I really like the current system tbh  

you guys act like people only download games to be the best on the leaderboards. i don't understand at all how putting an all time leaderboard discourages anyone. if i buy a call of duty game and see that someone already has a million kills, am i going to be like "oh wow i don't want to kill anyone anymore because i won't catch up"? no lol, i'm going to keep playing the game and having fun getting kills/getting spar wins.  

Posted by twilit

lmao, no.

Spoiler

I thought about leaving it there, but fine, Ill even elaborate for you. When you play arcade PacMan (or ANY game with a scoreboard) do you see a "Highest Number of Times Played" scoreboard? No. You see a "High Score" scoreboard, which is based on how good you are.

Unless you are talking about the old leaderboard. comet wasn't asking for the high score. now he wants a leaderboard based on Day/Week/All Time. that is not skill. that's dedication/hard work.

"Changing it to a win count board would be no different than the PK boards-- a disgusting scoreboard that has no way of reflecting skill."
just to be sure, I brought your first quote up here. ^this is what comet wants, it will display both wins and losses for the daily, weekly.

But side room sparrers can no life and can reach 100-1. So Ladder System is going to help us figure out who's really skillful lulz.

Posted by Hikaru

Oh no, please don't discourage me in Player Kills by having 800,000 kills.

haha good point. i was taking the castle with slx then saw this gigantic mob of ppl pking. i almost jumped in, but had to go help them defending. unlucky me. i think it went for days. that would prolly helped me to get my goal faster.

Posted by Kuz

In the system Comyt is proposing he believes it will show everyone who the "selective sparrers" are and cause people to report them. I think on paper this looks like a good idea but if you put it in reality it kinda isn't. I mean look if someone is in the quick spar room against sparrers like Deus and MShaks they aren't really selective sparring but because they aren't in the main spar room everyone assume they're boosting and selective sparring and they'll get falsely reported. I think we need to remember not everyone in the quick spar room is a selective sparrer.

lol not gonna lie, i find mixed room hard for some reason and often find myself @ quick spar room. but yeah good point, I don't selective spar.
just 50 ez wins and 10 'challenging ones' that rage quit after losing to me once, prolly makes me 60-0!!  

I don't see why the "selective sparring" phrase is even brought up. Any "good" sparer can go into the streak rooms and spar an hour and catch up to somebody that spent half the day selectively sparring.


Leader boards are not meant to determine who's the best. The players #1 on sports all-time list are rarely consider the best. Joe Montana is considered the best QB by many and he's not even close to the top in any passing statistic.


Best and skills are subjective not objective. I'm pretty sure most players in the daily pk list suck, but if they put in the time to be on the list, why hate. let them fools get their shine.  

i have over 4k points on this spar leaderboard and i only have about 200 spars on it, doesnt make sense to me still  

Posted by GOAT

I don't see why the "selective sparring" phrase is even brought up. Any "good" sparer can go into the streak rooms and spar an hour and catch up to somebody that spent half the day selectively sparring.


Leader boards are not meant to determine who's the best. The players #1 on sports all-time list are rarely consider the best. Joe Montana is considered the best QB by many and he's not even close to the top in any passing statistic.


Best and skills are subjective not objective. I'm pretty sure most players in the daily pk list suck, but if they put in the time to be on the list, why hate. let them fools get their shine.

INTELLIGENT LIFE FORM DETECTED. #WordToThallen  

Posted by Zetectic

Unless you are talking about the old leaderboard. comet wasn't asking for the high score. now he wants a leaderboard based on Day/Week/All Time. that is not skill. that's dedication/hard work.

??
That has nothing to do with my context. In my first post, I made a side comment about PK boards; You commented on my side comment about misconception of how the PK boards should work; I replied to your side comment, correcting your misconception of how scoreboards, in general, work. //none of which were related to the idea in the OP.  

Posted by MikvaGraal

i have over 4k points on this spar leaderboard and i only have about 200 spars on it, doesnt make sense to me still

you win points based on the ratio of the player that you are beating
multiply their ratio by 10 = the points you win after each spar

Posted by GOAT

I don't see why the "selective sparring" phrase is even brought up. Any "good" sparer can go into the streak rooms and spar an hour and catch up to somebody that spent half the day selectively sparring.


Leader boards are not meant to determine who's the best. The players #1 on sports all-time list are rarely consider the best. Joe Montana is considered the best QB by many and he's not even close to the top in any passing statistic.

I agree that a leaderboard can't possibly 100% accurately demonstrate who the best sparrers are, but I think this leaderboard does a pretty good of it while also giving attention to who the most active sparrers are

a few players in the top 10 on iDevice board as I type this: Sarah, Comyt, Abood, Prime, Kevin
a few players in the top 10 on iDevice board as I type this: David, Brett, Dante, Poodie, Jack

people can argue that others like Mau5, Jimbo, Maxy, or whoever else aren't top 10 sparrers, but when you're sparring actively all season and contributing to the sparring community by participating, you deserve to be recognized

the old leaderboard was almost never like that, there was always someone on an alternate account that sparred 50 times, camped, then never reappeared, or someone constantly abusing the rating glitch

it simply needs to be changed to show a shorter period of time: daily, weekly, seasonal
I do agree that seeing someone with 50k points is very discouraging  

Just make a poll to make it so that daily/weekly will stay as score and have wins set for all time. Polls show what majority wants, and not just 1-2 people.
1200pts/7230pts/#14 20,000 - 0  

IMO, the coolest leaderboard format would be:

• Winning: earn points equal to your opponent's ratio * 10
• Losing: lose points equal to your own ratio * 10

This leaderboard would be a constant over/under display of who is performing at a level above what their spar ratio suggests. If your ratio is an accurate representation of how you spar, you'd essential balance around 0 points.
If you spar better than what your ratio suggests, you'd go into the positives (probably no higher than 1000), and if you spar worse than what your ratio suggests, you'd go into the negative (probably no lower than 1000).

Why can't we have something like that though? People would fall back into the mold of sparring carefully, avoiding people, etc. It sucks, but that's just how this community seems to be.
I like that people are queuing generously now and sparring as often as possible without the "stress" of feeling like they can potentially lose their precious spar points.  

Posted by Thallen

a few players in the top 10 on iDevice board as I type this: Sarah, Comyt, Abood, Prime, Kevin
a few players in the top 10 on iDevice board as I type this: David, Brett, Dante, Poodie, Jack

people can argue that others like Mau5, Jimbo, Maxy, or whoever else aren't top 10 sparrers, but when you're sparring actively all season and contributing to the sparring community by participating, you deserve to be recognized

2 things in regards to this part(before I read hikarus post):

1. I think these players you mentioned would still be on top, but without having to spar excessively.
2. If it was only wins there would be no need to segregate the boards between pc and mobile.

This was before I saw hikarus post, but I think he brings a common ground to the argument.

Posted by Hikaru

Just make a poll, and keep daily/weekly for score and have all time for total wins.
1200pts/7230pts/#14 20,000 - 0

This is actually a good compromise.  

Posted by Thallen

IMO, the coolest leaderboard format would be:

• Winning: earn points equal to your opponent's ratio * 10
• Losing: lose points equal to your own ratio * 10

This leaderboard would be a constant over/under display of who is performing at a level above what their spar ratio suggests. If your ratio is an accurate representation of how you spar, you'd essential balance around 0 points.
If you spar better than what your ratio suggests, you'd go into the positives (probably no higher than 1000), and if you spar worse than what your ratio suggests, you'd go into the negative (probably no lower than 1000).

Why can't we have something like that though? People would fall back into the mold of sparring carefully, avoiding people, etc. It sucks, but that's just how this community seems to be.
I like that people are queuing generously now and sparring as often as possible without the "stress" of feeling like they can potentially lose their precious spar points.

The only way any of that would work is by blindly queuing and not knowing who you can end up sparring against. Making a system in which you queue anywhere on the map, and it tells you "searching for opponent, opponent found, starting match" then it warps you to an arena where you fight someone you didn't know would be there. This would make spar matches instant, and people can't selective spar.

Edit: And they could keep streak, and have it as a viewing room like the ones for gst, so everyone can watch(anywhere on map) a bad ass sparrer break the current streak record.  

I honestly don't think there's any reason to segregate the leaderboards regardless, the PC vs. iDevice argument is old and dead, no one even uses the iDevice or PC rooms anymore, it should all probably just be one leaderboard
as a PC player though, that's not my decision to make because I generally think mobile players are the mechanically disadvantaged of the two if we have to compare them in that way

I don't think it does any harm with them being separated though, so I don't have a strong opinion on that

And also, semi-on topic:


It has bothered me forever, can we please add padding or a space after the damn scores past 10k? I hate how they are right beside the names, drives my OCD nuts...  

Posted by twilit

??
That has nothing to do with my context. In my first post, I made a side comment about PK boards; You commented on my side comment about misconception of how the PK boards should work; I replied to your side comment, correcting your misconception of how scoreboards, in general, work. //none of which were related to the idea in the OP.

It's not a misconception, it was a part of suggestion. I was suggesting the ladder system and aside from that normal leaderboard could be used like a pk board. So whoever has the most wins = top.
Skill test = the ladder system.
Tbh Current board is the mixture version of both

Posted by Hikaru

The only way any of that would work is by blindly queuing and not knowing who you can end up sparring against. Making a system in which you queue anywhere on the map, and it tells you "searching for opponent, opponent found, starting match" then it warps you to an arena where you fight someone you didn't know would be there. This would make spar matches instant, and people can't selective spar.

Edit: And they could keep streak, and have it as a viewing room like the ones for gst, so everyone can watch(anywhere on map) a bad ass sparrer break the current streak record.

I agree. Lol i think i have suggested this million times, it was never paid attentioned by any developers -.-;;  

Also another addition to the blind matchmaking system on my previous post.

If it is possible Graal should add tier ranks, so that people fight others around their rankings, and if they win enough matches their tier rises (Ex: broze, silver, gold, crystal, diamond, legendary, etc), and if you lose enough matches you fall down a bit.

This would definetely be the best overall skill based system.
Cause 1: You can't see who you will fight, and you have to fight people around your level if you want to climb the ranks.
2: You can't selective spar and have a fake ratio, because if you win x amount of matches you will start fighting better people, until you start losing and losing and losing.
3: It will show which people have real skill when facing real opponents, based on which tier you are in.

Edit: since no one else has posted this yet.

Streaking should have more shout-outs to encourage players to streak more often. Let's say you get 10 wins which means you are at least decent, (Got these names off of vainglory, can be changed) "Aguzo is impressive", 25 wins "Aguzo is kind of a big deal", 50 "Aguzo is a big deal", 100 wins... geez "Aguzo is a nightmare!".

This way people can't get streaks off of nubs when no good people are on, and gives motivation to get a shout-out of your name, one of the things I like from era's pk streak system.