Race Points

did we decide yet?

Nope. Kinda fizzled out but we really do need to decide.

Is the plan to implement this system with Season 2 or are the points for the F-class tourney going to be redone and then we'll use it for this season? I don't think it's fair to implement a new point system starting mid season, whether it's 1 tourney in or 3.

My plan was to go back and re-apply the system to the results of the first Tourney (from a Season Standing point). The first Tourney was a bit of a cluster f#ck at the time but the final standings of that event will stand as is. Meaning if you got 6th place, you will keep your 6th place finish.

I would just go back and re-apply the new point system to the finished standing of the 1st Tourney. It will not effect your overall placement for the season. and we would move forward with this point system for the rest of this season.

I thin that is for the best. Our old point system is really outdated now that we are getting such large numbers.

Definitely think we need to implement it this season, and going back and applying it towards the last tourney is the easiest way.

I just wanted to make sure that if a new system was put in place that it was applied fairly and I think Zak's way of doing it will be best.

This is my final idea for points... The idea is you get a point "boost" for being in that top [_] spot, whether it is a top 10, top 5, top 3.

1 - 25
2 - 22
3 - 20
4 - 17
5 - 16
6 - 14
7 - 13
8 - 12
9 - 11
10 - 10
11 - 8
12 - 7
13 - 6
14 - 5
15 - 4
16 - 3
Attempt to Race and Fail - 1

i think its the most fair way we can do this...

S7 Wiggles78 wrote:

i think its the most fair way we can do this...

What about the guys who raced but had to miss the last one or too... they should atleast get 1 point.

To compare... this is the last event standing before and then the new points
Final Results
113 - Wiggles - 146
112 - Interseptor - 127 (Attempted to Play Points)
98 - Epic - 122
94 - Apex - 119
84 - Coolhand - 102
82 - Kenny - 101
82 - Atrum - 98
81 - Pooty Poo - 100
66 - RacecarDriver - 79
66 - Benji - 80
64 - Riff Raff - 77 (or 65 if we used the "attempted to play" points)
52 - OC - 62


As you can see very little difference... however, someone like Kenny or Pooty would have gained more for their Podium finish and Benji would get the edge due to his Top 5 finish

So are we using the above system or one of the ones Zak posted in his thread:

https://sacredseven.forumotion.net/t4086-points-poll-vote-now

We need to decide fast since the tourney is tonight.

S7 SockPuppet wrote:So are we using the above system or one of the ones Zak posted in his thread:

https://sacredseven.forumotion.net/t4086-points-poll-vote-now

We need to decide fast since the tourney is tonight.

Never saw that thread

Though i think what i came up with tonight is a little better and much easier math for me to handle on the fly

Here's is the numbers for each way and how the points would have ended up....
Mine - A - __B__ - C - Tourney
146 - 161 - 112 - 167 - 113 Wiggles
127 - 152 - 102 - 152 - 112 (102) Interseptor
122 - 131 - _94 - 134 - _98 Epic
119 - 125 - _90 - 129 - _94 Apex
102 - 101 - _78 - 101 - _84 Coolhand
101 - 103 - _77 - 103 - _82 Kenny
100 - _96 - _75 - _96 - _81 Pooty
_98 - _94 - _75 - _94 - _82 Atrum
_80 - _71 - _59 - _67 - _66 Benji
_79 - _69 - _59 - _65 - _66 Racecar
_77 - _67 - _57 - _64 - _64 Riff Raff
_65 - _57 - _49 - _58 - _54 Riff Raff with Attempt points
_62 - _52 - _45 - _45 - _52 OC


I think A and C are very similar and both give WAY too many points for being in the front, and B resulted in 2 different ties.... I think my system is the right balance, and will make every spot important, whether you're fighting for the win or 5th or even 10th...

Me no lika da point deviation.

I'm fine with either Wiggles' system or system 3. I just want a point setup that has a difference in points between 16th and DNF/fail to finish. I also think that if you don't or can't finish a race you get the 1 point vs the points for the last place available. For example, if you total your car and there's 10 racers you get 1 point, not the points for a 10th place finish. This would be the same if say your connection drops for whatever reason.

S7 Epic wrote:Me no lika da point deviation.

what exactly dont you like about it?

i think i explained my reasoning behind the bumps in the "levels"

This isn’t my fight, as I don’t race with you all, but have you ever thought of having an algorithm or formula for your points? With a possibility of 16 racers and no set minimum, it’s going to swing a lot throughout the year. If you only have 8 racers for one race, and then have 16 for the next, those who always finish at the end or middle of the pack are going to cause a lot of movement. I would fear that what you might set up is that for anyone who is not constantly in the top half of the leaderboards to have no reason to keep playing after they miss a race or two.

I know a formula makes it seem complicated, but it really doesn’t have to if you have some sort of sliding scale with simple multipliers. Anyhow, it’s something to think about in the future if a fixed point system doesn’t seem to pan out.

My 2 cents just to stir the pot and get you thinking of different avenues.

~mrmiller

S7 mrmiller wrote:This isn’t my fight, as I don’t race with you all, but have you ever thought of having an algorithm or formula for your points? With a possibility of 16 racers and no set minimum, it’s going to swing a lot throughout the year. If you only have 8 racers for one race, and then have 16 for the next, those who always finish at the end or middle of the pack are going to cause a lot of movement. I would fear that what you might set up is that for anyone who is not constantly in the top half of the leaderboards to have no reason to keep playing after they miss a race or two.

I know a formula makes it seem complicated, but it really doesn’t have to if you have some sort of sliding scale with simple multipliers. Anyhow, it’s something to think about in the future if a fixed point system doesn’t seem to pan out.

My 2 cents just to stir the pot and get you thinking of different avenues.

~mrmiller

we basically did something to that effect with F3... its was a dynamic scale based on F3's lobby point system

1 - 10
2 - 7
3 - 5
4 - 4
5 - 3
6 - 2
7 - 1
8 - 0

it always had 0 for last

1 - 9
2 - 6
3 - 4
4 - 3
5 - 2
6 - 1
7 - 0

etc

unfortunately there are not visible points in Forza 4.... and we a like to differentiate last from didnt race

In response to what Matt said about a sliding scale, I'll reintroduce the comment I posted on the F-Class tourney thread:

S7 SockPuppet wrote:I was looking around for point systems and came across one that has a sliding point system depending upon how many starters there are for a race. The scale would take into account if players drop for a race or two or if someone shows up late to the tourney.

My only suggestions would be to add 2 points to every place so that last place would get 2 points instead of 0. Then we could use the 1 point for participation, which still grants last place one point over the DNF racer(s). Here's the link to the scale:

http://www.score-international.com/points/chart.aspx

It was also pointed out that instead of adding 2 points to last place we could slide the scale to score as though there were two more starters, which would give last place 2 points and it would adjust the points for all positions accordingly. Ultimately this is the system that I would like most, but it didn't seem to get any play when I last introduced it.

Part of the reason I like a set point system is that we can use it for both the Tourney and the Season Standings. See, the Season Standings are applied after every Tourney and have to account for anyone who has already raced in the season, even if they only showed up for the first Tourney. A sliding scale would not be fair since some Tourneys would be worth more points based off how many showed up.

I don't mind using a sliding scale for the Tourneys but I still want a set scale that everybody can agree upon for the overall Season Standings.

As for the numbers that Wiggles suggested, I am not a fan of the point deviation either. It's just not normal. Pretty much every racing organization uses a system similar to the 3 choices we have up for a vote now. I don't want to over complicate anything if we don't have to.

I am going to be on as early as I can this evening. Anyone who wants to discuss it before the Tourney should be there. We will discuss what we think and come up with an official answer.

This meeting will take place at 7:30 pm tonight (1 hour before the Tourney).

S7 Wiggles78 wrote:

S7 Epic wrote:Me no lika da point deviation.

what exactly dont you like about it?

i think i explained my reasoning behind the bumps in the "levels"

I don't feel the deviation between the places reflects the achievement fairly. The distribution should be a curve, yours is jagged.

Point difference -

++++++
++++
+++
++
+
etc.

Yours is more like.

+++
++
+++
++
++
+
+

I feel like, in reality, drivers that will only be competing for places like 4th/5th overall get a bigger point differential than the place deserves, just for being position 5, 10, etc. I'm aware that there are a few bands of us in regards to race pace and I think having a system that is also in bands, like yours, doesn't reward consistency as much as it should.

Like I said, not my argument, but having the different races in a season being worth different amounts does not mean it’s not fair. Finishing first still means you have more points added to your total over anyone else. I’m not talking sliding scale, but a true formula. I’m just thinking about the guys further down the ladder, as a 6th place finish in a 8 man race getting the same amount of points as a 6th place finish in a 16 man race seems bad for the guy finishing 6th, but great for the one finishing “next to last”. And why shouldn’t a first place finish be rewarded more points based on the number of challengers? Just throwing it out there for future thought.

~mrmiller

Well then use your logic and make a points system that reflects this

Average Finishes
2.57 Wiggles
4.14 Interseptor (5.57 with DNS)
4.57 Epic
4.71 Apex
6.14 Coolhand
6.29 Atrum
6.43 Kenny
6.57 Pooty
8.57 Racecar
8.57 Benji
8.85 Riff Raff (10.29 with DNS)
10.57 OC

cause none of the choices awarded atrum's consistency and we definitely don't have anything that punishes interseptor for not being able to race twice

S7 Epic wrote:

I don't feel the deviation between the places reflects the achievement fairly. The distribution should be a curve, yours is jagged.

Point difference -

++++++
++++
+++
++
+
etc.

Yours is more like.

+++
++
+++
++
++
+
+

I feel like, in reality, drivers that will only be competing for places like 4th/5th overall get a bigger point differential than the place deserves, just for being position 5, 10, etc. I'm aware that there are a few bands of us in regards to race pace and I think having a system that is also in bands, like yours, doesn't reward consistency as much as it should.

I agree with epic. I'm a fan of the options interseptor listed.

Also, no sliding scale. It just complicates things and is not very reasonable in a multi event season.