Rayman Pirate-Community

So in the 'List of ranks' thread I was discussing how I thought that the rank boundaries were too high and unrealistic to achieve if you were a newer member. I initially suggested to change the boundaries of the ranks. This may not be a very favorable solution for some, and it also might be a pain to implement.

In the thread Adsolution suggested that we could increase the number of tings received by submitting a Rayman 3 score to the HoF. I think this is a pretty good idea. I think if the ting pay-out was higher it'd give more of an incentive for people to score more in Rayman 3, maybe re-newing and adding to the popularity of the leader board.

My score is something like 360k, so lets say the ting payout should be 36k. - That may sound high, but it's not really. Look at the rank boundaries for this forum. You'd have to have like 25k+ posts to achieve the ranks on posts alone. The boundaries warrant a higher ting payout for HoF scores. My thoughts on the boundaries can be found in the 'List of ranks' thread, I'm happy to C&P them over if anyone wants me to.

Thoughts?

Yes, its a pretty good idea unfortunatly i suffer of hyper tings avidity and i always want more....
I think 80% of the active community will be okay with that idea. A vote in the thread is rrecommended.

That's true, I probably should have made this a poll.

Although I thought it'd be worth discussing it first and seeing what the general feeling is.

I say :

More tings !

More tings !

Well I think there are a few options:

you either up the ting value per post

up the ting value per rayman 3 score

OR lower the ting boundaries on the ranks

All the three.

The ting requirements for the ranks were just upped at the end of 2012 (stretching them out from 100,000 to 250,000), and for good reason, after much deliberation, so that's a no-go.

However, I've always thought that the amount of tings given out for Scores were relatively low. Only 8,000 tings for a world-class achievement? I think that it should be at least double that, if not triple, because that's an unbelievable amount of work. Or, if that rewards people who only scored in the 200-300k range too highly, perhaps a higher reward for people who score in the 700-800k range would be ideal.

Hm, if this were to be implemented, how would we go about applying this potential new hand-out in relation to already uploaded scores? I don't think it'd be fair to leave them as-is.

I'd assume that it's not simply a ting reward, but that it might work differently, such as it being a separate value that divides your score by 100, rounds to the nearest whole number, and places that on top of your ting count. If it were done like that, it would explain how improving your score, or submitting a worse one adjusts your ting count accordingly, which would mean that making the HoF automatically re-submit everyone's score would do the same with the new rewards.

I have no idea how it works though, just guessing.

Adsolution wrote:The ting requirements for the ranks were just upped at the end of 2012 (stretching them out from 100,000 to 250,000), and for good reason, after much deliberation, so that's a no-go.

However, I've always thought that the amount of tings given out for Scores were relatively low. Only 8,000 tings for a world-class achievement? I think that it should be at least double that, if not triple, because that's an unbelievable amount of work. Or, if that rewards people who only scored in the 200-300k range too highly, perhaps a higher reward for people who score in the 700-800k range would be ideal.

I just think it should be like this:

score 100k in Rayman 3 - you get 10k tings. - and so on.

I think that's fair in regards to the rank boundaries.

- Also you actually wouldn't even need to change the current system to implement it. - If there was a separate announcement thread where people who 'sign on' get the new percentage of tings from their score added onto their account manually

Scoring in the 200-400k range is what someone does on a casual playthrough, I don't think that they should receive 20k-40k tings for something like that, that's ridiculous.

Adsolution wrote:Scoring in the 200-400k range is what someone does on a casual playthrough, I don't think that they should receive 20k-40k tings for something like that, that's ridiculous.

But look at the rank boundaries & ting requirements!

And hey, it took me a lot of work to get to 360k! I'm not even kidding!

See this is why you guys can't understand

you've totally lost touch with people who aren't insane Rayman 3 pros, and haven't been here for like 10 years!!!

rolesfamily wrote:See this is why you guys can't understand

you've totally lost touch

Let's not jump to conclusions here.

rolesfamily wrote:with people who aren't insane Rayman 3 pros,

We can't have a scale that adapts to the individual. In my opinion, the only thing worth 30-40 thousand tings is someone who has worked their butt off to attain a 700-800k score. I highly doubt you've put in that same amount of effort to get a score of ~360,000.

rolesfamily wrote:and haven't been here for like 10 years!!!

I capped 100,000 tings after only about two and a half years. I always participated in contests like SOTM, TTQ and Record Day; posting to gain tings is only the bare minimum you can do.

Adsolution wrote:

rolesfamily wrote:See this is why you guys can't understand

you've totally lost touch

Let's not jump to conclusions here.

rolesfamily wrote:with people who aren't insane Rayman 3 pros,

We can't have a scale that adapts to the individual. In my opinion, the only thing worth 30-40 thousand tings is someone who has worked their butt off to attain a 700-800k score. I highly doubt you've put in that same amount of effort to get a score of ~360,000.

rolesfamily wrote:and haven't been here for like 10 years!!!

I capped 100,000 tings after only about two and a half years. I always participated in contests like SOTM, TTQ and Record Day; posting to gain tings is only the bare minimum you can do.

Sorry, I just know what it can be like when you've been at a place for years you begin to lose touch with what it was like to start out. I think that's a pretty fair comment, although it obviously won't apply to everyone & certain individuals.

That's true, I haven't put in the same amount of effort to get 700k-800k that's fair enough. BUT I did put in quite a lot of time and effort to get my score. I know it's not that high compared to some, but for my skill level of the game it was quite difficult, and I'm proud of my score. There are a lot of well established members who only have a score that's like 400k! So I doubt they'd like to hear that that

rolesfamily wrote:There are a lot of well established members who only have a score that's like 400k! So I doubt they'd like to hear that that

I also doubt they'd be asking for 30-40 thousand tings for it!

Adsolution wrote:

rolesfamily wrote:There are a lot of well established members who only have a score that's like 400k! So I doubt they'd like to hear that that

I also doubt they'd be asking for 30-40 thousand tings for it!

Well maybe that's a tad rich, - I think your idea of having a different reward bracket for the people in the 700k-800k would be favourable.

I think it might be a good idea to give more Tings for scores greater than 500,000 and less for others. After all, that's a pretty straightforward score and it gives you the equivalent of 1000 posts which is quite a lot.

As for Ting requirements for ranks, the discussion does not belong here.

We could always reward people on cages as well as score? Or a multiplier for tings (E.g. 60 cages = x6 tings, 50-59 = x5 etc).

Hunchman801 wrote:I think it might be a good idea to give more Tings for scores greater than 500,000 and less for others. After all, that's a pretty straightforward score and it gives you the equivalent of 1,000 posts which is quite a lot.

As for Ting requirements for ranks, the discussion does not belong here.

No less for less then 500k then it is already! If everything is being brought up a knot, then the ting payout for less then 500k should be higher then it is now!

Thanks for the suggestion, Roles!

Personally, I'm quite happy that the rewards for lower scores are fair, but I'm all ears for revised rewards for the higher scoring members. The incentive does seem a little weak.