Overall Ranking Thought

[aragorn675]

Just a quick overall ranking thought. Currently Overall Ranking is achieved my grand score which isnt fair for the newbie players or for the people who play ff7 and 4fm3r or w/e its called.......lol. But i was thinking average out their total ranking on individual songs...so u just average out the scores they got on individual songs which shows true rank against skill and not points earned.....and the beginner players will have a better chance of obtaining rank also......just a thought.....

[Kilgamayan]

This has been suggested multiple times, and is likely what Synth will do once R2 rolls around.

[Blind_sk8er105]

haha ok.....just thought id toss it out there....thnx for reply

[dunnski007]

i prefer the idea of making it to do with the ranking on every song. although this is more work for synth.. it makes it so that some idiot cant just go on, play 1 perfect song and get the top spot. you have to keep in mind that when doing things like these there are only so many fair ways to do it. if you do it like that lots of people can find ways to take advantage of it. and also for the ranking way i have noticed that even when i get 100% perfect on songs (all arrows, all perfect) there still seems to be a single person or 2 that are above me. i noticed this in the new song freak out by deepbluesea or w/e his name is. but i think the way its done now is fine. people have taken their time and worked to get higher scores, so i think that some people shouldnt just be allowed to come around and just get thrown right up to the top.

[djl33]

im not into that idea all that much, but i like the total score better.

keeps it nice and simple...

[Tasselfoot]

i think that people will be upset regardless of how the overall rank is done. if you look at somoene like Nima, his overall rank right now is 2, because he plays ALL THE TIME. he also has over 8000 games played, because his goal isn't to get 1 million points on EVERY song... its to PC every song. so because of this, his overall score under the new system would be... something like 1,300,000,000 / 8200 = 158,536 whereas my own is... 266,000,000 / 720 = 369,444

now, does this make much sense? that someone like nima would be ranked WAY below someone like me? i don't think it does... overall ranking is based purely on total score, because it only judges how MUCH you play. the only other fair way, IMO, would be to base it on total games played. it would just be easier for people to rank whore themselves that way than this. at least this way you have to be competent at playing to get good scores.

its just like in any MMORPG... people are going to powertrain. if there is any competition to be #1, there will be.... but like in most places... the best players may not be #1... but they are usually close (cept Arch0wl).

[Kilgamayan]

The best way to determine ranking is to take your highest rank on all the songs and add them all up. The lowest total would have the #1 ranking then next lowest would be #2, etc. This way, your rank doesn't go up just because you whored out 4F73R M3 and Lethal Injection for points, or FOTBB and Megaman 2 Wily Theme 1 for games played.

[Synthlight]

It's tough, it seems there are not many fair ways to do it. Each way will bring advantage to someone different. Maybe the only true method here is a multiple ranking systems.

Like

Highest average score per game played
Highest grandtotal
Highest combined ranking on all levels

Anyone know some good php coders that would be willing to help with these suggestions? I am stuck doing much of this myself and could use some outside help. Also remember that we have to run these numbers nearly 300,000 times each time we update the rankings x each method x each song if we are doing the "combined ranking".. Makes for some intensive database work.

Cheers,

Synthlight

[Tasselfoot]

synth... i feel that you are burdening yourself too greatly over something that is so trivial as a ranking system.

the system that is currently in place is the single best way to measure ability because:

a. it is a fairly accurate measure of who is good and who isn't (you can't get 1 billion points easily by sucking, now can you? it takes thousands of games of practice)

b. it is a simple method; only having to do 1 calculation per person per day (vs the "best" method of ranking, taking the total of your best rankings on each song, which would be around 50 additions per person per day, and penalizes someone for not playing a particular song)


i think you should leave it the way it is synth... the majority of the player base is either happy or apathetic towards the decision, and it seems to be WAY too much effort for you to change it... i'd rather see more songs than the "PERFECT RANKING SYSTEM"

[GregHead]

I'd say make a grand score that is the sum of the player's highest scores for each level. Then the grand score would only have to updated when the player beats his highscore or plays a song he/she hasn't played before.

[dmleet7]

Originally Posted by Tasselfoot

synth... i feel that you are burdening yourself too greatly over something that is so trivial as a ranking system.

the system that is currently in place is the single best way to measure ability because:

a. it is a fairly accurate measure of who is good and who isn't (you can't get 1 billion points easily by sucking, now can you? it takes thousands of games of practice)

b. it is a simple method; only having to do 1 calculation per person per day (vs the "best" method of ranking, taking the total of your best rankings on each song, which would be around 50 additions per person per day, and penalizes someone for not playing a particular song)


i think you should leave it the way it is synth... the majority of the player base is either happy or apathetic towards the decision, and it seems to be WAY too much effort for you to change it... i'd rather see more songs than the "PERFECT RANKING SYSTEM"

Do you know who Arch0wl is? His rank is higher than 600, but he is way better than most of the people here (only about three or four people better than him). Though I don't see much of him these days.

I'd go with GregHead's suggestion, which is pretty accurate.

[Tasselfoot]

dmleet...

its just like in any MMORPG... people are going to powertrain. if there is any competition to be #1, there will be.... but like in most places... the best players may not be #1... but they are usually close (cept Arch0wl).

i said that above....


i think ANYONE will agree that adding the total of your highest score on every song is THE BEST and THE MOST FAIR way... but when you combine it with the fact of HOW DIFFICULT it is to impliment into the system, and to update it each day.... the current system is better; it is already implimented and working fine, it is simple to keep it running, and it is a somewhat accurate measure not only of skill, but of who is the best of FFR, not who is the best keyboard DDRer in general...... the overall rank is a means for FFR only, so for someone like Arch who doesn't play FFR that much, his rank isn't that high. he doesn't deserve a top ranking against someone who has played 3000 games, when he has only played a few hundred.


edit: i'm not even arguing for my own benefit, merely because i believe this is a better system vs the implimentation of a different system or other features. i'd rather see more songs than a more accurate ranking system.

edit: also, i think my rank would be higher if it was done the way you suggest. i'm around 420 now, and i feel i'd be around 200 if the new system was put into place. on another note, give me 10 days more of playing, and i'll be ranked in the 100s, but that is besides the point.

[alainbryden]

I think the ranking should be how it is -- a reflection of the most devoted ffr players. It wouldn't be fair for someone like arch who quit ffr, and other people who just play SM, to be ranked the highes on FFR. No, the current score doiesn't necessarily display the very best players, but I think I deserve this rank I have for playing ffr 2 hours a day, even though I'm, at best, about 40th :P

[Kilgamayan]

What's unfair about basing overall rank on individual song rankings? It's not like you're going to be ranking people highly that don't deserve it.

[ultima301]

Originally Posted by Kilgamayan

What's unfair about basing overall rank on individual song rankings? It's not like you're going to be ranking people highly that don't deserve it.

It's messed up because on some songs (like breaking the common) that have been played thousands of times..if you just get a few greats your rank drops from 1 to like 500..and then on newer, less played songs, you can do only decent and still get a rank of like 40 - 80. In my opinion my new idea for ranking is fairer than every other one mentioned so far, view it here: http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/...=152961#152961

[Kilgamayan]

Your highest rank doesn't drop if you get a bad score. What the hell are you talking about?

The only thing that would make your rank drop wuold be someone getting a better score than you.

[dmleet7]

It's because Breaking the Common isn't hard to FC at all. There's a lot of people who AAAd that song because it's easy. And most definitely many of the new songs are harder than Breaking the Common mostly those in the Secret Section. IMO it's actually the easiest Difficult other than Alpha Helix.

[ultima301]

Originally Posted by Kilgamayan

Your highest rank doesn't drop if you get a bad score. What the hell are you talking about?

The only thing that would make your rank drop wuold be someone getting a better score than you.

Well your highest rank for a very commonly played song could be 500+ even if you only got a few greats or something...but for example I just played Synthestic, the new song in secret..I did pretty bad and got a lot of misses and boos..yet my rank is like 46..now why would my rank on a song I did better on be so much worse than a song I totally messed up on? That is the unfairness of the system..you have to virtually perfect combo or SDG an older song that's been played more to have a good highest rank for it.

[Kilgamayan]

But all the scores are being wiped, so who cares?

Besides, if the song is so easy that tons of people have AAAed it, then shouldn't you be able to AAA it too?

[ultima301]

Originally Posted by Kilgamayan

But all the scores are being wiped, so who cares?

Besides, if the song is so easy that tons of people have AAAed it, then shouldn't you be able to AAA it too?

My point is that as long as FFR releases new songs they will be easier to get higher ranks on, thus causing an inbalence in song weighting. Even if they do wipe the scores and all songs are equal, the moment FFR releases another song that song will be much easier to get a higher rank on..so unless they wipe the scores every time a new song is released there will always be an imbalence with ranking on different songs.