Leaderboard D9 new name and color

[ToonE156]

Originally Posted by Toxicity783

Just because one top player (i.e. Kane) is marginally better than another top player (i.e. OWA) doesn't mean one player should be ranked an entire division below the other.

Anmao? Eliminate? I would normally agree with you if there wasn't a stark difference between any low D8 and a higher D8. The biggest red flag that there needs to be another division is when the higher end of the division can easily slap the lower end to submission without any questions, which is exactly what is going on in D8. Personally, I think that D9 should probably hold off until more top players transition over, but it is what it is

Originally Posted by Toxicity783

A quantifiable number will always be better than an arbitrary adjective. Dumb shit like "MasTeR! gUrU!!! LEgEnDArY!!1!!! GODLY!!1!!11!1" has no place in something like skill quantifications of competitive players.

we can have both doe

[xXOpkillerXx]

Originally Posted by ToonE156

Anmao? Eliminate? I would normally agree with you if there wasn't a stark difference between any low D8 and a higher D8. The biggest red flag that there needs to be another division is when the higher end of the division can easily slap the lower end to submission without any questions, which is exactly what is going on in D8. Personally, I think that D9 should probably hold off until more top players transition over, but it is what it is

That is not the "red flag" that causes D9 to be made. The actual reason (which I mentioned too many times) doesn't really require more than a few players to be justified

[CrashTheBoard]

Personally I think Revolutionary is a bit of a bust.

I'm fine with Master being lower. I think it's appropriate for like, d6 level. As an example, master is actually kind of low on the chess totem pole when you consider all the ranks there are; thought the caveat to that is each rank past that does have master in the title. Master, fide master, international master, grandmaster, and the relatively new and informally used but very popular "Super GM" title being thrown around for players around 2700+ rating.

I just think we should keep our naming themes consistent. I don't like revolutionary because when we go beyond "master" it has some epic connotations behind it. Legendary, godly, that's the kind of stuff that makes you feel like it's going far beyond human limits. I like the idea of something like "Transcendent" or "Mythical" more, it follows the theme we have better than Revolutionary. It's a bit too mundane to follow after being Godly.

[ToonE156]

Originally Posted by xXOpkillerXx

That is not the "red flag" that causes D9 to be made. The actual reason (which I mentioned too many times) doesn't really require more than a few players to be justified

Yeah but an increased skill gap is the main reason why new divisions are made, and the issue in D8 is presented is a result of that

[xXOpkillerXx]

Originally Posted by ToonE156

Yeah but an increased skill gap is the main reason why new divisions are made, and the issue in D8 is presented is a result of that

Yes but the way you said it initially was wrong, and the distinction is actually important. The logic of your other post could be applied to even further divide the existing divisions, and that is not the desired goal. Semantics are important here if we want to avoid causing more confusion than there already is

[rushyrulz]

idk how Yes is winning the poll but there's almost no representation in the thread itself, did someone just log a bunch of alts or something?

[justin]

Just from a generic naming progression I'd definitely argue that the following progression makes mores sense:

D1 Novice
D2 Intermediate
D3 Advanced
D4 Expert
D5 Master
D6 Guru
D7 Revolutionary
D8 Legendary
D9 Godly

revolutionary and legendary could possibly be swapped but simply from connotation neither are above godly imo.

I'd really not argue against a more broad redefining of a few roles, if we wanted to avoid "revolutionary". Something like what rushy suggested seemed reasonable.

D1 Novice
D2 Intermediate
D3 Advanced
D4 Expert
D5 Master
D6 Guru
D7 Grand-Master
D8 Legendary
D9 Godly

I'm not a huge fan personally of Guru but I know it's got history with FFR, so I'd suspect I won't have many that side with me on that moving out. But ideally, this would be my preference for naming I think. Intermediate indicates a "middle" skill level, which I always thought was a little odd for D2. Shifting up from that point moves Master/GM into D6/7, which makes more sense to me as well:

D1 Novice
D2 Competent
D3 Intermediate
D4 Advanced
D5 Expert
D6 Master
D7 Grand-Master
D8 Legendary
D9 Godly

[sff_writer_dan]

I'm also definitely on the side of "There's really no reason to feel like we have to keep the terms around in one place that we basically don't even use in other places anymore"

If we're going to insist we need to keep using master/guru type language, we should put in the effort to make it consistent with the difficulty category names in the game too.

We've got 8 player categories and 13 song categories when it would probably make the most sense to make the song difficulty categories map directly onto the player category of the same name. If a division is basically "everybody between 50 and 60" then the song category for all songs between 50 and 60 should be the same one, so you can signpost to people more clearly where the songs for their skill level are.

And if we're talking about fully disconnecting the player milestone category names from placement in tournaments, then there's no reason to care about "adding a 9th division" in terms of what it might do to an OT, so you might as well decide on the ranges for the songs, and then make the player ranges identical to those yeah?

[alloyus]

Originally Posted by justin

I'm not a huge fan personally of Guru but I know it's got history with FFR, so I'd suspect I won't have many that side with me on that moving out. But ideally, this would be my preference for naming I think. Intermediate indicates a "middle" skill level, which I always thought was a little odd for D2. Shifting up from that point moves Master/GM into D6/7, which makes more sense to me as well:

D1 Novice
D2 Competent
D3 Intermediate
D4 Advanced
D5 Expert
D6 Master
D7 Grand-Master
D8 Legendary
D9 Godly

I really like this

[radioamor]

Originally Posted by justin

D1 Novice
D2 Competent
D3 Intermediate
D4 Advanced
D5 Expert
D6 Master
D7 Grand-Master
D8 Legendary
D9 Godly

This hierarchy is particularly hilarious because not only does it imply that D1 is sub-competent, but it also makes D2 synonymous with condescending descriptors like "adequate," "satisfactory," and "milquetoast".

I don't have any vested interest in division nomenclature, I just thought this was amusing.

[sff_writer_dan]

Originally Posted by radioamor

This hierarchy is particularly hilarious because not only does it imply that D1 is sub-competent, but it also makes D2 synonymous with condescending descriptors like "adequate," "satisfactory," and "milquetoast".

I don't have any vested interest in division nomenclature, I just thought this was amusing.

Yeah I'd probably stay away from things like 'competent' implying anybody below that is incompetent. Though from the perspective of the majority player of FFR, anybody under 20 or 30 skill rating -is- incompetent so...

[justin]

Those are valid points and I'm not married to the title of "Competent" by any means - I was more just trying to indicate that Intermediate for D2 doesn't make sense to me and a renaming of D1/D2 to shift the rest up might make the most sense. Definitely open to ideas - was looking for something to indicate better than "brand new" (novice) and less than "average" (intermediate), so if others have suggestions I'm definitely keen to hear those.

[xXOpkillerXx]

Originally Posted by rushyrulz

idk how Yes is winning the poll but there's almost no representation in the thread itself, did someone just log a bunch of alts or something?

There's likely not much to say when someone is in agreement, whereas someone who votes "No" will be inclined to suggest what they think is a better alternative. Imo that's normal and expected.

[xXOpkillerXx]

Originally Posted by justin

Those are valid points and I'm not married to the title of "Competent" by any means - I was more just trying to indicate that Intermediate for D2 doesn't make sense to me and a renaming of D1/D2 to shift the rest up might make the most sense. Definitely open to ideas - was looking for something to indicate better than "brand new" (novice) and less than "average" (intermediate), so if others have suggestions I'm definitely keen to hear those.

I don't remember who suggested it, but if you mix that shift with moving Novice to D2 and calling D1 "Beginner", that's probably better.

Also @sff_writer_dan I'm 100% for mapping song difficulty names to the leaderboard divisions, but it can very much wait if it's any sort of challenge (somehow) code-wise.

[jacobvl39]

Aren't "novice" and "beginner" synonyms? Does one seem higher than they other?

[justin]

Originally Posted by jacobvl39

Aren't "novice" and "beginner" synonyms? Does one seem higher than they other?

This is why I didn't move Novice out of the bottom -- it is synonymous with "new to something", i.e. beginner or newcomer.

I think the most realistic thing here is likely adding something in place of "competent" in what I outlined, though we could also rename Novice while we're at it if it made sense to do so given a name chosen above that. Rookie was something else that crossed my mind, but fairly synonymous with novice still.

[rushyrulz]

Originally Posted by justin

Those are valid points and I'm not married to the title of "Competent" by any means - I was more just trying to indicate that Intermediate for D2 doesn't make sense to me and a renaming of D1/D2 to shift the rest up might make the most sense. Definitely open to ideas - was looking for something to indicate better than "brand new" (novice) and less than "average" (intermediate), so if others have suggestions I'm definitely keen to hear those.

Adept instead of competent, might slot better into the D3 slot than D2 slot tho, I'd say Adept > Intermediate

[justin]

Alternate suggestion that moves up from D4, though I still think intermediate at D2 is odd...

D1 Novice
D2 Intermediate
D3 Advanced
D4 Superior / Distinguished
D5 Expert
D6 Master
D7 Grand-Master
D8 Legendary
D9 Godly

[Lights]

I'll throw my hat into the ring here.

D1 Beginner
D2 Novice
D3 Intermediate
D4 Adept
D5 Advanced
D6 Expert
D7 Master
D8 Legendary
D9 Godly

Clear progression between stages, titles roll off of the tongue, and it loosely sticks to the old structure.

[rushyrulz]

u can't do guru dirty like that.