poop_
Approved user
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2016
- Messages
- 147
This seems a no brainer to me. There is really NO downside. If you can think of one, please share.
I know of so many alliances who are good (even great) but can never make it into the top 100. The top 100 is mostly filled with cheaters, sandbaggers, heavy spenders, or abandoned. The reason is, 100 is a very small pool and some people are so determined to be on the list, they will do just about anything to get there. I think if the list were expanded to 500 (why not rank 1000 even?), you might reduce a bit of the crazy (and frustration) in the game. Yeah, the top 100 can still fight it out with each other, but I am pretty sure there would be a bunch of active players who would be happy to be recognized at #212 or whatever. With all the alliances out there, it isn't like getting to #212 would be a small feat.
It would encourage more competition and excitement for world war for everyone... make wars mean a little bit more again. The ability to move up or down depending on each war's outcome. Honestly, why not rank everyone? If loading one list is too hard for a phone game to handle, then break the list down into groups, ex: gold, silver, bronze or something...
It would also help matching active players with active alliances. Right now, if you don't want to be extremely intense about war, it can be hard to find the right alliance. Rankings would allow more visibility for more alliances.
Nexon ranks players in medals leagues (which let's be honest, when was the last time you looked at that?), so why not expand the list for ranking alliances by glory.
We all know the war matchmaking and glory are messed up, but it seems that Nexon is dragging their feet doing anything about that, so this would be a minor improvement that I don't think would be that hard (I am not a coder, so I don't know, but a list seems an easy thing to compile).
This is a small change, but I think it would help a lot with player enjoyment and retention. TinSoldier please pass this along
I know of so many alliances who are good (even great) but can never make it into the top 100. The top 100 is mostly filled with cheaters, sandbaggers, heavy spenders, or abandoned. The reason is, 100 is a very small pool and some people are so determined to be on the list, they will do just about anything to get there. I think if the list were expanded to 500 (why not rank 1000 even?), you might reduce a bit of the crazy (and frustration) in the game. Yeah, the top 100 can still fight it out with each other, but I am pretty sure there would be a bunch of active players who would be happy to be recognized at #212 or whatever. With all the alliances out there, it isn't like getting to #212 would be a small feat.
It would encourage more competition and excitement for world war for everyone... make wars mean a little bit more again. The ability to move up or down depending on each war's outcome. Honestly, why not rank everyone? If loading one list is too hard for a phone game to handle, then break the list down into groups, ex: gold, silver, bronze or something...
It would also help matching active players with active alliances. Right now, if you don't want to be extremely intense about war, it can be hard to find the right alliance. Rankings would allow more visibility for more alliances.
Nexon ranks players in medals leagues (which let's be honest, when was the last time you looked at that?), so why not expand the list for ranking alliances by glory.
We all know the war matchmaking and glory are messed up, but it seems that Nexon is dragging their feet doing anything about that, so this would be a minor improvement that I don't think would be that hard (I am not a coder, so I don't know, but a list seems an easy thing to compile).
This is a small change, but I think it would help a lot with player enjoyment and retention. TinSoldier please pass this along