Feedback: Guild Rankings II

[asommers]

As discussed in this thread (link (https://www.spacetimestudios.com/showthread.php?654831-Feedback-Guild-Rankings)), we're considering changing the way we compute guild rankings. I've read through all of the feedback and we've done some test changes to the guild ranking algorithm.

To recap, we're looking at simplifying it to the following:
* For all players in a guild, consider the players active within the last 14 days.
* Of those players, sum highest achievement points for up to 500 players in the guild to compute the guild score.
* Top guild scores represent guild rank.

Here's a test run of the proposed changes showing the top 20 guilds. You can compare this to the official ranking here (link (https://www.spacetimestudios.com/showthread.php?658504-Arcane-Legends-Top-50-Guilds-2022-10-19)).

249534

NOTE: Guild stats in the final report are not determined at this time. We'll probably go stat by stat and see if it's useful to keep. Things like guild age could still be a stat, but wouldn't factor into the ranking algorithm.

Comments welcome!

-ALS

[Immortal_Blood]

+1.....simple, nice, . looks good to me, a guilds "goodness??" should simply be calculated by how much aps is in it. yes

other than aps and activity, i guess.. pve/pvp kills/members is next important to disclosing the best guilds.

account age seems like itd become impossible for new guilds to progress on lb.

i wish the transition to this new computerization .. hahaha... be smooth with no backlash to dev.

[lethal]

maybe make it las 30 days

[Encryptions]

Seems nice, guilds mainly are for active players and people who are advanced into the game.
I don't know how the activity works but if its adding up activity percent per day then at the end of the 2 weeks diving that total percent by 14 to get the average then thats great.
Or maybe if it takes those 2 weeks and counts percent of the guild logged on within those 2 weeks.

[papas]

Ok so it's gonna be just guild aps lb. Seems fine. No more botters and dummy farmers for boost ranking.


Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Oawaoebi]

I thought to maybe also add badge per member would be cool


Gesendet von iPhone 13 mit Tapatalk

[QuaseT]

Ok so it's gonna be just guild aps lb. Seems fine. No more botters and dummy farmers for boost ranking.


Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας TapatalkMost aps within 500 (or less) active players of the guild I think. Not all members and not the ones that have been offline for more than 14 days.

[tailwarrior]

Only having active players and aps as a parameter still doesn't do justice to guild rankings.

I suggest some of these things here:

1.Guild leaving to joining ratio, since a good guild should be able to hold onto their players.

2.Only 1 character per account's aps should be considered in case they have alts in guild. Suppose if a single player has 10 alts with good aps in the guild, then it means a single player can affect the ranking to a large extent.Also there won't be a difference between a 500 player guild with each player having 10 alts to a guild with 50 players 'active'.


Sent from my M2010J19CI using Tapatalk

[Nocturnus]

I like it, that looks good.
The "Percentage of players" would be the number of active players of the guild in 14 days that were taken for the calculation?
And having an icon in the game, or something like that, which directs us to the guild information would be good, there it could indicate, age or day the guild was created, number of players, statistics, etc.

[Nocturnus]

Only having active players and aps as a parameter still doesn't do justice to guild rankings.

I suggest some of these things here:

1.Guild leaving to joining ratio, since a good guild should be able to hold onto their players.

2.Only 1 character per account's aps should be considered in case they have alts in guild. Suppose if a single player has 10 alts with good aps in the guild, then it means a single player can affect the ranking to a large extent.Also there won't be a difference between a 500 player guild with each player having 10 alts to a guild with 50 players 'active'.


Sent from my M2010J19CI using Tapatalk

Even if you have hundreds of chars with maximum aps, logging in with all the accounts, every day, would be really exhausting.
Leaving it at 14 days or even 7 days will discourage that.

[papas]

Only having active players and aps as a parameter still doesn't do justice to guild rankings.

I suggest some of these things here:

1.Guild leaving to joining ratio, since a good guild should be able to hold onto their players.

2.Only 1 character per account's aps should be considered in case they have alts in guild. Suppose if a single player has 10 alts with good aps in the guild, then it means a single player can affect the ranking to a large extent.Also there won't be a difference between a 500 player guild with each player having 10 alts to a guild with 50 players 'active'.


Sent from my M2010J19CI using Tapatalk-1

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[papas]

So I just realised. That this isn't the final ranking. This is how u define top 50 guilds that will be on the lb.
And now ur on the phase that u choose which factors will be, that will make the final rankings.
Having alrd desided that guild age will not be part of it. Tho why a guild being solid and active and have supported the game for most time, should not be rewarded? Would really love to have a reply on this one.
Keeping the system of excluding worse and best rank factors should remain to help new guilds. If u choose not to keep it tho np. It will be smae for everyone.
@asommers

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[tailwarrior]

Even if you have hundreds of chars with maximum aps, logging in with all the accounts, every day, would be really exhausting.
Leaving it at 14 days or even 7 days will discourage that.Just logging for a day within that 2 week frame will make me active and I don't need to do it everyday. I have like 4 accounts with 30k+ aps in each. So I contribute 120k aps. isn't that right?

Sent from my M2010J19CI using Tapatalk

[asommers]

I'll formulate some responses to recent comments later, but I'll ask a simple question:

If the top 500 active players in the game (by APs) all joined a single guild, wouldn't that be the top guild in the game?

If so, we've got enough data create a list of top guilds. If not, why not?

-ALS

[Encryptions]

I'll formulate some responses to recent comments later, but I'll ask a simple question:

If the top 500 active players in the game (by APs) all joined a single guild, wouldn't that be the top guild in the game?

If so, we've got enough data create a list of top guilds. If not, why not?

-ALS

This works fine, in the current guild ranking system I can use my own characters to get a guild to top 12 easily only by leveling those characters to 46 with 10k aps on each x pve kills for kdr and x pvp kills for kdr. I did the math to it all back then but never decided to do it because I needed 400 characters with all of that. With this lb you still need 300 characters with a minimum of 10k aps each to hit lb so its still the same just alot easier to do. I doubt anyone will want to pull it off too due to the difficulty of managing all of that.
Guild age is not a good thing to factorize when ranking on lb, yes its nice to know there are guilds from 2012 but what is the point of them being on lb when most of them are inactive with 0 players. Guild lb is ment to show people what guilds are the most advanced and active in the current time period.

I suggest to show stats on the lb too, Rank, name, PlayerCount, APS, Activity %, Date Created. If it all can fit.

[papas]

This works fine, in the current guild ranking system I can use my own characters to get a guild to top 12 easily only by leveling those characters to 46 with 10k aps on each x pve kills for kdr and x pvp kills for kdr. I did the math to it all back then but never decided to do it because I needed 400 characters with all of that. With this lb you still need 300 characters with a minimum of 10k aps each to hit lb so its still the same just alot easier to do. I doubt anyone will want to pull it off too due to the difficulty of managing all of that.
Guild age is not a good thing to factorize when ranking on lb, yes its nice to know there are guilds from 2012 but what is the point of them being on lb when most of them are inactive with 0 players. Guild lb is ment to show people what guilds are the most advanced and active in the current time period.

I suggest to show stats on the lb too, Rank, name, PlayerCount, APS, Activity %, Date Created. If it all can fit.

U need to understand that aps is the only factor that brings u on guild lb. After ur in there are multi factors that defines ur overall rank. Even if u have lowest aps between all guilds u can get way better place.
With new system that counts aps of the members been active last 14days all those guilds u mention are off lb. There were guilds with activity like 5% on lb. Now all those aps don't count cause 95% of members are inactive.
Untill now guild age counted the less tha everything else in game for guild ranking. Plus there is the excluding system of top and lowest rank, so that even makes it matter less(the oldest guild with rank1 is same with all guilds that their guild rank is worse than rest of their factor ranks) idk if u can understand how this actually works. But the point is guild age will not get u on guild lb unless u have enough active ppl with total aps needed.


Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Encryptions]

The numbers ur using is totally wrong. Idk when u did ur math but rn u can't get on lb with 300members with 10k aps average. Stop misleading ppl. I can tell many ppl follow u and u provide wrong info on this one. Do better homework before u embarrass urself.

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

Its simple math. What is 300 times 10k? 3m, look at the chart asommers made above, top 20lb is in the 3m aps range.

[papas]

I thought u was talking abt old lb. That's why I changed my comment. If those 300 are active last 14days then ur right.
Mb @Encryptions

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[InsanitrisesAL]

I believe this new system isn't really doing any justice to the fairness of the guild lb / for years all of the top aps players have swarmed to the #1 guild for no other reason than their rank , now that aps will be the main deciding factor i feel that all guilds below that are being disadvantaged shown by cu being the only guild still in the top rankings after the new change please consider this comment

[papas]

I believe this new system isn't really doing any justice to the fairness of the guild lb / for years all of the top aps players have swarmed to the #1 guild for no other reason than their rank , now that aps will be the main deciding factor i feel that all guilds below that are being disadvantaged shown by cu being the only guild still in the top rankings after the new change please consider this comment

U misunderstand. This rank u see is just the aps factor ranks. Is desided who will be on lb. Not the final Rankin overall. CU was 5th rank on old lb in aps factor. Now getting rank1. That's because 1-4rank guilds were all full with inactive members which now don't count. So they lost their ranks.
Changes of lb are made exactly to be fair!
Pls dont mention things abt a guild u obviously don't know. Top 1guild on lb is attractive for newbies not top aps players. Cu has closed recruiting for years, with little exceptions of close friends and returning players. We became Top aps players by grinding together as a team n I can say with honesty also as a family!
No matter what changes will be done CU will be on top spots of guild lb. I'm sorry if that makes u sad. And for ur info we never tried hard for it. I never forced anyone do aps or grind pvp/pve kills. We just play a game we love.

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Nocturnus]

Just logging for a day within that 2 week frame will make me active and I don't need to do it everyday. I have like 4 accounts with 30k+ aps in each. So I contribute 120k aps. isn't that right?

Sent from my M2010J19CI using Tapatalk

You are right, I was thinking about the parameters of 1 active day, 3 days, 7 days etc of the current Lb. Perhaps those parameters should be included and give more points for being more active.

[Nocturnus]

Its simple math. What is 300 times 10k? 3m, look at the chart asommers made above, top 20lb is in the 3m aps range.

At the end of the post there is a note, maybe you should read it.

[InsanitrisesAL]

not the place to get defensive i was posting my ideas and comments as #2 lb gm ^^ to devs if you disagree thats up to you but to be fair noobs / low aps wouldn't be allowed to join so

[lethal]

I'll formulate some responses to recent comments later, but I'll ask a simple question:

If the top 500 active players in the game (by APs) all joined a single guild, wouldn't that be the top guild in the game?

If so, we've got enough data create a list of top guilds. If not, why not?

-ALS

top guild by aps: yes
top guild by best players: no

aps is only about how much people play and how much they pay

but i still like the idea of ranking just by aps

[InsanitrisesAL]

Yes i feel like just basing it on aps circulates ptw into the guild lb a little tbh i think there should be more factors that determine the lbs but certainly not as many as there are now

[Fkned]

Yes i feel like just basing it on aps circulates ptw into the guild lb a little tbh i think there should be more factors that determine the lbs but certainly not as many as there are now
Seen this a couple times about aps being ptw. Except for a few of the newer ones which can be gotten w plat, how is this so?
You can have people to hunt rares for you, but that's always been the case, and that's gold anyway.. And anything u can buy w plat you can buy w gold regarding aps, again, as it's always been. So not seeing a marked correlation here? Regardless, I would like to see guildevents available in guildevent section that counts aps, would be a nice add at some point perhaps. Also, the consensus on 30 days for lb to be counted would be nice. Updated weekly, especially if any new guild management tools coming. So you can use the tools given, and see the effects of what you do, over a month it's much more difficult to know. Thanks again for your efforts on this Asommers :)

Itsed, Master of Bellum

[InsanitrisesAL]

Hm ill clarify :) ofc you can gl farm any aps but at the cost of what pumping all your hard earned gold that you could have bought gears with into aps / and further you can basically buy crate keys and sell them to get a large portion of the aps available/ arcane / heroic pets / locations - buyable with plat / sell crate keys and buy a gl set , thats easily a large chunk of gold you wouldn't need to farm if you bought plat pets about 200-250 m or more / locations probably in the 100 m range even if you resold youd still have to first farm the gold , and a decent gl set to even get started on the 1 b aps is 350m+ but that's just for starters im sure theres more :D

[Fkned]

Hm ill clarify :) ofc you can gl farm any aps but at the cost of what pumping all your hard earned gold that you could have bought gears with into aps / and further you can basically buy crate keys and sell them to get a large portion of the aps available/ arcane / heroic pets / locations - buyable with plat / sell crate keys and buy a gl set , thats easily a large chunk of gold you wouldn't need to farm if you bought plat pets about 200-250 m or more / locations probably in the 100 m range even if you resold youd still have to first farm the gold , and a decent gl set to even get started on the 1 b aps is 350m+ but that's just for starters im sure theres more :D

You mean what seasonals are doing now anyways and could always be done? Aps always been a thing. A top five seasonal spent in the 140 range, and it moves you quick, but again, still gotta grind a huge chunk of it. And it stops em in the I think 55k range even with max resources and daily grinding in the time allowed? And most of your og players already have a good chunk over time anyways. So back to grinding 1k bosses or whatever you missed.. Money only gets you so far. If you can motivate them to spend it. And remember, with 500 players counted, the effort to have that many do it to make a major difference, and motivate a chunk of them to spend for lb would be impressive. I built Bellum under a different ruleset. I want players to do what they wish. No reqs. At all. And will continue to be. Do what you want, makes you want to do more of it :) And yet, we are doing ok on lb ranking. Currently #1 aps, and number four in new system.

[Empressfury]

Looking good 👍

[Fkned]

Hi, just looking for any info on lb changes. Thank you!

Itsed, Master of Bellum

[Monelgr]

think better to be active 7 days count the aps but lb also like if 90% of guildmates are in lb to count like in hauntlet, tombs, planar arena seasonals or honor like if someone have 60k aps and have seasonal top 10 with 40k aps amd top runner in tombs 110k pts 10k pts people will get if they are in lb if they are in 10 different categories +100k pts l think guild lb need to be with people who are in lb in aps seasonals and runners in lb planar tomb waves

[Rafaop]

Its a good idea

[asommers]

This should be out before the end of the week.

-ALS

[flashio]

This should be out before the end of the week.

-ALS

Could we have a rundown on what the team is thinking on doing with the new guild rank system?

[InsanitrisesAL]

Im not saying this because my guild went down im saying it because its true , how is bellum #2 guild when half of it is dead :) my guild score top activity, aps Should not be the only factor

[asommers]

These changes are now live since we've started a new year and new season. Settled internally on 7d (updated weekly). Changes should be visible in the game and the forums (link (https://www.spacetimestudios.com/showthread.php?671180-Arcane-Legends-Top-50-Guilds-2023-01-05)).

-ALS

[Zestee]

Hi. When a guild has less than 500 members, is their score weighted to reflect that?

[asommers]

Hi. When a guild has less than 500 members, is their score weighted to reflect that?

No, it's simply the sum of the achievement points of the top 500 members active within the previous week.

-ALS

[Zestee]

Thank you.

Can it be considered to divide the total points by the number of members counted, and rank by that number instead? Seems fairer.

Or some other way of averaging/weighting, as this way favours large guilds.

251939

[Ploid]

No, it's simply the sum of the achievement points of the top 500 members active within the previous week.

-ALSI think top 500 is a bit too much. Some guilds prefer quality over quantity. Maybe decrease to 300?

Sent from my GM1913 using Tapatalk

[Rangersss]

happy for being top 3 guild Latino Community

Enviado desde mi Redmi Note 8 mediante Tapatalk

[InsanitrisesAL]

Believe me remi im all for a change but bellum as being #2 guild scored 50 percent active after 7 days and only 70 after 30 days , imagine what this looks like in a guild with lets say 2-3 k members , is there any way we can implement activity into the algorithm?

[Zestee]

No, it's simply the sum of the achievement points of the top 500 members active within the previous week.

-ALS

Another idea. What about taking the top 80%(?) of chars APS, rather than the top 500 chars? Then dividing by the number surveyed, as per my previous example.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ploid]

Quality should be more important than quantity imo.

Sent from my GM1913 using Tapatalk

[Oawaoebi]

I like the change I can create a guild just with my Alts and bring it to lb. But I’m sure it would be more fair to make average aps per member.


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

[papas]

This change on guild lb was suggested by devs months ago. You should have made suggestions sinse then. This is final and can be considered as a new thing. New lb in al. Guilds that interested in this lb can work on it np.


Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[papas]

Believe me remi im all for a change but bellum as being #2 guild scored 50 percent active after 7 days and only 70 after 30 days , imagine what this looks like in a guild with lets say 2-3 k members , is there any way we can implement activity into the algorithm?U get a high rank on this lb cause activity. How u can not see this and asking for activity to count more......


Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Fkned]

Believe me remi im all for a change but bellum as being #2 guild scored 50 percent active after 7 days and only 70 after 30 days , imagine what this looks like in a guild with lets say 2-3 k members , is there any way we can implement activity into the algorithm?

Yep. And my guild has 700+ chars logging in every week (your activity is now implemented), and 75% activity, over a thousand, on a monthly basis. Seems to work as intended. I could have 3000 people and it wouldn't matter, as like everyone else, only the top 500 are counted. And imagine what exactly here? What does it look like? I see no issue with people who take time off knowing they can come back to the place their friends were when they left. As a matter of fact, I think that would encourage them to do so. Good luck to all on future lb rankings, we will be working hard on ours, with no requirements to do so, in the pure pursuit of #1

Itsed, Master of Bellum

[scoburus]

Quality > quantity

That s all I gotta say, lame

[Raziast]

I like the new ranking system because of the following reasons:

1: New players will have the opportunity to be with top players and progress with their help. I've always been bored with the environment of top guilds before with all members already maxed out on everything.

2: New players were always stuck with lower rank guilds with slow progress, now every guild is bound to get people to have 500 members for more achievement points at least, without worrying about low pve, bad pvp kdr etc

3: This is completely fair for everyone. Even the previous top guilds can regain their spots in lb, fairly easily with combination of best players they already have and just by getting the required number of people in the guild. I am not sure where the problem is.

4: Even a bit laid back guild on activity is losing their spot now. This is completely perfect and how it's supposed to be.

I am not saying all that because my guild is at the top with new system. It'll be well deserving and easily understood if i lose my top place now.

These are legit reasons why the new lb system should be appreciated.

Sent from my POCO F3 using Tapatalk

[Neutrone]

I actually like this system because in a way it promotes activity in guilds.

A lot of the top 10 guilds (in previous ranking) while having very great players (both skill and personality), they were generally inactive. Going online and finding less than 10 people online? Thats not what a guild should feel like.

Furthermore this is not just 500 active players, its the BEST 500 active players in that week. Thats still quality imo. Get more quality players to join your guilds, by helping newbies with APs, by actually having guild activities, and recruiting high quality players. One thing I do agree with in another thread is having a cap on number of members.

[|Ares|]

So much effort in form of pointless suggestions into the feature that has completely no impact on the game for a good decade now. Worry about the rankings, activity and members achievements when developers will actually introduce a feature that will make a guild rank having any meaning. As of now anything achievable is based in your own solo game experience and your decisions, not the "guild" as whole.

[nathan2693]

I'm not on a top 50 guild and I'm not planning to join any but i find this new guild ranking system bs. Its easy to gain achievement points if you have a lot of gold.

I'd say add a new feature like guild missions where the guild will earn points after finishing a certain task. Also, once a guild cleared all of the missions, the guild will earn bonus points. Guild missions must reset weekly. This might take time for the devs to implement this in game but it'll be worth it imo since it will make the other players to become active again.

Also, maybe add a feature where the first 10 guilds who finished the missions quickly will be receiving a reward by spinning a roulette. (can be gold, jewels etc)

[asommers]

A few of changes in development (coming soon):
1. Players need to be in the guild for the entire week in order to be counted as active. This is to discourage guild hopping.
2. Guilds larger than the maximum guild size will not be eligible for the top guild leaderboard when maximum guild size is implemented (link (https://www.spacetimestudios.com/showthread.php?671205-Feedback-Guild-Size)). We will show you a warning indicator on your guild page if your guild will not qualify.
3. We plan on introducing a border around the guild name for the top guild. This will be displayed automatically if you choose to show your guild name as your title. Only players that are counted as active for that week will receive the ability to display the top guild border.

-ALS

[Fkned]

Top 1 guild badge will automatically entrench them as top guild, it's where everyone will want to be for those who care, for the badge. Maybe top 5 or top ten guild badge? You could even have that badge for only those up to 500 that counted in that weeks ranking. Now THAT would be neat :)

[nathan2693]

yeah i agree, top 10 guilds must be given a badge. but it must meet a lot of requirements to get it. take my guild missions as an example. if you added some guild missions guild ranking will have a spice of competitiveness in it. Also, i suggest to add a new Pvp arena where we can also get points for the guild.

Also, you guys should update Sirspendsalot's shop asap if you wanna drain the players' gold. I can see that you guys are trying to drain the players' gold by basing the tallying of guild ranking via achievement points of a certain guild members. it won't work that much. Just put some vanities or an aura with a ridiculous amount to drain their gold. It might work on other players since some of them just wanna flex. Add a new non tradable aura or vanity on Sirspendsalot's shop that cost 500m+ or maybe make it 999m. lol

[Enetry]

Top 1 guild badge will automatically entrench them as top guild, it's where everyone will want to be for those who care, for the badge. Maybe top 5 or top ten guild badge? You could even have that badge for only those up to 500 that counted in that weeks ranking. Now THAT would be neat :)

Yeah there should be top 10 guild badge and the 500 ppl counted in ranking should get the badge till next reset [emoji18]

[BaronB]

Well better late than never, but seeing as the weekly rankings seem to have a link to the thread it's fair to assume the topic isn't a dead one just yet and after reading through the posts so far... understandable.


Firstly ill be paraphrasing at times what some have already been saying and because its going to be quite a few times and different people you'll all have to excuse me for individually quoting.

So this week currently using top 500 of the last 7 days active to determine the rankings, ok.

Well lets go back to the basics and ask what is the purpose of the guild leaderboard/ranking in the first place.

The simplest answer would be, to show a, as fair as a possible representation of which are the top guilds in the game.

We can then ask, why bother even showing it then?

Well the top guilds will usually consist of the more experienced/top players.

Why is that useful?

Well as a new or inexperienced player knowing where you are more likely to find knowledge or help is essential towards getting better at this game. Even if you're just going to throw money at the game to get to the top... rather pointless if you don't even know where to actually know the best places to throw that money and get there.

It can also serve as a goal for new players along with different communities within the game for players to find themselves in, chill with one they enjoy also provides longevity for a player as they end up coming online for not just the game itself but the community they've grown attached/created bonds with.

Now, are the guild leaderboards a "fair" representation of the top guilds in the game?

Well, let's look at the old system that's been in place for a decade. Seems only a small amount of people actually understood how it worked so I will try to explain it to make it easier to understand.

To get into the Top 50 guild rankings a guild needed to achieve a total number of APs overall with all its members.

There are 2 ways to really do that,
1 - gather lots of people with lower APs individually
2 - have fewer people but higher APs individually

After that, what number a guild was in the top 50 was broken into 16 different factors.

6 for PvP (CTF&TDM)
5 for Activity(1,3,7,15,30)
2 for PvE (KvD&KpM)
2 for Age (Player+Guild)
1 for APs (Just because guild got enough APs to be in LB still might have a low amount compared to others)

After that the numbers of players in each guild is counted and an average number is found. Based on that average number is a guilds overall number for each factor.

Then to get the Overal score (the bit we see on the LB in game) is worked out by removing a guilds... Ill use my own guild as an example
252304
So the guilds Overall Aps was ranked 48th out of the top 50 however because the majority of the players in HS have high PvE kills it is ranked 1st in the top 50.
That 1st ranking is removed by the 48th ranking, and this carrys on until the guilds Overall Ranking is found.

16 factors to count is quite a few... tho having so few factors deciding a guilds rank based on APs/PvE is what's really out of line with the game being more geared towards those aspects of the game instead of PvP which has the highest amount of deciding factors.

Just looking at the numbers the old way, you can usually work out which guilds most likely have the more experienced players that are also active and with lower numbers, the guilds that have large numbers but less experienced, the guilds with players who aren't as active, etc.

Taking into count a guild and player account age is also something important however, as can be seen, it actually counts for a small fraction towards the overall rankings as mentioned in a previous post.

Also, the activity factors account for having people being offline at different intervals which worked nicely in being able to determine how active guilds are looking at the rankings which can be a deciding factor when choosing a guild to venture into.

So based on all those factors id say with confidence the "old" ranking system was a pretty fair representation of the top guilds in the game. Tho this is also assuming everybody understands how to read and truly understand the old rankings which is why if you really did then not only would know what to do to make your guilds climb the ranks also realise it isn't actually that easy and just having gathered every new player in game wont amount to jumping right into being a high ranking guild because of all the different factors also involved.

Imagine being a new player, looking at the leaderboard rankings seeing the top guild and finding after joining its mostly filled with players who are also in the same boat of being new players to the game.

Its the "blind" leading the "blind".

Which is why knowing where your more likely to find people that are not "blind" helps navigate better when you cant "see" yet yourself.

Now lets go with what we have today.

To become a #1 guild is rather simple. Just loads of APs/People who have recently enough been online.

Total number = 12,000,000 APs

Lets do some quick math...
252305

If we have a guild 1 with 500 players all with at least 24,000 APs each... well 500 x 24,000 = 12,000,000 APs...

But wait...

We can also have a guild 2 with 250 players all with 48,000 APs each... well 250 x 48,000 = 12,000,000 APs...

Now both guilds have 12m APs so with today's current way of doing it both represent being #1...

Now we have to ask ourselves out of the 2 guilds which one is more likely to have players that will be helpful towards getting better at the game...

The guild where most of the members have low APs or the guild with the members with high APs?

Rather an obvious choice would be guild 2...

That's not to ever say you wouldn't find someone helpful in guild 1 and find someone useless in guild 2... there will always be exceptions...

Exceptions don't make the rule.

The general consensus would be those with higher APs are more likely to be able to more helpful in helping you get more

Also, the players from guild 2 tho less of them, worked to gain x2 the amount of APs guild 1 members have gotten... so would the current system in place which would put guild 1 and guild 2 at #1 spot be truly a as fair as possible representation of a #1 guild and its players...

In my opinion, I would strongly say No.

By no means was the previous way of guild rankings flawless. It could do with some adjustments to be more in line with current times or the direction of which the game is trying to go (which can say at least is away from PvP)

So introducing more AP/PvE factors instead to the previous system such as quests completed, badges/titles earnt, and level capped, are just a handful off the top of my head whilst writing this but hopefully, that's enough to get the idea across.


IN regards to making guilds more relevant of course more management tools would always be great! People asking for badges when yeah would be cool tho be I have been suggesting guild Banners concepts multiple times in the past even custom coloured titles!

But to really make guilds more useful to players besides the cheaper pot and place for members to have a private space to gather...

Why not introduce locations guild master can apply to a guild hall where the effects are given to all its members similar to how a player can buy a house and get locations for the buffs (and APs)... could even just be different buffs guilds can choose out of like 10 but can only pick 3 even if its the same so different guilds might have different buff benefits of being a member...

Say a guild picked 25% MS buff 3 times so all members got additional 75%ms just for being part of the guild

Same with gold loot or damage mana reduction for smaller pvp guilds...


But that's all another topic just thought it would be rude not to put my take on the rankings whilst the topic is still open at least



1 <3

[Angelaxd]

Well better late than never, but seeing as the weekly rankings seem to have a link to the thread it's fair to assume the topic isn't a dead one just yet and after reading through the posts so far... understandable.


Firstly ill be paraphrasing at times what some have already been saying and because its going to be quite a few times and different people you'll all have to excuse me for individually quoting.

So this week currently using top 500 of the last 7 days active to determine the rankings, ok.

Well lets go back to the basics and ask what is the purpose of the guild leaderboard/ranking in the first place.

The simplest answer would be, to show a, as fair as a possible representation of which are the top guilds in the game.

We can then ask, why bother even showing it then?

Well the top guilds will usually consist of the more experienced/top players.

Why is that useful?

Well as a new or inexperienced player knowing where you are more likely to find knowledge or help is essential towards getting better at this game. Even if you're just going to throw money at the game to get to the top... rather pointless if you don't even know where to actually know the best places to throw that money and get there.

It can also serve as a goal for new players along with different communities within the game for players to find themselves in, chill with one they enjoy also provides longevity for a player as they end up coming online for not just the game itself but the community they've grown attached/created bonds with.

Now, are the guild leaderboards a "fair" representation of the top guilds in the game?

Well, let's look at the old system that's been in place for a decade. Seems only a small amount of people actually understood how it worked so I will try to explain it to make it easier to understand.

To get into the Top 50 guild rankings a guild needed to achieve a total number of APs overall with all its members.

There are 2 ways to really do that,
1 - gather lots of people with lower APs individually
2 - have fewer people but higher APs individually

After that, what number a guild was in the top 50 was broken into 16 different factors.

6 for PvP (CTF&TDM)
5 for Activity(1,3,7,15,30)
2 for PvE (KvD&KpM)
2 for Age (Player+Guild)
1 for APs (Just because guild got enough APs to be in LB still might have a low amount compared to others)

After that the numbers of players in each guild is counted and an average number is found. Based on that average number is a guilds overall number for each factor.

Then to get the Overal score (the bit we see on the LB in game) is worked out by removing a guilds... Ill use my own guild as an example
252304
So the guilds Overall Aps was ranked 48th out of the top 50 however because the majority of the players in HS have high PvE kills it is ranked 1st in the top 50.
That 1st ranking is removed by the 48th ranking, and this carrys on until the guilds Overall Ranking is found.

16 factors to count is quite a few... tho having so few factors deciding a guilds rank based on APs/PvE is what's really out of line with the game being more geared towards those aspects of the game instead of PvP which has the highest amount of deciding factors.

Just looking at the numbers the old way, you can usually work out which guilds most likely have the more experienced players that are also active and with lower numbers, the guilds that have large numbers but less experienced, the guilds with players who aren't as active, etc.

Taking into count a guild and player account age is also something important however, as can be seen, it actually counts for a small fraction towards the overall rankings as mentioned in a previous post.

Also, the activity factors account for having people being offline at different intervals which worked nicely in being able to determine how active guilds are looking at the rankings which can be a deciding factor when choosing a guild to venture into.

So based on all those factors id say with confidence the "old" ranking system was a pretty fair representation of the top guilds in the game. Tho this is also assuming everybody understands how to read and truly understand the old rankings which is why if you really did then not only would know what to do to make your guilds climb the ranks also realise it isn't actually that easy and just having gathered every new player in game wont amount to jumping right into being a high ranking guild because of all the different factors also involved.

Imagine being a new player, looking at the leaderboard rankings seeing the top guild and finding after joining its mostly filled with players who are also in the same boat of being new players to the game.

Its the "blind" leading the "blind".

Which is why knowing where your more likely to find people that are not "blind" helps navigate better when you cant "see" yet yourself.

Now lets go with what we have today.

To become a #1 guild is rather simple. Just loads of APs/People who have recently enough been online.

Total number = 12,000,000 APs

Lets do some quick math...
252305

If we have a guild 1 with 500 players all with at least 24,000 APs each... well 500 x 24,000 = 12,000,000 APs...

But wait...

We can also have a guild 2 with 250 players all with 48,000 APs each... well 250 x 48,000 = 12,000,000 APs...

Now both guilds have 12m APs so with today's current way of doing it both represent being #1...

Now we have to ask ourselves out of the 2 guilds which one is more likely to have players that will be helpful towards getting better at the game...

The guild where most of the members have low APs or the guild with the members with high APs?

Rather an obvious choice would be guild 2...

That's not to ever say you wouldn't find someone helpful in guild 1 and find someone useless in guild 2... there will always be exceptions...

Exceptions don't make the rule.

The general consensus would be those with higher APs are more likely to be able to more helpful in helping you get more

Also, the players from guild 2 tho less of them, worked to gain x2 the amount of APs guild 1 members have gotten... so would the current system in place which would put guild 1 and guild 2 at #1 spot be truly a as fair as possible representation of a #1 guild and its players...

In my opinion, I would strongly say No.

By no means was the previous way of guild rankings flawless. It could do with some adjustments to be more in line with current times or the direction of which the game is trying to go (which can say at least is away from PvP)

So introducing more AP/PvE factors instead to the previous system such as quests completed, badges/titles earnt, and level capped, are just a handful off the top of my head whilst writing this but hopefully, that's enough to get the idea across.


IN regards to making guilds more relevant of course more management tools would always be great! People asking for badges when yeah would be cool tho be I have been suggesting guild Banners concepts multiple times in the past even custom coloured titles!

But to really make guilds more useful to players besides the cheaper pot and place for members to have a private space to gather...

Why not introduce locations guild master can apply to a guild hall where the effects are given to all its members similar to how a player can buy a house and get locations for the buffs (and APs)... could even just be different buffs guilds can choose out of like 10 but can only pick 3 even if its the same so different guilds might have different buff benefits of being a member...

Say a guild picked 25% MS buff 3 times so all members got additional 75%ms just for being part of the guild

Same with gold loot or damage mana reduction for smaller pvp guilds...


But that's all another topic just thought it would be rude not to put my take on the rankings whilst the topic is still open at least



1 <3

Looking for a way to get back to the top 5 because you didn't like falling so much, you're standing in the city all day, start recruiting people and that's it

[wowdah]

Feel like the top 500 should be reduced to top 100 or 50 or some lower number, since right now this system basically says if you have less than 500 active people in the guild then it's not optimal for guild ranking - most guilds want to be like a family and this typically means less active players.

[Nocturnus]

Well better late than never, but seeing as the weekly rankings seem to have a link to the thread it's fair to assume the topic isn't a dead one just yet and after reading through the posts so far... understandable.


Firstly ill be paraphrasing at times what some have already been saying and because its going to be quite a few times and different people you'll all have to excuse me for individually quoting.

So this week currently using top 500 of the last 7 days active to determine the rankings, ok.

Well lets go back to the basics and ask what is the purpose of the guild leaderboard/ranking in the first place.

The simplest answer would be, to show a, as fair as a possible representation of which are the top guilds in the game.

We can then ask, why bother even showing it then?

Well the top guilds will usually consist of the more experienced/top players.

Why is that useful?

Well as a new or inexperienced player knowing where you are more likely to find knowledge or help is essential towards getting better at this game. Even if you're just going to throw money at the game to get to the top... rather pointless if you don't even know where to actually know the best places to throw that money and get there.

It can also serve as a goal for new players along with different communities within the game for players to find themselves in, chill with one they enjoy also provides longevity for a player as they end up coming online for not just the game itself but the community they've grown attached/created bonds with.

Now, are the guild leaderboards a "fair" representation of the top guilds in the game?

Well, let's look at the old system that's been in place for a decade. Seems only a small amount of people actually understood how it worked so I will try to explain it to make it easier to understand.

To get into the Top 50 guild rankings a guild needed to achieve a total number of APs overall with all its members.

There are 2 ways to really do that,
1 - gather lots of people with lower APs individually
2 - have fewer people but higher APs individually

After that, what number a guild was in the top 50 was broken into 16 different factors.

6 for PvP (CTF&TDM)
5 for Activity(1,3,7,15,30)
2 for PvE (KvD&KpM)
2 for Age (Player+Guild)
1 for APs (Just because guild got enough APs to be in LB still might have a low amount compared to others)

After that the numbers of players in each guild is counted and an average number is found. Based on that average number is a guilds overall number for each factor.

Then to get the Overal score (the bit we see on the LB in game) is worked out by removing a guilds... Ill use my own guild as an example
252304
So the guilds Overall Aps was ranked 48th out of the top 50 however because the majority of the players in HS have high PvE kills it is ranked 1st in the top 50.
That 1st ranking is removed by the 48th ranking, and this carrys on until the guilds Overall Ranking is found.

16 factors to count is quite a few... tho having so few factors deciding a guilds rank based on APs/PvE is what's really out of line with the game being more geared towards those aspects of the game instead of PvP which has the highest amount of deciding factors.

Just looking at the numbers the old way, you can usually work out which guilds most likely have the more experienced players that are also active and with lower numbers, the guilds that have large numbers but less experienced, the guilds with players who aren't as active, etc.

Taking into count a guild and player account age is also something important however, as can be seen, it actually counts for a small fraction towards the overall rankings as mentioned in a previous post.

Also, the activity factors account for having people being offline at different intervals which worked nicely in being able to determine how active guilds are looking at the rankings which can be a deciding factor when choosing a guild to venture into.

So based on all those factors id say with confidence the "old" ranking system was a pretty fair representation of the top guilds in the game. Tho this is also assuming everybody understands how to read and truly understand the old rankings which is why if you really did then not only would know what to do to make your guilds climb the ranks also realise it isn't actually that easy and just having gathered every new player in game wont amount to jumping right into being a high ranking guild because of all the different factors also involved.

Imagine being a new player, looking at the leaderboard rankings seeing the top guild and finding after joining its mostly filled with players who are also in the same boat of being new players to the game.

Its the "blind" leading the "blind".

Which is why knowing where your more likely to find people that are not "blind" helps navigate better when you cant "see" yet yourself.

Now lets go with what we have today.

To become a #1 guild is rather simple. Just loads of APs/People who have recently enough been online.

Total number = 12,000,000 APs

Lets do some quick math...
252305

If we have a guild 1 with 500 players all with at least 24,000 APs each... well 500 x 24,000 = 12,000,000 APs...

But wait...

We can also have a guild 2 with 250 players all with 48,000 APs each... well 250 x 48,000 = 12,000,000 APs...

Now both guilds have 12m APs so with today's current way of doing it both represent being #1...

Now we have to ask ourselves out of the 2 guilds which one is more likely to have players that will be helpful towards getting better at the game...

The guild where most of the members have low APs or the guild with the members with high APs?

Rather an obvious choice would be guild 2...

That's not to ever say you wouldn't find someone helpful in guild 1 and find someone useless in guild 2... there will always be exceptions...

Exceptions don't make the rule.

The general consensus would be those with higher APs are more likely to be able to more helpful in helping you get more

Also, the players from guild 2 tho less of them, worked to gain x2 the amount of APs guild 1 members have gotten... so would the current system in place which would put guild 1 and guild 2 at #1 spot be truly a as fair as possible representation of a #1 guild and its players...

In my opinion, I would strongly say No.

By no means was the previous way of guild rankings flawless. It could do with some adjustments to be more in line with current times or the direction of which the game is trying to go (which can say at least is away from PvP)

So introducing more AP/PvE factors instead to the previous system such as quests completed, badges/titles earnt, and level capped, are just a handful off the top of my head whilst writing this but hopefully, that's enough to get the idea across.


IN regards to making guilds more relevant of course more management tools would always be great! People asking for badges when yeah would be cool tho be I have been suggesting guild Banners concepts multiple times in the past even custom coloured titles!

But to really make guilds more useful to players besides the cheaper pot and place for members to have a private space to gather...

Why not introduce locations guild master can apply to a guild hall where the effects are given to all its members similar to how a player can buy a house and get locations for the buffs (and APs)... could even just be different buffs guilds can choose out of like 10 but can only pick 3 even if its the same so different guilds might have different buff benefits of being a member...

Say a guild picked 25% MS buff 3 times so all members got additional 75%ms just for being part of the guild

Same with gold loot or damage mana reduction for smaller pvp guilds...


But that's all another topic just thought it would be rude not to put my take on the rankings whilst the topic is still open at least



1 <3

You say "The blind leading the blind"
Now imagine a guild with many "old" or "good" players completely idle or afk in Expedition all day.
It would be "The blind man led by a dead companion dog"

Adjustments are probably needed, but it's a step in the right direction.
On the other hand, it is the Lb of the "best guild of the week" which is why it is updated weekly.

[papas]

Well better late than never, but seeing as the weekly rankings seem to have a link to the thread it's fair to assume the topic isn't a dead one just yet and after reading through the posts so far... understandable.


Firstly ill be paraphrasing at times what some have already been saying and because its going to be quite a few times and different people you'll all have to excuse me for individually quoting.

So this week currently using top 500 of the last 7 days active to determine the rankings, ok.

Well lets go back to the basics and ask what is the purpose of the guild leaderboard/ranking in the first place.

The simplest answer would be, to show a, as fair as a possible representation of which are the top guilds in the game.

We can then ask, why bother even showing it then?

Well the top guilds will usually consist of the more experienced/top players.

Why is that useful?

Well as a new or inexperienced player knowing where you are more likely to find knowledge or help is essential towards getting better at this game. Even if you're just going to throw money at the game to get to the top... rather pointless if you don't even know where to actually know the best places to throw that money and get there.

It can also serve as a goal for new players along with different communities within the game for players to find themselves in, chill with one they enjoy also provides longevity for a player as they end up coming online for not just the game itself but the community they've grown attached/created bonds with.

Now, are the guild leaderboards a "fair" representation of the top guilds in the game?

Well, let's look at the old system that's been in place for a decade. Seems only a small amount of people actually understood how it worked so I will try to explain it to make it easier to understand.

To get into the Top 50 guild rankings a guild needed to achieve a total number of APs overall with all its members.

There are 2 ways to really do that,
1 - gather lots of people with lower APs individually
2 - have fewer people but higher APs individually

After that, what number a guild was in the top 50 was broken into 16 different factors.

6 for PvP (CTF&TDM)
5 for Activity(1,3,7,15,30)
2 for PvE (KvD&KpM)
2 for Age (Player+Guild)
1 for APs (Just because guild got enough APs to be in LB still might have a low amount compared to others)

After that the numbers of players in each guild is counted and an average number is found. Based on that average number is a guilds overall number for each factor.

Then to get the Overal score (the bit we see on the LB in game) is worked out by removing a guilds... Ill use my own guild as an example
252304
So the guilds Overall Aps was ranked 48th out of the top 50 however because the majority of the players in HS have high PvE kills it is ranked 1st in the top 50.
That 1st ranking is removed by the 48th ranking, and this carrys on until the guilds Overall Ranking is found.

16 factors to count is quite a few... tho having so few factors deciding a guilds rank based on APs/PvE is what's really out of line with the game being more geared towards those aspects of the game instead of PvP which has the highest amount of deciding factors.

Just looking at the numbers the old way, you can usually work out which guilds most likely have the more experienced players that are also active and with lower numbers, the guilds that have large numbers but less experienced, the guilds with players who aren't as active, etc.

Taking into count a guild and player account age is also something important however, as can be seen, it actually counts for a small fraction towards the overall rankings as mentioned in a previous post.

Also, the activity factors account for having people being offline at different intervals which worked nicely in being able to determine how active guilds are looking at the rankings which can be a deciding factor when choosing a guild to venture into.

So based on all those factors id say with confidence the "old" ranking system was a pretty fair representation of the top guilds in the game. Tho this is also assuming everybody understands how to read and truly understand the old rankings which is why if you really did then not only would know what to do to make your guilds climb the ranks also realise it isn't actually that easy and just having gathered every new player in game wont amount to jumping right into being a high ranking guild because of all the different factors also involved.

Imagine being a new player, looking at the leaderboard rankings seeing the top guild and finding after joining its mostly filled with players who are also in the same boat of being new players to the game.

Its the "blind" leading the "blind".

Which is why knowing where your more likely to find people that are not "blind" helps navigate better when you cant "see" yet yourself.

Now lets go with what we have today.

To become a #1 guild is rather simple. Just loads of APs/People who have recently enough been online.

Total number = 12,000,000 APs

Lets do some quick math...
252305

If we have a guild 1 with 500 players all with at least 24,000 APs each... well 500 x 24,000 = 12,000,000 APs...

But wait...

We can also have a guild 2 with 250 players all with 48,000 APs each... well 250 x 48,000 = 12,000,000 APs...

Now both guilds have 12m APs so with today's current way of doing it both represent being #1...

Now we have to ask ourselves out of the 2 guilds which one is more likely to have players that will be helpful towards getting better at the game...

The guild where most of the members have low APs or the guild with the members with high APs?

Rather an obvious choice would be guild 2...

That's not to ever say you wouldn't find someone helpful in guild 1 and find someone useless in guild 2... there will always be exceptions...

Exceptions don't make the rule.

The general consensus would be those with higher APs are more likely to be able to more helpful in helping you get more

Also, the players from guild 2 tho less of them, worked to gain x2 the amount of APs guild 1 members have gotten... so would the current system in place which would put guild 1 and guild 2 at #1 spot be truly a as fair as possible representation of a #1 guild and its players...

In my opinion, I would strongly say No.

By no means was the previous way of guild rankings flawless. It could do with some adjustments to be more in line with current times or the direction of which the game is trying to go (which can say at least is away from PvP)

So introducing more AP/PvE factors instead to the previous system such as quests completed, badges/titles earnt, and level capped, are just a handful off the top of my head whilst writing this but hopefully, that's enough to get the idea across.


IN regards to making guilds more relevant of course more management tools would always be great! People asking for badges when yeah would be cool tho be I have been suggesting guild Banners concepts multiple times in the past even custom coloured titles!

But to really make guilds more useful to players besides the cheaper pot and place for members to have a private space to gather...

Why not introduce locations guild master can apply to a guild hall where the effects are given to all its members similar to how a player can buy a house and get locations for the buffs (and APs)... could even just be different buffs guilds can choose out of like 10 but can only pick 3 even if its the same so different guilds might have different buff benefits of being a member...

Say a guild picked 25% MS buff 3 times so all members got additional 75%ms just for being part of the guild

Same with gold loot or damage mana reduction for smaller pvp guilds...


But that's all another topic just thought it would be rude not to put my take on the rankings whilst the topic is still open at least



1 <3We alrd explained many times how old lb was working. I'm sad see u keep miss informing in forum, when some friends told me u changed now after u got dumped by time record team. Several ppl with high pve kills u mentioned is just few botters farmed millions of pve in gauntlet, also u got op kdr in ctf cause with same way u got hundreds of thousands ctf kills. Many got banned for that reason so its a fact!
CU was mostly harmed from change old lb algorythm sinse all scores was legit. Ofc most in guild used dummies just to get 10k kills in pvp won't deny that. We have tho many who actually achieved those aps and a good kdr plus 10k flags legit.
Tho sinse it was a lb which could easily cheated by anyone. I m good with sts removing it. That's how I see this. Old lb was removed like in the past the pvp and pve kills were.
And I accept a "New lb", which yes some guilds have an advantage alrd cause of 2k members but it is what it is.
Those who interested in rank1 and new rewards coming will have somethin to work for.
Cheers

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Kelyx]

https://giphy.com/gifs/ztXnhkdvprlIfq1xEU

[emoji851][emoji851]

Enviado desde mi SM-G781B mediante Tapatalk

[BaronB]

Admittedly, my presence hasn't been around for a "minute" as I have been busy on life's journey.
My lack of presence is also only temporary until my work dies down.

First, in keeping with the topic itself at hand and why the leaderboards shouldn't be ranked as simply as they currently are.

The leaderboards are supposed to represent The Best (scores, kills, times, etc)...
Most of the leaderboards represent individual players, we then have a few parties of 4 and then a single guilds leaderboard which represents larger parties/groups (small social communities).

If we are going to use APs alone as the main deciding factor for The Best guilds ranked in the game then that would mean of course the more APs the better...

There surely can't be disagreements that a player with a higher amount of APs is going to be more helpful to someone new to the game learning to gain more APs...

If a guild is supposed to represent that, rather than looking at just the total overall amount of APs a guild has in total... why not look at the average APs a guilds players has instead as the guild with players with an average of higher APs would obviously be the environment most beneficial for someone new to the game...

Already mentioned a player with higher APs would be more helpful to someone then someone with a lower amount.


To work out the average amount of APs a guilds members has all we have to do is take the total number of APs and divide it by the number of members that are counted towards that total number of APs.

So based on the most recent figures just looking at The Best guilds in the game, starting with the current Top 3 to find the average APs each guild has per member...

1st - 25k APs average per member
2nd - 20k APs average per member
3rd - 27k APs average per member.

To keep it easy here's a handy spreadsheet of the top 20 guilds with all the math done already...

Source. (https://www.spacetimestudios.com/showthread.php?672763-Arcane-Legends-Top-50-Guilds-2023-01-11)
252602
252605

And now if we were to actually rank the guilds based just on the average APs a guild's members have, because remember more APs alone means more of a help to new players...

252603
252606

Feel free to go verify it all for yourselves.
(edit* the above is a example using the top 20, not sure what the top 50 results would be but if done let please share)

Uncomfortable truths.

A guild that's top of the leaderboards is supposed to be representing the group of best players that would potentially be the most helpful to new players (even if it helps by becoming a goal for that new player to aspire towards) and the best players has also been determined mostly by how many APs a player has (can go look at the player LBs).

Sure lets look at the total number of APs as a collective a guild has to judge if its The Best guild in the game...

A ton of Lead and a Ton of Gold weigh the same ... however the value each has greatly differs.

So we can't just look at the total APs a guild has and we know of course some players in a guild have more APs than others do as well so the fairest way, in reality, is by looking at the average APs amongst all the members of each guild.

Now we know there is more to the game now than just APs and what good is all that if members aren't even online?
so then factoring in not only the APs but also how often a guild members are even online is another good measure to help best represent what is Lead or Gold when looking at the leaderboards.

Oh look we've come back to pretty much what we had before.

The old leaderboards could definitely do with with a bit of tuning in to be a better representative of top guilds otherwise were just pretty much just happy to go along with delusional perspectives and ideas.

Quality > Quantity

Now some of the responses... lol


you're standing in the city all day, start recruiting people and that's it

Most think its a miracle if i even reply let alone sit there recruiting all day/night...
I can leave my mage online as my laptop is on and running 24/7 even whilst I'm at work or asleep which is why I'm always Online but not actually there.

Now imagine a guild with many "old" or "good" players completely idle or afk in Expedition all day
Not sure why your even triggered, the guild mostly as adults who get on their own business and time to time have a cheeky chat...
We all use the game for different things... I'm sure you can even comprehend that much?


I'm sad see u keep miss informing in forum, when some friends told me u changed now after u got dumped by time record team
Its amazing how you can literally contradict yourself in a single sentence... wow.
What exactly is the "misinformation" your causing me of? You seem be talking as if you know facts yet your source is "when some friends"...

You could always come and talk to me directly tho last time it was even me who reached out to you to try make some peace tho you have no interest... still hurting after I called out for trying to poach my officers in the past perhaps?


Ofc most in guild used dummies just to get 10k kills in pvp won't deny that.
We are actually in agreement ironically enough which again I mentioned about removing or at least adding more to balance it out better.


So by all means adjust Leaderboards, however, I'm sorry but what's currently in play is not a true representation of The Best guilds in the game.


If people really don't care about quality in this game anymore then by all means lets see what the future holds.

[Raziast]

I really don't get the point here. Obviously the guild with higher average aps will still get the top spot "eventually".
What differs from before is that you can't have 100 members only and still be at the top without working on recruitment, which leads to helping new people.

As i said before the guilds at top before will have the easiest time to get their positions back, obviously because of their average aps. The only thing that's hurting right now is to get the required amount of members and not getting off easy with countable people having high aps already.

If you need a practical example of previous top guilds still at advantage, look at CU. Their avg aps were always higher. And as expected, with more recruitments they're getting their way back up steadily, you can see the difference in their score of first and 2nd week.

If anyone will in case argue that the old ranking system was better, then no it wasn't. That system relied vastly on pvp scores or kdr. Which is impossible to achieve now because of completely inactive PvP, unless you go on to farm dummies to get huge +ive kdr. Which'll lose the point of being experienced anyway.

Let's compare my guild @ 25k avg with 500 members and another having @ 30k avg with 100 members. I don't get the point why 100 members guild is better.

If i start trimming down my members right now back to 100 and keep the highest aps people, my average will go way above 30k. And I'll still come out at the top. lol Beated you at your own ground of
Quality > Quantity

Basically what you're saying is that we need to be punished for recruiting more members? xD

It's something so simple that I don't need to post reference rank lists to explain.

Sent from my POCO F3 using Tapatalk

[papas]

I really don't get the point here. Obviously the guild with higher average aps will still get the top spot "eventually".
What differs from before is that you can't have 100 members only and still be at the top without working on recruitment, which leads to helping new people.

As i said before the guilds at top before will have the easiest time to get their positions back, obviously because of their average aps. The only thing that's hurting right now is to get the required amount of members and not getting off easy with countable people having high aps already.

If you need a practical example of previous top guilds still at advantage, look at CU. Their avg aps were always higher. And as expected, with more recruitments they're getting their way back up steadily, you can see the difference in their score of first and 2nd week.

If anyone will in case argue that the old ranking system was better, then no it wasn't. That system relied vastly on pvp scores or kdr. Which is impossible to achieve now because of completely inactive PvP, unless you go on to farm dummies to get huge +ive kdr. Which'll lose the point of being experienced anyway.

Let's compare my guild @ 25k avg with 500 members and another having @ 30k avg with 100 members. I don't get the point why 100 members guild is better.

If i start trimming down my members right now back to 100 and keep the highest aps people, my average will go way above 30k. And I'll still come out at the top. lol

Basically what you're saying is that we need to be punished for recruiting more members? xD

It's something so simple that I don't need to post reference rank lists to explain.

Sent from my POCO F3 using TapatalkWell said. I can make a guild with 15members and get rank 1 that will never be bellow that. If lb work with average aps.
Would that be the best guild in game? Just a childish try to claim best guild title....



Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[papas]

Admittedly, my presence hasn't been around for a "minute" as I have been busy on life's journey.
My lack of presence is also only temporary until my work dies down.

First, in keeping with the topic itself at hand and why the leaderboards shouldn't be ranked as simply as they currently are.

The leaderboards are supposed to represent The Best (scores, kills, times, etc)...
Most of the leaderboards represent individual players, we then have a few parties of 4 and then a single guilds leaderboard which represents larger parties/groups (small social communities).

If we are going to use APs alone as the main deciding factor for The Best guilds ranked in the game then that would mean of course the more APs the better...

There surely can't be disagreements that a player with a higher amount of APs is going to be more helpful to someone new to the game learning to gain more APs...

If a guild is supposed to represent that, rather than looking at just the total overall amount of APs a guild has in total... why not look at the average APs a guilds players has instead as the guild with players with an average of higher APs would obviously be the environment most beneficial for someone new to the game...

Already mentioned a player with higher APs would be more helpful to someone then someone with a lower amount.


To work out the average amount of APs a guilds members has all we have to do is take the total number of APs and divide it by the number of members that are counted towards that total number of APs.

So based on the most recent figures just looking at The Best guilds in the game, starting with the current Top 3 to find the average APs each guild has per member...

1st - 25k APs average per member
2nd - 20k APs average per member
3rd - 27k APs average per member.

To keep it easy here's a handy spreadsheet of the top 20 guilds with all the math done already...

Source. (https://www.spacetimestudios.com/showthread.php?672763-Arcane-Legends-Top-50-Guilds-2023-01-11)
252602
252605

And now if we were to actually rank the guilds based just on the average APs a guild's members have, because remember more APs alone means more of a help to new players...

252603
252606

Feel free to go verify it all for yourselves.
(edit* the above is a example using the top 20, not sure what the top 50 results would be but if done let please share)

Uncomfortable truths.

A guild that's top of the leaderboards is supposed to be representing the group of best players that would potentially be the most helpful to new players (even if it helps by becoming a goal for that new player to aspire towards) and the best players has also been determined mostly by how many APs a player has (can go look at the player LBs).

Sure lets look at the total number of APs as a collective a guild has to judge if its The Best guild in the game...

A ton of Lead and a Ton of Gold weigh the same ... however the value each has greatly differs.

So we can't just look at the total APs a guild has and we know of course some players in a guild have more APs than others do as well so the fairest way, in reality, is by looking at the average APs amongst all the members of each guild.

Now we know there is more to the game now than just APs and what good is all that if members aren't even online?
so then factoring in not only the APs but also how often a guild members are even online is another good measure to help best represent what is Lead or Gold when looking at the leaderboards.

Oh look we've come back to pretty much what we had before.

The old leaderboards could definitely do with with a bit of tuning in to be a better representative of top guilds otherwise were just pretty much just happy to go along with delusional perspectives and ideas.

Quality > Quantity

Now some of the responses... lol

Not sure why your even triggered, the guild mostly as adults who get on their own business and time to time have a cheeky chat...
We all use the game for different things... I'm sure you can even comprehend that much?


Its amazing how you can literally contradict yourself in a single sentence... wow.
What exactly is the "misinformation" your causing me of? You seem be talking as if you know facts yet your source is "when some friends"...

You could always come and talk to me directly tho last time it was even me who reached out to you to try make some peace tho you have no interest... still hurting after I called out for trying to poach my officers in the past perhaps?


We are actually in agreement ironically enough which again I mentioned about removing or at least adding more to balance it out better.


So by all means adjust Leaderboards, however, I'm sorry but what's currently in play is not a true representation of The Best guilds in the game.


If people really don't care about quality in this game anymore then by all means lets see what the future holds.I pretty much clearly explained all my points.Try read again my comment.
Propably u forget what really happened with blaze, but that's expected from u. Trying change real facts to cause dramma. U can check our chat in discord where I sent u his reply with ss.
Yes u came to me for an apology which I accepted. That doesn't mean I have to like u, or asosiate with u, right?
Peace
Ps this is feed back thread. Devs don't need extra bs to read.


Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[BaronB]

I really don't get the point here. Obviously the guild with higher average aps will still get the top spot "eventually".
What differs from before is that you can't have 100 members only and still be at the top without working on recruitment, which leads to helping new people.

As i said before the guilds at top before will have the easiest time to get their positions back, obviously because of their average aps. The only thing that's hurting right now is to get the required amount of members and not getting off easy with countable people having high aps already.

If you need a practical example of previous top guilds still at advantage, look at CU. Their avg aps were always higher. And as expected, with more recruitments they're getting their way back up steadily, you can see the difference in their score of first and 2nd week.

If anyone will in case argue that the old ranking system was better, then no it wasn't. That system relied vastly on pvp scores or kdr. Which is impossible to achieve now because of completely inactive PvP, unless you go on to farm dummies to get huge +ive kdr. Which'll lose the point of being experienced anyway.

Let's compare my guild @ 25k avg with 500 members and another having @ 30k avg with 100 members. I don't get the point why 100 members guild is better.

If i start trimming down my members right now back to 100 and keep the highest aps people, my average will go way above 30k. And I'll still come out at the top. lol

Basically what you're saying is that we need to be punished for recruiting more members? xD

It's something so simple that I don't need to post reference rank lists to explain.

Sent from my POCO F3 using Tapatalk

I am sorry that you are misunderstanding, simply put there should be more metrics in place to determine a guild's rank besides it boiling down to the total number of APs a guild has to be the overall deciding factor.

Watch the movie "300" if you haven't before if you want a great demonstration of quality is better than quantity.

It is possible to stretch out time and resources across a larger number of people however you will always yield better results if the same time and resources were concentrated into smaller groups.

Same as a smaller classroom will yield students with better results.

Based on that philosophy and their track record even looking at the current figures I do genuinely believe CU should still be #1

I also genuinely don't think its right that such a small place now and with a not so hands-on gm like myself that HS should be as high ranked up as it was before the changes. With that same breath, a good majority of the members in HS have been around for a very long time and worked hard for their achievements which is also reflected within the ranks.

It really isn't that hard to rank up if you're being active and interactive and getting a fun environment going for people to grind away to actually climb up the leaderboards

Im against dumbing it down as it devalues it if made to simple.

Could add a guilds seasonal banner count into the rankings that only updates ever season which the ranking from there also plays a part towards the guilds weekly rankings which is more commonly seen.

So guild that gets more banners end of a season more it will help to boost their rank for 3 months.

Can add a counter for overall quests completed as a factor of rankings.. be easy enough to know find how many quests each member of the guild has completed and more quests a guild overall has completed again better it plays on a guilds rank.


There is so much more that could be done besides just settling with something so basic if we truely want to strive for competition

[BaronB]

Well said. I can make a guild with 15members and get rank 1 that will never be bellow that. If lb work with average aps.
Would that be the best guild in game? Just a childish try to claim best guild title....



Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xeCeVeR9I54jkxIO_pXoAr6TJ9nWiWLpCnWI67rDVO8/edit?usp=sharing

I actually did the calculations welcome to check out the top 50.

Im using the average APsas an example of why just looking at APs alone is actually a bad idea and more should be considered.

Using the Average Aps is just the other side of using Total Aps... Seems might be some breakthrough happening

[papas]

We mentioned abt average aps if should be better than total 10days ago in this thread. We set example too. But after further thinking it can't work........


Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Raziast]

I am sorry that you are misunderstanding, simply put there should be more metrics in place to determine a guild's rank besides it boiling down to the total number of APs a guild has to be the overall deciding factor.

Watch the movie "300" if you haven't before if you want a great demonstration of quality is better than quantity.

It is possible to stretch out time and resources across a larger number of people however you will always yield better results if the same time and resources were concentrated into smaller groups.

Same as a smaller classroom will yield students with better results.

Based on that philosophy and their track record even looking at the current figures I do genuinely believe CU should still be #1

I also genuinely don't think its right that such a small place now and with a not so hands-on gm like myself that HS should be as high ranked up as it was before the changes. With that same breath, a good majority of the members in HS have been around for a very long time and worked hard for their achievements which is also reflected within the ranks.

It really isn't that hard to rank up if you're being active and interactive and getting a fun environment going for people to grind away to actually climb up the leaderboards

Im against dumbing it down as it devalues it if made to simple.

Could add a guilds seasonal banner count into the rankings that only updates ever season which the ranking from there also plays a part towards the guilds weekly rankings which is more commonly seen.

So guild that gets more banners end of a season more it will help to boost their rank for 3 months.

Can add a counter for overall quests completed as a factor of rankings.. be easy enough to know find how many quests each member of the guild has completed and more quests a guild overall has completed again better it plays on a guilds rank.


There is so much more that could be done besides just settling with something so basic if we truely want to strive for competition

Seems like we're finally getting somewhere, you simply think that it's too straight forward to count aps only and we should add more factors.

You mentioned banners and quests? I didn't understand the quests part because achievement points for number of quests done is already covering that.

Now we're left with banners, so here's the thing:

Let's be real. What's the main source of banners? Dungeons? Which covers almost 70% of banner rewards. Over the past several seasons we've seen more or less same 15 people and their teams dominating the lb because of their stupidly high ms gears which probably costs billions now. Even if more players try to compete, only 3-4% of them will be able to afford that kinda movement speed. Hence we see same people still on lb every season as they were long time ago.

To get those banners, some people, probably friends of those 15, request them to carry so they can get the banners. And there goes the competition. If someone in someway gets close enough in competing, than pings come in play. Which is impossible to have constant around the globe because of one server only.

So how in the world can you possibly decide the rank of 50 guilds having thousands of players, just by the banners going to same 15 players for several seasons?

If you ask me, only factors that can be counted fairly are seasonal and overall achievement points and probably the event leaderboards if that can be counted in some way.

Sure, I agree that counting aps are very simple, but if you want to add more "fair factors" it needs a lot of thinking and rework.

[Nocturnus]

Admittedly, my presence hasn't been around for a "minute" as I have been busy on life's journey.
My lack of presence is also only temporary until my work dies down.

First, in keeping with the topic itself at hand and why the leaderboards shouldn't be ranked as simply as they currently are.

The leaderboards are supposed to represent The Best (scores, kills, times, etc)...
Most of the leaderboards represent individual players, we then have a few parties of 4 and then a single guilds leaderboard which represents larger parties/groups (small social communities).

If we are going to use APs alone as the main deciding factor for The Best guilds ranked in the game then that would mean of course the more APs the better...

There surely can't be disagreements that a player with a higher amount of APs is going to be more helpful to someone new to the game learning to gain more APs...

If a guild is supposed to represent that, rather than looking at just the total overall amount of APs a guild has in total... why not look at the average APs a guilds players has instead as the guild with players with an average of higher APs would obviously be the environment most beneficial for someone new to the game...

Already mentioned a player with higher APs would be more helpful to someone then someone with a lower amount.


To work out the average amount of APs a guilds members has all we have to do is take the total number of APs and divide it by the number of members that are counted towards that total number of APs.

So based on the most recent figures just looking at The Best guilds in the game, starting with the current Top 3 to find the average APs each guild has per member...

1st - 25k APs average per member
2nd - 20k APs average per member
3rd - 27k APs average per member.

To keep it easy here's a handy spreadsheet of the top 20 guilds with all the math done already...

Source. (https://www.spacetimestudios.com/showthread.php?672763-Arcane-Legends-Top-50-Guilds-2023-01-11)
252602
252605

And now if we were to actually rank the guilds based just on the average APs a guild's members have, because remember more APs alone means more of a help to new players...

252603
252606

Feel free to go verify it all for yourselves.
(edit* the above is a example using the top 20, not sure what the top 50 results would be but if done let please share)

Uncomfortable truths.

A guild that's top of the leaderboards is supposed to be representing the group of best players that would potentially be the most helpful to new players (even if it helps by becoming a goal for that new player to aspire towards) and the best players has also been determined mostly by how many APs a player has (can go look at the player LBs).

Sure lets look at the total number of APs as a collective a guild has to judge if its The Best guild in the game...

A ton of Lead and a Ton of Gold weigh the same ... however the value each has greatly differs.

So we can't just look at the total APs a guild has and we know of course some players in a guild have more APs than others do as well so the fairest way, in reality, is by looking at the average APs amongst all the members of each guild.

Now we know there is more to the game now than just APs and what good is all that if members aren't even online?
so then factoring in not only the APs but also how often a guild members are even online is another good measure to help best represent what is Lead or Gold when looking at the leaderboards.

Oh look we've come back to pretty much what we had before.

The old leaderboards could definitely do with with a bit of tuning in to be a better representative of top guilds otherwise were just pretty much just happy to go along with delusional perspectives and ideas.

Quality > Quantity

Now some of the responses... lol

Not sure why your even triggered, the guild mostly as adults who get on their own business and time to time have a cheeky chat...
We all use the game for different things... I'm sure you can even comprehend that much?


Its amazing how you can literally contradict yourself in a single sentence... wow.
What exactly is the "misinformation" your causing me of? You seem be talking as if you know facts yet your source is "when some friends"...

You could always come and talk to me directly tho last time it was even me who reached out to you to try make some peace tho you have no interest... still hurting after I called out for trying to poach my officers in the past perhaps?


We are actually in agreement ironically enough which again I mentioned about removing or at least adding more to balance it out better.


So by all means adjust Leaderboards, however, I'm sorry but what's currently in play is not a true representation of The Best guilds in the game.


If people really don't care about quality in this game anymore then by all means lets see what the future holds.

Surely, you racked your brain calculating and looking for a way for your guild to "suspiciously" be in top 1 in that table.

Fun fact: your guild is the least active in that entire table.

Conclusions aside.

[BaronB]

Seems like we're finally getting somewhere, you simply think that it's too straight forward to count aps only and we should add more factors.

You mentioned banners and quests? I didn't understand the quests part because achievement points for number of quests done is already covering that.

Now we're left with banners, so here's the thing:

Let's be real. What's the main source of banners? Dungeons? Which covers almost 70% of banner rewards. Over the past several seasons we've seen more or less same 15 people and their teams dominating the lb because of their stupidly high ms gears which probably costs billions now. Even if more players try to compete, only 3-4% of them will be able to afford that kinda movement speed. Hence we see same people still on lb every season as they were long time ago.

...

Sure, I agree that counting aps are very simple, but if you want to add more "fair factors" it needs a lot of thinking and rework.

Exactly what I've been saying and making examples of from the start yes we definitely agree which is great to see!

Having spent enough time around the people running those timed maps, have to give credit where its due because even if you gave the same gears to other players, without the work that went into learning and perfecting the runs... some of the times accomplished in the maps couldn't be replicated by anyone.

Even so what if a guild does have the advantage in banners in there guild ranks, its something that can be obtained still and it doesn't have to be a major factor just like a guilds age for example however season banner ranks are more likely to change but would encourage guilds to aim for banners via gearing up enough for lbs, perhaps even include event banners within the season earnt by guilds in that count as well or even doing things like seasonal lbs... its just another factor thats a little more relevant with today's times.

With the quests one yes quests do count towards APs anyways however there are plenty of other ways to farm or buy easy aps.. perhaps then maybe a Hardcore factor counted so whether members in guilds have completed the HC family ap or not maybe?

With the quests could also be the % of players who have completed weekly tasks like how many total APs a guild earnt per week being a factor instead...

As at least if that's a factor it encourages constant gaining aps and what better way then with new players / characters of course guilds with just top players would suffer from this factor as would be less and less aps to farm each week but that's why having multiple factors makes it fairer instead of just total number of APs... at least counting only the top 500 of the last 14 day active is a start but we certainly can do better.

Perhaps even having a guild retention counter so how long at % of members have been in guild bit like the different activities time but with different lengths of time members of stayed in a guild... of course, the deader the guild the % would naturally go down as a guild would hold retention,

Something that would encourage a factor that counts towards having new members join and then shows how much you've helped them would be cool tho I personally cant quite think of a way at the moment so if anyone can then now in this public forum would be a great time to not hold back!



Surely, you racked your brain calculating and looking for a way for your guild to "suspiciously" be in top 1 in that table.

Fun fact: your guild is the least active in that entire table.

Conclusions aside.

After seeing the original one made by by Zestee Link Here To Post (https://www.spacetimestudios.com/showthread.php?658519-Feedback-Guild-Rankings-II&p=3952900&viewfull=1#post3952900)

which is the #39th post in this thread it clearly wasnt me that thought of using the average AP of members first and I even used it as an example of it not being a good way to do it either just like the top APs count.

High Society is 9+ years old, has been top 10 in the lbs since 2015,its only guild to ever be #1 for seasonal x3 in a row... twice, It still has the most #1 seasonal wins and ahead (9 in total), also did hit #1 on LB with CU dominating the #1 rank for so long.

Even after 50% of the guild had left due to a failed takeover, still was #2 until 2 other guilds merged just to take take the spot...

Your saying the "Fun fact: your guild is the least active in that entire table."

252622

Looking at December activities at least where we had a better break down, sure it isn't the most active but with an average of 7.5 out of 50 (highest rank is 6, lowest is 9 so for activity) definitely isn't the least active. Fact,

Also lets look at that table your most likely referring to and lets go over how to actually read the information...
252623

Yes in that count High Society has the lowest total APs in the top 20... the activity counter is showing out of all the guilds members what % of those were online within the last 14days and only those players APs counting towards the total APs.

So example if you have a guild member with sy 50k aps but been offline for the last 15 days, their APs wouldnt count towards a guilds overall APs count either anymore.

Out of all the members HS has, 88% of them were online within the last 14 days to count towards its total APs... Facts.

The guild that's #1 of that list, 89% of there players were online within the last 14days... Facts.

The current #2 ranked guild in game had 41% of its players online within the last 14 days... Facts.

Are you seriously that delusional to say HS is least active?

Yeah its a small quite place with members who casually do their own thing coming on when every other day as most of us are adults with other commitments in life that keeps us busy too.

Can see HS was also ranked #4 for average account age which proves when I say its just old time members who have been casually and quietly leveling up and enjoying the game over the years... Facts

Come back when you actually have something truthful or at least constructive when replying to me for attention. thank you.


Can we all seriously not be objective here with this topic and put emotions at least aside because all it would take is a small ground of 15/20 people making chars up to 25/30k aps each over several months of grinding to take over LB is simply put BS


Ive fulfilled my goals of chasing that success and thanks to a lot of people's help manage to obtain it... it came at great costs and I genuinely have no intentions of being after that #1 as aggressively as I have been in the past.

Been there. Done that.

Would I do it all again? No thanks.

To the best of my knowledge, there isn't a player in AL who has been a guild master for as long as I have and will carry on to be.

Ill just be chilling, streaming again later on and just getting by but my biggest love in this game and always has been is Guilds.

Why I'm so passionate about the changes being made to them. Ive even had my own guild quality of life threads done up in the past and have always been vocal about guilds so this isn't something new.

Whatever the outcome of the changes keeping with quality over quantity will always be a lb guild at least lets make changes that are sensible and represent top guilds as fair and as acurately as possible.

[papas]

We all gave reasons why old lb shouldn't change. We also gave suggestions of what should be counted other than aps in new lb before it comes. Sts desided that this is how it can be a lb that can't be cheated ig and most fair.
I beleive there is no point of keep suggesting but it's a feedback thread so it's free to everyone share thoughts.
Yes imo many more factors should be counted to prove why guild rank1 gets there, but sinse there was abuse in the past and completely broken rank having this way lb is ok. U only can get rank1 by doing aps legit.
And an honest opinion of me, a guild with 80members(90%) active can't be considered more active than guilds with 500members(50%) active.
Especially if those just log and chat and having a great time which is nothing wrong.Activity same as aps can't be counted by % if we wanna be realistic of how those members can contribute to help others. Also where would be the "quality" in this case? That once upon a time ppl made aps till overall but now they don't play actually game, or cause busy af just log once a week and farm couple hours. Still will contribute in guild lb the max but it's a dead toon.
Examples I gave are randoms. Just my point is that this quality and quantity thing isn't 100% accurate in every case.

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Dfgh]

R y’all actually crying about a reward-less lb bro grow up

[BaronB]

We could go backwards and forwards about if its all a good idea or not but the fairest most unbiased way of getting the answer these days is why not ask AI instead...

it is 2023 after all...

252652

That's from ChatGPT... So even AI would think its pretty much all a good idea as long as its done right.


Anyways if it was a done and dusted change then the thread would have been closed or at least no link would have been provided in the weekly updates post, indicating it is still a open topic and clearly looking for more opinions and feedback and that's all that's being provided.

When i first started this game I was a part of a guild which had 1000s of members within the top 20 in the leaderboards and it was a very lively active guild with 30+ online per day... however i personally didn't find it all that enjoyable as it was a lot of "spam"... The guild ended up falling apart after an officer had come online 1 day and did a mass kick of all members...

I had learnt a bit about the game at that time and was made an officer of that large guild for a short period before it got killed off, after which I had managed to get into the ranked #1 guild at that time called Phoenix guild which only had 2/300 members and really opened my eyes in the difference between quality vs quantity.

After leaving due to always getting in trouble in chat for me cheeky behaviour, Ive been heavily influenced by that experience and has always been my personal preference and im sure its a preference of others have as well otherwise it wouldn't work.


I appreciate and of course accept a guild with 500 out of 1000 members are online at least every 14 days it is indeed livlier then a guild that has 100 members that come online every 14 days...

I apologise for using poor examples.

https://www.spacetimestudios.com/showthread.php?672763-Arcane-Legends-Top-50-Guilds-2023-01-11

High Society has 106 members that were counted towards LB ranks...

Lowest count in that is 44 members... By no means the most lively guild on the leaderboards... most certainly not bottom of the table either.

Self corrected and moving on...


Heres actually another idea then to add to the factors for guild ranks

Weekly count of how many "Bosses" a guild collectively has killed each week... With Bosses you have less likely concerns of "botting" as its always mob kills that's usually done for those PVE kill counts...

It could work like the guild events system but on a global scale with counters live updates via a counter in the guild page.

Easier Bosses giving say 1 point and Harder Bosses giving 3 points... Would give some balance as could have large guilds with less geared players spam easier boss kills for guild points and the smaller better equipped players farm the harder ones for their points to keep up against the larger numbers.


As rewards perhaps why not introduce guild badges however the badges actually being next to the guilds name on the LBs instead?

A "Seasonal #1,2.3" badge
A "Most Aps Earnt" badge (measured weekly)
"Most Boss Kills" badge (weekly count)
"Most Active"badge (weekly count)

Using that guild badge system solves the worry about gifting anything to players, the badge is given to the guild and what better place for it then the leaderboard itself... some guilds could even earn multiple badges each week which can also give us a more fair representation of guild leaderboards.

Thats also keeping the leaderboards based on system of its rank being measured on several different factors and then ranked on its overall rank like we had before.

[papas]

We could go backwards and forwards about if its all a good idea or not but the fairest most unbiased way of getting the answer these days is why not ask AI instead...

it is 2023 after all...

252652

That's from ChatGPT... So even AI would think its pretty much all a good idea as long as its done right.


Anyways if it was a done and dusted change then the thread would have been closed or at least no link would have been provided in the weekly updates post, indicating it is still a open topic and clearly looking for more opinions and feedback and that's all that's being provided.

When i first started this game I was a part of a guild which had 1000s of members within the top 20 in the leaderboards and it was a very lively active guild with 30+ online per day... however i personally didn't find it all that enjoyable as it was a lot of "spam"... The guild ended up falling apart after an officer had come online 1 day and did a mass kick of all members...

I had learnt a bit about the game at that time and was made an officer of that large guild for a short period before it got killed off, after which I had managed to get into the ranked #1 guild at that time called Phoenix guild which only had 2/300 members and really opened my eyes in the difference between quality vs quantity.

After leaving due to always getting in trouble in chat for me cheeky behaviour, Ive been heavily influenced by that experience and has always been my personal preference and im sure its a preference of others have as well otherwise it wouldn't work.


I appreciate and of course accept a guild with 500 out of 1000 members are online at least every 14 days it is indeed livlier then a guild that has 100 members that come online every 14 days...

I apologise for using poor examples.

https://www.spacetimestudios.com/showthread.php?672763-Arcane-Legends-Top-50-Guilds-2023-01-11

High Society has 106 members that were counted towards LB ranks...

Lowest count in that is 44 members... By no means the most lively guild on the leaderboards... most certainly not bottom of the table either.

Self corrected and moving on...


Heres actually another idea then to add to the factors for guild ranks

Weekly count of how many "Bosses" a guild collectively has killed each week... With Bosses you have less likely concerns of "botting" as its always mob kills that's usually done for those PVE kill counts...

It could work like the guild events system but on a global scale with counters live updates via a counter in the guild page.

Easier Bosses giving say 1 point and Harder Bosses giving 3 points... Would give some balance as could have large guilds with less geared players spam easier boss kills for guild points and the smaller better equipped players farm the harder ones for their points to keep up against the larger numbers.


As rewards perhaps why not introduce guild badges however the badges actually being next to the guilds name on the LBs instead?

A "Seasonal #1,2.3" badge
A "Most Aps Earnt" badge (measured weekly)
"Most Boss Kills" badge (weekly count)
"Most Active"badge (weekly count)

Using that guild badge system solves the worry about gifting anything to players, the badge is given to the guild and what better place for it then the leaderboard itself... some guilds could even earn multiple badges each week which can also give us a more fair representation of guild leaderboards.

Thats also keeping the leaderboards based on system of its rank being measured on several different factors and then ranked on its overall rank like we had before.Dude. For real it's like u have no knowledge abt this game or u in purpose playing it "Saint". You say farming bosses can be a fair thing to be added as factor? Not easy to use script for farming?
Let me remind u that in ss devs removed drop of bosses cause ppl overgrind it with bots.
I am pretty much sure that there is one(at least) certain member in ur guild that will happily use script to grind bosses for better rank. Doesn't matter if u not aprove/aware abt this.
Wasn't him he was asked to be excluded from ur guild event between Carrot, Dm, HS? Cause he is a known botter?
Pls spare us. Enough bs.

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[BaronB]

Dude. For real it's like u have no knowledge abt this game or u in purpose playing it "Saint". You say farming bosses can be a fair thing to be added as factor? Not easy to use script for farming?
Let me remind u that in ss devs removed drop of bosses cause ppl overgrind it with bots.
I am pretty much sure that there is one(at least) certain member in ur guild that will happily use script to grind bosses for better rank. Doesn't matter if u not aprove/aware abt this.
Wasn't him he was asked to be excluded from ur guild event between Carrot, Dm, HS? Cause he is a known botter?
Pls spare us. Enough bs.

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

Trying to give some ideas and keeping it constructive.

Again no idea why constantly bitter or so dismissive either… rather strange.

Total APs
AVG APs per member
APs earnt per week
Average Account Age
Guild Age
1/3/7/15/30 active login (min 1h login)
Seasonal Banner Rank
Event Banner Count rank


That’s 12 different factors that guilds could be ranked on alone the last 2 being ones you couldn’t factor in just yet however the rest we could already get info on to use as factors for ranking guilds.

Only trying to make fair and coherent points whilst the window of opportunity is still open to suggest changes.

Not looking to give my guild any sort of additional leverage in the rankings either as don’t need them… already done it with previous perimeters can just do it again so it makes no difference in that regard

Thank you if your thinking of me as some kind of “Saint”…

Just trying to keep things as fair and worthwhile as possible as the previous way tho seems simple once you knew how wasn’t all that easy and still more challenging then what’s been put on offer now.

Sure giving away gold to drive the pve numbers, threat of kicks for not raising APs, dedicating teams and driving pvp kills for those bs to get APs, offering banner runs as prizes to help boost count, allowing toxic people in because of stats, kicking out members/friends who havnt logged in a long time whos stats would have also been low but are actually really nice people… with the kicks also giving lower members so better averages…

Yeah some rather shady stuff indeed or morally grey but not illegal all to get that top spot and after achieving, the burn out after from pushing for it so aggressively for and what it cost in terms of mistakes and friends is why not interested down that path again.

Want to tell me your so morally pure yourself with what you might be/not be aware of goings on under your own roof.

This isn’t some slander match for you to be trying to throw stones especially when living in a glass house, I may have been absent for the last several months but both of us as and our guilds are nearly as old as this game so I don’t doubt you hear and know plenty and worth remembering so do I.

So please, grow up and go outside and touch the grass a little and as you so eloquently put it… “spare us, enough bs.” ..


Let’s keep things on topic shall we

1 <3


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[papas]

Ur suggestions just make u look like someone that plays a diferent game. For as many years I use forum I never saw u made a suggestion nor a statement that was true or fair for community.
I just reply to ur suggestion with facts why they make no sense.
Again u giving me a chanse to reply on topics away from thread purpose.
It's good that u acknowledge ur mistakes in the past. There is not saddest thing to put a dead line to complete guild reqs for members n remove em after not get. Just my personal opinion. Everyone runs his own guild like he wants ofc.
Just some info, if we really cared abt guild lb or banners we would never been Rank2 on guild lb rankings n we have got rank1 for banners every season. Anyone can claim this statement like bs but ikr it's true. As long as "don't care anymore" "been there" "done that", I m really curious abt somethin n if u kind enough to reply. U can ignore ofc. Are u proud u achieved rank1 on guild lb by actions that banned ur members? And even after all that botting n dummy farming still managed to be on lb for 4 or 5 weeks?
Also pls dont mention our guild meaning that we cheat. At least that I understood u meant. Ofc I and my oficers can't know everything, but lemme give u a example abt how fair we are. When I found out a close friend of mine was botting in hauntlet (he was oficer and alrd in overall lb) I asked him to leave guild. Every guild has diferent way of thinking, diferent values and diferent way of having fun in game.
So if u really wanna be adults just accept that no lb proves which guild is "best". If u ask any al player I'm pretty sure that will reply that the best guild is the one that is member in. Best guild is where u enjoy and have a great time. No matter ranks n banners. If u need a broken lb to prove that ur good, then u never was good nor ever will be.
CU was not the best guild cause stands rank1 for years, nor now is worse than before cause 2guilds are above.

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Xuds]

Ur suggestions just make u look like someone that plays a diferent game. For as many years I use forum I never saw u made a suggestion nor a statement that was true or fair for community.
I just reply to ur suggestion with facts why they make no sense.
Again u giving me a chanse to reply on topics away from thread purpose.
It's good that u acknowledge ur mistakes in the past. There is not saddest thing to put a dead line to complete guild reqs for members n remove em after not get. Just my personal opinion. Everyone runs his own guild like he wants ofc.
Just some info, if we really cared abt guild lb or banners we would never been Rank2 on guild lb rankings n we have got rank1 for banners every season. Anyone can claim this statement like bs but ikr it's true. As long as "don't care anymore" "been there" "done that", I m really curious abt somethin n if u kind enough to reply. U can ignore ofc. Are u proud u achieved rank1 on guild lb by actions that banned ur members? And even after all that botting n dummy farming still managed to be on lb for 4 or 5 weeks?
Also pls dont mention our guild meaning that we cheat. At least that I understood u meant. Ofc I and my oficers can't know everything, but lemme give u a example abt how fair we are. When I found out a close friend of mine was botting in hauntlet (he was oficer and alrd in overall lb) I asked him to leave guild. Every guild has diferent way of thinking, diferent values and diferent way of having fun in game.
So if u really wanna be adults just accept that no lb proves which guild is "best". If u ask any al player I'm pretty sure that will reply that the best guild is the one that is member in. Best guild is where u enjoy and have a great time. No matter ranks n banners. If u need a broken lb to prove that ur good, then u never was good nor ever will be.
CU was not the best guild cause stands rank1 for years, nor now is worse than before cause 2guilds are above.

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας TapatalkYour guild isnt anything special it has over 1k members and like less than 5 people online

Sent from my DE2118 using Tapatalk

[papas]

Your guild isnt anything special it has over 1k members and like less than 5 people online

Sent from my DE2118 using TapatalkI think ur confused. Cu has 450members and definetely never has 5members online for all years I'm here. . It's fine u think it's nothin special, and I respect ur opinion. For me is the best place I can be. That's the point of diferent guilds so everyone finds a place where he belongs and have fun.

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Nocturnus]

Trying to give some ideas and keeping it constructive.

Again no idea why constantly bitter or so dismissive either… rather strange.

Total APs
AVG APs per member
APs earnt per week
Average Account Age
Guild Age
1/3/7/15/30 active login (min 1h login)
Seasonal Banner Rank
Event Banner Count rank


That’s 12 different factors that guilds could be ranked on alone the last 2 being ones you couldn’t factor in just yet however the rest we could already get info on to use as factors for ranking guilds.

Only trying to make fair and coherent points whilst the window of opportunity is still open to suggest changes.

Not looking to give my guild any sort of additional leverage in the rankings either as don’t need them… already done it with previous perimeters can just do it again so it makes no difference in that regard

Thank you if your thinking of me as some kind of “Saint”…

Just trying to keep things as fair and worthwhile as possible as the previous way tho seems simple once you knew how wasn’t all that easy and still more challenging then what’s been put on offer now.

Sure giving away gold to drive the pve numbers, threat of kicks for not raising APs, dedicating teams and driving pvp kills for those bs to get APs, offering banner runs as prizes to help boost count, allowing toxic people in because of stats, kicking out members/friends who havnt logged in a long time whos stats would have also been low but are actually really nice people… with the kicks also giving lower members so better averages…

Yeah some rather shady stuff indeed or morally grey but not illegal all to get that top spot and after achieving, the burn out after from pushing for it so aggressively for and what it cost in terms of mistakes and friends is why not interested down that path again.

Want to tell me your so morally pure yourself with what you might be/not be aware of goings on under your own roof.

This isn’t some slander match for you to be trying to throw stones especially when living in a glass house, I may have been absent for the last several months but both of us as and our guilds are nearly as old as this game so I don’t doubt you hear and know plenty and worth remembering so do I.

So please, grow up and go outside and touch the grass a little and as you so eloquently put it… “spare us, enough bs.” ..


Let’s keep things on topic shall we

1 <3


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Another week and your guild among the least active guilds.

252709

You want it to be in top 1 even if it is quite inactive.
It is nothing more than a whim.
On the other hand the pvp, pve, etc. They are quite redundant things, because they are already included in the aps.
With the average discouraging to recruit people and activity.
The age of a guild or account is just a privilege over new people. And outside of the Lb. It is not a factor that can be changed.
It's like starting an event Lb with tier platinum because your account is old.
It is not fair, nor competitive, it does not represent anything, only that you downloaded the game on that date and created a guild, seniority does not guarantee that you are better.
The banners, the same, work quarterly, they go out of the week, and they already have their own Lb and prizes.
1, 3, 7 days active could work.

[BaronB]

Literal dumb and dumber sigh...

Im even a little tipsy so ill keep these short and sweet and this weeks rankings don't have a link to the discussion so ill take it as a sign as overall APs + last 7 day active is where we are at with it.


Ur suggestions just make u look like someone that plays a diferent game. For as many years I use forum I never saw u made a suggestion nor a statement that was true or fair for community.
I just reply to ur suggestion with facts why they make no sense.
Again u giving me a chanse to reply on topics away from thread purpose.
It's good that u acknowledge ur mistakes in the past. There is not saddest thing to put a dead line to complete guild reqs for members n remove em after not get. Just my personal opinion. Everyone runs his own guild like he wants ofc.
Just some info, if we really cared abt guild lb or banners we would never been Rank2 on guild lb rankings n we have got rank1 for banners every season. Anyone can claim this statement like bs but ikr it's true. As long as "don't care anymore" "been there" "done that", I m really curious abt somethin n if u kind enough to reply. U can ignore ofc. Are u proud u achieved rank1 on guild lb by actions that banned ur members? And even after all that botting n dummy farming still managed to be on lb for 4 or 5 weeks?
Also pls dont mention our guild meaning that we cheat. At least that I understood u meant. Ofc I and my oficers can't know everything, but lemme give u a example abt how fair we are. When I found out a close friend of mine was botting in hauntlet (he was oficer and alrd in overall lb) I asked him to leave guild. Every guild has diferent way of thinking, diferent values and diferent way of having fun in game.
So if u really wanna be adults just accept that no lb proves which guild is "best". If u ask any al player I'm pretty sure that will reply that the best guild is the on If u ne that is member in. Best guild is where u enjoy and have a great time. No matter ranks n banners.eed a broken lb to prove that ur good, then u never was good nor ever will be.
CU was not the best guild cause stands rank1 for years, nor now is worse than before cause 2guilds are above.

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

1. The last time i went on about something was guild furnishing slots... other people also benefited from that. Your welcome.
Of course i wont comment on something i have 0 understanding about... Please don't project your arrogance onto me.
2. You started with the slander between us on this thread.
3. besides going on about dummy farming what factual disagreements have you actually made towards my other suggestions?
4. What players got banned for HS to reach #1 ? lol! It was after a mass cleanout of old inactive accounts that really increased the guilds overall rank,. Besides that it was raising everyone's APs + PvE over the years... got proofs over the years of the work that's been done. So after the kick, low member numbers yes meant better averages which was the largest factor to rasing the overall rank score.
5. So seasonal HC members in your guild just magically were getting 5/10k pvp kills in ctf for those seasonal APs/Banners... OK (again only person wanting to take this off topic and try slandering is you along with toxic couple others)
6. Yes i am proud that i accomplished my goals in making the most successful guild in AL. seasons 14.15.16 HS didnt even have time team yet first time in the history of the game a guild came #1 3 x in a row...
7. Im the original creator and master of HS why wouldn't i be proud... CU was passed down to Avy, to which then from what i heard was kicked out and taken over by yourself. Its no surprise you wouldn't have the same kind of pride in your guild and members as a master who actually created their own guild, and it shows to.
8. Of course asking peoples opinions on the "best guild" will always be different as opinions are always different. However, when there is an actual leaderboard in place or weekly/3 monthly results listed then in the context of competitiveness of course you will have those who are better than others. HS has had the most seasonal #1s to a point most banners ever earnt by a guild in history of a game. CU has been rank #1 longer than any other guild in history of the game... Have some pride in your guilds achievement? if there was not meant to be any competitiveness in the game whats the point in having LBs in the first place?!
9. Your example is rather pointless... good for you. What like I haven't kicked out LB players or refused entry or kicked out gold buyers/plat farmers etc in the past? None of us our perfect... we can only but help on rely on those around us as well when dealing with so many people sometimes and cant always get it right but as long as being honest and genuine and again it will show.


After this weeks rankings post seems with no link to the topic its a done and dusted case with total APs from the top 500 active in the last 7 days that counts towards lb ranks. Fair play.


With that thanks for the debate, the discussion is done.



Peace.


Another week and your guild among the least active guilds.

252709

You want it to be in top 1 even if it is quite inactive.
It is nothing more than a whim.
On the other hand the pvp, pve, etc. They are quite redundant things, because they are already included in the aps.
With the average discouraging to recruit people and activity.
The age of a guild or account is just a privilege over new people. And outside of the Lb. It is not a factor that can be changed.
It's like starting an event Lb with tier platinum because your account is old.
It is not fair, nor competitive, it does not represent anything, only that you downloaded the game on that date and created a guild, seniority does not guarantee that you are better.
The banners, the same, work quarterly, they go out of the week, and they already have their own Lb and prizes.
1, 3, 7 days active could work.

Thank you for showing how dumb and drama-instigating you are.


The least active guild would have the least number of players online over the last 7 days in that chart.

As we would say here in England... Should have gone to Specsavers.


1 <3

[Nocturnus]

The truth hurts.
Your guild remained, in the old top, because of the points of the dead characters.
On the other hand, I don't know what Specsavers is, I'm not from England.

[Angelaxd]

happy for being top 3 guild Latino Community

Enviado desde mi Redmi Note 8 mediante Tapatalk

Dilo de nuevo sin estar baneado por estar en cosas ilegales

[Raziast]

A few of changes in development (coming soon):
1. Players need to be in the guild for the entire week in order to be counted as active. This is to discourage guild hopping.
2. Guilds larger than the maximum guild size will not be eligible for the top guild leaderboard when maximum guild size is implemented (link (https://www.spacetimestudios.com/showthread.php?671205-Feedback-Guild-Size)). We will show you a warning indicator on your guild page if your guild will not qualify.
3. We plan on introducing a border around the guild name for the top guild. This will be displayed automatically if you choose to show your guild name as your title. Only players that are counted as active for that week will receive the ability to display the top guild border.

-ALSWhen will we be getting this update?

Sent from my POCO F3 using Tapatalk

[papas]

Just a suggestion abt changes for guild lb. Sinse only 2guilds have 500 active characters weekly and this is not going to change, maybe u should consider lower that number that actually counts for lb.

If you think that is not the right thing to do then maybe do a scale percentage count.

For example. We devide character numbers by 100 due to their higher aps.

I ll give an example and try to be clear.

If a guild has 350 members active last week. 100(A) of em have 50k aps each, 100(B) have 25k aps each, 100(C) have 15k aps each and 50(D) have 10k aps each.

So we have scaling counting by presentage. 100% 70% 50% 20% 10%.

A group aps counted is 100*50k*100%=5m

B group aps counted is 100*25k*70%=1.75m

C group aps counted is 100*15k*50%=0.75m

D group aps counted is 50*10k*20%=0.1m

E group aps counted is 0*10%=0

In this way smaller guilds will get small advantage than larger guilds sinse guilds with most members will get much lower aps.

I hope that I can get my point here and u can let all guilds participate in guild lb. As guildmaster of CU this will make harder for us get rank1 than u just take 2top guilds to get a penalty cause more members than is allowed.

Just feels a fair way to get a mid solution. Ofc u can block further recruiting to them till they get lower than max allowed members. U can still set limit like 1k members.

Hope this will be helpfull. Thanx a lot and sorry for long mail.

P. S. Sinse it's alrd announsed that ur gonna do changes in guild lb so long ago, u should make final desision fast. Top guilds keep recruiting, this is their way they chose to recruit everyone. Not saying is bad but if changes won't come soon rest guilds which like keep small will have bigger disadvantage.

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk