Currently there is very little incentive, point-wise, for players to complete, or improve times on, the less played maps. This is because completion points are heavily tied to group points, and group points are based on map completions, which creates a chicken and egg problem; the less completions a map has, the less completion points players get, and thus the less incentive there is to play the map.tordana wrote:1. Basing map points off of number of completions gives a lot of weight to lesser-played maps (and new maps, but you fixed that issue with the map age variable). Take something like surf_oompa_loompa. Nobody likes that map so it gets played very infrequently. However, it's pretty easy! It only has 152 completions - compare that with, say, surf_omnibus which is similar difficult level but has twice as many completions (300). (Bonus fact: surf_air_control has the most completions with 4744).
The system I proposed would balance the incentive between maps by awarding the same maximum completion points for every map, and by basing minimum completion points on map completions. The less completions a map has, the more completion points players get when ranking low - and likewise, the higher players rank, the closer to the maximum completion points they get.
Surf_air_control would no longer be an insanely valuable map to complete, and improve time on, compared to, say, surf_oompa_loompa. They would both award the same maximum completion points, while the less played map, surf_oompa_loompa, would have increased minimum completion points to make sure players gain enough completion points in case the map is hard - and if it's not, then more and more players will complete it, thus bringing down the minimum completion points, until it starts to reflect the real difficulty of the map.
The number of active players will be relatively high, depending on how we define it, while the rate of change, on the other hand, will be relatively low, which means that, because the effect is so small, we don't have to often re-calculate any values based on that. Once a day sounds good.tordana wrote:2. All the points in the proposed system are derived from the number of "active" players, however we choose to define that (there's 1,613 players with 10+ map completions btw). What happens when that value changes? Do we recalculate all points immediately? That's an assload of computation, with 800,000 time records currently in the database. Do we only recalculate once in a while?