20 November 2017, 14:31 | #41 | ||
Competition Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,756
|
Quote:
Quote:
That system should work well. The 25%-part basically are the bonus points. |
||
20 November 2017, 14:34 | #42 | |
Global Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Might as well be WORK :(
Age: 56
Posts: 4,110
|
Quote:
I wish you guys luck in sorting this out, it's got my head |
|
20 November 2017, 14:39 | #43 |
Baked Produce
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Age: 43
Posts: 1,197
|
True. But it's also true of being in 9th and 10th. There's only one point apart. If a player can make it to 2nd place on the score board I'm not sure they need that much more motivation compared to someone in 10th place. This is why I prefer the score multiplier method. It will encourage everyone equally. And I did include a small podium bonus. But it keeps the championship points close. And I see that as the more important part than motivating someone in 2nd place on the scoreboard.
|
20 November 2017, 14:57 | #44 | |||
Competition Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,756
|
Quote:
Quote:
Let me quote the late Andrew Lines regarding this matter who once said: Quote:
Last edited by john4p; 20 November 2017 at 15:12. |
|||
20 November 2017, 16:37 | #45 | ||||
Local Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lancashire, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 1,591
|
Looks like I missed most of the fireworks already. We posted various suggestions threads over the years, and even one this year, but its amazing how the opinions start to flow then options are on the table.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by lifeschool; 20 November 2017 at 17:18. |
||||
20 November 2017, 17:10 | #46 | |||
Local Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lancashire, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 1,591
|
Quote:
With Option 2, the bonus points would be given for every new player. So if 1 person plays they get 21 points. 2 people play, 1st would get 22, 2nd would get 19 (using the top 16 system). It gives the illusion of more points, but in practice, as everyone would go up by the same number of points, the only gain would be in terms of round-to-round attendance variance rather than extending a points gap between players. It is hoped that this might encourage more players to join more rounds, and perhaps even play the whole season. Option 3 is similar, only it would award bonus points only when the player count hits 12. We usually have at least 10-12 players in a round, so this means the regulars arnt rewarded. But if we have more that the usual suspects playing, then everybody gets an extra point or two. For example, if we had 20 players in a round, everyone would get 9 bonus points. The gaps per player would remain the same, but rather than rewarding overall season attendance, it rewards extra players and newbies. It is hoped this might encourage players to recommend friends, and this would be a way to gain extra league points, even if you are stuck or done with a particular game. Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by lifeschool; 20 November 2017 at 17:41. |
|||
20 November 2017, 17:48 | #47 | ||
Competition Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,756
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
20 November 2017, 17:58 | #48 |
Baked Produce
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Age: 43
Posts: 1,197
|
Thanks to Loki’s post on Lemon I took a step back and looked again at this from the perspective of - what are our objectives and how do we achieve them?
My objectives would be: 1. Top players have something to strive for and reasonable reward for getting a podium place. 2. Lower players should get good points for participation and encouragement to keep posting scores. I’ve run a bunch of numbers in a spreadsheet based on the current round Monster Business and the Rick Dangerous II round earlier this year. My earlier suggestion for a heavily score based system won’t make the difference. While it’s fair in one sense - it’s not going to achieve the objectives. It was a surprise to me that it didn’t create better points, but hey. Gotta move on. So I’d like to propose a new system for you to evaluate. It’s still quite simple and based on what we have now but I’ll explain the pros at the end. The top five positions receive fixed scores. 1st = 20 points 2nd = 17 points 3rd = 15 points 4th = 13 points 5th = 12 points For everyone below this you get 5 points for participation and a potential extra 7 points based on your score as a proportion of the 5th place score. That means everyone from 5th and below can potentially score 12 points. But in order to win the league or push ahead you will have to reach those top 4 positions and get the extra points. Due to the closer points available for 5th place and lower it gives more opportunity to get back into contention for the league championship. Setting the score multiplier using 5th place helps to strip out very high scores and making it a true battle between those below the top four spots, with attainable achievements for improving their scores. Below I’ve posted how the points would look for those two rounds. I’ve compared them to the CURRENT scoring system and using a FIXED point system for the top 16 players as proposed. Which is probably the best alternative at this time. You can see that on the SCORE 20 TIER system the difference between points received has been reduced. The top players get extra and the lower ones get noticeable rewards and remain competitive. The only players on the Monster Business score board to receive less points than other systems are in 4th and 6th place. On the Rick Dangerous score board, which has a tougher scoring curve, only players in 6th, 7th, and 8th, get less than in other systems. However everybody below those positions get the same or considerably more. I think this system has potential. |
20 November 2017, 18:01 | #49 |
Competition Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,756
|
Excellent idea. Really like this! Best of both worlds.
|
20 November 2017, 18:09 | #50 |
Baked Produce
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Age: 43
Posts: 1,197
|
|
20 November 2017, 18:15 | #51 |
Competition Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,756
|
With a minimum of 5 points everyone will have the feeling of getting somewhere while at the top the competitive spirit is not diminished in any way.
|
20 November 2017, 18:28 | #52 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: France
Age: 49
Posts: 760
|
Quote:
For example the rule 2 weeks instead of 3 can work for all rounds. It would be fun to see his score evolve in the 3rd week, how many places we lose I don't care much about statistics of top players, for me it's necessary to focus on players who have more difficulties, we must motivate them to play regularly or to excel. An idea (wacky?), why not make a lottery for each round. At the end of a round, you give some points (5 ?) to a player who is not on the podium Easy with a site like this: http://www.dcode.fr/random-selection |
|
20 November 2017, 18:47 | #53 | |||
Competition Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,756
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
20 November 2017, 19:27 | #54 |
Local Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lancashire, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 1,591
|
If there are people who support your idea then we can move forward, but in all the confusion over possible systems, nobody is agreeing on any points so far.
I can see the merit of a scaling fixed points system, where it depends on how many play as to the fixed points on offer, but this is not simple! edit: I just notice on your Rick Dangerous example, there is only 4 points between the lowest 1K score and my 37k score. With a fixed system each player over 16 would get 1 point, so the gap would be 10 points. Last edited by lifeschool; 20 November 2017 at 20:15. |
20 November 2017, 19:49 | #55 | |
Local Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lancashire, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 1,591
|
Quote:
But for the reasons you point out, I think giving one point per player is too risky and unpredictable, and I am more happy thinking about a => 12 or => 16 bonus system, which only rewards participation after a certain level. If my original 1 bonus point idea is totally bad, then I am happy to remove it from the options list for the vote. Last edited by lifeschool; 20 November 2017 at 20:16. |
|
20 November 2017, 21:04 | #56 | |
Zone Friend
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Aussie
Posts: 1,144
|
Quote:
I don't like your system at all. Would be better to have a 15 -1 system. Get 25% of 1st place score just by turning up? |
|
20 November 2017, 23:22 | #57 | |
Baked Produce
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Age: 43
Posts: 1,197
|
Sorry about that.
Quote:
However, if the idea of giving 25% of 1st place for taking part doesn’t appeal to you. It can be restructured like this... 1st = 15 2nd = 13 3rd = 11 4th = 9 5th = 8 6th and below = 1 + (up to 7 points based on 5th place score) It should yield very similar results. It may actually make things more competitive because lower points narrow the gap between 1st and last marginally further. |
|
21 November 2017, 02:39 | #58 | |||
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Australia
Age: 44
Posts: 1,126
|
Quote:
Quote:
I especially like the way it incorporates the bonus points idea. Alhough fixed 16 will still get my primary vote Because it is will always provide the simplest, cleanest, fairest spread of points. Yes, the issue of players outside the top 16 all on 1 point is there, but I think this only matters if there is huge abnormal burst in player count. In most cases (if not all) would mean just a little extra dedication to break into the top 16. However, Biscuit's score 20 system gets my secondary vote for sure.. and on that note - will we be able to cast a secondary vote when it is time? Quote:
|
|||
21 November 2017, 08:13 | #59 | |
Zone Friend
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Aussie
Posts: 1,144
|
Quote:
The options for the vote will obviously be re-assessed before voting, based on these discussions. |
|
21 November 2017, 10:04 | #60 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Australia
Age: 44
Posts: 1,126
|
Quote:
Observation: It's only relevant if having to make the top 16 for additional points actually does, or at least is likely to put new players off taking part. Does everyone here believe it would? I myself am not so sure If the common belief is yes I'll most certainly vote for Biscuit's idea |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Themes and Palettes discussion | fitzsteve | project.ClassicWB | 16 | 11 March 2011 13:47 |
Old KGLoad Discussion | killergorilla | project.KGLoad | 357 | 20 January 2011 16:08 |
Castlevania Discussion | john4p | Retrogaming General Discussion | 30 | 30 January 2009 02:10 |
ROM Discussion... | derSammler | project.EAB | 41 | 29 January 2008 23:36 |
General Discussion | Zetr0 | project.Amiga Game Factory | 12 | 15 December 2005 13:53 |
|
|