Update!!

[phineas94]

Aren't the 2 ranking systems separate? Your league position shows how your doing in your league and the Top 200 shows how you're doing in skill. If someone wants to boost their league position by playing every minute of every day then why not have win/loss data available next to their accumulated points which could then be used to calculate their real worth.

---

Aren't the 2 ranking systems separate? Your league position shows how your doing in your league and the Top 200 shows how you're doing in skill. If someone wants to boost their league position by playing every minute of every day then why not have win/loss data available next to their accumulated points which could then be used to calculate their real worth.

[EkoFox]

(01-30-2013 07:30 AM)phineas94 Wrote:  Aren't the 2 ranking systems separate? Your league position shows how your doing in your league and the Top 200 shows how you're doing in skill. If someone wants to boost their league position by playing every minute of every day then why not have win/loss data available next to their accumulated points which could then be used to calculate their real worth.

Yes, the two rank systems are completely separate. League Position is more of an indicator of activity, while the hidden ranking is your actual skill.

The only visible indicators of your hidden ranking are the Top 200 List (which only show the top 200, obviously) and which League you are in. The problem is that there are only 5 leagues, and 80% of the players are in the bottom two. Which league you are in is very misleading. You could be a Clever player (2nd league) and actually be in the top 25% of all Outwitters players. A Gifted player is in the top 20%, while a Master-level player is in the top 5% of the entire player-base.

Also, people wouldn't want to see win:loss ratios, because the system tries hard to average your wins:losses to 50:50. That's a little depressing to look at all the time.

[Taatgarath]

(01-30-2013 07:25 AM)EkoFox Wrote:  As promised, my replay of a Bramble v Mobi Reaper rush. It's not a perfect example since it wasn't a fully committed rush, but it demonstrates that Bramble can stop a rush (and the most talked about rush ever, at that) and Bramble is no longer underpowered. I can post some more of my Veggienauts replays as they come out, if you want.

Hey, was versus me, I've been surprised by the new thorns well played !
If you want to play again tell me.

[EkoFox]

Yes, it'd be great to play again. I want to see how the new Bramble stacks up against the Adorables

[harvarnold]

I don't get the point of only losing 1 point on a loss. Today I lost to a player, he gained 20 points and I only lost 1. The shifts the focus of the points back to activity, and I'm not sure I like it that much. The old system seemed to be pretty reflective of skill, which was a good thing. If you worry about people at zero points, just have everyone start at 500 or something. I hope losing only 1 point is a bug, because I would hate to see losses no longer punished.

[connor34911]

(01-30-2013 08:50 AM)harvarnold Wrote:  I don't get the point of only losing 1 point on a loss. Today I lost to a player, he gained 20 points and I only lost 1. The shifts the focus of the points back to activity, and I'm not sure I like it that much. The old system seemed to be pretty reflective of skill, which was a good thing. If you worry about people at zero points, just have everyone start at 500 or something. I hope losing only 1 point is a bug, because I would hate to see losses no longer punished.

It's not. I've finished several games since the update and I don't think anyone's lost more than 3 points.

[EkoFox]

I've beaten a few people who've lost 4 or 5 points, but of course that's still much lower than the 18-22 points I gained.

[harvarnold]

(01-30-2013 09:12 AM)connor34911 Wrote:  

(01-30-2013 08:50 AM)harvarnold Wrote:  I don't get the point of only losing 1 point on a loss. Today I lost to a player, he gained 20 points and I only lost 1. The shifts the focus of the points back to activity, and I'm not sure I like it that much. The old system seemed to be pretty reflective of skill, which was a good thing. If you worry about people at zero points, just have everyone start at 500 or something. I hope losing only 1 point is a bug, because I would hate to see losses no longer punished.

It's not. I've finished several games since the update and I don't think anyone's lost more than 3 points.

I meant I hope it's a general bug and everyone is losing <5 points even though they shouldn't be.

[Harti]

Maybe the points system makes some adjustment for consecutive losses.

I have no clue about it though, I've already noticed that on the beta but I thought that would be because of the huge skill gap there was. Apparently it's also happening for equal matches.

Guess OML has had a reason to implement that. I don't see why not though, it doesn't necessarily only represent activity. The only thing that's changed is that you cannot climb the ladder with being inactive.

[harvarnold]

^The problem is that now someone who wins 1 in 100 games can accumulate more points than someone who wins half of their games simply by playing a ton on games. I don't see what was so bad about the old system.