Add Average Rank Ratings for Classic/Campaign and Melee
Add an "Average Ranked Finish" and post it next to a Players Tenacity Ranking. Take the average finish for all Classic and Campaign games and a separate average finish for Melee games. It would encourage players to finish high each game to increase their averages. It would allow other players another quick tool to judge a player's worthiness of alliance.
This "Average Ranking" could also be used as a modifier to Leaderboard rankings to get the high finishers ranked above players that play 12 games at once and finish middle of the pack.
-
FigaK commented
Close? Since the re-introduction of the difficulty modifier
-
tom n commented
As there is no way to edit my suggestion, I would like to amend it in one way: Joining any game after turn 1 would not count toward the "Average Rank". This would insure replacement players would not risk their average when joining a game in progress.
-
tom n commented
@Husker Mike, You say finishing 2nd or 11th is the same? Maybe in real war, but not in Planets. For one thing MOST of these games end with a winning team, so then you're saying that the winning ally who ended up with 120 planets did no better than the player with 2? Really?????
If you play all eleven races I think you'll find that winning as a Borg or Colonies player can be less strategically challenging than coming in third or fourth place as a Fascist or Bird...IMHO.
-
Husker Mike commented
Don't like this at all. Finishing second is not a high result. It is losing. Implementing this change would:
1. Discourage people from taking risks to try to win.
2. Encourage people to help others win in exchange for a high result, thus invalidating those victories.
3. Penalize people like me who try to win even if failure means coming in last place.
Coming in second place or last place means the same thing: You have failed at winning. Whether the cross you are crucified on is pure gold or moldy wood, the result is the same.