Point System Problems

[bedub1]

Problem:

• Current scoring system prevents fair play.

Specifics:

• High ranked players attack lower ranked players to avoid losing as many points
• Low ranked players attack higher ranked players to attempt to gain more points
• Different players, facing the same challenges, have to "ante up" different amounts to play
• Different players, facing the same challenges, obtain different amounts for the same success
• Players refuse to play with other players because as the risk increases, the reward decreases.
• The system is backwards, as the more you put into the system, the less you get out.
• When a new player joins, it is automatically assumed they are "terrible". If they join a game with proven pro's, they might all be the same skill level, but the n00b has the least to loose and the most to gain(when you assume, you make an ass out of you and me. Stop being such an ass and stop assuming)
• Creates segregation and separation of the players
• Limits the games people have the "option" of playing
• Limits the number of Real Time games even further

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• Enable fair competition among all players
• Allow players of all point level to compete with each other
• Create a ranking system that is independent of the scoring system/point reward system as they are TWO SEPARATE ITEMS

Possible Solutions
New Mode: Hidden Names and Ranks

Final Note
I'm not sure what the solution is, but instead of just outright dismissing these "complaints"...maybe we should all brainstorm and see if we can come up with a better system, that doesn't lead to score inflation etc....and creates a level field for all to play.

[blakebowling]

Problem:

• Current scoring system prevents fair play.

Specifics:

• High ranked players attack lower ranked players to avoid losing as many points
• Low ranked players attack higher ranked players to attempt to gain more points
• Different players, facing the same challenges, have to "ante up" different amounts to play
• Different players, facing the same challenges, obtain different amounts for the same success
• Players refuse to play with other players because as the risk increases, the reward decreases.
• The system is backwards, as the more you put into the system, the less you get out.
• When a new player joins, it is automatically assumed they are "terrible". If they join a game with proven pro's, they might all be the same skill level, but the n00b has the least to loose and the most to gain(when you assume, you make an ass out of you and me. Stop being such an ass and stop assuming)
• Creates segregation and separation of the players
• Limits the games people have the "option" of playing
• Limits the number of Real Time games even further

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• Enable fair competition among all players
• Allow players of all point level to compete with each other
• Create a ranking system that is independent of the scoring system/point reward system as they are TWO SEPARATE ITEMS

Solution
I'm not sure what the solution is, but instead of just outright dismissing these "complaints"...maybe we should all brainstorm and see if we can come up with a better system, that doesn't lead to score inflation etc....and creates a level field for all to play.

, That's not the form

and, all you did is point out what is wrong, you didn't give a solution

but I thought of one, what about making games weighted (8 player standard is more than 4 player standard) and freestyle would be worth more than sequential.

The only problem is deciding how much each are worth, and what to do about current ranks (eg. drop them all and make everyone '?' 's or keep them the same and let them even out??)

[Diamonds14]

I think the system is fair.. the highest rank ive been is a lieutenant and i try to avoid people lower than a corpal first class because good or not.. theres still abig chance oflosing a lot of points.. i like toplay higher ranked people. andif i was higher ranked ill play higher rank people. i dont think the system is flawed. give more points for bigger upsets.

[Timminz]

i dont think the system is flawed. give more points for bigger upsets.

Agreed. I have yet to hear of another system that wouldn't result in ridiculous scores for the players who know how to work the system.

[blakebowling]

i dont think the system is flawed. give more points for bigger upsets.

Agreed. I have yet to hear of another system that wouldn't result in ridiculous scores for the players who know how to work the system.

what about my weighted system, or a wager on each game, that is set before the game, and each player would loose/gain the same amount of points

[bedub1]

i dont think the system is flawed. give more points for bigger upsets.

Agreed. I have yet to hear of another system that wouldn't result in ridiculous scores for the players who know how to work the system.

what about my weighted system, or a wager on each game, that is set before the game, and each player would loose/gain the same amount of points

Kinda like poker?

, That's not the form

I know my user of the form isn't perfect...it's setup if you already have a solution.

and, all you did is point out what is wrong, you didn't give a solution

I never claimed to have all the answers. I just think it could be better than it currently is.

I think the system is fair.. the highest rank ive been is a lieutenant and i try to avoid people lower than a corpal first class because good or not.. theres still abig chance oflosing a lot of points.. i like toplay higher ranked people. andif i was higher ranked ill play higher rank people. i dont think the system is flawed. give more points for bigger upsets.

Oh...so you like to play higher ranked players? Really? I think everybody does. Do you realize that when you are playing higher ranked players, that they are playing a lower ranked player?

And it's not necessarily a "bigger upset". If it is a battle between two players that have played enough games to achieve their "average" then it could be. But as when you join you are at 1000 points, that is NEVER going to be your "average". So you can't claim anything about a "bigger upset" because the points the guy has doesn't reflect his ability.

i dont think the system is flawed. give more points for bigger upsets.

Agreed. I have yet to hear of another system that wouldn't result in ridiculous scores for the players who know how to work the system.

Lets take our time then and devise a system that can't be "worked".

[Thezzaruz]

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• Create a ranking system that is independent of the scoring system/point reward system as they are TWO SEPARATE ITEMS

I'm having a bit of trouble understanding what you want the second (new) system to do??? I can't see the use of having dual rankings tbf.

Lets take our time then and devise a system that can't be "worked".

An admirable idea but not really doable I'm afraid.

[bedub1]

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• Create a ranking system that is independent of the scoring system/point reward system as they are TWO SEPARATE ITEMS

I'm having a bit of trouble understanding what you want the second (new) system to do??? I can't see the use of having dual rankings tbf.

Lets Pretend: "I've been playing a board game very similar to this for the past 20 years. I've played probably close to 1000 different people, joined tournaments etc. Then I come here, and join, and have 1000 points. Now my experience level makes me a pro, but my points level makes me a very crappy player. The points I have do NOT reflect my abilities. Everybody here just ASSUMES that you are as good as however many points you have. What I'm saying is that in this example, the number of points you have does NOT reflect my abilities."

Lets take our time then and devise a system that can't be "worked".

An admirable idea but not really doable I'm afraid.

Lets get lots of people in on it.....we can come up with proposals..and see if anybody can find a way to "work the system". If it is ever deployed, we should realize we aren't "married" to our new idea...and if people start to abuse it, we change it to prevent the abuse.

[cranberrysucks]

How about consulting the inventor of the BCS system? That system is flawless!

[Timminz]

]Lets Pretend: "I've been playing a board game very similar to this for the past 20 years. I've played probably close to 1000 different people, joined tournaments etc. Then I come here, and join, and have 1000 points. Now my experience level makes me a pro, but my points level makes me a very crappy player. The points I have do NOT reflect my abilities. Everybody here just ASSUMES that you are as good as however many points you have. What I'm saying is that in this example, the number of points you have does NOT reflect my abilities."

Maybe I'm confused here...no. I, definitely, am confused. Are you suggesting that we develop a method of rating people BEFORE they've ever played a game here?

Besides that, I'm fairly confident that we have the best possible scoring system, already in place. The score is not a linear progression, nor should it be. Any other method that I've thought of, or read in the forums, that would keep the non-linear score progression would just be a slight variation on the current method, and would still work the same way. Just with different numbers.

[Timminz]

How about consulting the inventor of the BCS system? That system is flawless!

Sarcasm?

If not, I'd like to see how someone expects to carry that over to a scoreboard with 20,000+ active members.

[e_i_pi]

How about consulting the inventor of the BCS system? That system is flawless!

Sarcasm?

If not, I'd like to see how someone expects to carry that over to a scoreboard with 20,000+ active members.

I just looked this (BCS) system up on Wikipedia, scrolled down 10 odd pages, yawned, and closed the window.

To the OP: The current system is fine. Suggest an improvement and you'll be rich, as you'll be able to sell it to FIDE.

[lancehoch]

bedub, Timminz is right. There is no way to gauge a player's ability on the site, before they play on the site. The way the current system works, a player's score will normalize at a range based on their abilities given the types of games they play. This does not necessarily mean that the best overall player will have the highest score. rabbiton is a great example, I have never seen him play and I am not saying anything about his skill, but he is one of the best players at classic, standard, freestyle, escalating, chained, no fog, 1v1. He won over 200 games playing these settings and is now a general because of it. That is his normalized score for those settings, would he necessarily be good at 7 player, terminator sequential, fog, no cards, unlimited on AOR3? Probably not, but that is not what his score reflects. The scoring system is fine, people just make unnecessary and incorrect assumptions based on it.

[Diamonds14]

The point system is so fair.. if you are new to CC and youre really good or a pro as you so claim yourself then youll in no time reach your average score of a general, brig, or a captain. If youre a new player and youre bad.. then youll stay a cook, private whatever.. Play a few games and the system is so accurate of how good of a player you are.. just give it some time. The system works.

[bedub1]

]Lets Pretend: "I've been playing a board game very similar to this for the past 20 years. I've played probably close to 1000 different people, joined tournaments etc. Then I come here, and join, and have 1000 points. Now my experience level makes me a pro, but my points level makes me a very crappy player. The points I have do NOT reflect my abilities. Everybody here just ASSUMES that you are as good as however many points you have. What I'm saying is that in this example, the number of points you have does NOT reflect my abilities."

Maybe I'm confused here...no. I, definitely, am confused. Are you suggesting that we develop a method of rating people BEFORE they've ever played a game here?
Besides that, I'm fairly confident that we have the best possible scoring system, already in place. The score is not a linear progression, nor should it be. Any other method that I've thought of, or read in the forums, that would keep the non-linear score progression would just be a slight variation on the current method, and would still work the same way. Just with different numbers.

No, we should not develop a method of rating people before they have ever played a game. I'm stating that their point total when they start doesn't reflect their skill....as they haven't played a game here. So Current Points != Skill. Thus...since they aren't equal...i see them as 2 different things.

rabbiton is a great example, I have never seen him play and I am not saying anything about his skill, but he is one of the best players at classic, standard, freestyle, escalating, chained, no fog, 1v1. He won over 200 games playing these settings and is now a general because of it. That is his normalized score for those settings, would he necessarily be good at 7 player, terminator sequential, fog, no cards, unlimited on AOR3? Probably not, but that is not what his score reflects. The scoring system is fine, people just make unnecessary and incorrect assumptions based on it.

Exactly! His score does not reflect his ability! So why should the points he gains/looses be based upon his score that doesn't accurately reflect his ability......?????


What if everybody at the start of a game had to "Ante" up 20 points? Then it doesn't matter what the rank of people are who you play...doesn't matter who wins..the winner still gets X points. If you are low ranked, and beat a higher ranked "team"...then you get what the underdog always gets...bragging rights about beating somebody better.

If my friends and I were going to wager "points" on a game we played in the house...you better believe we all put in the same thing.

If the "good" player wins the poker game and beats the "bad" players...does he get less money? NO
If the "bad" player wins the poker game and beats the "good" players...does he get more money? NO
Do they use handicaps in the PGA?
Do they use handicaps in Bowling?
If the player ranked #300 beats Tiger Woods...does he get more money for winning? What if tiger wins...does he get less money cause he's already good?
Seems to me the current CC systems punishes success.
Can you give me an example that relates the current point system at CC to the real world?

[Timminz]

What if everybody at the start of a game had to "Ante" up 20 points? Then it doesn't matter what the rank of people are who you play...doesn't matter who wins..the winner still gets X points. If you are low ranked, and beat a higher ranked "team"...then you get what the underdog always gets...bragging rights about beating somebody better.

If my friends and I were going to wager "points" on a game we played in the house...you better believe we all put in the same thing.

If the "good" player wins the poker game and beats the "bad" players...does he get less money? NO
If the "bad" player wins the poker game and beats the "good" players...does he get more money? NO

Can you give me an example that relates the current point system at CC to the real world?

You seem to be a suggesting a system that would encourage noob hunting more than you can imagine. Think about it. There are a handful of players near the top of the scoreboard, who have achieved their score by winning 2 or 3 points at a time from new recruits who don't fully grasp freestyle. Now think about what their scores would be like if they were getting 20 points for each new recruit they beat.

[bedub1]

What if everybody at the start of a game had to "Ante" up 20 points? Then it doesn't matter what the rank of people are who you play...doesn't matter who wins..the winner still gets X points. If you are low ranked, and beat a higher ranked "team"...then you get what the underdog always gets...bragging rights about beating somebody better.

If my friends and I were going to wager "points" on a game we played in the house...you better believe we all put in the same thing.

If the "good" player wins the poker game and beats the "bad" players...does he get less money? NO
If the "bad" player wins the poker game and beats the "good" players...does he get more money? NO

Can you give me an example that relates the current point system at CC to the real world?

You seem to be a suggesting a system that would encourage noob hunting more than you can imagine. Think about it. There are a handful of players near the top of the scoreboard, who have achieved their score by winning 2 or 3 points at a time from new recruits who don't fully grasp freestyle. Now think about what their scores would be like if they were getting 20 points for each new recruit they beat.

Fantastic point...thank you. Let me think some more....
I never claimed to have answers...I just see problems...

[Timminz]

Fantastic point...thank you. Let me think some more....
I never claimed to have answers...I just see problems...

Please do, keep thinking. I'm all for a system that would work better. I just haven't thought or heard of one yet.

[bedub1]

Fantastic point...thank you. Let me think some more....
I never claimed to have answers...I just see problems...

Please do, keep thinking. I'm all for a system that would work better. I just haven't thought or heard of one yet.

Same here...thats why I'm trying to get all the minds on CC to help think....I'm not smrt enough to do it myself....

[Timminz]

I'm not smrt enough to do it myself....

Maybe you should buy a vowel?

[bedub1]

I'm not smrt enough to do it myself....

Maybe you should buy a vowel?

lol...I do every night. It's the safest sex you can possibly have.....

[Timminz]

I'm not smrt enough to do it myself....

Maybe you should buy a vowel?

lol...I do every night. It's the safest sex you can possibly have.....

Hahaha!!!

BUt, what's life with out taking a few RISKs now and again?

[bedub1]

Okay so how about this. I don't think QuestionMarks should be able to loose/gain points. If you are a cook getting slaughtered by the top guys...maybe you should stop joining games with them. This will allow the new users to the site 5 games to finish before they can loose/win any points. Thus driving the lemming question marks over the edge of the cliff gains you nothing.

[Diamonds14]

Okay so how about this. I don't think QuestionMarks should be able to loose/gain points. If you are a cook getting slaughtered by the top guys...maybe you should stop joining games with them. This will allow the new users to the site 5 games to finish before they can loose/win any points. Thus driving the lemming question marks over the edge of the cliff gains you nothing.

You still will have new players, maybe not ?'s, but cooks, cadets, privates joining any open game and high ranked players will just have the easy win. Yeah it will take a lot of new players out of the question but not most of them in my opinion.