[dev] Would you like to be able to negatively affect other players' ranking?

[Zeras]

Would like to be able to affect (negatively) other players' rankings by beating them? Of course, this would mean they can affect your ranking as well.

[SamuriFish]

No. I really don't want to drop in ranking just cuase one person is farming me for prizes or whatever. That would just be really annoying.

[_slic_]

I would like to negatively afect other players rankings....having said that I voted no.

why?

even though I beleive every match you lose in reality should affect your ranking it would be too easy for groups such as those pesky FBG's :D to gang up on a particular player and affect that players ranking to a much greater degree than he deserved. It also would require yet another level of dificulty for the devs to figure out how to make the rankings fair. lets face it weve been through numerous incarnations of the rankings already and theyre still not hreat....this would only make it more fifficult I beleive.....

sooooo as much as I'd like to send a few people tumbling down the ranks I dont see it happening without adversely affcting the game .

[Athion]

Slic and Sam both make good points... but I think an antifarming filter (say only one battle lost to the same opponent per day matters) would cure the farming issue.

As for the mass attacks.. thats what guilds are for :)

I'm personally undecided though... I like it a little bit though...

[Personater]

What about vacations or things like that? If you leave, you will not only suffer from not moving forward, but move down as well. I'd prefer to see people affect my rankings negatively by being able to be at a higher rank, and not by fighting me.

[Qozux]

What about vacations or things like that? If you leave, you will not only suffer from not moving forward, but move down as well. I'd prefer to see people affect my rankings negatively by being able to be at a higher rank, and not by fighting me.
to solve this, there could be a hidden profile option. if you select this, you may not do ANYTHING besides talk in the forums for one week (arbitrary number) i you can't attack and you're invisible on the rankings, there's no chance to go up or down.

[Personater]

to solve this, there could be a hidden profile option. if you select this, you may not do ANYTHING besides talk in the forums for one week (arbitrary number) i you can't attack and you're invisible on the rankings, there's no chance to go up or down.

I like this idea, but maybe a set date...because sometimes people leave for weekends only, so a selection of "X days" you cannot fight people, or have them fight you. Sounds like a good idea to me!

[DarrenStone]

I agree with Slic on this one. The mass attack problem that guilds could cause becomes griefing after only a short while. I much prefer the fact that my ranking is entirely based on my own choices of weapons (counting the random drop factor of course), skills, and who I attack (as compared to everyone else), without factoring in anyone else attacking me.


I'd hate to see people leave the game because of (for example) the FBGs not liking and keeping them at a crap ranking no matter how hard they try to advance.

[Qozux]

I agree with Slic on this one. The mass attack problem that guilds could cause becomes griefing after only a short while. I much prefer the fact that my ranking is entirely based on my own choices of weapons (counting the random drop factor of course), skills, and who I attack (as compared to everyone else), without factoring in anyone else attacking me.


I'd hate to see people leave the game because of (for example) the FBGs not liking and keeping them at a crap ranking no matter how hard they try to advance.
i'm sure Z could think of something to prevent this. Also remember, if you could hurt someone's ranking by attacking them, you would have to be able to help their ranking or exp (i prefer EXP) by losing to them.

[Shallman]

Several people have mentioned the FBGs gangin up on people... is that just an example... or do people really think they would?

Anyway--I think if the two things mentioned previously (anti-farming filters to limit the # of times someone can impact your rating in a day/week, etc, and losing when you attack someone else helping their rating) were implemented it would be ok and would actually improve the 'king of the hill' concept which I think we all like.

[FBGstevec]

Several people have mentioned the FBGs gangin up on people... is that just an example... or do people really think they would?

Anyway--I think if the two things mentioned previously (anti-farming filters to limit the # of times someone can impact your rating in a day/week, etc, and losing when you attack someone else helping their rating) were implemented it would be ok and would actually improve the 'king of the hill' concept which I think we all like.

I don't know, but I joined through a link from someone on FBG. It's kind of neat to be able to recognize people you know from another site, and recognize them instantly, but other than that, it's no big deal to me.

It just makes it handy to not say "is that the same guy from website X?" I've run into different people with the same handle on different sites, and run into it myself as well. So for me, it's just a way to ID people.

[zacaria]

ya then it would kind of be like the old everwars. then you could see how many losses they have to make a better judgement if you can beat them or not. i think it would be more accurate then ratings but still keep the ratings

[Dellen]

People like me sandbagged in the first Everwars to become #1, removed all weps when not fighting, to accumulate tons of losses, then when I had 4k losses, I equipped and skyrocketed to #1...And no one could surpass me because I was still getting all those attacks from the people thinking I was weak. So, they removed the option to see losses, because thats what people do, Sandbag