Rank vs Score - What can we learn about progress?

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

   I've just done a plot of about 30 points, comparing 'Rank' against 'log_10 (Score)' in the Global Rankings, for Rank above 4000. The resulting plot is very close to a straight line.

When ascending the Rank sequence, the line continues fairly straight, with players getting a score boost at around Rank 3000. Above the 250th Rank, player's scores exceed the pattern of the previous ranks, and start climbing. These guys have found some 'critical mass' and have exceeded the 'geometric progression' results of the other players. Above 80th rank, it's obvious, with scores 2x the expected score.

I think this shows that there's 'something special' that can be pulled out of the hat when players reach a high level (scoring over 150 million), which not all players find. I would have expected the reverse: a bunching of scores at the top, where they reach the achievement limits of the game.

There are lots of ways to read the data (including finding fault with the use of Rank vs score, and the inclusion of dormant players), mostly interpreting the distribution of player ability or the point at which a player might become bored with the game and abandon it (dare I suggest such an outcome :o), or even that the highest scores are from opportunist players who started Illyriad in its earliest days and that the top ranks will eventually even out. I'll watch replies with interest. Finally, this all becomes moot if any tweaks are made to game balance, or new features are introduced.