Forum
Advisor Blog
Reviews
Strategies
Ideas
Dominance Explaination - leave the other threads alone
|
Ryan wrote
at 2:24 PM, Monday February 12, 2007 EST
Dominance is an ELO based adjustment where you have an expected score of 0-6. Your expected score is calculated based on ratings at the start of the game. If all ratings are equal then everyone has an expected score of 3.
Your score is accumulated during the game as players are knocked out. Each time a player is knocked out your AS(average size) for the game up to but not including the current round is compared. If you have a higher AS you get one point to your score. If you AS is equal then you get 0.5 added to your score. If it is less then you don't get anything added to your score. AS is measured as the average total count of your territories at the beginning of each turn. The first round is not counted. |
|
SandyBell wrote
at 10:49 PM, Monday February 12, 2007 EST "You put you expected score and your actual score into the ELO equation and out pops a rating adjustment."
how about treating everybody equaly for dominance? I'm fed up of getting -1, +2 etc for 2nd place. |
|
gohstlee wrote
at 2:06 AM, Tuesday February 13, 2007 EST I vote for showing AS. It's educational. It may not improve people's strategery, but it may cut down on the whining! ;-)
|
|
|
gohstlee wrote
at 2:06 AM, Tuesday February 13, 2007 EST I liked it, for the short time it was "on" in the Sandbox.
|
|
algios wrote
at 9:31 AM, Tuesday February 13, 2007 EST I don't know how people without former knowledge of kdice play with that AS-counter but you tend to be more aggressive with it. It leads to constantly asking oneself: "How do I compare to other players?". I can tell by my very own experience. This will lead to higher greediness (one of the major problems of lower tables). Therefore it would be wise of the tactically skilled not to demand it. For the benefit of more than 50% of players. :)
PS: Now one could demand that counter on high-ranked tables. ;) |
|
Hugo van Almsick wrote
at 11:35 AM, Tuesday February 13, 2007 EST For me the game is mot the same as before the scoring system changed. People are playing more aggressive and it can't be the sense of the game. Strategy should be the character of games like this. I played a game on place 4th and received -3 Pts. The player on place received 8 Pts. I can't really understand, because the goal is to be best at the end, not to be the player with most war and place in the beginning and the middle of the game. Also negative is, that the gain isn't often much more than 42 Pts. and that there is making of agreements between one match. Pls. thinking about changing scoring system one more time. thx a lot
|
|
Wurzlbrunft wrote
at 12:26 PM, Tuesday February 13, 2007 EST Is the AS rate based on the biggest area of connected fields only, or on the total count of occupied fields?
|
|
kwizatz wrote
at 7:37 PM, Tuesday February 13, 2007 EST "Each time a player is knocked out your AS(average size) for the game up to but not including the current round is compared."
Compared to the AS of the player who got knocked out? |
|
CHolmes011 wrote
at 7:40 PM, Tuesday February 13, 2007 EST Dear Ryan,
I hate your new system. Sincerely, One of your largest donators. |
|
|
gohstlee wrote
at 9:26 PM, Tuesday February 13, 2007 EST Wurzl, I believe the answer is "all countries", not just the connected ones.
|
|
Ramzunijus wrote
at 9:38 PM, Tuesday February 13, 2007 EST What if two last players wait for 100 turns before flagging? Then they got ALL dominance bonuses themselves?
Sincerely, old system was more strategis, this one is too luck-orientied... |
