# Average Ranking?

This is a feature request. Feature requests can be voted up by supporters.
Current Priority: +0
I really don't get the point of this statistic since you can calculate it yourself

#### qlum wrote:

I really don't get the point of this statistic since you can calculate it yourself
You seem to be forgetting that most people play more than 5 maps.
I don't know about you, but I honestly don't feel like taking 300 different maps and averaging that.

Also, I think this would be a great idea, it sounds better than the current ranking system derived from total score.

#### Nakata Yuji wrote:

Also, I think this would be a great idea, it sounds better than the current ranking system derived from total score.
One person plays one map. Is #1 on that map. Another person plays 10,000 maps, of which they are #1 on 50.

Who wins and why?

#### Nakata Yuji wrote:

Also, I think this would be a great idea, it sounds better than the current ranking system derived from total score.
One person plays one map. Is #1 on that map. Another person plays 10,000 maps, of which they are #1 on 50.

Who wins and why?
Exactly the point of my post.

(Unless, strager, you were talking about the MGF. In which case I was being cheeky. It's true though. )

This is by far more abusable than accuracy. There are enough #1 whores on the system as it is.
It definitely wouldn't make any sense as a ranking mechanism.

It would be moderately cool as a miscellaneous statistic on the user's page, with all the other statistics.
Averaging was never really...an accurate method of calculating.

Imagine you get #1 and a #100. The average would roughly be about #50-51.

If we were to further develop on this and you kept on getting #1's after that (Not that it won't/will happen)

2 x #1 + 1 x #100 / 3 = #34

3 x #1 + 1 x #100 / 4 = #26 (Round off)

4 x #1 + 1 x #100 / 5 = #21 (Round off)

No matter how many times you do it. You will never get to #1 unless you completely get #1 for every map you play and stay #1 on the leaderboard.

And if you are wondering... 100 x #1 + 1 x #100 / 101 = #2.

EDIT: There would also be a lot of ties too for #2, #3 and even lower places. Unless you are saying we should have a decimal rank #2.987 blah blah blah.
That's why it's requested not as any sort of ranking thing; it's wanted just as a statistic in the profile for fun.
This map has been deleted on the request of its creator. It is no longer available.

#### Nakata Yuji wrote:

Also, I think this would be a great idea, it sounds better than the current ranking system derived from total score.
One person plays one map. Is #1 on that map. Another person plays 10,000 maps, of which they are #1 on 50.

Who wins and why?
Guess I wasn't thinking that far. But it would be nice as a statistic, however unnecessary.
peppy removed useless stats from ranking/profiles before, so I don't see this happening. Plus, it'd probably be another one of those things that would put load on the database, thus rending it more "harmful" than anything.
I'm with strager on this....i don't see why this is usefull....seems useless really

#### Ekaru wrote:

That's why it's requested not as any sort of ranking thing; it's wanted just as a statistic in the profile for fun.
Right.

I still don't see the usefulness, though.
There is no usefulness. That was my point. It's just something to waste 30 minutes on then never look at/care about again.