Scoring update

posted by Breadmower on Sun 10th Feb, 08 at 18:26:35

Evening all,

I've made a small (but interesting) change to the scoring. Basically, the person who has played the fewest games won't qualify for the leaderboard. I know it doesn't sound like much, but I'm wondering if I've been overthinking about how to fix the scoring, and we just need something like this to make it so there's an incentive to play more games. This way, you can't get a good score and stop playing, as you'll get knocked off the board.

Of course, something like this only works if you know that it's happening (so I can't just test it on last week's data), hence why I've put it on the actual leaderboard. If it doesn't work out, I'll get rid of it - think of it as you're all being beta testers of possible new scoring systems.

So, just to clarify, here's an example. At the moment, the leaderboard is:

Rank	Username	Average guesses	Games completed
-	DOM	3.6	5
-	Mr.Puzzlewit	4.6	5
1st	sharon	5.3	30
2nd	bin1	5.56	18

DOM and Mr.Puzzlewit aren't ranked, as they've played the fewest games. If, however, Mr.Puzzlewit was to play another game, that'd mean that DOM would be the person with the fewest games - and despite having the best average, he wouldn't be ranked. Of course, he could then play another two games (so that he'd played more than Mr.Puzzlewit), meaning that DOM gets on the board, and Mr.Puzzlewit gets taken off. Suppose that they both end up playing 19 games in total - that'd mean that they're both safe, and it's then Bin1 that's in trouble, so he'd need to play a few more. Make sense? Cool - let's see what happens.

Seems straight forward.  The lowest scoring individual can't benefit from not playing.

Only problem I can see (but haven't thought about it much) is that the player with the lowest games will never qualify...

Super cool though.

I think the new scoring is great

Wow, responses already! :-)

Sharon: thanks - let's see how it works out.

Bin1: Yeah, I'm thinking of the old "KISS" (Keep It Simple, Stupid) thing that we always quote in programming or user interface design. It's simple enough to look at the board and go "oh, I need to play another 3 games to get back on" - much easier than any of the other systems we looked at. We'll have to see how Stokie reacts to being "it", and how everyone else reacts to his reaction. As for the player with the lowest games never qualifying, well - that's some encouragement to play more games, isn't it? ;-)

Hi! Im back! woo! :D

I came back because i heard that you were testing out a new scoring system...

Seems easy... and fun to laugh at peple who get frozen out when they are winning...