| Autori |
Temë: GPRO Points System-Will it change? |
2971 përgjigje
|
|
|
Quote ( Jes Roth @ April 14th 2014,21:05:13 ) If it is true that:
If I finish 10th every race, and
My competitor finishes 20th in all races but finishes 9th once
My competitor finishes above me in the points, even though we both have zero points.
Then I think the system should reward consistancy, not one decent race.
yes but you will have done a lot better in other areas due to coming 10th every race.
on top of that if you say expand it to 10 point scoring places, the arguement would be if i come 11th every race and someone comes 10th once.......
You know what you have to do to score points , if you can finish 10th every race and not manage to get 9th or higher when someone who is finishing 20th every race can do it once then maybe they deserve to finish higher than you :)
|
|
|
|
|
#2280 Postuar 14 Prill 2014, 21:14:27 (Së fundi edituar 14 Prill 2014, 21:17:29 nga Jes Roth)
|
Citim
|
The season is 17 races, not one. If I perform better over the season I should get rewarded more then a manager who shows up for one race.
I missed retaining last season even though i finished better, on average, then 3 managers who retained over me.
Just think it makes sense, to me, that if I average 10th place I AM better then the manager who averages 15th, assuming we both have zero points
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Jes Roth @ April 14th 2014,21:14:27 ) The season is 17 races, not one. If I perform better over the season I should get rewarded more then a manager who shows up for one race.
You do. The problem is that you haven't got your eyes open long enough to be able to see why.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Jes Roth @ April 14th 2014,21:14:27 ) The season is 17 races, not one. If I perform better over the season I should get rewarded more then a manager who shows up for one race.
I missed retaining last season even though i finished better, on average, then 3 managers who retained over me.
yes, so you have 17 chances to win points and if you cannot, and someone else can, who is more deserving ?
It becomes a matter of opinion, of which you will have at least two different camps, both of which have valid points.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Gordon Ashford @ April 14th 2014,21:17:43 ) Quote ( Jes Roth @ April 14th 2014,21:14:27 )
yes, so you have 17 chances to win points and if you cannot, and someone else can, who is more deserving ?
It becomes a matter of opinion, of which you will have at least two different camps, both of which have valid points.
What if we all had zero points? Thats the case,points always beat no points, of course,but my example is about mngers w zero points
|
|
|
|
|
It's the same thing but without points.
|
|
|
|
But if you move the number of managers who score points, you create this same argument but at lower levels...like I said before....
Quote ( Gordon Ashford @ April 14th 2014,21:09:19 ) If you cannot do better than 10th and your opposition can get a 9th, does that not make them better than you?
|
|
|
|
I dont mind the current 8 racers score system, i just think the mngers w zero points should be sorted by avg position.
I have my solution, ill score more points next time and it wont matter 😜
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Jes Roth @ April 14th 2014,21:30:19 ) i just think the mngers w zero points should be sorted by avg position.
And what if you get a random or two? that messes your average position up.
If one good result should be banned (one 9th beats 10 tenths etc) then surely one bad result shouldnt decide it either?
|
|
|
|
will we have double points last race? No!! because is stupid as changing scoring in GPRO. If we change so 10 ppl get points why not 20 of us get points? why not all 40 racers get some points.
I will change scoring and give points only to 1st , 2nd and 3rd, they real earn it not manager on 10th place.
|
|
|
|
So...you want this to be rally racing Jes? please, no....and not like Nascar either!
Gordon, Peter and everyone else with a sensible opinion I fully support. Most of those are...status quo.
|
|
|
|
It's cool how it is, now that I know how it all works. I
I was confussed at the end of last season, but now I know why those few guys beat me in points even though I avg higher finishes.
thanks for clarifying,
|
|
|
|
The age old argument that "if you move the number of managers who score points, you create this same argument but at lower levels" isn't really valid.
It might be the same argument, it might be at a lower level, but you also STILL get more managers with points throughout the season, making it a different argument.
Instead of 8 managers in points every race and 24 managers scoring points throughout the season you might have 10 managers in points every race and 30 managers scoring points throughout the season. (arbitrary season numbers, not exact as it fluctutates depending on season, group, level of competition, and so on)
This would mean retention spots are based more on points scored than positions scored for those on the edge, meaning it's NOT the same argument in the end as it's an argument on 0 (zero) points managers fighting for staying in their group for next season, and moving the points 2 steps would make that no longer such, in most cases.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Max Watson @ April 14th 2014,20:31:50 ) Although some people seem keen not to see it no compelling data has been adduced, nor convincing argument presented, in favour of changing the points system without convincing rebuttal.
Unless a fresh argument can be posited (which hasn't happened for many pages now) we should really lay this thread to rest.
Quite a posh version of my post. ;)
Quote ( Gordon Ashford @ April 14th 2014,20:40:40 ) I know an exercise was done a while back trying out different points systems and seeing what effect it had on the group table. The answer was surprisingly minimal.
That's what I've always thought. The point difference will be bigger, but in relation to the current points version, there won't be much difference. It'll just make people's egos bigger.
|
|
|
|
As I already said once, if GPRO was made from start with 10 managers scoring points, that would be the best number, not 8, not 12. It's "tradition". Nobody showed explanation why 8 out of 40 is the best (was chosen), apart it was current scoring system in F1.
If one 8th place is better than 17 9th places, then why 5 wins is not better than one win?
What makes that 8th place so special, apart from, again, it was scoring at the time GPRO was started.
If there were more scoring places, there would be less smoking cars driving around the track, as their 15 points from first 5 races wouldn't be enough to retain.
But bottom line is, I got used on 8 managers scoring and I wouldn't change it.
|
|
|
|
|
40 points for 1st place down to 1 point for 40th place.
Only viable change in my eyes - and not one that I would ever advocate as it would lose several traditionalists from the game, and remove the strategic options as Gordon mentioned.
There is a valid point of consistency not being rewarded, and that does lose players through frustration - but the current F1 points system wont solve that, you'll have the same issues with 11th v 10th as you do with 9th v 8th.
So in summary, don't change the points system - but if you do then 40 points for 1st is the only way of doing it fairly IMHO.
|
|
|
|
Consistency is rewarded, but mediocrity is not.
The guy coming 10th every race will do better financially than the OBP guy, and that is before we even mention sponsors. The problem is that he isn't good enough to get a better result, so rightly gets punished for being consistently not good enough.
|
|
|
|
How about
1st - 50
2nd - 45
3rd - 42
4th - 40
5th - 38
6th - 36
7th - 34
8th - 33
9th - 32
10th - 31
and so on
That would give everyone points but still keep the advantage for the higher positions...
|
|
|
|
Let's look at the pros and cons:
Pros:
- Brings the game closer to real F1. It is the easyest and least gamechanging to implement and the most visible difference.
- Adds more spice to retention battles
- Is easy to implement
- Ends this thread until FIA changes it again
Cons:
- Messes up stats comparison.
- Someone has to do some codeing
- Does not change the game that much
At least this is what I have gathered from reading this forum. IMHO the longer the old scoring is used the bigger the dislike for it will be, because it is getting ancient.
I tried to introduce my nephwes (15 and 17) to this game but they did not pick it up aand said it's not F1 at all.
|
|
|
|
I wouldnt mind a bonus point for leading a lap and a bonus point for leading the most laps in the race.
That could create a stratagey, meaning some managers might adjust pit stratagies in an effort to lead one lap
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Jes Roth @ April 15th 2014,02:25:06 ) That could create a stratagey, meaning some managers might adjust pit stratagies in an effort to lead one lap
Yeah... 100 CT. It would become a complete farce.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Cale Murray @ April 14th 2014,13:30:16 ) No I don't agree with the points and you said the people against even agreed it made no difference at the top which is wrong.
I still have seen more reason have a different Point system to the 1 we have now.
Quote ( Luke Frost @ April 14th 2014,10:56:21 )
It can be changed, but wont be changed :)
The GPRO-Standings are calculated as the FIA-Regulations are: http://www.fia.com/resources/documents/471827260__2008_F1_sp...
Dead Heat, 25.) if two or more constructors or drivers finish the season with the same number of points, the higher place in the Championship (in either case) shall be awarded to:
a) the holder of the greatest number of first places,
b) if the number of first places is the same, the holder of the greatest number of second places,
c) if the number of second places is the same, the holder of the greatest number of third places and so on until a winner emerges.
d) if this procedure fails to produce a result, the FIA will nominate the winner according to such criteria as it thinks fit.
And there is one big reason why we wont change this system: I saw a championship decision somewhere else where both top managers finished with the same points. One got 2 wins and one got 9 wins. One of them was unlucky and had a random failure. Now guess, who got the champ and who not.
In summary, I agree with Stefan on this one.
this told me nothing .
Idem. This told me nothing.
Anyway without continous improvements there is no future or only decline (and this is truth for everythings).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Gordon Ashford @ April 14th 2014,21:09:19 ) Quote ( Jes Roth @ April 14th 2014,21:05:13 )
If you cannot do better than 10th and your opposition can get a 9th, does that not make them better than you?
If you finish three times 8th and the opposition finish only one time 7th and never 8th than you are better than the opposition. So why if you cannot do better than 10th and your opposition can get a 9th does that make them better than you?
IMO the point system should be change and the game would be nicer.
|
|
|
|
This game is a F1 simulation game, so I think that points will be adeguated as F1
1st 25
2nd 18
3rd 15
4th 12
5th 10
6th 8
7th 6
8th 4
9th 2
10th 1
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Marco Fantini @ April 15th 2014,15:11:47 ) This game is a F1 simulation game
I don't normally like to say it but GPRO is not F1 :-)
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Marco Fantini @ April 15th 2014,15:11:47 ) I think that points will be adeguated as F1
why do people make these suggestions and fail to provide a reason WHY it is better than the existing system? Please enlighten us why you or anyone would you want to fall 24 points behind the leader every race with a 10th place instead of only 9 with an 8th?
the current system works best, period. If you can't finish in the top 8 then you are ordered in terms of best finish.
Nascar system is not better than this.
Current F1 system is not better than this.
Average position is not better than this.
The only thing better than this is actually having LESS points places, not more or increasing the gap between leader and last place.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Matteo Bacchini @ April 15th 2014,15:03:55 ) If you finish three times 8th and the opposition finish only one time 7th and never 8th than you are better than the opposition. So why if you cannot do better than 10th and your opposition can get a 9th does that make them better than you?
That is a pointless argument as will always apply to whatever the cut off point for scorers is, unless you planning on giving points to at least 39 people every race.
If the top 15 score, then a person finishing once 15th finishes higher than person finishing 17 times in 16th. If the top 20 score, then a person finishing once in 20th finishes higher than a person finishing 17 times in 21st.
As has been covered at length throughout this thread, unless you support an "all score" type of system, that is not a valid point to change the scoring system as it always remains regardless.
Yes, you can argue about percentage of scorers per race and such like to debate if more should score, but the point about the person finishing just out the scoring positions will always remain.
Again, as has been well covered (I can feel Sion's blood pressure rising already), people know what the scoring system is and it is their job to manage their season based on that scoring system. They know what the cut off for scoring points is and it is their job to manager their season accordingly.
Changing the points could actually work against newbies and those struggling to retain as they won't be able to look at group histories to get a rough idea on how many points are needed for survival under a new scoring system.
|
|
|
|
But with points to 10th place, getting those few points to retain would be much easier.
/sarcasm.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Marco Fantini @ April 15th 2014,15:11:47 ) This game is a F1 simulation game, so I think that points will be adeguated as F1
From the Wiki (repeatedly)... As with all F1 based suggestions - the main argument against is simple. GPRO may be based on F1 in a very general sense, but that does not mean it should be expected to follow the F1 regulations. F1 rules and regulations are forever changing, which would mean large chunks of the game would need to be redesigned and re-coded each year. In a game like this, where consistency and analysis of fixed data streams is key - then large, sweeping changes would only frustrate managers.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Mark Pinnick @ April 15th 2014,15:41:07 ) But with points to 10th place, getting those few points to retain would be much easier.
no it won't....it would be the same as now, since players are sorted by position if they do not finish in the top 8 at all in a season....and if a 10th is good enough to retain, you still will....regardless of whether you have a point to show for it or not.
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Română
Italiano
Português
Português
Français
Polski
Русский
Български
Македонски
Српски
Nederlands
Vlaams
Suomi
Lietuvių
Čeština
Magyar
Eesti keel
Slovenčina
Türkçe
Ελληνικά
Hrvatski
Bahasa Melayu
Dansk
Pirate
