You are here

Inflation/deflation

Before posting make sure you are aquainted with our forum rules.

7 posts / 0 new
Last post
G_master's picture
Offline
Champion
Inflation/deflation

Hey,

I think inflation/deflation in the top 10 rank have too much influence on actual rank. Each week you can get around 10 points for playing ONLY one game with full of noobs. And it's really hard to get 10 points with victory against 10 people (i got 13 ppt for 1st place when room had average 1940). This way, you can come from 2000 to 2100 in 2 months with not playing at all.

What is my suggestion? You get deflation/inflation points depending on how much have you played previous week. And upgrade to this sugestion -> you get more points for playing against stronger opponents. This way you force top 10 players to actually play, and you encourage palyers to play more.

I hope you like it :)

G_master

Fire's picture
Offline
Champion

^^


~.~

^^

gandalfx's picture
Offline

I don't think this is such a good idea. The rank is supposed to represent ONLY the players true skill in comparison to other players. It is not important if a player plays a lot only whether he has more or less skill then the rest of the bunch. Don't think of rank points as a 'reward', think of them as an indicator of actual skill.

Example: If you were on top (which you are, I think ;D) and you only played one game a week and the 2nd placed playes a lot of matches but still wouldn't normaly reach you because his wins and loses even out. Then according to your system he would eventually overtake you only because of inflation while his actual skill might still be inferiour to yours.

G_master's picture
Offline
Champion

ya i understand you, and you are correct, BUT: there are some top 10 accounts playing only 1 match per week with total noobs just so they don't loose rank (don't forget that if you don't play once a week you LOOSE 1% points and not gain any - and the relative difference is not the same here).

OK sth better for points decay -> after playing 1 match you don't loose any points, but also gained none -> and lets say you would gain points linearly to let say 5 or 10 games; and after 5 games you would gain whole amount of points. it's not a lot of coding behind this :) just to encourage players to play more than one game per week.

Fire's picture
Offline
Champion

And you are sure they won't play 5 matches with total noobs?


~.~

Geert's picture
Offline
Developer
Moderator
Clan: MOD

Well, it might look like you gain only when you are active, but actually also the inactives that are above the average gain the same amount of points. After they have gained it, then they will get a deduction on their amount of points.

so

1) 2200 points is active + 10 => 2210

2) 2100 points is inactive +10 => 2120, 2% rank decay => 2078

The gain is to keep the average of all the players at the same level. The difference of 10 points is because of 2 reasons:

  1. when a player has lost points due to inactivity, and starts to play again, the total pool of active players have lost points
  2. new players tend to be less strong than the average. Because they have a higher point multiplier, they will lose more points and thus take away from the pool, making the average lower than it should be.

 

Off course it might seem wise to not play alot of games. But in the end if you don't play alot of games, at a certain point the followers are able to take you over, and then you have to play.

There could be a chance that the points gained do to averaging, might be a too big of a gain. A hypothetical example: The gain stays around +10 points, and the top player decides to only play 1 game a week, gaining 0 points => 520 points a year, making him around rank 2700 over a year
Now a new player with equal skill comes and starts to play. he didn't have the bonus points of a year. Quickly he will be at 2000 points, but can he come over the gap of 700 points?

Pfft, I have to think about it...