Player Rankings

[--Privateer--]

I'd like to see a player ranking system, not a daily ranking, a permanent list.

I don't know how the rankings should work, that can be discussed. However, one important thing is it should be a ranking of player skill, not based on time spent. The daily pvp board is just total BR sunk, so that's obviously time based. 

Once there is an initial list of player ranks, people should be able to challenge those ranked above them, and if they win or the challenge goes unmet, they move up the rankings. 

 

 

 

[Liq]

Hard to implement properly

Does any battle count? 1v1 just as 5v1 etc.?
Do bigger ships "count more" as smaller vessels? Or are there seperate rankings?
OW Encounterings are RNG, how can you "proove" your abilities?
How do you prevent Alt farming?

Also this would lead to people not taking fights anymore "Because they have to stay on top of the ranking"

I had a similar idea somewhen but I figured it only kind of worked for 1v1's in an arena match

 

[vazco]

The current ranking is perfect, based on gamification principles. People want to get on the list because of renown, and they want to do better, as it's not only time based - it's time and skill based. Both things are good for the game, and current raking worked well for a long time.

If you want to add a ranking, it should be a new one. The only other reasonable one I know is ELO-based (chess), where you get more points for sinking someone with your rank or better. NA is different than chess though, as it's not always a 1 vs 1 game. This would also need to be included in such a rank - you should have no points for ganking a same rank player, and much less points if you have a higher rank already.

WIth such ranking, you would have a few advantages:

• additional progression goals for players
• incentive to fight non-gank fights. Since they're more fun for everyone, it's good for the game
• option to reward more for sinking renowned players much higher than you, which would empower new players as well

 

If GameLabs made such a ranking with a help of a mathematician, it could be a great addition.

Edited December 22, 2019 by vazco

[vazco]

As a side-effect of any additional ranking, you would get a lot of moaning as well though, as encounters in NA can't be predicted:

• when a seasoned-wood 1st rate is attacked next to a fort, it's different than a shabby AI-captured 1st rate being caught in the open
• when in a group fight a smaller ship doesn't score any kills, but chains everyone and keeps enemy from escaping, he's a valuable player, but invisible for such a ranking
• when a fireship explodes and wins a PB for a team, it's invisible for a ranking

A new ranking would change the behaviour of players. Hard to predict how in detail.

Edited December 22, 2019 by vazco

[Mad Dog Morgan]

Online Air Combat game called Aces High had a excellent stats page for every player followed by rankings, so kills per hour were more important than actual kills per death, as anyone can milk/game a good K/D ratio. From those stats overall ranks were determined. 

Then of course you would have Squadron (clan) ranks as well for different aspects of the game.  Below is one players data for one tour=one month.

 

 

Edited December 22, 2019 by Mad Dan Morgan

[Eyesore]

I'd like to see personal stats.

Number of fights, br-difference, saildamage done/sustained, wins, losses, draws/escapes, crew killed, masts taken, pve stats are in a different column or something (different to count maybe in mixed fights), etc.

Maybe we could even have a log from every battle we ever played?

I don't need to see a ranking to other players, because of reason posted above already.

Edited December 22, 2019 by Eyesore

[contact]

I would have thought if you knew just as entered combat you were fighting a “Pro”. It might make you decide for run for it.

Better to find out how good or not a player is when combat.

A good way to learn from them too.

 

[--Privateer--]

4 hours ago, Eyesore said:

I don't need to see a ranking to other players, because of reason posted above already.

Comparisons to other players is the only reason I want the rankings. I keep offering duels to everyone to show I'm better, it would be easier though if there was some leader board I could point them to instead though. 

[--Privateer--]

8 hours ago, vazco said:

As a side-effect of any additional ranking, you would get a lot of moaning as well though, as encounters in NA can't be predicted:

• when a seasoned-wood 1st rate is attacked next to a fort, it's different than a shabby AI-captured 1st rate being caught in the open
• when in a group fight a smaller ship doesn't score any kills, but chains everyone and keeps enemy from escaping, he's a valuable player, but invisible for such a ranking
• when a fireship explodes and wins a PB for a team, it's invisible for a ranking

A new ranking would change the behaviour of players. Hard to predict how in detail.

I agree with all your points, a ranking system based on normal OW battles would be nearly impossible as it is hard to get a good comparison between players.
Ranked battles could be limited to the solo patrol zone, or possibly include battle is started in the OW between matching ships (I know they're rare😢). 

I was actually thinking the OW stuff would mostly determine initial rankings; after that they would mostly be determined as in my suggestion below, with maybe slight shifts from OW content.

10 hours ago, --Privateer-- said:

Once there is an initial list of player ranks, people should be able to challenge those ranked above them, and if they win or the challenge goes unmet, they move up the rankings.

 

[Beeekonda]

we could start with something simple like this leaderboard

^Make this as PVP Daily Leaderboard

and make another tab with score over all time, where score is just a sum of all your daily scores

 

[--Privateer--]

11 hours ago, Beeekonda said:

and make another tab with score over all time, where score is just a sum of all your daily scores

nah, I don't care about how long people have played. Maybe scores over time, divided by number of ships sunk to get the average, and then scale each one by the BR of the ship you were sailing so herc vs herc battle is just as important as santi vs santi. Some people don't like line ships, but they can still be good pvpers.

[Earl of Grey]

We have a very good system atm, dont change it. Every "long time ranking" will only lead to "optimize my Ranking" playstyle ... 

Current system ist almost perfect, you can made you a name and almost eveyona can conquer a place in the list, next day everything is forgotten and you have a fresh start ...

 

[Durin]

admin postet some pvp kills, pve kills, KD statistic once, that was quite interesting. wouldnt mind an update of that, an ingame statistic would ofc be even better