Final score

[quietmint]

I didn't want to mix this with the other discussion about how ELO should work, but in the UI can you display the final score as whatever calculation is now happening based on number of players and game difficulty? The UI still shows the final score as 1. Can we see the actual final score (3, 7, whatever) instead?

A) Games are worth 5VP by default (6VP for 4player games)
B) Easy difficulty are worth 2VP fewer, hard games 2VP more. Extreme difficulty is +4VP.
C) Group challenge cards double of half the sum of A+B (for group challenge/handicap)
D) Individual challenge cards add or subtract 1VP to the value from step C (for challenge/handicap)

The result is your final score, positive (win) or negative (loss).

[Kayvon]

Ah, that's a bug. A side effect of the new implementation. You have a keen eye for detail!

I've just deployed a change that should fix the issue. If for some reason you still see it, just file a bug report (I don't always check the forums).

Thanks for finding this.

[quietmint]

Thanks, now I can see the final score.

"double of half the sum of A+B" is really strange wording. This just means 150% or multiply by 1.5, right?

I don't understand how we got 29 here with 2 players, extreme difficulty, group challenge, 1 individual challenge:
https://boardgamearena.com/7/daybreak?table=545388764
5 + 4 = 9 points for extreme difficulty
9 * 1.5 = 13.5 points points with group challenge
+ 1 = 14.5 points with individual challenge

Where did 29 points come from? 14.5 * 2 = 29? You multiply the calculation by the number of players? That part wasn't mentioned in your description and seems like it will scale very quickly when it's more than 2 people? Is that intentional? With 4 players, the final score here would be something like 60 points for a single game? A single game could be worth more than half a level (Apprentice - Average - Good are 100 points apart; Strong - Expert - Master are 200 points apart)? If you multiply the result by the number of players anyway, why start with a higher base for 4 players?

Basically I'm asking whether your calculation was wrong or whether your description of the calculation was wrong. I assume the calculation is wrong.

[Kayvon]

"double of half the sum of A+B" is really strange wording.

That's a typo. It should be "double or half the sum" based on a challenge or handicap.

[Kayvon]

I don't understand how we got 29 here with 2 players, extreme difficulty, group challenge, 1 individual challenge

A) 5 Games are worth 5VP by default (6VP for 4player games)
B) +4 Easy difficulty are worth 2VP fewer, hard games 2VP more. Extreme difficulty is +4VP.
C) *2 Group challenge cards double or half the sum of A+B (for group challenge/handicap)
D) +1 Individual challenge cards add or subtract 1VP to the value from step C (for challenge/handicap)

That should be (5+4)*2+1 = 19.
Regardless, I've already registered your vote to return to the previous system of +1 and -1. I spent an hour going back and forth with you last night on the subject. At this point, I'm content to tally the vote and just move on.

[quietmint]

Ok so it's a bug.

The current calculation isn't what you intended. So you're going to fix it to be as you intended? Leave it as is until you decide on something else?

[ufm]

Reported: https://boardgamearena.com/bug?id=132662

Also, I proposed two slight changes in that report as well:

A) Games are worth 5VP by default, and add +2 per player count above 2 (so, 7VP in 3p, 9VP in 4p)
With more players, the coordination level required to win the game (and the difficulty) naturally increases as well.
This aligns the rating change across the number of players and the difficulty mode similar to each other:
- 2p easy: base 3vp
- 2p normal = 3p easy: base 5vp
- 2p hard = 3p normal: base 7vp
- 2p extreme = 3p hard = 4p: base 9vp

D) Individual challenge cards add or subtract 1VP to the value BEFORE applying step C (for challenge/handicap)
Group challenges and individual challenges are applied together, increasing or decreasing the difficulty of each other.
For example:
4p, harder group challenge on, 4 harder individual challenges - (5 + 4 + 4) * 2 = 26
4p, no group challenge, 4 harder individual challenges - (5 + 4 + 4) * 1 = 13
4p, easier group challenge on, 4 harder individual challenges - (5 + 4 + 4) / 2 = 6.5 (rounded off to 6)

[quietmint]

I think it helps everyone to see a chart (especially since the original description of it had a major typo). If I understand the new scoring system correctly, it was intended to be like this (I didn't consider individual challenges in this chart):


I would agree with ufm that coordinating your actions with 4p is more difficult than 3p is more difficult than 2p, so a small bump at every player count would also make sense to me.

[Kayvon]

Based on ufm's feedback, the system has been revised slightly, basically reversing steps C & D.

A) Games are worth 5VP by default (6VP for 4player games)
B) Easy difficulty are worth 2VP fewer, hard games 2VP more. Extreme difficulty is +4VP.
D) Individual challenge cards add or subtract 1VP (for challenge/handicap)
C) Group challenge cards double or halve the sum of A+B+C (for group challenge/handicap)