Handicap System for the arena

[BluePriest]

Bragging Rights vs Electrum. The ultimate question is what will be more motivational. I think platinum mode will retain its difficulty because more people will care about braggin rights than the amount of electrum they get. Especially since they are already in platinum, so many players will have enough electrum (that doesnt mean 6 of all cards, but enough that they are happy)

[Kamietsu]

I don't see this working even close to how people think it would work. You get less reward for facing multiple firestalls, which would be annoying. But the handicap on the firestalls would mean they need more wins to gain rank...which is easy for a firestall. All this would do is make the rewards for beating a firestall worthless, leading more people to autoquit fire decks, which leads to more wins for the firestall which in turn makes them gain rank faster. This feels like a very counter-intuitive idea.

[Xenocidius]

I don't see this working even close to how people think it would work. You get less reward for facing multiple firestalls, which would be annoying. But the handicap on the firestalls would mean they need more wins to gain rank...which is easy for a firestall. All this would do is make the rewards for beating a firestall worthless, leading more people to autoquit fire decks, which leads to more wins for the firestall which in turn makes them gain rank faster. This feels like a very counter-intuitive idea.

But to my understanding you would get a higher reward against unoriginal decks, unless I missed some exposition.

[SnoWeb]

But to my understanding you would get a higher reward against unoriginal decks, unless I missed some exposition.

Absolutely! The reward (noted R whith NR being the reward we have now) for beating a deck played by the AI would be R(human) = NR(human) / H whereas if said deck beats you the reward for its owner would be  R(AI) = NR(AI) x H.

For a deck with a high handicap (Firestall, Ghostmare, Immorush) => 0.1 < H < 1 then R(human) > NR(human) and  R(AI) < NR(AI)
For a deck with a low handicap (Eggosis, Franctantlion, ProtecDissShield) => 1 < H < 2 then R(human) < NR(human) and  R(AI) > NR(AI)

It is the logical behaviour of a handicap system. A deck with a high handicap (0.1 < H < 1) is supposed to be better. Therefore beating it should give you more. On the other hand it beating you will reward less.

[...] the handicap on the firestalls would mean they need more wins to gain rank...which is easy for a firestall.

Maybe but a loss would cost them so much that they would be kicked out way faster.

Lets call GW and GL the gain in rating for a win or a loss respectively and NGW and NGL the equivalent that we have now: GW = NGW x H and GL = NGL / H

I think in platinum NGW = 10 and NGL = -45 => ratio(-NGL/NGW) = 4.5
For a deck with a high handicap (Firestall, Ghostmare, Immorush) => 0.1 < H < 1 then GW < NGW (for H = 0.5 we obtain GW = 5) and  GL > NGL (for H = 0.5 we obtain GL = -90) => ratio(-GL/GW) = 18
For a deck with a low handicap (Eggosis, Franctantlion, ProtecDissShield) => 1 < H < 2 then GW > NGW (for H = 1.5 we obtain RW = 15) and  GL < NGL (for H = 1.5 we obtain GL = -30) => ratio(-GL/GW) = 2

Bragging Rights vs Electrum.

No with this system a  deck with a high handicap (0.1 < H < 1) will earn less electrum and less rating for the same amount of win.

[Kamietsu]

But to my understanding you would get a higher reward against unoriginal decks, unless I missed some exposition.

Absolutely! The reward (noted R whith NR being the reward we have now) for beating a deck played by the AI would be R(human) = NR(human) / H whereas if said deck beats you the reward for its owner would be  R(AI) = NR(AI) x H.

For a deck with a high handicap (Firestall, Ghostmare, Immorush) => 0.1 < H < 1 then R(human) > NR(human) and  R(AI) < NR(AI)
For a deck with a low handicap (Eggosis, Franctantlion, ProtecDissShield) => 1 < H < 2 then R(human) < NR(human) and  R(AI) > NR(AI)

Bragging Rights vs Electrum.

No with this system a  deck with a high handicap (0.1 < H < 1) will earn less electrum and less rating for the same amount of win.

Contradictory. You stated that high handicap equals less electrum. But in the first quote, you said that unoriginal decks yeild higher electrum. Unless you misstated? High handicap means firestalls, unoriginal means firestalls. ( i know it doesn't mean only firestalls, just as an example)

[SnoWeb]

Contradictory. You stated that high handicap equals less electrum. But in the first quote, you said that unoriginal decks yeild higher electrum. Unless you misstated? High handicap means firestalls, unoriginal means firestalls. ( i know it doesn't mean only firestalls, just as an example)

In the first quote I said "when 0.1 < H < 1 then R(AI) < NR(AI)" which means that the reward for a win made by a deck played by the AI with a high handicap will reward less electrum with this new system than now.
Unless your refer to another post of mine? Or another quote?

[Kamietsu]

Xenocidius said:

    But to my understanding you would get a higher reward against unoriginal decks, unless I missed some exposition.

And you proceeded to say "Absolutely", and then apparently said otherwise with your formula(which i completely ignored because i hate formulas, but I digress). Makes you seem llike you are saying someone does get a higher reward for beating an unoriginal(firestall) deck.

[Xenocidius]

The way I understand it:

Unoriginal decks gain less from winning, and rank up less quickly. Players who put them up gain less electrum. Players who beat them gain more electrum.

Original decks gain more from winning, and rank up more quickly. Players who put them up gain more electrum. Players who beat them gain less electrum.

[SnoWeb]

Xenocidius said:

    But to my understanding you would get a higher reward against unoriginal decks, unless I missed some exposition.

As I understand it you is a human and the AI plays an unoriginal deck (0.1 < H < 1). If you beat it you earn more (R(human) > NR(human)). If it beats you, it earn less (R(AI) < NR(AI)).

Sorry for the formulae, I thought it would simplify the understanding ...

[gumbeh]

I feel like this will dramatically reduce the headache factor of arena. I can instantly tell via the handicap system whether a deck I'm facing is trite, effective, and likely to result in a loss for me. Which I'd then be pretty okay with.

[TheManuz]

I feel like this will dramatically reduce the headache factor of arena. I can instantly tell via the handicap system whether a deck I'm facing is trite, effective, and likely to result in a loss for me. Which I'd then be pretty okay with.

You can tell it from win/loss, rank and age (better decks will last more). Handicap only tells if you should expect a very common deck or a not so common deck.

[bogtro]

Absolutely brilliant. I don't know how difficult this would be to code, but barring coding arguments the idea is amazing.

The math behind it would probably be pretty simple - the average card would have a value of 1 (not  , 1 unit). Other cards would be scaled towards that - for example, if the average card is used in 70/500 decks, and immolation is used in 280/500 decks, then immolation would have a value of 0.25.

Add up the values of every card, scale it to league (for example in gold the average card would be worth 5/(# of cards in deck)), and boom, brilliancy.

This number could appear on the arena screen (deck efficiency or something similar), making players able to gauge what they are playing. As a sidenote, this would make the "Surrender" button something other than a target for mouseslips).

Love.