Rules: Read Me!
Admin: sue943
Legal / Conditions of Use

Page 4 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Topic Options
#834479 - Fri Oct 26 2012 07:35 PM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: cubswin2323]
Mariamir Offline
Multiloquent

Registered: Wed Feb 29 2012
Posts: 4258
Loc: Ontario Canada
Originally Posted By: cubswin2323
To clarify Darryl's point, The GM daily games DO have divisions, but they're not divvied up acccording to your Level. You just get one of 15 random group quizzes, regardless of Level. MM is based on a person's Level.


But MM's configuration is the same as the GM games. Random sets, not by level. While a Champs for Mind Melt sounds good for "regular" players, what about the Champs? As stated before, not all Champs are equal, and I for one would hate to be always in the same division as players like DaBomb.
_________________________
Secret, shall I tell you? Quiz author at FunTrivia am I. Won this job in a raffle I did, think you?

Top
#834494 - Fri Oct 26 2012 08:04 PM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: Mariamir]
cubswin2323 Offline
Mainstay

Registered: Sun Jan 31 2010
Posts: 931
Loc: Omaha, Nebraska
So would I. That's why the call for a Champs Division. I've NEVER been in a division 1-20. If it were just random, I would be.


Edited by cubswin2323 (Fri Oct 26 2012 08:11 PM)
_________________________
-Dave

December 23rd is Festivus. A Festivus for the rest of us! Get the aluminum pole out from the crawl space. A donation has been made in your name to The Human Fund. The Human Fund. Money for people.

Top
#834571 - Sat Oct 27 2012 06:53 AM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: cubswin2323]
Chavs Offline
Prolific

Registered: Fri Jul 15 2011
Posts: 1018
Loc: Ireland
I'm voting for Jake's Chump divison.

I also think there should be a chimp division.

(This test is a 'limited-hold memory task', using a sort of photographic memory, a test in which young chimpanzees out-perform adult humans.

http://games.lumosity.com/chimp.html

It'll give you about 10 turns before it tells you how well you performed compared to the chimp. Good luck all.)


Edited by Chavs (Sat Oct 27 2012 07:12 AM)

Top
#834613 - Sat Oct 27 2012 09:51 AM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: Chavs]
cubswin2323 Offline
Mainstay

Registered: Sun Jan 31 2010
Posts: 931
Loc: Omaha, Nebraska
The main arguments are that the vets are punished because they have to play against the supers while the newer players get to pile up points against equally new players. The divisions are mostly Level-based, As a result, vets can never get the points to get a 5 or 50 K or even a monthly badge. Not to mention even winning a division. Other non-GM games have a champs division, MM has evolved to the point where it should have one as well


Edited by cubswin2323 (Sat Oct 27 2012 09:52 AM)
_________________________
-Dave

December 23rd is Festivus. A Festivus for the rest of us! Get the aluminum pole out from the crawl space. A donation has been made in your name to The Human Fund. The Human Fund. Money for people.

Top
#834616 - Sat Oct 27 2012 10:00 AM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: cubswin2323]
Mariamir Offline
Multiloquent

Registered: Wed Feb 29 2012
Posts: 4258
Loc: Ontario Canada
One more argument, the supers are punished playing the supers, too. Not all supers play equally, some are even "superer" than others. It's not fair for the "less super" Champs to be forever in a division with the "super-supers". There is probably no way to satisfy everyone. I rather think a Champ division would be a good idea, but still punishing on some players. If the divisions are indeed Level-based, then make MM like the GM games. Random sets, you might land in the same set as a very good player, then again, you might not. So vets, newbies, supers, all get their shot at winning a division and getting more points.

I hope that made sense... laugh
_________________________
Secret, shall I tell you? Quiz author at FunTrivia am I. Won this job in a raffle I did, think you?

Top
#834637 - Sat Oct 27 2012 12:09 PM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: Mariamir]
AdamM7 Offline
Mainstay

Registered: Sat Feb 18 2012
Posts: 529
Loc: Cheshire England UK           
Originally Posted By: Mariamir
If the divisions are indeed Level-based, then make MM like the GM games. Random sets, you might land in the same set as a very good player, then again, you might not.


I am fairly sure that they are not. I can't find anywhere that says that they are, and I was put in a set with lots of players who are roughly half my level, the lowest of which is 53.

Originally Posted By: cubswin2323
I've NEVER been in a division 1-20. If it were just random, I would be.


You probably have been in a division with players under level 20, but you've just not noticed it. Unless you're telling me that every day you've ever played mind melt, you've always checked the levels of every single player in your division in the last minute (or at least last hour) of the day so no-one else plays after you look.

But even if you haven't, that doesn't prove much. Most of the people who play mind melt (or any other hourly or daily) will be above level 20. Look at WTE - I've seen hours where over 70 people have played in my division (the top one apart from champions) but only 1 in the level 1-20 division.


Edited by AdamM7 (Sat Oct 27 2012 12:09 PM)
_________________________
"No, please don't eat me. I have a wife and kids, eat them" - Homer Simpson

~(_8(I)

Top
#834641 - Sat Oct 27 2012 12:37 PM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: AdamM7]
salami_swami Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Nov 01 2007
Posts: 8240
Loc: Colorado USA
No, Dave means he hasn't been placed in divisions 1-20. Come to think of it, most high scores from high leveled players are put in divisions past 20...
_________________________
"The only water in the forest is the River."

Top
#834642 - Sat Oct 27 2012 12:38 PM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: AdamM7]
TimBentley Offline
Explorer

Registered: Mon Apr 09 2012
Posts: 83
Loc: Indiana USA
It appears that players in divisions 6-15 have less than 5000 melting points; players in 16+ have at least 5000 melting points. I haven't found any other pattern.

There's a level 29 player in set 27 and a level 168 player with more than 50000 melting points in set 16.


Edited by TimBentley (Sat Oct 27 2012 12:43 PM)

Top
#834949 - Sun Oct 28 2012 05:00 PM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: TimBentley]
cubswin2323 Offline
Mainstay

Registered: Sun Jan 31 2010
Posts: 931
Loc: Omaha, Nebraska
They have less melting points because they haven't been around as long Still, they are garnering points at a faster rate than the vets, A champs division needs to be established. Period. I'm not backing down on this, Why? Because I know in my heart and mind I am correct.
_________________________
-Dave

December 23rd is Festivus. A Festivus for the rest of us! Get the aluminum pole out from the crawl space. A donation has been made in your name to The Human Fund. The Human Fund. Money for people.

Top
#834956 - Sun Oct 28 2012 05:11 PM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: cubswin2323]
flopsymopsy Offline
Multiloquent

Registered: Sat May 17 2008
Posts: 2719
Loc: Northampton England UK      
Having a champs division won't get you more points, all it gives you is more of a chance to be beaten by a few who are really good at it with almost no hope of ever winning the set. If you want to be demoralised, be a very good player in the WAI champs divisions - you'll almost never win and as a result will get fewer points. It's better now than it used to be but even so, never winning is just as demoralising for champs as it is for anyone else. And now you want to spread the gloom to MindMelt which is a pretty depressing game anyway. Give it a rest.
_________________________
The Hubble Telescope has just picked up a sound from a fraction of a second before the Big Bang. The sound was "Uh oh".

Top
#835015 - Sun Oct 28 2012 11:54 PM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: flopsymopsy]
cubswin2323 Offline
Mainstay

Registered: Sun Jan 31 2010
Posts: 931
Loc: Omaha, Nebraska
I beg your pardon? I'm entitled to my beliefs. Don't tell me what to say. The fact remains I'm correct. Trying to shut people down only further proves people like me and Sabre are right all along. MM has evolved to the point to where Champs division is needed. It's pretty much impossible to win a division due to the fact all of the "champs" are in the vets divisions now. I find it strange nobody gripes about the Daily Game's champs sets. Why not do it that way?
_________________________
-Dave

December 23rd is Festivus. A Festivus for the rest of us! Get the aluminum pole out from the crawl space. A donation has been made in your name to The Human Fund. The Human Fund. Money for people.

Top
#835019 - Mon Oct 29 2012 12:15 AM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: cubswin2323]
looney_tunes Offline
Multiloquent

Registered: Tue Jan 20 2009
Posts: 3132
Loc: Briar Hill Victoria Australia 
Of course, over time "vets" who keep playing will meet the criteria to become "champs", even if they only get there through persistent mediocrity (which is how I seem to have reached champions division in a couple of games). They then will always compete only against superchamps, and never again collect any points, as currently happens in Who Am I. Because there are fewer sets for champs, as there are always going to be fewer of them than of lesser mortals, the competition is intensified. If everyone is spread out, you will by luck sometimes be in an easier pool, and sometimes in one with tougher competition.
_________________________
(Editor in Humanities, Literature and Books For Children)
That's all, folks!

Top
#835020 - Mon Oct 29 2012 12:20 AM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: cubswin2323]
Mariamir Offline
Multiloquent

Registered: Wed Feb 29 2012
Posts: 4258
Loc: Ontario Canada
But the Daily Game doesn't even have a Champ division.

Quote:
It's pretty much impossible to win a division due to the fact all of the "champs" are in the vets divisions now.


Your point is that the veterans cannot win a division because of the Champs. Firstly, not everyone in every set is a Champ, with this configuration there will always be a set without Champs in it. You, I take it you are one of the vets you keep mentioning, are saying it isn't fair to the vets. Well, if all the Champs are put in their separate division, there will always be some Champs that will NEVER win that division. It isn't fair to them, either. As Mind Melt is right now, at least everyone has a shot at winning their division. Can you prove that the players who keep winning the divisions the vets are in are Champs? You can't. Just because they're better than you doesn't mean that there aren't others better than them. Q.E.D. Mind Melt as is is fairer to ALL. laugh If you think that the Champs winning or losing has nothing to do with you, well, they still need to be taken into consideration as well.

Edit: exactly what looney_tunes said.


Edited by Mariamir (Mon Oct 29 2012 12:21 AM)
_________________________
Secret, shall I tell you? Quiz author at FunTrivia am I. Won this job in a raffle I did, think you?

Top
#835061 - Mon Oct 29 2012 03:45 AM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: Mariamir]
Chavs Offline
Prolific

Registered: Fri Jul 15 2011
Posts: 1018
Loc: Ireland
Maybe each game needs something like the hardcore system in the Global Challenge. Something optional. Added on to what we have already.

Those looking for a more competitive challenge can opt in once they have done their time in Champs or got the required badges/levels etc.

That might serve everyone best?

Top
#835067 - Mon Oct 29 2012 05:02 AM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: Chavs]
looney_tunes Offline
Multiloquent

Registered: Tue Jan 20 2009
Posts: 3132
Loc: Briar Hill Victoria Australia 
I believe the request is not to provide more or different competition for the Champs, but to forcibly remove them from competition with others. Making it optional would not have the desired effect. What is being called for in setting up a Champs division would be rather like saying that everyone who is Immortal in GC must play Hardcore.

edited to clarify an ambiguous wording


Edited by looney_tunes (Mon Oct 29 2012 11:49 AM)
_________________________
(Editor in Humanities, Literature and Books For Children)
That's all, folks!

Top
#835077 - Mon Oct 29 2012 06:44 AM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: looney_tunes]
ssabreman Offline
Prolific

Registered: Wed Nov 03 2010
Posts: 1616
Loc: Mesa AZ
To quote Terry from Feb 1,2010 and the rationale of Champs Divisions
As briefly touched in an earlier post, "Champion Divisions" are being added to some of our hourly games.

Why they are good for most players:

They are special divisions where our super-expert players can battle against each other in our hourly games without inadvertently stomping on newer players hour after hour.

Why they are good for the champions:

Champions get to fight it out with the best of the best in a small, comfy setting. It's you vs them. All champs get special rating statistics, and you can battle your enemies directly on a daily basis. Champions will also tend to earn more points than regular players due to their thinner numbers and exclusive division.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Many, but not all of those who beat me now have the monthly and the Mastery badges and would then be Champs. I'm sure many of the Champs were not pleased with being separated from the masses in the other games, but they would then experience what many of the rest of us mediocre players have put up with all along. If the Champs have ALL the badges in the game, what are they really missing out on? Stomping? And if they are mediocre Champs, like I am in WaI, it's just back to being stomped by the real Champs like it was before. So be it. The best players win. The Champs are not losing out on anything. Winning a set in Champs in MM would lead to nothing else since there is no ELO in that game.
I am no better than the newbies who get to play in sets 6-15 yet I am being stomped on just the same. I gain far fewer points each day than they do as my 26- 30/30 in 250 sec gains me 20 -40 points but the same score in sets 6-15 will probably win or get 90 points. Those who are streamed into those sets will have the advantage of winning the monthly and Mastery long before others. But why? I have never had the privilege of being in those sets.
If Terry had a reason to create the Champs divisions, why is this game exempt? If there is no Champs division, then ALL players should be randomly spread across ALL sets. NO streaming. The newbies and casual players should not have a greater opportunity to win than other vets. WaI had a Champs Division of 2 sets long before there were 320 Champs as there are in MM, and then it was expanded to 5 sets. The best will win, regardless.
Giving the vets a chance to gain some points towards the monthly would be appreciated.


Edited by ssabreman (Mon Oct 29 2012 06:47 AM)

Top
#835079 - Mon Oct 29 2012 06:51 AM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: looney_tunes]
Chavs Offline
Prolific

Registered: Fri Jul 15 2011
Posts: 1018
Loc: Ireland
Originally Posted By: looney_tunes
I believe the request is not to provide more or different competition for the Champs, but to forcibly remove them from competition with others. Making it optional would not have the desired effect. It would be rather like saying that everyone who is Immortal in GC must play Hardcore.


Wouldn't it be more like saying that everyone who is Immortal in GC has the option to play Hardcore but doesn't have to?

(Then, with those who would like to play hardcore kept busy in their own divison, the rest of the immortals carry on playing each other as normal. And everyone is happy?

From everything written here, the people who like the champ divison are people who enjoy stiff competition and don't feel put off by being worst of the best - so presumably they would opt for hardcore thus opening up the current divisions for the "veteran-but-not-feeling-very-championish-today" players.)



Edited by Chavs (Mon Oct 29 2012 06:56 AM)

Top
#835085 - Mon Oct 29 2012 07:31 AM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: Chavs]
salami_swami Offline
Forum Champion

Registered: Thu Nov 01 2007
Posts: 8240
Loc: Colorado USA
I am in favor if the champs division. It is in my opinion that if champs want to complain about not winning.... Tough. They have the badges. But a regular guy cannot compete against constant 85-110 second scores.

When the game started, I was in the top bracket. Power players emerged and skyrocketed to all the badges while us mediocre players could never get a good enough score to get many points. Now they have their badges, and still compete in the divisions. We still truck along.


That being said, though I am in favor of champs, I certainly won't be disappointed if it stays as is.
_________________________
"The only water in the forest is the River."

Top
#835099 - Mon Oct 29 2012 08:31 AM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: salami_swami]
TimBentley Offline
Explorer

Registered: Mon Apr 09 2012
Posts: 83
Loc: Indiana USA
An alternate idea would be to put people with 50000+ melting points (I don't know how many of the 145 regularly play; if I counted correctly there were 10 in my set yesterday, so probably most) in their own sets. However, I would think a monthly badge (the person currently in 10th has average about 70 melting points per day) includes more strong players than the mastery badge, as it includes strong players who haven't played for well over a year. There could be 3 or 4 sets of masters, or perhaps about 7 sets of champs (I don't know how many of the 321 monthly winners regularly play, I assume most of them have won a set and gotten the achievement badge).

It should be noted that the main issue people seem to have with the Who Am I champ division (they don't actually need all the badges, they can lack the mastery badge, or even the whozit collector badge (although not many people would be a monthly winner before getting 5000 whozits)) is people getting the 50000 whozit points more slowly in those sets.

I can see the advantages and disadvantages regardless of any action or lack thereof.

Top
#835102 - Mon Oct 29 2012 08:34 AM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: salami_swami]
Mariamir Offline
Multiloquent

Registered: Wed Feb 29 2012
Posts: 4258
Loc: Ontario Canada
Eh, my two cents' worth. I am not a Champ, obviously. I argue against having a Champ division because I think it'd be unfair to the less super Champs to be forever stuck in a division where they will almost never win. As is right now everyone gets a fair shot at winning every now and then. If the Champs themselves want to be in a separate division, then by all means, away with them! :-P Whatever way you do it some people will lose out, so I guess the issue is keep it as is and the vets lose points they ought to have, or some less Champy Champs almost never win, and so lose out... Now what to do?

I knew I was going to type something wrong...


Edited by Mariamir (Mon Oct 29 2012 08:42 AM)
_________________________
Secret, shall I tell you? Quiz author at FunTrivia am I. Won this job in a raffle I did, think you?

Top
#835126 - Mon Oct 29 2012 09:39 AM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: Chavs]
Jakeroo Offline
Prolific

Registered: Sat Aug 30 2008
Posts: 1952
Loc: Alberta Canada
Originally Posted By: Chavs

the "veteran-but-not-feeling-very-championish-today" players.)



I'm more of the "not feeling very championish EVERY day" sort of player lol. Doesn't matter to me which route is ultimately chosen, my chances are the same in either case. Sometimes I get lucky lol.
_________________________
Everybody gets so much information all day long that they lose their common sense
- Gertrude Stein


Top
#835132 - Mon Oct 29 2012 10:29 AM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: Jakeroo]
TimBentley Offline
Explorer

Registered: Mon Apr 09 2012
Posts: 83
Loc: Indiana USA
An interesting tidbit of information: the 10th person in the Who Am I monthly badge standings is 13th overall (note that the easy sets add a wrinkle here, I know that when I choose to go for the monthly badge I'll probably play easy), and the 10th person in the Mind Melt monthly badge standings is 86th overall.

All but one person in the Who Am I race have 5000+ whozit points (one has 50000+); three people in the Mind Melt race have 5000+ melting points.

This last point sours my disposition regarding the status quo. I was thinking that players could be separated based on whether they had won a timed set instead of 5000+ points (2860 have won their set, 2360 have 5000+ points), but that would probably cause the number of new people winning a set every day to more than double, and I think that would be a net negative. Also, should someone be moved up because 2048 was good enough to win their set?


Edited by TimBentley (Mon Oct 29 2012 10:44 AM)

Top
#835178 - Mon Oct 29 2012 02:26 PM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: looney_tunes]
Terry Offline

Head Honcho

Registered: Wed Dec 31 1969
Posts: 17934
Loc: USA
Yes, the plan is to have a champ division for mind melt too, for players who have won all the badges there.

Top
#835187 - Mon Oct 29 2012 03:20 PM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: Terry]
ssabreman Offline
Prolific

Registered: Wed Nov 03 2010
Posts: 1616
Loc: Mesa AZ
Very good news. Thanks.
When you say ALL the badges, you mean both the Monthly and the Mastery?

Top
#835188 - Mon Oct 29 2012 03:30 PM Re: About the CHAMP Classification [Re: ssabreman]
Terry Offline

Head Honcho

Registered: Wed Dec 31 1969
Posts: 17934
Loc: USA
Yes

Top
Page 4 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >

Moderator:  Terry