| Win records for large FFA games: 2011-10-20 17:27:46 |
The Duke of Ben 
Level 55
Report
|
I've been trying to get into larger FFA games lately, and I've noticed something when trying to determine how good a particular player is. If someone has played a lot of FFA games, they are likely to have a listing for just about every number of players.
16 player FFA 0/6
17 player FFA 1/5
18 player FFA 1/17
And so on. To me, those are functionally the same, since there is almost no difference between a 16 player game and a 17 player game.
My suggestion would be to put like groupings together, like 20-24 player games being the same category. This would make looking at someone's profile much easier, and make the information we are actually looking for (how experienced/good in this player at X game type) more accessible.
|
| Win records for large FFA games: 2011-10-20 18:28:11 |
bman7
Level 37
Report
|
There actually is a bit of a difference between them, since it's 1 more player to eliminate. Maybe the records could be sorted like you said, but have one of those expandable things to see the details of the individual game types.
|
| Win records for large FFA games: 2011-10-20 18:51:34 |
The Duke of Ben
Level 55
Report
|
An expandable section would be fine for me. It's just awkward to try and count up all the wins/games played for each category when there is usually a very small number of wins in each category.
|
