1. B(posted 9203 days ago)It's the best system that's been in place, but that's not saying a whole lot - it's only the second.
2. Sorry to split this one, but it's the only way my answer will make any sense.
10-3-1 or similar with large 1st bonus - D It's a bad, bad, idea to force a race for first place without more controlled conditions than MARP has, or maybe I should say more controlled conditions than MARP could possibly have.
10-7-5-3-1 or similar with less than ten places - C
12-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 or similar with at least ten places - B
10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 or similar with at least ten places - A Probably the best system that's a political possibility. My personal preference is 25 places.
3. A 4. C I think ties should, in general, get equal points. I don't care all that much though, except for the ones that are practically impossible to lose and NEED TO BE DROPPED ALTOGETHER.
5. B (with 6)/C (without 6) 6. A 10% to 30%, with minimum scores through tenth place regardless (call it a Galaga rule?). This has as much to do with the load on anyone trying to follow the scoreboard as it does with the server. And in case anyone forgot or wasn't here yet, there were a few people pulling the A.D. bit while it was still 10-3-1.
or
(yes, it's out of order) 9. A - 10 per day I'd rather see this than a minimum percentage cutoff, especially since there's only an expiration date on tournament entries.
7. A/B/C - depending on ????
I don't know. It would sure as hell put a stop to the beta rush - 1st place worth 1 point :) But ... a strong first place score could get stuck with a relatively small number of points if people decide it's not worth the chase. Could be interesting, but a fixed number of places is probably a saner option.
8. No leaderboard - C The leaderboard is one of the unique features of MARP. As innaccurate as it may be at times, it's still a cool thing to have around.
Aqua