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
Bookmarks