The issues with the streaking could be resolved by awarding extra points for streak length perhaps?  

Posted by Sarah_

What if winning spar points were simply based on opponent's (Wins)-(losses)?
Let me tell you why this would be better than the current system.

1/ Currently there are so many players who just chase noobs in side rooms, with that system sparring noobs will mostly give you negative points. For example, if you spar a noob with 40-100 and win, it will give you -60 pts! So there won't be any reasons to spar noobs anymore.

2/ If you spar a booster with 10:1 ratio + very little wins, you win 100 pts easily
But if you spar a person like Thallen who is also 10:1 ratio + 40k+ wins, you win 100 pts aswell but the hard way.
I always thought this situation was unfair.

Wins-losses takes in consideration your wins which means your experience in spar AND it also takes in consideration your ratio so you will get the pts you deserve to get.


I'm aware that this wouldn't be fair for a person that is streaking since noobs are queueing but this could be solved by not allowing new playechangedtreak rooms it's only unfair for them they will only lose. They can spar people with the same level in side rooms until they get better.

I'm not asking to implant this, this is a suggestion. My suggestion might have flaws that I'm not seeing. PLEASE DO NOT DERAIL MY THREAD!
Credit: Thallen's duel discord bot gave me this idea.

Ya lol, Ive made 1st twice. Its all about the ratio which is a bit dumb. like I used to chase Ravage around in the side rooms. Was like 53points per win? All u have to do is hunt high ratios no matter if there a booster or what. I agree the point system should be changed. You have ravage a side roomer giving 53points per win while u have me fighting everybody in mixed and only give 22points? Which is sad  

Posted by Sarah_

1/ Currently there are so many players who just chase noobs in side rooms, with that system sparring noobs will mostly give you negative points. For example, if you spar a noob with 40-100 and win, it will give you -60 pts! So there won't be any reasons to spar noobs anymore.

I dont think it would be fair to necessarily punish people for sparring negative ratio players. 50% of players have a negative ratio (theoretically), and they have every right to participate in spar; but every time a negative ratio player joins a spar, they cause anyone else to lose points? It also makes no sense to lose points for winning a spar. Especially when you gain/lose 0 points for losing a spar.

Instead, winning spars vs negative ratios could give diminishing return. If the opponent's negative ratio is so bad that it is below a certain threshold, 0 points will be gained. Sorry if this was already pointed out; I didnt read many comments. The rest makes sense.  

Posted by twilit

I dont think it would be fair to necessarily punish people for sparring negative ratio players. 50% of players have a negative ratio (theoretically), and they have every right to participate in spar; but every time a negative ratio player joins a spar, they cause anyone else to lose points? It also makes no sense to lose points for winning a spar. Especially when you gain/lose 0 points for losing a spar.

Instead, winning spars vs negative ratios could give diminishing return. If the opponent's negative ratio is so bad that it is below a certain threshold, 0 points will be gained. Sorry if this was already pointed out; I didnt read many comments. The rest makes sense.

Posted by Void

I like the idea, but instead of losing points from winning against people with a bad spar ratio, I would suggest something different.

For example not gaining any points at all for a win, if Your spar ratio, compared to theirs is much better, but losing a ****ton of points if you lose against them.

I also wouldn´t exclude noobs from the normal streak room. Rather would it make sense to make rooms for people with more total spars and/or positive ratio.
If You win in these rooms, You would get more points per win, which would motivate players to spar in them, to get on the leaderboard quicker.

Posted by Sarah_

This is better! Or maybe if you spar negative ratio, the current system can be applied so that the point you get from negatives are far less than positive ratio.

What's really annoying about any system is that we don't lose points when we lose a spar making it based on activity just like pking. Sparring shouldn't be treated the same way as pking imo

^^^  

*Looks at 50-350 spar record*

Oh. Yay.  

Wouldn't be a horrible idea to make people lose points when they lose, but the leaderboard encourages new players to come and get on it. If this was a thing I don't think any new sparrers would come. As well as some other players just stop sparring. Sparring is dying as it is, this would just kill it all the way. Leaderboard always pushed me to go higher in my wins.  

congratz on the 1billionth post on sparring.  

Posted by BrandonGraal

Wouldn't be a horrible idea to make people lose points when they lose, but the leaderboard encourages new players to come and get on it. If this was a thing I don't think any new sparrers would come. As well as some other players just stop sparring. Sparring is dying as it is, this would just kill it all the way. Leaderboard always pushed me to go higher in my wins.

There aren't that many players that care for points.  

derail the thread someone, they said not to.  

Posted by G Fatal

congratz on the 1billionth post on sparring.

Congratz on continuing to participate on forums for a game you don't play.  

Posted by Striken

There aren't that many players that care for points.

Still, there are some. Even 3 new sparrers is good enough in 2017 lol  

Posted by EP

Congratz on continuing to participate on forums for a game you don't play.

Who said I didn't play? I do have breaks out and use new acc/s rather than my old accounts as more a social fun play than getting lots of kills etc, nevertheless a forum is for people to express their opinion on whatever matter. You'll do a goodjob on doing what OP said if you want to reply @thread personally never was into sparring although I don't think there is much wrong with how system was; but as said not a keen sparrer so they'll likely see different hence the billion posts on the subject.