Top of the leaderboard is now taken by players that got lucky with one match (and Quadro 
) You already have a system that requires from you to be at least level 3 and rewards you silver orders after you achieve 3 victories, why not make leaderboard depend on having 3 victiories to compete? The point is to reward players for their mean performance.
1 Like
having a single batle decide all the event its prety stupid i would say.
the more you play, the less chance you gonna rank top 3 when the 3rd player have 500% winrate with only 3 matches? how is that even a thing ? lolā¦
wtf. i m serious disapointed, finnaly some ācompetitiveā aspect ingame with such bad design around itā¦
how can someone have over 500% winrate with 3 matches ā¦ how? LOL
5 Likes
what that does even mean to have 500% win ratio XD
victories/batles.
check the 3rd guy
with 3 batles. 500% win ratio LOL
he actually wins more games than games played.
good system .
3 Likes
So if your top 1-2 on your team and you win all 3 how high do you rank?
Basically you just have to hope you get a āblessedā first and maybe second battle, with very high score, then you donāt need to play anymore and you winā¦
The more you play, the more your results tend to be lower than those āblessedā battles (even though still very high).
Not that it interests me (I am just playing for the silver cards and being cannon fodder for more skilled players) but it seems a bad and rushed implementation.
They didnāt account for people deserting games in half of their equation lol.
If you quit, it wonāt count towards your games played, but your team wins game without you, it still will add to your games won.
This is so hillariously bad i canāt even.
The only math they seem to be capable of is calculating how much grind can player take before they quit, and they still double it for f2p.
3 Likes
this is so incredibly stupid.
definitely not bothering with this ācompetitionā
That explains the 500% win rate.