Board 8 > Board 8 Ranks the Dark Souls II Bosses and Areas

(+) Yeah! (+)

Or you could pretend you did that but really just watch a Darklurker youtube video and judge from that. It seems a shame for all of your work to be excluded because you haven't fought one optional boss
---

Robazoid posted...

Or you could pretend you did that but really just watch a Darklurker youtube video and judge from that. It seems a shame for all of your work to be excluded because you haven't fought one optional boss

That's what I'd do tbh
---

tazzyboyishere posted...

- You must rank everything in a group, though if you only want to do one of the bosses or areas, feel free!
- Please rank based on your own personal opinion.

Sorry man, I felt like these two rules made it pretty obvious you needed to have played everything. If I allow people to rank without having experienced certain bosses or areas, it puts optional and late game content at a significant disadvantage, undermining the fairness in the list. Sorry if this rule turns you off of the series but I hope you understand why it exists.
---

Alright, sent the email with my friend's rankings. Two big games coming out made it difficult for him because he would actually get his rankings done while talking to a different friend (who proceeded to just play Nier and ME:A so he couldn't for the entire deadline). And even he had to just stop playing ME in order to finally crack down instead of wait on being able to do this his way.
---

Sorry I put it that way last night. I guess I was pretty bummed when I heard about the rule. You can use my Areas list and the write-ups submitted for the boss rankings.

metaIslug posted...

regardless of this contest, if you still got DS2 installed Axl, you should definitely try Darklurker. takes only an afternoon or two, and is worth it imo.

I do have a SotFS save on my PS4 before going to the next cycle. I guess I'll give it try. There is still a day before the deadline.
---

Thanks for understanding. Sorry your work had to be thrown out. I'll make sure to include a more specific rule in the next rankings to hopefully aboid this.

While I don't wanna make you rush, if you can finish it before I post the topic itself, I'll let you keep your ranking. Though it takes a while to do it unless your super fast...
---

missing a boss from his list messes up the data, a bit though. all of his entries would have to be one point higher or one point lower in relation to all of the other lists which would mess up the weighting of them. either his first place boss is ranked as a second place boss, or his last place boss is ranked as a second-to-last placed boss. and everything in the middle gets offset slightly.

the latter is probably a better way to handle it since it will have less impact on the top results. but if tazzy doesn't want to include incomplete lists I'd understand that, too. I mean he did write it in the rules. not his fault that Axl didn't read the rules.
---

MariaTaylor posted...

his first place boss is ranked as a second place boss

This is the rule I had in place for the Demon's Souls ranking, but once you mix in optional and DLC stuff, it favors early game and mainline stuff way too heavily. And Axl was rating Darklurker at 40th, which is honestly even worse to me, since that's a severe handicap and would actually heavily impact the results, considering how many points are available in this list.
---

don't worry, my list is already doing a good enough job of tanking darklurker's placement.

Honestly, the only way I'd accept it is if the thing getting shafted were finishing last. Darklurker ain't that low
---

tazzyboyishere posted...

This is the rule I had in place for the Demon's Souls ranking, but once you mix in optional and DLC stuff, it favors early game and mainline stuff way too heavily. And Axl was rating Darklurker at 40th, which is honestly even worse to me, since that's a severe handicap and would actually heavily impact the results, considering how many points are available in this list.

what you do if you accept his list is just not have Axl with a +1 entry. the bottom of his list is +2 and everything else goes up from there to the normal +40. Darklurker is absent from his list.

instead, when you calculate the Darklurker's average, you only use his scores given from the other 5 lists or however many there are without Axl's entry included. this will offset the scores a tiny bit, but probably not enough to make any major difference. it will have the largest impact at the very bottom of the list where his lowest ranked entry will be given a +2 instead of a +1.

Darklurker's own average will only take into consideration the people who rated the boss and played the boss, but since it's an average it will still land him somewhere on the same scale as all the other bosses.

but that's really only if you choose to include Axl's list.
---

Well, I'm not disputing the rule anymore. It is there and the more I think about it the more it makes sense.

I'm at work right now but I guess I can give it a try and see how it goes later.

I'll see if I can manage to fight darklurker and submit the list before the topic hits otherwise you can go ahead without my Boss list.
---

Well this isn't using averages, it's using points added onto each other based on placement. I feel like the only real solution that wouldn't create an advantage or disadvantage aside from axing it would be to take the average ranking and just put Darklurker's placement there on Axl's list. But that still sounds like it could lead to a huge advantage/disadvantage unless something were directly middle-of-the-pack.
---

tazzyboyishere posted...

Well this isn't using averages, it's using points added onto each other based on placement.

to turn them into averages you just divide by the total number of lists

then, for darklurker, you divide by 1 less (because he will be on 1 less total lists than all other bosses)

this will give the exact results you want but with only a tiny amount of offset due to darklurker. funny enough DL himself will get the MOST accurate ranking, while everyone else will be offset. but they will all be offset by the same amount (+1) so it won't make any difference in the end.
---

if you send me the data I can do it for you if you want.
---

Well the general consensus seems to be that Axl should be allowed, so let's just make sure @Axl_Rose_85 is alright with the solution Maria proposed.
---

I'm fine with yours and Maria's proposal. At the same time I can try beating Darklurker today before the deadline expires and googling him up it looks very much possible. If I fail to submit the altered list by tonight then you can go with what Maria suggested. Thank you both.
---

Just franchise tag Darklurker and put the result into Ax's list. If you don't watch football, a franchise tag is when you take the top five salaries at a position and pay the player you've tagged a one year salary based on the average. Example: Curt Cousins was tagged this year, meaning he's owed 20 million based on the top five average QB salaries.

So take the top five Darklurker spots, average them, and plop the average into that spot in his list. Easy peasy.

Me and Atma both hated that fight so this is honestly not a big deal. It's not like something in the top 3 is getting affected by this.
---

oh silvermont, cool. he has some good lore vids.
---

Ultii posted...

Just franchise tag Darklurker and put the result into Ax's list. If you don't watch football, a franchise tag is when you take the top five salaries at a position and pay the player you've tagged a one year salary based on the average. Example: Curt Cousins was tagged this year, meaning he's owed 20 million based on the top five average QB salaries.

So take the top five Darklurker spots, average them, and plop the average into that spot in his list. Easy peasy.

Me and Atma both hated that fight so this is honestly not a big deal. It's not like something in the top 3 is getting affected by this.

Such a move would affect multiple spots on the list. That's a pretty big deal for someone who's favorites are around Darklurker.
---

Oh, well Axl just sent a revised list anyway. Kinda shocked he made it honestly...
---

It didn't take nearly as long as I thought it would. I realized I made a numbering error as well and corrected that too.

All said and done, I think a complete list is what's best for the integrity of these ranking topics. Sorry I was a bit sour about the rules being imposed on me last night.
---

So is The Ringed City DLC gonna be mandatory for the Dark Souls III ranking topic?

If so, I guess I have to play it on launch.

If not, then I'll just take my time and get around to it after Persona 5.
---

We're doing Bloodborne next, aren't we? To give everyone more time to digest The Ringed City? Speaking of which, I'll be playing Bloodborne DLC later to prep for the release of the FINAL DARK SOULS CONTENT EVER. Typing it out like that is making me feel all nostalgic, and I only got into the series late into 2015!

If anyone else is getting wistful about Souls and wants to help me take down Ludwig and co., I'll be setting up a password for jolly cooperation!
---

Yeah Bloodborne is next, and I probably will wait a little on Dark Souls III afterwards. Some people need to play these games multiple times to comfortably rank everything.
---

I still need to beat the first dark souls 3 dlc bosses. Was annoyed by them and the subpar dlc and kinda quit on the game.

Well, I guess I can't vote in this one anyways. I never played the DLC.

I also haven't finished the Bloodborne DLC or Chalice Dungeons or DS3's first DLC.
---

Chalice dungeon bosses will be a separate ranking.
---

Final day!
---

Still haven't beaten the remaining dlc bosses only got past the first one
---

Forgot to bump midday, but less than an hour left!
---