Inflation Information

MeDeFe · Post by **MeDeFe** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:38 am

Guys, hello? Here's some news, point inflation is not a problem.

Since it isn't a problem it doesn't have to be "solved".

Itrade · Post by **Itrade** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:46 am

MeDeFe wrote:Guys, hello? Here's some news, point inflation is not a problem.

Since it isn't a problem it doesn't have to be "solved".

That's what I've been saying.

If anything, inflation is a good thing. It means we have to update the ranks, which means we get newer and more awesome rank insignias. Who doesn't want newer and more awesome rank insignias, eh?

DiM · Post by **DiM** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 12:20 pm

Itrade wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:Guys, hello? Here's some news, point inflation is not a problem.

Since it isn't a problem it doesn't have to be "solved".
That's what I've been saying.

If anything, inflation is a good thing. It means we have to update the ranks, which means we get newer and more awesome rank insignias. Who doesn't want newer and more awesome rank insignias, eh?

and unfortunately you're both wrong. inflation is bad and it will always be considered bad.

MeDeFe · Post by **MeDeFe** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:54 pm

DiM wrote:
Itrade wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:Guys, hello? Here's some news, point inflation is not a problem.

Since it isn't a problem it doesn't have to be "solved".
That's what I've been saying.

If anything, inflation is a good thing. It means we have to update the ranks, which means we get newer and more awesome rank insignias. Who doesn't want newer and more awesome rank insignias, eh?
and unfortunately you're both wrong. inflation is bad and it will always be considered bad.

Inflation in economics maybe, but why would it be bad, or even matter, on this non-Risk(tm)-affiliated internet gaming site?

DiM · Post by **DiM** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 5:05 pm

MeDeFe wrote:
DiM wrote:
Itrade wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:Guys, hello? Here's some news, point inflation is not a problem.

Since it isn't a problem it doesn't have to be "solved".
That's what I've been saying.

If anything, inflation is a good thing. It means we have to update the ranks, which means we get newer and more awesome rank insignias. Who doesn't want newer and more awesome rank insignias, eh?
and unfortunately you're both wrong. inflation is bad and it will always be considered bad.
Inflation in economics maybe, but why would it be bad, or even matter, on this non-Risk(tm)-affiliated internet gaming site?

well one of the resons would be the ever increasing highscores that need to be mantained as low as possible to give the new players the feeling they can reach the top.
if a guy starts with 1000 points and sees he gains 20 for a 1v1 win and sees the top player with 100000 points then he'll surely quit.

sully800 · Post by **sully800** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:04 pm

Big update due to info found from the "way back machine" on alexa.com. It's not entirely accurate because they scoreboard wasn't updated with each archived entry, but it gives a much broader scope of data than what I collected.

The long term view of all graphs appears to be linear, not exponential.

Over the past 2 years, the average score of the top 10 players has increased by an incredible 2.333 points per day!

sully800 · Post by **sully800** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:07 pm

Once again, the score of 100th place vs time shows better linear correlation since it comes from steadier data. Also, the slop is lower as expected (since the score of 100th place is lower than the score of the top 10 it must increase by less each day).

The score of 100th place has increased roughly .955 points per day since CC's inception

sully800 · Post by **sully800** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:12 pm

The score of 250th place has increased ~.9728 points per day.

One final note: The linear correlation appears to be high based on the R^2 value, but thats actually a bit inaccurate. Since I have so many data points in a tight grouping in December regression basically treats that as one very heavily weighted data point...and the distance between the point and the line in December is low, so the total linear correlation is high.

The point is, more future data may indicate that the trend is logarithmic and not exponential (scores keep increasing but at slower and slower rates). I think a logarithmic trend makes a lot of sense intuitively, and each of the graphs seems to roughly support that conclusion.

Itrade · Post by **Itrade** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:02 pm

Excellent work Sully! The results are startling. It's also slightly embarrassing since I said it looked to be exponential and it turns out that it's linear, but oh well.

So does this mean that Poo-Maker will have an additional 850 or so points by the end of this year?

Anyway,

DiM wrote:if a guy starts with 1000 points and sees he gains 20 for a 1v1 win and sees the top player with 100000 points then he'll surely quit.

No. May I point you to the RuneScape highscores page? The overall skill level all players begin with is 23. The highscore is 2277. To get there requires easily more than five hundred hours of work (You can't really call it playing anymore). And yet there are hundreds upon hundreds of new players joining every day and playing.

People join and stay at Conquer Club for the games, not for the scoreboard. The scoreboard is a feature of the site, not the site itself.

Inflation is bad in real life when applied to real things. Points are not real things. They're just there to show how skilled a player is (Or how lucky, if you believe all this "CC is 100% luck" nonsense). The skill level between players is relative anyway, so it doesn't matter if points are decreasing in value, you just have to see a 150 point gap today like you saw a 100 point gap six months ago. Just don't worry about inflation because it isn't a problem and stop proposing ridiculous and fun-killing methods to "stop" it because, once again, it's not a problem.

Blitzaholic · Post by **Blitzaholic** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:21 pm

graph master sully, nice work

DiM · Post by **DiM** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:24 pm

Itrade wrote:Excellent work Scully! The results are startling. It's also slightly embarrassing since I said it looked to be exponential and it turns out that it's linear, but oh well.

So does this mean that Poo-Maker will have an additional 850 or so points by the end of this year?

Anyway,
DiM wrote:if a guy starts with 1000 points and sees he gains 20 for a 1v1 win and sees the top player with 100000 points then he'll surely quit.
No. May I point you to the RuneScape highscores page? The overall skill level all players begin with is 23. The highscore is 2277. To get there requires easily more than five hundred hours of work (You can't really call it playing anymore). And yet there are hundreds upon hundreds of new players joining every day and playing.

People join and stay at Conquer Club for the games, not for the scoreboard. The scoreboard is a feature of the site, not the site itself.

Inflation is bad in real life when applied to real things. Points are not real things. They're just there to show how skilled a player is (Or how lucky, if you believe all this "CC is 100% luck" nonsense). The skill level between players is relative anyway, so it doesn't matter if points are decreasing in value, you just have to see a 150 point gap today like you saw a 100 point gap six months ago. Just don't worry about inflation because it isn't a problem and stop proposing ridiculous and fun-killing methods to "stop" it because, once again, it's not a problem.

at 5 hours a day that means just a bit over 3 months to get to #1 on runescape.

if the #1 player here had 100000 points it would take a new player way more than 3 months to get there. more like 3 years or even better i'd say never.

people aren't here just for the games they are also here for the points. for getting to number 1 on the scoreboard. maybe you don't play for points but i assure you many people do. in fact many people sacrifice fun for those damn points.

and one more thing. you don't have to believe me inflation is a problem. but you must believe twill or lack when they say it. and they have done it many times. feel free to ask any of them if CC is facing inflation and if that inflation is causing a problem.

unlike you i am trying to find a solution because i can tell when a solution is needed. you simply decide to deny it. your choice and i don't blame you the world is full of ignorants. and i don't mean it as an insult towards you it's a simple statement about a true phenomenon. many people chose denial instead of bothering to find solutions.

PS: and for crying out loud it's SULLY not SCULLY

PPS: and if you think CC inflation can't be bad because it has nothing to do with RL then i point you towards lack own wallet. that's real life and real money. if people are discouraged and leave it means he loses potential customers and thus real money.

and the last PS: just for personal curiosity please go to hattrick.org. that's a soccer manager game. and like any manager game it involves money and stuff. in game inflation became a real problem because the game simulates economy. because hattrick has well over a million users and the membership fees are bigger than CC you can only imagine that's a multi million us dollar business. the site owners fought hard and still fight a tough battle against in game inflation because this inflation disrupts the gameplay. and bad gameplay means huge money losses. real money.

Itrade · Post by **Itrade** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 12:12 am

Firstly, I've edited all my posts in this thread to say Sully. Can't believe I didn't catch that earlier.

Secondly, I am PMing Lack about point inflation to ask him if he thinks it's a problem.

Thirdly, I was making a huge understatement when I said 500 hours of work to get to the top of the RuneScape scoreboard. Numbers like that look so much bigger before you consider that there are 24 hours in a day. I asked around an someone gave me the estimate of >6000 hours. Anyway, what I meant to do in the other post was pull out a very very big number and say that's how much you would have to play to reach number one, and the average player will never be able to nor want to do that. Zezima, the current number one player, has been at that number one spot for four or five years now. But CC and RuneScape are very different games, and so my comparison between their highscores doesn't really work.

Fourthly, I don't think people will be discouraged to leave CC because the highscores are too high. Much more people would leave because their first few gaming experiences were dulled by deadbeats or suiciders or abuse directed towards them or being completely mindboggled by joining the wrong map. Maybe you should put your effort towards that instead of "solving inflation".

Finally, maybe you're right. Maybe I am in denial. But unless you can prove to me somehow that high highscores is what's causing as many new players to leave as you're claiming, I'm going to keep believing that the extent of point inflation's effects is bigger numbers next to people's names on the scoreboard.

P.S. I checked out Hattrick on wikipedia, I don't understand how their inflation occured or what it has to do with CC, perhaps you could elaborate for me?

Also, let's keep this from getting hostile. It's just a game-site, anyway.

lackattack · Post by **lackattack** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 9:33 am

Excellent work Sully! I always sensed that inflation was there but now you've gone and measured it in a brilliant way. You should consider becoming an economist.

As for what to do... nothing for now.

DiM's point-reset scheme and "no points for new recruit deadbeats" are under consideration but won't happen anytime soon. We may just adjust rank levels every year or so...

The important thing is that we now know how fast scores are inflating, and I think most of us would agree that it is not happening quickly enough to make fighting it a priority at this time.

Ronaldinho · Post by **Ronaldinho** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 9:56 am

Reset the scores and give ronnie mod powers, should be a top priority i should imagine.

DiM · Post by **DiM** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 11:04 am

Itrade wrote:
Thirdly, I was making a huge understatement when I said 500 hours of work to get to the top of the RuneScape scoreboard. Numbers like that look so much bigger before you consider that there are 24 hours in a day. I asked around an someone gave me the estimate of >6000 hours. Anyway, what I meant to do in the other post was pull out a very very big number and say that's how much you would have to play to reach number one, and the average player will never be able to nor want to do that. Zezima, the current number one player, has been at that number one spot for four or five years now. But CC and RuneScape are very different games, and so my comparison between their highscores doesn't really work.

i played runescape for ~3 hours a lot of years ago. comparing cc with that is a bit far stretched because runescape is an rpg. and as such it can offer satisfaction in many ways. CC offers satisfaction through simple games and this can get boring after a while, people always need to have a reachable goal to make them interested and keep playing. that's why here people organize tourneys form clans and have battles and so on. to break the boredom and add a bit of extra fun on runescape no matter how bad you are as a player you still manage to achieve things. an extra level a new skill, etc. it has many things that keep you going, simply by his rpg nature.

Itrade wrote:Fourthly, I don't think people will be discouraged to leave CC because the highscores are too high. Much more people would leave because their first few gaming experiences were dulled by deadbeats or suiciders or abuse directed towards them or being completely mindboggled by joining the wrong map. Maybe you should put your effort towards that instead of "solving inflation".

true but that's a whole other issue. and trust me i do as much as i can to correct every little thing that i consider a problem. the deadbeats problem will be tackled by a more detailed introduction to the game via pms and mails with tips and advices. the maps are currently going through a bit of reorganization and in the near future there will be grouping options by number of terits complexity rating and so on (please check the foundry).
and if you still don't think i do my part for solving issues then search terminator experiment results thread and you'll see how i convinced lack to change terminator games to prevent abuse.

Itrade wrote:Finally, maybe you're right. Maybe I am in denial. But unless you can prove to me somehow that high highscores is what's causing as many new players to leave as you're claiming, I'm going to keep believing that the extent of point inflation's effects is bigger numbers next to people's names on the scoreboard.

i don't need to prove you that mate. lack did in the post above. inflation is a problem and it will be dealt with. at the moment it's effects aren't so bad but they will be. unfortunately a perfect solution that's embraced by all hasn't been found.

Itrade wrote:P.S. I checked out Hattrick on wikipedia, I don't understand how their inflation occured or what it has to do with CC, perhaps you could elaborate for me?

it was just an example of inflation in a game that went too far and threatened to destroy the fun and make people to leave.
if you're not familiar with hattrick then forget about it. it would take me a lot to explain everything that went there.

Itrade wrote:Also, let's keep this from getting hostile. It's just a game-site, anyway.

sorry if you thought i'm hostile. in no way did i mean that. i agree i may be a bit blunt and straight forward sometimes but i have nothing but the best intentions.

Itrade · Post by **Itrade** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 7:55 pm

DiM wrote:i don't need to prove you that mate. lack did in the post above. inflation is a problem and it will be dealt with. at the moment it's effects aren't so bad but they will be. unfortunately a perfect solution that's embraced by all hasn't been found.

Huh? I don't see lack saying that inflation is a problem. He says he's considering the idea of point-resets and fixing the problem of people getting free points from new recruit deadbeats, but he doesn't say anywhere that it's a problem. Yet.

TheTeacher · Post by **TheTeacher** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 8:35 pm

Heimdall wrote:Time to increase the lending rate to curb inflation

now there's bright thinking.

on a serious not, inflation = not a problem. it's just a phenomena that will cause change. now, let's look at some of the effects of this change:

gap between good and bad players get's much, much bigger (higher groups go up exponentially (we think))

mean players, those with average ability (which 'cording to twill's quote, from i-forget-who, is above mediean) go up linearly (roughly)

all in all, to the average new joining player, it takes more work to catch up.

is this a bad thing? i don't think so, some might argue it is, but change happens, there's not fighting that, and i don't see any particular issue with this... lack just needs to update the ranking system every once in a long while.

AAFitz · Post by **AAFitz** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:35 pm

TheTeacher wrote:
Heimdall wrote:Time to increase the lending rate to curb inflation
now there's bright thinking.

on a serious not, inflation = not a problem. it's just a phenomena that will cause change. now, let's look at some of the effects of this change:

gap between good and bad players get's much, much bigger (higher groups go up exponentially (we think))

mean players, those with average ability (which 'cording to twill's quote, from i-forget-who, is above mediean) go up linearly (roughly)

all in all, to the average new joining player, it takes more work to catch up.

is this a bad thing? i don't think so, some might argue it is, but change happens, there's not fighting that, and i don't see any particular issue with this... lack just needs to update the ranking system every once in a long while.

the gap really isnt that much bigger... its actually easier now for a new recruit to get to the top than before.

before, you had to play perfect, and be much better than now just to get to 2000 points... and, it is still very difficult in the 2200-2500 area, and throught the 2500 area and up... I know this for a fact... theres no difference... the inflation makes it easier for low ranks, not harder... theres just more players with more ranks.. the percentages are probably close to the same,

and the sheer volume of new players that play very little, or play a few and bolt, throw all the numbers off... it seems as though 50000 people are trying to get to be conquerer, when 10 of those people might actually consider it a goal.

No one would mind being at the top, but not everyone is going for it. Thats obvious by the games they play. I sure as hell am not going for it, and probably never will. I dont even aim for colonel, not to say if I stumbled on it, I wouldnt be happy...

Im guessing the majority of players play these games for fun, and dont worry about thier points too much. Only the highly motivated ones really break through to the top, but it doesnt come easy. Every move is perfect. Every game choice is important. It pure precision, and it isnt necessarily as fun as most would like to play the game.

If someone is really struggling, all they have to do, is ask another player for advice, and with a few simple instructions, and a lot of work, any player can get to captain. They just have to want it.

Itrade · Post by **Itrade** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 2:44 am

But then again, a game shouldn't really be all about hard work. I think CC's main goal should be to provide a fun gaming experience, not to make it easy for everyone to get to number 1.

mrkaris · Post by **mrkaris** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 4:58 am

Itrade wrote:But then again, a game shouldn't really be all about hard work. I think CC's main goal should be to provide a fun gaming experience, not to make it easy for everyone to get to number 1.

i think Itrade makes a good point here - are you playing for fun (in which case the scoreboard means nothing) or are you playing to compete to be number one. (in which case the scoreboard means everything) finding which side you are on also shows whether or not u think inflation is a problem.

**to Sully, can you show where SPEED games came into effect? because i believe that with the (great) addition of speed games. the points increased much more rapidly and this would account for a small but significant jump in top 10 player average points.

Itrade · Post by **Itrade** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:02 am

I think your speed game theory is interesting. Speed games allow more games to be played in less time, which means points would be rising from the bottom of the scoreboard to the top much quicker.

Blitzaholic · Post by **Blitzaholic** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:40 am

Itrade wrote:I think your speed game theory is interesting. Speed games allow more games to be played in less time, which means points would be rising from the bottom of the scoreboard to the top much quicker.

this is interesting

should they update a change in speed games? is their a loop hole?

let me ponder

Itrade · Post by **Itrade** » Sun Jan 10, 2010 2:53 am

So it's been two years. There should be some pretty solid evidence for or against point inflation and its effects by now. What do you guys think?

Robinette · Post by **Robinette** » Sun Jan 10, 2010 1:17 pm

Itrade wrote:So it's been two years. There should be some pretty solid evidence for or against point inflation and its effects by now. What do you guys think?

sully will likely do a more detailed and more scientific graph...

but this is what i came up with whenever i am shopping for points...

nagerous · Post by **nagerous** » Mon Jan 11, 2010 7:31 pm

Itrade wrote:So it's been two years. There should be some pretty solid evidence for or against point inflation and its effects by now. What do you guys think?

Stuff like the removal of the defacto double turn rule in freestyle and the new farming rules/restrictions on new recruits joining certain settings has helped reduce inflation.

Inflation Information

fun or competition

Re: Inflation Information

Re: Inflation Information

Re: Inflation Information