What goes into calculating avatar skill on the leaderboard?

**sutphin** · April 13, 2011, 12:16 AM

I'm asking because someone that is 0/7 is over me apparently because he/she has more skill. I am 8/12 in 1 v 1 including a win against a ten star general.

**TheTrueGreek** · April 13, 2011, 09:08 AM

its not the amount of wins/losses but how you won/lost them. close defeats will increase your score (especially against high ranking opponets). and heroics victories/decicive are worth the most. so you could have lost a few of those battles as decicive defeats and thats keeping your score down?

**The Bobba-Job** · April 13, 2011, 09:28 AM

Originally Posted by TheTrueGreek

its not the amount of wins/losses but how you won/lost them. close defeats will increase your score (especially against high ranking opponets). and heroics victories/decicive are worth the most. so you could have lost a few of those battles as decicive defeats and thats keeping your score down?

So does that mean noob bashing is the most effective way of climbing the ladder?

**sutphin** · April 13, 2011, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by TheTrueGreek

its not the amount of wins/losses but how you won/lost them. close defeats will increase your score (especially against high ranking opponets). and heroics victories/decicive are worth the most. so you could have lost a few of those battles as decicive defeats and thats keeping your score down?

No, I have only had one decisive defeat and that was against someone that was one level lower than me. But, I guess that could mean that his skill was really bad or something.

But, really, unless this person above me that was 0/7 had seven losses against 10 star generals in the top 100 including close defeats, how could his skill be better than mine. Remember, I beat the ten star and he lost(hypothetically).

**TheTrueGreek** · April 13, 2011, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by sutphin

No, I have only had one decisive defeat and that was against someone that was one level lower than me. But, I guess that could mean that his skill was really bad or something.

But, really, unless this person above me that was 0/7 had seven losses against 10 star generals in the top 100 including close defeats, how could his skill be better than mine. Remember, I beat the ten star and he lost(hypothetically).

Who knows then. since your so early into the leaderboards i don't think you should really care, (not that you should care at all). just win a few and you'll pass him.

**sutphin** · April 13, 2011, 03:23 PM

Originally Posted by TheTrueGreek

Who knows then. since your so early into the leaderboards i don't think you should really care, (not that you should care at all). just win a few and you'll pass him.

Oh, I don't really care. I mean, I'm not the best player around. I was curious aabout the my postion botton on the leaderboard so I pressed it. So, after about 250 some pages a looked at my score and just wondered how he/she was better.

This was not a question posed for my ego. I am only curious as to how skill is recorded. I play this for fun and I do not care about wins and losses.

**RTKBarrett** · April 13, 2011, 09:21 AM

Its flat out broken

**TheTrueGreek** · April 13, 2011, 09:42 AM

idk. i jump everywhere. once 900. 2 hours later 2300. but the matchmaking is "supposed" to keep you around your skill points amount. so in theory youll play people around your rank making noob bashing for extended periods of time hard if not impossible. So i can play 5 games against people in the 2000's and win them all, jump up to the 1500's on the leaderboard and hit a wall and lose my next 4 and ill be sent back to the 2000's.

In the original posters case, he might just want to play more games so that there is more work to be graded by the leaderboards.