*sam* Posted Jun 25, 2015, 11:23 am	Just letting you know that I have just added a hidden 'tiebreak' random number to league entries, which is created when the entry is made. This means that anyone scoring identical points in a league will be sorted on this random number rather than (as it was previously) being sorted according to who entered the league first.
*Brunwulf* Posted Jun 25, 2015, 3:46 pm	Isn't the obvious and fairest way to sort by number of 1st places- 2nd places- 3rd places etc as in most real leagues?
DirkNotSoGently Posted Jun 25, 2015, 4:13 pm	Obvious & fair - yes And very easy for a human mind to encompass & work out But you just try coding it!
*Brunwulf* Posted Jun 25, 2015, 4:55 pm	DirkNotSoGently said: Obvious & fair - yes And very easy for a human mind to encompass & work out But you just try coding it! OK- I take that point, and I don't know anything about coding. But, I do have a human mind (of sorts) and I would be more than happy to work out any tiebreakers and send the results to SAM or XMAN. After all, this being done 'properly' could be the difference between someone winning a Laser, or a Car Cannon (SS DR League running now) so such massive game changing scenarios really shouldn't come down to a hidden random. That goes for anything SAM and XMAN. One thing I unfortunately do have at the moment is lots of free time- so any human donkey work that you need doing- please ask me- I would love to help with anything I can.
*jimmylogan* Posted Jun 25, 2015, 6:17 pm	*Brunwulf* said: so such massive game changing scenarios really shouldn't come down to a hidden random. Isn't most of this game 'hidden random' anyway? :-) To hit, for example, and recruiting...
*Brunwulf* Posted Jun 25, 2015, 6:24 pm	*jimmylogan* said: *Brunwulf* said: so such massive game changing scenarios really shouldn't come down to a hidden random. Isn't most of this game 'hidden random' anyway? :-) To hit, for example, and recruiting... Kind of- but they are variables- I just think something so easy to properly work out like a league tiebreaker shouldn't be left to a dice roll
DirkNotSoGently Posted Jun 25, 2015, 6:28 pm	I kind of agree on the point that something as important as a league winner shouldn't be random However that's way better than being based on who registered first - so at least what's on offer here is an improvement
*Brunwulf* Posted Jun 25, 2015, 6:35 pm	DirkNotSoGently said: I kind of agree on the point that something as important as a league winner shouldn't be random However that's way better than being based on who registered first - so at least what's on offer here is an improvement Even who scored first is a better option? Or who was ahead after week 1 even?
DirkNotSoGently Posted Jun 25, 2015, 6:46 pm	*Brunwulf* said: DirkNotSoGently said: I kind of agree on the point that something as important as a league winner shouldn't be random However that's way better than being based on who registered first - so at least what's on offer here is an improvement Even who scored first is a better option? Or who was ahead after week 1 even? Again we're back to realities of computer systems - instead of making the decision based on just information available at the end of the league, those options would require that information to be stored for every entrant throughout the whole contest for reference in case of a tie-break Adding new data storage like that can be non-trivial
*The X Man* Posted Jun 25, 2015, 6:48 pm	*Brunwulf* said: OK- I take that point, and I don't know anything about coding. But, I do have a human mind (of sorts) and I would be more than happy to work out any tiebreakers and send the results to SAM or XMAN. I don't know a whole lot about coding myself. But I do get a better understanding of it with each meeting. Also, time needed to do some of these changes may outweigh any of its proposed benefits. Dirk said: Obvious & fair - yes And very easy for a human mind to encompass & work out But you just try coding it! Exactly *Brunwulf* said: After all, this being done 'properly' could be the difference between someone winning a Laser, or a Car Cannon (SS DR League running now) so such massive game changing scenarios really shouldn't come down to a hidden random. True, but it is a change that evens out any players chance and gives any player a fair shot at a prize or league title/badge. The old tiebreaker, IMO, was bad. Did it need to be changed, Yes. Was the change the best possible solution, No. But it is much better than what was currently used. The goal was to have a tiebreaker as fair as possible, especially to new players. All the vets know when signups are and that gave them an advantage before the league ever started its first race. *Brunwulf* said: That goes for anything SAM and XMAN. One thing I unfortunately do have at the moment is lots of free time- so any human donkey work that you need doing- please ask me- I would love to help with anything I can. Brun, I appreciate the fact you want to help. But there is no way, realistically, you could maintain constant up to date stats. You do remember me constantly prodding you for results of the 99 Open?? That was 2 races a week. We are talking about hundreds of weekly races with dozens and dozens of players and NPCs to research and calculate. Leave that headache where it is. Remember, tiebreakers are not always needed in these leagues, but they do occur. Since players cannot pre-calculate their final positions, this just may bring out some more competitive racing among the players. Maybe even some ruthless tactics during a race.... and thats where the fun will be!
*Brunwulf* Posted Jun 25, 2015, 7:44 pm	I think I didn't explain myself properly. I wasn't offering to keep upto date with every race of every day. I was simply suggesting that it is coded that when 2 or more players tie for a prize winning league position- top 3 only. No prizes are awarded. Then I could just simply look through each of the tied players results, and award points for each finish: 10 for win, 9 for second, 8 for 3rd etc. Most points wins the tiebreaker. Easy. 15 mins work. Gotta be better than a random dice roll or whatever, And would be needed what? 3 times a season max? Oh well- At least I offered to help- anything you need XMAN- just ask. Much love all, Brun.
*Bigspenner* Posted Jun 25, 2015, 8:04 pm	My logic says it should be based one of two ways, count back ie who was leading after the penultimate event and so forth back through the league or even better it should default to me even if I haven't entered that league.
*The X Man* Posted Jun 25, 2015, 8:26 pm	Like I mentioned Brun, It's not the best fix, but it was the easiest to do and better than what was in place. This may not even come into effect anytime this season, meaning ties for prizes or titles may not even happen. Yes, Brun, we do appreciate you and your offer to help. Just ride this wave out and see what really happens at the end before yelling the sky is falling Main focus now is working on the intercept fails. I have compiled data over the past month for Sam to review to determine the error. The same to be said for fixing second spawns during an encounter. Hopefully these won't take too long to resolve.
*Brunwulf* Posted Jun 25, 2015, 8:37 pm	THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING!!!! Oh no. My mistake- it was just XMAN being all god-like again! Just kidding XMAN I agree- far more important is fixing intercepts- as half the players in the game are itching for this to be sorted soon- and we all know why!
PA Racers Posted Jun 25, 2015, 8:52 pm	Why not settle a tie with a race to break the tie?
*The X Man* Posted Jun 25, 2015, 9:29 pm	That would be a good way PA, but you would win all the tie breaker races I think what is being overlooked here is that players wont be playing for the "Tie" score knowing they will win anyways. Instead, they will race to win outright to take the tiebreaker out of the equation. There will be more competitive racing, especially in the PVP oriented leagues. Meaning, a little more scratched paint and a few more bullet holes to match. As a result, you will see an increase in DNFs and more outright winners.
*Brunwulf* Posted Jun 25, 2015, 10:07 pm	*The X Man* said: That would be a good way PA, but you would win all the tie breaker races  I think what is being overlooked here is that players wont be playing for the "Tie" score knowing they will win anyways. Instead, they will race to win outright to take the tiebreaker out of the equation. There will be more competitive racing, especially in the PVP oriented leagues. Meaning, a little more scratched paint and a few more bullet holes to match. As a result, you will see an increase in DNFs and more outright winners. I dont think anyone has ever played for the Tie score anyway. Everyone plays to win- and in each event I don't believe any players are thinking about what happens in a tie. PA would probably win a Tie race off most of the time- but surely thats only even more of an argument for a better way of sorting than a random thingy- it means we all know that a Tie isn't enough- it would need to be backed up in a 1 on 1 event with whoever has matched ourselves throughout the league. And The elite players are certainly not guaranteed anything anyway. I have seen PA, Joel, Snipe- all beaten by lesser players in various events. OK- not often- but there is always that chance- far better than deciding any major results with random, unseen dice rolls surely?
*Snipe* Posted Jun 26, 2015, 5:13 am	I agree, there should be a tie breaking event. Make the winner actually win. I still think there should be - for a lack of better term - a Thunderdome, where there are ranked fights. Let there be a "Best of Evan" , give the older players something to fight over that does not involve getting newer players in the middle of it (unless they wanted to, of course). Have a ranking system - somewhat like the ladders. The top guy has to defend so many times a week to keep it. I wouldn't say to make them all to the death - but I think the option should surely be there. Not to de-rail anything.
Lord Foul Posted Jun 26, 2015, 6:00 am	Agree, silly code change. This would have been done years ago if was even a "slightly" better option. I've said and suggested it many times in the past, use the nascar method. It can't be that hard to code a simple check. I keep shaking my head even more at what I see and don't see every month in this game now.
*The X Man* Posted Jun 26, 2015, 6:06 am	I like these discussions with Brun. They remind me of the movie Rush Hour when Chris Tucker asks Jackie Chan, "Do you even understand the words that are coming out of my mouth!?!"
Racing Robbie Posted Jun 26, 2015, 9:48 am	Trying to think in terms of what is going on in the background – I guess that the league table is held as a table in a database, so would it be possible to expand the details it held so for each player in that league it records the position finished in each race entered – doesn’t need the indivual race details just the position. And then when there is a tie in points it compares the numbers in the 1st, 2nd etc columns and the first highest number wins. Depending on the software running the numbers - it shouldn’t be too hard to do the comparison side of things, might be difficult to create the routine that records the position.
Lord Foul Posted Jun 27, 2015, 6:26 am	Here's something I posted back in 2010 about this subject. Quote: If it's a tie, Have it go to player with the best average of their combined placing during the league. So if one player was 1st 3 out of 4 weeks, but it ended in a tie, then it goes to the player who was in first place the most during the league. This would be similar to how nascar does it, who had most first place finishes, then who had the most second place finishes etc.. If by some odd occurrence both players were tied each week for first place or were in first place an equal amount of times during the league, then it would go to the player who scored the the highest amount of points in a single league event. This would represent the player had fought/raced against the most live players to actually obtain the league points needed to place 1st.
DirkNotSoGently Posted Jun 27, 2015, 7:27 am	Lord Foul said: Here's something I posted back in 2010 about this subject. Quote: If it's a tie, Have it go to player with the best average of their combined placing during the league. So if one player was 1st 3 out of 4 weeks, but it ended in a tie, then it goes to the player who was in first place the most during the league. This would be similar to how nascar does it, who had most first place finishes, then who had the most second place finishes etc.. If by some odd occurrence both players were tied each week for first place or were in first place an equal amount of times during the league, then it would go to the player who scored the the highest amount of points in a single league event. This would represent the player had fought/raced against the most live players to actually obtain the league points needed to place 1st. Good suggestions - but of course neither one prevents the possibility of an edge-case where there is *still* a tie I work as an analyst for a major investment bank - and any suggestion still returning the chance of the same problem would be dismissed out of hand What we need is a simple, easy to implement solution, which removes any chance of a tie - while not *great*, Sam's fix does meet that criteria - even if only as an interim measure while something better is considered
NotSure Posted Jun 27, 2015, 2:54 pm	Dirk, can I use your quote when dealing with my operations team? "... any suggestion still returning the chance of the same problem would be dismissed out of hand" Brilliant! I know too well where you are coming from on this. That said, what if SAM's patch was to remain AND we were able to add Lord Foul's recommendation? As for the coding, I guess I don't understand the architecture sufficiently to comment other than to say ANYTHING can be coded provided there is enough time, will, and resources. Not sure any of those attributes apply to this situation. Cheers
*Brunwulf* Posted Jun 27, 2015, 3:36 pm	Lord Foul said: Here's something I posted back in 2010 about this subject. Quote: If it's a tie, Have it go to player with the best average of their combined placing during the league. So if one player was 1st 3 out of 4 weeks, but it ended in a tie, then it goes to the player who was in first place the most during the league. This would be similar to how nascar does it, who had most first place finishes, then who had the most second place finishes etc.. If by some odd occurrence both players were tied each week for first place or were in first place an equal amount of times during the league, then it would go to the player who scored the the highest amount of points in a single league event. This would represent the player had fought/raced against the most live players to actually obtain the league points needed to place 1st. Yep- That's more or less what I was trying to say. A few months ago, we were all very grateful for anything SAM did to keep this game going as we all knew he wasn't making much out of it. With the influx of new players, and the CHR profits, the "that's too difficult to implement" line just doesn't ride now. (I will now duck down behind the parapet, and await the tirade!)
DirkNotSoGently Posted Jun 27, 2015, 5:37 pm	NotSure said: As for the coding, I guess I don't understand the architecture sufficiently to comment other than to say ANYTHING can be coded provided there is enough time, will, and resources. Not sure any of those attributes apply to this situation. Agreed - anything at all *can* be coded - but to Brun's point, there seems to have been a point where hope for bug fixes and enhancements was all but lost. In that context, I see Sam's current code change as a simple improvement to the status quo - not perfect, agreed - but the man hours involved in coding one of the more complex solutions (fairer though they clearly are) may not be forthcoming
*The X Man* Posted Jun 27, 2015, 5:52 pm	Dirk understands, so at least I know I am not the only one. As for Brun, I think I will have better luck talking to his doggie first, then have him translate it to Brun for me... minus the remote.
*Brunwulf* Posted Jun 27, 2015, 6:01 pm	WOOF, WOOF, WOOF, WOOF, WOOF. Ah, OK - I get it now.