Premium Member
 PSN Profile
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

28 Excellent

1 Follower

About Kal2210

  • Rank
    Premium Member

Recent Profile Visitors

680 profile views
  1. https://lbp.me/v/q5b3j-q/activity Just starting this journey as well. Would hugely appreciate as many level hearts, creator hearts, and plays as I can get. Will obviously heart and play back as well! Thanks!
  2. PSN: kal2210 Level name: Covid-19 https://lbp.me/v/q586hgt/activity Looking for the 50 plays trophy and will happily return the favor!
  3. I’d be interested in boosting this game as well.
  4. I guess I don’t expect to necessarily break into the top 1000. I still think that a new leaderboard like this will help combat the EZPZ/stack issue for a lot of players at least to some extent. And you can still track yourself on a leaderboard that you trust more. The difference between being 30k on a leaderboard and like 10k is definitely possible so to me it’s worthwhile. I strongly disagree that <1% of the site would be interested in this. You’ve seen the monthly “rata-EZPZ” complaint threads that go on for 30 pages say that “trophies aren’t worth anything anymore”. This would be a strategy to have those voices be heard while still mostly maintaining status quo.
  5. I don’t understand this argument at all. I feel like this assumes that people only care about the absolute top of the leaderboard? The leaderboard is a nice way to track your progress for the middle of the pack as well, which this would likely impact quite a bit. Not sure why the focus on the top 10 who play most games in existence.
  6. Well it solves the problem of EZPZs and worthless stacks which I think is what a lot of people would prefer removed. It also gives a weighted bonus for rarer trophies. To me, there’s no perfect leaderboard, but this would serve its purpose well. And, if after removing ALL those games, the leaderboard is relatively unchanged (which it won’t be), then at least people won’t have an excuse anymore. You can check the leaderboard with all trash games removed and your proudest trophies emphasized so no one can complain about how useless the leaderboard is because of Ratalaika 6 stacks. I think it would be a great additional leaderboard.
  7. I don’t think the goal is to take away trophies from people. An uncommon trophy should give points, just less than something rarer. It’s fine that quantity has some impact. Most uncommon plats can’t be done in under an hour. This would at least get rid of all ultra EZPZs and EZ stacks which is the primary hope for a lot of people I think. The goal for those common plat games would be for them to not count at all because the primary reason many people play them are for easy, quick trophies.
  8. Personally, I think either a <.5% or a <1% cutoff would definitely improve the formula. Extraordinarily few trophies are <.1% anyway. The only other thing I think would improve Beyond’s formula, though again would complicate it, would be making platinums add some type of additional value (obviously common plats still worth nothing).
  9. I’m not sure how legitimate those rarity rankings are. That was the main reason for my post. To have a visible, well maintained leaderboard for rarity. I still think that Beyond’s idea is very solid.
  10. Just did this. Best advice I can give is throw a bit early. Much more leniency built in for early throws than late throws.
  11. The emphasis on removing stacks was solely based on VN and rata-like stacks. I have no goal of removing difficult stacks like the ones you included. I think Beyond’s idea of completely eliminating common trophies handles this well. I’m sure there are other ideas as well but I definitely didn’t mean that challenging stacks should be removed. Having said this, some BS stacks could boost score significantly. For instance, once you do Friday the 13th once, you can get its stacks with minimal difficulty and this would count as many ultra rare trophies. These types of things are mostly unavoidable. You’re either taking away legitimate stacks from people or you’re allowing BS rare stacks so no perfect solution.
  12. Excuse my ignorance with the challenges of managing and compiling large data sets, but is it possible to combine stacks to a single rarity? Irrespective of a new rarity leaderboard, having a single rarity percentage for a single game seems like the ideal situation since they’re identical games. Given that this isn’t already standard, I’m assuming there is a reason that isn’t the case, but I am curious if that is something that is possible given all versions have total number of players, percentages, and links to all other versions available on the same page.
  13. Don’t get me wrong, this sounds good to me, but Beyond’s idea is great for its simplicity. I suppose adding either a <1% (maybe too high) vs <.5% (probably the right answer) could make some sense to give classics like SMB, Wolfenstein2, ESO and hardcore indies like cloudberry kingdom some extra reward, but there can’t be too many “extras” like this. Everyone will want slightly different things, but the idea Beyond proposed is fair, relatively simple, and would likely make a good LB.
  14. I think this is a really good idea. While I’d love for games I personally see as “legitimate” (though admittedly short and easy) like Spyro to count for something, there will never be a perfect answer and I think what you laid out is fair and would provide an interesting/different leaderboard. Love the idea actually.
  15. I’m aware this exists, but as I said in my post, it would be nice if this was: 1.) equally visible-it’s actually hard to even find and I’ve never even figured out how to access it on mobile. Essentially, it would be nice when you click leaderboard for it to give you the option to sort by “general” or “weighted” 2.) its algorithm took away stacks 3.) it would be really nice to be able to see platinum counts after removing stacks on the leaderboard with more detailed breakdowns of ultrarare, mid tier, and common plats. I’m aware that it’s not an easy feat, but this post was to gauge interest and see if this was being discussed. edit: also, thanks for the easy to access link as you mentioned in your next comment