Actual competitors for the global score
|Opened by:||Bruno Kestemont|
|Opened on:||Friday, October 25, 2013 - 09:46|
|Last modified:||Thursday, November 14, 2013 - 18:13|
On puzzle 797 I largely underperformed but I was surprised to get 80 points. It appears that it's thanks to the large amount of players (809) for this puzzle, probably students, most of them only opening the puzzle not getting more than 1 point.
Advantage: It's a good incentive to all of us to try to get more players. It gives a warm unattended reward for most good players.
Inconvenience: In popular puzzles, it's so easy to get many global points that there is a risk of under-performance on the top side. Less popular puzzles risk suffering a small number of competitors. This all is not optimal for Science.
Suggestion: In the scoring system (Points = Max(1, RoundUp(((1 - R/N)^5) * X))), only counting the number N of players that enhanced the starting position (getting more points than the starting points). I mean real competitors, not the number of players N who opened the puzzle.
Motivation: The aim of scoring system including the number of competitors N is to reward good ranked people amongst a large number of competitors. But 1 soloist point players are not really competing. They opened the window to see the puzzle or to load another player's solution to evo.