So just to clarify, setting aside the hot button issue of the whopper tax, it sounds like you’re also planning to reduce the size of the “player card” from “best 20 events” to “best 15 events”?
I’m relatively neutral on the eff% stuff (although it does appear to help me quite a bit~), but I’m a huge fan of reducing the size of the card to 15. I’ve never really felt like I could muster enough time / money / energy to compete in enough big events to keep 20 slots fleshed out with good results, but 15 feels waaay more achievable. Ironically, this will almost definitely end up pushing me to play more pinball, since I feel like I’ll actually have a shot at getting back to the WPC once the new formula goes into effect. Excited for these updates!
Out of curiosity, will you also be reducing the size of the SCS card from 20 to 15? A 20 event window for SCS always felt kind of extreme to me, especially since (unlike your world ranking card) all the events have to be from one calendar year and have a geographical limitation.
in this example you’re just multiplying the numerator and denominator by 2, so of course the final result (your eff%)is the same.
if you played double the amount, and got last in each of those additional tournaments, because your Card shows only your top 20 results, you would have had 7145 wpprtunity (is that the right use of the term?) but you only “rack up” another 1 wppr total (you got last place in every additional tournament), you’re now up to 1221.41 active WPPRs, you’re eff% is now (1221.41/7145.26) = 17.1% – This would have an effect on your ranking, correct?
Is it:
1.: Average of your eff%? So, if you only have 3 tournaments and you got 100 %, 0 % and 0 % (yeye, i know it’s not possible) it would be 33,3 %?
or 2: Eff. of your total points. So, with same results as above, but the three tournaments are worth 100 / 10 / 10 for the winners. Our player won the first and got 0 points for the last two (yeye, i know). That would make a total of 100 points of 120 possible = 83,33 %.
Pretty sure it’s #2 (as it should be), but just making 100 % sure
Ummm yes, if I played the next three years the same amount I’ve played these past three years, and finished last in every event I’ve played in, I dare say that’s some evidence of my skill on display and my world ranking at how good I am at pinball should be impacted to show that.
On the flip side if I got first place and every event I played in for the next three years, even if none of those first place events hit my top 20 card (let’s say I just grinded out 4000 small tournaments over the next three years), my Eff% would go up.
The top 15 card has been Brian’s solution for a while, for exactly the reason as to how that impacts someone like you. There’s a large group of “good players” that can’t keep up with the Joneses with respect to playing at such a crazy amount. This should hopefully encourage those players to play a little more.
The eff% nonsense was my solution. Through our internal discussions we went with “fuck it let’s do both and see what it looks like”.
SCS count has not been finalized yet. Today the plan is still 20 for the year.
Even though I personally will probably never crack 20 state events a year, I like the high limit because it encourages everyone to get out and grind, support their local operators, locations, etc. Now you Illinois folks just gotta start buying more beer when you’re out at Mikerphone or Noon Whistle.
well just 2 monthly events each month will get you there
even one per month is 12 and then just need to find 8 more
IF it where to be 15
then that gives you event one per month + 3 more to fill in.
so 10 is to low 15-20 is good and 24 is 2 monthly events each month
maybe 25 max 2 monthly events + one more.
but over 25 may be extreme
Im sure 20 events makes sense for most places where there are more tourney opportunities but currently I wouldn’t mind seeing only the top 10 events count in my Province.
Yep. In the farm era where WPPRs became basically worthless unless you were willing to farm every month, the circuit still provided some incentive for me to travel to Cleveland last year after I had a couple of high circuit event finishes so I could lock in my Circuit Final spot (that’s when we thought it was going to be limited to 20).
Having circuit points, state points, things of that nature; it motivates people to play even if your basic garden variety WPPRs aren’t the sole goal.
so should there be something like the super states say over X activity then that zone / state / Province gets to have more counting events.
Say 3 points? with the number for each point in the ranges listed below?
min level 10-12
Mid level 18-22
High / Max level 25-28
EXTREME LEVEL (may just for ones that go way over the MAX) 30-35?
I was kind of just thinking that you’d start with top 10 counted, but when a total of like 30 events were run in a State/Province then it could move up to 15 and then at 40 it could move up to 20 events or something like that. Mostly I just don’t like how valuable playing more is compared to playing good when it comes to qualifying for our Provincial Championship.
This is a tricky scenario to me. I understand the whole support your location. I am by definition a location player, I do not own any machines and if it wasn’t for the locations I’ve been spoiled with locally or even within a 2 hour drive, I definitely would not be playing as well as I am. (Northeast Ohio)
But I don’t think it should ever be a “grind”. There has to be some balance of efficiency verses grind. Does taking away the grind in theory hurt some locations? Sure. Yet we also will see an increase as well as @BonusLord proved to us.
Anyone(in theory) can just go to event after event and grind. Not everyone can win. It’s a fine line between a skillful amount of tournaments and “pay to increase ranking”.
With the new changes to how tournaments are graded and after playing in the most points Ohio has ever had in a tournament recently I would much rather do a huge monthly weekend than league every week. I think that will encourage more people to make the time for these larger events and take them more seriously.
IFPA should stick to “How do we make the most accurate and fair pinball rankings/ratings”. Their focus shouldn’t be “how do we make a location money”. That’s way to much and personally they do a lot as evidence by this thread here. I don’t have a solution, for I wish there was a better way to support a location(something similar to private golf courses) I don’t know, that’s not my forte. I just play pinball.
