PRS

mepbmlist
#1

Mike was right: we've been through all this before,
but, since there's a dead horse in the road...

Brian Mason's point:
  >I am
responsible for an astronomical observing program.. If
we were to give any sort of "success rate" to the
observers there
would be a dis-incentive to observe the difficult
objects.

recommends Brad Brunet's proposed PRS, from Bree 13.
It's pretty simple:

% games completed
+ % team wins
+ MVP reward
+ comparison of VP score to your nation in past games

Thus, you can get a great rating even playing Rhun. To
do so, you need to play the game through and boost
your teammates to victory. Not a bad measurement.

It'd be even better if VP's were adjusted to Fred's
system. Fred points out that current VP's are fickle
-- gold reserves can change drastically in a given
turn, for instance. So he proposed:

1 point for every military battle your army wins

against an enemy army.
1 point for every enemy pop center your army captures.
1 point for every enemy character you assassinate.
1 point for every enemy pop center your emissaries
influence away.
1 point for every artifact your mages pick up

That can be tweaked (I'd keep chr strength and total
pc development in the VP's, since one use they have
now is a measure of relative nation power), but the
idea is sound.

Long email, but actually a simple system to reward
players who stay in the game, help their teammates to
victory, and do relatively well with their nations.

Dan

···

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools

#2

Mike was right: we've been through all this before,
but, since there's a dead horse in the road...

It's not dead, just realllllyyyyyyy lame.

And, there were so many against it or indeferent about
it before, that it got tossed up on the shelf for a
year. Maybe we can finally kill the lame horse this
time around.

recommends Brad Brunet's proposed PRS, from Bree 13.
It's pretty simple:

% games completed
+ % team wins
+ MVP reward
+ comparison of VP score to your nation in past
games

Still, rewards greedy play. Punishes good team play.
Rewards careful selection of positions and games.
Fails to punish drops. Relies on voting system that
few will bother with.

Thus, you can get a great rating even playing Rhun.

Sure, if you go FP, stay home, do nothing but place
and improve pops, horde gold, train characters, and do
a host of other things that will keep you off the DS
radar.

In short, as the Rhun, you can do well, but only if
you are a very sucky player.

To
do so, you need to play the game through and boost
your teammates to victory. Not a bad measurement.

Or, keep your head down long enough for the truly good
players to win the game for you while you play
selfishly and tentativly.

>1 point for every military battle your army wins
against an enemy army.
1 point for every enemy pop center your army
captures.
1 point for every enemy character you assassinate.
1 point for every enemy pop center your emissaries
influence away.
1 point for every artifact your mages pick up

And the Dun player that sits back from the front,
shipping supplies to allies, doing ScoChars and LATs,
transferring pops to allies in need, getting
emissaries whacked when they try to InfOther away an
enemy pop.

This system is "okay" compared to the current "horrid"
system, but it still fails to reward all aspects of
great team play.

Long email, but actually a simple system to reward
players who stay in the game, help their teammates
to
victory, and do relatively well with their nations.

Dan

I'm with you right up to the "do relatively well with
their nations". I was in a 1650 game where the
Easterlings got truly slammed by DS assassins. I'm
talking 5 characters left at one point. Few pops, few
armies, few victories.... HOWEVER, is utter refusal to
drop remained a thorn in the DS side. It was their
plan to single out nation by nation, picking on that
one nation to the point that the game was "no fun" and
the player dropped. Too bad for them that they picked
Easterlings first, and that player absolutly refused
to drop... By the time they gave up trying to annoy
him out of the game, Angmar and Mirkwood was ours. We
took Ithil, Morannon, East Mordor.....

That Easterlings player was one of the biggest reasons
we one, but ANY ranking system would have said that he
did poorly with his nation.

You simply can't measure how well anyone did with
their mation, and any attempt to will only encourage
bad play as people try to get a good score instead of
a fun and challenging game.

Darrell Shimel

···

--- D N <nanooknw@yahoo.com> wrote:

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools