I've been thinking about this for a while. I believe that it would do the PP good to have WRL on the site as the main ranking system instead of strictly Average Finish.

For those who don't know, WRL, or World Ranking List, is a ranking system that MK64 uses. It incorporates AF, ARR, PRSR, Total times (3/5lap and 1lap) and a small WR bonus (if a player has any) to generate a more well-rounded ranking system.

There are several perks to this:

- More accurate depiction of skill within the rankings
- More motivation for players due to more things to work for instead of strictly AF; AF graveyards aren't so scary/demotivating when standards & course/lap totals are thrown in the mix
- One's rank isn't affected as heavily by others (still can be passed obviously, but the more factors make passing people more about skill and less about activity/inactivity)

Now, of course, the system would have to be tweaked from MK64. This is because of factors such as ZZMT, strats that a top few use and many don't (Rainbow Road?), would have to weaken things such as course totals and ARR. With this system, the order of strength that the factors would be arranged in would something along the lines of:

1. AF
2. Flap Total
3. PRSR
4. Course Total
5. ARR
6. WR Bonus

These, of course, could be reworked, were MKSC ever to have something like balanced standards, where ZZMT isn't an absolute requirement to get a decent standard on some tracks (see:PC).

So my proposal is to have WRL added to the PP as a trial ranking. This system would be open for revision, should a better balance be found or if standards are ever reworked. This would allow the community to see it in effect and let them decide whether or not they prefer it more than a ranking based strictly off AF.

Lafungo wrote on 11/19/13 at 19:06:37:

Naaa, I never liked the wrl, AF is better.

Though I doubt my opinion on this carries much weight (until I get back into the Top 100 at least ), but I've always liked the WRL system in MK64 more than the AF system. It provides many more sources for motivation on how to move up the rankings when you hit those annoying AF graveyards as stated above, and I believe it shows a more clear and complete ranking of players in the game.

flo233 wrote on 11/20/13 at 12:52:12:


Really would appreciate it if people would explain their reasoning for or against this idea.

Also, this is currently in a phase of proposition of just being added to the site as a side stat. It's planned to remain so (if it makes it on) for several months at least, as the formula determining the WRL score is improved, standards are revised, etc. (And of course as we get a better gauge on the degree of approval/disapproval for making it the main ranking. Which is why I would appreciate explanations of people's thoughts on this.)

Well, if you want a more accurate rankings based on "skill" you will have to include time of playing , date of the record and strat known at this point ,...
AF is easy to understand to pass someone you just need to beat his time no matter if you beat him by 0.01 or 10.00
i have no problem to add this as an other alternative ranking like ARR or total time but in no case as  main ranking.

Thanks for posting some of your reasoning - honestly really helps everyone I think better understand the perspectives of others.

Also, let's please remember that I think all of us posting here are doing so with good intentions. We all want the rankings to be fair and in the best interests of everyone as a whole. I would honestly be very disappointed if the discussion in here escalated to mudslinging or threats; this doesn't need to be another Fenner case. We're all rational people. You explain to me a rational argument that I think trumps my current reasoning and position, and I will change my mind. I hope we all have this mindset to some degree or another.

Further, we've got as long a time as we need to work this out. It doesn't seem to me that anyone has a problem with adding the WRL stat to the site. Let's just start there. Once it's up, there may be a strong chance that I'll agree that it's too complicated and/or not appropriate for the main rankings.

I also read your post on the French MB *Pierre*, and I do not think it's fair to treat WRL as main rankings as some kind of disease that could be spread across to other karts, and it should just be quarantined to MK64. It's under consideration here due to arguments of fairness and interest in developing a system that could be more fitting than AF in determining rankings. It also may very well fail and should be regulated as a side stat. And if the topic arises in other karts, it should be continued to be treated as such, not a "hey, the other karts are doing it, let's do it too!"

Anyway, just a few more thoughts I wanted to share.

Edit: Misunderstood who made the thread in the French MB, my apologies.

Etch wrote on 11/20/13 at 13:21:39:

'refuse' is a strong word.

Shock wrote on 11/20/13 at 14:00:59:

Basically, all other metrics give stronger weighting to zzmt players atm. Any formula that includes them increases the disparity towards nonzzmt players.
So, the obvious way to make a wrl ranking work is to rework the standards in such a strong way such that the higher standards have not much more added strength (i.e. large difference in value) between a decent zzmt time that beats most if not all nonzzmt times easily, and a very good zzmt time.
Then after this give this new arr strong weighting in chart.

Actually, after thinking this out, this sounds appealing though. Definitely do not want wrl happening unless we have a big change though, because it's just another pointless ugly metric.
As I said, AF is lovely and simple, so wrl would really need to represent the skill level of karters much more effectively to warrant it's creation.

Formula calculating it aside, (it doesn't need to be even remotely similar to the MK64 formula), adding a poll to gauge whether or not people would object to having WRL on the site as a secondary statistic, like PRSR, ARR, etc. currently are. If people at least don't object to having it on the site as a stat, then I'm hoping we can reconsider the standards for non-SC.

Also, Lafungo did a preliminary calculation of the Top 20 AF using the MK64 formula, and all positions were preserved; I had a 5.8 score, Seb had a score of 9, Mick 11, Chris 12, 20th (Michael Fried) 20.7. If you want the full list, we can post it here.

Don't wanna sound as if there was a French conspiracy but I strongly agree with the two Flo's.

Shock wrote on 11/20/13 at 13:41:14:

This happens way too often in the MK community when people disagree on something slightly important...

Quote:

Oh shit, American spies on the French territory!

Shock wrote on 11/20/13 at 13:41:14:




Shock wrote on 11/20/13 at 14:00:59:


It can't be helped if people don't play more.

This is primarily the consequence of molding a broken game to often debated rulings for non-sc racing.  The difference in strats are even greater for sc but that's the way it is there.  This game also has the fewest players amongst the sister sites.  I understand the importance in trying to extract data in a meaningful way but it's difficult with far fewer stats to work from.  I felt this game has survived solely by high ranked players; so while this game may look awkward overall, AF is a pretty good indicator at the top.

What is underplayed one day may not be the next.

Shaping a ranking to match the site as it is now doesn't help in the long run.  The permanence of ARR is probably more appealing than the evolving nature of AF or a wrl formula.  And I'll be honest, a lazy guy like me wants to kart more than update so why make life harder constantly revising shit?

Shock wrote on 11/20/13 at 14:00:59:


It can't be any worse than learning non-sc rules, unless you're bad at math.

Not many new players anyway so no, it wouldn't discourage people from joining.

It's just unnecessarily convoluted.

Shock wrote on 11/20/13 at 14:00:59:


Yea, that was just an easy jab since I saw ARR being mentioned. lol

I have been vocal about failed efforts to revamp standards since most don't realize the enormity of the task.  Like you said, it would have to done thoroughly course by course with input from the entire community.  This game is kind of an oddball and a one size fits all based on god times won't give us balanced standards.

Nosey wrote on 11/20/13 at 16:39:05:


I know making one's d-pad pro-zzmt isn't like flipping a switch but people will ultimately stick to what they enjoy.

I'm not trying to demean those that don't because I played non-zzmt style up until a year ago.  The same can be said for shortcuts which involves a whole slew of strange tricks which I found monotonous at first but addicting later.

Nosey wrote on 11/20/13 at 16:39:05:


The AF chart already makes no distinction between zzmt and non-zzmt so I don't see why ARR should.  Again, this goes back to rule enforcement and the ability to zzmt on unmodified consoles.  Incorporating charts that go about things very differently would only cause more confusion for what a wrl means.

Shock wrote on 11/20/13 at 14:00:59:


Does this have to do with how people perceive the rankings?

To those outside looking in, the AF chart does not make that readily apparent due to low activity but that's all the players we got.  Standards however fill in the so called gaps balancing things as far as rank is concerned.  We know what times are great, okay, or suck but not newbies.  I think ARR does more justice than AF in that respect.  I think a wrl would give the same picture so maybe this is really the heart of the matter?

Shock wrote on 11/20/13 at 14:00:59:


Again with skill, nothing ARR couldn't solve.

Shock wrote on 11/20/13 at 14:00:59:


Terms like "skill" are viewed very differently around here.

I was trying to get at the impending debate over what metrics should be more important to a player's score.  This is usually a contentious topic and there will be folks who will feel wronged in the end.  I don't think people would throw their cartridge in the river over this but everyone must be in agreement or this will face very steep opposition.

Shock wrote on 11/20/13 at 14:00:59:


Fair enough, that's why we added shortcut charts right?

We can't please everyone nor should we feel obligated to change the site to suit everyone's individual needs.  There could be hundreds of charts but we have chosen to focus on time trials in this community at large.  How we rank players helps competition hone in on a couple areas to produce fantastic world records.  As already evident, changing long time traditions here isn't always warmly received.  Calling the topic "WRL instead of AF," like Neo mentioned automatically puts most into defense mode so some responses are not surprising.  It's also unclear what the ultimate goal is and players are naturally skeptical.  I also think it's important the sites more or less follow the same guidelines which makes the combined ranks possible.

I'm pretty sure AF/ARR are the most revered by far.

Unlike PRSR (which nobody brags about making cuts on), the WRL is closely tied to the role AF and ARR already play.  We shouldn't clutter the site with charts that do the same thing. Without proper standards to begin with, how can one say the site doesn't display so called overall skill effectively?

There's no harm in getting the beat on certain issues but this discussion jumps the gun by miles.

Shock wrote on 11/20/13 at 14:00:59:


That's what the players' page is about, working together to destroy world records and a place that brilliantly displays them!

Stephen De Winter wrote on 01/14/17 at 18:51:32:

The Non-SC standards are definitely not "fair" (aka consistent) at the top. I'd say anything above Hero in general is very uneven across the board. As it stands, on many tracks it's basically impossible to get a Myth due to how close the standards are to each other (you often end up jumping from Titan straight to God). Furthermore, some Gods are way too easy compared to others (see rVL2 and rDP3 flaps vs. RR and rKB1 5laps, for example).

There's been talk of revising the standards due to how ridiculously unbalanced they are, but the project is currently stalled due to players' IRL commitments.

I can't contribute any accurate comment on the standards for Non-SC on MKSCPP above 'Hero' status since that is WAY beyond my skill level, I simply don't know what I am talking about.

Although, I also cannot judge standards for any MKPP unless they are ridiculously obviously wrong it seems that, the lower standards for Non-SC on MKSCPP are accurate, (even though I don't have the expertise to know what I am saying with accuracy.)

I still STRONGLY disagree with the GOD standards for Glitch Coconut Mall on MKWPP and the Beginner standards for MK7PP regardless of the fact I am quite weak at MK7PP. The standards inaccurately reflect the skill of the players in the bottom area of the AF rankings for MK7PP, (which is off topic I know.)

Back on topic, I vote for both WRL and AF ranking systems for MKSCPP. I trust, the WRL system to be made fair in the end, once the balance is found, if it goes ahead