Forum
Advisor Blog
Reviews
Strategies
Ideas
Dropping 3 points a day is unfair simply for inactivity
|
A_Nihilist wrote
at 11:46 AM, Friday January 12, 2007 EST
I thought the scoring system was based on elo.
Now I admit I don't know a lot about elo but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't drop your score for inactivity. I mean its meant to reflect how good you are. Not how often you play. I appreciate that theres a lot of people wanting to encourage the top players to play but this isn't a good solution IMHO. I'd prefer to see a point bonus for activity rather than a point reduction for inactivity. |
« First
‹ Previous
Replies 31 - 39 of 39
|
aixo wrote
at 5:07 PM, Monday January 15, 2007 EST pTm - change your ranking!
1500+ --> Beginners and normal players less 1500 (!) --> BAAAAD players and some B beginners with bad luck perhaps... 1700+ --> Good players ;) 1900+ --> Very good players... Bye the way: Lose Points for inactivity is ok. But only some like ryan installed it currently. Sometimes you haven´t the chance to play - if you have hard to work, your wife (or maybe your husband ;) ) is crying, your in vacances/holidays, your computer is damaged... there are a lot of points of inactivity... losing 3 points a day after a while will be fair to the other players but not unfair to the disabled players! |
|
TheGrid wrote
at 2:10 AM, Tuesday January 16, 2007 EST Well, there is not awesome much strategy/skills in this game. As long as you are not too aggresive like most newbies, you are already a good player. If your "strategic advantage" is to play with friends you are a very good player.
Thats all folks. Not all too much glory in it. |
|
Gabble wrote
at 5:22 AM, Tuesday January 16, 2007 EST There seem to be two issues here, one over ELO rating, and one over ranking. I'm mildly against there being a decay in ELO rating for inactivity, but am a bit bugged by people who don't play occupying the top ranking. A simple solution to that would be to remove inactive players from the rankings, but leave their rating intact. When they start playing again, they could re-enter the rankings. That would stop people who don't play sitting on the top rankings. Guess this solution only works if people are more concerned about ranking then rating.....
oops, re-reading the thread, i see the brain has suggested this, but no one seems to have taken it up... what do people think? |
|
algios wrote
at 9:46 AM, Tuesday January 16, 2007 EST @Gabble: Nobody talking against it = nobody has arguments or nobody IS against it.
Seems to be a good Idea to me. Having sorted top 5 after "played this week", "played this month", "old system" (as long it differs from 'this month'). Showing "played this week" as preset would award active players. |
|
|
A_Nihilist wrote
at 12:21 PM, Tuesday January 16, 2007 EST Yeah I really like the idea of dropping inactive players off the leader board but letting them keep their score.
|
|
|
algios wrote
at 9:55 PM, Saturday January 27, 2007 EST up again
|
|
Jaits wrote
at 3:34 AM, Sunday January 28, 2007 EST hmm now everyone is against it.. when i lost 150 pts noone was complaining :P
|
|
THE Z3 wrote
at 5:00 AM, Sunday January 28, 2007 EST I am not against it, it made me start playing my account that was over 2000 agiain. It really is a good idea.
|
|
SandyBell wrote
at 1:02 AM, Friday February 9, 2007 EST .
|
