Maintenance for the week of December 22:
• NA megaservers for maintenance – December 22, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 8:00AM EST (13:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – December 22, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 8:00AM EST (13:00 UTC)
• NA megaservers for maintenance – December 22, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 8:00AM EST (13:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – December 22, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 8:00AM EST (13:00 UTC)
vMA leaderboards not TOP 100 anymore?
bharathitman
✭✭✭✭
I used to think the vMA leaderboards had 100 places for each class. But now I see that it has been capped to 60? Have they changed the logic leaderboard logic or something? The 60th cut off cap for sorc seems to be around 540k, same for nightblades on PC/EU
0
-
Olupajmibanan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭vMA leaderboard size scales with number of participants. The more players participate, the smaller is the leaderboard.
The leaderboard size is set as a percentage of all participants. It stays at 100 until certain number of participants is reached (we don't know the number yet). Then, the leaderboard size will start scaling down with increasing number of participants.
If it is 60, that means a looot of players participated in given leaderboard that week.Edited by Olupajmibanan on March 18, 2019 9:42AM1 -
glavius✭✭✭✭✭Olupajmibanan wrote: »vMA leaderboard size scales with number of participants. The more players participate, the smaller is the leaderboard.
The leaderboard size is set as a percentage of all participants. It stays at 100 until certain number of participants is reached (we don't know the number yet). Then, the leaderboard size will start scaling down with increasing number of participants.
If it is 60, that means a looot of players participated in given leaderboard.
That doesn't make any sense. The more players participate, the less get rewards. So if 100k players participated it might only be 1 or 2 guys who got weekly rewards.
Really would seem illogical.5 -
Olupajmibanan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Olupajmibanan wrote: »vMA leaderboard size scales with number of participants. The more players participate, the smaller is the leaderboard.
The leaderboard size is set as a percentage of all participants. It stays at 100 until certain number of participants is reached (we don't know the number yet). Then, the leaderboard size will start scaling down with increasing number of participants.
If it is 60, that means a looot of players participated in given leaderboard.
That doesn't make any sense. The more players participate, the less get rewards. So if 100k players participated it might only be 1 or 2 guys who got weekly rewards.
Really would seem illogical.
Rewards are supposed to be given to % best players. Let's say, only top 5% of all participant are allowed to have rewards. I don't understand much either, but this happens in other trial leaderboards as well.Edited by Olupajmibanan on March 18, 2019 9:44AM0 -
Olupajmibanan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Olupajmibanan wrote: »Olupajmibanan wrote: »vMA leaderboard size scales with number of participants. The more players participate, the smaller is the leaderboard.
The leaderboard size is set as a percentage of all participants. It stays at 100 until certain number of participants is reached (we don't know the number yet). Then, the leaderboard size will start scaling down with increasing number of participants.
If it is 60, that means a looot of players participated in given leaderboard.
That doesn't make any sense. The more players participate, the less get rewards. So if 100k players participated it might only be 1 or 2 guys who got weekly rewards.
Really would seem illogical.
Rewards are supposed to be given to % best players. Let's say, only top 5% of all participant are allowed to have rewards. I don't understand much either, but this happens in other trial leaderboards as well.
I just adapted to it. My stable 580k with Sorcerer is always enough to stay in the leaderboard.1 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Olupajmibanan wrote: »vMA leaderboard size scales with number of participants. The more players participate, the smaller is the leaderboard.
The leaderboard size is set as a percentage of all participants. It stays at 100 until certain number of participants is reached (we don't know the number yet). Then, the leaderboard size will start scaling down with increasing number of participants.
If it is 60, that means a looot of players participated in given leaderboard.
That doesn't make any sense. The more players participate, the less get rewards. So if 100k players participated it might only be 1 or 2 guys who got weekly rewards.
Really would seem illogical.
The only way this makes sense is if it's checking the scores earned, and then selecting only the top 5% of scores gets in, not the top 5% of players who ran it. Which, would be weird, but possible. Why it would be like this instead of a fixed number of slots, or a fixed percentage of the players running the content overall, I have no idea.0 -
AbysmalGhul✭✭✭✭✭
✭I don't know exactly, but I do know it's wonky as far as keeping up/tracking other players. For example, a couple of weeks ago I was 50 for the sorcerer weekly board with just 72 players. A couple of hours later, I was at rank 74, but 10 players that were ranked higher than me, had a 100-200k lower score than me. Then an hour later it adjusted and I was put back 57 or so....then all of the better players pulling 500k+ scores shoved me down the high 90's and then completely off the leader boards.
So it's all about how many people complete and rank on the leaderboards.0 -
Dragneel1207✭✭✭✭If more ppl run it if based on percentage shouldn't there be more slots.why less slots?Edited by Dragneel1207 on March 18, 2019 9:59AM0 -
Svenja✭✭✭✭✭
✭The scoreboards for vMA have never been working %-wise.
It has always been "Top 100", as a flat number.
I have seen people with scores like 50k (yes, 50, not 500) on the Warden Leaderboards last year when I still did vMA on different classes for the weekly. I am not good at vMA and it was enough to just finish with any low score on Templar, DK and Warden because there were never 100 players that even competed. You'd always get the weekly.
If they changed that to "X % of players" then that's a very new change. I would have never made the leaderboards otherwise, as I never do great scores.
I would like to see the Patchnotes where this is stated.Edited by Svenja on March 18, 2019 10:04AMPC | EU
Svea Rochaud | Templar Healer | AD
Grand Overlord - Flawless Conqueror - Immortal Redeemer - Tick-Tock-Tormentor - Gryphon Heart - Spirit Slayer3 -
Olupajmibanan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭The scoreboards for vMA have never been working %-wise.
It has always been "Top 100", as a flat number.
I have seen people with scores like 50k (yes, 50, not 500) on the Warden Leaderboards last year when I still did vMA on different classes for the weekly. I am not good at vMA and it was enough to just finish with any low score on Templar, DK and Warden because there were never 100 players that even competed. You'd always get the weekly.
If they changed that to "X % of players" then that's a very new change. I would have never made the leaderboards otherwise, as I never do great scores.
I don't know exact math behind this. Nothing has been disclosed. But, the leaderboard size stays at 100 until certain number of players participate. Then it starts scaling down.
Why you always get the rewards on templar, DK and wrdn is because there is not enough players to even fill the 100
0 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Dragneel1207 wrote: »If more ppl run it should not the percentage should be more slots right.why less slots?
Because there's two ways you can get a top % in this case.
The top percentage of players. So, if 1000 players run it, the top 5% would be 50 players.
Or the top 5% of scores. In which case, you'd need to look at those 1k players and their scores, and then evaluate what the percentage is.
For example, if the high score was 500k, the top 5% would be ~475k. So, you'd need to have a score above 475 to place on the leaderboard. Let's say that's 20 people. Then someone comes along and scores a 580k. Then you would need to be ~550k to be in the top 5% of scores, and all 20 of those players at 500k would be wiped from the board, and the leader board would be reduced to the new high score.
Now, to be clear, that 5% number is just for illustration, I have no idea what the actual range is. There's also a mechanic with the leaderboards where it seems that it forces additional players onto the board, based on their score, if there isn't enough data. But how it's working exactly? No idea.2 -
Olupajmibanan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭starkerealm wrote: »Dragneel1207 wrote: »If more ppl run it should not the percentage should be more slots right.why less slots?
Because there's two ways you can get a top % in this case.
The top percentage of players. So, if 1000 players run it, the top 5% would be 50 players.
Or the top 5% of scores. In which case, you'd need to look at those 1k players and their scores, and then evaluate what the percentage is.
For example, if the high score was 500k, the top 5% would be ~475k. So, you'd need to have a score above 475 to place on the leaderboard. Let's say that's 20 people. Then someone comes along and scores a 580k. Then you would need to be ~550k to be in the top 5% of scores, and all 20 of those players at 500k would be wiped from the board, and the leader board would be reduced to the new high score.
Now, to be clear, that 5% number is just for illustration, I have no idea what the actual range is. There's also a mechanic with the leaderboards where it seems that it forces additional players onto the board, based on their score, if there isn't enough data. But how it's working exactly? No idea.
It seems to be tied to quantiles rather than high score. Warden leaderboard on PC/EU always has someone to score 600k+ yet the leaderboard is always of size of 100 and it isn't even filled.0 -
code65536✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭It's always been top 100 scores.
Still is top 100 scores.
The problem is that the leaderboard display has been bugged for the past year or two. There are 100 scores on there. But when the game client asks the server for those 100 scores, the server will send only a partial list.
If you pay attention, you'll notice that a name might appear one moment. Then disappear when you look an hour later. And then reappear when you look an hour after that.
There really are 100 scores, and those 100 scores really will get their weekly mail. This bug is just a problem with the display of the leaderboard.
Everything else in this thread--about it being a percent, about the leaderboard size being dynamic, etc.--are all completely incorrect. Just a display bug. End of story.Edited by code65536 on March 18, 2019 10:10AMNightfighters ― PC/NA and PC/EU
Dungeons and Trials:Personal best scores:- Dragonstar Arena: 46817 (NA)
- Maelstrom Arena: 600526 (NA)
- Blackrose Prison: 99274 (EU) (Unchained)
- Maw of Lorkhaj: 165227 (EU)
- Halls of Fabrication: 220708 (NA) (Tick-Tock Tormentor #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11, #12)
- Asylum Sanctorium: 114957 (NA) (Immortal Redeemer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10)
- Cloudrest: 131256 (NA) (Gryphon Heart #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7)
- Sunspire: 250866 (EU) (Godslayer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7)
- Kyne's Aegis: 235841 (EU) (Dawnbringer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8)
Dungeon trifectas:- Mountain God and Leave No Bone Unbroken
- Apex Predator and Pure Lunacy
- Depths Defier and Relentless Raider
- Defanged the Devourer and Nature's Wrath
- In Defiance of Death and No Rest for the Wicked
- Bane of Thorns and True Genius
- Ardent Bibliophile and Subterranean Smasher
- Battlespire's Best and Bastion Breaker
- Zero Regrets and Land, Air, and Sea Supremacy
- Fist of Tava and Invader's Bane
- Curator's Champion (Valinna) and Temporal Tempest
- Unshakeable Fervor and Lighting the Embers
Extended Journal Add-Ons: Item Set Browser ― Loot Log ― Character Knowledge ― Collectibles Tracker ― RaidificatorPC/Console Add-Ons: Combat Alerts ― Group Buff PanelsOther Add-Ons: Deconstruction Junk Marker ― Purge Tracker ― Asylum Status Panel ― Smart Looter ― Improved Companion Rapport Information16 -
Cheezits94✭✭✭✭✭Olupajmibanan wrote: »The scoreboards for vMA have never been working %-wise.
It has always been "Top 100", as a flat number.
I have seen people with scores like 50k (yes, 50, not 500) on the Warden Leaderboards last year when I still did vMA on different classes for the weekly. I am not good at vMA and it was enough to just finish with any low score on Templar, DK and Warden because there were never 100 players that even competed. You'd always get the weekly.
If they changed that to "X % of players" then that's a very new change. I would have never made the leaderboards otherwise, as I never do great scores.
I don't know exact math behind this. Nothing has been disclosed. But, the leaderboard size stays at 100 until certain number of players participate. Then it starts scaling down.
Why you always get the rewards on templar, DK and wrdn is because there is not enough players to even fill the 100
But then that doesn't make sense. Why would the amount of players on the leaderboards GO DOWN if the amount of participants GO UP?
That's pretty effed up then. When 300 people participate, 30 get a reward, and if 65 people participate, all 65 get a reward?
That's some dumb s*** if ZOS made it this way and I absolutely don't believe that this is true.
Edited by Cheezits94 on March 18, 2019 10:11AMIf you can't even spell sets, locations and items, you probably have no clue what you even are talking about.
Tamriel, not Tamerial, Temerial or Tamériál
Alkosh, not Alkoash
Dolmen, not Dolman
Olorime, not Oloramie
Sorcerer, not Sorceror1 -
Juhasow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Olupajmibanan wrote: »vMA leaderboard size scales with number of participants. The more players participate, the smaller is the leaderboard.
The leaderboard size is set as a percentage of all participants. It stays at 100 until certain number of participants is reached (we don't know the number yet). Then, the leaderboard size will start scaling down with increasing number of participants.
If it is 60, that means a looot of players participated in given leaderboard that week.
That is not true. PvE leaderboards are not percentage based but top 100. Percentage based leaderboards are reserved for Cyrodill. Even BGs have top 100. Vet MA leaderboard is always at 100 best scores it doesnt matter how many people were participating. There are 2 reasons currently why we see less then 100 players in leaderboards which are :
1. Leaderboard being bugged and not showing all participants. It happends for every leaderboard not only vMA. You can see sometimes for example on dragonstar or blackrose arena that there are 2-3 players having number 1 score which is kinda impossible. That bug is here since pretty long time already.
2. Not enough people participating in vMA per week on certain classes. For example on warden You'll get to top 100 weekly scores if You'll just finish vMA in one attempt.
Now the only thing why it's so visible on vMA not other content is that because if leaderboard wont show 1 or 2 players names in group content leaderboard there will be still few remaining players keeping that score spot but when it comes to vMA 1 player is 1 score spot so if leaderboard is not showing his name it actually messes up with leaderboard.
Edited by Juhasow on March 18, 2019 10:24AM1 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭It's always been top 100 scores.
Still is top 100 scores.
The problem is that the leaderboard display has been bugged for the past year or two. There are 100 scores on there. But when the game client asks the server for those 100 scores, the server will send only a partial list.
If you pay attention, you'll notice that a name might appear one moment. Then disappear when you look an hour later. And then reappear when you look an hour after that.
There really are 100 scores, and those 100 scores really will get their weekly mail. This bug is just a problem with the display of the leaderboard.
Everything else in this thread--about it being a percent, about the leaderboard size being dynamic, etc.--are all completely incorrect. Just a display bug. End of story.
This explanation makes way more sense. Especially when you consider the sheer volume of data on the leaderboards tab.1 -
Olupajmibanan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭It's always been top 100 scores.
Still is top 100 scores.
The problem is that the leaderboard display has been bugged for the past year or two. There are 100 scores on there. But when the game client asks the server for those 100 scores, the server will send only a partial list.
If you pay attention, you'll notice that a name might appear one moment. Then disappear when you look an hour later. And then reappear when you look an hour after that.
There really are 100 scores, and those 100 scores really will get their weekly mail. This bug is just a problem with the display of the leaderboard.
Everything else in this thread--about it being a percent, about the leaderboard size being dynamic, etc.--are all completely incorrect. Just a display bug. End of story.
Purposely tested exactly that and no I did not get the reward. Leaderboard size was of 76 with last player having 545k. I scored 543k and I wasn't on the list. Do you really think that 24 players had score between 543k and 545k?Edited by Olupajmibanan on March 18, 2019 10:15AM1 -
Juhasow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Olupajmibanan wrote: »It's always been top 100 scores.
Still is top 100 scores.
The problem is that the leaderboard display has been bugged for the past year or two. There are 100 scores on there. But when the game client asks the server for those 100 scores, the server will send only a partial list.
If you pay attention, you'll notice that a name might appear one moment. Then disappear when you look an hour later. And then reappear when you look an hour after that.
There really are 100 scores, and those 100 scores really will get their weekly mail. This bug is just a problem with the display of the leaderboard.
Everything else in this thread--about it being a percent, about the leaderboard size being dynamic, etc.--are all completely incorrect. Just a display bug. End of story.
Purposely tested exactly that and no I did not get the reward. Leaderboard size was of 76 with last player having 545k. I scored 543k and I wasn't on the list. Do you really think that 24 players had score between 543k and 545k?
The thing is when it comes to vMA 1 player is 1 score spot so if leaderboard for example is not showing someone with lets say numer 10 on leaderboard everyone with lower spot will go up by 1 place and for example number 90 will be now number 89. So in Your case when number 76 on leaderboard had 543k that doesnt mean he was really number 76. He could be in fact number 126 and leaderboard just did not showed 50 players with better score then him which moved him 50 places up. The more participants in certain leaderboard the higher chance for names to be missing.Edited by Juhasow on March 18, 2019 10:33AM2 -
code65536✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Olupajmibanan wrote: »It's always been top 100 scores.
Still is top 100 scores.
The problem is that the leaderboard display has been bugged for the past year or two. There are 100 scores on there. But when the game client asks the server for those 100 scores, the server will send only a partial list.
If you pay attention, you'll notice that a name might appear one moment. Then disappear when you look an hour later. And then reappear when you look an hour after that.
There really are 100 scores, and those 100 scores really will get their weekly mail. This bug is just a problem with the display of the leaderboard.
Everything else in this thread--about it being a percent, about the leaderboard size being dynamic, etc.--are all completely incorrect. Just a display bug. End of story.
Purposely tested exactly that and no I did not get the reward. Leaderboard size was of 76 with last player having 545k. I scored 543k and I wasn't on the list. Do you really think that 24 players had score between 543k and 545k?
The missing scores are not necessarily at the bottom of the list. They are random throughout the entire list. There might be one or two missing scores at the every end, but often that final score that you see really is the final score. I.e., #76 probably was #100. It's just 24 other scores through the board are not being displayed. So for the purposes of determining the final cutoff score for the weekly, the leaderboard is still accurate or at least pretty close to accurate.Edited by code65536 on March 18, 2019 11:42AMNightfighters ― PC/NA and PC/EU
Dungeons and Trials:Personal best scores:- Dragonstar Arena: 46817 (NA)
- Maelstrom Arena: 600526 (NA)
- Blackrose Prison: 99274 (EU) (Unchained)
- Maw of Lorkhaj: 165227 (EU)
- Halls of Fabrication: 220708 (NA) (Tick-Tock Tormentor #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11, #12)
- Asylum Sanctorium: 114957 (NA) (Immortal Redeemer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10)
- Cloudrest: 131256 (NA) (Gryphon Heart #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7)
- Sunspire: 250866 (EU) (Godslayer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7)
- Kyne's Aegis: 235841 (EU) (Dawnbringer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8)
Dungeon trifectas:- Mountain God and Leave No Bone Unbroken
- Apex Predator and Pure Lunacy
- Depths Defier and Relentless Raider
- Defanged the Devourer and Nature's Wrath
- In Defiance of Death and No Rest for the Wicked
- Bane of Thorns and True Genius
- Ardent Bibliophile and Subterranean Smasher
- Battlespire's Best and Bastion Breaker
- Zero Regrets and Land, Air, and Sea Supremacy
- Fist of Tava and Invader's Bane
- Curator's Champion (Valinna) and Temporal Tempest
- Unshakeable Fervor and Lighting the Embers
Extended Journal Add-Ons: Item Set Browser ― Loot Log ― Character Knowledge ― Collectibles Tracker ― RaidificatorPC/Console Add-Ons: Combat Alerts ― Group Buff PanelsOther Add-Ons: Deconstruction Junk Marker ― Purge Tracker ― Asylum Status Panel ― Smart Looter ― Improved Companion Rapport Information3 -
code65536✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Your case when number 76 on leaderboard had 543k that doesnt mean he was really number 76. He could be in fact number 126 and leaderboard just did not showed 50 players with better score then him which moved him 50 places up.
Yes, and no. Nobody beyond the top 100 scores will appear. Yes, that score was moved up to 76 by the missing scores. No, that place could not be #126.
If your score appears on the board, you are somewhere in the top 100. No score beyond the top 100 will ever show. If your score doesn't appear, but you know that your score is better than the bottom score being shown, then your name is one of the ones that isn't being shown due to the reporting bug. If your score doesn't appear, and it's lower than the bottommost score on the board, then you probably aren't in the top 100.
(There's a small chance that the bottommost score is actually #99 and your missing score is #100. But a very small chance. You can force the server to resend scores by relogging and then rechecking the board. If it still doesn't appear after doing that four or five times, then your score simply did not make the cut.)Edited by code65536 on March 18, 2019 11:59AMNightfighters ― PC/NA and PC/EU
Dungeons and Trials:Personal best scores:- Dragonstar Arena: 46817 (NA)
- Maelstrom Arena: 600526 (NA)
- Blackrose Prison: 99274 (EU) (Unchained)
- Maw of Lorkhaj: 165227 (EU)
- Halls of Fabrication: 220708 (NA) (Tick-Tock Tormentor #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11, #12)
- Asylum Sanctorium: 114957 (NA) (Immortal Redeemer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10)
- Cloudrest: 131256 (NA) (Gryphon Heart #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7)
- Sunspire: 250866 (EU) (Godslayer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7)
- Kyne's Aegis: 235841 (EU) (Dawnbringer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8)
Dungeon trifectas:- Mountain God and Leave No Bone Unbroken
- Apex Predator and Pure Lunacy
- Depths Defier and Relentless Raider
- Defanged the Devourer and Nature's Wrath
- In Defiance of Death and No Rest for the Wicked
- Bane of Thorns and True Genius
- Ardent Bibliophile and Subterranean Smasher
- Battlespire's Best and Bastion Breaker
- Zero Regrets and Land, Air, and Sea Supremacy
- Fist of Tava and Invader's Bane
- Curator's Champion (Valinna) and Temporal Tempest
- Unshakeable Fervor and Lighting the Embers
Extended Journal Add-Ons: Item Set Browser ― Loot Log ― Character Knowledge ― Collectibles Tracker ― RaidificatorPC/Console Add-Ons: Combat Alerts ― Group Buff PanelsOther Add-Ons: Deconstruction Junk Marker ― Purge Tracker ― Asylum Status Panel ― Smart Looter ― Improved Companion Rapport Information3 -
oranje_elf✭✭✭I am 100% sure there is an extra rule for the reward calculation. At least two times I have ended up being just 1-2k less than someone at the last *visible* position in the leaderboard (at a position of 70 or around), what would almost guarantee me a position in top 100 (as it is highly unlikely to have 30+ people in between, seeing the distribution of other scores). I did not get any rewards in either of the cases.
I had even sent a request to ZoS asking if this was a bug or it was intentional.
Received no answer, as usual.1 -
code65536✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭oranje_elf wrote: »I am 100% sure there is an extra rule for the reward calculation. At least two times I have ended up being just 1-2k less than someone at the last *visible* position in the leaderboard (at a position of 70 or around), what would almost guarantee me a position in top 100 (as it is highly unlikely to have 30+ people in between, seeing the distribution of other scores). I did not get any rewards in either of the cases.
I had even sent a request to ZoS asking if this was a bug or it was intentional.
Received no answer, as usual.
Read the two posts above yours.Nightfighters ― PC/NA and PC/EU
Dungeons and Trials:Personal best scores:- Dragonstar Arena: 46817 (NA)
- Maelstrom Arena: 600526 (NA)
- Blackrose Prison: 99274 (EU) (Unchained)
- Maw of Lorkhaj: 165227 (EU)
- Halls of Fabrication: 220708 (NA) (Tick-Tock Tormentor #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11, #12)
- Asylum Sanctorium: 114957 (NA) (Immortal Redeemer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10)
- Cloudrest: 131256 (NA) (Gryphon Heart #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7)
- Sunspire: 250866 (EU) (Godslayer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7)
- Kyne's Aegis: 235841 (EU) (Dawnbringer #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8)
Dungeon trifectas:- Mountain God and Leave No Bone Unbroken
- Apex Predator and Pure Lunacy
- Depths Defier and Relentless Raider
- Defanged the Devourer and Nature's Wrath
- In Defiance of Death and No Rest for the Wicked
- Bane of Thorns and True Genius
- Ardent Bibliophile and Subterranean Smasher
- Battlespire's Best and Bastion Breaker
- Zero Regrets and Land, Air, and Sea Supremacy
- Fist of Tava and Invader's Bane
- Curator's Champion (Valinna) and Temporal Tempest
- Unshakeable Fervor and Lighting the Embers
Extended Journal Add-Ons: Item Set Browser ― Loot Log ― Character Knowledge ― Collectibles Tracker ― RaidificatorPC/Console Add-Ons: Combat Alerts ― Group Buff PanelsOther Add-Ons: Deconstruction Junk Marker ― Purge Tracker ― Asylum Status Panel ― Smart Looter ― Improved Companion Rapport Information0 -
TriangularChicken✭✭✭✭It's always been top 100 scores.
Still is top 100 scores.
The problem is that the leaderboard display has been bugged for the past year or two. There are 100 scores on there. But when the game client asks the server for those 100 scores, the server will send only a partial list.
If you pay attention, you'll notice that a name might appear one moment. Then disappear when you look an hour later. And then reappear when you look an hour after that.
There really are 100 scores, and those 100 scores really will get their weekly mail. This bug is just a problem with the display of the leaderboard.
Everything else in this thread--about it being a percent, about the leaderboard size being dynamic, etc.--are all completely incorrect. Just a display bug. End of story.
True!
That says a lot about ZOS that they haven't been able to fix a one year old bug..especially when it's such a simple one..0 -
oranje_elf✭✭✭oranje_elf wrote: »I am 100% sure there is an extra rule for the reward calculation. At least two times I have ended up being just 1-2k less than someone at the last *visible* position in the leaderboard (at a position of 70 or around), what would almost guarantee me a position in top 100 (as it is highly unlikely to have 30+ people in between, seeing the distribution of other scores). I did not get any rewards in either of the cases.
I had even sent a request to ZoS asking if this was a bug or it was intentional.
Received no answer, as usual.
Read the two posts above yours.
Thanks! Now (after re-reading your post one more time) I finally got what you meant.
I guess I was just unlucky back then being just a few k's behind top 100, that is it.0 -
D0RID0RI240✭✭✭✭I also had this issue. I ran 530k (and change) on my nightblade, PC-NA, this past week but the weekly said "no score". It never appeared on the leaderboard but i received a leaderboard reward on that toon. Also had the same thing happen to one of my magplars.0 -
starkerealm✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭oranje_elf wrote: »oranje_elf wrote: »I am 100% sure there is an extra rule for the reward calculation. At least two times I have ended up being just 1-2k less than someone at the last *visible* position in the leaderboard (at a position of 70 or around), what would almost guarantee me a position in top 100 (as it is highly unlikely to have 30+ people in between, seeing the distribution of other scores). I did not get any rewards in either of the cases.
I had even sent a request to ZoS asking if this was a bug or it was intentional.
Received no answer, as usual.
Read the two posts above yours.
Thanks! Now (after re-reading your post one more time) I finally got what you meant.
I guess I was just unlucky back then being just a few k's behind top 100, that is it.
Or, take it as an incentive to try harder, get in more practice, more attempts, work to clean up your flaws. There's nothing that prevents you from getting better at content, the more you play it.0