Achievement Rankings

DeletedUser33353

Didn't know you were such an attention seeker.....

Recognition of achievements might have the ranking changed so it is more fair than a bland "achievement points" only. *Cough* experience/duel ranking *cough*.

Duel ranking for newer worlds should be changed to average experience per duel as a priority.


I know it is tough for you TUG, but please stay on topic. We were talking about achievements......not dueling.
As for an attention seeker? I think anyone that is still halfway active in any world is known.
 

DeletedUser26820

My bad....

I didn't know this thread was a discussion of what is Unnecessary in the game, "overachievers", "competition", attention seekers, stalking experience (whatever the heck that is??), or changing how other rankings, such as dueling for newer worlds, is calculated.

I could swear that this specific thread was titled "Achievement Rankings" and the proposal of adding a tab to the Rankings window.

If some want to propose it's UNNECESSARY, ok. But then justify why we have a Rankings window at all and to why it is NECESSARY.
Why is it necessary that everyone see that Town X is ranked higher than Town Z??
Why is it necessary that everyone see that Toon ABC is ranked higher than Toon EFG in any dynamic such as experience or dueling or fort fighting or where they're at with ap/sp allocation??
The game would easily exist without a single one of the already existing rankings tabs, but they're there nonetheless. Why??
Not a single one of them is NECESSARY, so it then stands to ask, "Heck, this game isn't even necessary, so why play it?"
"Wait.... what am I doing posting in this forum? It's NOT NECESSARY."

So, it's not about NECESSARY, as each of us could have a completely different answer to the question of why we play the game.
None of them are wrong, unless answers that differ from yours are wrong. Otherwise, they're just reasons.
What's wrong with a little competition or "bragging rights" or rankings? For more than one, it might be one of many reasons for playing.
And if there's nothing wrong with rankings, as we have experience, fort fights, dueling, crafting, town, skill points and hall of fame rankings, what's wrong with a continued progression of having an "achievements" rankings?? Heck, we could even have a Traveling Fair rankings based on mats dropped and hours of construction.

So, I have absolutely no issue with "over achievers." Heck, I very much value being surrounded by over achievers, and I love a good competition.
Maybe we could even come up an "Under Achievers" ranking tab. LOLOL. Make sure every gets a "participation trophy."
If Thomas Edison wasn't an "over achiever", we might be playing by candle light instead of an incandescent light bulb.
If Alexander Graham Bell wasn't an "over achiever", we might still be sending telegraphs instead of talking and texting on cell phones.
If Henry Ford wasn't an "over achiever", we might still be riding around in horse and buggy carriages instead of a Lexus or Cadillac.
I admire and value an "over achiever", but that's just me. It's unfortunate for some that has become a derogatory word and definition.

So, as was proposed in the first post in this thread, I'm in favor of an Achievements ranking tab in the Rankings window.
Just like the FF rankings, it can be weighted in a variety of ways:
(Achievement Points) + (Quests completed *2) + (Heroic Deeds *5) + blah blah blah however it wants to be weighted.
And if you want to throw in dueling dynamic participation and FF dynamic participation and crafting dynamic participation and town construction points and wrap them all into one, you can call it the "Big Kahuna" rankings tab.
If the FF ranking can have an "adventurer bonus" and the Town ranking can be changed to give less value to church construction relative to fort ownership, an "Achievement" rankings can be weighted and calculated in a multitude of ways.
In the end, it's just another ranking tab in an already existing ranking window full of tabs.

Over Achievers and Competitors Stand United ;)
 
Top