Mortal Kombat Player "Power Rankings"?

[Vagrant]

I ask this with hesitance because the MK community is...... The MK community.....


What if we had a neutral group of people organize power rankings for tournament players? If you're a sports fan you know the idealogy behind power rankings. We could update them after every tournament and it could add even more life to the community.

The problem is... It's not difficult at all to picture this being a complete clusterfuck and the cause of endless arguments/ rage threads/ mass war among the community.


I'm curious to hear what you guys think about this? Any ideas? Do you think it's doable? Can peoples egos handle it? Let me know you're thoughts. Just an idea I've been toying around with.

 

[Relaxedstate]

Dum

 

[Smarrgasm]

NFG....

 

[Compbros]

I plan on doing something like this with the entire FGC, not just MK. Here's how my rankings would work:

Top 4 are ranked per 1-2 point* tournies, top 8 for 3-4, and top 16 for 5.

1 Point Tournaments = Locals and Weeklies

2 Point Tournaments = Monthlies, smaller Regionals, Ranbats

3 Point Tournaments = Regionals and Invitationals (dunno about this one, might be a two instead)

4 Point Tournaments = Majors, Road To/Qualifiers, Sponsor Events (MLG, IPL, etc...)

5 Point Tournaments = World Tournaments


First place gets whatever the ranking for that tournament (4, 8, 16), second place gets one less (3, 7, 15) and so on, times the point their tournament is worth.

So, someone gets 2nd place at MLG, that means they would get 7 x 4 for 28 overall points.



This is a quick system I'm doing and plan to update it every month. Gonna do a "FGC Player of the Month" for every game, overall and then for the year at the end of December.

 

[Smarrgasm]

Compbros so winning 5 locals is just like winning EVO? K. Guys this will never be done. Its just too complex of a system and the fact that an insane amount of variables come into play make it way too hard to break it down to a science for ranking. Lets just let who we see and consider to be the best be the best. No reason to try to make a list out of it.

 

[Mikemetroid]

This thread is asking for trouble.

 

[ShadowBeatz]

I'm #1

 

[Compbros]

Compbros so winning 5 locals is just like winning EVO? K. Guys this will never be done. Its just too complex of a system and the fact that an insane amount of variables come into play make it way too hard to break it down to a science for ranking. Lets just let who we see and consider to be the best be the best. No reason to try to make a list out of it.

No, it's not. Winning 5 locals at 4 points is not like winning 1 EVO at 16 points. Plus it's a 1 multiplier so........

5 locals = 4 x 5 x 1 = 20 overall points.

Winning Evo = 16 x 1 x 5 = 80 Overall points.

You'd have to win 20 locals to equal an EVO.


Edit: Actually, I may decrease locals/weeklies to top 2 instead. I'll look into it.

 

[Eddy Wang]

What we should have is a universal MK database.
Where we could separate U.S.A tournaments from others countrys and planets tournaments.
This would help to a lot of things.
Which country has the most players
which country has the most local scenes
which country has the most tournaments (sub-divided on sponsorship)
Players stats (with all the deeds)
Which player in his country, wins the most tournaments, local scenes etc.
Around all registered, who has the most wins (tournament only) which could also be split by country or area in this country.

Every player from every country who would register for it, it would just put his country or area on the map ^^

Sounds cool, but i'm just dreaming too much, i'm gonna stop now.

 

[BillStickers]

^ that's my 'preparing for shitstorm' face.

 

[Smarrgasm]

No, it's not. Winning 5 locals at 4 points is not like winning 1 EVO at 16 points. Plus it's a 1 multiplier so........

5 locals = 4 x 5 x 1 = 20 overall points.

Winning Evo = 16 x 1 x 5 = 80 Overall points.

You'd have to win 20 locals to equal an EVO.


Edit: Actually, I may decrease locals/weeklies to top 2 instead. I'll look into it.

Thats my fault for missing the multiplier part. But still theres too much involvement for a system to make this correctly.

 

[Compbros]

Thats my fault for missing the multiplier part. But still theres too much involvement for a system to make this correctly.

Yes it is but I'm doing it for fun. People really don't have to take it seriously or as some official ranking or anything, it's just my thing I'm doing for the FGC.

 

[BlackBryan]

Why does it matter what someone thinks of their rankings? I'm positive pro sports players don't get a say in where they're placed. If they did every qb would be number 1, every running back would be mvp, and so on. You wanna play like a pro, get ranked like a pro. Complain and bitch all you want, but at the end of the day you've accomplished what you've accomplished and failed what you've failed, whatever the reason may be for said failure, its still a failure. Deal with it, or find a new pastime/career/second job/or whatever fighting games are for you.

I say rank away, and lettem cry.

 

[Compbros]

FGC tournament players need an official ranking system. Rank has always been one of the main reasons to play fighting games: getting your initials in the top spot. I suggested the NCAA basketball style rankings, which would inevitably lead to being able to seed tournaments based on national/global rank, and then lesser regional ranks. This would also let us have fun by filling out brackets like March Madness, and oh! who finally did that? The Cannons. They set up fantasy style brackets for the SF25th anniversary tournament.

I don't know if we should ever have an official ranking as we may return to the old days of regions favoring local players or top players being moved out of one pool and into another.

 

[Sami]

To be honest it could probably be covered by two types of lists: locals/minors and nationals/majors. Locals = just that, small grassroots tourneys primarily played by people in the area. Nationals/majors = MLG/etc that people will travel for. Perhaps give Evolution results slightly higher importance.

Locals are per "region", which region being whatever is the most appropriate (assuming state for you US players). Seeing for those tourneys would be:

1) any top-X (dependant on your choosing, top 32?) nationally ranked players that turn up get top seeds (includes nationally ranked players who are also ranked in the regional list).
2) other seeds go to the ranked players of that region that turn up
3) everyone else gets randomly seeded.

For nationals, only national rankings would be used. Even somebody who was god-tier in backwards state X wouldn't be seeded in a national unless they have competed (and placed, whether it be top-16 or whatever) at a national event. You want high rankings in a national? Play in nationals. Anyone outside of the top-X (again, take your pick on the number but it should be quite high) national rankings just gets grouped with the chuff.

Rankings should be determined by average placing rather than a cumulative points total to prevent people who attend every tourney and place in the mid from rising above those who may not play as much but place far higher, with a player's rank automatically decaying if they haven't participated in a tourney for a certain length of time. Stops somebody winning the year's first national and then not turning up to anything and still being considered ranked top.

Or you could do a weighted average of your tourney placings, so rankings at more recent tourneys (that's tourneys held, not tourneys you attended) would carry far more weight than ones from earlier in the year. That way your ranking better reflects your recent performance.

Will stop typing now.

 

[ETC AdmiralAugustus]

 

[CrimsonShadow]

I just saw this.. It's crazy how close you were Vagrant. E.S.P.