Alternative Ranking System

[SkyCaptain]

I think this has been brought up before, but I would like to expand on the idea of a win/loss ranking by giving a separate one for the standard 6 player free-for-all game type. As you can clearly see from looking at Jork's games in particular, the top players on the current system have become so by playing games which almost assure them of the win, such as triples with two friends against noobs. But if we had an additional ranking system where you could see a person's win/loss ranking in 6 player singles games, it would be a better indication of who the best players are.

This would be nice, but not essential, so I'm thinking a priority of 3 or so.

What does everyone think about this idea?

[SkyCaptain]

Also, before anyone gets in my face. No I'm not dissing the high-ranked players. Some of them are very nice people. And though I do play a lot of the traditional game type, I don't think I'd be near the top on this type of ranking, so it's not to see my name in lights or anything. I just think this would be a better indicator than the current scoring system of who the best players are.

And this isn't a replacement of the current one, just an addition.

[Guilty_Biscuit]

Yeah, the scoring system could use some improvement. I bet Tahitiwahini could come up with a better system at short notice.

[SkyCaptain]

Does that even mean anything? But thanks for the support. I guess. If that counts as support. Other people's comments would be appreciated!

[AK_iceman]

Yeah, please search for the other 20 threads on this suggestion and read them. There's been a lot of feedback on this idea already, and it's even on the to-do list. No need to make another "new" thread for a worn out topic.

[SkyCaptain]

Yes, in fact I have. However, to my knowledge, they're all about win/loss ratings and such. My idea is to have one of only standard 6 player games, so that the people who play all team game to jack up their points won't be on top any more.

[AK_iceman]

That's dumb. If we have one for only 6 player standard games then we should have one for.....
5 player standard
4 player standard
3 player standard
6 player terminator
5 player terminator
4 player terminator
3 player terminator
6 player assassin
5 player assassin
4 player assassin
3 player assassin
6 player triples
6 player doubles
4 player doubles

Not to mention the different settings like freestyle and sequential. Those game types aren't the same so we should have separate scoreboards for all of those too!
See what I mean? You're proposing a new scoreboard specifically for 6 player standard games, when it really makes no sense to have it.

[SkyCaptain]

Lol, no need to get hostile. The only reason I say that is because 6 player standard is the standard gametype. I mean, sure we could add in the terminator and assassin to it as well if everyone wants to do that. It's just an idea, and i was really hoping for more constructive criticism than worthless remarks like, "That's dumb." I don't know the statistics, but I would bet that a majority of the singles games are 6 player standards, and so i felt that that would be the most logical choice for a scoring system of this kind.

[AK_iceman]

Well maybe someone else can comment on it then. I don't see any reason to implement this if you're not going to make different scoreboards for every possible game type.
I much prefer the 20 other threads that suggested a different scoreboard for team games and standard games. Anyway, just my 2 cents.

[SkyCaptain]

Yeah, that sounds fine as well. I think that team and individual games have totally different strategies, and people who are good at one might not be good at the other. This was just a thought to add something like that, but the other idea is fine as well.

[JoshJ]

Why is 6 player standard the standard gametype? Why not 4?


I'd be fine with giving doubles, triples, assassin, terminator, etc their own scoreboards, or perhaps even setting up a sortable database of scores so you've got basically a total score list and people can go through and look at the scoreboard for combinations of game type, card type, map, etc.

[SkyCaptain]

Well, six player is standard because that's the official risk size, that's why you can only play with six max.

[spiesr]

There is no standard!

[JoshJ]

Well, six player is standard because that's the official risk size, that's why you can only play with six max.

Maximum is not "standard". The 'real' risk game comes with rules for 2 through 6 players. There's no standard in there.

[Enigma]

FOR REFERENCE:
Statistics are for current number of pages of Active and Waiting for Players games.

30 pgs 6 player Standard
12 pgs 5 player Standard
19 pgs 4 player Standard
20 pgs 3 player Standard
=total 81 pgs Standard

25 pgs any size Doubles
13 pgs any size Triples
12 pgs any size Terminator
4 pgs any size Assassin

-6 player Standard games are 1.5 times as popular as the next popular number of players in a Standard game.
-6 player Standard games are more popular than all sizes combined of each of the other gametypes.
-The Standard gametype is more than 3 times as popular as the next popular gametype.


I think this poposal has merit. However I would suggest that instead of limiting the additional ranking to 6 player standard games, to rather include all standard games. While this makes the system slightly less reliable, it also expands the ranking's practicality and reach.