Rankings are unrealistic why would there be number 4 in wbc and 80 in the rest
Why would Daniel Dubois be rated at x with one org and y with another and not with another…?
Is that unrealistic?
In this context does realistic mean comparable? Or something else?
We’re interested to know as it’s important
And to illustrate the point here are the current rankings in comparable format.
Are these unrealistic…
I understand that but Dubois ain’t going to be 80th in the world. 9 out of 10 of the time if a fighter is top 10 in a organisation he’ll be top 30 in the other which is more realistic
Not sure that’s true in every case. Look at the ranking variance across the top three as a standard deviation and then check the BM ones… You might see that they’re similar. However, one thing we’re trying at the moment is to make them different. As in real life, each organisation is a business, a franchise, one with house fighters etc etc. We need to represent that and sometimes given the organic way each unique gameworld develops there will be outliers. We’re trying things here. Anyway, hopefully Apple will approve the beta soon (29 hours and counting) and you’ll see what we’ve been up to. We then have another build ready for approval which sorts out many of the issues in the one we’re waiting for them to approve the beta for…
Also with a shorter answer, in response to being top 10 in one and top 30 in another that simply isn’t true. As the current comparison shows.
Also those rankings don’t scale downwards and so when a ranking goes to infinite depth (like each of the three in BM) how do relate when in real life no such comparison happens and rankings are top 20, top 30 etc?
Like we said in an earlier post. We are interested and think about this shit a LOT.
As ever, thanks for your contributions. We value them immensely.