All you have to do to get a suggestion added is present it nicely and explain how it's objectively good for the game... Objectively being the keyword there. It's not some 100% success rate method but I've seen it happen dozens of times on these forums.
Things that require a poll are usually subjective... If iClassic acted on everything that won a community poll with a sample size of 20, I can't imagine how bad the server would be.
|
there isn't any explanation
|
I can think of a bunch, so I'm sure staff can:
|
Look at how much easier PKing is now compared to back then due to mobs and a higher playercount. Doesn't it seem strange to compare Anyu and Xenthic all-time when the data is so skewed due to how completely different it is?
The same goes for towering. My last post explains what I think of towering back then compared to towering right now. With the guild system changing soon, it may be even more skewed. We might have a towering environment where the highest number of hours a guild gets per day is 10, and there are 20-30 other guilds that get between 0-9 hours daily. Is it really relevant at that point to compare those guilds against CoM having 20k on a leaderboard?
|
|
Speaking of BKs, that's another reason. They used to be measured by flat baddy kills, now they're points. How do you prorate that? Seems like all-time leaderboards are really constricting in terms of development. Simple changes like the latest stamina thing that affects bombs and bows, that has a huge impact on an all-time PKs leaderboard.
I dunno, just seems sloppy to have all of this mushed together into a permanent leaderboard. Doesn't seem to really hold much merit when things change so often.
|