Looked at the High Scores List Lately?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My Idea: Completely revamp the High Scores List.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

When given this informationÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâæ

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâæhow can you support the Current High Scores List?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Let us call the 677,010th ranked player Bob, 675,011 Jim, 1,000,000 Greg, 6 Colin, and 7 can be Gary.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Colin, with 299,434,484 Experience, is ranked ahead of Gary, who has 761,903,754 Experience, a difference of 462,400,000 Experience. Gary has more then 2.5 times the amount of Experience as Colin does, but with 2 extra levels, Colin leads Gary.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Greg (as of 12:15 PM November 23, 2006) has over 800,000 Experience more then Bob (as of 12:15 PM November 23, 2006). Bob (With 1,019,742 Experience), is ranked ahead of Jim (with 33,048,968 Experience) because of one level, even though Jim has most likely played the game longer then Bob, and proven that he is a far better player with over 32 times the Experience!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As someone said in an earlier post about this, a Combat Level 3 skiller, with 3 99ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s, and 317 Total level, having roughly 39,150,000 Experience would not even show up on the High Scores List. But, someone with all skills at 33 and 759 Total level, having roughly 414,000 Experience would be ranked. The Skiller has trained much longer and much harder then the average player, yet his efforts are not shown to the public.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The High Scores list should be based on Experience for this reason. Any supporters?

There should be two options, XP and levels.

There should be two options, XP and levels.

 

 

 

I agree. Not quite sure how that would work, but I suppose they should make, perhaps, two highscores. One for XP and one for levels.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I had never taken the time to look at this. Extremely interesting find :-k Thanks for bringin' this out there.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edit: "The High Scores list should be based on Experience for this reason. Any supporters?"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I still think that it's a good idea, but just they should perhaps make two highscores. If it was experience oriented, everyone would then complain about the levels. You can't please everyone, but perhaps with two highscores, you could.

Yeah, 2 High Scores would be good. Never actually thought about it, lol.

So someone with 200M cooking xp and no other stats raised should be ranked above somebody with 99 prayer, runecrafting, farming, herblore, mining, smithing, crafting, construction, agility, thieving, fishing, firemaking, fletching and woodcutting (13M xp in each = 195,000,000xp)? :notalk:

So someone with 200M cooking xp and no other stats raised should be ranked above somebody with 99 prayer, runecrafting, farming, herblore, mining, smithing, crafting, construction, agility, thieving, fishing, firemaking, fletching and woodcutting (13M xp in each = 195,000,000xp)? :notalk:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well....200Mil takes more dedication then 195kMil :roll:

The thing is jagax already uses one complete sever to hold the high scores. Any changes to it or making a new one would force jagax to get anther server just so people could see how others are doing. I would much rathers jagax get a new server and make a new world.

Not really , the highscores pages queries a database to retrieve its information , you could sort it by any criteria you wanted (well they could :P)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I never did understand why Jagex doesnt have options to sort the list ASCending , DESCending , By name, By rank , By exp , by level etc..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Guess they just dont feel its necessary :?

i dont really care about that, i just want the f2p list back!!! :ohnoes:

F2pers are in the Hi scores.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I support this idea too.