- Subscribers:
- Visitors:
- Players:
Games Direct Message (to Do)
Community Feedback
We're listening. For players who wish to have a voice in the future of Evernight, this is the place to talk to management. This is the newsgroup we'll be actively monitoring on a daily basis.
Resetting the Leaderboard
Submitted by Cortex 7/13/2012 7:00:00 AM {time} ago in Community Feedback
However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event. There are ofocurse countless arguments against it. If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list. - current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void. - constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :) - Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again. C.
You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
That's along the lines of what we're thinking.
The main leaderboards will be based on some kind of rolling benchmark. X number of games, X number of days/months, a "season" based period, something along those lines.
However, a permenant cumulative "lifetime achievments" or "hall of fame" kind of thing will be retained in some form as well.
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
Makes sense. That rolling time frame might be a year or two though. Using the lifetime scale probably isn't right either, you need a new kind of rating for the recent information. Points is an option, but so is skill rating change (which is hard to do on a timeframe basis). I like the ideas presented that were based on game stats, some of which i used to do, like average region size at game end, or given that every game is "different", average placement within the ranks (max 20), top placement, etc...
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
That's along the lines of what we're thinking.
The main leaderboards will be based on some kind of rolling benchmark. X number of games, X number of days/months, a "season" based period, something along those lines.
However, a permenant cumulative "lifetime achievments" or "hall of fame" kind of thing will be retained in some form as well.
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
So more like football or basketball ...
o Game Stats lead to o Season Stats lead to o Career Stats
Maybe we need an Evernight Season. And the different game types lead to Evernight Leagues. (I am sure there are better nouns that would align with the back story better)
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: Makes sense. That rolling time frame might be a year or two though. Using the lifetime scale probably isn't right either, you need a new kind of rating for the recent information. Points is an option, but so is skill rating change (which is hard to do on a timeframe basis). I like the ideas presented that were based on game stats, some of which i used to do, like average region size at game end, or given that every game is "different", average placement within the ranks (max 20), top placement, etc...
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
That's along the lines of what we're thinking.
The main leaderboards will be based on some kind of rolling benchmark. X number of games, X number of days/months, a "season" based period, something along those lines.
However, a permenant cumulative "lifetime achievments" or "hall of fame" kind of thing will be retained in some form as well.
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
Surely this is a great observation...
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: So more like football or basketball ...
o Game Stats lead to o Season Stats lead to o Career Stats
Maybe we need an Evernight Season. And the different game types lead to Evernight Leagues. (I am sure there are better nouns that would align with the back story better)
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: Makes sense. That rolling time frame might be a year or two though. Using the lifetime scale probably isn't right either, you need a new kind of rating for the recent information. Points is an option, but so is skill rating change (which is hard to do on a timeframe basis). I like the ideas presented that were based on game stats, some of which i used to do, like average region size at game end, or given that every game is "different", average placement within the ranks (max 20), top placement, etc...
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
That's along the lines of what we're thinking.
The main leaderboards will be based on some kind of rolling benchmark. X number of games, X number of days/months, a "season" based period, something along those lines.
However, a permenant cumulative "lifetime achievments" or "hall of fame" kind of thing will be retained in some form as well.
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
Don't you dare touch Skill Rating Stats!
;)
Just kidding. This should be left as a hall of fame... Hall of the Ancestors... and while the stats get reset, they should also get redesigned - some of Blue's old stats would be good. Team wins should be counted separetly as well or together with indi wins.
Just careful with that.
take care, Anguloki
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: Makes sense. That rolling time frame might be a year or two though. Using the lifetime scale probably isn't right either, you need a new kind of rating for the recent information. Points is an option, but so is skill rating change (which is hard to do on a timeframe basis). I like the ideas presented that were based on game stats, some of which i used to do, like average region size at game end, or given that every game is "different", average placement within the ranks (max 20), top placement, etc...
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
That's along the lines of what we're thinking.
The main leaderboards will be based on some kind of rolling benchmark. X number of games, X number of days/months, a "season" based period, something along those lines.
However, a permenant cumulative "lifetime achievments" or "hall of fame" kind of thing will be retained in some form as well.
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
"current" is about 4 years worth of data... At the point growth rate, considering that the point growth is between 20 and 100 points a year, a great rank of Mystic Tyrant takes about 4 years to get...
Though the skill rating system was designed to quickly allow you to see who is "hot" right now, though it will also push a lot of players to the opposite pretty quickly...
In golf, averages are best 10 of 20 rounds, 20 rounds can take 3 months at 2 rounds per week, though I know people that an put in 20 rounds in three to four weeks.
In evernight, 20 games at three games or so ata time, with games averaging 35 ticks or 7 weeks, is an absoluete minimum of a year. The top averages at 5-7 points per game means that 20 games can grow you from nothing to war master in a year.
When waterdios did the "recent rankings" thing, which I did as well with my stats, the time duration was a real difficult part of it, because there was simply not enough change over the short term..
It won't hurt though to have multiple tpyes of ranking systems. There simply arent' enough people to make a reset needed, though what is needed is to clear out the people that don't play. You come off the list if you don't play in 3 months perhaps, which means that the list is always relevant and you don't fight your way through players that haven't been here in six years...
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
The long time span is just the nature of the game.
Evernight isn't a fast paced game.
Regardless of what types of things we ultimately decide to track as leaderboards stats, I do like the idea of filtering out players who aren't currently active.
Say something like, players who haven't played a game within the past (30,60,90) days are automatically sorted behind those who have. Similar to how the citadel rank sorts players to bottom who haven't declared a religon.
In addition, players who haven't at least logged in in over X number of months are filtered out entirely.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: "current" is about 4 years worth of data... At the point growth rate, considering that the point growth is between 20 and 100 points a year, a great rank of Mystic Tyrant takes about 4 years to get...
Though the skill rating system was designed to quickly allow you to see who is "hot" right now, though it will also push a lot of players to the opposite pretty quickly...
In golf, averages are best 10 of 20 rounds, 20 rounds can take 3 months at 2 rounds per week, though I know people that an put in 20 rounds in three to four weeks.
In evernight, 20 games at three games or so ata time, with games averaging 35 ticks or 7 weeks, is an absoluete minimum of a year. The top averages at 5-7 points per game means that 20 games can grow you from nothing to war master in a year.
When waterdios did the "recent rankings" thing, which I did as well with my stats, the time duration was a real difficult part of it, because there was simply not enough change over the short term..
It won't hurt though to have multiple tpyes of ranking systems. There simply arent' enough people to make a reset needed, though what is needed is to clear out the people that don't play. You come off the list if you don't play in 3 months perhaps, which means that the list is always relevant and you don't fight your way through players that haven't been here in six years...
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
Sounds just fine
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
The long time span is just the nature of the game.
Evernight isn't a fast paced game.
Regardless of what types of things we ultimately decide to track as leaderboards stats, I do like the idea of filtering out players who aren't currently active.
Say something like, players who haven't played a game within the past (30,60,90) days are automatically sorted behind those who have. Similar to how the citadel rank sorts players to bottom who haven't declared a religon.
In addition, players who haven't at least logged in in over X number of months are filtered out entirely.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: "current" is about 4 years worth of data... At the point growth rate, considering that the point growth is between 20 and 100 points a year, a great rank of Mystic Tyrant takes about 4 years to get...
Though the skill rating system was designed to quickly allow you to see who is "hot" right now, though it will also push a lot of players to the opposite pretty quickly...
In golf, averages are best 10 of 20 rounds, 20 rounds can take 3 months at 2 rounds per week, though I know people that an put in 20 rounds in three to four weeks.
In evernight, 20 games at three games or so ata time, with games averaging 35 ticks or 7 weeks, is an absoluete minimum of a year. The top averages at 5-7 points per game means that 20 games can grow you from nothing to war master in a year.
When waterdios did the "recent rankings" thing, which I did as well with my stats, the time duration was a real difficult part of it, because there was simply not enough change over the short term..
It won't hurt though to have multiple tpyes of ranking systems. There simply arent' enough people to make a reset needed, though what is needed is to clear out the people that don't play. You come off the list if you don't play in 3 months perhaps, which means that the list is always relevant and you don't fight your way through players that haven't been here in six years...
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
Evernight is a very slow game, therefore there isnt as much people in the world that like to play a game like this. Probably mostly old play by mail gamers would want to play this game. Is there a place that advertises to play by mail gamers...
Also i would like to see evernight try to quicken its pace. It might not be feasable to see the current players filling in games very quickly, but let us keep hope that after some decent advertising that we will see something!
Would it be possible to add games that tick 30 mins apart for a few hours 5 days a week. Even though it seems a stress, I believe you could get a 20 tick game to finish easy in one week. Or maybe a 30 tick game. Thats 3 hours on a day..
G360
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
The long time span is just the nature of the game.
Evernight isn't a fast paced game.
Regardless of what types of things we ultimately decide to track as leaderboards stats, I do like the idea of filtering out players who aren't currently active.
Say something like, players who haven't played a game within the past (30,60,90) days are automatically sorted behind those who have. Similar to how the citadel rank sorts players to bottom who haven't declared a religon.
In addition, players who haven't at least logged in in over X number of months are filtered out entirely.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: "current" is about 4 years worth of data... At the point growth rate, considering that the point growth is between 20 and 100 points a year, a great rank of Mystic Tyrant takes about 4 years to get...
Though the skill rating system was designed to quickly allow you to see who is "hot" right now, though it will also push a lot of players to the opposite pretty quickly...
In golf, averages are best 10 of 20 rounds, 20 rounds can take 3 months at 2 rounds per week, though I know people that an put in 20 rounds in three to four weeks.
In evernight, 20 games at three games or so ata time, with games averaging 35 ticks or 7 weeks, is an absoluete minimum of a year. The top averages at 5-7 points per game means that 20 games can grow you from nothing to war master in a year.
When waterdios did the "recent rankings" thing, which I did as well with my stats, the time duration was a real difficult part of it, because there was simply not enough change over the short term..
It won't hurt though to have multiple tpyes of ranking systems. There simply arent' enough people to make a reset needed, though what is needed is to clear out the people that don't play. You come off the list if you don't play in 3 months perhaps, which means that the list is always relevant and you don't fight your way through players that haven't been here in six years...
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
The blitz game. I so liked them... We did both the all at once as well as the fast start game 5 ticks fast then slow down to once a day
-------Original Message-------
Godzilla360 wrote: Evernight is a very slow game, therefore there isnt as much people in the world that like to play a game like this. Probably mostly old play by mail gamers would want to play this game. Is there a place that advertises to play by mail gamers...
Also i would like to see evernight try to quicken its pace. It might not be feasable to see the current players filling in games very quickly, but let us keep hope that after some decent advertising that we will see something!
Would it be possible to add games that tick 30 mins apart for a few hours 5 days a week. Even though it seems a stress, I believe you could get a 20 tick game to finish easy in one week. Or maybe a 30 tick game. Thats 3 hours on a day..
G360
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
The long time span is just the nature of the game.
Evernight isn't a fast paced game.
Regardless of what types of things we ultimately decide to track as leaderboards stats, I do like the idea of filtering out players who aren't currently active.
Say something like, players who haven't played a game within the past (30,60,90) days are automatically sorted behind those who have. Similar to how the citadel rank sorts players to bottom who haven't declared a religon.
In addition, players who haven't at least logged in in over X number of months are filtered out entirely.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: "current" is about 4 years worth of data... At the point growth rate, considering that the point growth is between 20 and 100 points a year, a great rank of Mystic Tyrant takes about 4 years to get...
Though the skill rating system was designed to quickly allow you to see who is "hot" right now, though it will also push a lot of players to the opposite pretty quickly...
In golf, averages are best 10 of 20 rounds, 20 rounds can take 3 months at 2 rounds per week, though I know people that an put in 20 rounds in three to four weeks.
In evernight, 20 games at three games or so ata time, with games averaging 35 ticks or 7 weeks, is an absoluete minimum of a year. The top averages at 5-7 points per game means that 20 games can grow you from nothing to war master in a year.
When waterdios did the "recent rankings" thing, which I did as well with my stats, the time duration was a real difficult part of it, because there was simply not enough change over the short term..
It won't hurt though to have multiple tpyes of ranking systems. There simply arent' enough people to make a reset needed, though what is needed is to clear out the people that don't play. You come off the list if you don't play in 3 months perhaps, which means that the list is always relevant and you don't fight your way through players that haven't been here in six years...
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
I used to love the blitz games. They were a blast.
I like the idea of fast start games. 10 minute ticks for the first hour or so, then regular schdule.
The first 5 or 6 turns are mostly boring and routine with not a lot of complicated planning or tricky moves necessary.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote:
The blitz game. I so liked them... We did both the all at once as well as the fast start game 5 ticks fast then slow down to once a day
-------Original Message-------
Godzilla360 wrote: Evernight is a very slow game, therefore there isnt as much people in the world that like to play a game like this. Probably mostly old play by mail gamers would want to play this game. Is there a place that advertises to play by mail gamers...
Also i would like to see evernight try to quicken its pace. It might not be feasable to see the current players filling in games very quickly, but let us keep hope that after some decent advertising that we will see something!
Would it be possible to add games that tick 30 mins apart for a few hours 5 days a week. Even though it seems a stress, I believe you could get a 20 tick game to finish easy in one week. Or maybe a 30 tick game. Thats 3 hours on a day..
G360
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
The long time span is just the nature of the game.
Evernight isn't a fast paced game.
Regardless of what types of things we ultimately decide to track as leaderboards stats, I do like the idea of filtering out players who aren't currently active.
Say something like, players who haven't played a game within the past (30,60,90) days are automatically sorted behind those who have. Similar to how the citadel rank sorts players to bottom who haven't declared a religon.
In addition, players who haven't at least logged in in over X number of months are filtered out entirely.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: "current" is about 4 years worth of data... At the point growth rate, considering that the point growth is between 20 and 100 points a year, a great rank of Mystic Tyrant takes about 4 years to get...
Though the skill rating system was designed to quickly allow you to see who is "hot" right now, though it will also push a lot of players to the opposite pretty quickly...
In golf, averages are best 10 of 20 rounds, 20 rounds can take 3 months at 2 rounds per week, though I know people that an put in 20 rounds in three to four weeks.
In evernight, 20 games at three games or so ata time, with games averaging 35 ticks or 7 weeks, is an absoluete minimum of a year. The top averages at 5-7 points per game means that 20 games can grow you from nothing to war master in a year.
When waterdios did the "recent rankings" thing, which I did as well with my stats, the time duration was a real difficult part of it, because there was simply not enough change over the short term..
It won't hurt though to have multiple tpyes of ranking systems. There simply arent' enough people to make a reset needed, though what is needed is to clear out the people that don't play. You come off the list if you don't play in 3 months perhaps, which means that the list is always relevant and you don't fight your way through players that haven't been here in six years...
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
They are boring for us but its good for newbies to see some action. Id support this idea.
G360
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
I used to love the blitz games. They were a blast.
I like the idea of fast start games. 10 minute ticks for the first hour or so, then regular schdule.
The first 5 or 6 turns are mostly boring and routine with not a lot of complicated planning or tricky moves necessary.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote:
The blitz game. I so liked them... We did both the all at once as well as the fast start game 5 ticks fast then slow down to once a day
-------Original Message-------
Godzilla360 wrote: Evernight is a very slow game, therefore there isnt as much people in the world that like to play a game like this. Probably mostly old play by mail gamers would want to play this game. Is there a place that advertises to play by mail gamers...
Also i would like to see evernight try to quicken its pace. It might not be feasable to see the current players filling in games very quickly, but let us keep hope that after some decent advertising that we will see something!
Would it be possible to add games that tick 30 mins apart for a few hours 5 days a week. Even though it seems a stress, I believe you could get a 20 tick game to finish easy in one week. Or maybe a 30 tick game. Thats 3 hours on a day..
G360
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
The long time span is just the nature of the game.
Evernight isn't a fast paced game.
Regardless of what types of things we ultimately decide to track as leaderboards stats, I do like the idea of filtering out players who aren't currently active.
Say something like, players who haven't played a game within the past (30,60,90) days are automatically sorted behind those who have. Similar to how the citadel rank sorts players to bottom who haven't declared a religon.
In addition, players who haven't at least logged in in over X number of months are filtered out entirely.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: "current" is about 4 years worth of data... At the point growth rate, considering that the point growth is between 20 and 100 points a year, a great rank of Mystic Tyrant takes about 4 years to get...
Though the skill rating system was designed to quickly allow you to see who is "hot" right now, though it will also push a lot of players to the opposite pretty quickly...
In golf, averages are best 10 of 20 rounds, 20 rounds can take 3 months at 2 rounds per week, though I know people that an put in 20 rounds in three to four weeks.
In evernight, 20 games at three games or so ata time, with games averaging 35 ticks or 7 weeks, is an absoluete minimum of a year. The top averages at 5-7 points per game means that 20 games can grow you from nothing to war master in a year.
When waterdios did the "recent rankings" thing, which I did as well with my stats, the time duration was a real difficult part of it, because there was simply not enough change over the short term..
It won't hurt though to have multiple tpyes of ranking systems. There simply arent' enough people to make a reset needed, though what is needed is to clear out the people that don't play. You come off the list if you don't play in 3 months perhaps, which means that the list is always relevant and you don't fight your way through players that haven't been here in six years...
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
I wonder...perhaps it would be possible to make games where the players start not with one region, or even two regions.
But thirty regions. A small established empire. The player is given forces in various regions, pre-existing structures, and a small pool of resources to draw on from the start.
Each player who joins would have this. That way, there's no immediate focus on getting set up. You jump in and hit the ground running.
Also, this style of game could be excellent for building a whole new format based around "scenario games". A single player, two players, or more, are thrown into the game against AI enemies also established. And the goal is to either kill a key figure in the game (form, AI opponent, human opponent, natives, etc.), win a certain kind of battle when supposedly at a disadvantage, or solve some kind of situation at hand with varying resources at the players disposal.
The number of configurations that could be made are almost countless. And they make for great simulations, trainers, and just a fun different way of playing the game.
Hell, you could even go so far as eventually including scenarios for the players that involve not just pure strategy, but diplomatic issues for them to solve. Especially if you include an in-game alliance system.
Lunar Savage
-------Original Message-------
Godzilla360 wrote: They are boring for us but its good for newbies to see some action. Id support this idea.
G360
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
I used to love the blitz games. They were a blast.
I like the idea of fast start games. 10 minute ticks for the first hour or so, then regular schdule.
The first 5 or 6 turns are mostly boring and routine with not a lot of complicated planning or tricky moves necessary.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote:
The blitz game. I so liked them... We did both the all at once as well as the fast start game 5 ticks fast then slow down to once a day
-------Original Message-------
Godzilla360 wrote: Evernight is a very slow game, therefore there isnt as much people in the world that like to play a game like this. Probably mostly old play by mail gamers would want to play this game. Is there a place that advertises to play by mail gamers...
Also i would like to see evernight try to quicken its pace. It might not be feasable to see the current players filling in games very quickly, but let us keep hope that after some decent advertising that we will see something!
Would it be possible to add games that tick 30 mins apart for a few hours 5 days a week. Even though it seems a stress, I believe you could get a 20 tick game to finish easy in one week. Or maybe a 30 tick game. Thats 3 hours on a day..
G360
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
The long time span is just the nature of the game.
Evernight isn't a fast paced game.
Regardless of what types of things we ultimately decide to track as leaderboards stats, I do like the idea of filtering out players who aren't currently active.
Say something like, players who haven't played a game within the past (30,60,90) days are automatically sorted behind those who have. Similar to how the citadel rank sorts players to bottom who haven't declared a religon.
In addition, players who haven't at least logged in in over X number of months are filtered out entirely.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: "current" is about 4 years worth of data... At the point growth rate, considering that the point growth is between 20 and 100 points a year, a great rank of Mystic Tyrant takes about 4 years to get...
Though the skill rating system was designed to quickly allow you to see who is "hot" right now, though it will also push a lot of players to the opposite pretty quickly...
In golf, averages are best 10 of 20 rounds, 20 rounds can take 3 months at 2 rounds per week, though I know people that an put in 20 rounds in three to four weeks.
In evernight, 20 games at three games or so ata time, with games averaging 35 ticks or 7 weeks, is an absoluete minimum of a year. The top averages at 5-7 points per game means that 20 games can grow you from nothing to war master in a year.
When waterdios did the "recent rankings" thing, which I did as well with my stats, the time duration was a real difficult part of it, because there was simply not enough change over the short term..
It won't hurt though to have multiple tpyes of ranking systems. There simply arent' enough people to make a reset needed, though what is needed is to clear out the people that don't play. You come off the list if you don't play in 3 months perhaps, which means that the list is always relevant and you don't fight your way through players that haven't been here in six years...
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
This is certainly an interesting line of thought.
Instead of start regions, players have a starting empire.
-------Original Message-------
Lunar Savage wrote: I wonder...perhaps it would be possible to make games where the players start not with one region, or even two regions.
But thirty regions. A small established empire. The player is given forces in various regions, pre-existing structures, and a small pool of resources to draw on from the start.
Each player who joins would have this. That way, there's no immediate focus on getting set up. You jump in and hit the ground running.
Also, this style of game could be excellent for building a whole new format based around "scenario games". A single player, two players, or more, are thrown into the game against AI enemies also established. And the goal is to either kill a key figure in the game (form, AI opponent, human opponent, natives, etc.), win a certain kind of battle when supposedly at a disadvantage, or solve some kind of situation at hand with varying resources at the players disposal.
The number of configurations that could be made are almost countless. And they make for great simulations, trainers, and just a fun different way of playing the game.
Hell, you could even go so far as eventually including scenarios for the players that involve not just pure strategy, but diplomatic issues for them to solve. Especially if you include an in-game alliance system.
Lunar Savage
-------Original Message-------
Godzilla360 wrote: They are boring for us but its good for newbies to see some action. Id support this idea.
G360
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
I used to love the blitz games. They were a blast.
I like the idea of fast start games. 10 minute ticks for the first hour or so, then regular schdule.
The first 5 or 6 turns are mostly boring and routine with not a lot of complicated planning or tricky moves necessary.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote:
The blitz game. I so liked them... We did both the all at once as well as the fast start game 5 ticks fast then slow down to once a day
-------Original Message-------
Godzilla360 wrote: Evernight is a very slow game, therefore there isnt as much people in the world that like to play a game like this. Probably mostly old play by mail gamers would want to play this game. Is there a place that advertises to play by mail gamers...
Also i would like to see evernight try to quicken its pace. It might not be feasable to see the current players filling in games very quickly, but let us keep hope that after some decent advertising that we will see something!
Would it be possible to add games that tick 30 mins apart for a few hours 5 days a week. Even though it seems a stress, I believe you could get a 20 tick game to finish easy in one week. Or maybe a 30 tick game. Thats 3 hours on a day..
G360
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
The long time span is just the nature of the game.
Evernight isn't a fast paced game.
Regardless of what types of things we ultimately decide to track as leaderboards stats, I do like the idea of filtering out players who aren't currently active.
Say something like, players who haven't played a game within the past (30,60,90) days are automatically sorted behind those who have. Similar to how the citadel rank sorts players to bottom who haven't declared a religon.
In addition, players who haven't at least logged in in over X number of months are filtered out entirely.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: "current" is about 4 years worth of data... At the point growth rate, considering that the point growth is between 20 and 100 points a year, a great rank of Mystic Tyrant takes about 4 years to get...
Though the skill rating system was designed to quickly allow you to see who is "hot" right now, though it will also push a lot of players to the opposite pretty quickly...
In golf, averages are best 10 of 20 rounds, 20 rounds can take 3 months at 2 rounds per week, though I know people that an put in 20 rounds in three to four weeks.
In evernight, 20 games at three games or so ata time, with games averaging 35 ticks or 7 weeks, is an absoluete minimum of a year. The top averages at 5-7 points per game means that 20 games can grow you from nothing to war master in a year.
When waterdios did the "recent rankings" thing, which I did as well with my stats, the time duration was a real difficult part of it, because there was simply not enough change over the short term..
It won't hurt though to have multiple tpyes of ranking systems. There simply arent' enough people to make a reset needed, though what is needed is to clear out the people that don't play. You come off the list if you don't play in 3 months perhaps, which means that the list is always relevant and you don't fight your way through players that haven't been here in six years...
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
Custom tick schedules we could make happen.
I think a game that ticked 30 minutes apart for 2-3 hours a day 5 days a week would be a pretty cool idea.
The trick is finding enough players to fill the game who all have that same exact 2-3 hour time slot available to play.
-------Original Message-------
Godzilla360 wrote: Evernight is a very slow game, therefore there isnt as much people in the world that like to play a game like this. Probably mostly old play by mail gamers would want to play this game. Is there a place that advertises to play by mail gamers...
Also i would like to see evernight try to quicken its pace. It might not be feasable to see the current players filling in games very quickly, but let us keep hope that after some decent advertising that we will see something!
Would it be possible to add games that tick 30 mins apart for a few hours 5 days a week. Even though it seems a stress, I believe you could get a 20 tick game to finish easy in one week. Or maybe a 30 tick game. Thats 3 hours on a day..
G360
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
The long time span is just the nature of the game.
Evernight isn't a fast paced game.
Regardless of what types of things we ultimately decide to track as leaderboards stats, I do like the idea of filtering out players who aren't currently active.
Say something like, players who haven't played a game within the past (30,60,90) days are automatically sorted behind those who have. Similar to how the citadel rank sorts players to bottom who haven't declared a religon.
In addition, players who haven't at least logged in in over X number of months are filtered out entirely.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: "current" is about 4 years worth of data... At the point growth rate, considering that the point growth is between 20 and 100 points a year, a great rank of Mystic Tyrant takes about 4 years to get...
Though the skill rating system was designed to quickly allow you to see who is "hot" right now, though it will also push a lot of players to the opposite pretty quickly...
In golf, averages are best 10 of 20 rounds, 20 rounds can take 3 months at 2 rounds per week, though I know people that an put in 20 rounds in three to four weeks.
In evernight, 20 games at three games or so ata time, with games averaging 35 ticks or 7 weeks, is an absoluete minimum of a year. The top averages at 5-7 points per game means that 20 games can grow you from nothing to war master in a year.
When waterdios did the "recent rankings" thing, which I did as well with my stats, the time duration was a real difficult part of it, because there was simply not enough change over the short term..
It won't hurt though to have multiple tpyes of ranking systems. There simply arent' enough people to make a reset needed, though what is needed is to clear out the people that don't play. You come off the list if you don't play in 3 months perhaps, which means that the list is always relevant and you don't fight your way through players that haven't been here in six years...
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
BlueSky is master of the numbers. I like it.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: "current" is about 4 years worth of data... At the point growth rate, considering that the point growth is between 20 and 100 points a year, a great rank of Mystic Tyrant takes about 4 years to get...
Though the skill rating system was designed to quickly allow you to see who is "hot" right now, though it will also push a lot of players to the opposite pretty quickly...
In golf, averages are best 10 of 20 rounds, 20 rounds can take 3 months at 2 rounds per week, though I know people that an put in 20 rounds in three to four weeks.
In evernight, 20 games at three games or so ata time, with games averaging 35 ticks or 7 weeks, is an absoluete minimum of a year. The top averages at 5-7 points per game means that 20 games can grow you from nothing to war master in a year.
When waterdios did the "recent rankings" thing, which I did as well with my stats, the time duration was a real difficult part of it, because there was simply not enough change over the short term..
It won't hurt though to have multiple tpyes of ranking systems. There simply arent' enough people to make a reset needed, though what is needed is to clear out the people that don't play. You come off the list if you don't play in 3 months perhaps, which means that the list is always relevant and you don't fight your way through players that haven't been here in six years...
-------Original Message-------
old_ugly wrote: You just need a statistic that forgets old data. The leaderboard could be sorted by the longevity stats, but you are also interested in who's hot right now.
I think of golf or tennis.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
While at this point, specific details for implementation are on the table for discussion, I can say:
"The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art"
Pretty much sums up the big picture plans at this stage.
I can also say, there won't be a leaderboard. There will be leaderboards.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
Stats are one incentive, may not be as big a draw as it used to be, but stats are still interesting!
The more the better!
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
While at this point, specific details for implementation are on the table for discussion, I can say:
"The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art"
Pretty much sums up the big picture plans at this stage.
I can also say, there won't be a leaderboard. There will be leaderboards.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
I'm thinking we're going to want to break out different areas of stats.
The first thing that comes to my mind is maybe breaking out leaderboards by game type:
Indie Games Team Games Blitz Games Solo Games Elim Games Private Games Custom Games etc.
And then within each segment; sortable & filterable by Points, Wins, Most Played, Most Finished, Highest Avg., etc.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: Stats are one incentive, may not be as big a draw as it used to be, but stats are still interesting!
The more the better!
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
While at this point, specific details for implementation are on the table for discussion, I can say:
"The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art"
Pretty much sums up the big picture plans at this stage.
I can also say, there won't be a leaderboard. There will be leaderboards.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
Having the data will lead to lots of interesting correlations
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
I'm thinking we're going to want to break out different areas of stats.
The first thing that comes to my mind is maybe breaking out leaderboards by game type:
Indie Games Team Games Blitz Games Solo Games Elim Games Private Games Custom Games etc.
And then within each segment; sortable & filterable by Points, Wins, Most Played, Most Finished, Highest Avg., etc.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: Stats are one incentive, may not be as big a draw as it used to be, but stats are still interesting!
The more the better!
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
While at this point, specific details for implementation are on the table for discussion, I can say:
"The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art"
Pretty much sums up the big picture plans at this stage.
I can also say, there won't be a leaderboard. There will be leaderboards.
-------Original Message-------
Cortex wrote: However you look at it nobody ccan deny it would a major relaunch event.
There are ofocurse countless arguments against it.
If I add all the arguments against a reset, which I've read in the last 4 years, I get the following list.
- current users have to approve a reset. No point in alienating a reset. If after a mass email with the question : 'Would you play EN again if the LB is reset?' and the answer is a resounding yes then whatever the majority opinion of existing playerbase is then, I guess, null and void.
- constructing a decent Hall of Fame for the current leaderboard. A screenshot of the LB to commemorate all those dedicated players probably wont be very appreciated. The current leaderboard could become the Hall of Fame while the new LB should be state of the art :)
- Some great new features would have to be implemented before a reset. Just resetting to bump the playerbase is cheap and likely not effective, losing the players again.
C.
Connect With Us