Every time I look at this forum hoping (in vain typically) there’s some new stuff of significance on the game to see (343 geez yall tight lipped) I see a thread or two complaining 1-50 ranking is gone.
Frankly I dont care I’m not one of you gaming try hards out there, and this game tag is new (also a default name lol if that gives you an indication how casual i am).
So while my apt. billowed w/ strange clouds earlier today i felt like playing afro samurai an old game i have. if youve seen the anime w/ samuel l. jackson you know its about a violent never ending quest for the #1 headband which means your the best fighter in the world, like a god.
well what if instead of ranking 1-50 there was a complicated calculus that ranked every player individually vs the rest of the multiplayer population. like when you start you are ranked at #22,534,679 (or whatever the #'s of people who play are i dont know) and start to climb the ladder as you play, the best player in the world being #1.
I feel like this would keep the try hards playing forever hoping to become the #1 if only for a brief moment in time, thus keeping large populations in the game.
You would get ranked on all the categories you would normally, weighted accordingly, certain things like headshots would be included , # of kills to deaths etc, with a curve up based on amount of games played (in other words if in your first game in matchmaking you play a perfect game vs n00bs you dont become the #1) and also weighted against the ranking of the players you are playing as you achieve things or fail at things (if you were ranked #420 in the world and killed the #102 in matchmaking that kill would be worth more than killing the #485 in the same game). Of course you would be being matched with players closest to your score that were available for games.
Is this making sense to you? would you like to see this in the game, a true rank system?
It could work. The only ways I can think of to do it would be average your K&A/D per game and win percentage. It also would need to have a minimum amount of games to qualify or it would fail to those who play one match and never play again.
Or it could also take your average score per game. That would work well with the new 1-500 point system if they actually are going to do that(let’s hope not)
there should just be some hidden system that takes down your kills, deaths, wins, loses and possibly other stuff and put it into some formulae to work out a rank between 1-50 or 1-100 to match you up with people that are as good as you.
> It could work. The only ways I can think of to do it would be average your K&A/D per game and win percentage. It also would need to have a minimum amount of games to qualify or it would fail to those who play one match and never play again.
>
> Or it could also take your average score per game. That would work well with the new 1-500 point system if they actually are going to do that(let’s hope not)
yeah it would have to be an average of many factors. id see bonuses for mvp, minuses for lvp, etc, minuses for betrayals and such. i think that at first you couldnt get higher than #100 meaning you were top 100 in the world, than if you hit certain point totals you could get higher up to #1. Points would always accrue/subtract with every game but there would be a # of matches multiplier or something.
like you could play tons of games and be negative in your point totals cuz you only do terrible stuff every game. If in my first MP match ever i score negative points so our ratio is the same, you would be ranked lower due to the multiplier, which shows you suck all the time, this might just be a bad game or two for me. likewise even with initial success you wouldnt be ranked as high as someone with the same ratio who has done it over more matches, or against higher competition.
> Every time I look at this forum hoping (in vain typically) there’s some new stuff of significance on the game to see (343 geez yall tight lipped) I see a thread or two complaining 1-50 ranking is gone.
>
> Frankly I dont care I’m not one of you gaming try hards out there, and this game tag is new (also a default name lol if that gives you an indication how casual i am).
>
> So while my apt. billowed w/ strange clouds earlier today i felt like playing afro samurai an old game i have. if youve seen the anime w/ samuel l. jackson you know its about a violent never ending quest for the #1 headband which means your the best fighter in the world, like a god.
>
> well what if instead of ranking 1-50 there was a complicated calculus that ranked every player individually vs the rest of the multiplayer population. like when you start you are ranked at #22,534,679 (or whatever the #'s of people who play are i dont know) and start to climb the ladder as you play, the best player in the world being #1.
>
> I feel like this would keep the try hards playing forever hoping to become the #1 if only for a brief moment in time, thus keeping large populations in the game.
>
> You would get ranked on all the categories you would normally, weighted accordingly, certain things like headshots would be included , # of kills to deaths etc, with a curve up based on amount of games played (in other words if in your first game in matchmaking you play a perfect game vs n00bs you dont become the #1) and also weighted against the ranking of the players you are playing as you achieve things or fail at things (if you were ranked #420 in the world and killed the #102 in matchmaking that kill would be worth more than killing the #485 in the same game). Of course you would be being matched with players closest to your score that were available for games.
>
> Is this making sense to you? would you like to see this in the game, a true rank system?
That’s even WORSE than the 1-50 system because you “newbs” who call us people who love the 1-50 “tryhards” will be at like rank 22 million, even worse than only being a 30 something… Come on guys. Use the brain.
> > Every time I look at this forum hoping (in vain typically) there’s some new stuff of significance on the game to see (343 geez yall tight lipped) I see a thread or two complaining 1-50 ranking is gone.
> >
> > Frankly I dont care I’m not one of you gaming try hards out there, and this game tag is new (also a default name lol if that gives you an indication how casual i am).
> >
> > So while my apt. billowed w/ strange clouds earlier today i felt like playing afro samurai an old game i have. if youve seen the anime w/ samuel l. jackson you know its about a violent never ending quest for the #1 headband which means your the best fighter in the world, like a god.
> >
> > well what if instead of ranking 1-50 there was a complicated calculus that ranked every player individually vs the rest of the multiplayer population. like when you start you are ranked at #22,534,679 (or whatever the #'s of people who play are i dont know) and start to climb the ladder as you play, the best player in the world being #1.
> >
> > I feel like this would keep the try hards playing forever hoping to become the #1 if only for a brief moment in time, thus keeping large populations in the game.
> >
> > You would get ranked on all the categories you would normally, weighted accordingly, certain things like headshots would be included , # of kills to deaths etc, with a curve up based on amount of games played (in other words if in your first game in matchmaking you play a perfect game vs n00bs you dont become the #1) and also weighted against the ranking of the players you are playing as you achieve things or fail at things (if you were ranked #420 in the world and killed the #102 in matchmaking that kill would be worth more than killing the #485 in the same game). Of course you would be being matched with players closest to your score that were available for games.
> >
> > Is this making sense to you? would you like to see this in the game, a true rank system?
>
> That’s even WORSE than the 1-50 system because you “newbs” who call us people who love the 1-50 “tryhards” will be at like rank 22 million, even worse than only being a 30 something…
> Come on guys. Use the brain.
nice font. don’t take it personally, I love the games but dont have the time/commitment to spend bazillions of hours in the MP scene, thats all I mean by tryhards…i’m old at this no n00b. i thought 1-50 was fine no beef with it but wouldn’t you like to know just a little bit exactly how good you are not just “somewhere in the 50 range?” Thats the point of my thread
I’d hate to be the guy that’s 22,285,765 out of 22,285,765 in Team Slayer.
The rank of course being that large should be hidden unless you’re 1-100 in that specific playlist. The only way to see it is through service record. I could see a ton of bashing come out of a Leaderboard type system like this though…
> Unknown, your capable of a better argument than that, I’ve seen it, come on man.
UNKNOWN* and how is that not a legitimate argument? It’s short, simple, direct and to the point. Doesn’t need to be fleshed out.
People complain about the 1-50 because they never got to higher ranks and didn’t want their 28 to be visible. With the aforementioned global leaderboard system, all those 28’s would be #20 billion. It’s way more embarassing…
ok UNKNOWN, what if only those in the 50 rank category were shown their true rank? that way all those under that rank (which would likely include me) wouldn’t have to see #'s in the millions next to their names or whatever you meant about people feeling sad cuz they suck so bad
> ok UNKNOWN, what if only those in the 50 rank category were shown their true rank? that way all those under that rank (which would likely include me) wouldn’t have to see #'s in the millions next to their names or whatever you meant about people feeling sad cuz they suck so bad
Why not just choose to have your 1-50 rank visible or not in that case? Much simpler…
> > ok UNKNOWN, what if only those in the 50 rank category were shown their true rank? that way all those under that rank (which would likely include me) wouldn’t have to see #'s in the millions next to their names or whatever you meant about people feeling sad cuz they suck so bad
>
> Why not just choose to have your 1-50 rank visible or not in that case? Much simpler…
no i meant everyone’s rank would be visible 1-50, but in ADDITION those in the rank of 50 would have their “true rank” shown from #1 player in the world down to (what are there a few thousand 50’s i have no idea??) #3,052 or what not visible to them.
So once you achieved being a 50, you could still strive to be the best player in the world. (aka rank 50, #1) or (rank 50, #537)
> Every time I look at this forum hoping (in vain typically) there’s some new stuff of significance on the game to see (343 geez yall tight lipped) I see a thread or two complaining 1-50 ranking is gone.
>
> Frankly I dont care I’m not one of you gaming try hards out there, and this game tag is new (also a default name lol if that gives you an indication how casual i am).
>
> So while my apt. billowed w/ strange clouds earlier today i felt like playing afro samurai an old game i have. if youve seen the anime w/ samuel l. jackson you know its about a violent never ending quest for the #1 headband which means your the best fighter in the world, like a god.
>
> well what if instead of ranking 1-50 there was a complicated calculus that ranked every player individually vs the rest of the multiplayer population. like when you start you are ranked at #22,534,679 (or whatever the #'s of people who play are i dont know) and start to climb the ladder as you play, the best player in the world being #1.
>
> I feel like this would keep the try hards playing forever hoping to become the #1 if only for a brief moment in time, thus keeping large populations in the game.
>
> You would get ranked on all the categories you would normally, weighted accordingly, certain things like headshots would be included , # of kills to deaths etc, with a curve up based on amount of games played (in other words if in your first game in matchmaking you play a perfect game vs n00bs you dont become the #1) and also weighted against the ranking of the players you are playing as you achieve things or fail at things (if you were ranked #420 in the world and killed the #102 in matchmaking that kill would be worth more than killing the #485 in the same game). Of course you would be being matched with players closest to your score that were available for games.
>
> Is this making sense to you? would you like to see this in the game, a true rank system?
This would only work in FFA / it doesn’t require team work so you would get kids killing you for rockets and sniper …
I personally don’t give damn about some stupid ranks.
What I’d much rather see would be an actual MODERATED tournament within the multiplayer (being matched up against specific players and teams, with at least some in-game rewards, if only prestige skins, armor components etc.)