Sort the clan page by percentage of clan ranked today on 1v1 ladder. That'll make things interesting ;)

I'll make my 1 member clan be rank 1 :x

This would be perfect, as it would encourage the competitive clans to actually use the clan rankings, and it would also put the DARKLORDs exactly where they should be on the rankings... with less than 3% of their members currently ranked, it's a win-win for everyone!

Edited 7/28/2015 20:21:45

That's kind of a stupid way to rank clans as well.

That's kind of a stupid way to rank clans as well.

I agree, but I stand by my belief that this proposal is demonstrably less stupid.

At this time, there is no penalty for dropping out of the ladder whenever it is convenient. There is no penalty for using alts, either. Adding this sorting method, however, gives a mild penalty to both -- an alt will not contribute to the main account's clan's social status, and dropping out could hurt your clan's standing.

Adding this filter would force clans that focus on quantity of members to fight more on the 1v1 ladder instead of ignoring its existence, which will lead to a natural increase in average skill.


In conclusion, this method would not be worse than what we currently have.

Some clans don't participate in 1v1 ladder while some cland are exclusive. Bias detected

Wait, you want it to be by percent on 1v1 ladder? So a clan of 4 people with 4 people playing the ladder would be #1 (%100)?

That is terrible.

If you want to base it on ladders, why not do the total ratings of all ladder teams (1v1 is a ladder team of 1 still) for each clan? Then at least performance matters.

*If a 2v2 ladder team is two people from that clan, you would need to count it twice.

Edited 7/28/2015 21:29:48

I agree.

Since I heard upvoting is roaring maybe it should be implemented in clans a clan with a high upvote means higher on the list :) there are no downvote button for clan haters to spam

I agree with Chris, it should be something like (1/2p) * r

p = percentage of clan ranked on 1v1 (also it could be extended to all 4 ladders)
r = amount of clan members ranked on 1v1 ladder.

Gives me an idea. Fizzer is probably looking into this thread. Make the best ideas and he will listen to us! The game is made by the people!

The staff already said they would consider a ranking change (with no guarantee), but someone has to do all the leg work.

I suggest someone do a ladder based formula on their own and post the results. I am sure if the right formula was found and proven, we could convince them to use it

Personally, I don't like the idea of factoring in participation rates.

Suppose you have:

clan A with only 1 person on the ladder at 2000 rating
clan B with all 4 people on the ladder at 300 rating

Are you saying clan A should be ranked lower?


@Ben, your formula does not even consider actual rankings (only participation).

I also would not do average rating, because that punishes clans with people that are noobs (by lowering their average).

What would the flaw be to total rating for all clan members? I guess you could have a troll clan with 30 people on there that are 700 rated ranked higher than a clan with 5 people rated 2000. That doesn't seem right.

Perhaps the ranking should be the total ranking of the top 10 ACTIVE players from each clan on every ladder (1v1, 2v2, Current Season, RT).

@Chris, then clans like Apex would fall last because of members, also a lot of people do not like the 2v2 ladder template. Here is my new formula:

(A1 * 1000) + (A2 * 1500) + (A3 * 1200) + (P/2)

A1 = Average 1v1 Ladder Ranking for top 10 in clan
A2 = Average RT Ladder Ranking for top 10 in clan
A3 = Average Seasonal Ladder Ranking (Current/Most Recent) for top 10 in clan
P = Average Points in the last 30 days for top 10 in clan

My logic behind the weights:

- 1v1 Ladder moves super slowly and is just 1 template.
- RT Ladder moves very quickly and is 10 templates
- Seasonal Ladder has a lot of participants, and is seasonal.
- Points are less valueable because of this guy:
https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=7336723589

Edited 7/29/2015 00:21:01

If you put points in then ladder ratings are a waste. Players will have tens of thousands of points there and ladder points will have little impact. Some pkayers earn hundreds of thousands of points in 30 days.

Also, why weight ladders more than another? Especially less strategic ones than 1v1 ladder

Edited 7/29/2015 02:26:42

Also I just play diplos, so I'm not ranked at all. Some clans just play diplo games.

If you don't compete on ladders you probably don't care about the ranking then anyway

@Chris I was trying to think of something that would give non-elite clans a chance, I guess I didn't come up with the best idea. Also, in theory the RT ladder is 10 times more strategic than the 1v1 ladder because there are 10 times more templates to master. I would change 1v1 to the same weight as seasonal (or higher)

Edited 7/29/2015 03:34:10

ranking clans by calculation through points, ladder record, etc. all seems pretty silly to me. We should have a clan ladder/war system. I mean what do we care if it is calculated through the game? If it's calculated by points, the most active wins. If it's calculated by ladder records, then small elite clans win and big clans by default lose. If it's calculated by both, then it's just as bad of a metric as suggested before. Why not have a clan ladder that forces you to rotate your members consistently? A challenge/war system to fight over positions? If you have some sort of clan ladder, it's good for the competitive clan. A war system so that clans could also fight position through challenges (allowing diplos and very large team games) would fit for others.

@Lolo How would you rank clans that are not participating in the clan ladder? Other than that you made some great points.

Edited 7/29/2015 03:39:00

What is wrong with overlooking inactive clans? It would be a competition afterall.

My system would probably be fine for less elite clans because most of the elite ones dont have 10 players on the ladders anyway.

I dont see why we care about some vlans not being represented anyway. Shouldn't a ranking reflect performance anyway?

Edited 7/29/2015 03:59:43