64 replies to this topic

[Roadkill]

Stefka Kerensky, on 27 June 2016 - 09:32 PM, said:

60 matches are 2 matches per day.
Weekend warriors should be fine with that: 4 weekend per month, 15 matches per weekend. Absolutely duable.
Lowering even more would make ladder meaningless, esactly the situation we have now.

Sounds like someone who has no life other than gaming.

You do realize that you just confirmed what I said? You're asking people to basically devote all of their gaming time to MWO if they want to be on the ladder at all. Not win - it's acceptable for the winners to need to commit a ton of time to be successful - but to simply participate.

A 30 match minimum is not at all the same thing as what we have now. What we have now are 1-hit wonders. Literally just one match. None of those players would still be in the top 50 if they played even 10 games, let alone 30. The only reason they're on the list now is because they got 1 lucky game and stopped playing.

Set the minimum too high and you destroy the point of the ladder. The point of a ladder is to let people find out how they rank against their peers. The point is not to force people to spend all of their free time playing MWO.

Tier 1 Smurf, on 27 June 2016 - 06:08 PM, said:

Because even in T3 alt accounts with 100s of games on it is still too easy to farm big scores, in essence this is what people are trying to propose fixes for.

A 30 match requirement alone will not solve it. Sure it gets rid of the one hit wonder alts, but I'd bet if everyone needed 30 matches to place and solo and group queue was split, I'd have a very good chance to be in the running for topping the board. By farming potatoes.

Well... I was actually recommending that non-T1 not be ranked, so no a T3 couldn't farm potatoes to get a high ranking. But I've since changed my mind, in which case I agree with you that there should be separate ladders for each Tier.

Still doesn't solve the farming problem, but at least it separates it out.

[STEF_]

Roadkill, on 28 June 2016 - 07:34 AM, said:

Sounds like someone who has no life other than gaming.

You do realize that you just confirmed what I said? You're asking people to basically devote all of their gaming time to MWO if they want to be on the ladder at all.

LOL.
seriously?

15 matches per weekend can be too much FOR YOU.
Don't speak for people, man.

Just play for fun and not for the ladder, then

[Lily from animove]

best X match score sum of the last 20 matches within the last month (30 days)

KD and stuff also of the average of the last month (30 days)

beginning with at elast 20 matches done to appear in said Leaderbords.


That way once we hit day 31 the leaderboard is a dynamic system with a constant change sicne old games drop out having to be efreshed with new games. and it all related to the "recent" well, 30 day performance of a pilot.

[Roadkill]

Stefka Kerensky, on 28 June 2016 - 07:52 AM, said:

LOL.
seriously?

15 matches per weekend can be too much FOR YOU.
Don't speak for people, man.

Just play for fun and not for the ladder, then

LOL.
seriously?

Exclusionist, much? Worried that some of those weekend warriors might be better than you? Is that why you want to keep them out, so that it's easier for you to get a better rank?

What are you afraid of?

Just let people participate. We need a minimum only to eliminate obvious gaming of the system. We don't need a minimum to segregate the population between weekend warriors and no-lifers.

[STEF_]

Roadkill, on 28 June 2016 - 08:02 AM, said:

What are you afraid of?

I'm afraid of the pointless leaderboard we have just now: pilots with 4-5 matches and top ladder.

and hell YES... if pgi puts out weekendwarriors I would manage to enter in top 1000.....

Edited by Stefka Kerensky, 28 June 2016 - 08:21 AM.

[Roadkill]

Stefka Kerensky, on 28 June 2016 - 08:07 AM, said:

I'm afraid of the pointless leaderboard we have just now: pilots with 4-5 matches and top ladder.

and hell YES... if pgi puts out weekendwarriors I would manage to enter in top 1000.....

Are you really worried that those 1-5 match pilots could sustain that kind of luck through 30 matches?

Do you really believe that there's a significant difference between 30 and 60 matches in that regard?

I mean, seriously, if someone can manage to maintain a top-10 rank through 30 matches, they pretty much deserve it. Sure, 60 shows slightly more consistency, but it's a pretty minimal improvement. At 30 matches you're well into the 99th percentile for standard deviation.

(I really wish we could check the leaderboards from the website... having to log in is pretty stupid IMO.)

[STEF_]

Roadkill, on 28 June 2016 - 08:36 AM, said:

Are you really worried that those 1-5 match pilots could sustain that kind of luck through 30 matches?

Do you really believe that there's a significant difference between 30 and 60 matches in that regard?

I mean, seriously, if someone can manage to maintain a top-10 rank through 30 matches, they pretty much deserve it. Sure, 60 shows slightly more consistency, but it's a pretty minimal improvement. At 30 matches you're well into the 99th percentile for standard deviation.

(I really wish we could check the leaderboards from the website... having to log in is pretty stupid IMO.)

60 is more solid than 30, indeed

Also, can u imagine how many alt accounts there are here?
Keeping a big number would be a deterrent.

Another issue I can see, being carried in a 8-12 man team for 30 matches (and only to bring him up there) is way easier than 60.
Or we could split up pilot stats while dropping solo or group.

[Roadkill]

Stefka Kerensky, on 28 June 2016 - 09:05 AM, said:

60 is more solid than 30, indeed

Not in a mathematically significant way, no. It's only psychologically more solid.

Quote

Also, can u imagine how many alt accounts there are here?
Keeping a big number would be a deterrent.

Sure. But in the process it also deters people who simply can't log that many matches easily. And the more people you exclude, the less "real" the ladder feels because it isn't a zero-sum activity. You're creating potatoes to farm in the sense that they'll never be on the ladder, so have no skin in the game.

Quote

Another issue I can see, being carried in a 8-12 man team for 30 matches (and only to bring him up there) is way easier than 60.
Or we could split up pilot stats while dropping solo or group.

Absolutely have to split group/solo queue ladders. Otherwise collusion will make the ladders as bad or worse than they are now. Pretty trivial for a big unit to get one representative into the top 10 no matter how many matches you require. I'd even go so far as to say that a group queue ladder is pointless - it should be solo queue only.

[Ted Wayz]

Tier 1 Smurf, on 27 June 2016 - 06:08 PM, said:

Because even in T3 alt accounts with 100s of games on it is still too easy to farm big scores, in essence this is what people are trying to propose fixes for.

A 30 match requirement alone will not solve it. Sure it gets rid of the one hit wonder alts, but I'd bet if everyone needed 30 matches to place and solo and group queue was split, I'd have a very good chance to be in the running for topping the board. By farming potatoes.

This reminds me of the guy who said he would place on all Warhammer leaderboards because he thought he had a good match and I had to break it to him that he wouldn't finish in the top 10 of any of them. He lacked perspective and understanding and his ideas were unsupported by data. And he held them until the end of the tournament when he was proven wrong.

People throw out the Tier 1 is more competitive all the time. Where is the data to support this assumption? Played against all tiers and seen the same bonehead play in all of them by all tiers of players. In the end tier is irrelevant, teamwork is everything.

In short tier means you have played more than most and is no reflection of skill or willingness to use teamwork. Or at least there is more evidence to support that assumption than the argument being made by l33t t1 players that it is harder on them.

Edited by Ted Wayz, 28 June 2016 - 04:40 PM.

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

Only most damage kills should count.

Killing blow statistics should be tossed out a window.

To cut down on kill steals and people not helping their team until the very end hoping to pick up easy kills.

AFK and DC kills should also not be counted if possible.

Edited by I Zeratul I, 28 June 2016 - 05:12 PM.

[JeepStuff]

Roadkill, on 28 June 2016 - 08:36 AM, said:

(I really wish we could check the leaderboards from the website... having to log in is pretty stupid IMO.)

I thought the leaderboards were only available in the client too, but it turns out you CAN see them on the website! You get there by logging in and clicking Profile. The Leaderboards tab is next to your stats tab.

[PhoenixFire55]

Stefka Kerensky, on 28 June 2016 - 07:52 AM, said:

LOL.
seriously?

Roadkill, on 28 June 2016 - 08:02 AM, said:

LOL.
seriously?

Guys guys, don't fight.
Allmighty epeen-o-meter will settle this ...





Last I checked 243 > 236.

But on that note ...



So both of you insignificat scrubs should shut it and listen to what a far superior skilled player is going to tell you ...
[/troll]

Seriously tho ... easiest thing to do is add "min games played" filter into that page so that everyone can easily see who is where at any given numbers of games played. There is nothing wrong with everyone being on that leaderboard even with 1 played game, everyone can see who is 1-hit-wonder and who isn't anyway. However to qualify for a monthly reward or whatever you should have 100+ games during that month etc.

Needless to say separare solo/group/solo CW/group CW boards are a must.

But as I said, all this is meaningless anyway. When MM gives a T1 anothr T1's to play against and T5's play with T5's the difference in achieving same matchscores in these matchs is quite vast. If each tier played only vs same tier then separate leaderboards for tiers could have been a thing, but as this isn't the case leaderboards doesn't really matter.

[PhoenixFire55]

Roadkill, on 28 June 2016 - 08:36 AM, said:

(I really wish we could check the leaderboards from the website... having to log in is pretty stupid IMO.)

JeepStuff, on 28 June 2016 - 11:17 PM, said:

I thought the leaderboards were only available in the client too, but it turns out you CAN see them on the website! You get there by logging in and clicking Profile. The Leaderboards tab is next to your stats tab.

Yeah, what he said^^.
Epeen-o-meter.

[STEF_]

PhoenixFire55, on 30 June 2016 - 02:57 AM, said:

Guys guys, don't fight.
Allmighty epeen-o-meter will settle this ...





Last I checked 243 > 236.

But on that note ...



So both of you insignificat scrubs should shut it and listen to what a far superior skilled player is going to tell you ...
[/troll]

Seriously tho ... easiest thing to do is add "min games played" filter into that page so that everyone can easily see who is where at any given numbers of games played. There is nothing wrong with everyone being on that leaderboard even with 1 played game, everyone can see who is 1-hit-wonder and who isn't anyway. However to qualify for a monthly reward or whatever you should have 100+ games during that month etc.

Needless to say separare solo/group/solo CW/group CW boards are a must.

But as I said, all this is meaningless anyway. When MM gives a T1 anothr T1's to play against and T5's play with T5's the difference in achieving same matchscores in these matchs is quite vast. If each tier played only vs same tier then separate leaderboards for tiers could have been a thing, but as this isn't the case leaderboards doesn't really matter.

I'm rather proud to have mastered my seven PXH in solo que only.
I've played PXH only for one week, and as you can see that mech is OP for real.

TBH, I would like to see where your stats would go by piloting PXH only for one week.

Or.... are you meta tards only?

Edited by Stefka Kerensky, 30 June 2016 - 03:18 AM.

[Lily from animove]

PhoenixFire55, on 30 June 2016 - 02:57 AM, said:

Guys guys, don't fight.
Allmighty epeen-o-meter will settle this ...





Last I checked 243 > 236.

But on that note ...



So both of you insignificat scrubs should shut it and listen to what a far superior skilled player is going to tell you ...
[/troll]

Seriously tho ... easiest thing to do is add "min games played" filter into that page so that everyone can easily see who is where at any given numbers of games played. There is nothing wrong with everyone being on that leaderboard even with 1 played game, everyone can see who is 1-hit-wonder and who isn't anyway. However to qualify for a monthly reward or whatever you should have 100+ games during that month etc.

Needless to say separare solo/group/solo CW/group CW boards are a must.

But as I said, all this is meaningless anyway. When MM gives a T1 anothr T1's to play against and T5's play with T5's the difference in achieving same matchscores in these matchs is quite vast. If each tier played only vs same tier then separate leaderboards for tiers could have been a thing, but as this isn't the case leaderboards doesn't really matter.

and isn't that amazing how yet all are T1? ^^

alos the leaderbaords score as ranking is anways poop, Shall we just for board stroking make now high drps stripping builds to land up in the top there by accumulating hihg scores done by large damage? When you play some mechs you have to kill efficient and not play stripwarrior. The leaderboards are rather meaningless, in that case i truly prefer the event leaderbaords they weight KMDD and stuff at elats higher and make them samewhat more relevant in relation to the others.

Edited by Lily from animove, 30 June 2016 - 03:23 AM.

[PhoenixFire55]

Stefka Kerensky, on 30 June 2016 - 03:14 AM, said:

I'm rather proud to have mastered my seven PXH in solo que only

Srsly? You care enough to make excuses? lol

Well I'm rather proud to have mastered three Highlanders IIC in solo queue only.
(actually quite happy I've done it in 50 matches)

Bottom line ... its doesn't matter, doesn't matter. Like ... at all.

[STEF_]

PhoenixFire55, on 30 June 2016 - 03:18 AM, said:

Srsly? You care enough to make excuses? lol

Well I'm rather proud to have mastered three Highlanders IIC in solo queue only.
(actually quite happy I've done it in 50 matches)

Bottom line ... its doesn't matter, doesn't matter. Like ... at all.

zero english skillz ?
I wrote I'm proud.
You even aren't good enough to troll good.


If you are sincerely interest about my skillz, feel free to ask to Col.ONeill, xCico, Hans Davion, and such

Edited by Stefka Kerensky, 30 June 2016 - 03:23 AM.

[PhoenixFire55]

Lily from animove, on 30 June 2016 - 03:18 AM, said:

and isn't that amazing how yet all are T1? ^^

Well 1 out of 3 isn't displaying his tier so ...

We've talked about PSR and tiers many times. For players who are at least average its an exp bar.
However, if you aren't T1 and not even approaching it rapidly it says alot about you.

[STEF_]

PhoenixFire55, on 30 June 2016 - 03:24 AM, said:

Well 1 out of 3 isn't displaying his tier so ...

We've talked about PSR and tiers many times. For players who are at least average its an exp bar.
However, if you aren't T1 and not even approaching it rapidly it says alot about you.

it's a bit strange that xCico and Hans Davion invite me in group.... and thier teams are both top EU ladder.
How's that?

And the Black Spits? how are they going?
While....

[PhoenixFire55]

Stefka Kerensky, on 30 June 2016 - 03:23 AM, said:

I wrote I'm proud.

Proud @ No.8284. Keep it up.


As for this ...

Stefka Kerensky, on 30 June 2016 - 03:23 AM, said:

zero english skillz ?
You even aren't good enough to troll good.
If you are sincerely interest about my skillz

... is exactly ...

Stefka Kerensky, on 30 June 2016 - 03:23 AM, said:

zero english skillz

...

Stefka Kerensky, on 30 June 2016 - 03:23 AM, said:

If you are sincerely interest about my skillz, feel free to ask to Col.ONeill, xCico, Hans Davion, and such

Oh I will the next time we'll scrim against Cico and his team or Hans and his team. If you have such wicked skillz I wonder why you aren't on those teams in the first place. Must be too good.

Stefka Kerensky, on 30 June 2016 - 03:32 AM, said:

PhoenixFire55, on 30 June 2016 - 03:24 AM, said:

Well 1 out of 3 isn't displaying his tier so ...

We've talked about PSR and tiers many times. For players who are at least average its an exp bar.
However, if you aren't T1 and not even approaching it rapidly it says alot about you.

it's a bit strange that xCico and Hans Davion invite me in group.... and thier teams are both top EU ladder.
How's that?

And the Black Spits? how are they going?
While....

And here is a great example of zero cohesion skillz ...