On Tue, 21 Jul 2009, Roger Hicks wrote: > On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 13:18, C-walker<charles.w.wal...@googlemail.com> > wrote: >> Allowing 'empty places' on the list could make things more >> interesting: maybe players could automatically rise to the top of >> pockets of empty places in the list? >> > Ooo....I like the idea of empty spots on the list. Another idea is to > invert the list. Instead of players trying to get to Rank #1, they try > to get to the highest numbered rank. Then voting limit could be equal > to rank.
I think various linear or nonlinear formulas Limit ~ f(Rank) could work well (making the direction distinction unimportant except for ease of language) and blank spaces are a good idea perhaps; I don't want something that changes everyone's rank when someone new joins (i.e. when N changes, all the numbers push down one). So I think it's more "stable" from a recordkeeping perspective to have "better" ranks numbered lower. I tend to prefer exponential near the top so the top few spaces are highly competitive, but that's just me. (That doesn't so much penalize newbies as reward the top few performers; which is fine if they rotate out regularly or have a hard time holding the spot due to lots and lots of cards in play). -G.
