VDSA Leaderboard - Lets be honest, make it account bound already

Lykurgis

Suru wrote: »

Lykurgis wrote: »

Saturn wrote: »

VDSA has effectively become a marathon sprint. I don't care about being on the leaderboard because I know that skill isnt as essential a factor anymore.

Now just hold on a second there...it takes massive skill to spam jabs/steel tornado where the portals spawn mobs and have them die before ever showing up. THAT is the essence of skill and engaging encounter design right?

/end sarcasm

IMO, the entire PvE leaderboard endgame can be summed up 2 words: RAPID MANEUVERS

Its easy to spam a skill, and kill ***, but no direction, cooperation or knowledge of where stuff sspawns, you'll just be capped at the same old low scores. Being effecient at a rotation, knowledge and consistency is what makes the top vDSA groups the best Players.

Meh.
I still don't think it's very good encounter design, not that engaging, and a poor measurement of "skill" in the grand scheme of MMO PvE content. Not trying to hate on the guys who did a million runs and put in the time memorizing spawn locations and whatnot, I am just not that impressed is all.

Suru

Lykurgis wrote: »

Suru wrote: »

Lykurgis wrote: »

Saturn wrote: »

VDSA has effectively become a marathon sprint. I don't care about being on the leaderboard because I know that skill isnt as essential a factor anymore.

Now just hold on a second there...it takes massive skill to spam jabs/steel tornado where the portals spawn mobs and have them die before ever showing up. THAT is the essence of skill and engaging encounter design right?

/end sarcasm

IMO, the entire PvE leaderboard endgame can be summed up 2 words: RAPID MANEUVERS

Its easy to spam a skill, and kill ***, but no direction, cooperation or knowledge of where stuff sspawns, you'll just be capped at the same old low scores. Being effecient at a rotation, knowledge and consistency is what makes the top vDSA groups the best Players.

Meh.
I still don't think it's very good encounter design, not that engaging, and a poor measurement of "skill" in the grand scheme of MMO PvE content. Not trying to hate on the guys who did a million runs and put in the time memorizing spawn locations and whatnot, I am just not that impressed is all.

Group with non-top tier groups that make it easy and layed out for you and then you'll get your engaging combat.

Lykurgis

Suru wrote: »

Group with non-top tier groups that make it easy and layed out for you and then you'll get your engaging combat.

Been there done that *cough* turd the vamp tank *cough*.

Suru

Lykurgis wrote: »

Suru wrote: »

Group with non-top tier groups that make it easy and layed out for you and then you'll get your engaging combat.

Been there done that *cough* turd the vamp tank *cough*.

Still a better DSA score

sagitter

100% agree, i reported this unfair thing long time ago...
It's absurd that ppl with 2 accounts and more than 8 , v14 characters are monopolizing the weekly leader board.

Naslu

But still no comment by official side.

One more try for an overhaul of the system: it all depends on the loot, vdsa jewlery is tradeable so its profitible do to it like :

sagitter wrote: »

100% agree, i reported this unfair thing long time ago...
It's absurd that ppl with 2 accounts and more than 8 , v14 characters are monopolizing the weekly leader board.

maybe introducing a token loot system with a token equipment trader would be a solution. In that way leaderboards can exist still but everybody will get access to the loot?!

EgoRush

Love_Chunks wrote: »

Easy solution: a static minimum score for a weekly reward while still displaying top ranked scores. That way people who try hard enough can still get a reward and ppl who like to gloat can... well... gloat. Everyone wins.

I like this idea. Get over a minimum score (e.g. 9000 points) and you win a prize. Perhaps tiers of prizes for if you get >10K, 11K, 12K? Though that adds complication.

Locking people out is stupid. Some of us are training in arena and are constantly trying to improve our best time - lock me out and I may as well quit the game. That's why Xantaria was in arena so much; training new tactics, not just for the benefit of others getting a weekly time.

As for the lack of skill, by all means go into arena and get a 12K score if all it takes is nuking portals. I agree that portals should be immune to damage until adds fully spawn, but that doesn't mean the top teams are without skill. There's a reason only 2 guilds in the world (to my current best knowledge) can achieve over 12K scores.

One issue with locking it account wide is as Xantaria has mentioned - people can still be carried through. 3 good people with someone half-decent can still get a leadeboard score in arena. But I think locking it account wide is a step in the right direction. It would be fun to see which character I can get a better score with (though the answer to that is obvious for me...).

Xantaria

It's gonna be your templar :')

smokes

rokrdt05 wrote: »

I agree that the system does need to be reworked and maybe should be account based. However, if a player has multiple characters that have completed it and have earned their spot, they should still be allowed the reward.

If not, you are discouraging replayability and the incentive (in some cases) to level another character.

Not that you actually mentioned the characters should not earn the reward, but it sounds like the post actually leans that way if it is an account wide setting.

i see it more as: only your highest ranked character will appear on the leaderboards. even though your other characters can still compete for leaderboard positions, only your highest will actually appear.

Cherryblossom

As long as you are giving that person credit for all his characters on his account that contributed to his score I seen no reason why this should not be Account linked rather than Character.

But I do not think this should limit someone who has put in the effort to be top in the game from getting the rewards they deserve for their dedication.

Nikkiy

I agree that newer players should have a better chance, but our group alone put 20+ DC characters on the weekly leaderboard everytime so I cant really say we did not take advantage of this. Yellow DSA Jewelry paid for my fancy PVP box gear XD

KerinKor

Alcast wrote: »

Ok ZOS listen, the system atm is just idiotic.

Leaderboards matter?

Rinmaethodain

Yes to that, No matter which character is playing its still same person playing it.
The person should be on leaderboard, not character.

Yes to accounts on leaderboard, not separate characters.

Artemiisia

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/172331/weekly-leaderboard-fair-unfairness#latest

im with you Alcast, made a thread about it last time as well

I have at-least 6 friends that I know of that all had 3-5 chars in the weekly board

Latter

Alcast wrote: »

54 belong to Hodor

How many of them are templars? (budum tshh)

Kupoking

Oh nice arguements. Was against your title statement at first but your right, new players have a hell of a hard time getting there. Maybe if they reset the leaderboards with the removal of pvp buffs they could add this.

Merlin13KAGL

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

I agree. Let's limit the best players to help those less skill players achieve leaderboard.

Because the alternative where a single player takes up 8 slots on the leaderboard is so much better.

It's better than telling the best players in the game they are not permitted to play more than once character.

It's better than needing the leaderboard into meaningless. Account lockouts would make ranks below 50 are of less value.

There is a better solution I have mentioned and that is a weekly lockout per character. Why, because the idea most of the leaderboard is locked up by small groups up people carrying their friends though. Not as much 8 characters per player. That is where you get 1 player holding a ranked spot during the week.

My solution doesn't water down the leaderboard yet opens it up more but only to those who have put the work in to get it done right. The account lockout solution merely makes the leaderboard a joke.

If there was a limit of one spot per character (which there isn't), there are 12 leaderboard spots.

Twelve. (100/8 , assuming each of these l33t players have all of their character slots filled.)

It's supposed to be a weekly reward - you take the best score any of your characters have gotten and you get gear accordingly. I'm perfectly content that you get a better reward based on your position on the leaderboard. This nullifies your statement about "the best players...not permitted to play more than one character." Play them all, keep your best score.

You do that or you break it down into tiers.

Even crappy end of Alliance war rewards give you different tiers.

The simple fact is that most of your hardcore characters stay on the leaderboard because of the gear they've earned by getting on the leaderboard. Sub out that gear and I'm guessing you wouldn't be getting the scores you're currently getting.

I'm not questioning that you're more hardcore, more dedicated, or perhaps even better than average. You got on the leaderboard because of those things. You stay on the leaderboard because you got on the leaderboard early.

(They've never once reset scores, to my knowledge after adjusting 'skilled play' issues. Pretty sure that is a different issue unto itself.)

Without at least a tier system and some chance of getting a version of the gear that ends up being a reward, newer groups will not catch up - ever.

As it stands now, there is little hope of progression for new groups.

Make it account wide limited, continue to earn your position, not just your presence, and get and even better reward in the process.

One better reward.

Beyond that, what is your reasoning for denying others the reason to even try?

byrom101b16_ESO

There should be 400 places on the leaderboard, and all based on accounts.

That's equivalent to 100 DIFFERENT teams.

Teams should really be a footnote, as running the very same team of players whilst varying the alts means the few get to monopolise as things stand, which is of course how they like it...

Catering to the very few is bad for business however. The leaderboard should always have been for DIFFFERENT teams, not the same old no-lifers hammering away at it with all their alts and keeping perfectly good 10K+ runs by other players permanently off the board due to them not enjoying the simple advantage of run-spamming.

However, if you have alts that have run VDSA with a score within 5% of the highest one your account has posted for that week, and you are on the leaderboard, each alt with that score should also get the reward.

That's the fairest way to deal with it I would say...

idk

Joy_Division wrote: »

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

I agree. Let's limit the best players to help those less skill players achieve leaderboard.

Because the alternative where a single player takes up 8 slots on the leaderboard is so much better.

It's better than telling the best players in the game they are not permitted to play more than once character.

It's better than needing the leaderboard into meaningless. Account lockouts would make ranks below 50 are of less value.

There is a better solution I have mentioned and that is a weekly lockout per character. Why, because the idea most of the leaderboard is locked up by small groups up people carrying their friends though. Not as much 8 characters per player. That is where you get 1 player holding a ranked spot during the week.

My solution doesn't water down the leaderboard yet opens it up more but only to those who have put the work in to get it done right. The account lockout solution merely makes the leaderboard a joke.

A joke? Meaningless? Give me a break dude. Sorry if the 100 best actual PLAYERS would be polluting your precious leaderboard rankings.

Yes and if they were to implement the change anything below rank 50 should not receive gold gear. This thread is calling for lowering the bar so others who have not put as much work into it can make the leaderboard. The OP basically states he wants this account based lockout so the stronger players cannot take up as many leaderboard spaces to make room for others.

Naslu wrote: »

no response by zenimax so far? why? pls comment!

No reason to expect a response. This isn't the first thread on the subject, far from it. If they even replied it would have been an earlier thread and they rarely keep making the same response to each thread on the subject since that is uneeded redundancy. It's a small minority that wants this change.

Xantaria

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

This thread is calling for lowering the bar so others who have not put as much work into it can make the leaderboard. The OP basically states he wants this account based lockout so the stronger players cannot take up as many leaderboard spaces to make room for others.

Kind of. His main point tho was, that it is almost impossible for new players to achieve leaderboard scores when the elite takes up all spots with more and more characters. Everyone is grinding up new characters (*** Championsystem). At one point the best team in the world will have 100 characters per person. And then? Only 4 persons in the world will get weekly. Does that reward system make any sense? I don't think so.

I know it's completely exaggerated, but that's the overall trend.

Merlin13KAGL

Xantaria wrote: »

I know it's completely exaggerated, but that's the overall trend.

Not as much as you think.

Four accounts (players) with 3 alts running every combination of 4 could eat 81 of the spots in short order... All technically being different teams.

Jeckll

I'm kind of torn on that one.

While I see the point of @Alcast , the other side of the coin surely is that there are players who get the weekly maybe twice and they are not abusing anything. They happen to be very skilled and dedicated players, being able to make top scores with different characters. I think there should be some sort of "reward" for them.

I think @Xantaria mentioned that he was helping others to get the weekly and I think that in itself is good. Strong players helping guild mates / friends to achieve a hard to accomplish goal. That's challenging and fun I think. And that should be rewarded if he has to use different chars to do so. Like if Group A needs a Tank and Group B needs a DPS.

Like every good and social system, this one is also subject to abuse from players overdoing it, getting like 8 characters into the weekly...so I see that this anti social behavior should be restricted in some way...

It's just sad that you're punishing those who maybe have 2 characters and use their alt to help out friends and those guys go home unrewarded if the weekly reward gets account wide.

In the grand scheme of things, I think the benefits of account wide rewarding outweighs the negative side so I would have to agree with @Alcast in the end.

I think it's really sad that we cant have nice things because there are always players overdoing it.

Shadesofkin

I try to play at my best level to get on the leaderboard each week, even in VDSA. If I manage to do it more than once that's my business, not yours.

Jeckll

Shadesofkin wrote: »

I try to play at my best level to get on the leaderboard each week, even in VDSA. If I manage to do it more than once that's my business, not yours.

In a social environment, the strong should actually care about the weaker ones and it's the business of the community to set the rules in a way everyone can be happy.

Rinmaethodain

Maybe its not our buissness if someone manages getting there more than once. But its our buissnes when broken system rewards same person all over again, multiple times at once for achieving exactly same thing just on different characters. A single person gets multiple achievment for doing exactly same feat.

Just like you cant be punished multiple times for same thing, you shouldnt be awarded multiple times for same thing.

Cuyler

Just curious what the lowest score to get on the vDSA leaderboard is at this time (NA and EU)? I'm at work and can't look.

Jeckll

Cuyler wrote: »

Just curious what the lowest score to get on the vDSA leaderboard is at this time (NA and EU)? I'm at work and can't look.

I think it was ~10,5k on EU for last weeks weekly on EU.

Rinmaethodain

for NA its 10431 right now

Xantaria

EU > NA Kappa

Seth_Black

100% agree
Closed elitist guilds shouldn't own half of the board just because they've got enough characters geared to do it.
Tbh I would completely remove it since only weekly board matters and everyone should be able to see his own personal record ...and that's all.