[POLL] Site Points System!

[Matt_192]

I have had an idea for the site where we can have a points leaderboard for everyone on the site, based on wins/losses against other players. Whilst this would be difficult to track - read on, as I believe I have a solution already.

We do already have Team Wars and Rankings in that, but I also feel that people might like a Solo Leader-Board as well. This means we could also have seeds for tournaments (which links in nicely with my previous idea: Sweepstakes), making these bets easier to calculate.

It would simply work as a sub-forum where we can upload Battle Videos, stating the people involved as well as the video. This can either be a recording or a code which we can check against. As I said above, this would be difficult to track, but I think that if we can get a select few people to moderate this sub-forum, we shouldn't have any/many problems.

Calculating the scores could also be difficult - we could either use standard increments (+20 for every match) or come up with some kind of formula to work out the overall win/loss ratio (GXE from Smogon/Showdown would work nicely for this).

So yeah, that's the whole idea. Drop a comment below on what you think of it, and remember to vote!

 

[Dom]

Although I like the effort and thought you put into it, I don't like the concepts of rankings. I know some people get easily offended and I feel it would start more fights than it's worth, iirc it was already discussed just my two cents

 

[Blaguard]

Although I like the effort and thought you put into it, I don't like the concepts of rankings. I know some people get easily offended and I feel it would start more fights than it's worth, iirc it was already discussed just my two cents

I agree; if you want rankings you can use showdown, us trying to put in a system like that would just end up with petty comparisons and big heads, and since we already have so many well-established battlers it would be hard for new members to try and reach the top tier. If we have any sort of rankings I think it should be by team wars to promote teamwork and participation instead of individual dominance.

 

[Matt_192]

Although I like the effort and thought you put into it, I don't like the concepts of rankings. I know some people get easily offended and I feel it would start more fights than it's worth, iirc it was already discussed just my two cents

I agree; if you want rankings you can use showdown, us trying to put in a system like that would just end up with petty comparisons and big heads, and since we already have so many well-established battlers it would be hard for new members to try and reach the top tier. If we have any sort of rankings I think it should be by team wars to promote teamwork and participation instead of individual dominance.

Whilst I do agree with both of you, I do feel that an individual site rankings is nice to have separately to Showdown (as this is comparing you to thousands of other random people). I do also agree about the arguments that this could cause, but we could perhaps but severe warnings in to neuter this.

 

[Dom]

Whilst I do agree with both of you, I do feel that an individual site rankings is nice to have separately to Showdown (as this is comparing you to thousands of other random people). I do also agree about the arguments that this could cause, but we could perhaps but severe warnings in to neuter this.

If we give out warnings for petty arguments that are completely pointless which I think this would induce plenty of, then I feel like that would degrade warnings overall

I just think the cons outweigh the pros and seeing as we have a bi weekly tournament and clan wars and all of these things that you have mentioned, we can see who the better battlers are everytime these events happen, Just my opinion

I think any sort of official scale for something that changes match to match especially with the luck factor in pokemon would not be perfectly accurate naturally therefore, I feel as if it would spark too much controversy to be worth it

But that's just me

 

[Matt_192]

If we give out warnings for petty arguments that are completely pointless which I think this would induce plenty of, then I feel like that would degrade warnings overall

I just think the cons outweigh the pros and seeing as we have a bi weekly tournament and clan wars and all of these things that you have mentioned, we can see who the better battlers are everytime these events happen, Just my opinion

I think any sort of official scale for something that changes match to match especially with the luck factor in pokemon would not be perfectly accurate naturally therefore, I feel as if it would spark too much controversy to be worth it

But that's just me

I do agree, yet these hax based matches are part of any tournament, team war or any Pokemon match ever really. In any case, a system where people can participate in infinite battles allows people to recover their losses rather than get kicked out as soon as they lose, then again, just my opinion

 

[Dom]

I do agree, yet these hax based matches are part of any tournament, team war or any Pokemon match ever really. In any case, a system where people can participate in infinite battles allows people to recover their losses rather than get kicked out as soon as they lose, then again, just my opinion

So someone like doulie who may be very busy but is still very good where would he stand on the list?

 

[Matt_192]

So someone like doulie who may be very busy but is still very good where would he stand on the list?

This is true, but maybe we could implement limits to the amount of matches to give less active members a fair chance. It can seem unfair, but everyone isn't forced to participate. Just a suggestion here, but maybe people who are already deemed to be better players could start with a higher rating?

 

[Dom]

This is true, but maybe we could implement limits to the amount of matches to give less active members a fair chance. It can seem unfair, but everyone isn't forced to participate. Just a suggestion here, but maybe people who are already deemed to be better players could start with a higher rating?

Now this is where I'm confused,

" In any case, a system where people can participate in infinite battles allows people to recover their losses"

You wanted infinite battles now you want to cap them? Which would it be (That's why i asked about busy members)

(By the way I like the idea as I said and i know a lot of people think i'm tearing their ideas apart when I ask these questions but really, I'm seeing how they would hold up in different scenarios if anything it strengthens the better ideas and filters out the worse ones)

 

[Matt_192]

Now this is where I'm confused,

" In any case, a system where people can participate in infinite battles allows people to recover their losses"

You wanted infinite battles now you want to cap them? Which would it be (That's why i asked about busy members)

(By the way I like the idea as I said and i know a lot of people think i'm tearing their ideas apart when I ask these questions but really, I'm seeing how they would hold up in different scenarios if anything it strengthens the better ideas and filters out the worse ones)

Yeah I completely understand But sorry, when did I say the matches would be capped?

Another suggestion which I've just been discussing in the shoutbox is that of predefined rankings. Let me give you an example...

1. doulie
2. Dom
3. Gold 2.0
etc....

Then it just works simply: If you challenge a player above you and beat them, you move up above that player. This is just another way, still open to suggestions though

 

[Dom]

Yeah I completely understand But sorry, when did I say the matches would be capped?

Another suggestion which I've just been discussing in the shoutbox is that of predefined rankings. Let me give you an example...

1. doulie
2. Dom
3. Gold 2.0
etc....

Then it just works simply: If you challenge a player above you and beat them, you move up above that player. This is just another way, still open to suggestions though

"This is true, but maybe we could implement limits to the amount of matches"

I assumed you meant capping the amount of matches with a limit or atleast temporary capping, If not what do you mean by limits?

 

[Cheza]

I don't battle that much however isnt there a similar systems on the site already?

Team warriors on the site could be considered the best battlers of the team and those called into battle most often could be the "strongest of the warriors".

Also official tournaments show a lot about who is the strongest on the site, your average round victories etc.

 

[Niqyue]

Putting out rankings of members who we deem are better would cause arguments as in "Random member #1 starts of ranked one but random member #2 has never lost to number #1 but is started ahead of them" this would cause arguments as in many opinions differ and would cause arguments having preset rankings would cause people who would actively use this to get quite upset and cause more petty arguments like @Dom pointed out. I Generally love the idea but as this isn't like PS where we have something to where people can randomly find each other and battle here and get points up automatically it causes major problems because we are Wifi Battling Site and if we implemented something like that it would look like a cheap knock of Pokemon Showdown, almost as if we were trying to become them.