23 replies to this topic

[Andi Nagasia]

Just as the Title Says,
Should PGI Reset all LeaderBoards Every Patch?
Than Only Calculate LeaderBoards From Patch to Patch,
(Assuming of Course you need at least 25Matches to Get on them)


this would get rid of those only 1 Game Played off the LeaderBoards,
Give a Localized and Accurate Home Many Accounts where Played that Month,
as well as Give Those Wanting to Test their Skills a Way to Push to be the Best,

Also as Bandito has Said

El Bandito, on 11 July 2016 - 05:28 PM, said:

Unless the exploits are mitigated somewhat, resets wont do much.

1. There must be a minimum number of games played. 75 at the least.

2. There must be a separate leaderboard for solo-q and group-q.

Both Would Also Help with LeaderBoard Problems


Thoughts, Comments, Concerns?
Thanks,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 11 July 2016 - 07:24 PM.

[El Bandito]

Unless the exploits are mitigated somewhat, resets wont do much.

1. There must be a minimum number of games played. 75 at the least.

2. There must be a separate leaderboard for solo-q and group-q.

And more...

[Mystere]

And mess with people's ePeen waiving? <chuckles>

[Kuritaclan]

What has a reset to do with only get counted if at least 25 matches are played. I do not get it.

Beside of that. Yes 25 matches should be the minimum if not more.

A specific timing for reset on the other hand I don't have an informed opinion. But i think no not every patch. It doesn't make things compareable. Quality of data starts to kick in of about 10000 samples. Pools with like 1000 samples are not that good. A reset every patch would make the leaderboard data worthless, since not many will make over 100 games a month, despite achiving 1000 or for a good comparision 10000 games.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 11 July 2016 - 05:30 PM.

[cazidin]

No. PGI should fix Machine Guns and LRMs. Apparently it takes about a month to do the same edit so... focus on gameplay first.

[Mister Blastman]

No. Leaderboards should be continuous. They are very useful.

El Bandito, on 11 July 2016 - 05:28 PM, said:

1. There must be a minimum number of games played. 75 at the least.

2. There must be a separate leaderboard for solo-q and group-q.

I would like to see both of these.

[Andi Nagasia]

Kuritaclan, on 11 July 2016 - 05:29 PM, said:

What has a reset to do with only get counted if at least 25 matches are played. I do not get it.

Beside of that. Yes 25 matches should be the minimum if not more.

well its to Stop those From having that one Amazingly Good Game and Stoping,
its not Fair to see a guy at #1 with only 1 Game Played(Shows Blind Luck),
where the #2 Guy has 180 Games Played(shows Consistent Skills)

Kuritaclan, on 11 July 2016 - 05:29 PM, said:

A specific timing for reset on the other hand I don't have an informed opinion. But i think no not every patch. It doesn't make things compareable. Quality of data starts to kick in of about 10000 samples. Pools with like 1000 samples are not that good. A reset every patch would make the leaderboard data worthless, since not many will make over 100 games a month, despite achiving 1000 or for a good comparision 10000 games.

well things can Change Patch To Patch, so even over 100 Games a Month you can see where you stand,
how your Changing Month to Month, rather than Look at your Self Year to Year, which can be abit taxing,
(Ex, your Losing Weight, but you Cant Look at your Self to See if it worked until the years over, )
Though perhaps a Previous Score Above your Current would help Show people where they are,

[Kuritaclan]

Andi Nagasia, on 11 July 2016 - 07:31 PM, said:

Kuritaclan, on 11 July 2016 - 05:29 PM, said:

What has a reset to do with only get counted if at least 25 matches are played. I do not get it.

well its to Stop those From having that one Amazingly Good Game and Stoping,
its not Fair to see a guy at #1 with only 1 Game Played(Shows Blind Luck),
where the #2 Guy has 180 Games Played(shows Consistent Skills)

All right. But it stays both things don't relate to each other. The reset wouldn't change the thing. If so it would get a hand full of players out of the leaderboard, because they do not achive the requirments of X games per patch at all. And as of the minimum to get listed - idk.

Andi Nagasia, on 11 July 2016 - 07:31 PM, said:

well things can Change Patch To Patch, so even over 100 Games a Month you can see where you stand,
how your Changing Month to Month, rather than Look at your Self Year to Year, which can be abit taxing,
(Ex, your Losing Weight, but you Cant Look at your Self to See if it worked until the years over, )
Though perhaps a Previous Score Above your Current would help Show people where they are,

Statistics should be in a open database accessible over a browser to begin with. - I know there are enough smart people in the playerbase to get a hand on those data to sort them. So to speak. Saying one reset option would be better over another doesn't help at all. And i can not see that a monthly reset is better than a reset with every patch or every major patch or whatever you wanna take.

[Squirg]

Well, first they need to make an actual leaderboard and not... whatever it is they have now.

[EgoSlayer]

Didn't Russ say in the Town Hall announcement that when there were prizes added they would reset the board every month?

[Andi Nagasia]

Kuritaclan, on 11 July 2016 - 07:40 PM, said:

All right. But it stays both things don't relate to each other. The reset wouldn't change the thing. If so it would get a hand full of players out of the leaderboard, because they do not achive the requirments of X games per patch at all. And as of the minimum to get listed - idk.

well ya, i was just kinda throwing something Most all Agree on in there for Clarity,
seems i messed up abit on the Clarity Part, fixing the LeaderBoard need to Come First,

Kuritaclan, on 11 July 2016 - 07:40 PM, said:

Statistics should be in a open database accessible over a browser to begin with. - I know there are enough smart people in the playerbase to get a hand on those data to sort them. So to speak. Saying one reset option would be better over another doesn't help at all. And i can not see that a monthly reset is better than a reset with every patch or every major patch or whatever you wanna take.

i do think Data should be Accessable being able to Check Months Past,
but i think Monthly Resets would give some the Drive to Push to move up and see where they Go,
the (i was #239 in K/D Last time, im pushing for Better this time) Mentality, Vs what we have now,

[Kuritaclan]

Andi Nagasia, on 11 July 2016 - 07:59 PM, said:

i do think Data should be Accessable being able to Check Months Past,
but i think Monthly Resets would give some the Drive to Push to move up and see where they Go,
the (i was #239 in K/D Last time, im pushing for Better this time) Mentality, Vs what we have now,

Yeah. It is what you think the data is worth to you. If you keep trying harder, because of the leaderboard, then i up to a leaderboard that you can compare different periods with each other.

However. If this would be open acessable data, Websites could be build upon it to even make the data better presented, as it is in game and will ever be by PGI. I mean finally PGI did the step. All hail PGI after 4 years, to do what was requested since beginning. Anyway they put in so much ressources by now with the ingame thing, and it stil is "basic" level. When i see other games with open access. There you don't have to care how to make all things shiny, because people do it by himself and achieve better results for no payment.

I'm glad that we actually have leaderboards. How they are set up. Pfff. At least now we can make some informated guesses about the game, comparing data. And don't argue into the blue for changes. Thats the biggest achivment right now. Everything else only will be a cherry on top.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 11 July 2016 - 08:40 PM.

[Navid A1]

Who cares Andi.

Its not like PGI is sitting there waiting for us to tell them to flick a switch or not.

If they really want our opinion... them how about fixing machine guns, massively decreasing large LRM spreads, and creating a meaningful FW.

[Carl Vickers]

Well if they are going to be giving out monthly rewards to leader board leaders, then there will need to be resets, else the same peeps will just keep winning.

[Kuritaclan]

Carl Vickers, on 11 July 2016 - 08:57 PM, said:

Well if they are going to be giving out monthly rewards to leader board leaders, then there will need to be resets, else the same peeps will just keep winning.

Somewhat self explaining. xD

[Bishop Steiner]

Andi Nagasia, on 11 July 2016 - 05:23 PM, said:

Just as the Title Says,
Should PGI Reset all LeaderBoards Every Patch?
Than Only Calculate LeaderBoards From Patch to Patch,
(Assuming of Course you need at least 25Matches to Get on them)


this would get rid of those only 1 Game Played off the LeaderBoards,
Give a Localized and Accurate Home Many Accounts where Played that Month,
as well as Give Those Wanting to Test their Skills a Way to Push to be the Best,

Also as Bandito has Said

Both Would Also Help with LeaderBoard Problems


Thoughts, Comments, Concerns?
Thanks,

No.

Because then it never collects meaningful enough levels of info for it to be at all useful.

What should be the case is that the leaderboards doesn't even post your position until after you have, say, 250 matches. By then there is enough data to really see trends.

Still trying to decide if there would be any value to having Leaderboard broken down by Tier.

[C E Dwyer]

I feel it's pointless to reset unless P.G.I place a minimum number of matches to get on it.

50 seems to be the most asked for and I agree with that sentiment

[Lily from animove]

juts a dynamic leaderbard tracking the last 100 matches

[meteorol]

IMO, that would make them even more useless than they currently are.

[PhoenixFire55]

Nothing wrong with having both monthly and all-time leaderboards.