Well another (better?) way to do scoring in multiplayer games, it sounds strang at first, but is quite nice when implemented (seen this at other games, where 6 people always battle each other (sissyfight)) Since this scoring is taken almost from chess, which has 1vs1 playing and no random luck, it doesnt really fit well.

Remove negative scores!

Yes, you only get positive scores. This will
* Greatly reduce grieff, you are always happy with every game
* remove the problem that top players have no (score) incentive to play.

Yes this means the more you play the better the score is. (Isn't bad for the game site, or? ;o))

6th player gets +0, 5th +1, 4th +2, 3rd +3, 2nd +4 and first +10 points per game.

Table ranks, yes you can do Top table with spliting (and rounding) of scores there are. Make no limit tables, make 25%+ tables (meaning the limit is, you are in the better 3/4 of the player, 50%+ tables, and 75%+ tables.

To keep the scores growing in the sky, reduce score e.g. 0.5% a day. Yes fame vanishes over time :o)

So no matter what, if you play there are only winners!

Oh I mean, to hinder the scores growing in the sky, reduce each score e.g. 0.5 per day (or 2% a week, or whatevery you design).

sounds like alot of serverwork to do yet it. isnt the worst idea. since you can't take back your votes yeat im waiting to embrace this idea until i hear other opinions about this. Yet thanks for caring about the game thegrid.

Well your vote wouldn't hurt ;o)

I don't think it would be all tooo much work, compared to other ideas :)

oh i forgot:

+ this scoring brings more players on the tables more often!

oh i forgot, away player always get 0 ;)

Removing negative scores altogether is, in my opinion, not a good idea. It makes it to where, while winning does have a decent effect on your score, the people at the top are the ones who've spent the most time playing. I once played a Tetris game where I could easily beat the #1 ranked person, as he was only ranked #1 because he had played more than anyone else (and would only play against opponents he could beat).

I'm not saying that the scoring system is perfect, but I don't think that removing negative scores is a good idea.

Well people who play most, get highest score.

So what?

1 vs 1 playing is at kdice never possible. So you cant tell that number 1 on the negative score game, just got lucky with partner (e.g. he always plays with friends) or just lucky with dice rolls.

Well as the 2nd evens over time. People who play with friends never even out.

So, it really doesn't matter how good you are, just how much time you have to waste. *shrug*