted by Zetectic

update ur list. idk y u skipped some people or put wrong names.

I don't have every single sparrer on my friends list...

I found most of them by just going through spar guilds.  

Comparing sparring and PKing is just plain wrong though. One is a measure of mindless quantity and how much time you're willing to spend spamming doorways while achieving a number while the other is more quality oriented. A number doesn't seem like an accurate measure of skill to me as far as sparring goes.

I was able to get #1 on the daily PK board by doing nothing but spamming arrows at PK mobs and my sword at towers where people tend to be below 1.5 a lot of the time anyways. Which is fine. PKing should be a measure of how much time you're willing to put into the game but sparring is just an entirely different thing.  

Posted by Aguzo

Because, they can at least be #1 in daily/weekly, without having to wait 3 months.

I agree, which is why I don't understand why the current leaderboard isn't sectioned off as daily/weekly/seasonal
I've suggested it a handful of times

It doesn't make sense to me that we still split up the mobile and PC leaderboards either - the PC room has been dead since forever and the iDevice room has grown increasingly less active, so I don't really think many people care about segregating themselves away from PC sparrers anymore
I think the leaderboard itself would be more interesting just combined together and if the top tabs were showing daily/weekly/seasonal, with daily being the default

GS board is a whole different thing obviously  

Posted by Aguzo

I don't have every single sparrer on my friends list...

I found most of them by just going through spar guilds.

yeah so i listed 'em for u. u skipped few, look at 13k line
and cally isn't nadine, nadine is above 25k  

Posted by Zetectic

yeah so i listed 'em for u. u skipped few, look at 13k line
and cally isn't nadine, nadine is above 25k

Yeah, but you added them later on. I mix them up a lot. Thanks anyways.

Pretty cool to see that the pk boards line up almost identically to a total wins board.

Around the same amounts, if 1k Wins = 10,000 kills. Mostly at the top it's sort of similar  

To be fair if there was such a leaderboard I would acc spar more and seriously , personally I think that wins aren't necessary arm as they don't acctualy equate to anything in game. This demotivated me from focusing on spar and I end up afk 3/4 of he time , so if this was added I think at least I would be more happy with sparring , idk about anyone else but that's my opinion  

Posted by Saber Alumba

To be fair if there was such a leaderboard I would acc spar more and seriously , personally I think that wins aren't necessary arm as they don't acctualy equate to anything in game. This demotivated me from focusing on spar and I end up afk 3/4 of he time , so if this was added I think at least I would be more happy with sparring , idk about anyone else but that's my opinion

Yeah, I don't feel like sparring 90% of the time, because there is no leaderboard. It's practically more mindless than pking.

"One day they will add a leaderboard, and I'll be in top 100" is what motivated me, but after a while it's just pointless.  

Posted by Aguzo

Yeah, I don't feel like sparring 90% of the time, because there is no leaderboard. It's practically more mindless than pking.

1.) Definitely not lol

2.) A leaderboard for total wins would only demonstrate how long someone has mindlessly grinded in the arena..it would show nothing that has anything to do with spar.

The problem with anything in "total" is that it doesn't measure skill, it measures time spent doing something. Now, the two can sometimes correlate, and often do in some cases, but the list itself would not show that.

If we're trying to put in something that shows spar skill, this is not that thing.  

It's not to show skill, just to show who has the most wins.

No leaderboard can measure skill, because people would just boost.

Maybe if they added an "Average points per match" for the current boards, that would show skill. Would show who is fighting nubs, but I could care less about skill, just listing an example.

Total wins board.  

Posted by Aguzo

It's not to show skill, just to show who has the most wins.

In that case, fine. It does a good job of that.

I don't want it there because it would mislead the masses to thinking that it represents skill. I guarantee the masses would think so too, which is sad. If this was added along with another type or ranking system to show skill then I'd be 100% fine with it. I just feel like it's going to mislead people, even though its intention is not so.  

Posted by Fulgore

In that case, fine. It does a good job of that.

I don't want it there because it would mislead the masses to thinking that it represents skill. I guarantee the masses would think so too, which is sad. If this was added along with another type or ranking system to show skill then I'd be 100% fine with it. I just feel like it's going to mislead people, even though its intention is not so.

Read what I posted, the total wins board will not replace the current ones.


But, if people want to measure skill, then an "Average points per match" on the side of people's score would get the job done.  

Posted by Aguzo

Read what I posted, the total wins board will not replace the current ones.


But, if people want to measure skill, then an "Average points per match" on the side of people's score would get the job done.

Not really. Noob ques up in streak. RIP average points number.  

Posted by Fulgore

Not really. Noob ques up in streak. RIP average points number.

And there would clearly be a difference. Even if it's an average of 10 points meaning you basically fight people with positive ratios, compared to 3 points (selective sparrer).

So, yes really.  

Posted by Aguzo

And there would clearly be a difference. Even if it's an average of 10 points meaning you basically fight people with positive ratios, compared to 3 points (selective sparrer).

So, yes really.

I don't think you get it.

You're streaking right? You just beat zid/dante/jack/thal. Your average points right now are crazy high. Everyone praises you and cheers your name. Then 8 members of kawaii squad que up. You beat them for all of your fans. Then you notice that the points you got from them dropped your average significantly. You lost all your fans. You suck at spar.

That is the storyline.

Edit: From my understanding of how the point system works and how averaging things works, this would happen. And there are far more people with negative ratios than good ones. It might not appear that they que as often but that's most likely because the spars aren't memorable, they're pretty free.  

Average points will always define if someone is good or not, whether you believe it or not.

We aren't talking about 10 matches here.

#N/A, Someone with 30 points, because they beat a 3:1, doesn't mean they are good.

#1 on board, Someone with 3,000 points, and if they average 20 ppm, that would mean they are decent to good. Most of their matches are against people with 2:1 ratios, and the person has a lot of points.

30 ppm on average would probably be great.

Like I said though, this would be the only way to fix the current scoreboard for "skill", and have total wins on the side for all-time.