Quote:
|
Originally Posted by drunkenmonk
From a development perspective it doesn't really matter.
Simple bonuses are obviously very easy but I could implement a sliding scale, just means I'd have to use my brain.
Ouch
|
Even then, from a sliding scale point of view, you'd still have to know how many people attended and how many tables there were. Once you have that the coding itself is/should (depends on language) be very easy. Well. If you haven't been drinking that is!
As someone who tends to play in the larger attended games, it would be nice to get more points for that, as you have to work a lot harder (and stay more awake) to get anywhere.
Maybe for a sliding scale system:
16-8: 5 points per person
8-4 (first half final table): 10 points per person (you've been out half of the btter players in the field)
4-1: 15 points per person
It's simple from the coding point of view, simple from working out the number of points you get, and with the existing points structure, those making the final table still get significantly more points for position, and if it is a really huge field (40-50 people) then those bonus points can easily equal winning at a 5 person game. Hence. you get a lot more points for winning through a large field, but still get a lot of points for winning the smaller games.