Leaderboards, and When to Ignore Them

Leaderboards work on people, which is precisely why they should be handled with a little care.

The useful version is straightforward. A ranking supplies a reason to return, a sense of where you sit among people doing the same work, and — in the weekly views — a fresh start often enough that nobody is permanently locked out by an old score set on a lucky afternoon.

What it does well

Comparison against people roughly like you is motivating in a way that abstract self-improvement is not. 'Get better at tactics' produces very little behaviour. 'You are four solves behind someone you play regularly' produces a session.

Friends-only views are the strongest form of this, which is why they exist. A global top ten is aspirational at best; the person one place above you who you actually know is the one who gets you to sit down.

Where it turns

The failure mode is chasing the number instead of the skill. It shows up as replaying an easy game mode you have already mastered to protect a rank, or avoiding a mode you are weak at because your score there is embarrassing.

That is exactly backwards. The mode where your score is embarrassing is the one with the most improvement available. A leaderboard that stops you playing a game is doing you harm, and the correct response is to stop looking at it for a fortnight and go be bad at something.

A quiet rule

Check the board after a session, not before. Before a session it sets a target, and targets make people rush. After a session it is information, and information is what you wanted.

The scores will still be there next week. So will you.