11 replies to this topic

[Iron Peep]

Its looking like its currently sorted by average total level but is it taking into account the amount of players in a team in any way?

 

I'm just wondering because it seems right now like 2 people could make a team and aslong as they keep their average total up they would be a higher rank then a team of 5 with varying total levels?

 

Should we be taking into consideration TOTAL team XP in any way when it comes to ranking? Teams should be ranked higher if they have 5 players rather then just 2-3 I believe but how do you guys feel about it?

[Morgen]

I completely agree, teams who have more people grinding obviously would be more xp than a team of, 2

[Sheep]

As of now it should be that only teams of 3 players or higher will be on those hiscores, haven’t checked if it’s actually true, that is just what Omicron has told me.
I would agree to make it fair for everyone and also if there’s no other option I’d rather see an advantage for the people with 5 man in a group instead of a 3 man group.

[Iron Peep]

As of now it should be that only teams of 3 players or higher will be on those hiscores, haven’t checked if it’s actually true, that is just what Omicron has told me.
I would agree to make it fair for everyone and also if there’s no other option I’d rather see an advantage for the people with 5 man in a group instead of a 3 man group.

 

This is what I was thinking, it makes a lot more sense to reward teams with 5 because it takes a lot more planning and commitment for 5 people to grind rather then 3.

[GroupIronman]

Yeah i thought that, it does look like all teams up top have 5 members, and on the individual highscores it doesn't matter it's normal hs then haha

[Iron Peep]

Yeah i thought that, it does look like all teams up top have 5 members, and on the individual highscores it doesn't matter it's normal hs then haha

 

I heard rank #3 was 2 accounts and a alt but I could be wrong. It's hard to tell when you can't click on the actual team to see more info or see how many players are in the team.

 

EDIT:  whales of oz is a 3 man team yet rank 4, swiggles is a 2 man team yet rank 23

[Omicron]

The highscores were being worked on today, it will now only list teams with 3 or more players as @ Sheep mentioned. Aside from that, it's sorted by average total level, and then average total XP (if the levels are even for 2 or more groups).

[Iron Peep]

The highscores were being worked on today, it will now only list teams with 3 or more players as @ Sheep mentioned. Aside from that, it's sorted by average total level, and then average total XP (if the levels are even for 2 or more groups).

 

So there's no incentive to actually do a 5 man team if competing for ranks then? Its much easier to only have 3 people in a team going hard rather then 5 going hard. Total XP or team total levels should be a factor in my opinion.

[Omicron]

So there's no incentive to actually do a 5 man team if competing for ranks then? Its much easier to only have 3 people in a team going hard rather then 5 going hard.

Just having more players to split resources with (and do certain activities like Theatre of Blood, which maxes out at 5 players) would be the benefit. 

[Iron Peep]

Just having more players to split resources with (and do certain activities like Theatre of Blood, which maxes out at 5 players) would be the benefit. 

 

Fair enough, I was just thinking if a team has 5 people all actively grinding vs a team of 3 actively grinding the team of 5 should come out on top rank wise but I guess it doesn't really matter.

 

I'm still glad my team is 5 players just for the entertainment factor even though it might not of been the best choice for competing for ranks.

[Zach McCoy]

I see the whole incentive thing of having more players to do ToB easier but I do agree with @ Iron Peep that it should be total XP based.

[Reload]

Agree with what sheep says 5 people average seems like a bigger accomplishment tbh hopefully it is that way.