Forum
Only first place scores? Bad Idea
|
RozaRay wrote
at 1:10 AM, Saturday September 22, 2007 EDT
Several people on the forums have been proposing that scoring be made so that only first place wins any points. The argument is that this will make people play for first. What are you thinking???
If first place is the only one to score, than if you don't think you are going to get first, you are going to flag as soon as possible. You will play for second to try and minimize your losses It will definitely not promote people playing for first. Bad idea... Scoring should be more distributed so that players have incentive to move up in rank. A player in 4th should want to try to get to 3rd. Right now, if they try to fight for it, they are going to end up losing more points because their ante is going primarily to the 1st place player. Points should be given out so that 1st-4th gain, with 1st gaining more than 2nd, etc. 5th -7th should lose points since they were the obvious losers of the round. Currently, 1st and 2nd gain while 3rd-7th lose points (generally). No one can up their rankings! |
Replies 1 - 6 of 6
|
rnd_ wrote
at 2:53 AM, Saturday September 22, 2007 EDT you have zero points
|
|
JKD wrote
at 6:12 AM, Saturday September 22, 2007 EDT Hi. 7th should play for 1st without messing up the game. To keep a losing player from messing up the game you give minimum reward to 2nd, 3rd, etc accordingly.
They tried giving a lot of points for just getting 2nd and the result was an away player or someone with two large stacks would often be the favourite of the leader and the game would get messed up by active dominant players losing and not scoring well enough. It should be encouraged to increase your ranking by playing for 1st as often as reasonably possible and cutting your losses when it's not. |
|
phoneguy wrote
at 11:32 AM, Saturday September 22, 2007 EDT I like the only points for first idea. The reason being is that once the out come is know people usually try to cannabolize the guy who is not in first.
|
|
|
phoneguy wrote
at 2:03 PM, Saturday September 22, 2007 EDT to expand further look ath the TOP PLAYERS Section there are 3 people on there who have 1st place finishes of less than 15%. That means they aquired all those points by getting second place and probably screwing over everybody in a lower spot.
|
|
Ryan wrote
at 2:44 PM, Saturday September 22, 2007 EDT Two reasons this would be bad:
1) 6/7 games you lose points and have a very negative attitude... not very good for the social aspect of the game. 2) Every game would be gang up on the leader. You would have endless games where it would cycle back and forth between a few players. Endless games like this are very bad. |
|
_\o/_ wrote
at 9:08 PM, Saturday September 22, 2007 EDT mmmm ... endless games
also ... don't you just hate it when your foot falls asleep? |
