18 November 2017, 19:14 | #1 | ||
Competition Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,756
|
SuperLeague Changes - Pre-Vote Discussion
We've been discussing some changes that might further improve the experience for everyone and also reduce some frustration in the case of runaway-scores diminishing everyone's efforts (besides the winner).
In the week from December 2nd to 8th we'll have a vote regarding changing the scoring system, and in the three following weeks we'll have further polls for other changes (bonus points, league schedule and team scoring system): Quote:
Thanks lifeschool for the writeup! Here's the original Lemon thread. |
||
19 November 2017, 14:49 | #2 |
Local Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lancashire, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 1,591
|
Hope everyone got to see this thread. I think many casual players arnt too fussed either way, but we've taken on board what EAB players have said over the whole season, and have come up with a few ideas which could be much fairer for everybody.
John suggested a fixed 16 place system, and then added the 75/25 system as another alternative between the two. I came up with bonus option 2. Bonus Option 3 is a variation of a Dynamic system Harry suggested years ago. Biscuit on Lemon suggested a new season schedule (http://www.lemonamiga.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14634) which may be interesting? Lastly, the Team Scoring option based on championship points was another of my brainwaves, and John updated it to be based on the top 5 players only. So it really was a collab effort. I hope you are proud of our fine competition, and would like to see some feedback on this. Last edited by lifeschool; 19 November 2017 at 15:00. |
19 November 2017, 14:57 | #3 |
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK
Age: 37
Posts: 11,167
|
Thanks Dan for writing this up and for John for posting this here. I've now made this thread a sticky so hopefully it can get a bit of attention.
Thanks to all the competition moderators who came up with and discussed these ideas, it was a constructive conversation. I know a few people don't like the scoring system in particular (although I personally do), and it certainly has its flaws when there's a huge gap between first and second, and first place gets 20 points but the next player only gets (say) 11 or 12. I think the 75/25 method which effectively 'caps' the gap in points earned between positions could be a good balancing act between preserving the current points structure and making things a bit fairer when certain games expose the problems in the current system (Rick Dangerous 2 was one of the more obvious and extreme examples). Not too sure if, in that case, a Bonus Point system based on the number of players would really work too well with that. It perhaps feels slightly too arbitrary, being based on the number of players who enter. In terms of the schedule, I am, of course, biased as I helped put it together, but I think the current structure of the season is actually really good, being split into two halves, with four double rounds giving a change of pace and the various themes we run providing plenty of variety. And three weeks per round 'feels' right, and everyone knows that it's a Sunday start. Just in terms of admin, I think maintaning a season where it's done at a certain date every month (the 1st?) is harder because it falls on different days where updating and creating new threads might not happen on time. Finally, the team scoring issue has been a bit contentious with a few people. Despite the impression it sometimes gives, I don't think the 'average top five players' score on each team' method does discourage people when - say - one team has only four players, as it doesn't happen too often, but the unbalanced scenario does happen occasionally and it is a gap that needs to be closed (it possibly wasn't before because of the rarity of it occurring and the even scarcer scenario that directly influencing the outcome). Having said that - I think the idea of adding up the League points accrued of the top five (or possibly a bit more, maybe?) players on each side is a really good one and instantly removes that inequality issue, instead only encouraging people to add to the score, and prevents a situation where one player can carry an entire team by acheiving a huge score. But that's just my own thoughts. I'm one individual, so it would be interesting to see what others make of these ideas, and of the competition generally. |
19 November 2017, 15:32 | #4 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Australia
Age: 44
Posts: 1,126
|
Yeh great work coming up with the ideas guys, awesome, long live the competition
Just a quick indication where I'll head with votes: 1. Player Scoring - 16 player fixed I just think would be better for the comp overall. 2. Bonus points for new players - does this refer to voting points, or league points per round? 3. Schedule - No change, I like the current system to I think 2 games every round will have some players thinking they can't keep up, especially if it's 2 games that require a lot of time. 4. Team scoring - It's a tricky one.. not sure yet. |
19 November 2017, 17:16 | #5 | |||||
Competition Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,756
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Adding up the league points would eliminate the problem that someone could drag his team's average down by participating. The more play the better for each team! I think this would be a good change. |
|||||
19 November 2017, 17:28 | #6 |
Warhasneverbeensomuchfun
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rio de Janeiro / Brazil
Age: 41
Posts: 3,450
|
Although I barely played even though I kinda tried... I really do like the current score system. I've played in many different online competitions during my life. The score here is cool because it makes you keep wanting to improve even if you are in first place. I think that if you really do trump everyone else you should indeed get more points.
Do people have a problem with this system? |
19 November 2017, 17:35 | #7 | |
Competition Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,756
|
Quote:
|
|
19 November 2017, 18:53 | #8 |
Global Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Derby, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 9,355
|
The issue is one or two players usually dominate, so the scoring would be irrelevant anyway.
It's very difficult to make a scoring system that works effectively with the number of entries each time varying. Maybe have rounds to start with the top 10 or so going into the actual game competition to score points. |
19 November 2017, 20:31 | #9 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Oxfordia
Posts: 200
|
Quote:
However, I am interested in anything that might keep new blood coming into the comp. Not just to keep it alive but to encourage people to join and gain from the enjoyment I've had over the years. |
|
19 November 2017, 20:56 | #10 | |
The Human/Gray Hybrid
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Elizabeth Arkham Asylum for the Criminally Insane
Posts: 372
|
Quote:
|
|
19 November 2017, 21:20 | #11 | |||||
Zone Friend
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Aussie
Posts: 1,144
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
This is not true at all. Quote:
Like Graham I do not want to have a big impact on voting. But The fixed system proposed would be a backward step. It puts all the emphasis on beating the person in front of you rather then improving your own score. The Bonus points for competitors method would be critical for a fixed points system in my view. And could also increase participation. (I would propose something different to what has been presented) 75/25 Fixed/proportional would go some way to addressing some concerns without doing anything to drastic. Team scoring changes could alleviate some of the pressure from rounds with a small turnout, whilst encouraging others to compete (depending on system chosen) I Just want people to think about what they are trying to achieve. If you have a better idea it is not too late. |
|||||
20 November 2017, 01:11 | #12 |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: France
Age: 49
Posts: 760
|
Why not give a penalty on whoever won for the next round or give an advantage to others players?
I take as examples some sports like the WTCC, a race is done in two rounds, the one who won the first must start last for the second round. In WRC the leader of the championship opens the first days. In F1 there is the DRS to overtake, etc. We could find penalties, example: the one who won the last round will be able to play only 2 weeks out of 3 (the first two) for the next round. We can find other ways depending on the game, a time penalty, fewer lives, etc. What do you think ? The championship would be tighter and give more chances to other players to win a round or the championship. |
20 November 2017, 04:07 | #13 | |||
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Australia
Age: 44
Posts: 1,126
|
Quote:
Fixed points means there is always even spread of points available, regardless of skill level, available time to play, massive scores at the top etc. Improving your own score is still important, in order to improve/defend your current position Quote:
Quote:
Perhaps the 'bonus points' could accumulate for each player, and be spent on round voting instead? |
|||
20 November 2017, 08:25 | #14 | |
Zone Friend
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Aussie
Posts: 1,144
|
Quote:
I wouldn't want it to be seen as a punishment but more just to spice things up a bit. I think more of the situation where you might need to double your score to gain a position, but improving you score a bit may get you an extra point. |
|
20 November 2017, 08:56 | #15 | ||
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK
Age: 37
Posts: 11,167
|
Quote:
Quote:
I accept this system does have its faults, but then I think they all do in some aspect and it's worth highlighting the positive side. I honestly don't think it really puts people off and Predseda pointed out in a private thread over at Lemon that as a casual player, he doesn't put any stock in how many points he gets for his score. In fact the team competition interests him more. I wonder how many of our less superhuman players (i.e. most of us) have a similar point of view. After all, Lemon 64 has used the same system for, what, about 15 years, and nobody (as far as I know) has had a major problem with it. At the end of the day, though, as has already been pointed out, the top players will always be the top players and whatever system you used, the actual leaderboard and the gap between players wouldn't change much, except a bit of shuffling about lower down. |
||
20 November 2017, 10:39 | #16 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Oxfordia
Posts: 200
|
Quote:
Proportional scoring is a de-motivational force that currently even makes me withdraw from rounds, so I feel it in practice. God knows how disengaging it must feel to a newbie or a part time gamer who just wants to drop in an chance their arm. I think a reversion to fixed scoring is akin to reformation of the modern church in Europe. . It ensures the future of the competition. |
|
20 November 2017, 11:07 | #17 | |||||||||
Competition Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,756
|
Quote:
But I now understand Harry's reasoning. By giving bonus points if there are more players than we award points for in a fixed system the last places don't all share 1 point but will have different league points. That makes sense. So for the suggested 16-players-fixed points that means the points have to be increased if there are more than 16 players participating. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Still it's a good idea to give extra incentive to the 1st player to further increase his score so maybe the 75/25-system would be a good middle ground that both reduces frustration for the middle and bottom parts of the table while still reward further improving your score even if you're ahead. Quote:
We want to encourage as many players to take part and enjoy the games as possible. You're right it wasn't easy to find a good system for varying numbers of entries but all of the suggested systems work well for that (in the case of the fixed system we might think about adding Harry's modification)! Last edited by john4p; 20 November 2017 at 12:46. |
|||||||||
20 November 2017, 11:25 | #18 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Australia
Age: 44
Posts: 1,126
|
Quote:
I know the current system was put in place for a more 'even spread', and as you say there is no truly perfect system, but the negatives outweigh the positives with proportional imo. Results can be all over the place depending on which game is being played etc. I'll also add that none of the superhuman players want to be extremely far ahead.. in any given situation. I'm sure John & Rexsu would agree. Perhaps another important question is which scoring system would this be least likely to happen. |
|
20 November 2017, 11:36 | #19 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Australia
Age: 44
Posts: 1,126
|
|
20 November 2017, 11:46 | #20 | |
Zone Friend
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Aussie
Posts: 1,144
|
Quote:
30% more points are on offer since changing from a fixed system. Nobody really noticed that. |
|
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 |
|
|