Mods Add a sorting feature based on the ratio of endorsements to unique downloads, or alternatively, simply display this ratio for each mod without sorting.

[nzzx]

Some mods gain more downloads due to factors like being released during peak player activity, having been available for a long time, or having eye-catching preview images—factors that don’t necessarily reflect their actual quality. This can overshadow hidden gems with only a few thousand downloads but a high number of endorsements.

Since only those who have used a mod can endorse it, a high endorsement-to-download ratio is a strong indicator of quality. Implementing this ratio—whether for sorting or just displaying it—would help players discover more underrated mods. Simply showing the ratio on each mod’s page would be a simpler solution.

[Squirrel97]

8 hours ago, nzzx said:

Since only those who have used a mod can endorse it, a high endorsement-to-download ratio is a strong indicator of quality. Implementing this ratio—whether for sorting or just displaying it—would help players discover more underrated mods. Simply showing the ratio on each mod’s page would be a simpler solution.

What about mods which are included in popular mod lists/collections? Everyone who downloads these collections will download every single mod included in them. And the majority of people who use these collections are never going to endorse the mods included in them (they don't even endorse the collection itself either), so you can end up with a mod that has 500 or less endorsements and 100,000 unique downloads. Does this mean it would then be considered a low quality mod?

[nzzx]

11 hours ago, Squirrel97 said:

What about mods which are included in popular mod lists/collections? Everyone who downloads these collections will download every single mod included in them. And the majority of people who use these collections are never going to endorse the mods included in them (they don't even endorse the collection itself either), so you can end up with a mod that has 500 or less endorsements and 100,000 unique downloads. Does this mean it would then be considered a low quality mod?

Mods added to modlists indeed cannot be accurately evaluated and may even have counterproductive effects. However, this metric can still reflect the performance of mods not included in modlists. If a mod's description is unappealing but has a high ratio, causing users to notice it, then it serves its purpose.

Of course, a better approach would be to exclude download counts from modlists when calculating this metric.

[JimboUK]

This has been suggested multiple times before, the problem is it tends to favour niche and joke mods and will produce some bizzare results.

[ShotFromGuns]

On 7/29/2025 at 6:08 AM, JimboUK said:

This has been suggested multiple times before, the problem is it tends to favour niche and joke mods and will produce some bizzare results.

That's not a reason not to have that sorting option. That's a reason for you, personally, to not use that sorting option.

We can sort by downloads, unique downloads, and endorsements already, which clearly acknowledges that none of those metrics is perfect or preferable for every user or use case. There's no reason not to add one more, based on data that already exists (unique downloads and endorsements), given that it's literally just dividing one existing number by another and letting us sort by it. And, yes, some types of mods will be overrepresented... but it will make it faster to compare similar mods without early uploads having an advantage that latecomers have to work extremely hard to overcome (particularly since the earliest mods are often rushed out the door specifically to get a head start on those numbers, which then snowballs as the only quality measures people can sort by are downloads and endorsements, not the relationship between the two).

If you don't like the idea of a ratio sort, just don't use it. It's not "unfair" to anybody for it to merely exist.