The Elite Forum

The Big Three Plus One => GoldenEye 007 => Topic started by: Aztec Exemplar on June 22, 2014, 02:00:42 pm

Title: ***ADJUSTED RELEVANT RANKINGS***
Post by: Aztec Exemplar on June 22, 2014, 02:00:42 pm
Due to Ace's recent WR strengths topic, we have decided to develop a new rankings system providing a more accurate level of your true skill.

How does it work?
Tier 4 = 1 pt
Tier 3 = 2 pts
Tier 2 = 3 pts
Tier 1 = 4 pts

RANKINGS
1. Rayan I. - 91 (Agent = 32, SA = 28, 00 = 31)

2. Marc Rutzou - 70 (Agent = 28, SA = 22, 00 = 20)

3. David Clemens - 46 (Agent = 18, SA = 17, 00 = 11)

4. Luke Szklarz - 28 (Agent = 16, SA = 10, 00 = 2)

5. Bryan Bosshardt - 23 (Agent = 13, SA = 7, 00 = 3)

6. Karl Jobst - 17 (Agent = 9, SA = 3, 00 = 5)

6. Ryan White - 17 (Agent = 10, SA = 5, 00 = 2)

6. Jimmy Bauer - 17 (Agent = 10, SA = 10, 00 = 2)

9. Ryan Lockwood - 13 (Agent = 9, SA = 2, 00 = 2)

10. Henrik - 11 (Agent = 9, SA = 2, 00 = 2)

Only top 10 for now, will make more later maybe. Will also make it look nicer later.
Title: Re: ***ADJUSTED RELEVANT RANKINGS***
Post by: Shadow on June 22, 2014, 02:23:49 pm
Very interesting idea. Thanks for taking the time to do it, it gives a different perspective regarding WR holders.
Title: Re: ***ADJUSTED RELEVANT RANKINGS***
Post by: Lark on June 22, 2014, 02:25:13 pm
Stop spamming the GE forum with useless topics, please.
Title: Re: ***ADJUSTED RELEVANT RANKINGS***
Post by: Stoxenbawns on June 22, 2014, 02:28:27 pm
Yeah Mirror, please we don't want the forums to become too active, thanks.
Title: Re: ***ADJUSTED RELEVANT RANKINGS***
Post by: Light on June 22, 2014, 03:30:09 pm
Interesting idea!
Title: Re: ***ADJUSTED RELEVANT RANKINGS***
Post by: OHMSS on June 22, 2014, 05:47:50 pm
In those oh-so-relevant rankings Archives 16 is worth 1pt while Control SA 405 is 0pt, right?
Title: Re: ***ADJUSTED RELEVANT RANKINGS***
Post by: RWG on June 22, 2014, 05:48:40 pm
Yes this is correct

But GE is all about "get WRs or die tryin'" so they have at least some value.
Title: Re: ***ADJUSTED RELEVANT RANKINGS***
Post by: simmen6 on June 22, 2014, 06:40:27 pm
So Archives 16 is worth 1 point and time like Dam 1.57, Bunker 2 56, Train 101, Cradle 35 and Aztec 1:27 is not worth any point?

In PD Duel 009 would be 1 point but a time like Extraction SA 1:19 would be worth none points, right?

Come on
Title: Re: ***ADJUSTED RELEVANT RANKINGS***
Post by: RWG on June 22, 2014, 07:38:09 pm
Funny how the irrels are mad about this rankings system while those ranked are cool with it.
Title: Re: ***ADJUSTED RELEVANT RANKINGS***
Post by: Aztec Exemplar on June 22, 2014, 11:41:44 pm
We are aware that amazing PRs like Dam 1:56 are worth 0 points on these rankings but times like Dam 0:53 are worth 1 point. We even discussed this matter while producing the rankings but we decided that the WR leaders page works in the same way. You get one WR, you get an extra point. Every WR is worth 1 point. So we decided to just keep it the same way.
Title: Re: ***ADJUSTED RELEVANT RANKINGS***
Post by: SimThreat on June 22, 2014, 11:44:39 pm
Quote from: MirrorMage on June 22, 2014, 11:41:44 pm
We are aware that amazing PRs like Dam 1:56 are worth 0 points on these rankings but times like Dam 0:53 are. We even discussed this matter while producing the rankings but we decided that the WR leaders page works in the same way. You get one WR, you get an extra point. Every WR is worth 1 point. So we decided to just keep it the same way.

LOL bro is this an anti-troll? Because this is gold, seriously gold.
Title: Re: ***ADJUSTED RELEVANT RANKINGS***
Post by: Wyst3r on June 23, 2014, 05:16:52 am
Guess i don't have to play for top 10 anymore :nesquik:
Title: Re: ***ADJUSTED RELEVANT RANKINGS***
Post by: Manocheese on June 23, 2014, 03:45:24 pm
Quote from: MirrorMage on June 22, 2014, 11:41:44 pm
We are aware that amazing PRs like Dam 1:56 are worth 0 points on these rankings but times like Dam 0:53 are worth 1 point. We even discussed this matter while producing the rankings but we decided that the WR leaders page works in the same way. You get one WR, you get an extra point. Every WR is worth 1 point. So we decided to just keep it the same way.

How about a system where the number of points you get is based on how many people have a time at least as good as yours? The points could go like this:

People with better or same timePoints
                    1100
                    297
                    395
                    494
                    593

And so on. The harder times would naturally be worth more points, as fewer people would have them. This would allow difficult non-records to receive a high number of points (e.g. 97 for Dam 1:56) while giving a low number of points for easy records (52 for Archives 16, 0 for Duel 3, etc.).
Title: Re: ***ADJUSTED RELEVANT RANKINGS***
Post by: Wouter Jansen on June 23, 2014, 04:06:29 pm
Mano! :) Are you still working on Silo DLTK? How's the progress?
Title: Re: ***ADJUSTED RELEVANT RANKINGS***
Post by: Manocheese on June 23, 2014, 04:20:22 pm
I've been working on speed running Rayman 2 lately, but I might get back into Silo after I finish.