12 replies to this topic

[Tarogato]

I like leaderboards, I like them alot. But I propose they be handled slightly differently.

---

The issue: Most leaderboards run between 3 and 5 days in length and you can play as many matches as you wish during that time. The problem is that everybody wants to be on the leaderboard, so they grind endlessly to tally up as many "perfect matches" as they can, since your 10 best count.

---

The solution: Have a maximum drop limit for each leaderboard event. Once you opt in, a counter starts. Once you've played the maximum number of drops allotted, then your score is final and goes up on the leaderboard.

---

Example: A leaderboard event only counts your 10 best scores and allows you to play a total of 100 drops. You can play 50 drops and still be on the leaderboard, or you can continue playing until you reach 100. But your 101^st drop will not count and at that point your total score is final.

I think this would alleviate the grind. I think that 100 matches is a pretty fair number, but it could be adjusted to be lower or higher - it's simply an upper cap so that you can't play a marathon of 300+ matches over the weekend to maximise your score as much as possible.

Edited by Tarogato, 22 June 2015 - 02:35 AM.

[Karbomb]

I like this idea a lot. I would vote to put it at no more than 50. One hundred matches over a weekend is still quite a lot to grind and people chasing that leaderboard spot would feel obligated to hit whatever the cap is. I would also argue for solo public queue only.

[Docta Pain]

Yes, 50, or at a minimum show beside the score on the leaderboard the number of matches to get that score. I honestly believe that I was on the Shadow Hawk leaderboard with the absolute lowest number of matches, and would love to see that in the next event so we can tell the difference between who has got the skills and who has got the time.

[Tarogato]

Shameless bump, because I reworded the OP and formatted it be as clear as possible.

And also because I'm playing in a leaderboard right now. And it's really grindy. And I can be competitive by just by ubergrinding instead actually being consistently good. Which is silly.

Edited by Tarogato, 22 June 2015 - 02:34 AM.

[TygerLily]

I had a similar idea: http://mwomercs.com/...icated-players/

TL;DR is leaderboards event that take only your first 10 matches in a chassis.

After 6 hours (or however long), you would then be able to try again with 10 more matches (highest scores replacing lowest).

All in all, I'd love for the leaderboards to reflect player skill and not player free time!!

[Surn]

Isn't the goal of these events to encourage and reward play? It sounds like you guys don't like the mecha arms race, but it does force you to perfect your strategies aNd configs. Unless you are using your unit meMbers to cheaT the other plaYers on the board.

[VVonka]

That isnt a bad idea, but I think the best I have heard is Take your AVERAGE match score at a minimum set of matches (say 25 for sake of argument).


This allows people to keep playing and trying to improve their scores BUT the more they play the less the big games will effect their average.


Also a big issue in challenges like this is the time to get the matches in, it is pretty widely known that morning USA time is the best time to get the outstanding matches. Not sure how this could be adjusted.

[Monky]

I played my urbies during the leaderboard challenge and got 3rd in the one I tried, haven't really touched them since, and the Urbie I did that with only has 90 games on it.

I agree with the general premise, but really 30 matches is a lot more practical. I only played 2 nights and was able to secure 3rd on a fairly contested mech with sub 100 games - I can't imagine many other leaderboard placers really ground MORE than that, and it was still very far into 'grind to win' territory.

[Appogee]

Given that the purpose of these events and leaderboards is actually to increase the number of people playing, there is zero chance PGI will limit the number of qualifying matches.

Zero.

[xCico]

I couldn't agree more with @Tarogato, and make damage count more than kills. Kinda sucks that player who make (steal) 5,6 kills and do 500 dmg (barely) get more points then someone who think in match and work hard for his 1,2 k dmg and maybe gets 2,3 kills. Everyone can steal kills....

[Rigmoran]

Agreed with OP. I've been thinking about posting something very much like this for a while. I do like the idea VVonka had of using an average as well. That would allow people to keep playing because as Appogee pointed out, is the reason for the tournaments. Either way, 50 matches a day is pretty realistic for a lot of younger players. If this game had been out 15 years ago I probably would have hit 70 matches some days.

They try to make different tournaments to fit different groups, so make one that rewards consistent players and those who don't have all weekend to grind.

P.S. PUG's only. I don't know about the rest but I don't group much because I don't have much time to play in one sitting.

Edited by Rigmoran, 22 June 2015 - 04:44 PM.

[bad arcade kitty]

Tarogato, on 30 May 2015 - 12:49 AM, said:

---

The issue: Most leaderboards run between 3 and 5 days in length and you can play as many matches as you wish during that time. The problem is that everybody wants to be on the leaderboard, so they grind endlessly to tally up as many "perfect matches" as they can, since your 10 best count.

---

The solution: Have a maximum drop limit for each leaderboard event. Once you opt in, a counter starts. Once you've played the maximum number of drops allotted, then your score is final and goes up on the leaderboard.

yeah, it's pretty reasonable

also this way one can participate in several leaderboards easier i.e. it probably won't even lower the whole number of event games much, which pgi may be afraid of (events are supposed to increase the players' activity); anyway the grindness should be lessened imo

xCico, on 22 June 2015 - 04:27 PM, said:

I couldn't agree more with @Tarogato, and make damage count more than kills. Kinda sucks that player who make (steal) 5,6 kills and do 500 dmg (barely) get more points then someone who think in match and work hard for his 1,2 k dmg and maybe gets 2,3 kills. Everyone can steal kills....

there are ways to do a lot of spread damage pretty easily
there should be some balance between kills (can be stolen, yeah), damage (lurms/srms to the win) and, possibly, destroyed components (yet again, spread damage destroys a lot of them)

Edited by bad arcade kitty, 22 June 2015 - 05:56 PM.

[xCico]

bad arcade kitty, on 22 June 2015 - 04:44 PM, said:

there are ways to do a lot of spread damage pretty easily
there should be some balance between kills (can be stolen, yeah), damage (lurms/srms to the win) and, possibly, destroyed components (yet again, spread damage destroys a lot of them)

You don't understand man, only new players spread damage, there is no spreading damage man, you are going for kill and hold aim on specific component, while doing that you are getting decent amount of damage, aim skill vs kill steal will always be harder, and thats what this tourney need.