Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Leaderboards

Collapse
X

Leaderboards

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Author membership
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Leaderboards

    Fisrt of all im happy its finnaly here but..

    I dont think ranking people based on number of wins is that great idea, someone with 1000 games and 50 wins will be better places then someone with 100 games and 40 wins? What about implementing some kind of mmr sistem where u get points based on place u finished and kills, and maybe lose points when you die early in the round. I know a lot of times you die in first 10sec becouse someone grabed gun first, but i think sistem like this would be way more fun then being under someone who have more wins only becouse he plays 16h daily...

    Example for solo:
    you start a round with -5 points, each kill gives you 1 point, if you finish top25 you get 3 more points, top10 10 points, 1st place 30points (prob unbalanced, just an example)

  • #2
    Someone who has more time in the game should be on top and this game only factors in kills or wind n kills is way easier to get so wins is what makes the leaderbords

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Two_Pinky_Ringz View Post
      Someone who has more time in the game should be on top and this game only factors in kills or wind n kills is way easier to get so wins is what makes the leaderbords
      To a certain degree. I've been pretty high on the 3rd party leader boards since the start (top 10 overall wins in solo and squad).The only reason people passed me and my squad was because I have a job and a girlfriend which takes away my ability to grind the game all day. But based on win percentage we are still the number one squad roughly 60% win rate with over 100 wins. I don't see how someone with a 20% win rate should be higher than me on the leader boards simply because they play a lot more. There has to be a certain level of adjustment so that people with jobs can compete. Otherwise it isn't even about skill. It's just about who grinded the most hours. That isn't what the leader boards should represent.

      The division system seems pointless to me. Without a "tier" system of some sort I see no point in it. I'm always going to be the top of my division. Most of the players will have 1 or 2 wins maximum. And then it just resets every week with no reward for winning your division so why does it even matter? I really hope they revise that.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Two_Pinky_Ringz View Post
        Someone who has more time in the game should be on top and this game only factors in kills or wind n kills is way easier to get so wins is what makes the leaderbords
        Thats absolutely wrong. Someone who plays BETTER should be on top. And playing better isnt number of wins but win rate, k/d etc...
        Someone with 2% winrate shouldnt be in front of someone with 20% no matter what.

        And yes those divisions seems like fail, 50 random ppl could be all inactive...

        Comment


        • #5
          Passed you because you aren't about the grind. Can't base it on win rate otherwise someone who plays the game 5 times and wins 5 matches would be on top because of a 100% win rate lol Win or be left behind.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by AlwaysBronze View Post
            Passed you because you aren't about the grind. Can't base it on win rate otherwise someone who plays the game 5 times and wins 5 matches would be on top because of a 100% win rate lol Win or be left behind.
            Well of course it can't be based on win rate solely. It needs to be subject to some type of "Grind" so that you don't see a player with 1 game played and 1 win at the top. The PUBG system is pretty good. They should do something similar. It factors overall wins but also win percentage as well as K/D. All give points that lead to your overall rating.

            Comment


            • #7
              Nobody said leaderboards should be only win rate, tho we taking here about formed win rate and k/d (like 50+ games). Just said that win rate is way more important then number of wins only. Rating should be grinding like in every game, but grinding where u gain points by playing good , and lose when playing bad. Right now there is no losing, you just queue in next game and spam it until you win and if you have enough free time, ull farm more wins then someone whos way better then you but have way less time.
              Imagine in lol or dota or csgo or whatever game you gain points only by winning game and you cant lose it, top in the leaderboards whould be some random ppl who play game 15h daily insted of pro players...

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Pwnzerino View Post
                Nobody said leaderboards should be only win rate, tho we taking here about formed win rate and k/d (like 50+ games). Just said that win rate is way more important then number of wins only. Rating should be grinding like in every game, but grinding where u gain points by playing good , and lose when playing bad. Right now there is no losing, you just queue in next game and spam it until you win and if you have enough free time, ull farm more wins then someone whos way better then you but have way less time.
                Imagine in lol or dota or csgo or whatever game you gain points only by winning game and you cant lose it, top in the leaderboards whould be some random ppl who play game 15h daily insted of pro players...
                Exactly. That's why flat numbers of wins makes absolutely no sense in analyzing who is actually the best at the game.

                Comment


                • #9
                  K/D ratio has nothing to do with anything in this game. It clearly states the only objective is to win, how you choose to do that is up to you. It should be non-factor as far as the leaderboards are concerned, it can be associated with XP that's totally fine. I have a strong K/D ratio so don't think I'm bias against it. Next the win % again it's a bad measure because like others pointed out if you play a low volume of games and happen to win a lot of them of course you will have a high win %, that win % is unlikely to be upheld over 1000 games. People like to cheese play a couple games get their high % win then stop playing to protect it. Just look at Maddens old ranking system, they converted to a time based one because of it.

                  The system obviously should be a point based system based around average finish. The higher you place the more points you are awarded. The bracket thing is currently going to be a huge miss/mess because it's a free game with a lot of dead accounts, I will be shocked if half my bracket even plays the game anymore(currently I'm the only one with games played in all 3 categories). If they want to continue with these brackets they should overtime adjust them to remove dead accounts and pool the more skilled players into the same bracket.

                  Comment


                  • AG_Carnivor commented
                    Editing a comment
                    A pointing system would reward people who play more, not people who win more. I can win 50 games, but someone who places top 5 and plays 200 will have more points. (just assuming) The ranking system should definitely be MMR, and it should rank you against players near your skill level. Hell, reduce the player count I don't care.

                • #10
                  Are you guys actually serious. The game mode is all about winning so it is only logical that the person with the most wins should be at the top. WTAF!

                  Comment


                  • #11
                    If you actually think Epic is going to insert an MMR system, you're crazy. Too lazy. I would love that system though. Once again, they're rewarding luck over skill. Or in this case, who can play the game more over skill. I guarantee I have a better W/L ration that 85% of players, but I can't play as much as 85% players either. It sucks.

                    Comment


                    • #12
                      Originally posted by DouubleYou View Post
                      Are you guys actually serious. The game mode is all about winning so it is only logical that the person with the most wins should be at the top. WTAF!
                      No its not logical. Leaderboards should show who is better player not who play more.
                      Lets say you are very good player, that good that you win every 3rd game. and you have time to play 6 games daily. so its 2 daily wins for you. Meanwhile im way worse then you and I win 1 time every 10 games but i have time to play 40 games every day, so i make 4 wins daily.
                      Dont you find it wierd that im placed higher then you?

                      Every competative game is about winning. Still in every one there are good players in top and bad on bottom of leaderboards simply becouse they not using useless stat as number of wins for player ranking.

                      Comment


                      • #13
                        Originally posted by Pwnzerino View Post

                        No its not logical. Leaderboards should show who is better player not who play more.
                        Lets say you are very good player, that good that you win every 3rd game. and you have time to play 6 games daily. so its 2 daily wins for you. Meanwhile im way worse then you and I win 1 time every 10 games but i have time to play 40 games every day, so i make 4 wins daily.
                        Dont you find it wierd that im placed higher then you?

                        Every competative game is about winning. Still in every one there are good players in top and bad on bottom of leaderboards simply becouse they not using useless stat as number of wins for player ranking.


                        So True Pwnzerino. Leaderboards are completly useless at the moment. Pls bring K/D winrate and/or a rating like PUBG. THX

                        Comment


                        • #14
                          I also have a job and a girlfriend, so definitely can't grind as much as most other players. That means I should be biased towards a win rate vs number of wins system, yet I don't think that would be a good idea at all.
                          Think about this: someone plays one game and happens to win for whatever reason, maybe they're lucky. Now they have a 100% win rate. They stop playing and there you go: that lucky person will be forever the top player.

                          That was an extreme example of course, but all in all that change would shift the favour towards people who play less, whether they play better or are luckier. If anything, leaderboards should incentivise people to play more.
                          And when I only have two hours to play in the whole day, I don't want to spend them in the lobby waiting for enough people to start a game.

                          Comment


                          • #15
                            Originally posted by Fox Cunning View Post
                            I also have a job and a girlfriend, so definitely can't grind as much as most other players. That means I should be biased towards a win rate vs number of wins system, yet I don't think that would be a good idea at all.
                            Think about this: someone plays one game and happens to win for whatever reason, maybe they're lucky. Now they have a 100% win rate. They stop playing and there you go: that lucky person will be forever the top player.

                            That was an extreme example of course, but all in all that change would shift the favour towards people who play less, whether they play better or are luckier. If anything, leaderboards should incentivise people to play more.
                            And when I only have two hours to play in the whole day, I don't want to spend them in the lobby waiting for enough people to start a game.
                            read post #7 again.
                            If you have system where wins and good placments give you + points and bad placments give u - points, peaope with high winrate will have more points then people with low. So if u play only one game and have 100% winrate you will still have low amount of points as you got them only once. So you need to play more good games to farm points.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X