(R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Give us your feedback about the website! Or have an idea? Post it here!

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby spirit9871 » 7 November 2015, 16:59

Terabrion wrote:Or maybe because the ping limit started there? Hmpf.


It's both of those things, really. The mood of the community sorta changed with PP implemented and the ping limit definitely discouraged a lot of people from playing. User-based ping limits should be set, but that's for another topic.
The world is defined by those willing to act, not by those dreaming to act.
User avatar
spirit9871
Usurpation Soldier [50]
 
Posts: 95
Joined: 25 August 2013, 04:08
Location: New York~

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby xXOgMonkeyXx » 7 November 2015, 18:27

The Murk wrote:Approval Idea:
1. At a minimum of 100 votes, with a majority being five stars.
2. The map has to be able sized a bit more, with PB2's always growing lag issues I noticed a spawning problem during multiple 1v1. When someone repeatedly sword, the enemy usually spawns close to the area around the sworder. So, a bigger map for now on would help reduce this problem.
3. Perhaps instead of one or two people approving maps, you train your head-moderator and higher staffing to approve maps. Since you have a guide for approval, more people approving would seem more productive since you're working on PB2.5, right?

This could make people ask for ratings more, which everyone knows is annoying.
Number 2./3 are great suggestions.
I think only Admins should, and there should be a section of the Forums for asking for approval like the ban appeal section, except there could be a poll so people can vote if it is a good enough map, along with an Admin or Headmod saying it is okay. Staff can also decline it and lock the topic (or delete it), like the ban appeal section.

So, yeah. :D

xXOgMonkeyXx
 

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby Sniper J » 7 November 2015, 21:20

Yeah, people are constantly begging for people to rate their map 5 stars. If you implement you 1st suggestion, it would just cause people to beg even more.

Sniper J
Advanced Usurpation Soldier [150]
 
Posts: 168
Joined: 7 December 2014, 03:01
Location: United States

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby Riften » 8 November 2015, 23:15

For anyone that is complaining about the ranked matches not allowing people with higher pings, just stop. First of all, Eric wanted to make the pings relatively smooth between players in-order to decrease the lag. Ranked matches are meant for skill not whoever lags better can get a better chance of surviving/killing.

Eric said this on his twitter, "There can't be perfect system. Probably PB2.5 will have multiple rankings if it will have such ones." This allowing players that may not be able to preform in ranked matches for more than 2 seconds have another targeted goal. I believe we'll have more than one system, just to give everybody a chance at the top.
User avatar
Riften
Cyber Grub [25]
 
Posts: 33
Joined: 13 August 2013, 05:56

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby spirit9871 » 9 November 2015, 00:17

Riften wrote:For anyone that is complaining about the ranked matches not allowing people with higher pings, just stop. First of all, Eric wanted to make the pings relatively smooth between players in-order to decrease the lag. Ranked matches are meant for skill not whoever lags better can get a better chance of surviving/killing.


I think the community wants to be able to set their own ping limits rather than it being automated by the servers. Though it is debatable considering how bad lag was back before the automatic system was created.
The world is defined by those willing to act, not by those dreaming to act.
User avatar
spirit9871
Usurpation Soldier [50]
 
Posts: 95
Joined: 25 August 2013, 04:08
Location: New York~

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby Terabrion » 9 November 2015, 00:32

Riften wrote:For anyone that is complaining about the ranked matches not allowing people with higher pings, just stop. First of all, Eric wanted to make the pings relatively smooth between players in-order to decrease the lag. Ranked matches are meant for skill not whoever lags better can get a better chance of surviving/killing.

It is obvious you have no idea what you talk about, also YOU CAN ALWAYS set the ping you want, remember? Genius.
Laggers have both advantage and disadvantage, they look like an advantage because we cannot see their point of view, but us being faster than them is much of an advantage.
Scissorhands
Another step in an unknown direction
How can I be sure, oh how can I be sure?
Days go by, it seems to grow (it seems to grow)
It feels still right where I am
I can't see you anymore, feel you anymore
These voices are pushing me
They want me to fail (they want me to fail)
I am falling
Nothing to lose, nothing to win
How could I be sure?
Why so sure, why so sure?
User avatar
Terabrion
Civil Security Lite [100]
 
Posts: 117
Joined: 10 September 2014, 11:16
Location: Spain

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby mingo1 » 9 November 2015, 03:03

Terabrion wrote:
Riften wrote:For anyone that is complaining about the ranked matches not allowing people with higher pings, just stop. First of all, Eric wanted to make the pings relatively smooth between players in-order to decrease the lag. Ranked matches are meant for skill not whoever lags better can get a better chance of surviving/killing.

It is obvious you have no idea what you talk about, also YOU CAN ALWAYS set the ping you want, remember? Genius.
Laggers have both advantage and disadvantage, they look like an advantage because we cannot see their point of view, but us being faster than them is much of an advantage.


While that IS correct, the whole lobby has to vote on the ping limit suggested. Many players ignore the vote or just don't bother to.

Setting it yourself would be much easier.
Also, a nice feature would be that when you set it, it stays that way for let's say 3 minutes—then someone else may choose to make it what they like.
Obviously, there has to be some sort of setting on the server that makes it so you can't just automatically set the ping limit to 10 and NUKE the server lol.

That's my own 2 cents.

:)
User avatar
mingo1
Administrator
 
Posts: 515
Joined: 1 January 2014, 00:19
Location: California—The Golden State!

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby Terabrion » 9 November 2015, 07:21

mingo1 wrote:While that IS correct, the whole lobby has to vote on the ping limit suggested. Many players ignore the vote or just don't bother to.

You said it yourself, now let me illuminate you.
Scissorhands
Another step in an unknown direction
How can I be sure, oh how can I be sure?
Days go by, it seems to grow (it seems to grow)
It feels still right where I am
I can't see you anymore, feel you anymore
These voices are pushing me
They want me to fail (they want me to fail)
I am falling
Nothing to lose, nothing to win
How could I be sure?
Why so sure, why so sure?
User avatar
Terabrion
Civil Security Lite [100]
 
Posts: 117
Joined: 10 September 2014, 11:16
Location: Spain

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby spirit9871 » 9 November 2015, 22:40

I don't know if that picture is accurate though, in that anyone who has a ping limit higher than 130 or so is automatically booted, even if the ping limit is set initially to 1000. I'm almost certain there is an automated system that just kicks players off after they go over 130 ping.

Might have to experiment with that later though.
The world is defined by those willing to act, not by those dreaming to act.
User avatar
spirit9871
Usurpation Soldier [50]
 
Posts: 95
Joined: 25 August 2013, 04:08
Location: New York~

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby xChakra » 10 November 2015, 02:16

Spirit , its 180*
Anyways, in order to keep activity up, we should have the system be seaseonal.
Every two weeks, people will fight for places on the leaderboards, at the very end of two weeks, people are rewarded, and system resets. If youve already achieved the spot your in it will give you a recognition for you on your profile. In my opinion, seasons should last for one month, but two weeks seems universally good.
[sarcasm] Yeah... Sure[/sarcasm]
Spoiler: Show More
Loading...
User avatar
xChakra
Advanced Usurpation Soldier [150]
 
Posts: 184
Joined: 31 December 2013, 01:49

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby spirit9871 » 10 November 2015, 03:08

xChakra wrote:Spirit , its 180*
Anyways, in order to keep activity up, we should have the system be seaseonal.
Every two weeks, people will fight for places on the leaderboards, at the very end of two weeks, people are rewarded, and system resets. If youve already achieved the spot your in it will give you a recognition for you on your profile. In my opinion, seasons should last for one month, but two weeks seems universally good.


Yeah, I really like this idea to be implemented.
The world is defined by those willing to act, not by those dreaming to act.
User avatar
spirit9871
Usurpation Soldier [50]
 
Posts: 95
Joined: 25 August 2013, 04:08
Location: New York~

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby gordonwater » 10 November 2015, 05:21

What about the separation between pros and noobs? I had my friend try this out and he said it sucks because it's too hard for him. Maybe the reason why noobs are unable to blend in well is us pros are too hard for them. It would encourage more new players and once they become better, they can go to pros side. It must be not that too hard.

gordonwater
Recruit
 
Posts: 17
Joined: 23 October 2014, 22:20

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby maxim12 » 10 November 2015, 13:35

Your idea is good, doomwrath.

But i have to agree with what he said:
xChakra wrote:system should not be based on site stats, system should be based merely on any formation of points gained in ranked matches, not level dev, or campaign progress.
Thunder and Blood

maxim12
Phoenix Falkok [450]
 
Posts: 462
Joined: 16 July 2013, 20:56

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby Destroyer_ » 11 November 2015, 22:37

I wouldn't say every two weeks.What about every month or so?

Destroyer_
 

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby spirit9871 » 12 November 2015, 00:41

I think monthly would be fair.
The world is defined by those willing to act, not by those dreaming to act.
User avatar
spirit9871
Usurpation Soldier [50]
 
Posts: 95
Joined: 25 August 2013, 04:08
Location: New York~

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby monkeyman2535 » 12 November 2015, 04:20

IMHO, it's a dumb idea to have an auto-resetting top 100 players at all. The top 100 should be a goal that people strive to achieve, not some monthly contest whose results are constantly discarded. There would be no reason for people to compete if they didn't get any permanent recognition from it-- and that's not even factoring in awards from the top 100: would people even get them from an auto-resetting list? If they did, the entirety of PB2 would be saturated with awarded players-- there would be so many nobody would care about getting one. Keep a solid top 100 players, just set it to a ranking system that gives people a fair shot of getting onto it based on skill and how frequently they play. This means a permanent KDR- and kills-based system with a built-in decay mechanism that drops people down if they become less active or their KDR/kills increases at a slower rate than others'.
Also, about a ranking system based on all PB2-related achievements, whether they be competitive play- or maps- or campaign-related, I think that's a good idea, and it would do well to replace the traditional Top 100 system with something like that. I think we could do well with a system that promotes well-roundedness and achievement over just killing people. PB2 is more than just the race to blow your friends' heads off, it's a diverse and creative place filled with many multi-talented people. It'd be cool to have a system that reflects that.
✿✿✿~*.:тнσѕє αяє му тнσυgнтѕ:.*~✿✿✿
User avatar
monkeyman2535
Civil Security Lite [100]
 
Posts: 109
Joined: 28 July 2013, 21:22
Location: wand'ring softly down the halflit streets

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby spirit9871 » 12 November 2015, 23:32

monkeyman2535 wrote:IMHO, it's a dumb idea to have an auto-resetting top 100 players at all...
Also, about a ranking system based on all PB2-related achievements, whether they be competitive play- or maps- or campaign-related, I think that's a good idea...


I think it's important to note however the main concern is that something should be done in making the ranking system more flexible. With PP incapable of properly showing player skill, it just becomes hard to think that all people aside from pre-existing players have a fair chance in making it there. The reset system could work in that it would accurately indicate player skill over time rather than have people bloated with PP up top. So either that, or an entire different system should replace the one we have now.

As for your second point, I agree that all PB2-related achievements should be commemorated. Nothing to criticize there from my end.

Side-note, Mingo and I will go through these replies summarizing what has been said and suggested alongside other problems people may have mentioned. We hope to do this by this weekend or the next, and then start up the next Revivalist Topic.
The world is defined by those willing to act, not by those dreaming to act.
User avatar
spirit9871
Usurpation Soldier [50]
 
Posts: 95
Joined: 25 August 2013, 04:08
Location: New York~

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby Hikarikaze » 13 November 2015, 00:39

Let's not forget that while multiplayer is still in beta stage, Eric can't do much to multiplayer in terms of ranking systems. I'll let this old, but still relevant, PM explain for itself:



The censored part doesn't relate to this discussion. It was only a summary of the PP difference update.

Perhaps we could be seeing an improved ranking system, with few of his 'perfect solutions' hopefully implemented, in PB2.5, but that seems like a long way to go, and only time can tell how and if that'll even become a reality.
User avatar
Hikarikaze
Noir Lime [600]
 
Posts: 694
Joined: 24 January 2014, 02:05
Location: Somewhere, just not here

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby spirit9871 » 13 November 2015, 01:04

Hopefully he does have some in mind, Hikarikaze. I'd love to see his best guns on this issue.
The world is defined by those willing to act, not by those dreaming to act.
User avatar
spirit9871
Usurpation Soldier [50]
 
Posts: 95
Joined: 25 August 2013, 04:08
Location: New York~

Re: (R) Revivalist Phase II Topic 1: Ranking System (R)

Postby monkeyman2535 » 13 November 2015, 04:51

Hikarikaze wrote:Let's not forget that while multiplayer is still in beta stage, Eric can't do much to multiplayer in terms of ranking systems.

Let's not forget that this is an ages-old and tired excuse, and while I genuinely do believe Eric is a wonderful human being with only the best of intentions, I think he's basically totally given up on PB2 MP. The "Beta" will be until the end of PB2's life; it's been there from the birth of PB2, its life, and now its twilight into death. This topic should only concern updates in PB2.5; there's nothing else left to help PB2.
spirit9871 wrote:I think it's important to note however the main concern is that something should be done in making the ranking system more flexible. With PP incapable of properly showing player skill, it just becomes hard to think that all people aside from pre-existing players have a fair chance in making it there. The reset system could work in that it would accurately indicate player skill over time rather than have people bloated with PP up top. So either that, or an entire different system should replace the one we have now.

You're forgetting my main point-- that periodic resets will take away people's incentives for getting on the top 100 a first place. People will only strive for spots on the top 100 if they see it as a place of great achievement; the top 100 is a hall of fame for PB2's greatest competitive players (in theory, that is-- right now, it's a mess), not a periodic competition whose winners are discarded as soon as they make their achievement. I can't imagine players enthusiastically throwing themselves into the fray and battling their way up to the top if they just won big and had their place taken away. New crowds would jump in every month or so, and once they got to the top and got kicked off, they'd realize their awards meant nothing, and give up. I'd give this system 3-4 months before imploding.
Want some proof? Just look at the PP system. Although PP was never quite as equal-opportunity-idealistic as your proposed system is, it's similar in that PP took hard work to obtain and could easily be snatched away by a quick spawnkill or lucky shot. People fought for it ardently for the first few months, but when everyone realized just how pointless it was, they gave up. I can see your proposed system dying in just the same way.
Also, my point about awards was that if everyone got awards from these monthly contests, everyone would have them, and nobody would think they would be very special anymore.
✿✿✿~*.:тнσѕє αяє му тнσυgнтѕ:.*~✿✿✿
User avatar
monkeyman2535
Civil Security Lite [100]
 
Posts: 109
Joined: 28 July 2013, 21:22
Location: wand'ring softly down the halflit streets

PreviousNext

Return to Website / PB2 Game

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users



cron