Smart Scoring

Unknown

After a few months, I've decided to stop being lazy along enough to throw up this thread. The idea was from HailMary who is on MPQ sabatical at the moment (probably because they believe (correctly/incorrectly) that they are smarter than most of us). Feel free to PM HailMary with lots of questions. No nudes (sorry TU1).

I'm not the best to explain this, but essentially the idea is have a more uniform scoring system. As most of us are aware, certain time slices have higher scores than other. This system would address this issue. It also has some other benefits as well.

Bascially, for individuals in PVP, it means if someone wins by 1 or 1000 points, they get a base set of points, say 500 points (or something similar to this) for their season points. Second place, 499, etc. The total of individuals' Smart Score points would be tabulated to determine the alliance's score for that PVP to deteremine placement.

Alliance scores work similarly. In conjuction with individual smart scoring, alliance scores would be calculated the same way after each PVP. So if an Alliance got 1st, they'd get a base set of say 20,000 points, 2nd 19,999 points, etc. This way Season Alliance scores are done by alliances, not players. So if a player leaves at the end of a season, it does not affect the season score. This should result in less player swapping or alliances kicking members at the end of the season.

Full disclosure, I do not pay full attention, so it's possible I've gotten some/most of the details of the Smart Scoring system incorrect.

Unknown

Criticisms:
1. This rewards players in later brackets the same as early brackets in terms of scoring. People who play more in harder brackets are less rewarded than those who play less. While we already have that with bracket rewards, it seems silly to compound the error.
2. This dulls competition even more. When you get to the top 1%, it can be a real competition to see who is better, and by how much.
3. Luck of bracketing (or team coordination) becomes a bigger factor. Eg, if somehow all 20 members of an alliance ended up in the same bracket, the best they could do is 1st - 20th, meaning they would be beat by another alliance where every member placed 10th in the bracket. Getting top 2 is an order harder than top 5, which is an order harder than top 25, etc...
4. This seems to reward teams that are worse than the current best. What is the intended benefit of this system? How is it trying to level out the playing field? Is it purely for alliance ranking?

Spoit

Maybe if they fixed death sharding, but right now? No, just....no.

hex706f726368

Spoit wrote:

Maybe if they fixed death sharding, but right now? No, just....no.

This! Sharding creates too much disparity between scores needed to top a bracket. Smart scoring would have to be accompanied by a Sharding change that created a more even distribution of scores. I don't see that happening as I think D3 likes not scaring off the noobs right away.

Unknown

hex706f726368 wrote:

Spoit wrote:

Maybe if they fixed death sharding, but right now? No, just....no.

This! Sharding creates too much disparity between scores needed to top a bracket. Smart scoring would have to be accompanied by a Sharding change that created a more even distribution of scores. I don't see that happening as I think D3 likes not scaring off the noobs right away.

oh god. The top 10 alliances in PVP would turn into all noobs winning with 200 points. Have you looked at the heroics top 10 rosters? They just give them the wins with level 10 guys, lets not pvp end up that way too!

JamieMadrox

I was there when this was originally conceived in HailMary's brain-womb and it was like this:

• Everyone still plays for points like they do now, but your points only matter for the event's individual placement rewards and progression rewards in both the event (assuming they fix them) and the season.
• Alliance event placement, personal season placement, and alliance season placement are all dependent on your SmartScore.
• Your SmartScore is based on your placement in the event. 1st gets 500 points, 500th gets 1 point.
• Alliance SmartScore is all of your alliance members' SmartScores for the event added together. Alliance placement rewards for the event are based on this.
• A player's season placement is based on their SmartScores from each event added together.
• An alliance's season placement is based on their alliance's SmartScores from each event added together.
• Ties are broken using points (still tracked as a separate stat).

Unknown

As somebody who fairly consistently finishes in the top 50, but doesn't necessarily do it with 1K+ points, I like the idea. It would make the season placement rewards actually attainable for me, instead of just conceding the fact that I won't place above 200.

Unknown

Jamie Madrox wrote:

I was there when this was originally conceived in HailMary's brain-womb and it was like this:

• Everyone still plays for points like they do now, but your points only matter for the event's individual placement rewards and progression rewards in both the event (assuming they fix them) and the season.
• Alliance event placement, personal season placement, and alliance season placement are all dependent on your SmartScore.
• Your SmartScore is based on your placement in the event. 1st gets 500 points, 500th gets 1 point.
• Alliance SmartScore is all of your alliance members' SmartScores for the event added together. Alliance placement rewards for the event are based on this.
• A player's season placement is based on their SmartScores from each event added together.
• An alliance's season placement is based on their alliance's SmartScores from each event added together.
• Ties are broken using points (still tracked as a separate stat).

What JM said. Basically, it's a fairer scoring system that balances out some time slices having significantly higher scoring than others.

It also makes winning (placement) more important that inflated scoring. In other words, it's more important that you win than how you win.

Unknown

I think I like this idea, even though it would probably mean my beloved slice 3 would get invaded by the other slices as people aim for higher placement.

Trisul

I generally like the idea, but bracketing MMR manipulation could potentially ruin it for people... though that's probably not any worse than it is now.