18 replies to this topic

[razenWing]

Well, even though you can no longer see the voting tallies as you go up, so you can't deliberately do this. But, maybe you are the lottery winner type and can achieve insanely high stack by getting lucky.

But that's not what I am interested in. What I want to know, is what's the highest theoretical stack you can attain from the quick play votes? See, I used to think it's 23, because as soon as you hit 24,even if there are 23 people voting against you, you are going to win.

But that's just way too simplistic. Because, I did not take into account that 23 other people might have stacks too.

So here's the intricacy comes in. Because assuming you can hit a new high in stack, TECHNICALLY, 23 other people can hit that too, thus further pushing up the new maximum.

(Kinda like a repeating loop)

Now, I am no math major, so my guess is infinity, but I don't know if I am missing a limiting factor somewhere, what you guys think?

What is the theoretical highest voting stack you can ever attained from quick play votes?

Edited by razenWing, 23 November 2016 - 04:08 AM.

[Mcgral18]

I thought it capped at 12

[razenWing]

Mcgral18, on 23 November 2016 - 04:07 AM, said:

I thought it capped at 12

Assuming no hard cap.

[Mechteric]

razenWing, on 23 November 2016 - 04:09 AM, said:

Assuming no hard cap.

Then what's the point, at that point it's just a math problem with no point to it?

[kesmai]

12/12 for map/mode.
12 votes do not guarantee a success though in qp.
Assuming no hard cap?
Why the mindfapping for nothing?

[Tristan Winter]

Best case scenario is if you have (in this hypothetical) x23 multiplier and everyone else has x1 multipliers.
Worst case scenario is if you have x1 multiplier and everyone else has (hypothetically) x23 multipliers.

In reality, the cap is x12, so best and worst case is x11 multipliers.

The thousands and thousands of other possible combinations are in between these extremes. The number of combinations would be 23^24, I believe.

[Idealsuspect]

kesmai, on 23 November 2016 - 04:59 AM, said:

12/12 for map/mode.
12 votes do not guarantee a success though in qp.
Assuming no hard cap?
Why the mindfapping for nothing?

In best case if you have x12 multiplicater vote you have to beat 23 voters which have, in best of case for you, a x1 multiplicater

Also it mean you have 12/12+23
x12/x35 also tier of total votes multiplicaters..

But in many cases all 23 people don't vote.

[Lily from animove]

How does it work?

Quote

Map and Game Mode Voting Screen Changes
We have introduced a weighting mechanism to the Map and Game Mode screen.
Each time a player votes for a Map or Game Mode that does not win, their vote weight for the next vote session goes up by one for that category (to a maximum of 12 votes for Map. and a maximum of 12 votes for Game Mode).
• Example: Player A votes for Terra Therma and Conquest. Terra Therma and Conquest both lose the vote. Player A thus gains one additional Map vote and one additional Game Mode vote the next time they vote.
• Example: Player A votes for River City and Conquest. River City wins the vote, but Conquest does not. Player A thus gains one additional Game Mode vote the next time they vote.
Each time the player votes for a Map or Game Mode that wins, their vote weight returns to 1 for that category.
• Example: Player A has a Map vote weight of 4, and a Game Mode vote weight of 4. Player votes for Crimson Strait and Skirmish. Skirmish wins the vote, but Crimson Strait does not. Player A's Game Mode vote weight thus returns to 1, and their Map vote weight increases to 5.
If a player does not vote for a Map or Game Mode, their vote weight for that category remains the same.
For Groups, now only the Group Leader will be able to cast a vote. For all other players in the Group, the Map and Game Mode voting is disabled. However, the Map and Game Mode vote cast by the Group Leader will be visible to all other members of the Group. The respective Map and Mode vote weights for the Group Leader will also be visible to the other Group members.
Players can now rescind a vote by clicking on the respective Map or Game Mode for which they have voted.
Vote percentages are now based on the number of votes cast, rather than reflecting the total number of possible votes.
• Example: If only one person has voted, the displayed percentage will be 100% rather than 4%.

This theoretically would mean it could be infinite.

just imagine the following:

matchup 1 vote 1:

24 people vote for map 1-4

6 vote map 3
6 vote map 2
12 vote map 4

Matchup 2 vote 1

24 people vote.

6 vote for map 1
6 vote for map 2
12 vote for map 3.

now imagine all those 12 people who have NOT gotten their vote will happen to end up in the SAME matchup for the match after the first one.

this would generate a matchup of 24 people having a 2x multiplier EACH.

highly theoreitcally it could be that you end up with a multiplier of 24, and yet not win because soemwhere in the other remaining 23 pilots is someone with a 23x multiplier and one with a 2x multplier voting for the same map.

you cna however make a funny experiemt and try to vote only for the unpopular maps and see how high you cna raise it. Most of the time when when multiple popular maps appear, like, mining, canyon and HPG and another one, you will mostlikely be the deciding factor with a 3x or 4x multiplier as all the other votes may even out amongst them. But theoretically it could be infinite - but also require an infinite amount of players-. (ignoring downitimes for maintenance which reste stuff)

Edited by Lily from animove, 23 November 2016 - 05:24 AM.

[Idealsuspect]

Tristan Winter, on 23 November 2016 - 05:14 AM, said:

Best case scenario is if you have (in this hypothetical) x23 multiplier and everyone else has x1 multipliers.
Worst case scenario is if you have x1 multiplier and everyone else has (hypothetically) x23 multipliers.

x23 multiplicaters exist? lol
If not and if OP was wrong correct him about this first..

[Lily from animove]

Idealsuspect, on 23 November 2016 - 05:23 AM, said:

x23 multiplicaters exist? lol
If not and if OP was wrong correct him about this first..

I don't think such a multiplier was ever reached it would need an extremely unlikely scenario to reach such a multiplier.

So the missing factors are the player population and how long it is possible for it to be online (maintenance times) Those will decide how far a multiplier can theoretically reach would all those players constantly play between the servers downtimes meeting the perfect conditions to always caue enough players with multiplier +.

Edited by Lily from animove, 23 November 2016 - 05:36 AM.

[razenWing]

CapperDeluxe, on 23 November 2016 - 04:51 AM, said:

Then what's the point, at that point it's just a math problem with no point to it?

Hence the title... MATH challenge.

Here's another challenge, can anyone calculate the chance of said scenario? (well, i guess because technically, it could be infinity assuming infinity of players, we are only going to have 23 to 30, and see if we can find a trend line.

Edited by razenWing, 23 November 2016 - 08:27 AM.

[Tristan Winter]

Idealsuspect, on 23 November 2016 - 05:23 AM, said:

x23 multiplicaters exist? lol
If not and if OP was wrong correct him about this first..

I already covered it in my post, in the part you didn't quote. And someone else already covered it before me.

Why do some people have such a hard-on for scoring cheap points in discussions on the internet, even if it means ignoring part of people's posts? What are you trying to accomplish by saying this?

"lol".

[Bombast]

In this scenario, the theoretical maximum voting stack is infinite.

And it's bizarre you think it's take a math major to figure it out.

Realistically though, even if the modifier was not locked, and the impossible kept happening and people's multipliers just kept getting bigger, there's a point where the game and the server would be unable to log the numbers anymore and would error out. If it's limited by the software (Likely) that's a question for the programmers. If it's limited by hardware, it might as well be infinite as far as anyone's concerned.

[Idealsuspect]

Tristan Winter, on 23 November 2016 - 08:47 AM, said:

I already covered it in my post, in the part you didn't quote. And someone else already covered it before me.

Why do some people have such a hard-on for scoring cheap points in discussions on the internet, even if it means ignoring part of people's posts? What are you trying to accomplish by saying this?

"lol".

If you still don't know it mean you need give more serious answers to everyone you don't understand

[PhoenixFire55]

Theoretically there is no limit. If we assume infinite pool of players of course.
Using math induction one can prove it.
Lets say you currently have a voting multiplier of X. Which means there are possibly other people with voting multiplier X. Obviously they can outvote you thus your multiplier becomes X+1. Continue same logic infinitely.
Realistically tho with limited pool of players, tiers etc. I doubt anyone would have been able to get over x20 or so. And either way, its capped at 12.

[Bud Crue]

Given the variables in question, and the data points discussed thus far, I have considered all options and concluded...

[Bandilly]

PhoenixFire55, on 23 November 2016 - 09:38 AM, said:

Theoretically there is no limit. If we assume infinite pool of players of course.
Using math induction one can prove it.
Lets say you currently have a voting multiplier of X. Which means there are possibly other people with voting multiplier X. Obviously they can outvote you thus your multiplier becomes X+1. Continue same logic infinitely.

Infinite is indeed the answer when we don't have a player limit. If we had a limit to the number of accounts that we can use to create this hypothetical top multiplier then a concrete number would appear.

As long as their are more players to boost up other players who can boost up other players and so on you can just keep stacking. Of course this would require continuous coordinated planning of a lot of matches as the higher your top tier gets the more it takes to make a group that can boost them up even 1 more multiplier.

Edited by Bandilly, 23 November 2016 - 10:02 AM.

[Rift Hawk]

Mcgral18, on 23 November 2016 - 04:07 AM, said:

I thought it capped at 12

x6 is the highest I've ever gotten. Every time I get that high I win.

[Lily from animove]

Bombast, on 23 November 2016 - 08:57 AM, said:

In this scenario, the theoretical maximum voting stack is infinite.

And it's bizarre you think it's take a math major to figure it out.

Realistically though, even if the modifier was not locked, and the impossible kept happening and people's multipliers just kept getting bigger, there's a point where the game and the server would be unable to log the numbers anymore and would error out. If it's limited by the software (Likely) that's a question for the programmers. If it's limited by hardware, it might as well be infinite as far as anyone's concerned.

dpeend son how many digits they gave for storing the number, but I think we would run out of humans required in numbers before we would reach such a limit that a pc can't show anymore.