After mission report: is 'stealth' a low=good scoring system?

[Dunbaratu]

(i.e. like golf)

 

Because that's the only way it makes any sense to me, since more severe discoveries seem to cause larger scores.

[Melan]

That's correct.

[demagogue]

Yes, it's additive. Zero is perfect; higher is doing worse.

 

It used to be subtractive, where you start with 10, and some wanted 100, and it counts down. But the problem with that is that too often the score just went down to zero and stopped. And then it gives you no information. But an additive one will give you information forever, no matter how you do.

 

The other issue was that different FMs need different scales. Some FMs have only 2 AI, so counting down from 10 makes sense. Others may have 50, where starting from 100 makes sense. So a system counting-down will always differ depending on the FM size.

 

But with a system that starts from "0" and counts up, then it's like golf as you say, and different FMs can have different "par" values, where small FMs maybe 15 is an ok score, but for very big ones, maybe 40 or 50 is still a decent score. So the same counting system can be used for different FMs whatever their size.

 

So that's why we switched to the golf style of scoring.

[Dunbaratu]

Okay thanks. It makes sense to do it that way. But perhaps it might be a good idea to mention on the score report screen somewhere that that's how it works. A simple one line that says "The lower the score the better. A perfect score is 0." on the screen would be helpful.

[demagogue]

I actually tried to fit something like "(Zero is perfect)" after the score, but it didn't fit, and then I didn't know where to put it. Yeah, maybe somewhere on the details page would be good. I agree it's a good idea to clarify it.

[eigenface]

(oops, posted by mistake)

Edited April 18, 2014 by eigenface