• English
  • Deutsch
  • Français
  • Español

A new score system ?

46 replies [Last post]
chris's picture
Last seen: 1 year 3 weeks ago
Admin
Posts: 852
Points: 848

Hi,

sometimes ago we talked about reseting the scores when releasing the new version. During this time I thought about it, and finally is there really many advantages for reseting the scores without changing the score system itself ?
As you know there is no automatic perfect system without a referee watching each game and detecting unfair players or cheaters. That's why some of us want to do a reset from times to times.
In the other hand, it is clear for me that negative points is a very bad idea for players activity and motivation. Each time I corrected a bug that some cheaters used, each time there were less activity in the gameroom. Most of the players want to play with fun and to win points, a few of them can accept losing points.

A more simple and even less fair system could be better to keep players motivated instead of one that makes many of them sick and sometimes aggressive when losing points (RS is not an international chess contest, just a strategic and funny online game ...)
Now you've got my opinion :), and I can explain what could become the new score system, starting from the current one :

Current score system :
Based on ethic and player's level (similar to chess score system). Each time a player wins points another one loses it (except scores under 200 points). Pros : it's quite fair. Cons : most of the player's don't like to lose points and it can be a little "fun killing".

Current formula :
gain=coeff x mini(average opponents score, average score)
with coeff = (0.5 to 1 depending on the type of game) x nb of opponents/2
losses= -1 x gain (negative points shared within the players depending on their score)

A new score system could be based on fun first to encourage for playing more, and in a friendly spirit. That means : no more negative points but increasing difficulty to win points for high scores against low scores. To avoid giving preferential treatment to "active players" against real "good players", the score expectation to win against a higher score should be higher. And to limit the cheaters activity, one should win more points if there is more players in the game, and the death matches should keep giving more points than the races (as the current system does).

So I suggest the rules could become : 
- no negative points. You never lose any point, except when leaving (or disconnecting) a game before the end ?
- the minimum is +1 pt for each game you win (even against non registered bots)

Formula :
gain = round (max (1, gametype x scoreleverage))
with gametype= (0.5 to 1 depending on the type of game) x nb of opponents/2 : this goes from 0.25 to 3.5
with scoreleverage= max(1, min(3, (average opponents score - winner score)/500 )) : this goes from 1 to 3

As Yeku suggested in another thread, we can also take into account that when a player wins a race game killing all the other bots, it gives the same amount of points that in a death matcvh game

The top 10 scores on the home page could also be completed with the best progression of the last 7 days, that enables new players to be in the shortlist, while the score screen remains as it is now (OK Tof with a button to go back to the gameroom ;) ).

Besides, the score is not the only goal. We could maybe include other items in the stars ranking. One star would be for the score but the others could be about community activity, nb of played games, nb of friends, etc ...

Please let me know what you think about those ideas

Bye
Chris

east amloo's picture
Last seen: 2 years 29 weeks ago
Modo
Posts: 1258
Points: 1260

Chris said : Is there really many advantages for reseting the scores without changing the score system itself ?

Amloo : I began with the end with the answer : your new system of points will permit to gain times for reseting...


As you know there is no automatic perfect system without a referee watching each game and detecting unfair players or cheaters. That's why some of us want to do a reset from times to times.
In the other hand, it is clear for me that negative points is a very bad idea for players activity and motivation. Each time I corrected a bug that some cheaters used, each time there were less activity in the gameroom. Most of the players want to play with fun and to win points, a few of them can accept losing points.

A more simple and even less fair system could be better to keep players motivated instead of one that makes many of them sick and sometimes aggressive when losing points (RS is not an international chess contest, just a strategic and funny online game ...)

I agree with you for all this points. It's maybe the key of the reborn of Robostrike. It's quite an ended of the score like lots of people would few years ago.
 

A new score system could be based on fun first to encourage for playing more, and in a friendly spirit. That means : no more negative points but increasing difficulty to win points for high scores against low scores. To avoid giving preferential treatment to "active players" against real "good players", the score expectation to win against a higher score should be higher. And to limit the cheaters activity, one should win more points if there is more players in the game, and the death matches should keep giving more points than the races (as the current system does).

I am ok, but i think we need a maximal value of score. When some people comes to the high score, a new reset must be done. If it's too short, we can actualize a new maximal value for the next reset. Is it possible chris ? (i mean more than one reset ?). Otherwise, we will have some hyper active players who will up to thousands and thousands points...


So I suggest the rules could become : 
- no negative points. You never lose any point, except when leaving (or disconnecting) a game before the end ?
- the minimum is +1 pt for each game you win (even against non registered bots)

Formula :
gain = round (max (1, gametype x scoreleverage))
with gametype= (0.5 to 1 depending on the type of game) x nb of opponents/2 : this goes from 0.25 to 3.5
with scoreleverage= max(1, min(3, (average opponents score - winner score)/500 )) : this goes from 1 to 3

Seems ok, but we keep points without comma no ? So when we win 2 points, it's chritmas xD.


As Yeku suggested in another thread, we can also take into account that when a player wins a race game killing all the other bots, it gives the same amount of points that in a death matcvh game

No problem if it's not too complicated and too long to do.


The top 10 scores on the home page could also be completed with the best progression of the last 7 days, that enables new players to be in the shortlist, while the score screen remains as it is now (OK Tof with a button to go back to the gameroom wink ).

The best progression is a real good idea, but of the last 7 days... it's too long for new players... I vote for each days if it's one player who is in the shorlist. Seven days can be good maybe for a top 10 of progression.


Besides, the score is not the only goal. We could maybe include other items in the stars ranking. One star would be for the score but the others could be about community activity, nb of played games, nb of friends, etc ...

We can add bonus points for each players who suscribe on robostrike with the link of an old player ? Maybe we can add a link system between the event in the forum and the game. Example : future tournament with some gains. (controlled by moderators and administrators).


Please let me know what you think about those ideas

Finally, it's a good idea. It's quite a system who killed the score system but... it can be good. But warning, you must be carefull about the hyper-activity of some players and we must have a maximal score or some modos with the power of reset, or reset of one players (who cheat for example). The risk is that admins (chris and bill) go away for one or two years without news... In this case, this system is not good.

 

yeku's picture
Last seen: 6 weeks 23 hours ago
Modo
Posts: 420
Points: 421
Hi,

Here the first part of what I think (I have no more time to explain all :()

I think that with this new system of score there will be more problems with the scores and more players will play for points.

Why?
  1. Because it's easier to get points
  2. Any player can win a lot of points.
  3. Tthe most active players will have a lot of points.
  4. it's easier to cheat.
  5. Activity wins vs. skill in points
And what will happen? Imagine it...
  1. Players will have a lot of points and they won't stop having more.
  2. ALL the players will have a lot of points and each time players will have more points.
  3. The most active players will be the players with more points
  4. Imagine 1 vs 1 in which each time win one player.
  5. The same that point 3.
But there are some good points: players won't care if they lose, players will play more to win points (I hope) and maybe some other that I don't know now.

About the rules I you could do that: if a player leaves after executing the moves of the first turn, lhe will lose points (now a player can leave in the second turn and he doesn't lose points)

The conclusion: it's a system of score that benefits the activity, players won't stop having points (as Amloo says, you should put a limit, but i think that a reset to 0 for all players would be bad...) and it will have more problems. (I would put more things, but as I said before, I can't :( )


But, why do you think about a system 50 % skill and 50 % activity (and according to the players that play RS too)?
Moreover, i have some ideas about that rankings ( and one similar about what you think Amloo but with more motivation)

Next week I explain that! ;)








east amloo's picture
Last seen: 2 years 29 weeks ago
Modo
Posts: 1258
Points: 1260
Hum... we need a limit of points with this system, it's sure. Maybe we can include some levels ? I explain :

We put a limit of points : example 1000 points. When the player go to 1000 points, he win a special statut, he became level 2 (or anything else). After that, his level points come back to 0 but he keep this special statut (maybe a special visual robot effect ? With a shining cockpit maybe ?). After that, the player can continue to increase his points with a more difficult progression... (maybe it's too hard to do that ?)
When he attain 1000 points again, he gain the level up, etc...

At the end of the level 3, the player can win only one point for one match in any case... So to finish the score level system, he need to have almost 2000 victory. We need almost 1 or 2 years to do that with an hyper-activity. And we can adapt the limit of points...

That's just an idea.

dharokan's picture
Last seen: 3 days 21 hours ago
Modo
Posts: 779
Points: 783
Hmmm..
to be honest, I don't like the idea of a only-positive score system. (Sorry Chris :D)

Here are my first thoughts about it:

1.
The main reason for this idea seems to be motivating (new) players to play. But imho this would have the opposite effect. Okay, Chris said: Players want to get points.
But why do they want points? 
They want points because points are valuable.
They want points to compare themselves to the other players (and to be better).

But with that system, points would loose value. Everybody can get points. And players will recognize that ^^

2.
Okay, let's move ahead to the second aspect: motivating new players:
When we would reset the scores, everybody would start gaining new points. And everybody will get points, regardless of his/her skills. In a few months the majority of players will get more or less high scores. New players will start at 0 and will feel as if everybody is better than them. (Ok that's normal, but that effect might get enlarged with the new system)

3.
Defeated players would not get any real disadvantage. At least it won't feel as any. You think that might be less demotivating them, but on the other hand, it's also less motivating the winner.
It's normal that you loose when you are new, but when you win once, you want to celebrate that. You want to earn high scores and you want the others to loose points too. 

"Friendly spirit" is not what motivates people to play.

4.
Scores are not only a way to reward players. They are also a way to visualize their level of playing. At least now. But not anymore with the suggest new system. 
The stars won't change that because they only depend on the points as well as the levels of Amloos suggestion would. (Amloos idea is only a different kind of displaying the score imho)

With that only-positive score system, we would need a new way to distinguish good from less good players.

5.
Players who can't accept loosing points?
Well... those are bad players. From the bottom of my heart I would not do anything to satisfy them. 
And I doubt a different score system would change anything. Imho it's not only loosing points what they can't accept, it's loosing a game in general.

6.
Here is my provocant thesis: 
Instead of this new system, we could also get rid of any score system at all. :evil:


Btw: Negative points for leaving a game?
Why that? What's worse in leaving compared to loosing. Remember, sometimes there are server bugs that drops you out of a game. In that case sanctions would frustrate. 
And there would be no way to surrender when the game is already decided.
Last round, 2 players left. Player A god bombed. It's quite usual that he quits the game because it would be pointless to continue. Sanctions for that?

Btw2: 
This exception from the only-positive-rule shows that the system would not work. Same for the needed limit. The system would need far too many many compromises and I think the classical score system in gaming is not established without reason ;)

In my opinion, we should better invent something additional to the classic score system.
For example (as suggested earlier) a system of achievements or special rewards.

Just my 5 cent...

Cheers,
Dharo
yeku's picture
Last seen: 6 weeks 23 hours ago
Modo
Posts: 420
Points: 421
Dharokan said
"In my opinion, we should better invent something additional to the classic score system.
For example (as suggested earlier) a system of achievements or special rewards."


This is one of the ideas that i want to explain the next week:

What do you think about a system score that depends of the next?
  1. Your position in the ranking
  2. Number of players in the ranking (just the players that appear in the mainly ranking (who have played in last 7 days).
  3. Number of points of the players
Moreover, each month players would lose a % of his points (you will know why ;))

But sorry, I can't explain now, as I told before I'm just in a rest and I have no enough time to explain it well (I'm in the university:disgusted).
east amloo's picture
Last seen: 2 years 29 weeks ago
Modo
Posts: 1258
Points: 1260
... I prefer when there is some change but... I think dharokan is in the true way.

This score system is not so bad... but need a reset according to me. Why a reset ?

It's simple, all this old score (as yeku, dharo, etc...) come to the very old system score with reset points. The reset didn't works and all players go to 10 000 and more (max 22 000 elec_lapin). After that, Chris come back and he save the score system with a classical score system BUT he (you chris) just put all score between 1 and 1000 dividing per 10 all scores except for very high level who all come back to 1000 (like elec_lapin for example). I think it's why some people have 1800 points (like yeku xD) and who are not very different in real level to players with 800, 1000 or 1200 points.

But if everybody start with 0 point. The start of increase will be slowly and i think scores will be better than before.

The actual score system must be after that keep a long time (and let admins works on others things).
yeku's picture
Last seen: 6 weeks 23 hours ago
Modo
Posts: 420
Points: 421
east amloo a écrit :
... I prefer when there is some change but... I think dharokan is in the true way.

This score system is not so bad... but need a reset according to me. Why a reset ?

It's simple, all this old score (as yeku, dharo, etc...) come to the very old system score with reset points. The reset didn't works and all players go to 10 000 and more (max 22 000 elec_lapin). After that, Chris come back and he save the score system with a classical score system BUT he (you chris) just put all score between 1 and 1000 dividing per 10 all scores except for very high level who all come back to 1000 (like elec_lapin for example). I think it's why some people have 1800 points (like yeku xD) and who are not very different in real level to players with 800, 1000 or 1200 points.

But if everybody start with 0 point. The start of increase will be slowly and i think scores will be better than before.

The actual score system must be after that keep a long time (and let admins works on others things).


I don't know if the reset worked well, but when i was back to RS in summer 2008, after the reset, I started with 300 points. Moreover, I have 3 accounts with more than 1300 points started with 0 points, and many other with more than 600 and because I bored playing for points (:)) and I stop playing with these accounts.

After 2 years, scores have gone to the real level of the players.

The bad reset was doing in setember 2006 and when Elec_Lapin and Clem759 had more than 20.000, don't imagine the points that i would have had if I had played RS, but be sure that more...
chris's picture
Last seen: 1 year 3 weeks ago
Admin
Posts: 852
Points: 848
east amloo a écrit :

This score system is not so bad... but need a reset according to me. Why a reset ?
...
The actual score system must be after that keep a long time (and let admins works on others things).

Well talked ! I agree that the last reset was too complicated and put the mess in the new system that is not so bad indeed.

dharokan a écrit :
Hmmm..
to be honest, I don't like the idea of a only-positive score system. (Sorry Chris :D)

Oh, please don't ;)
It's a fair discussion and my mind isn't made up yet. Many thoughts make sense to keep negative points, and I share most of them (that's why we have this current score system, of course).

But I still have one question : why is RS the only webgame with negative points ? Could we be right against the whole world :D
Maybe because it's one of the best games (kidding) ?

More seriously, I'm OK to keep on using negative points (but with some little tuning of the current formula and a reset to 0 for everyone). We can add after other features, as Yeku will soon suggest (after the exams)
scorpia's picture
Last seen: 2 years 33 weeks ago
Power bot
Posts: 39
Points: 39
Quote:
why is RS the only webgame with negative points ?

Not really the only one, but other webgame don't start with 0 point, that's why players don't really see they are in negative

For the score system, increase gained points depending on the removed life points to support the players who shoot on other robot, and give few points to the winner.
dharokan's picture
Last seen: 3 days 21 hours ago
Modo
Posts: 779
Points: 783
chris a écrit :
why is RS the only webgame with negative points ? Could we be right against the whole world :D
Maybe because it's one of the best games (kidding) ?

Oh you answer your own questions, hehe.
You cannot compare RS to any RPG alike online game. RS provides short matches, many duels. 
On the other hand you cannot compare it to the ton of casual games either.

In fact I only know very few games that could be compared to Robostrike. But I don't know their score systems because they are not free. And why should I pay for a game worse then RS? :D

So my opinion: In order to be better than others, you have to do your own thing!
 



scorpia a écrit :
For the score system, increase gained points depending on the removed life points to support the players who shoot on other robot, and give few points to the winner.
Very interesting idea.


But imagine 2 players on Blitz:
  1. Player A shoots player B
  2. Player B heals himself with energy
  3. Repeat from 1.)
With such a method, a player could do 1000 damage in one game. This would again open doors for cheaters :(

Anyway I think this is a good approach. Maybe we could use something like a second score which counts only the inflicted damage or the kills of a player? This could be a substitution for the current stars. Or a completely new addition...

Just brainstorming,
Dharo