Print

[PurpLeHaZe-]

It is true, and unless you fast play every single game, and it can't really be done you will loose some times. If you have a look at Kungen's game's its not many stars in there, mostly it's noobbashing - and let's face it: he is the best noobbasher. Would be more interesting if streak were weighted much lower, and high profile games EVEN higher.

I dont agree to 100 % with you. Streaks shouldnt count less. Since good streaks like kungens are pretty hard to make they should still count the same as they do right now. But i agree on the term that a "low-star-game" should get less points in comparision to a "high-star-game" because beating noobs is really not to hard and that shouldnt count to much to your rank-points. But yea anything has to get changed

[applecheese]

It is true, and unless you fast play every single game, and it can't really be done you will loose some times. If you have a look at Kungen's game's its not many stars in there, mostly it's noobbashing - and let's face it: he is the best noobbasher. Would be more interesting if streak were weighted much lower, and high profile games EVEN higher.

I dont agree to 100 % with you. Streaks shouldnt count less. Since good streaks like kungens are pretty hard to make they should still count the same as they do right now. But i agree on the term that a "low-star-game" should get less points in comparision to a "high-star-game" because beating noobs is really not to hard and that shouldnt count to much to your rank-points. But yea anything has to get changed

agreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeed

[me1k0r]

The ranking system is made to show who is the best and not who plays most, so its natural the big streaks that are very difficult to make and need skill will ne the most rewarded. Through the previous seasons we had a lot problems with the system, like ppl who had 50/550 and where in top 20, also ppl that avoided the top rankers. Now by rewarding the high rank games and making also the negative ranking we have achieved the best point i think. You must consider that in this game there arent fixed matches so that everyones plays the same number of games, if u take under consideration all these facts ull see that this is the best way 

ps appleechese dont write agrreeeeed!!!!! xD

[applecheese]

The ranking system is made to show who is the best and not who plays most, so its natural the big streaks that are very difficult to make and need skill will ne the most rewarded. Through the previous seasons we had a lot problems with the system, like ppl who had 50/550 and where in top 20, also ppl that avoided the top rankers. Now by rewarding the high rank games and making also the negative ranking we have achieved the best point i think. You must consider that in this game there arent fixed matches so that everyones plays the same number of games, if u take under consideration all these facts ull see that this is the best way 

its allright that high streaks give alot of points but Seariously... make those low ranked games paying less... it just has no sense giving soemone only becuz he gotta streak mass of points for beating 8 total noobs ( or 9 dunt rly remember if games starts at 9 or 10)

Once in a game there were rly only noobs and even some laggers n haters(which ofc been on my side cuz i got soem diplo skills) so I just too australia, ant, Africa, europe and asia without having even a real war, except the best of the noobs which had like 4/100 stats and started in africa,which i killed in turn 7 easily. everyone else were sitting and hating in south america and north america...

Why would u get for such a game mass points???

ps: but but i do agree ! :3

[Era2.Gurzigod]

I think its fine having a bonus for streaks but i think that bonus is way to high... when you have 30/5 and win 14 games in a row you should get still as much points as someone gets with 14/0 dont you agree with that? It just happens that u lose a game, else its just a lot of luck. I do not want to delete my stats but still a fair chance on rank #1...

[Kungen.]

I think that the higher streak you get u should really get awarded for it. But i also think that if u play a game full of noobs you should get less points, and with better players more points.

Ps. Lets get some pro games going soon? Ds.

[PsycoMarauder]

You do get more points for beating better players. There isn't a streak bonus in the formula, it's just obviously good to win. Gurzi you can't really expect to be anywhere close to kungens amount of points when you have 37/10. Taso won last year with 191/30... 37/10 is nowhere close. The formula has changed over the seasons, but check the History to see what some of the past season records look like. I made win ratio be more important in the formula for this season than it was last season because, if I do what you guys are requesting, which would be more similar to the formula last season, whoever had the most time to play would be top 10.

Gurzi, numerically how do you come up with a formula so that someone who loses a bunch of games and then goes 14/0 is equal to someone that is 14/0? Which honestly doesn't make that much sense. Someone going 14/0 more likely has played some decent players than a player with a bad record who then goes on a 14/0 streak-- my money is that the bad record player had an easier 14/0.

The part you seem to dislike is that after each loss you receive a fraction less amount of points per each future win because your win ratio decreased. Trust me, this adds a soft cap to the formula so there is a general ceiling people will bottom out at.  If I didn't make it like this, whoever played the most games would be top 10.

There's a reason why the top 3, really the only with respectable top 10 records, are within a general distance of each other. No one else has great records at the moment.

[PsycoMarauder]

When kungen was 14/0 he had 1123 points, which is only 200 off from your score gurz. The difference easily could have been from the players played in that time span, as well, since kungen played a lot of high ranked games in his first 14 games. In fact, 1/3 of his games are considered high ranked. He has as many high ranked wins as you do but with many less games played.

I don't think anything is wrong about the formula with what you guys have mentioned so far.