the Ranking System

[Obey]

Just get rid of the ranking system all together.

[Obey]

Just get rid of the ranking system all together.

[ILLoKWENT]

Again... as i told @NOBLE..implement the goldmic rating system...+10/-15 you lose points or gain them based on who u battle.a top battler would have a 1500 rating.. and if he sees a noob opponents profile.hed see +5/-50..if he wins he gains 5 points toward his 1500 score.. if he loses he ends up losing 50 points...if he battles an even skilled battler ,he sees +15/-15.... etc.etc.. this will eliminate dudes tryin to pick on noobs and strive for stronger opponents ..

[ILLoKWENT]

Again... as i told @NOBLE..implement the goldmic rating system...+10/-15 you lose points or gain them based on who u battle.a top battler would have a 1500 rating.. and if he sees a noob opponents profile.hed see +5/-50..if he wins he gains 5 points toward his 1500 score.. if he loses he ends up losing 50 points...if he battles an even skilled battler ,he sees +15/-15.... etc.etc.. this will eliminate dudes tryin to pick on noobs and strive for stronger opponents ..

Anybody can be a top battler.. Some noobs give the dudes we think is whack 10s..

Anybody can be a top battler.. Some noobs give the dudes we think is whack 10s..

[Godbody]

Originally Posted by NOBLE

We already have a skilled based ranking system. It's the stars under each person's name. It will say something like 8.1 or 7.63 and it is the average of every rating you have ever received in Text (if its your text stars) or Audio. It's based on how the community ranks your skill level with the way they have been rating you. What we could do is create a listing of top 100 based on the star ratings. However, it might be a bit skewed because people who have been on LB for some years are more likely to be overrated star-wise due to the fact that giving 9's and 10's were common in the past whereas now, a lot of people are dropping more realistic rates and you have to be REALLY good to get anything more than a 6. So someone who just started within the last year might actually be equally or more skilled than someone who has been here for years and still have less star points than the older member. It won't be perfect, but it would probably be the easiest and most practical way to accomplish what you are asking for.

I know, I alluded to the points system ya'll have in place and all but its flawed. The star ranks are flawed too. Those are ratings given to you by other people. Dickriders can give wack dudes 10s and haters can give nice dudes 1s... It's a flawed system

now if I just have a tier, like Bronze or some shit... I can battle someone in my tier, or higher...and algorithms will determine how many points I get or lose if i win/lose to them, and those points count towards my progression

for example... I could be Bronze tier and 2/3rd's of the way to Silver...but if I lose to a really low Bronze, I go back down to 1/3rd of the way or even less...or if I'm 2/3rds done with Bronze and I beat someone that's Silver, I automatically shoot up to Silver, or close to it. If I beat someone that's Gold as a Bronze tiered dude with 2/3rds of his progression done, I'll shoot up to Silver tier with 1/3rd of the progression for silver done. or if I beat a Diamond nigga I'll shoot up to Silver & 2/3rds of the way to Gold. Idk, something like that. Ya'll figure out how many W's it'll take but thats the general idea

its similar to what ya'll have now, but the thing with this current system is its based on how many battles you have, not the quality of the people you battle. and that's what ya'll should do, is create a separate leaderboard entirely with tiers alongside the shit ya'll have now, or wipe the leaderboards completely and implement the tiered shit and only the tiered shit

because while the shit ya'll have now does have some kind of skill based shit goin on, it's more based on how many battles you win. & that's a problem when dudes do 10 snipes a day against shitty cats and reach #1 on the all time leaderboard

[Godbody]

Originally Posted by NOBLE

We already have a skilled based ranking system. It's the stars under each person's name. It will say something like 8.1 or 7.63 and it is the average of every rating you have ever received in Text (if its your text stars) or Audio. It's based on how the community ranks your skill level with the way they have been rating you. What we could do is create a listing of top 100 based on the star ratings. However, it might be a bit skewed because people who have been on LB for some years are more likely to be overrated star-wise due to the fact that giving 9's and 10's were common in the past whereas now, a lot of people are dropping more realistic rates and you have to be REALLY good to get anything more than a 6. So someone who just started within the last year might actually be equally or more skilled than someone who has been here for years and still have less star points than the older member. It won't be perfect, but it would probably be the easiest and most practical way to accomplish what you are asking for.

I know, I alluded to the points system ya'll have in place and all but its flawed. The star ranks are flawed too. Those are ratings given to you by other people. Dickriders can give wack dudes 10s and haters can give nice dudes 1s... It's a flawed system

now if I just have a tier, like Bronze or some shit... I can battle someone in my tier, or higher...and algorithms will determine how many points I get or lose if i win/lose to them, and those points count towards my progression

for example... I could be Bronze tier and 2/3rd's of the way to Silver...but if I lose to a really low Bronze, I go back down to 1/3rd of the way or even less...or if I'm 2/3rds done with Bronze and I beat someone that's Silver, I automatically shoot up to Silver, or close to it. If I beat someone that's Gold as a Bronze tiered dude with 2/3rds of his progression done, I'll shoot up to Silver tier with 1/3rd of the progression for silver done. or if I beat a Diamond nigga I'll shoot up to Silver & 2/3rds of the way to Gold. Idk, something like that. Ya'll figure out how many W's it'll take but thats the general idea

its similar to what ya'll have now, but the thing with this current system is its based on how many battles you have, not the quality of the people you battle. and that's what ya'll should do, is create a separate leaderboard entirely with tiers alongside the shit ya'll have now, or wipe the leaderboards completely and implement the tiered shit and only the tiered shit

because while the shit ya'll have now does have some kind of skill based shit goin on, it's more based on how many battles you win. & that's a problem when dudes do 10 snipes a day against shitty cats and reach #1 on the all time leaderboard

[Saxx]

Who cares about ranks anyway

[Saxx]

Who cares about ranks anyway

^You're missing the point of the thread

^You're missing the point of the thread

[Saxx]

I get the point but who cares. People high ranked are going to say keep it the same and people who want to feel superior to others that dint battle much will say change it.

---------- Post added at 03:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:01 PM ----------

I never joined the site and thought about leaving because I was ranked 100,0000 or something..more peoples shitty attitudes towards each other.

[Saxx]

I get the point but who cares. People high ranked are going to say keep it the same and people who want to feel superior to others that dint battle much will say change it.

---------- Post added at 03:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:01 PM ----------

I never joined the site and thought about leaving because I was ranked 100,0000 or something..more peoples shitty attitudes towards each other.

[M-Rock]

Don't think it would be fair to the handful of dudes that have dropped thousands of battles and earned their ranking to just reset everything

Maybe adding a separate skill ranking system, like you said, to give people a more realistic idea of what's what could work. Cause the top 10 on the front page can be very misleading if someone is visiting for the first time

[M-Rock]

Don't think it would be fair to the handful of dudes that have dropped thousands of battles and earned their ranking to just reset everything

Maybe adding a separate skill ranking system, like you said, to give people a more realistic idea of what's what could work. Cause the top 10 on the front page can be very misleading if someone is visiting for the first time

[NOBLE]

I understand what you are saying @Godbody and I know an even easier way to accomplish perfect skilled based ratings. It's called the ELO system and is an algorithmic calculation used to calculate chess rankings but can easily be adapted to other games and is similar to what they used at Goldmic which @ILLoKWENT was talking about. That would be the *perfect* way to go about it, but it won't be the easiest or most readily implementable. Meanwhile, the star ratings are already in place and are actually somewhat accurate though not perfect as we've both pointed out. People's dickrider ratings won't account for the average of ALL their ratings on all their battles. Because it's already in place, it's not that hard for us to create a page and simply list the top 100 in sequential order. We can either go for something that's not perfect but somewhat accomplishes what we want and is easier to implement therefore more likely to occur or we can go for something that perfectly accomplishes what we want but is more difficult and less likely to ever happen due to how difficult is is and how much time it would take. From my time here on LB, I've come to realize that not everything will happen right away. Look how long it took for us to get a new skin or for me to remove the cash banner which hadn't been applicable since November of last year. That's why I've come to have the approach that sometimes that which is more possible is more worthwhile to pursue than that which may be greater but less possible.

[NOBLE]

I understand what you are saying @Godbody and I know an even easier way to accomplish perfect skilled based ratings. It's called the ELO system and is an algorithmic calculation used to calculate chess rankings but can easily be adapted to other games and is similar to what they used at Goldmic which @ILLoKWENT was talking about. That would be the *perfect* way to go about it, but it won't be the easiest or most readily implementable. Meanwhile, the star ratings are already in place and are actually somewhat accurate though not perfect as we've both pointed out. People's dickrider ratings won't account for the average of ALL their ratings on all their battles. Because it's already in place, it's not that hard for us to create a page and simply list the top 100 in sequential order. We can either go for something that's not perfect but somewhat accomplishes what we want and is easier to implement therefore more likely to occur or we can go for something that perfectly accomplishes what we want but is more difficult and less likely to ever happen due to how difficult is is and how much time it would take. From my time here on LB, I've come to realize that not everything will happen right away. Look how long it took for us to get a new skin or for me to remove the cash banner which hadn't been applicable since November of last year. That's why I've come to have the approach that sometimes that which is more possible is more worthwhile to pursue than that which may be greater but less possible.

[Godbody]

Originally Posted by M-Rock

Don't think it would be fair to the handful of dudes that have dropped thousands of battles and earned their ranking to just reset everything

Maybe adding a separate skill ranking system, like you said, to give people a more realistic idea of what's what could work. Cause the top 10 on the front page can be very misleading if someone is visiting for the first time

Well thats what I was sayin...theres 2 ways to go about doin it

doing away with the other ranking system completely and wiping the leaderboards

or adding a seperate ranking system, keeping the current leaderboards, but having a 'tier based' rank to compliment the Top 100. I think that would appeal to the crowd that wants to climb the ranks and not drop 300 battles to get there. Basically people can't climb ranks on this site if they don't battle alot...you shouldn't be punished for not sniping 5 battles a day like a lot of these clowns do...you should be rewarded for dropping quality shit against quality opponents..even if that means 1 battle every 2-3 weeks.

TLDR: the ranking system we have now is too one dimensional and there needs to be another way to assess someone's talent/skill other than a ranking system based on the quantity of battles & the number of W's one piles up within that large quantity of battles they had to do.. so when a newcomer signs up, they might not be able to climb the traditional Top 100 leaderboard but they can progress in a tier based one

[Godbody]

Originally Posted by M-Rock

Don't think it would be fair to the handful of dudes that have dropped thousands of battles and earned their ranking to just reset everything

Maybe adding a separate skill ranking system, like you said, to give people a more realistic idea of what's what could work. Cause the top 10 on the front page can be very misleading if someone is visiting for the first time

Well thats what I was sayin...theres 2 ways to go about doin it

doing away with the other ranking system completely and wiping the leaderboards

or adding a seperate ranking system, keeping the current leaderboards, but having a 'tier based' rank to compliment the Top 100. I think that would appeal to the crowd that wants to climb the ranks and not drop 300 battles to get there. Basically people can't climb ranks on this site if they don't battle alot...you shouldn't be punished for not sniping 5 battles a day like a lot of these clowns do...you should be rewarded for dropping quality shit against quality opponents..even if that means 1 battle every 2-3 weeks.

TLDR: the ranking system we have now is too one dimensional and there needs to be another way to assess someone's talent/skill other than a ranking system based on the quantity of battles & the number of W's one piles up within that large quantity of battles they had to do.. so when a newcomer signs up, they might not be able to climb the traditional Top 100 leaderboard but they can progress in a tier based one