That is a lot of bold. We can read, you don't need to make your post more readable than others because it's not any more special or correct than any other.Dexus wrote:
a bunch of stuff i entirely agree with
I had a similar idea in mind but didn't know how to put it to practice or come up with a solid explanation of how it would work, so I never posted about it. Glad someone did, this is a really neat idea.
Dexus wrote:
At first I was against putting 0% worth, but the more I think about it the more it makes sense to not even count so many scores. 1% of a score shouldn't really be what a player is focusing on in my opinion, but constantly replacing your top score to get anywhere will just cause such anxiety. I'm honestly interested in seeing where all players would be sitting if such a weighting method was put in place.
I think that if you're using 1%, you might as well use 0%. If I set 100 100pp scores that are all weighted 1%, that's 100pp extra that i don't even deserve. As Drezi said, players should aim to improve their best performances, not set a bunch of average performances that are easier than opening a can of soda to set. I can consistently set OD7 TV Size SS ranks given that they're not too hard, and I don't become a better player from doing so. It's not a real achievement, thus I don't deserve to be rewarded for it at all.
So, yes, I agree with Drezi. Only the top ~40 or so (I'd personally say the top 25 but whatever) should actually be rewarded, and rewarded more handsomely than it is now. And Dexus' application of it seems like a much more fair alternative than what we have now. I recall a player telling me that I shouldn't be trying to get top 5 performances all the time, and rather gain pp in slow increments instead - and I completely disagree with that, there's nothing impressive about average scores in my opinion.
So, yeah. Fully support this idea.