Jump to content
  • 0

In-Game Player Rankings


DoubleJ

Question

It's about time to implement a rankings system in game. Considering we have automated tournaments, applying an automated rankings program to those shouldn't be difficult. The rankings can be displayed in one of the battle tower buildings or simply can be pulled up from the HUD. Either way, I think that by adding something as coveted as being proclaimed "the #1 OU tournament player" players might be more willing to get into competitive play a bit more than they are now. 

 

I would suggest making an overall CC ranking list, an overall official tournament ranking list, and then also breaking them down by tier (OU, UU, NU, Doubles, LC).

 

Let's get it on @Desu and @Darkshade

Link to comment

25 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Also as an added push, most know that I've ran an unofficial "rankings" system in PokeMMO for quite some time and I have to say it was pretty damn popular. In addition, one of the many reasons players flock to Showdown is so they can flex on the ladder and say "LOOK AT ME I'M #22 ON THE LADDER!" 

 

If we had that in PokeMMO, maybe we could get more players to show up here and say "LOOK AT ME I'M #6 ON THE POKEMMO TOURNAMENT LADDER!"

Link to comment
  • 0

Some universal cumulative point system could be cool which is automatically restored. Something like

 

1 point for 3rd round

2 points for 4th round 

5 points for semifinals

10 points for finals appearance

20 points for tournament win

 

For 64 man tournament. For 128 man the point gain doubles and the point gain starts from 4th round.

Link to comment
  • 0
35 minutes ago, OrangeManiac said:

Some universal cumulative point system could be cool which is automatically restored. Something like

 

1 point for 3rd round

2 points for 4th round 

5 points for semifinals

10 points for finals appearance

20 points for tournament win

 

For 64 man tournament. For 128 man the point gain doubles and the point gain starts from 4th round.

don't agree with 3rd/4th round deserving points, it's not anything special to reach those at all. semis is fine I guess

Link to comment
  • 0
17 minutes ago, sherdoonach said:

would this start from now onwards or would every tournament ever played have to be taken into account?

I would love for every tournament to be included since we have those stored, but I'll take whatever we can get. 

Link to comment
  • 0

Already implemented.

 

Called ranked match making... you know... the superior competitive format?  Best ROI and also public acknowledgment... Tournaments are for shineys and to be listed in some obscure "hall of fame" that no one ever looks at.

 

This should be common sense by now.

 

1 hour ago, Eggplant said:

Or they could just make the leader board worth playing with like

actual resets periodically

actual rewards at the end of each period

 

since i mean we literally already have a ranking system in the game (that just happens to be a bit unpopular), the most intuitive fix is probably not to create a second one


There is monthly compression.  I stormed up the ladder in a week to #14.. i was one win away from $10... probably still am haven't looked.  stop acting like its hard to do, if your a good player its very easy.  but it isnt easy to do with gimmicks and shit "only works one time" teams.  Ranked is for the real players but also who have busy lives and cannot set aside 4+ hours to "maybe" play a tournament.

Edited by Murcielago
Link to comment
  • 0

@Murcielago

matchmaking is competitive?

afaik most people play it to grind BP or try out teams, most of the time its just people with half assed attempts to grind some ranking on a leaderboard that doesnt actually matter. In fact to join monthly leaderboard tournaments you only have to be in top 100 to be able to join, meaning you basically play one half assed match a month. Doesnt matter if you win or lose you most likely get placed 100 anyway. The only reason people actively try to climb is to be able to throw it into some noobs face and hope they are impressed by your so called skill...

tourneys are the only place people try their best to win, besides the price, people actually recognize you as a better player if you win.

 

Id be for some kind of leaderboard 

this might stimulate more people to play if their effort is rewarded.

Link to comment
  • 0
1 hour ago, Eggplant said:

Or they could just make the leader board worth playing with like

actual resets periodically

actual rewards at the end of each period

 

since i mean we literally already have a ranking system in the game (that just happens to be a bit unpopular), the most intuitive fix is probably not to create a second one


 I hate resets, at least short ones (monthly periods are stupid)... specially when you already have an elo system that force players to be quite active to stay in the leaderboards

still... periodical rewards would be great...

 

Link to comment
  • 0
6 minutes ago, Murcielago said:

ok well simply because you don't like a format, or are misinformed doesnt mean the devs should bend over backwards to cater to you.

But I do like matchmaking, its great way of testing teams grinding BP you need, or even to kill time. 

Look we all celebrated to coming of matchmaking, but we quickly realised that matchmaking isnt a viable way of knowing who is better, for example Hotarubi is known for bringing a rain team to her matchmaking matches, without knowing who you are going to face, you have no way of knowing what to prepare for, preparing for a rainteam means that in case you dont meet someone with a rain team, you are basically doomed, meaning its not a good idea to bring a team that counters rainteams. Hotarubi knows this and sweeps a lot of people with her rain team meaning she can easily climb the ladder.

so bringing gimmicky teams gives you an edge over someone that doesnt and thats not a viable way of testing skill. Furthermore im not sure what you mean with misinformed, so if you could elaborate on that, would be nice

 

my point being. Matchmaking isnt a good way to see if someone is good or not. Meaning an overall ranking board might help with this

Link to comment
  • 0

ummm...

 

You clearly don't understand ranked matchmaking...  the better you do the harder it gets to move up the ladder, and theoretically you face better opponents, get punished harder for losing, and get less for winning (as far as ELO)

 

There is an attitude amung some players that "the only thing that matters is tournaments" which is clearly false.  If you want 2x31,4x25 shiney and 1mil yen then tournaments are for you.  If you want an acurate list of who the best players are in any tier you look at the leaderboard.  I'm not sure what your trying to "argue here".

 

We can go on and on, I really don't care. 

 

The majority of the playerbase doesn'tr even read these forums, but simply because a handfull of cringey nerds want some additional validation for winning at a format that thier team is good at... doesn't mean the devs need to bend over backwards to make it happen.

Link to comment
  • 0
2 hours ago, Murcielago said:

Already implemented.

 

Called ranked match making... you know... the superior competitive format?  Best ROI and also public acknowledgment... Tournaments are for shineys and to be listed in some obscure "hall of fame" that no one ever looks at.

 

This should be common sense by now.

 


There is monthly compression.  I stormed up the ladder in a week to #14.. i was one win away from $10... probably still am haven't looked.  stop acting like its hard to do, if your a good player its very easy.  but it isnt easy to do with gimmicks and shit "only works one time" teams.  Ranked is for the real players but also who have busy lives and cannot set aside 4+ hours to "maybe" play a tournament.

As someone who has a busy life and like 90% of my free time and pretty much the only time I log into this game is during that 13 hour period where there's no matchmaking, it's pretty ass. Sometimes I get home in time to hop on and play a little UU ranked before that 10pm session ends but that's pretty much it. Tournaments though vary in times and sometimes fall into that window where I can play. 

 

Point being the ranked sessions are short and only at certain times and myself and possibly a lot of others get left out of it almost entirely 

Edited by Rigamorty
Link to comment
  • 0
1 minute ago, Murcielago said:

So then add more ranked sessions.

 

There is also the oceanic tournament series that caters to those that cannot make any of the ranked sessions.

Yes, exactly, tournaments sometimes happen in the time like I said. That was the point. But yeah more ranked sessions would be nice, but entirely irrelevant to this suggestion. The fact that matchmaking leaderboard exists doesn't make a tournament one any less desirable because they're completely different concepts 

Link to comment
  • 0
1 minute ago, Murcielago said:

ummm...

 

You clearly don't understand ranked matchmaking...  the better you do the harder it gets to move up the ladder, and theoretically you face better opponents, get punished harder for losing, and get less for winning (as far as ELO)

 

There is an attitude amung some players that "the only thing that matters is tournaments" which is clearly false.  If you want 2x31,4x25 shiney and 1mil yen then tournaments are for you.  If you want an acurate list of who the best players are in any tier you look at the leaderboard.  I'm not sure what your trying to "argue here".

 

We can go on and on, I really don't care. 

 

The majority of the playerbase doesn'tr even read these forums, but simply because a handfull of cringey nerds want some additional validation for winning at a format that thier team is good at... doesn't mean the devs need to bend over backwards to make it happen.

Im not sure what I dont understand about ranked matchmaking... but alright.

There are always people that try their best to be at the top of any leaderboard, and they are free to do so. Look there is a reason only tournaments are placed in the Hall of Fame, besides there is also a tournament to decide who is the best of the matchmaking leaderboard, it literally doesnt mean shit if you are first on the leaderboard but get first rounded by some random kid...

next point: are you even reading what im saying? Or JJ for this matter. The Title literally says: "In-Game player rankings" im not sure what this has to do with us being "cringey nerds" but if that floats your bad alright.

Look you have said multiple times that "Devs shouldnt have to bend back and cator to our whims" Im not sure if you know what the suggestion box is about but let me explain this to you: its a place for suggestions, meanig Devs dont have to do shit with this if they dont want to. They dont even have to bend a finger to type the words "not going to happen" they could literally not answer for the rest of this perpetuality and there is nothing we could do about it. So you saying that devs are catering to our whims is just wrong

Link to comment
  • 0
On Saturday, March 04, 2017 at 3:11 AM, Murcielago said:

ummm...

 

You clearly don't understand ranked matchmaking...  the better you do the harder it gets to move up the ladder, and theoretically you face better opponents, get punished harder for losing, and get less for winning (as far as ELO)

 

There is an attitude amung some players that "the only thing that matters is tournaments" which is clearly false.  If you want 2x31,4x25 shiney and 1mil yen then tournaments are for you.  If you want an acurate list of who the best players are in any tier you look at the leaderboard.  I'm not sure what your trying to "argue here".

 

We can go on and on, I really don't care. 

 

The majority of the playerbase doesn'tr even read these forums, but simply because a handfull of cringey nerds want some additional validation for winning at a format that thier team is good at... doesn't mean the devs need to bend over backwards to make it happen.

I have no idea what you are trying to argue here to be honest. Sass included because so did yours.

 

First of all, your comment about forums and cringy nerds is irrelevant. No one is asking a rank system in the forums, we can just make one ourselves. And we actually did, for the longest time. The biggest problem with ours was that because of how the mindset of an average MMO pleb works currently is that it isn't official unless someone with a tag says it is. That's what we're asking for here: An officially validated tournament ranking/power ranking indicator.

 

Also matchmaking is a horrible way to tell about power structures correctly. And by this I mean any kind of ELO based ladder, not just MMO's - in fact, MMOs ELO ladder is actually very well made. But because of how a standard ELO ladder works the players with most matches as long as their win rate is above 50 % will be at the top. Basically no-lifing the ladder is the way to go to the top. Just check at the OU leaderboards, the top positions are claimed by people with hundreds near thousands of matches with 55 % win rate and meanwhile some people near 75 % are behind with less matches. It just isn't a clear indicator how good someone is, more than how dedicated one is for farming. Sure, when you're at the top you're gonna face other "top" players but because the way to the top already isn't "valid" the ladder rankings have very little value. And even if win rates had some value in ladder (impossible to implement with ELO btw), then the rankings would be based by decimal percentage rankings. Not really valid in a RNG based game.

 

In tournaments everyone has the same route - to the top. No grinding, just this tournament. Who can beat everyone? To me it's absurd someone would even remotely argue that ladder tells better of any kind of "best players" in PokeMMO, especially of how it's working right now. Sure, tournaments are unfair. That one crit and you can be out of the tournament.. but that's why we're asking for a database to take data from multiple tournaments. Could be cumulative at best.

Link to comment
  • 0
44 minutes ago, OrangeManiac said:

 But because of how a standard ELO ladder works the players with most matches as long as their win rate is above 50 % will be at the top. Basically no-lifing the ladder is the way to go to the top. Just check at the OU leaderboards, the top positions are claimed by people with hundreds near thousands of matches with 55 % win rate and meanwhile some people near 75 % are behind with less matches.

This argument is flawed, and inaccurate. Again, your dwelling on win ratio and ignoring the fact that someone could have raked up lots of losses as a newb but had 80%+ win rate for a month and rocket to the top of the ladder.  There is only one player I am aware of that has an artificially high elo, and its as if his team is only designed to beat newbs, or be so cancerous a % of the player base just gives up playing vs. him because it is a boring and not fun match... I'm not interested in naming names, but you probably know who he is if your active in comp.  The players with high win % and low elo are getting knocked down by monthly compression... which is how it should be.

Link to comment
  • 0
3 hours ago, Murcielago said:

This argument is flawed, and inaccurate. Again, your dwelling on win ratio and ignoring the fact that someone could have raked up lots of losses as a newb but had 80%+ win rate for a month and rocket to the top of the ladder.  There is only one player I am aware of that has an artificially high elo, and its as if his team is only designed to beat newbs, or be so cancerous a % of the player base just gives up playing vs. him because it is a boring and not fun match... I'm not interested in naming names, but you probably know who he is if your active in comp.  The players with high win % and low elo are getting knocked down by monthly compression... which is how it should be.

Actually lower ELOs benefit from ladder compressions, not higher ELOs. This comment seems really confusing because you seem to defend the higher ELO validity in everything else you talk about. 

 

No, I'm not asking win % to be the lone indicator of rankings. I'm only arguing ELO is not a valid ranking system. Yes, the ELO system does match you with lower skill players at early stages and that's how ELO works. That is actually the very purpose of ELO - to at least try to match you with opponents with similar ranks than you are. Every ELO game however is always ruined by so called 'smurfs' (people who purposely want to play against people below their rank) and in addition you might in fact face better players in lower ranks only because they have less matches. This itself makes the purpose of ELO broken and thus unreliable to rank people accordingly.

Edited by OrangeManiac
Link to comment
  • 0

Yeah Orange you have some good points there.  I actually agree that there isn't any downside to this.  My posts here may have been a bit off base tbh.  Threads like that "best of 2017" are a nuisance though and I just assumed this was more of that... you know...

 

some kid gets an easy bracket, has a whole team of people coaching him... hell I wouldn't be surprised if some of those "top 10 ou players" literally had a player who is actually good hand them teams and hold their hand through the finals...

 

Shit, I cannot be bothered to enter tournies these days, but I will coach my team mates if they get to the third+ round... I digress...

 

I actually like the fact JJ explicitly said "best tournament players"

 

This would be really cool if it could compile all tournament data some how... like... if a player consistently gets to the 4th+ round, if a player beats someone else who is the "best tourney player"...

 

A great wish list item, but in all honesty i doubt the fruit would be worth the squeeze for the dev. team... and honestly, I would rather see them make tournaments even worth playing... I guess this would help a bit... I really dont care about 2x31 4x25 pokemon with "different colored sprite"...

 

what would be really cool is if they could compile tournament data + ranked match making data some how...  That would be the best of both worlds.

Link to comment
  • 0
13 hours ago, OrangeManiac said:

Every ELO game however is always ruined by so called 'smurfs' (people who purposely want to play against people below their rank) and in addition you might in fact face better players in lower ranks only because they have less matches. This itself makes the purpose of ELO broken and thus unreliable to rank people accordingly.

and plus, in this game there are just not enough players to garantee you gonna play with someone that have your rank

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.