Only a few rules were modified for the new season. Changes are as follows:
- We have again 12 tracks, one each month.
- To avoid confusion, the deadline of each track is put back to 20:00 GMT+1 on the last day of the month.
- Tracks are available on or before the 4th of each month. If the track is available before the 4th, leading time is not calculated until 0:00 GMT+1 on the 4th day of the month. (this guarantees I have enough time to update the site)
- Your FOUR worst results don't count, as opposed to the TWO worst as until now. We all have less time to race.
- To compensate the above change, bonus points are awarded to frequent pipsqueaks. This is called EB, "Endurance Bonus" After replays were submitted for 8 tracks during a season, participation on each additional track attacts bonus points. Just as LTB, these points accumulate, do not affect the track scoreboards or team scores, but are included in the seasonal scores:
- 9. track = +1 point
- 10. track = +2 points
- 11. track = +3 points
- 12. track = +6 points
- Car bonuses are not reset but continued from their state at the end of 2011
I guess that's all. Opinions are welcome.
Sounds good!
I think the bonuses are wrong though. Corvette definitely shouldn't be at 27% right now :)
ouch. by mistake the Ferrari got the deduction instead of the Vette. sorry, corrected :)
Hey! Ive already started a replay with vette :o
It must be discarded...
sorry! :(
It seems we all are not registered in our respective teams on the 2012 scoreboard(s).
Yes, i forgot to re-register teams for 2012. doing it right away...
Add me to MeganiuM as I will for sure take part this year!
Thx, now Cork can be brought to the top of the scoreboard! ;)
Quote from: Duplode on January 10, 2012, 04:59:25 AM
Thx, now Cork can be brought to the top of the scoreboard! ;)
No way! Damage Inc. will win the team contest.
Is there still 0,11 - 0,10, - 0,09 and 0,08 points for the slower players this year?
sure, you can check it on the seasonal scoreboard.
Brian: Damage Inc. mustn't be interested in < 1 pt zone. Not even in < 4 pts. We are both better than that! ;D
Of course you're right! ;D I just thought that the "high" number of pipsqueaks this month wouldn't continue if the newbies didn't get any small points out of it. I couln't see it on the scoreboard, only four times 0..
I'm sorry I didn't have time for a replay at the end of January, but I'm more than ready to fight for the team-scoreboard win this year. 8)
Quote from: SuperBrian on February 02, 2012, 05:53:42 PM
I'm more than ready to fight for the team-scoreboard win this year. 8)
Sorry, but you have no chance against Mighty MeganiuM!
Quote from: Chulk on February 03, 2012, 12:20:31 AM
Quote from: SuperBrian on February 02, 2012, 05:53:42 PM
I'm more than ready to fight for the team-scoreboard win this year. 8)
Sorry, but you have no chance against Mighty MeganiuM!
Naaah, come on! Brian kicks Ayrton's and Rotoi's ass, Töff is a lot better than Gutix or you - and sometimes I can beat AbuRaf. ;)
Quote from: SuperBrian on February 02, 2012, 05:53:42 PM
Of course you're right! ;D I just thought that the "high" number of pipsqueaks this month wouldn't continue if the newbies didn't get any small points out of it. I couln't see it on the scoreboard, only four times 0..
Speaking of that, a small bug: 2012 results below 12th aren't being shown on the pipsqueak profiles.
:O
Quote from: zaqrack on January 03, 2012, 02:07:15 PM
- Your FOUR worst results don't count, as opposed to the TWO worst as until now. We all have less time to race.
- To compensate the above change, bonus points are awarded to frequent pipsqueaks. This is called EB, "Endurance Bonus" After replays were submitted for 8 tracks during a season, participation on each additional track attacts bonus points. Just as LTB, these points accumulate, do not affect the track scoreboards or team scores, but are included in the seasonal scores:
- 9. track = +1 point
- 10. track = +2 points
- 11. track = +3 points
- 12. track = +6 points
This is way too strong and overcompensating - and completely kills the idea of the "4 worst results don't count" rule, as even one missed race DOES count, quite a lot due to the endurance bonus.
For example: Aburaf has missed one race in February. I did not.
He had much better performance than I did, and has 56 points. I have 48. Now if we maintain about the same performance, but during the last two races I manage to close up 3 points on him, that would mean I am still behind by 5 points. Not with the EB: I get 1+2+3+6=12 from EB, while he gets only 1+2+3=6, meaning I gain 6 more points over him (just because he did not join in Feb!!!) and end up above in the classification. The EB is not a bad idea, but the bonus must be linear and with lesser impact
This is a very uneven and unfair rule in its current form. Very much.
I hate changing rules during the season, especially without asking your opinion, but this rule was not thought over well and MUST be adjusted. I intend change the EB to +1 point for each of the last 4 races in a linear fashion and the bonuses for the current round were assigned as such already.
If anyone has objections or feels a significant negative impact, please let me know and we can discuss and adjust. I was thinking in the concept of fairness and also to prevent draining all of your motivation during the last races.
For a clear view:
pipsqueaks with significant negative impact expected due to this correction (no missed races):
pipsqueaks with less negative impact expected due to this correction (one missed race):
pipsqueaks with major positive impact expected due to this correction (several missed races and in good overall position):
[/list]
Quote from: zaqrack on November 01, 2012, 03:03:46 PM
Quote from: zaqrack on January 03, 2012, 02:07:15 PM
- Your FOUR worst results don't count, as opposed to the TWO worst as until now. We all have less time to race.
- To compensate the above change, bonus points are awarded to frequent pipsqueaks. This is called EB, "Endurance Bonus" After replays were submitted for 8 tracks during a season, participation on each additional track attacts bonus points. Just as LTB, these points accumulate, do not affect the track scoreboards or team scores, but are included in the seasonal scores:
- 9. track = +1 point
- 10. track = +2 points
- 11. track = +3 points
- 12. track = +6 points
This is way too strong and overcompensating - and completely kills the idea of the "4 worst results don't count" rule, as even one missed race DOES count, quite a lot due to the endurance bonus.
For example: Aburaf has missed one race in February. I did not.
He had much better performance than I did, and has 56 points. I have 48. Now if we maintain about the same performance, but during the last two races I manage to close up 3 points on him, that would mean I am still behind by 5 points. Not with the EB: I get 1+2+3+6=12 from EB, while he gets only 1+2+3=6, meaning I gain 6 more points over him (just because he did not join in Feb!!!) and end up above in the classification. The EB is not a bad idea, but the bonus must be linear and with lesser impact
This is a very uneven and unfair rule in its current form. Very much.
I hate changing rules during the season, especially without asking your opinion, but this rule was not thought over well and MUST be adjusted. I intend change the EB to +1 point for each of the last 4 races in a linear fashion and the bonuses for the current round were assigned as such already.
If anyone has objections or feels a significant negative impact, please let me know and we can discuss and adjust. I was thinking in the concept of fairness and also to prevent draining all of your motivation during the last races.
For a clear view:
pipsqueaks with significant negative impact expected due to this correction (no missed races):
pipsqueaks with less negative impact expected due to this correction (one missed race):
pipsqueaks with major positive impact expected due to this correction (several missed races and in good overall position):
[/list]
Since nobody argued heavily against this rule and we completed 10 races knowing these circumstances, I think you mustn't change it (or simply decrease the bonus from 1-3-6-12 to... hmmmm... 1-2-4-6 or something like that).
It would not help. The issue is the last tracks giving a huge bonus (e.g. +6). Nobody complained as I think nobody really thought this over.
Quote from: zaqrack on November 01, 2012, 11:48:02 PM
I think nobody really thought this over.
Friker and I did for sure. Probably others too.
So, an anti meganium rule! Nah kidding xD. Really I'm kidding :) :-X
I support the change wholeheartedly. It would be better to know how Friker and Usrin feel about it, though.
Quote from: alanrotoi on November 02, 2012, 12:06:38 AM
So, an anti meganium rule! Nah kidding xD. Really I'm kidding :) :-X
Given the current standings, I believe MeganiuM pipsqueaks would actually benefit from the change (I might be messing up the maths though).
Quote from: Duplode on November 02, 2012, 01:03:49 AM
Given the current standings, I believe MeganiuM pipsqueaks would actually benefit from the change (I might be messing up the maths though).
He probably meant the original rule, not the change...
I am ok with 1-2-3-6 or ..-5. I was counting with that from the beginning of this season. The rule is working perfectly with Zak's comment somewhere (but yes, it's quite strong), so I don't see any point to change it (for this season). But I am ok with any modification (or completely scratching) this rule.
I'm against any modifications during the season. If getting the highest EB had been important for any pipsqueak, he could have created a listfiller in 5 minutes per track. If somebody didn't, it's not the fault of the system, as the rules were known for everybody.
Probably nobody would have complained if this idea hasn't been brought up; now a potential reason for flamewars is created. Is it good? (I'm prepared for the comments that I'm telling this only because the change affects me negatively...)
I suggest to set up possible scenarios for unchanged, decreased and eliminated bonus points.
Btw, retroactive changes in the rules are one of the "democratic" methods for which our "loved" prime minister is famous.
I think this season should not be touched but it should be reviewed before next season as it seems to be quite excesive. Anyway, I haven't taken part much this season, so...
OK let's summarize. pipsqueaks invovled in EB:
Duplode
CTG
Gutix
Friker
AbuRaf70
Zak
Usrin
dstien
Supporting the change to 1-1-1-1:
Duplode
Zak
Resisting the change to 1-1-1-1:
Usrin
Friker
CTG
No comment so far:
Gutix
AbuRaf70
dstien
Not involved but supporting the idea:
None
Not involved but resisting the idea:
Chulk
I will wait for 3 more days for opinions. Then we will either:
A. Keep rules as is for 2012
B. Change to 1-1-1-1, but keep original bonus system for those who resisted the change.
I supprot [sic] the change to 1-1-1-1.
Even if I'm not affected, I'm saying some words. Even if it is only an online competition of an old computer game, I think a rule change in the very end would make the whole championship a joke. It really sounds ridiculous.
Even if we had very bad scoring systems, there was no such precedent in the long history of ZakStunts (though we planned it during season for the next year).
Everybody here had 10 months to comprehend the rules (including the competition manager), even if they are bad. Everybody had the possibility to complain about it. The rules were clear at the beginning of the season, and they applied and apply to everyone here - therefore, it make no sense to construct lists about 'who would be favoured with a rule change and who wouldn't'. And one more thing: we should not punish those people (if there are any) who read, comprehended the rules correctly and then planned the racing season for himself; in other words, if one had been really interested in racing/managing this season, he would have checked the rules carefully.
In spite of my support of the content of the proposal, at this point I feel we should shelve it till 2013. The change is too divisive, and there are legitimate reasons for that. In any case, at the very least a strong consensus would be necessary to justify late changes in the rules...
Quote from: Akoss Poo on November 07, 2012, 02:32:46 PM
And one more thing: we should not punish those people (if there are any) who read, comprehended the rules correctly and then planned the racing season for himself; in other words, if one had been really interested in racing/managing this season, he would have checked the rules carefully.
Indeed. See also the Hungarian state "saving" those who did not think before they picked up a mortgage loan in a foreign currency. Life is unfair. But I am not (at least I am trying) So rules stay as is, then we'll change in 2013.
Quote from: zaqrack on November 15, 2012, 04:00:56 PM
Quote from: Akoss Poo on November 07, 2012, 02:32:46 PM
And one more thing: we should not punish those people (if there are any) who read, comprehended the rules correctly and then planned the racing season for himself; in other words, if one had been really interested in racing/managing this season, he would have checked the rules carefully.
Indeed. See also the Hungarian state "saving" those who did not think before they picked up a mortgage loan in a foreign currency. Life is unfair. But I am not (at least I am trying) So rules stay as is, then we'll change in 2013.
Wise decision.
Quote from: CTG on November 06, 2012, 10:22:39 AM
I suggest to set up possible scenarios for unchanged, decreased and eliminated bonus points.
Now without any consequences, only to demonstrate why Endurance Bonus should be eliminated in the
next season (compare with "Head to head" results or simply average rankings). My vote - even if it means a disadvantage for me - went for principals of avoiding such late rule changes.
Current EB system (1-3-6-12):
| Position | Duplode | CTG | Friker | Gutix | Renato Biker |
| 1 | 110 (112) | 93 (95) | 95 (97) | 88 (90) | 87 (89) |
| 2 | 109 (111) | 92 (94) | 94 (96) | 87 (89) | 86 (88) |
| 3 | 108 (110) | 91 (93) | 93 (95) | 86 (88) | 85 (87) |
| 4 | 108 (110) | 90 (92) | 92 (94) | 85 (87) | 84 (86) |
| 5 | 108 (110) | 90 (92) | 91 (93) | 84 (86) | 83 (85) |
| 6 | 108 (110) | 90 (92) | 90 (92) | 84 (86) | 82 (84) |
| 7 | 108 (110) | 90 (92) | 90 (92) | 84 (86) | 81 (83) |
| 8 | 108 (110) | 90 (92) | 90 (92) | 84 (86) | 80 (82) |
| 9 | 108 (110) | 90 (92) | 90 (92) | 84 (86) | 79 (81) |
| 10 | 108 (110) | 90 (92) | 90 (92) | 84 (86) | 78 (80) |
| 11 | 108 (110) | 90 (92) | 90 (92) | 84 (86) | 77 (79) |
| 12 | 108 (110) | 90 (92) | 90 (92) | 84 (86) | 76 (78) |
| >12 | 108 (110) | 90 (92) | 90 (92) | 84 (86) | 75 (77) |
| DNS | 102 | 87 | 84 | 82 | 75 |
Decreased EB (1-2-3-4):
| Position | Duplode | CTG | Friker | Gutix | Renato Biker |
| 1 | 102 (104) | 90 (92) | 87 (89) | 87 (89) | 87 (89) |
| 2 | 101 (103) | 89 (91) | 86 (88) | 86 (88) | 86 (88) |
| 3 | 100 (102) | 88 (90) | 85 (87) | 85 (87) | 85 (87) |
| 4 | 100 (102) | 87 (89) | 84 (86) | 84 (86) | 84 (86) |
| 5 | 100 (102) | 87 (89) | 83 (85) | 83 (85) | 83 (85) |
| 6 | 100 (102) | 87 (89) | 82 (84) | 83 (85) | 82 (84) |
| 7 | 100 (102) | 87 (89) | 82 (84) | 83 (85) | 81 (83) |
| 8 | 100 (102) | 87 (89) | 82 (84) | 83 (85) | 80 (82) |
| 9 | 100 (102) | 87 (89) | 82 (84) | 83 (85) | 79 (81) |
| 10 | 100 (102) | 87 (89) | 82 (84) | 83 (85) | 78 (80) |
| 11 | 100 (102) | 87 (89) | 82 (84) | 83 (85) | 77 (79) |
| 12 | 100 (102) | 87 (89) | 82 (84) | 83 (85) | 76 (78) |
| >12 | 100 (102) | 87 (89) | 82 (84) | 83 (85) | 75 (77) |
| DNS | 99 | 86 | 81 | 82 | 75 |
No EB:
| Position | Duplode | CTG | Friker | Gutix | Renato Biker |
| 1 | 98 (100) | 87 (89) | 83 (85) | 85 (87) | 87 (89) |
| 2 | 97 (99) | 86 (88) | 82 (84) | 84 (86) | 86 (88) |
| 3 | 96 (98) | 85 (87) | 81 (83) | 83 (85) | 85 (87) |
| 4 | 96 (98) | 84 (86) | 80 (82) | 82 (84) | 84 (86) |
| 5 | 96 (98) | 84 (86) | 79 (81) | 81 (83) | 83 (85) |
| 6 | 96 (98) | 84 (86) | 78 (80) | 81 (83) | 82 (84) |
| 7 | 96 (98) | 84 (86) | 78 (80) | 81 (83) | 81 (83) |
| 8 | 96 (98) | 84 (86) | 78 (80) | 81 (83) | 80 (82) |
| 9 | 96 (98) | 84 (86) | 78 (80) | 81 (83) | 79 (81) |
| 10 | 96 (98) | 84 (86) | 78 (80) | 81 (83) | 78 (80) |
| 11 | 96 (98) | 84 (86) | 78 (80) | 81 (83) | 77 (79) |
| 12 | 96 (98) | 84 (86) | 78 (80) | 81 (83) | 76 (78) |
| >12 | 96 (98) | 84 (86) | 78 (80) | 81 (83) | 75 (77) |
| DNS | 96 | 84 | 78 | 81 | 75 |