ticklemericky wrote:
liran wrote:
To best:
I am investigating. There are some bugs but the system itself is working as we expected. I'll continue to test, check and look for bugs. I appreciate you wrote what you wanted the way you did. Thank you.
The only gripe I have with this system is that there is particularly no benefit to start the week with wins. You get more points "stealing" them off people who are already at the top.
A suggestion I would have is that the greater the distance in ranking, the least points you can "steal".
Let me elaborate. If you are rank 1,000 and you beat someone in rank 100, you will get hardly any points. The closer the rank you are to a person, the more likely it is to surpass them. So
someone ranked 10 in the world can easily surpass ranks 10+. However
someone ranked 1,000 or ranked 500 will not yield much points defeating top 10. You need
consecutive wins near your ranks first. This punishes people who start tournaments late but not so much where they are behind in rankings.
The problem with the current system is that it's easy fall in rankings from how much "points" you lose.
It's also
difficult to "hunt" a specific person to rise in rankings. So they can stack points with a few wins easily where as you may spend 4-5x more bc just trying to get a target.
Another idea I'd like suggest is
point loss for when people near your ranks earn wins. So if you are ranked 1 and rank 2 beats rank 3,4, Rank 1 can lose some points. The idea is to
encourage constant activity between top ranks.
Reality is, the game really is heavy on people who spend tokens now. It's putting a burden on the player base who feel they do not stand a chance. This is a necessary evil but it keeps the game interesting. For me at least. =)
The main issue with such a system would be that top clans could attain insurmountable leads effectively excluding the rest of the player base.
Ideally the competition is tough and dynamic - the rank 1 changes a lot and you're never quite "safe". Top clans can not win every week nor be guaranteed a top spot - that would be an ideal situation, I reckon.
In the end, in my opinion at least, the game is more fun when it's competitive. And a key tool to making people competitive is giving them a obvious chance to win.
We see this in Battle Dawn (and in lesser form we saw it in Super Mechs) all the time. Once people are behind a lot - they're usually demotivated and stop trying. Even if their chances are secretly pretty high, the lack of strong positive feedback loops has a devastating effect to a players motivation.
People won't generally winter through a difficult spot - they will quit trying "for real" instead depriving a game of competition.
If instead they feel like they are constantly rising when they play, they are pushed to play more actively and try more. It has definite down sides (such as a much greater amount of stress among top clans) but it does significantly increase competition and put a much larger emphasis on building smart mechs.
Those are my two cent's, don't take them too serious. I have nothing to do with the creation of the ladder and am merely flaunting my personal opinion.
