Tournament balancing
Forum Index > Core > Suggestions > Rejected >
I've noticed two key issues with the tournament that I think should be addressed.
Another note is that most games that I am playing or have previously played have a balance system like this already in place which tells me that coding for this won't break Sally and does actually work seeing as none of these systems have been revoked.
Issue 1: number of leader board spots
Since the site's population is growing steadily, I think having only 50 spots on the leader board makes it increasingly unfair to many users. Since the amount of users online at a time seems to hover around 1100 or so, I will base my numbers off of that.
50 spots on the leaderboard only amounts to 4.5% of the total amunt of users usually online althought the actual number of users probably exceeds this reducing that percentage even further. I'd think that elevating the number of slots to 75 would be more realistic. 100, although nice and even would make the percentage around ten percent which would be 1/5 of the online user base which would make event eggs a little too easy to get.
issue 2: user cooldown period
Currently there is no cooldown period for a user who gets on the leaderboard. Hypothetically, a user could consecutively win event eggs by continuously being on the leaderboards. My suggestion is a cooldown of not being able to win an event egg for one additional tournament that occurs. I do think that an alternative prize should be in order if a user's score does meet leaderboard requirements. I'd think that 7 red tokens would be fair. This would allow users who have not won an event egg to get a chance to be on the leaderboard.
Avatar is from Pokemon Conquest by Nintendo
![Niet [Adam]'s Avatar](https://pokefarm.com/upload/:J/avatar/Niet_Icon150.png)
On average, 2500 people participate in the event each week, with variance depending on the objective.
50 winners is about 2% of participants, which is ideal when the prise includes a chance at lucking out and getting a shiny, albino or even a melan.
It's worth noting that sometimes a small number of users actually reach the Hard target. Having a higher number of prizes given out would counterintuitively reduce participation further because there's less need to compete for top spots.
Locking people out of winning consecutively, again, reduces participation overall and would be very harmful.
Clip from Pokémon anime, re-lined by me
-- OMNOMNOM!Featured story:
Injustice
Feedback welcome!
Okay, now I get it. I had no clue that participation was that low and I completely forgot about the guaranteed shiny/albino/melanistic pokemon. It's kind of hard to get the full picture without having access to Sally's data. But, now that I know that much, it makes sense.
Cannot post: Please log in to post