[MrCrabbs]

OK so,

Player E will:
Gain: 0
Lose: 50000*28/100 = 14000 (Split equally between the 4 players above him, so that's 3500 each)
Net subtotal: -14000
Time Bonus: +100
Total: -13900

Player D will:
Gain: +3500
Lose: 40000*22/100 = 8800 (Split equally between the 3 players above him, so that's 2933 each)
Net subtotal: 3500-8800 = -5300
Time Bonus: +100
Total: -5200

Player C will:
Gain: 3500+2933 = 6433
Lose: 10000*16/100 = 1600 (Split equally between the 2 players above him, so that's 800 each)
Net subtotal: 6433-1600 = +4833
Time Bonus: +100
Total: +4933

Player B will:
Gain: 3500+2933+800 = 7233
Lose: 30000*10)100 = 3000 (Which all goes to the only player above him, Player A)
Net subtotal: 7233-3000 = +4233
Time Bonus: +100
Total: +4333

Player A will:
Gain: 3500+2933+800+3000 = 10233
Lose: 0
Net subtotal: +10233
Time Bonus: +100
Total: +10333

[MrCrabbs]

To double check, do the sum of all losses equal the sum of all gains (Ignoring the Time Bonuses)?

Well...

-14000-5300+4833+4233+10233 = -1

Correct - it's not exactly zero because of the rounding on the 2933.

[judd]

greetings all,

nice maths for a chef crabbs

for me, the points system does have the inherent problem trace has mentioned - kill the big point players in multi player, especially 5p where the damage is 28% of your points split evenly amongst the other players.

one possible way around this issue would be for the sum of all the players points multiplied by say 10% to create a "pool" of points for distribution. These could then be divided out, for example in a 5p, at say 0% for last, 10% for 4th, 20% for third, 30% for second and 40% for first (minus the 10% put into the game)

The game should put points in, currently 200 if the game lasts over 5/10 minutes, this should continue if you ask me.

keep smiling
_________________
Ex-Moderator
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[NewMagnate]

Thank you,
It's obvious that we should discuss all alternatives before the final decision.
Please suggest your ideas. Will be nice if you can illustrate them with the example (5p game described above)

[MrCrabbs]

I made some mistakes in earlier drafts of the calculations above - they're now edited I hope!

[NewMagnate]

Thanks, Mr.Crabbs you are a math genius
Could you make the same calculation for the lower rating base system?

[MrCrabbs]

If I understand your suggestion, it would award points "as if" all players all had the points of the lowest ranked player.

Thus it would become:

Player E will:
Gain: 0
Lose: 10000*28/100 = 2800 (Split equally between the 4 players above him, so that's 700 each)
Net subtotal: -2800
Time Bonus: +100
Total: -2700

Player D will:
Gain: +700
Lose: 10000*22/100 = 2200 (Split equally between the 3 players above him, so that's 733 each)
Net subtotal: 700-2200 = -1500
Time Bonus: +100
Total: -1400

Player C will:
Gain: 700+733 = 1433
Lose: 10000*16/100 = 1600 (Split equally between the 2 players above him, so that's 800 each)
Net subtotal: 1433-1600 = -167
Time Bonus: +100
Total: -67

Player B will:
Gain: 700+733+800 = 2233
Lose: 10000*10/100 = 1000 (Which all goes to the only player above him, Player A)
Net subtotal: 2233-1000 = +1233
Time Bonus: +100
Total: +1333

Player A will:
Gain: 700+733+800+1000 = 3233
Lose: 0
Net subtotal: +3233
Time Bonus: +100
Total: +3333

[MrCrabbs]

This would also be zero-sum with no new points created except for the +100 time bonus points, just like the old system.

[MrCrabbs]

And of course, the payouts given would be true WHOEVER came 1st, 2nd etc.

eg: If the 10,000 point player came last, he'd lose 2700, and if the 50,000 point player came last, he'd also lose 2700.

[NewMagnate]

And this approach makes the targeting pointless.
It's interesting to know opinions of the existing players about implementation of this system in new GM.

[MrCrabbs]

Some obvious alternatives spring to mind too.

Instead of taking the points of the lowest-ranked player (10k), you could take some other number, eg: the average. Or you could take the points of the middle ranked player, for example.

Just substitute the value in place of the 10000 in the calculations in my post from Mon Sep 10, 2012 8:41 pm.

It happens in this example that the average score and the score of the middle-ranked player are the same, 30k.

If we did that, all the subtotals would be 3x as large, so:

Player E subtotal: -8400
Player E total: -8300 (Ouch, if you are the 10k player that will really hurt)

Player D subtotal: -4500
Player D total: -4400

Player C subtotal: -500
Player C total: -400

Player B subtotal: +3700
Player B total: +3800

Player A subtotal: +9700
Player A total: +9800 (Then again, if you're the 10k player and win, you just doubled your score)

[MrCrabbs]

If we went with an average score thing, there would be the possibility of players entering a game which they literally couldn't afford to lose.

eg: a 10k player and 4 50k players. The average score would be 42k, and the fee for finishing 5th would be 11760.

11760>10000 so the 10k player would have to be prevented from entering the game.

[NewMagnate]

Also we decrease luck factor (when you can lose 50-70% of your rating as a result of several unlucky games)

[MrCrabbs]

With your original idea, yeah we decrease luck factor quite a lot.

[MrCrabbs]

One change though would be that 2p games are similar to now, whereas in 4/5p games, the rewards and losses would be much smaller.