Zug um Zug Europa 15. Jubiläum Zug um Zug Europa 15. Jubiläum


Forum » GoF Competitive Play - English » Points System for GOF
Anzeigen: Heutige Nachrichten 
Senior Member

Nachrichten: 120
July 2004
Points System for GOF Mon, 29 December 2008 23:02
There has been some discussion in the GOF lobby about the need for a new points system. This thread is to solicit ideas for how the scoring should work.

Under the current system, each player is awarded/deducted points relative to how he/she does against each of the other 3 players. In a typical situation, the player who finishes 2nd earns a few pts, the player who finishes 3rd loses a few pts, and the 4th place finisher gets badly punished. It seems to me that there is soemthing fundamentally wrong with this scoring system. A 4-player GOF game is not 3 separate 1-on-1 games against 3 separate players; it is a single game, in which all players are trying (or should be trying) to win. This often requires a substantial amount of "team play." For instance, if I'm in second place, I might pass up a chance to win the hand because, if I win the hand, I will end the game with myself in 2nd place. Other players in this situation will "play for second" -- ending the game and earning the certain points, rather than keeping the game going & risking a 3rd or 4th place finish. Sometimes people even play for 3rd on the theory that 3rd is better than 4th. The current scoring system actually encourages playing for 2nd or 3rd, even though it's absolutely not the way the game should be played.

When I play GOF with friends (not online), there is no 2nd, 3rd, or 4th. There is a winner and 3 losers. As a result, the games are very hard-fought with lots of team play. I can see giving some sort of award for 2nd place, if only because it would give the 3 losing players some reason to keep fighting in a game where 1 player is far out in the lead. But I strongly disagree with the idea that there should be a distinction between 3rd and 4th. Yet, the fact is, finishing 3rd doesn't hurt you very much under the present scoring system. But finishing 4th really kills you. If someone is really focused on his/her pts, there is often every incentive to play for 3rd.

If I were King (or at least King of DOW), I would change the scoring system so that only the 1st place finisher actually gets points. There would be a slight punishment for 2nd place -- about equivalent to the punishment currently allotted to 3rd place. And there would be absolutely no distinction between 3rd and 4th place. They would both lose exactly the same number of pts. I don't pretend that this is a perfect scoring system but I think it would be an improvement over the present one. It would be interesting to see other ideas people have about how to change the scoring system to discourage playing for 2nd and 3rd. Maybe if we get enough general support for this idea, DOW will take notice and make some changes to its scoring system. And if they do take notice and change the system, maybe they can also get rid of that stupid one-card rule that everyone hates.
Lovely man
Senior Member

Nachrichten: 1496
June 2007
Re:Points System for GOF Tue, 30 December 2008 04:47
nice to read you Sol... Smile
I agree with you, just to defend the fun of this game...
the winner might be the winner with the cards that the shuffle gived , being smart, doing the effort, and also depending on the others...

The point system should not allowed a speculation on points....

Think about the absolut beginner at the dow site...
how many have join the site and left before they understood what the topic was???

then, after you find a kind of club between the "good" players...
Ok, some are really good, some others are always having dust in the eyes....

lets play the same rules: no possibility to fake!

If you did a mistake, it is a mistake... no worries with that for someome who is learning...
Or there is an emergency, you quit for an emergency

In fact, with the actual system, we get phobic!

play 30 minutes with some people for a fake result: you get hungry, because desappointed.!!!

Let's make it shinny!!!
Lovely man Solinsf supporter


[Aktualisiert am: Tue, 30 December 2008 18:30]

Senior Member
T2R World League 4th Champion

Nachrichten: 316
January 2006
Re:Points System for GOF Tue, 30 December 2008 13:22
Yep, you are right solinsf:
For explanation:

The ELO score is based on a 2 player system.

For a use in GOF it works by comparing your place with the place of each other player.

All players have 1500 points. You are player1.

If you are 1st:
You won against player2: + 4pts.
You won against player3: + 4pts.
You won against player4: + 4pts.
So you get 12 ELO-pts.

If you are 2nd:
You lost against player2: - 4pts.
You won against player3: + 4pts.
You won against player4: + 4pts.
So you get 4 ELO-pts.

If you are 3rd:
You lost against player2: - 4pts.
You lost against player3: - 4pts.
You won against player4: + 4pts.
So you lose 4 ELO-pts.

If you are 4th:
You lost against player2: - 4pts.
You lost against player3: - 4pts.
You lost against player4: - 4pts.
So you lose 12 ELO-pts.

Can you publish the formular DOW ?

Seems that the GOF ELO is not similar to TTR.
The TTR system is smarter.

I played a game where i got 4th.
One player was 80 pts below my score.
One player was 170 pts below my score.
One player was 180 pts below my score.

Couldn't believe i lost 23 pts. Pretty hard when you imagine that you can lose max 24 pts in one game.

[Aktualisiert am: Tue, 30 December 2008 13:55]

Junior Member

Nachrichten: 2
January 2006
Re:Points System for GOF Tue, 30 December 2008 17:11
I for one definitely thinks there needs to be a change. Solins way sounds good. I have thought of a different option, and that is that there is only the winner who will collect point(s). The other three players gain nothing but there is a twist. For every accumulated 3rd or 4th game you lose, you lose a point(s). Maybe this way could use a little polishing and I'm not saying it is perfect but one good benefit I believe is that it would diversify the players a lot more than the present system with some players only playing against certain others( high ranked playing only with other high ranked ). If these players enjoy only playing with these certain players, then it can still be done if they want with my proposed option. But let there be no doubt, something has to be done and I hope dow addresses this issue, and rather quickly before it starts running players away from this game.
Senior Member

Nachrichten: 120
July 2004
Re:Points System for GOF Tue, 30 December 2008 18:31
Agreed, Goscha. The system unfairly punishes the 4th place finisher and unfairly rewards 2nd and 3rd, even though all 3 players lost. There is a running joke among some players: "Play for 1st, finish 4th." That is, if you pass up a chance to play for 2nd, you run the risk of ending up 4th and being severely punished in the points system. This is totally unfair, and actually encourages players to do something that, outside the context of the point system, could only be characterized as bad play.

Games are for fun but the whole thing that makes them fun is that everyone is trying to win. The GOF scoring system actually discourages players from trying to win. Worse yet, it creates games in which different players have different agendas. There is nothing more annoying than playing for first by keeping another player alive, only to have that player turn around and play for third later on in the game.

No matter how the points system works, I am convinced there are many players who don't even pay attention to the score but just view each hand as an individual game in itself. These players will continue to "go out" even if it means ending the game and finishing 3rd. But at the very least, changing the scoring system would end, or greatly reduce, the practice of consciously playing for 2nd or 3rd. The point of a card game is to try to win. If you don't win, you lose.
Senior Member

Nachrichten: 561
December 2006
Re:Points System for GOF Sun, 11 January 2009 10:39
Hmm, interesting thoughts. Even I havent played GOF much, I'd still like to say my opinion.

Firstable, the suggestion is good, I see your point, but there are some things I was wondering.

1. This would not be a problem, but I guess average of ELO would go down, and much, people would have 50% chance to lose points, and 25% chance to win. (Now excepting that second place doesnt bring or take points).

2. The system is based by rankings, and If you are lets say 1250-player in a game with three 1700-players, and end up second, I would call that good playing (also amazing luck always possible).
But after that second place, you would get almost nothing... doesnt sound very encouraging to low rated players (like me, yes, i have here personal interests).

I guess whole system is based on, that if you are lower rated, its easy to get score, and if you are higher ranked, its hard to get more score.

At least I can honestly say, that my tactique in games, is play with 1500 and 1600 players and even I would end up 3rd, I get points.

This would mean that, it was very hard to me get points in future, becuase if all would get points with same way, the distance between tops and low rateds would be harder to pass.
(Of cource score would matter, but think difference between getting points from 3rd or losing from 3rd...)

Thats why I beleave its good to have ranking system which gives advantage to low rateds. (Its same in ttr, once I was second in multi, and lost score...)

I guess the main problem here is, that some play second and third?
Thats question of attitude, not rules or ranking system.
Many tops here dislike those 2nd players, so make a topic "2nd players - avoid these"
If you get your name on the list, players who all wants to play for win, know to not let them play with them.

EDIT: When I told this about Juuco, he also gave an idea.
The score/rank would be counted from winning percent. So if you are second in 100 games in a row, it wouldn't still be so good, but if you win 15 from 20, rank would be quite good. So only first places would give you score. Maybe 1-4 score, depending how much better ranked your opponents are.
This would be pefect solution for those who think only winning should matter.
2 choices with this:
-Only winning matters even you would lose 90% of games (this is good if you play much)
-Rank will be calculated from winning percent

Only one bad thing about this (even thought this might be in every possibilities) is, that rank would have to be deleted, and all started from same score again, because it wouldnt be fair, that some players have got good score, in time when it was easier.
But Im sure most of you, who want change, wouldn't want to do this and lose their score/rank.



[Aktualisiert am: Sun, 11 January 2009 16:28]

Vorheriges Thema:Gof Micmac
Nächstes Thema:GOF Team Cup 2009 Rules
Gehen Sie zum Forum: