• English
  • Deutsch
  • Français
  • Español

A new score system ?

46 replies [Last post]
yeku's picture
Last seen: 1 week 14 hours ago
Modo
Posts: 420
Points: 421
dharokan wrote:
Just an idea that came into my mind about the reset discussion:

Why not include an automatical loss of 5% score each month, for all players?
That would not be too hard for newbies, imho.

Just an idea ;)


That is what I wanted in my score system!!!

But not a 5%, i wanted a 50 % or more :p

PD: Chris, could you put pages in the forum? Because 31 pages in the same sheet....ans this hasn't finished....
elec_boyz's picture
Last seen: 44 weeks 2 days ago
Silver bot
Posts: 63
Points: 63
Just a question and a suggestion like that ...

To reward old / good players after the reset, why not give a lot of "distinction" in view of their victory?

I think that someone who accumulate more than 2,000 victories before the reset (So some evidence of activity) should get a bonus (This goes back to the idea of yeku increase the number of map or favorited the opportunity to create more)
We can create levels of such a player who accumulated 1,000 victories could save favorites and create a map in addition, two more victories for 2000 ... etc.

Congratulate new players are not disadvantaged (For the same opportunity to earn benefits over time) and former players are more attached to Robostrike.

I'm really bad in English, so I used google translation, please forgive me if I was not very clear.


Juste une question et une suggestion comme ca...

Pour récompenser les anciens / bons joueurs après le reset , pourquoi ne pas donner une sort de "distinction" au vue de leur victoire ?

Je pense qu'un joueur qui a cumuler plus de 2000 victoires avant le reset (Donc une certaine preuve d'activité) devrait obtenir un bonus , (On en revient a l'idée de yeku d'augmenter le nombre de map en favoris ou la possibilité d'en créer plus )
Nous pouvons créer des paliers , du genre un joueur ayant cumulé 1000 victoires pourrait mettre en favoris et créer une map de plus , 2 de plus pour 2000 victoires etc...

Avec ca les nouveaux joueurs ne seraient pas désavantagés ( Car possibilité de gagner les mêmes avantages avec le temps) et les anciens joueurs seraient encore plus attachés a Robostrike.

Je suis vraiment mauvais en anglais , donc j'ai utilisé google traduction , veuillez m'excuser si je n'ai pas été très clair.

dharokan's picture
Last seen: 1 week 13 hours ago
Modo
Posts: 779
Points: 783
Don't worry, boyz - your English is very well!
Welcome to the discussion. :)

And I basically support your idea in benefitting those old and active players a little when there will really be a reset.

Salut,
Dharo
chris's picture
Last seen: 48 weeks 12 hours ago
Admin
Posts: 852
Points: 848

elec_boyz wrote:
Just a question and a suggestion like that ...
We can create levels of such a player who accumulated 1,000 victories could save favorites and create a map in addition, two more victories for 2000 ... etc.

Let's say we could start from 10 slots for private maps and 10 slots for favorite maps. Then we can add 10 more slots of each for each 500 points or 500 played games with a max of 50 slots. Is it right, is it enough ?
If not let's continue the discussion on the right topic

About the score system:
There will be a full reset as soon as possible.
As I said, we must before achieve a new score system, the reset all the old scores.

Thank you to all players who posted in this topic to help us tuning the new system. We can't put all suggestions all together as they are if we want something working, so I took the main "ideas" and tried to built a new system from all this stuff.

The new system I'm about to program is this one :
Score= Bonuspoints + Activitypoints - Stakepoints

1) Bonuspoints are given to the winner only. It's a range of points (or a coeff starting from Yeku's example) between 1 and 9 depending on the number of players in the game and the rank of the winner's score within the game.
The formula is (1+(N-2)/3) x (1+2x(R-1)/(N-1)) with N= number of players who joined the game and R= Rank of the winner within the players in the game. But a small table should be easier to see the effects:
     2    3   4   5   6   7   8 = number of players
1   1   1   2   2   2   3   3
2   3   3   3   3   3   4   4
3    -   4   4   4   4   4   5
4    -    -   5   5   5   5   6
5    -    -    -   6   6   6   6
6    -    -    -    -   7   7   7
7    -    -    -    -    -   8   8
8    -    -    -    -    -    -   9
= rank of the winner's within other players' score
The more players there are in the game, the more the winner bonus is.
The more his (her) rank is (= a lower score than the other players), the more the bonus is.

2) Activitypoints can be given to every player in the game (winner included), depending on what he/she did.

  • Killspoint for Death Matches : 1 point is given for 1 kill (except guest bots kills)
  • Markspoints for Races : 3 points x validated marks/total marks (ie from 0 to 3 points depending on the marks validated at the end of the game)

3) Stakepoints are due from each player to join a game. They depend on his/her score. The formula is 2% x yourscore / nbplayers with a max of -10+nbplayers/2 and a min of -1. For instance it gives the following results
                     2    3   4   5   6   7   8 = number of players
score=190     -2  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1
score=450     -5  -3  -2  -2  -2  -1  -1
score=900     -9  -6  -5  -4  -3  -3  -2
score=1750   -9  -9  -8  -7  -6  -5  -4
score=2800   -9  -9  -8  -8  -7  -7  -6
The more your score is, the more the stake is (with a limit to -9)
The more players there are in the game the less the stake is.

OK to start with this ?
Bye
Chris

BTW 1: We could discount the scores of non active players each month (we already did that in the second score system). But with a full reset and the new rule for displaying the best scored (where only active players are shown) I'm not sure it's really usefull. Let's discuss it on a new topic if needed.
BTW 2(as Dharo would say :)): Giving points to referers who bring new players is a good idea (we already did it too in the first version of RS score system and it still works - but desactivated). The difficulty is to prevent cheating, because many players created fake accounts with their link to get more points ... I thought we could maybe give point only when the referee has played more than X games ? Let's continue this discussion on another topic if needed.

yeku's picture
Last seen: 1 week 14 hours ago
Modo
Posts: 420
Points: 421
chris wrote:
2) Activitypoints can be given to every player in the game (winner included), depending on what he/she did.
  • Killspoint for Death Matches : 1 point is given for 1 kill (except guest bots kills)
  • Markspoints for Races : 3 points x validated marks/total marks (ie from 0 to 3 points depending on the marks validated at the end of the game)
But....

1 vs 1? A player with 450 would win only 1 point (although he kills 1 bot or 3)....No motivation-->Byebye 1 vs 1

In multiplayer games: Players would play to kill players because they win the same points if they win or lose--> Byebye win. The points of activitypoints should be multiplied..

And more: A player with 2800 points, in a game with 8 players,  being the player with more points he only would need to kill 4 players to win at least 1 point.

chris's picture
Last seen: 48 weeks 12 hours ago
Admin
Posts: 852
Points: 848
Here you have the global scheme and I think it matches our goals most of the time. But it surely remains some tuning to do about points of each kind.
yeku wrote:
Byebye 1 vs 1
You're right ! stakepoints adjustment needed :) especially with less players. Stake points should be a little less for high scores when few players and a little more when many players
yeku wrote:
In multiplayer games: Players would play to kill players because they win the same points if they win or lose--> Byebye win. The points of activitypoints should be multiplied..

I don't think so: if they win they get the winner's bonus points in addition, and it's bigger than activity in most of the cases
yeku wrote:
A player with 2800 points, in a game with 8 players, being the player with more points he only would need to kill 4 players to win at least 1 point
? No, the stakepoints are -6, so he needs at least 7 kills to win one point if he's not the winner
yeku's picture
Last seen: 1 week 14 hours ago
Modo
Posts: 420
Points: 421
chris wrote:

yeku wrote:
A player with 2800 points, in a game with 8 players, being the player with more points he only would need to kill 4 players to win at least 1 point
? No, the stakepoints are -6, so he needs at least 7 kills to win one point if he's not the winner


Ahhhhh ok ok, I read bad, you are right :thumbsup:. I didn't see that the bonuspoints are only for the winner.

chris wrote:

You're right ! stakepoints adjustment needed smile especially with less players. Stake points should be a little less for high scores when few players and a little more when many players


Totally agree.
chris wrote:

yeku wrote:
In multiplayer games: Players would play to kill players because they win the same points if they win or lose--> Byebye win. The points of activitypoints should be multiplied..


I don't think so: if they win they get the winner's bonus points in addition, and it's bigger than activity in most of the cases

In 1 vs 1: look the examples

Winner: 450 points; Loser: 300
Score= 1 + 3 - 5= -1 that would be 1

And if winner:450 points and loser: 500
Score= 3 + 3 - 5= 1
chris's picture
Last seen: 48 weeks 12 hours ago
Admin
Posts: 852
Points: 848
So I changed the Stakepoints formula from 2% x yourscore / nbplayers with a max of -10+nbplayers/2 and a min of -1 into 1% x yourscore / nbplayers with a max of 2+nbplayers/2
Now it gives the following results
                     2    3   4   5   6   7   8 = number of players
score=190     -1  -1   0   0   0   0   0
score=450     -2  -2  -1  -1  -1  -1  -1
score=900     -3  -3  -2  -2  -2  -1  -1
score=1750   -3  -4  -4  -4  -3  -3  -2
score=2800   -3  -4  -4  -5  -5  -4  -4
score=4000   -3  -4  -4  -5  -5  -6  -5
The more your score is, the more the stake is (with a limit to -6)
The more players there are in the game the less the stake is.

This should solve the last issues and enable high score players to play against new players with a limited risk and a minimum gain even in 1vs1.
Do you see any problem left with this tuning ?
yeku's picture
Last seen: 1 week 14 hours ago
Modo
Posts: 420
Points: 421
No, no...any problem. This is better.:)
east amloo's picture
Last seen: 2 years 21 weeks ago
Modo
Posts: 1258
Points: 1260
I agree with this new score system. Maybe we will see some changes to do after (that we can't see for now).