happy for being top 3 guild Latino Community
Enviado desde mi Redmi Note 8 mediante Tapatalk
happy for being top 3 guild Latino Community
Enviado desde mi Redmi Note 8 mediante Tapatalk
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?
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.Originally Posted by asommers
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quality should be more important than quantity imo.
Sent from my GM1913 using Tapatalk
Arcane Legends Top 50 Guilds - 2023-01-05
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
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
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
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
Quality > quantity
That s all I gotta say, lame
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
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.
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.
Aka Ares/Twerrk/Mystery. :]
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)
#54
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). 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
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 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
Yeah there should be top 10 guild badge and the 500 ppl counted in ranking should get the badge till next resetTop 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
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
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...
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 itWell 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
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...
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
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.
Ign: frynoodles
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks