I have a suggestion! Can you add user's place on leaderboard to their profile? (I hope you'll understand what I writed, even translator don't helped me write this).
I don’t exactly understand how Exp is calculated.
(0.01%). The square root of 0.01 is 0.10, multiplied by 10 is 1. This means a nearly unobtainable Achievement gives just 1 point?
(25%) Square root of 25 is 5, multiplied by 10 is 50. So an achievement with 25% gives 50 points while a much rarer one gives less?
Please explain what I’m doing wrong, cause I don’t understand how this is skill based if rare achievements are worth less.
Yes makes sense, I'm going to add this very soon (had to make some changes to the database).I have a suggestion! Can you add user's place on leaderboard to their profile? (I hope you'll understand what I writed, even translator don't helped me write this).
The values seem to be what I would expect, it's definitely giving a lot more EXP for rare achievements. Link me to a game though and I'll check.Welk i also don't understand becausr i have rare games on google play but it gives me nearly nothing in exp. While i taken a look that games with lots of Players gives many exp for the whole game. I think it should be different.
Also i can be wrong.
I believe he’s talking about games that aren’t popular with rare achievements. A few games only have 1 or 2 players who both earned a really rare achievement but because 100% of this site that played it owns the achievement it becomes worth less.The values seem to be what I would expect, it's definitely giving a lot more EXP for rare achievements. Link me to a game though and I'll check.
this is not a full concept yet, but maybe something like this could make everyone happy:
First of all, you use sqrt(ratio) for the computation. Here I would suggest using some other function that converges to some constant value, thus setting a maximal number of exp that can be earned from one trophies. Maybe use 10*tanh(ratio*atanh(0.1)), which is normalized in such a way that the minimal exp is 10 and the maximal exp is 100. You can even play with the parameters to get the best slope.
Afterwards, in order to account for games with only a few players, use some kind of error on the number of players and archievers. Here I would suggest using a poisson error = sqrt(N).
Then for the calculation, add the error to the number of players and substract it from the number of earners (This maximizes the exp in favour of the player). Afterwards proceed as usual except that you use tanh instead of sqrt.
This way a game with only one player would have
Ratio = (1+sqrt(1))/(1-sqrt(1)) -> inf and therefore give the highest amount of exp. Using this method the calculation is always in favor of the player. And for games with a lot of players the error is so small that it does not really matter.
Two players, two archievers would result in approx 53 points and 100 players, 100 earners, would only give 12 exp.
The only downside is that you get rewarded for playing games, no one else has played before. But maybe this also is a good thing. This adds some kind of a meta game, as you can actively reduce the exp of a competitor by playing games only he has played before. This could easily increase the number of players for certain games.
It should be resolved now, someone pointed out that a lot of games with spam achievements on Steam were still being counted, I've fixed it.Hmm Steam exp more higher than PSN and Xbox?! Most of players in top 50 only play Steam games
because of this i went from 19 to 50....oh well it needs to be balanced and fair...plus 50 is still sexy lolIt should be resolved now, someone pointed out that a lot of games with spam achievements on Steam were still being counted, I've fixed it.
Also, if you're using the beta, you can now sort games by EXP on the profile pages.
They were being excluded from the EXP system for some reason. I made some changes, will be counted after the next calculation.So, why is it that Blizzard achievements don't seem to have exp at all?
At first I thought it might be because there isn't enough of a sampling size to calculate a score (several of my WoW achievements I'm the only listed unlocker), but going way back into my history, even ones any non-achievement hunter would unlock during the course of casual gameplay have no score attached to them.