Leaderboard for profiles under 50% average rarity

[Mobeda]

PSN: Mobeda

Platinums: 468

Ultra Rare Platinums: 80

Average Rarity: 41.95%

[SuperPatchZ7]

PSN: SuperPatchZ7

Platinums: 107

UR Platimuns: 8

Average Rarity: 41.16 %

[RustyZero]

why not. Count me in

 

PSN: RustyZero

Platinums: 218

UR Platimuns: 17

Average Rarity: 40.40 %

[OBSTINATIO]

Great project! 

PSN: OBSTINATIO 

Platinums: 160 
UR Platinums: 29

Average Rarity: 36,27%

[Manuelito]

Cool idea!

PSN ID: Pesentii

Platinum Count: 107

Ultra Rare Plat Count: 17

Average Rarity: 40.99%

Edited September 4, 2022 by Winston

[Ich1994-1994]

Psn: Ich1994-1994

platinum: 455

ultrarare platinum 58

avarage trophy rarity: 41,28%

 

happy to join

[KyleMcLaughlin]

great idea, I’d love to join!

psn:kylemclaughlin

platinums:95
ultra rare platinums:15

average rarity:43.5% 

[Reinachii-]

Interesting idea,

I think I am understanding correctly: platinum count +1 point for UR plat? 

Is there no way to use the average rarity stat you are asking for? 

The current formula still favors plat count vs actual overall rarity

 

 

Noticed this was already suggested. Definitely the way to go.

Edited September 5, 2022 by Reinachii-

[Feichti1992]

I like that

 

Psn: Feichti1992

Platinums: 182

Ultra rare platinums: 42

Average rarity: 36,5%

[pinkrobot_pb]

The leaderbored has 100 members now!

 

Because of the discussion about average rarity, I have added a new column that calculates an alternative score. It multiplies the standard points (platinums + UR platinums) by the number 50 minus your average rarity. (I picked 50 because it was chosen as the cuttof percentage).

 

You can sort the list on the new score by clicking on the header of the last column. It causes some interesting movement. Among other things, it pushes me firmly down to where I belong

Edited September 5, 2022 by pinkrobot_pb

[MonaSaxPayne]

shouldn't the top 10 display rarity % instead of total points? (or at least show it alongside total points)

[Platinum_Vice]

@pinkrobot_pb I'm sure everyone will agree that this is a great use of your time. Can I make one (significant) suggestion? Please consider:

 

Bite the bullet and address the elephant in the room: pick one measurement to use for this leaderboard. Make the formula extremely clear for everybody. If you need to gather the opinions of everybody to come to that measurement, do it ASAP. Everybody would do this leaderboard differently and you will be receiving constant complaints/requests ad nauseum to amend the formula as people see fit (or even, simply, so that people can see themselves leapfrog up the leaderboard). Having a definitive measurement immediately will save you (and the thread) significant hassle in the long term. 

 

Personally, I'd recommend doing that before amending the leaderboard again (and maybe even removing the leaderboard temporarily to gain the least-subjective bias).

 

I'll hang around like a creeper in the corner regardless of whether you take on this advice or not. ?? thanks for putting this together.

[Hitman_Spinksy1]

I'm just wondering and not sure if this has been brought up earlier, but do we need to post updates on our stats or is there some sort of script because looking through the leaderboard I see my average rarity has gone up in the leaderboard to match what it is now, due to me playing Miles-Morales. Great game btw and one I highly recommend. 

[pinkrobot_pb]

7 hours ago, Hitman_Spinksy1 said:

[snip] ... or is there some sort of script ... [snip]

Yes the page that you see is produced by a script that collects the information automatically. I launch it by hand right now, once a day. There is no need to post updates.

 

8 hours ago, Platinum_Vice said:

@pinkrobot_pb I'm sure everyone will agree that this is a great use of your time. Can I make one (significant) suggestion? Please consider ... [snip]

Thanks, I agree, especially because it only cost me about an hour of my time so far.

 

As for your suggestions, the little script I put together is still only the small thing I was able to do to make sure PS-Leaderboard would not have to do all that work manually. It's still very much his topic and leaderboard at this point.

 

I added the new points calculations mainly out of my own curiosity. I can add other calculations too, if people want to know what their effect would be. The reason why this one was easy to implement was that I did not need to query for any extra data. It literally cost me 5 minutes. As soon as I need to look at individual games and trophies, the amount of data crawling would increase significantly and I would need to turn this in an actual project and not just a quick one page script.

 

For the record, that is no problem either, it would just take a little more thought and a better design to incorporate so many users. I already crawl my own profile regularly to create the image you see in my signature. If you look closely, you will see that I add the ribbons system to it (the one that was talked about some time ago but never came to fruition).

Edited September 6, 2022 by pinkrobot_pb

[Reinachii-]

@pinkrobot_pb

The new formula is : plats + UR plats*50-(avgrarity)%?

 

[pinkrobot_pb]

35 minutes ago, Reinachii- said:

@pinkrobot_pb

The new formula is : plats + UR plats*50-(avgrarity)%?

 

Yes, to make it even more clear with some more parentheses:  (Plats + UR Plats) * ( 50 - Average Rarity ).

 

Right now it is just an additonal metric that made some sense to my simple mind trying to bring average rarity into play. Like I said, feel free to suggest different ones. I really do not want to hijack @PS-Leaderboard's topic though. You (and anyone else) can also just drop me a PM with any thoughts you might have.

 

I have some different ideas as well, that I will implement when I have some more free time. But free time is hard to find right now with a 2 month old baby.

 

In general I honestly think that simply putting ideas into practice and seeing what that does to the rankings is a good way to go about this. What seems like a good idea in theory might cause some unexpected results in practice. (And I personally prefer implementations that can be explained in a single paragraph and that do not take a math degree to understand. )
 

Edited September 6, 2022 by pinkrobot_pb

[Reinachii-]

To be fair, the formula with avg rarity makes the most sense. Was surprised it was omitted from the original. Plats + UR plat count still favors someone with a lot of plats. 

Also, I think I would be rank 1 with your formula ?

[grimydawg___]

Yeah, the formula will definitely favor someone with a lot of platinum trophies.  Some folks have more ultra rare trophies than the top ten people, yet won't be close to the top.  It is what it is *shrugs*

Edited September 6, 2022 by grimydawg___

[Platinum_Vice]

3 hours ago, pinkrobot_pb said:

As for your suggestions, the little script I put together is still only the small thing I was able to do to make sure PS-Leaderboard would not have to do all that work manually.

 

Ah. Well it shows how much attention I'd been paying when I get confused as to who was running the event.  sorry @PS-Leaderboard

[RE_MANIA_97]

Hi, would like to join

 

RE_MANIA_97

Platinum: 87

UR Platinum: 14

Average Rarity: 37,26 %

[Tomy_IV]

Sign me up! 

 

Tomy_IV

 

Platinums 641 

Ultra Rare Platinums 165 

Average Rarity 36.65% 

[DeepEyes7]

21 hours ago, pinkrobot_pb said:

Yes, to make it even more clear with some more parentheses:  (Plats + UR Plats) * ( 50 - Average Rarity ).

 

Right now it is just an additonal metric that made some sense to my simple mind trying to bring average rarity into play. Like I said, feel free to suggest different ones. I really do not want to hijack @PS-Leaderboard's topic though. You (and anyone else) can also just drop me a PM with any thoughts you might have.

 

I have some different ideas as well, that I will implement when I have some more free time. But free time is hard to find right now with a 2 month old baby.

 

In general I honestly think that simply putting ideas into practice and seeing what that does to the rankings is a good way to go about this. What seems like a good idea in theory might cause some unexpected results in practice. (And I personally prefer implementations that can be explained in a single paragraph and that do not take a math degree to understand. )
 

 

Thanks for being open to suggestions, my suggestion as I said befores is just 

 

UR Plats / % Average Rarity

 

That way people will be motivated to increase the number of UR plats or at least decrease their average rarity playing games that even if dont have an UR plat will help to decrease their rarity and still gaining some points in the leaderboard. Not countig the total plats is the only way of not being overwhelmed by the accounts with ezpz plats even if there is a minimum average rarity to enter.

[pinkrobot_pb]

37 minutes ago, DeepEyes7 said:

 

Thanks for being open to suggestions, my suggestion as I said befores is just

UR Plats / % Average Rarity

 

Thanks, this additional score has been added as the last column in the list.

 

I have also added the two new people who signed up: @RE_MANIA_97 and @Tomy_IV. The leaderbored has 102 members now.

Edited September 7, 2022 by pinkrobot_pb

[RonanO_1O1]

PSN: RonanO_101

Plats: 80

UR Plats: 21

Average: 33.02%

 

[DrBloodmoney]

1 hour ago, DeepEyes7 said:

 

Thanks for being open to suggestions, my suggestion as I said befores is just 

 

UR Plats / % Average Rarity

 

That way people will be motivated to increase the number of UR plats or at least decrease their average rarity playing games that even if dont have an UR plat will help to decrease their rarity and still gaining some points in the leaderboard. Not countig the total plats is the only way of not being overwhelmed by the accounts with ezpz plats even if there is a minimum average rarity to enter.

 

So, if I understand correctly, essentially what you've come up with there is the formula for a leaderboard where if two players both have exactly the same 50 UR plats, but the first one also platted The Walking Dead, or Life is Strange (for example), the second one would rank higher?

 

Or, to put it another way... you've managed to come up with a Leaderboard, where hiding a completed, non-rare game would actually move someone up, rather than down?