Bonus points should be totally revised. Suggestion: as simple as possible. Even if I like numbers and stats, point system must be clear.
(In contrary, I have some really wild idea, like "Podium time bonus" instead of LTB to decrease the demotivating factor of an early strong replay. I'm going to explain if you are interested in it.)
Quote from: CTG on December 01, 2012, 12:18:04 PM
Bonus points should be totally revised.
As in
malus points! Skip a race, some points will be taken away. Then your car, and you house.
Quote from: CTG on December 01, 2012, 12:18:04 PM
Bonus points should be totally revised. Suggestion: as simple as possible. Even if I like numbers and stats, point system must be clear.
(In contrary, I have some really wild idea, like "Podium time bonus" instead of LTB to decrease the demotivating factor of an early strong replay. I'm going to explain if you are interested in it.)
explain please.
Leading Time Bonus is generally a good idea, but the current system doesn't really support the original will. 1 or 2 points bonus can't motivate a middle class pipsqueak to keep up with the top dogs, especially if XY or (typically) RB sends a very strong replay already in the first few days. And why would they fight for temporary 2nd or 3rd places in the middle of the month? It would be nice to give the possibility to 3-4 pipsqueaks instead of 2 to get some bonus points and probably it would lead to sharp races even in the upper middle class.
'Podium time bonus' could be a solution as an extension of LTB. My pre-conception is to calculate it as follows:
PT = 1.0 * (time spent in first position) + 0.6 * (time spent at 2nd place) + 0.4 * (time spent at 3rd place)
And without limiting to two pipsqueaks:
+ 3 PTB: over 500 hours
+ 2 PTB: over 250 hours
+ 1 PTB: over 100 hours
Of course these numbers must be optimized.
Which leads to a completely new system:
pipsqueks' score (PS) = 12*(time spent at 1st p.) + 11*(time s. at 2nd p.) + 10*(time s. at 3rd p.) + ... + 1*(time s. at 12th p.) + 0.1*(time s. at places below). ;)
There could be a modification:
PS2 = (PS + final position) / 2.
Well, this system is completely nonsense in the real world (imagine that in F1 :) ), but it is worth to try in this competition. :) Even middle class pipsqueaks could earn some points with an early good replay.
Uh, I though CTG had called for a system "as simple as possible" ;D
Quote from: Duplode on December 01, 2012, 07:14:34 PM
Uh, I though CTG had called for a system "as simple as possible" ;D
Quote from: CTG on December 01, 2012, 12:18:04 PM
In contrary, I have some really wild idea, like "Podium time bonus" instead of LTB to decrease the demotivating factor of an early strong replay.
!
Quote from: Duplode on December 01, 2012, 07:14:34 PM
Uh, I though CTG had called for a system "as simple as possible" ;D
My presented system is sipmpler than the current one for me (and much more than CTG's).
Quote from: Friker on December 01, 2012, 03:46:35 PM
Which leads to a completely new system:
pipsqueks' score (PS) = 12*(time spent at 1st p.) + 11*(time s. at 2nd p.) + 10*(time s. at 3rd p.) + ... + 1*(time s. at 12th p.) + 0.1*(time s. at places below). ;)
There could be a modification:
PS2 = (PS + final position) / 2.
Well, this system is completely nonsense in the real world (imagine that in F1 :) ), but it is worth to try in this competition. :) Even middle class pipsqueaks could earn some points with an early good replay.
With such a system, missing the first two weeks of a race would limit a pipsqueak to 75% of the maximum possible points. In effect, that would replicate all of the current problems with EB, except we would be talking about days instead of months...
I don't think I'm going to race regularly in the next season, but just some ideas:
- I never liked any bonus system, I think the final season standings should only contain the results of the 12 tracks, without leading time, endurance or any bonuses
But if there are any:
- it is very hard to eliminate the rewarding of an early strong replay with keeping leading time bonus, it is a consequence of the insistence to this kind of bonus... I think the main goal should be not this (there's nothing really wrong with it if we accept that there is LTB), but rather to avoid sending 0.05 seconds faster replays constantly (it clearly favours computer addicts)... to do so, the leading time bonus can be higher (maybe as much as 10 points), but divided by the sent leading replays
- I don't see any reason to reward 'a middle class r@cer sending a good replay early'... but if it is really necessary, i recommend something like this (to avoid boring mid months and to help middle class r@cers): a r@cer who managed to reach the 102%/103%/105% of the winning replay or sends a replay lesser than 2/3/5 seconds worse than the final winning replay in the first one/two/three weeks of the competition, gets plus 1/2/3 points
- the endurance bonus is not a bad idea to make the drivers race constantly, it is worthy to keep it
- even who reaches a maximum bonus in a month (including endurance bonus fraction) and finishes second should not score higher than a winner who sends his replay in the last minute (with having only this replay in the whole year)... the winner should be the winner on a track, and on the final scoreboard as well
I also do not agree with the car usage system, but it is the pointsystem topic.
I'm starting to get the feeling the best way is to do it without any bonuses..
Another funny idea without bonuses: pipsqueaks should sign them on a participants list in the first week and only those will be evaluated at the end. For me time hiding is not a problem (whole ltb thing). I have more difficulties with "player hiding" - I want to see who is racing and who is not. :) (you should register to a competition in advance in the real world also. registered players with unsent replays should be penalized.)
Quote from: Friker on December 05, 2012, 10:02:29 AM
I'm starting to get the feeling the best way is to do it without any bonuses..
I'm saying that since LTB was introduced ten years ago. :-)
Two realities of life without bonuses:
1. The first 30 days are eventless, and 80% of all replays are sent on the last day. Only the last day of the month is of any significance in Stunts.
2. Winner of the season is not the best pipsqueak, but the best consistent pipsqueak, who does not miss a race. Same thing further down the scoreboard. 12 6th-places beats 8 4th-places.
Quote from: BonzaiJoe on December 05, 2012, 11:27:42 AM
Two realities of life without bonuses:
1. The first 30 days are eventless, and 80% of all replays are sent on the last day. Only the last day of the month is of any significance in Stunts.
2. Winner of the season is not the best pipsqueak, but the best consistent pipsqueak, who does not miss a race. Same thing further down the scoreboard. 12 6th-places beats 8 4th-places.
1. There's nothing wrong with the fact that the perfect replay is only formed on the winning driver's computer on the last day. What's the use of constant braking during the month to send and send 0.05 seconds faster replays? It is a tactical possibility to try not to show the best reachable time. A driver should find out the best reachable time by himself (I really think this is an important skill which is not apparent on the scoreboards here since ages), not by checking the scoreboard and drive against other times. And anybody remembering ZCT 16? Was there any leading time bonus?...
2. Who forces you to miss any race? Looking the enthusiasm of some pipsqueaks here, it would be surprising to see any top pipsqueak missing races. And one more thing: it depends on the scoring system. For example with the classic Formula One point system (10-6-4-3-2-1) the factor of missing a race can easily be mitigated. Or with saying 'the worst two results don't count'. I'm sure that the best driver wins without meaningless bonuses, too...
Here's what I think about
LEADING TIME: I think leading time bonus makes the month boring (and even demotivating sometimes) if a very strong replay is sent in the first few days. To make it more exciting throughout the entire month, I would suggest something like Mark's checkpoints idea (say 10th and 20th or weekly) and give bonus points for leading in those checkpoints, only if an improvement of 'X'% was done. That would keep the top dogs from sending an ultra fast replay on the first day, because that would keep them from getting bigger bonuses. And that would also help those consistent drivers that send replays every week, allowing them to get bonus even if they're not the fastest on track.
ENDURANCE BONUS: I think we should change it to 3 races (same amount of races which results won't count) and 1-2-3 or maybe 1-2-4. This should be taken a little further, maybe by stating a replay must be 'X'% of the winning replay (to avoid obvious listfillers or that circle around the finish line CTG mentioned) or at least 2 replays/month (or both, to avoid 2 circles around the finish line)
PS: Friker's idea of registration in the 1st week sounds good, but the problem with that is most of us have jobs/university/family and such, and that makes it hard to know in advance if we'll have some free time, even on weekends.
Quote from: Chulk on December 05, 2012, 03:45:32 PM
ENDURANCE BONUS: I think we should change it to 3 races (same amount of races which results won't count) and 1-2-3 or maybe 1-2-4. This should be taken a little further, maybe by stating a replay must be 'X'% of the winning replay (to avoid obvious listfillers or that circle around the finish line CTG mentioned) or at least 2 replays/month (or both, to avoid 2 circles around the finish line)
What do you have against listfillers? Zak is doing that constantly, everybody knows he doesn't have time to do any better, everybody's fine with that. So what? Everybody has the same opportunity to send only a listfiller, if he wants to. Ok, calm down Friker.. :D
"X" percent of the winning replay is a very bad idea. See dstien.
Quote from: Chulk on December 05, 2012, 03:45:32 PM
PS: Friker's idea of registration in the 1st week sounds good, but the problem with that is most of us have jobs/university/family and such, and that makes it hard to know in advance if we'll have some free time, even on weekends.
Well, a listfiller is a solution. Create a 1 noRH lap is a 10 minutes work and in most cases it is also a big fun. :) And don't tell you have not 10 minutes in a month.
Quote from: Friker on December 05, 2012, 10:02:29 AM
I'm starting to get the feeling the best way is to do it without any bonuses..
Another funny idea without bonuses: pipsqueaks should sign them on a participants list in the first week and only those will be evaluated at the end. For me time hiding is not a problem (whole ltb thing). I have more difficulties with "player hiding" - I want to see who is racing and who is not. :) (you should register to a competition in advance in the real world also. registered players with unsent replays should be penalized.)
I have to say that's the worst idea yet. If anything, we do not need rules that reduce the number of pipsqueaks to a minimum and keep new pipsqueaks away.
I hope we will keep rules as simple as possible. No set of rules is perfect anyway, and complicated rules will confuse people and reduce participation.
In my dreams: Kalpen rules (10-9-8-...), LTB bonus 1 point, (or perhaps 2 and 1 point), 3 worst results don't count.
Agree with BJ, easy rules please.
On the subject of fancy bonuses, I like the idea of SDR style checkpoints (see Chulk's post). Akoss' second suggestion (bonuses for any early strong replays) sounds nice too, but would likely be hard to get right. On the other hand, I do wonder, alongside BJ and Alan, about what is the point of diminishing returns of complex rules, after which either people don't care any more or there is no noticeable effect on the results.
Quote from: Akoss Poo on December 05, 2012, 08:53:02 AM
- even who reaches a maximum bonus in a month (including endurance bonus fraction) and finishes second should not score higher than a winner who sends his replay in the last minute (with having only this replay in the whole year)... the winner should be the winner on a track, and on the final scoreboard as well
I suppose that implies moving away from a linear scoring system, and that, I believe, would be a sound move. Our complaints and worries about bonuses being too strong stem at least in part from the fact that gaps at the top are too small.
Quote from: Chulk on December 05, 2012, 03:45:32 PM
ENDURANCE BONUS: I think we should change it to 3 races (same amount of races which results won't count) and 1-2-3 or maybe 1-2-4.
I agree with you and BJ in that dropping 3 races is better than 2 or 4. As for the bonuses, with 1-2-3 do you mean the awarded EB in each round or the accumulated points (that is, one point per round, adding up to 3 points)?
Quote from: Duplode on December 06, 2012, 04:28:37 AM
As for the bonuses, with 1-2-3 do you mean the awarded EB in each round or the accumulated points (that is, one point per round, adding up to 3 points)?
Per race
per replay sent ;D
Quote from: CTG on December 10, 2012, 09:53:50 AM
Quote from: alanrotoi on December 06, 2012, 04:25:33 PM
per replay sent ;D
per forum messages, please ;D
lol ;D
I'm not really active but here is my 2 cents :
- any LTB is globally a good idea to keep pipsqueaks active along the month instead of racing only during quiet days
- I agree with Akoss on this point : race winner with no bonus should get more points than 2nd driver with bonus(es).
- linear point system is not good for podiumers. In FTT competition (I abandonned suddenly when life had its own priorities, sorry again) point system was that last driver would get 1 point, and all pipsqueaks will get 1 more point than the pipsqueaks behind them, except the 2nd who will get 2 points more than the 3rd driver and the winner who will get 2 points more than the 2nd driver. That kind of system could be adapted, and it would proably be easier to understand for newcomers than 0.1, 0.09, 0.08... points given for pipsqueaks 13th to last.
This system has 2 benefits IMO :
- winning is rewarded better than with a constant point system like Kalpen competition, because winning has to be rewarded,
- winning versus 5 pipsqueaks is rewarded less than winning versus 10 pipsqueaks, because it's easier to win a 5 players race.
This system has also some weaknesses :
- ending 4th in a 10 players race will give as much points than winning of a 5-players race (7 points, without any bonus), which is far from perfect,
- maybe an average finish rank should compensate the system (a kind of "opposition level bonus), because a 5-players win versus Ayrton+Renato+Argy+Duplode (or CTG, or BJ, ... no offence, it's just an example ;)) is an exploit compared to winning a 10-players win versus 9 guys as crappy as I am (especially now after almost 3 years of non-competition and a game still not running fluently on my current computer). :p.
Quote from: Duplode on December 06, 2012, 04:28:37 AM
On the subject of fancy bonuses, I like the idea of SDR style checkpoints (see Chulk's post). Akoss' second suggestion (bonuses for any early strong replays) sounds nice too, but would likely be hard to get right. On the other hand, I do wonder, alongside BJ and Alan, about what is the point of diminishing returns of complex rules, after which either people don't care any more or there is no noticeable effect on the results.
Quote from: Akoss Poo on December 05, 2012, 08:53:02 AM
- even who reaches a maximum bonus in a month (including endurance bonus fraction) and finishes second should not score higher than a winner who sends his replay in the last minute (with having only this replay in the whole year)... the winner should be the winner on a track, and on the final scoreboard as well
I suppose that implies moving away from a linear scoring system, and that, I believe, would be a sound move. Our complaints and worries about bonuses being too strong stem at least in part from the fact that gaps at the top are too small.
Not necessarily. non-integer bonuses are possible (and we saw it happen in the past)
Quote from: Duplode on December 06, 2012, 04:28:37 AM
Quote from: Chulk on December 05, 2012, 03:45:32 PM
ENDURANCE BONUS: I think we should change it to 3 races (same amount of races which results won't count) and 1-2-3 or maybe 1-2-4.
I agree with you and BJ in that dropping 3 races is better than 2 or 4. As for the bonuses, with 1-2-3 do you mean the awarded EB in each round or the accumulated points (that is, one point per round, adding up to 3 points)?
I am also leaning towards 3 races, 4 being too much, 2 being not enough.
Endurance bonus may stay - but only with a much lesser impact, and probably with no bonus at all on the very last (12th) completed race.
Quote from: zaqrack on December 10, 2012, 01:28:43 PM
Endurance bonus may stay - but only with a much lesser impact, and probably with no bonus at all on the very last (12th) completed race.
The best endurance bonus system was applied in 2002. Sometimes the first idea is the useful one.
Quote from: CTG on December 10, 2012, 01:32:44 PM
Quote from: zaqrack on December 10, 2012, 01:28:43 PM
Endurance bonus may stay - but only with a much lesser impact, and probably with no bonus at all on the very last (12th) completed race.
The best endurance bonus system was applied in 2002. Sometimes the first idea is the useful one.
If we take only the pure rankings without LTB, the current standings would be:
16.86 - Duplode
15.40 - CTG
14.94 - Gutix
14.17 - Renato Biker
14.14 - Friker
Calculating with the best available result:
17.50 - Duplode
16.14 - CTG
15.70 - Gutix
15.29 - Renato Biker
15.00 - Friker
thanks for your thoughts.
point system for 2013:
- no change in position scores
- no change in LTB
- three worst result don't count
- EB reduced to 1-2-3 pts on the last three races.
Quote from: Chulk on December 05, 2012, 03:45:32 PM
ENDURANCE BONUS: I think we should change it to 3 races (same amount of races which results won't count) and 1-2-3
Quote from: zaqrack on January 02, 2013, 10:50:14 PM
- three worst result don't count
- EB reduced to 1-2-3 pts on the last three races.
I won! I won!!
Quote from: Chulk on January 03, 2013, 05:10:11 PM
Quote from: Chulk on December 05, 2012, 03:45:32 PM
ENDURANCE BONUS: I think we should change it to 3 races (same amount of races which results won't count) and 1-2-3
Quote from: zaqrack on January 02, 2013, 10:50:14 PM
- three worst result don't count
- EB reduced to 1-2-3 pts on the last three races.
I won! I won!!
Congratulations to you! :D The most valuable victory, isn't it? :D
Quote from: Friker on January 03, 2013, 07:44:50 PM
Congratulations to you! :D The most valuable victory, isn't it? :D
Nope, it is just stage one of my plot to win Zakstunts '13
Quote from: Chulk on January 04, 2013, 02:53:41 PM
Quote from: Friker on January 03, 2013, 07:44:50 PM
Congratulations to you! :D The most valuable victory, isn't it? :D
Nope, it is just stage one of my plot to win Zakstunts '13
hmm.. and will you join us or stay with meganium?
Aburaf came back and Alan said he'll take a few runs this month, so it seems I'll stay home ;)
I know it's not pointsystem-related, but I didn't know where else to post this.
There is a bug with deadline clock. It finishes an hour before the actual deadline, and it shows 'x days + 24 hours' when it changes.
Second thing is more of a suggestion: Can it be default setting to sent replays hidden during quiet days?
Quote from: Chulk on March 04, 2013, 07:24:07 PMThere is a bug with deadline clock. It finishes an hour before the actual deadline, and it shows 'x days + 24 hours' when it changes.
Additionally, a link to something like an event timer (http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedform.html) would be cool, for people in strange timezones!
do you have a php source for this or something similar?
I admin the countdown is the worst code I have ever written :)
I don't have any code ready, but the internet does :)
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1735252/php-countdown-to-date
Oh, that Goddess called Internet...
Quote from: alanrotoi on March 06, 2013, 09:52:55 PM
Oh, that Goddess called Internet...
Is Internet that place full of porn?
Quote from: Chulk on March 07, 2013, 02:37:50 AM
Quote from: alanrotoi on March 06, 2013, 09:52:55 PM
Oh, that Goddess called Internet...
Is Internet that place full of porn?
I always knew that Chulk is Rotoi. :D
Why don't you retire again and leave us alone for once?
Quote from: alanrotoi on March 07, 2013, 08:04:08 AM
Why don't you retire again and leave us alone for once?
You took it seriously... I hate to explain "jokes", but it seems I have to. The Chulk = Rotoi relation was "assumed" because of the porn thing, with a huge :D icon at the end - I don't think anybody but you would consider it as a real charge. Shall I add "kidding" to all of these messages for better understanding? Bah...
Quote from: alanrotoi on March 07, 2013, 08:04:08 AM
Why don't you retire again and leave us alone for once?
we don't want CTG to retire - he teaches us how to ignore annoying people and that is a valuable skill in this world, isn't it? :)
Quote from: Friker on March 07, 2013, 12:42:24 PM
Quote from: alanrotoi on March 07, 2013, 08:04:08 AM
Why don't you retire again and leave us alone for once?
we don't want CTG to retire - he teaches us how to ignore annoying people and that is a valuable skill in this world, isn't it? :)
...because I tried to joke with the porn addiction of Rotoi. Nice.
Quote from: CTG on March 07, 2013, 12:48:04 PM
Quote from: Friker on March 07, 2013, 12:42:24 PM
Quote from: alanrotoi on March 07, 2013, 08:04:08 AM
Why don't you retire again and leave us alone for once?
we don't want CTG to retire - he teaches us how to ignore annoying people and that is a valuable skill in this world, isn't it? :)
...because I tried to joke with the porn addiction of Rotoi. Nice.
I must admit that this joke against Rotoi was one of the better ones. :)
Quote from: Friker on March 07, 2013, 12:56:13 PM
Quote from: CTG on March 07, 2013, 12:48:04 PM
Quote from: Friker on March 07, 2013, 12:42:24 PM
Quote from: alanrotoi on March 07, 2013, 08:04:08 AM
Why don't you retire again and leave us alone for once?
we don't want CTG to retire - he teaches us how to ignore annoying people and that is a valuable skill in this world, isn't it? :)
...because I tried to joke with the porn addiction of Rotoi. Nice.
I must admit that this joke against Rotoi was one of the better ones. :)
Friker agreeing with CTG? End of the world really IS coming!
Because I am Friker, don't you see? :P
I understood perfectly what you said. But maybe I overreacted so I apologyze. Anyway I took it serious because even in joke format, you really can't talk about ghosts. They were the worst thing in this community. They created a feeling of nontrust between pipsqueaks mostly against new pipsqueaks when they had good performance. The ghost almost killed the community and the free existance of them witout any control was one of the reasons I was away from so much time. I couldn't know people like Mark for example. It's a delicated thing and you should have more respect.
Anyway I feel now I shouldn't say something like that, so I apologyze.
Note to myself: this comunity is afraid of ghosts. :)
Who you gonna call? :D
Quote from: dreadnaut on March 08, 2013, 10:04:01 AM
Who you gonna call? :D
Rotoi would make a premium porn call (2.99 USD/min). :D
Quote from: Friker on March 08, 2013, 05:38:03 AM
Note to myself: this comunity is afraid of ghosts. :)
This reminded me of Joker saying: "Note to self, need to order more henchmen" in Batman's Arkham series for PS3/X-Box/PC
BTW, if you played the game and loved the voice (as I did) but don't know who it is: It is Mark Hamil