Quote ( Christoph Seifriedsberger @ August 13th 2012,15:45:42 )
To find the cut off point may not be easy, but as I said I believe the current system isn't far off.
And so no point tweaking something that does the job already. :)
Everyone knows what they need to do to retain and should plan accordingly. Anyone not doing so is failing as a manger. It's been said before, but someone finishing 9th place every race over someone that finishes 8th once and 40th the rest of the time is a bad manager. Both knew what they had to do to score points, and one didn't do that.
Anything overly rewarding consistency damages management options, and would take away from what is, first and foremost, a management and planning game, not a racing game.
Quote ( Kevin Parkinson @ August 13th 2012,15:37:08 )
You can live with it knowing, as you are a smart guy, that they aren't doing themselves any real benefits in the long term in most situations. :)
Questioning this of late to be honest. Im going to push quite a bit this season and I still will not promote. :) This game is getting tougher or I am getting worse. I really am not sure anymore.
I can live with both I would just prefer a system that allows a few more managers to score that is all :)
Edit: How that is achieved I have no idea. Alot more smarter people in this game than myself.
Quote ( Michael Keeney @ August 13th 2012,17:17:10 )
I can live with both I would just prefer a system that allows a few more managers to score that is all :)
This is fine for me and as I stated earlier I'm sure that a point scoring system could be worked out where more (10 or 12) people score points without changing the "balance" and some people may would get out more joy of it.
Having missed out on a full day of fun in this thread I figure I'll give one last example.
The effect of a change would be similar to what we saw in Elite on the first season after the experience change. Take a look at the history link on first page and compare season 30 to previous seasons. The change is entirely different but the effect is similar. More people scoring and points went all the way into the relegation zone. What we see in almost every other season of Elite is basically a gold medal system in regards to retention. You're sorted on best position alone, not points. It is somewhat counterintuitive to retain a group on 0 points, imho.
Looking through previous seasons, you would have to go to at least 15 scoring positions if not 20 to ensure that relegation in Elite is ordered by points rather than the single best performance. Lower leagues are much less extreme. Last few seasons for myself have shown relegation pretty consistently on 5-6 points. On many occasions with multiple managers hitting the same number and being ordered again by single best performance. Points limit for retention in pro and master is largely governed by how many are going for promotion, something that is not the case in Elite where managers aren't deliberately running at a lower pace.
Quote ( Pål Göran Stensson @ August 13th 2012,21:09:31 )
Lower leagues are much less extreme. Last few seasons for myself have shown relegation pretty consistently on 5-6 points.
Exactly and I think that's just fine.
Quote ( Pål Göran Stensson @ August 13th 2012,21:09:31 )
Points limit for retention in pro and master is largely governed by how many are going for promotion, something that is not the case in Elite where managers aren't deliberately running at a lower pace.
Whilst this is certainly true, that's by far not the only factor why it's almost always different in Elite. There are a lot more managers in Elite who usually deliberately relegate and less people competing leads to less people scoring. Then there is also the driver factor as managers who have been in Elite already don't have any OA restrictions which leads to a bigger OA gap from top to bottom as in other groups. And last but not least the higher the league you're in the more important are ALL aspects of the game to be competetive and you can trust me that a lot managers promoting from Master to Elite do neglect some aspects like CCP's, S&F, sponsors etc as otherwise they wouldn't be able to compete for promotion and those will get hit hard when racing with the best managers combined with those other issues (like driver OA).
So IMO Elite is a completely different case and as you pointed out yourself almost always 5-6 points are needed in Pro and Master (sometimes even more and sometimes less) to retain which seems quite reasonable and the majority probably can't be score in a single race. Those who can or even more in just one race are most likely capable of scoring even more points if needed, but may follow a different approach for whatever reason once they feel safe (and that's not a good idea anyway and they get punished for that in future seasons).
Of course, I wasn't trying to explain all the reasons why Elite is different. Just that the desired effect of the change shows similarities with what we've seen there for other reasons. For me, retention being challenged on points rather than single race performances is essential. We're not talking requiring to score 17 times nor 10 times nor even 5 times with a new model. However, for me, it should generally be more than a single result in 17 tries.
You also only need to go back to season 29 to see that 2/4 master groups retained people on 0 points and one of the other two had last retainee on 1 point and first relegator on 0 points. Checking the first 20 amateur groups in season 29 shows 2 groups with managers retaining on 0 points.
Conclusion is that it is happening at all levels where retention is required although not excessively often. However, to me, the problem isn't only the 0 point retainees but the single result effect overall.
Quote ( Pål Göran Stensson @ August 13th 2012,21:37:17 )
You also only need to go back to season 29 to see that 2/4 master groups retained people on 0 points
Well, being part of one of those groups and even the last one to retain let me tell you one thing. This was mainly caused by those managers promoting being quite a bit faster than the rest and because more than 4 managers have been fighting for promotion. So if you have the top 5 - 6 managers scoring in the majority of the races, there won't be much points for others (but that's not very often the case I think). And as for me, I felt safe after someone in front went in negative and I knew it would be really difficult for those behind me to get a good enough finish as they were either just too slow or didn't have the car / money left thus I didn't upgrade the one or two parts to push in the last race also. So it's also always the situation which defines whether someone is trying once more or not.
But you can't change the system based on such seasons as the opposite is also the case in different seasons (if I'm not mistaken someone ended up in the relegation zone even with a race win and I know for certainty that someone with a 2nd place finish relegated + a 9th place for that matter).
Averagely I think it's quite common that quite a few points are needed for retention and the most managers need to try more than once a season to score 5,6 or even more points which I believe is fair enough. Those who manage to score big with a single try most likely could score even more if they wanted so I don't see an issue if they retain without trying a second time to score. They decided to take a different approach for whatever reason and it will most likely hurt them in future seasons and they would most likely still retain if more than 1 result would be needed.
Edit: PS: I'm just discussing it further with you so you don't feel left out ;)
On the average instance, it is barely satisfactory. That leaves a lot of cases where it isn't. You just mentioned an example yourself, whenever there are more than 4 people fighting for promotion. The point system should be able to handle, preferably, all instances but at least everything but the edge cases. Elite is possibly one such edge case due to the particular dynamics only present there.
The thing is, the other end of the scale that you use as an example won't be much affected at all given the change is made properly. I'm pretty sure I saw a master relegator with a win at some point. This would happen with an extended point scoring system as well but not necessarily more frequently. Combining an extended scoring range with a slightly increased ratio between the top 3 or top 5 positions would accomodate both positions. Strengthening the value of a win while allowing retention battle to be more than the single result.
The funny thing is, that it would probably be quite easy to simulate this. Given the number of seasons played and the number of groups available you could crunch the numbers to find a proper compromise.
Anyways, its bedtime again. Time to let this thread rest for a few months again. It is like whack'a'mole to keep this one buried..
Quote ( Pål Göran Stensson @ August 13th 2012,22:57:27 )
Combining an extended scoring range with a slightly increased ratio between the top 3 or top 5 positions would accomodate both positions. Strengthening the value of a win while allowing retention battle to be more than the single result.
Yeah this is something I could live with although I have to say that it's often not a single race which decides. Even if a manager scored points in just a single race, he most likely tried more often than once which can be hardly called OBP then (and there are also a lot who score points more than once to get to the 5 or 6 points).
Quote ( Pål Göran Stensson @ August 13th 2012,22:57:27 )
The funny thing is, that it would probably be quite easy to simulate this. Given the number of seasons played and the number of groups available you could crunch the numbers to find a proper compromise.
That's true but I for one am way too lazy to check that and I'm not really bothered whether the system stays the same or changes. But I do believe (it's just my personal opinion and may be completely wrong) that if the admins wouldn't have wanted to encourage the OBP strategy (although it isn't really OBP in a lot of cases), they wouldn't have implemented favourite tracks :P
Hi guys I am fairly new to this game still and am coming up to have completed a seasons worth or racing in this game. I have been thinking about this points system since I joined and to me at least as a new rookie I feel it is not ideal especially with groups as large as they are. Now in the last half of last season (I joined mid season) I did actually manage to score points and was reasonably happy especially as I was still very much learning. This season however I feel I have a reasonable grip of how to play now and I think I have a reasonable driver (I believe much better than what I had last season) and yet I have only managed to get 1 point in the first race. In the other races I have only managed to come mid pack.
From my perspective I would much sooner either an F1 style points system where the top 10 or as we have pools of 40 drivers top 15-20 get points. Or my preferred where everyone racer gains points starting around 100 points for first and going back to 1 point for 40th. I understand concerns that giving out too many points will unbalance or maybe over balance the game but I can't see this can be true as there are so many real racing formats that utilise similar systems effectively. From the perspective of a new player too I would certainly be more engaged in the game if I knew I would be scoring points each race and that each position mattered overall. I think it would rank those of us in the mid and lower packs much better as it would reward both consistency end effort over those who get lucky for 1 or 2 races and get some decent points and come last every other. One other benefit for those starting the game will be to know better which kind of driver is the one to be looking for at they will have a higher points/ race than the others.
I understand based on conversations I have had on chat that it is unlikely that a change is going to happen and seeing this thread started in 09 and nothing has happened as far as I can see. I would still be one who would vote for a change to the system.
I am laughing so hard right now I can't see straight. Not at anything you said, Shawn, but at the fact that another guy here named Sion will be having convulsions when he sees this. Lying on the floor slobbering with his eyes rolled back in his head. };{D>
Seriously, though, when you get a TON of spare time, read all of these 66 pages plus one or two other threads on this topic. There is some interesting reading in there.
but I can't see this can be true as there are so many real racing formats that utilise similar systems effectively.
But none of these "Real racing formats" have such a promotion/relegation system as far as I'm aware. Also on top of this, I heavily doubt changing the points system will change anything anyway. As follows:..
I think it would rank those of us in the mid and lower packs much better as it would reward both consistency end effort over those who get lucky for 1 or 2 races and get some decent points and come last every other.
This is what is referred to as the One Big Push (OBP) strategy. And I honestly cannot think of a system that could in anyway deter that. You can award 100 points for a win and 1 point for 40th, and if one person manages to get 1 win, then that practically gets them ahead of the most consistent finishers in the mid pack (15-25th) for the season.
Secondly. using myself as an example - In season 30, I finished my first amateur season after promotion in 22nd position. 3 places above relegation and with an average of about 12th position per race. Any proposed system would've awarded me with a similar outcome but what people fail to look at was the financial gain I had of finishing that high up on average.
In that season alone, I earned 80 million, which has put me in the position I am now. Whereas the OBP strategy you suggest would more than likely put people in a position of struggling 2 seasons on.
My point is, Consistency IS thoroughly rewarded financially in this game and when you consider this to be a Financial and risk management game ahead of a racing management game, you can realise that the points system is the least of a players worries.
From the perspective of a new player too I would certainly be more engaged in the game if I knew I would be scoring points each race and that each position mattered overall.
I thoroughly understand this position, however such a practice 'could' mislead new players into thinking that they're doing everything "Right" and 3 or 4 seasons later wonder why they're never promoting. Though that is fully hypothetical.
I don't get why Jonathan got the thumb's down when he makes all the valid points.
And the financial gain he explained is much more beneficial on longer run; e.g. position 13th on end of season might be worse than pos #22 because you might have 30mil less, for a simple reason of ending 13th(needs more risks) due to higher points gain but lesser avg position.
my 2p in for good measure Obviously I'm speaking from a rookie point of view as it's the only one I have.
It's me first season and I'm doing ok so I do not personally see the need for a points change for myself. also retaining on no points is not an issue as with no points your place in the table is decided by your finishing positions.
The only reason I could see for changing anything is player retention in rookie. Joe blogs qualifies in 25th, finishes in 23rd and is sooooo far from even a glimmer of points he gets disheartened and leaves to find another game that agrees with him better.
If points were somehow changed to not upset the current balance (as I think there is nothing wrong with it) but to throw a bone to people further down the grid it might help keep players for a bit longer and give them a better incentive to improve
Maybe something like points for top 10-top 12 could address joe's problem, yeah. But if you go over and give points to too many there's that risk too that a point position becomes 'inflated', too easy to achieve - and then joe with 274 points starts comparing himself to Winner who has 32665, and quits the game anyway.
All in all, i think the points change would be good.. BUT i see where the problem is, we have 31 (now 32) seasons of an old points system, for history's sake it would be too hard to change. Hence it would THEN look like "GPRO is in fact.. F1" :)
Quote ( Thomas Wesker @ August 28th 2012,16:58:11 )
Quote ( Matt Kasar @ August 28th 2012,16:49:41 )
The only reason I could see for changing anything is player retention in rookie.
Everyone but the top 3 players retain in rookie with the rookie reset :)
you misunderstood, I said player retention meaning keeping the player playing the game, nothing to do with groups or levels
Quote ( Riley Morrell @ August 28th 2012,16:58:27 )
All in all, i think the points change would be good.. BUT i see where the problem is, we have 31 (now 32) seasons of an old points system, for history's sake it would be too hard to change. Hence it would THEN look like "GPRO is in fact.. F1" :)
I hear you and I'm probably wrong, a quitter is a quitter no matter how many points they get!
EDIT - I meant to quote jannes comment second here but my friend johnnie walker somehow intervened. my reply is for janne not ridley
Quote ( Adrian Summers @ August 28th 2012,05:16:44 ) Seriously, though, when you get a TON of spare time, read all of these 66 pages plus one or two other threads on this topic. There is some interesting reading in there.
Sorry for bringing up old discussions but it does not make mine and everyone else who had requested a change in this area any less valid. True I did not manage to read the whole thread (66 pages is a lot to read) but I did skim a few and pages and might look at a few more.
As Matt Kasar said above a change to the points system is really for us rookies to keep us new guys playing. I can't see myself slogging it out for many more seasons to race races and get nearly nothing out of it be it promotion or even points. I also understand the argument that there is a lot of history to this game and that guys do not ruin their stats history but that point alone should not stop progress as nothing would ever change.
This game is also made possible I would think mostly from the support of the players with some advertising and I can't see it being as well supported as it could be if you a have a) limited pool of players that can play at any one time as we have now and b) turning over a large proportion of your rookies due to lack of interest or possibility to advance. A change to the points system at least to me would likely improve this as there would be more to pay and play for.
I do not mean to come off as discounting your opinion Shawn, but I assure you that changing the point system to the current one in F1 is not the answer. If/When you begin to proceed into the upper classes, you would possibly understand that.
Nevertheless, I commend you for taking the time to properly address how you currently feel about this aubject as you have.
As Matt Kasar said above a change to the points system is really for us rookies to keep us new guys playing. I can't see myself slogging it out for many more seasons to race races and get nearly nothing out of it be it promotion or even points.
I really don't understand this view.
The main reasons for changing the point system given throughout this thread is so that relegation is decided on points, as any change would make very little difference at the top of any group. I disagree with that for the reasons I've stated in the past but I do understand that view.
This is a Rookie level manager showing how low the numbers of actual people racing in a Rookie group can be. It is not uncommon for people to sign up and never race or race once, and half of Rookie groups, if not more, are these people. They get replaced quickly with new people wanting to join, but it clearly shows that the number of participants actually putting any effort in to the game is much lower (at least half, IMO) in a Rookie group, so the percentage scoring is much higher than at any other level.
Unless you are advocating giving points to virtually ever Rookie manager that puts a bit of effort in, which is silly as makes them worthless, not an achievement at all, and not going to change their progress in the game as just as unlikely to promote and may even make them falsely believe they are doing OK by scoring, then the point system in Rookie, more than any other group, does reward a large percentage of the managers, particularly those that are doing OK.
Quote ( Kevin Parkinson @ August 29th 2012,09:22:35 )
Quote ( Shawn Sobey @ August 29th 2012,04:51:25 )
This is clearly not an issue in Rookie.
Furthermore, this thread was opened very recently... /gb/forum/ViewTopic.asp?TopicId=20747#scroll
This is a Rookie level manager showing how low the numbers of actual people racing in a Rookie group can be. It is not uncommon for people to sign up and never race or race once, and half of Rookie groups, if not more, are these people. They get replaced quickly with new people wanting to join, but it clearly shows that the number of participants actually putting any effort in to the game is much lower (at least half, IMO) in a Rookie group, so the percentage scoring is much higher than at any other level.
Unless you are advocating giving points to virtually ever Rookie manager that puts a bit of effort in, which is silly as makes them worthless, not an achievement at all, and not going to change their progress in the game as just as unlikely to promote and may even make them falsely believe they are doing OK by scoring, then the point system in Rookie, more than any other group, does reward a large percentage of the managers, particularly those that are doing OK.
I am in fact suggesting pints for all and why not? Just because there are not the full 40 people racing in every rookie group is not a reason in my opinion to not give points to all who race. In my group I have been averaging around 30 racers each race which is still a very large group to be fighting for the top 8 spots and does leave 22 non scorers. I do see how you want every points scoring finish to be special and that is a reasonable point to make. But it also is very much possible to be playing the game reasonably well and never score a single point and that person getting disheartened and stop playing. My suggesting of points for all finishers (they do have to finish and complete 75 % of the race like in most other categories) will likely encourage retention of players in rookie and remove this most of the problem of half full rookie groups.
English
Deutsch
Español
Română
Italiano
Português
Português
Français
Polski
Русский
Български
Македонски
Српски
Nederlands
Vlaams
Lietuvių
Čeština
Magyar
Eesti keel
Slovenčina
Türkçe
Shqip
Ελληνικά
Hrvatski
Bahasa Melayu
Dansk
Pirate
