Gold medals are incredibly simple to get. So much so that they are a worthless accolade. A person doesn't even have to spend money to get one. If you live in your mother's basement and have no friends, you could get a gold medal every week with some half-assed build that only wins 60% of the time.

The weekly tournament rewards quantity, not quality and the pool of people who like to brag about how much time they spend on their computer isn't nearly as large as the pool of people who would like to be able to brag about their win-rate for a week.

Let's have a 64-player bracket-style tournament where you enter a single setup. You can replenish your kits between matches but not change their type. And you can't touch anything else about your setup. Then we'd have an accolade worth fighting for. I'd play this without even a reward.

Oh being number 1 is not good

I didnt know that

Better to be on rank 27

Funny



So a good win-loss-ratio is better

Nice idea J^8

Thats why you have so less gold medals






So the weekly win-loss ratio is much more important ...

1217 / 32 = 38 ... bestplayeroftheworld
_560 / 19 = 29 ... j^8-rabbit

funny




P.S.: we dont talk about or compare the win-streak

Regardless of who's got the better ratio here, both are quite fantastic.

But overall, I believe J^8 was trying to get at the fact that some people can actually physically be at their computer longer to put in more matches, but it doesn't necessarily mean they actually have a better mech.

With the results shown, we can't see who you lost those 32 matches with. For all we know, that could be 32 losses against J^8, which would make it seem like he's the better player, but you could log in more hours (I am NOT saying this is actually the case, just putting the scenario up there).

The tournament style would eliminate the quantity aspect and make it purely about the quality of the mech and a tad bit of luck.

If we calculate everyone's Win/Lose ratios they come out to the following:
Best - 38.03
CocodiJoco - 5.57
Dewah77 - 8.26
r1234 - 12.71
Nic - 17.47
grosbite - 11.15
crash - 10.91
Dottore - 8.24
j^8 - 29.47
DongNiYu - 9.13

Just looking at the example you put up Best, sure you deserve 1st with your win ratio, but CocodiJoco's ratio is 5.57. It's the WORST out of the top 10 there. While the fact that he played so much more should be attributed, the fact that his ratio is so low should also be factored in. j^8's ratio is VERY good. He SHOULD be 2nd based on that ratio determination, but he can't log in the hours like you do.

I dunno what the current system calculates exactly, but it should be point based in my opinion.
Wins = x pts
Losses = loss of x pts

So if Winning were +2 pts and losing was -5 or something, then we'd have a better system for determining those who deserve rewards. It still rewards quantity, but puts more emphasis on quality (better ratios).

New rankings based on above would be
1. Best - 2594
2. Dewah - 1428
3. Coco - 1228
4. r1234 - 1123
5. j^8 - 1025
6. Nic - 1018
7. grosbite - 951
8. crash - 908
9. DongNuYu - 809
10. Dottore - 804

Even as scenario not possible ...
bestplayeroftheworld won 5 against j^8 out of the last 7 battles


Also the system dont "allow" so much battles against the same player



Please correct that ... a small but important mistake

1217/32 = 38,03




3rd point about time ...
if you dont take part of a world-championship, you will NEVER be a world champion, doesnt matter if you are 7 times better than the actuell world champion.

You can compare it to the tennis main-tour ... if you dont play 40 weeks you cannot be number 1

ah, my mistake, fixed the 3.

Point being once again. Those who commit more time should not be burdened just because they have the time. But those who cannot commit quite as much shouldn't be burdened either when they no doubt DO have considerably better mechs as seen by the stats.

There is no doubt, you should be on the top in all the scenarios above. But, Coco having the WORST W/L ratio of the group (and by a large gap too), should be factored in as well in my opinion. Coco's got quantity, but not quality. My altered version would reward j^8 for his superior mech with his great win/lose ratio, but not so much that it overshadow's the time dedicated by Coco.

And I do have to agree with the quantity of medals, vs. quality issue. BD has a similar issue going on. There are indeed a good many who deserve the medals they have and the medals are a good representation of THEIR specific achievements. Then we have other's who have simply gotten away with farming medals on noncompetitive worlds, yet they have more medals than some of the best players in the game.

It's not to say your achievements aren't earned, but that not everyone's are.

Sorry - but you are a Goofy j^8 ... I tell you now exactly why ...
(you should really think about why you are)

beststreakoftheworld = j^8

Dont lie about, because Malice can see it

That shows "oh I want see me in first rank" and you tried with an other account to agree with yourself ... funny



Top 15 ... why not top 10 like Malice used ... oh you are not in top 10



Dreams, dreams, dreams.




As mentioned ... you agree to yourself.




Funny that the one who cheated write this AND for the other cheater it explain exactly why he got it in old system

Really ... thats the main reason I HAD TO write "Goofy" ... it is not bad meant ... it just describe your thinking perfectly


Btw ... 1 tournament says also absolut nothing (right kit - just 1 example).
You would need weekly tournaments ... OHH ... we HAVE weekly tournaments