# Modification of ranking score

Hello,

For now, at the end of a challenge, the ranking score is calculated with the formula Score = N - C +1, which means that the difference between 1st and 20th is the same than the one between 201th and 220th. For my point of view it is unfair, because it is much more difficult to win a place when you are in the top 10, than when you are 200th.
Moreover, this formula means that it is really difficult (or even impossible), to catch up someone who have played more challenge than you (even if you finished first to all new challenges).

I think using a forumula like this one (which is really simple) can be more fair : Score = N ^ ((N - C +1) / N) , because score difference between 1st and 2nd is bigger than score difference between 2nd and 3th and so one.

You can view the plot here

What do you think of it?

20 Likes

I came for the plot. But your idea is good too. ^^

2 Likes

I like the idea, I think the distribution could be a little more even.

Thanks @trnsnt, this seems fair. Weâ€™ll test it in the next few days (locally) and check how it impacts the global ranking.

I completely agree with your point. Iâ€™m new here and I already completely gave up on reaching the top of the global leaderboard. I finished first on PR2, I earned like 600 points, gamoul earned 8 points less and is still 10 000 pts ahead. I would need more than 1000 challenges like that to join him ! I think itâ€™s faster to just wait 80 years for the top 300 to be dead ^^

2 Likes

@fredericdesmoulins Is it online now? Cause Iâ€™ve lost 20 places in the global leaderboard Or is it just more awesome people coming here ?

No, it isnâ€™t online yet, but yes: thereâ€™re awesome people coming there!

2 Likes

+1 for the idea

+1 for this suggestion

I have another question on the same topic.

As of today, you can gain a little above 4000 points by winning achievements points.
Even the 2000 points lead of top 50 players is huge.

Thus it is nearly impossible to new players to really compete in the leaderboard.
And as time goes on itâ€™ll go worse.

Have you already considered this ?
Many developers like competition and this could deter new players to participate.

I guess there are many ways to overcome this :

• value less points coming from old contests
• only count points of contest done in last X months/years

Well it is just a suggestion

3 Likes

Experience points = Points from achievements unlocked

Skill points = A + B + C + D

A = Points from games solved.

If the player have solved any
very hard puzzle, he get 800 points
else if have solved any
hard puzzle, he get 400 points
else if have solved any
medium puzzle, he get 200 points
else if have solved any
easy puzzle, he get 100 points

and then get also 1 point for each puzzle achievement unlocked.

B = Maximum points got in all SOLO contest played

C = Maximum points got in all MULTI contest played

D = Maximum points got in all TRAINING contest played

Thatâ€™s all folks

2 Likes

At first i didnâ€™t like your idea, but then I re-read and I found it quite nice, the A+B+C+D is kinda a true skill ranking.

1 Like

Thatâ€™s nice.
Maybe we could also add the notion of consistency ?

I mean a player which is always in top 10 has more skill than another which just was in top 10 one time.

My suggestion should be on a new thread in order all people can find it.

Any moderator could be so kind to move it out?

huum, nah because your idea is fine but not perfect and moreover, I think the dev are actually developping some kind of modification:

And moving it to another topic will just flood them. They are already doing it properly, but if you want to make sure or to remind them once in a while, donâ€™t hesitate to post on this topic

Here are the list with the number of players participating on every single contest in this site:

Solo
1023
681
692
553
836
705
772
963
1251
751
1283
827
614
129
413
349
331
220

multi
1153
560
1080
449
621
672

training
1205
599
1339
717
770
1480

Only for information purpose

Hey @trnsnt,

Seems just fair

Do not forget that the main purpose of condingame is to achieve the best developer loyalty,
so if a new ranking system is created, it has to deal to some kind of contradictory goals.

• encourage new members by allowing the best among them to improve their rank within a realistic delay.
• encourage old members to go on playing games (and not give up) by increasing their rank at each challenge they play.

I think that the current system can be improved by adding some kind of bonus points for people that are in the Top100 of a challenge.
for example (to be improved) B = 100 + 5*(100-N+1) : i.e.
600 points for the 1st
595 points for the 2nd
105 points for the 100th
0 points for the others

Another idea would be, starting from the next challenge, to associate a counter to the challenge,
letâ€™s say CC=1 (2 for the following, etc.)
and to add to the current scoring system 100*CC points for those having a non null score to the challenge number CC.

in other terms, that means that each new challenge can give 100 more points than the previous.
(1000 more points after 10 challenges ~1 year)
old challenges will have a relative weight decreasing at each new challenge.

1 Like

2 Likes

Some ideas are fine but it seems overcomplicated to me. I mean, to be efficient, a ranking system should be easy to understand and easy to predict:

• if Iâ€™m ranking X in this contest, what can I expect for my global ranking?
• if Iâ€™m ranking better than this person in this contest, can I now be in front of him in the global ranking?
These are the kind of questions you probably wonâ€™t be able to answer thus itâ€™ll likely kills part of your motivation if youâ€™re interested in global ranking.

Moreover, you canâ€™t free the top ranks with a max loss of 400, knowing the maximum is 14000 (at the moment) because thatâ€™s less than 3%. So the leaderboard top could be bloated with people who arenâ€™t participating anymore in any contest.

And finally, though people should be able to quickly reach the leaderboard top, you canâ€™t let them do it with only 1 solo contest and 1 multiplayer contest because thatâ€™s clearly not enough for a meaningful ranking.

1 Like