Potential New Scoring System

[vadernader]

I am some others have been discussing that if there is one cheap showcase and one expensive showcase, your score for that day is mainly affected by the more expensive showcase.

That's how it is supposed to be.

I believe that with at LEAST the item is bullet 1, is forces our players to bid well on BOTH showcases to acheive a great score,

This is false, the new system would benefit those who bid badly on an expensive showcase but well on a cheaper showcase. For example:

SC1 ARP: $45,000
SC2 ARP: $25,000

  Player            Bids                Old System       New System       Margin
Player 1: $42,500/$23,000           93.57                93.22            -.35
Player 2: $32,500/$24,000           80.71                84.11            +3.30
Player 3: $44,600/$24,000           98.00                97.55            -.45
Player 4: $34,000/$20,000           77.14                77.78            +.64

The only thing this new system does is reward those who tend to bid more conservative with higher scores for doing worse on expensive showcases but coming reasonably close on cheap showcases. The worst part is: the closer you get to the more expensive showcase, the larger the margin will get because percentage-wise, at least in this case, you will need to get almost twice as close on the $25,000 showcase just to not lose points from the Old to the New.

Examples:

If you're $1,000 away on Showcase 1, you need to be within about $556 of Showcase 2 or else your Old System score will be greater.

If you're $500 away on Showcase 1, you need to be within about $278 of Showcase 2 or else your Old System score will be greater.

On the other hand, if you're within $1,000 of Showcase 2, as long as you bid under $43,200 on Showcase 1, your New System score will be greater than your Old System score.

[bigwheel1991]

I like bullet 1 but I still like the original system.

I like the original system. It is awesome if you do great and if you fail you fail.

[silverice878]

Like it's been said many a time before: IF IT AINT BROKE, DONT FIX IT!!!!

[BigJon]

It seems some people either don't care about the first bullet, or wouldn't mind making each showcase weight equally, still a simple math calculation.  You'd just be doing what you do now against each showcase instead of both at the same time..  I get the fact that no one is liking the partial/loss of points.  Understood

Thanks for all the comments, criticisms and suggestions so far. The general consensus so far is basically, if you overbid on one showcase, you get a 0 for the day, like it is currently.  I appreciate you input on this.

[Roadgeek Adam]

Might want to make sure that this will be implemented in S41.

[GuyWithFace]

^Whoa, hold on there, sir -- the first post details proposed changes, not confirmed ones. Despite only playing once (and massively Garfing), weighing the Showcases equally, I believe, would not work.

Things are just fine as it is, Jon, and I very much hope that you will not be like other people in charge of various things (not here; I mainly refer to YouTube) and proceed with the proposed changes anyway despite the consensus otherwise.

[FieldsFan336]

I'd rather keep the current scoring system rather than overhaul it.  It's a lot easier this way

[Prizes]

I get that you work a good deal, Jon, you have a busy life, and all. Life comes first for anyone, I get that for sure, results can get delayed a few times. It happens, my job is demanding, and can ask for me to get ready in literally 5 minutes, and I gotta be ready then. But, I'm going to ask this out of fairness: How is it that as soon as you have this idea, this can get quickly posted, yet daily results (which take time out of a busy schedule, I understand and respect that) can be delayed around 3 weeks?

Also, I'm with Vader- that's why balancing the SCs weights to be equal doesn't fit, IMO. It doesn't seem fair to value a Splendido SC as one with say, a Corvette. This is a nice idea, Jon, but I don't think it's entirely practical for use here.*

*On the other hand, as I've suggested elsewhere, you can host this version on that other site, the one that starts with B and ends with V, exclusively. Seems like the reception to the idea is much more warm there, in my honest opinion.

[RCPlanes59]

I like this new system. I'm in the minority, but I don't like the idea of one overbid ruining both showcases. Here is my logic: if one stage player overbids, the other player doesn't lose their showcase (assuming that player underbid). I think the subtraction of points for an overbid is a good compromise between those who feel that a one SC overbid should and shouldn't equal zero. Also, it's very frustrating when Mike decides to sex up one showcase and it flies under the radar, leading to an absurdly low score to those who haven't memorized the prices. This really puts all of us on a more level (but obviously not completely level) playing field, where it really comes down to pricing skill.

[vadernader]

Also, it's very frustrating when Mike decides to sex up one showcase and it flies under the radar, leading to an absurdly low score to those who haven't memorized the prices. This really puts all of us on a more level (but obviously not completely level) playing field, where it really comes down to pricing skill.

The game is supposed to be like that, not "Oh, let's just curve all the scores today because there was a sexed up showcase" which is, in sense, what this system is.

A giant curve.