This game brutally great

[havahl]

The only bad thing is when a player reach the top 10 and stops playing to maintain the position, but i can't imagine a solution for this.

Something like every player loses 10 points per day or week. Then you have to continue to play in order to maintain your rating. Could also only apply the loss of points to players that haven't played 1 game in 24 hours or only with a rank above X.

That would solve the problem. If you have not played a game in 24 hours, you lose 10 points.

Other solution is to only count in games in certain period of time.. say 2-4 weeks.

[MikaRosendahl]

The only bad thing is when a player reach the top 10 and stops playing to maintain the position, but i can't imagine a solution for this.

Not everyone can even reach top 10. Theoretically the rating could grow limitlessly, but in practice people will find their range after certain amount of games played.
The point in the long run is, that people enjoy the game, and the rating system is just a way to highlight top 100 people.
It gives everyone a chance to set their own goals, "that's where I want to be".

In the near future we're going to implement features that encourage everyone to play and by playing certain amount of games even for the Rank-1 player it will be beneficial to play the game.

[Mip]

Another way to promote regular online play might be to give one influence point on your first victory of the day.

But I think the top 10 still plays regularly now, at least little1 does and he is number one.
Ow and my goal is ofcourse top 5 with Danann, preferably maintain it, but I'll settle for a screenshot now.

Not everyone can even reach top 10.

Are you suggesting that the top 10 is limited to only 10 people at a given time or other such strange notions

[Acid25]

Not everyone can even reach top 10. Theoretically the rating could grow limitlessly, but in practice people will find their range after certain amount of games played.

True, but before the reset some top player was not playing to not loose rating. When i was playing yellow, during the tournament, i reached the first position with 2020 rating or something, i continued playing and i lost the tournament (6th). When you are number one the best thing to do is to stop playing until someone gets more rating than you, and this could never happen.

Another solution could be to reset the rating of a player when he don't play for 2-3 months.

[Klasu]

I must say that I think the top 10 is very active at the moment and I've played a lot myself and I've been up and down from 1800-2050 so the swings are huge. Currently 2000+ again, phew.

I feel that sometimes the rating system is too harsh, specially when you are in top 10, and then get a game vs at least a decent player with 1700-1850 rating, you lose like over 30 points?! Isn't that a little much since its highly possible to lose vs a 1850 player with a bad draw or even without one! Specially when players seem to have made testing accounts for the tournament when u got double influence for new players ( Im so frustrated I didn't realize that... ) so that means behind that rating 1700 player might be one of my fellow top 10's.

[Mip]

If you lower the amount of points you lose for a loss, it will only reward the most playing amongst us. The more you play, the higher your rating. Which doesn't make it a rating more of a total games played counter. This will get really frustrating over the long run. There will almost always be people with more time than you have. Now at least the highest rated players also seem to not skyrocket up. So you atleast have a steady target to move towards.

Imagine the idea of having to win atleast another 400 games for 5 points before you come close to the top, not even counting compensations for eventual losses. That is what you get when you lower the punishment for losing and increase the rewards for winning.

Say we have two people one with rating A and one with rating B. Say A gains 5 points for winning and loses 25 for losing. That means you just have to beat him 5 out of 6 times. The other players who are your rating apparantly also do so. If you can't, you should drop down a bit or he should rise a bit. The matchup system isn't out there just to mess up your specific score. You get a smaller rating decrease against new players, since their 1200 is only a first guess, so the system doesn't blame you too much for losing to them, since they might just be alternative accounts. And they can gain a lot of points in their first few games to quickly get a better guess for their skill level and to not disturb the rating system a lot.

I think adding a few more columns might be more rewarding to those who want a nice linear progression of their skill level. Perhaps add a column for numbers of games won this season and a column with a win percentage.

My basic point is this: the reward and decrease need to be in a certain ratio to prevent the rating system from exploding and becoming ever higher. Sure you can lower the penalty for losing, but you'd also need to decrease the reward for winning if you don't want to end with impossibly high ratings. And then we'll complain about not getting enough for winning instead of complaining about too much lost for losing.

[Acid25]

If you lower the amount of points you lose for a loss, it will only reward the most playing amongst us. The more you play, the higher your rating. Which doesn't make it a rating more of a total games played counter. This will get really frustrating over the long run. There will almost always be people with more time than you have. Now at least the highest rated players also seem to not skyrocket up. So you atleast have a steady target to move towards.

Imagine the idea of having to win atleast another 400 games for 5 points before you come close to the top, not even counting compensations for eventual losses. That is what you get when you lower the punishment for losing and increase the rewards for winning.

Say we have two people one with rating A and one with rating B. Say A gains 5 points for winning and loses 25 for losing. That means you just have to beat him 5 out of 6 times. The other players who are your rating apparantly also do so. If you can't, you should drop down a bit or he should rise a bit. The matchup system isn't out there just to mess up your specific score. You get a smaller rating decrease against new players, since their 1200 is only a first guess, so the system doesn't blame you too much for losing to them, since they might just be alternative accounts. And they can gain a lot of points in their first few games to quickly get a better guess for their skill level and to not disturb the rating system a lot.

I think adding a few more columns might be more rewarding to those who want a nice linear progression of their skill level. Perhaps add a column for numbers of games won this season and a column with a win percentage.

My basic point is this: the reward and decrease need to be in a certain ratio to prevent the rating system from exploding and becoming ever higher. Sure you can lower the penalty for losing, but you'd also need to decrease the reward for winning if you don't want to end with impossibly high ratings. And then we'll complain about not getting enough for winning instead of complaining about too much lost for losing.

I totally agree

[MikaRosendahl]

I think adding a few more columns might be more rewarding to those who want a nice linear progression of their skill level. Perhaps add a column for numbers of games won this season and a column with a win percentage.

If people want these figures, we will gladly provide them.

Who would like to see win%, and doesn't mind it being shown to others?

[tatterdemalion]

Who would like to see win%, and doesn't mind it being shown to others?

This times 1,000,000. It would also be great to see the Cabal that players has played the most with. Maybe just the loyalty resource symbol next to their name.

[Xevious]

The more you can show the better.
Any chance for a top players of the day and past 7 days? Use win % and make a specific number of games played a requirement. Maybe 5 for the day and 35 for last 7 days?
Thanks