Talk:Altador Cup II

Altador Cup II?

This year's competition seems to be called in official media Altador Cup II, not Altador Cup 2007... Propose move... --Macbeth 16:22, 10 Jun 2007 (UTC)

If we did that, would the Altador Cup 2006 article be called "Altador Cup I"? I named them this way to have readers quickly understand the difference between each years activities, and to have them seperate from the main game article, "Altador Cup". If we were to call this Altador Cup II, readers would perhaps think it was an update to the regular Altador Cup, rather than the installment of 2007. You are right in that Neopets mentions this current plot as "Altador Cup II", so perhaps mentioning the difference in the the trivia will suffice. --Jacob 18:43, 10 Jun 2007 (CDT)

It is an update on the regular Altador Cup... in that... It's the second one. The same numbering system is used in other real life sporting events, e.g. the Super Bowl... It shouldn't be too difficult to figure out :¬/. --Macbeth 18:13, 12 Jun 2007 (UTC)

Checked out the Super Bowl article, and it seems they do indeed label each individual bowl with a roman numeral. Hmmm...i suppose it could swing either way, but i think showing the year off the bat is quicker to identify than those with roman numerals. then again, we don't really how people will identify with each of the plots. If it's being presented in the roman numerals, then i'm all for it. can also be changed in the future if nessesary. :) --Jacob 01:01, 13 Jun 2007 (UTC)

I don't quite see the matter. After all Altador Cup II redirects to this article. Independent of what the user searches for, he will find the article, anyway.--Demon 05:50, 13 Jun 2007 (UTC)

Quite, but we could have Altador Cup II and Altador Cup 2007 both redirecting to Hermit Hugglepumps Magical Adventures in a Strawberry Field, and while whichever someone searches they will get the article, it is hardly appropriate. :P.

For reference, it is referred to as Altador Cup II here, and in the Current Event section here... The Altador Cup II NeoBoard, of course, also bears this notation. Elsewhere, it is just called Altador Cup, a generic name... Sometimes second annual Altador Cup. I cannot find Altador Cup 2007 in any official media. --Macbeth 11:20, 13 Jun 2007 (UTC)

No fair making jokes. Didn't feel like smiling. :D Again, "Altador Cup 2006/2007" is a title I created for ease of use, which i believe was even before they called this plot "Altador Cup II". We can redirect to the properly titled articles as needed. If other users show complaints, we can always change it back. --Jacob 23:39, 13 Jun 2007 (UTC)

Ranking system

the ranking scores have been taken into affect as of today...or at least i finally got enough of a score to get level one. To help measure these scores (if it's even possible), here is what i currently got for level one...

Level 1

• Yooyuball
  • Goals Scored: 172 - 278
  • Number of Wins: 38 - 55
  • Number of Draws: 1
  • Number of Losses: 0
• Slushie Slinger
  • Games Played: 26 - 43
• Make Some Noise
  • Games Played: 52 - 90

if players are guaged by how well they play against other players and their contributions to the team vs. other users of the same team, then guaging this system will be next to impossible. :( *fingers crossed* --Jacob 03:25, 17 Jun 2007 (UTC)

To help guage the score (if it's possible), I added what i got from yesterday... --Jacob 02:35, 18 Jun 2007 (UTC)

Will continue to modify my score till i get a new rank... --Jacob 19:06, 18 Jun 2007 (UTC)

I feel compelled to put you out of your misery ;). I've found a ranking guide that appears to be quite reliable. For record's sake, I'll quote it here:

"ALTADOR CUP RANKING GUIDE!!

OK - this is my latest attempt at explaining how ranking works. It will not be 100% yet, but the shape of it works, just needs some fine tuning. As a few have asked, I am also happy for anyone to use this information, or even to further develop!

Remember there are no guarantees here - just a best estimate based on data seen to date! The breaks at the top ranks are still needing a lot of testing, as little data is avaialable here yet.

So what you need to do!

QUICK METHOD - Simply give yourself one point for each YYB win, one point for every three SS games played and one point for every 15 MSN games played. That is your total!

Or in full; you need to convert your activity in to a points total. Here is how.

For each YYB game you have won, give yourself 1 point (care, games played not goals). Give yourself 0.334 points (one third)for each drawn game.

For each SS game you have played, give yourself 0.334 (again multiply by one third) points.

For each MSN game you have played, give yourself 0.0667 points (care here, 6.667% not 66.67%)

Add them up. That is your 'points total'. One warning here - the small number of people whose scores do not match this chart have high numbers of SS games played. I increasingly believe there is a 'cut off' score, wherby below that it shows as a win on your record, but does not score for rank. If this is the case, it is to stop people playing loads of games getting very poor scores quickly.

The ranking for points then is;

Beginner - less than 49.99

Rank 1 - 50-99.99 points

Rank 2 - 100-149.99 points

Rank 3 - 150-199.99 points

Rank 4 - 200-274.99 points

Rank 5 - 275-349.99 points

Rank 6 - 350-424.99 points

Rank 7 - 425-499.99 points

Rank 8 - 500-599.99 points

Rank 9 - 600-699.99 points

Rank 10 - 700-799.99 points

Rank 11 - 800 -899.99 points

Rank 12 - 900-1024.99 points

Rank 13 - 1025-1149.99 points

Rank 14 - 1150-1274.99 points

Rank 15 - 1275-1399.99 points

Rank 16 - 1400-1549.99 points

Rank 17 - 1550-1699.99 points

Rank 18 - 1700-1849.99 points

Rank 19 - 1850-2000 points

Above that is currently unknown, although it is known there is a maximum of 20 ranks."

--Macbeth 01:43, 24 Jun 2007 (UTC)

Results by day

UBracter has recently edited out the results by day section, and i put them back in place, due to them being the best method to show how each team did on each day. How better to display it and what improvments to use is the purpose of this discussion. *is ready to hear ideas* --Jacob 20:30, 27 Jun 2007 (UTC)