Ranking system feedback after getting feedback on my feedback

Hugo Alpha Surveyor Posts: 140

Here are the suggestions I and some of the community members came up with:

I myself would first give it a name like "The Sanctuary Ranking system" as per the lore we are currently in a worldwide sanctuary chimeric war over genmat. So having a system of ranking the most dangerous sanctuaries would be a great idea and would make sense in the story.

Now secondly I would want a leaderboard with at least the top 100/top 500 highest-ranked players. This could work as a public leaderboard and on another leaderboard, it might show you and the two people who are behind you in rank and the two that are in front of your rank. An overall leaderboard would be cool but if the game becomes too big it would just get annoying if it were too large.

Thirdly, add time as one of the conditions that calculate elo gained and lost not just deaths and rank of the builder.

Fourth, maybe give maps individual ranks based on the overall kill ratio and accolades gained by the builder (Over a pool of all the maps that they ever created.)

Fifth, rank rewards, don't just give boring currencies that are useless for the highest-ranked people as they probably have already everything unlocked and maxed out. Give something special. Even if it is just a trophy that stands in your sanctuary with the rank and season written on it. And maybe give the highest-ranked players a season-exclusive skin.

As for maps the top 100 maps of the season with the best KR and accolades gained can be played in a separate tab that still gives the builders and raiders rewards. Or but the best-rated and best KR outpost in a hall of fame. That could also be done with the ranked first of each season. As per the suggestion of @Kharel, it would be a great idea to have them split into 4 categories with each having the 25 best maps of the category. Top kills, top accolades, top picks by the devs, and 25 highest prestige point maps, could be possible categories.

Sixth, the season length make it moderately long but not too long. It probably is at least 1 month and at most 6 months. With 3 months being probably the best way to do it.

Now all this is what I like in a ranking system getting something unique so it is worth the hassle as well being somewhat competitive. O


  • Entchenklein
    Entchenklein Member Posts: 35

    Personally i feel like a ranking system would not suit this game also i can already see a few problems with this system:

    • Raiding Time is strongly dependent on how big the map you are raiding is so you can eighter get very lucky or unlucky
    • Same with Death if you just get a lot of easy maps in a row where you almost can not die your rank will go up quickly without you actually doing anything
    • What stops you from just rushing easy maps and gaining a bunch of points
    • You will have to make a system that can give points and remove points fairly since you are not playing directly againth another player will the person that made the outpost just lose rank points
    • If you add in outposts in the ranking system and how much the outpost killed players you can just ask a friend to just die in your outpost a bunch of times (yes i know you would need to find it first and when there are a lot of players playing there will be likely something like 2000 outposts but you can make a python makro pritty easyly that just cycles through till it finds one of your friends outposts)
    • Also i like to create at least some just funny outposts if i do that in a ranked system i will just get downranked just because i have fun
    • Why is it always the top 100 players if just the top 100 players get something it will be harder to get in or easyer to get in depending on how many players are currently playing what about the top 1% get something this way its player base independent
  • Hugo
    Hugo Alpha Surveyor Posts: 140

    Hmm I see your concerns so let me see what I can see here. First yeah a normal ranking system wouldn't and what people wanted, in the beginning, was a leaderboard for each outpost where the five fastest times are displayed to raiders. Now what we got in the open beta was a skeleton for a Ranking system.

    And as I was unsure if they would remove it or keep it I thought I should at least talk about what could be done better with the current ranking system.

    Now to your first point that it depends on the length of the map, how long a player takes is correct but it is easy to fix. We got the HRV so HRV can be timed once while all traps are inactive and calculate how long it took to the genmat and back. And if the raider is faster than this time it is counted as gaining more elo, if it is the time HRV took +-10s you can give no bonus gained or lost, if the player takes longer the bonus is inverted into a negative and subtracted from the elo gained. It is a very very easy fix.

    Your next point is your weakest point so far, as that is the case for every game that has a ranking system, if you are lucky you get a lot of easy matches if not you don't. Ranking is never just skill but also just as much dependent on luck.

    To your third point, yeah, for now, it would just be the amount of elo gained and lost. You shouldn't be able to gain or lose elo after a certain rank. That might help although it might also be infuriating to some that would like to abuse the system.

    Yeah, it could be made so that if the raider gains elo, the elo gained is subtracted from the builders elo, and if the raider loses elo, that elo is added to the builders elo.

    Yeah, it is a valid concern that this might happen and people would abuse it by making bots that die a bunch so the builder gains elo. And atm I don't have a solution in mind for that, maybe a elo gained cap per outpost might help.

    Oh yeah being downranked for having fun is something I was concerned about as well, so maybe a system where you can decide on of you want ranking activated for your outpost could be created. Possibly also for raiders that there is a button in the command center that can be active or inactive for ranked. That would also bring some new difficulties but this text is getting already pretty long.

    I never said that ranked rewards should be restricted to the top 100, it was meant only for the leaderboard in case it would be too much to have all players displayed. It might not ever become a problem but if over 10000 people are displayed in the leaderboard it would take some time to click through it, so why not restrict it to just the 100 highest-ranked players?

    And the top 100 for maps makes still sense as in one season there will probably be tens of thousands of maps if the player retention is kept and not lost.

    But yeah it is a concern that ranking is not that thought out here yet so it is important to talk about problems and possible solutions.

  • Entchenklein
    Entchenklein Member Posts: 35

    What i came up with:

    Raider Ranking:

    • Every Outpost Has there Own Ranking List Aka
      • Outpost1:
        • Player1 4 Death 10min Time +25
        • Player2 5 Death 11min Time 0
        • Player3 12 Death 20min Time -25
    • Season Takes 1 Month after the Season Every Leaderboard of every outpost will be taken Players get +25 Elo when beeng on the top Half of a outpost Leaderboard and -25 Elo for beeng on the Bottom Half
    • And then its just a lost of How much Elo Players Have


    • Hard to exploit since Every death just hurts your own ranking
    • It doesnt Matter What outpost you play againth since every outpost has there own leaderboard so a good time in one outpostt might be 20min and in another 40min


    • Potentially Grindy since the more outposts you play the more points you could generate this could be fixed by randomly choosing lets say 100 random outposts that players who want to be ranked can beat ofer the course of a month
    • Building is not Integrated in the Ranking However it might be best to seperate rankings for builders and raiders