Idea for Taekwon ranking, discussion welcome.
#26
Posted 17 July 2012 - 06:16 PM
#27
Posted 17 July 2012 - 07:50 PM
#28
Posted 17 July 2012 - 11:14 PM
Cutting all Mission Points in half every quarter. This could go along with the Alchemist Rankings.
Older Rankers will keep their position, but it will be easier for new rankers to catch up.
Also, 3 month aren't really a short time period for somone who plays active
#29
Posted 18 July 2012 - 06:44 AM
For example:
Position 1 ~ 10 loses 4 points
Position 11 ~ 30 loses 2 points
Position 31 ~ ∞ loses 1 point
#30
Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:07 AM
Something else that might work:
Cutting all Mission Points in half every quarter. This could go along with the Alchemist Rankings.
Older Rankers will keep their position, but it will be easier for new rankers to catch up.
Also, 3 month aren't really a short time period for somone who plays active
I don't think it's fair to punish active rankers in any way. I wouldn't be too happy if I'm getting points cut off the same way as that inactive guy. Only inactives should lose the points. The whole point is to get rid of inactives, not make it harder to reach the taekwon rankings.
#31
Posted 18 July 2012 - 08:43 AM
#32
Posted 19 July 2012 - 10:22 AM
Person A does one mission a week, but only plays every other week. That's +4 points for the weeks played, and -8 total degradation. That's -4 to the total.
Person B does one mission a week, and plays every week but goes on vacation for 4 weeks. That +4 points for the weeks played, a (-1-1-1-1-1-2-4-8) = -19 to their rank, for a -15 change
They played the same amount of time, but person B gets a 4x penalty. So yeah, no on the exponential drop.
Edited by KataiKou, 19 July 2012 - 12:14 PM.
#33
Posted 19 July 2012 - 07:05 PM
#34
Posted 19 July 2012 - 07:11 PM
The exponential one is quite a bit more time intensive to implement than a straight decrease, as we then have to compare each week to each other rather than just updating the ranks as a whole, downwards. This means more likely to fail (if it is automated) or not done due to busy other schedule if it is done by hand. There are already too many little things to do and remember without adding another burden.
A straight decrease is far too lenient to players who don't actively play their ranker. It could only fail while automated if it's implemented incorrectly the first time. I'd assume you have test servers. I mean, like, you do test things before you let them go live, right?
Segregate the code from any global variables to prevent it from contaminating or messing with any other code. Or do you not have enough control and access to do that? It's easy to ask for suggestions, but I suppose you really are limited to what you actually have access to change.
#35
Posted 20 July 2012 - 12:23 AM
Once its implemented anyone who isnt active is going to get knocked out of the ranks quite fast *IF* there are active TK's trying to get ranked. What it seems like a lot of people is saying is "im too lazy to do ranked missions, i want everyone above me harshly overpenalised so i only have to do the bare minimum to get ranked". for those people just wait a couple months before trying to get ranked, same result, but done fairly. If someone is putting in a lot more work than you to get ranked, they deserve their rank even if they dont play as regularly as you.
#36
Posted 31 July 2012 - 04:59 AM
#37
Posted 11 August 2012 - 05:42 PM
#38
Posted 15 August 2012 - 06:10 AM
rank healers by amount of hp restored, melee classes by amount of damage and magic classes by amount of magic damage in level groups of 20 levels.
Easily abused and we all know all Suras would top the damage ranks because of their crazy damage output.
#39
Posted 19 February 2013 - 04:46 PM
#40
Posted 13 June 2013 - 12:10 AM
#41
Posted 15 June 2013 - 06:40 PM
In the old days that hp and damage increase might be an amazing thing, but now with third classes?
Edited by Lunebeam, 15 June 2013 - 06:42 PM.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users