No offense to anyone, but the Hall of Fame seems to have become the Hall of People Who Have the Most Free Time. Who else remembers when everyone in the HoF had an average of at least 9 or 10 karma per game?
I calculate KPG as follows:
Total Karma/(# of games - games the user is in that haven't finished yet)
So for example, IAmPaxton has 1515 karma and has played 156 games (including one still in progress).
I beat some of them in kpg but with fast games now doesn't mean a low kpg means you suck for example if I win 10 duels my kpg for those 10 games would be 5 which is low although I don't suck :[
5.23 but I don't care about kpg anymore to be honest I reached black on this account in 30 games and once fast games came kpg went down for everyone except for ppl who only played survivor cause the rest of the games had low payouts and counted as extra games where as survivor merges counted as 1 game
kpg is not important, because of how flawed, and favoured it is towards one particular game. every merge should be one extra game on your account imo, that would balance it out.
those that have a decent KPG WITHOUT an excessive merge-streak, then yeah, you're good, you can boast, whatever lol. Equally, some people who play really well have a poorer one, just because they flare at frookies or whatever, with much less of a reward...I mean, how is that fair? :s
either way, a good KPG does not always define a 'good player' like some think. I've played survivor with ppl who made alot of merges, and they were honestly some of the worst social and challenge players I've seen, lol. In fact, I do agree that people who play a crazy amount of games per day should consider getting out more, but the same can be said about those wh'd rather prune their KPG to perfection, because they're that afraid of spoiling it, they too can sit there at the screen for hours, spamming for wins, or else frantically working to avoid being voted out.
Plus, people who are nutss over their KPG, I find that stops them from 'enjoying' the site, and getting the best out of it ... because that one vote-out or whatever that ruins their record, they freak out over.
This is a good concept to think about. My kpg is like 10.46 or something like that I believe. PrincessTeePee also made some good points about the whole kpg issue as well. You can look at it both ways. I do think that survivor merges should count as additional games.
It's also for newer people to have better karma per games than older people because the karma is so inflated now 60K for crookies win and 25K for slow castings 20K for survivor
It used to be 15K for rookies 10/15K castings and 10K survivor so that's definitely a big deal
I think there should be a separate KPG for each type of game. Those who play 10 Rookies, and get First in every game, will have a lower KPG, for those who join Survivor and Merge 4 times.
My KPG is shit because I'd rather play games than care about KPG... I'm here to play games (giggle), why do people forget about this aspect of the game
The thing is that KPG is completely irrelevant now because there have been like 20+ games over the course of Tengaged that all gave out different amounts of karma.
It is an utterly worthless stat these days.
The thing is that KPG is completely irrelevant now because there have been like 20+ games over the course of Tengaged that all gave out different amounts of karma.
It is an utterly worthless stat these days.
The thing is that KPG is completely irrelevant now because there have been like 20+ games over the course of Tengaged that all gave out different amounts of karma.
It is an utterly worthless stat these days.
The thing is that KPG is completely irrelevant now because there have been like 20+ games over the course of Tengaged that all gave out different amounts of karma.
It is an utterly worthless stat these days.
The thing is that KPG is completely irrelevant now because there have been like 20+ games over the course of Tengaged that all gave out different amounts of karma.
It is an utterly worthless stat these days.
The thing is that KPG is completely irrelevant now because there have been like 20+ games over the course of Tengaged that all gave out different amounts of karma.
meeee :P
I admit I care a lot about my KPG, everyone plays for different goals. I will probably stop playing frookies soon because I get mad over that one vote-out. It's the only game that makes me mad, therefore I don't like playing it. As bad as all that sounded, it's the truth for me.
I loveeeee making friends but it's also a personal goal to get to 10 KPG for me. Keeps me motivated.
For those saying that most people with high KPG is only based on who has a big survivor streak, can't speak for everyone BUT
If I added all my merges on as "games played" (even though a merge IS NOT a new game and I will debate that til I'm blue in the face) :P
Anyway, I have 134 total merges.. and have enrolled 7 times.. so I'll add 127 onto my games played
your* oops... just made myself look stupid after that rant :P
Oh and I also agree with what someone said about how early days games didnt pay out as much, for example I've won stars twice and got 100K total.. but now you get 100K from one win.
some of the massive game playing is annoying
whenever i get passed by someone who's really not that decent in games but just plays them over and over I get a lil annoyed LOL
however on the same token i think too many factors kinda prove all this work you put into the blog, useless. The ridiculous rates given out for fast games vs the high rates given out for week games. I don't play week games all to often so i'd prefer to have equal karma in fast games for time when I am able to play. Survivor merges kinda nullify kpg really.. bluestar falls onto that list not ridiculously over it but on it.. so if you added survivor to the people who have a good kpg.. they'd fall amongst all of us.
its not that valid to you Kez, but maybe to others it is..even people with long streaks have joined more survivoors, and have more games played too, so it won't be balanced there. you said it well though, not everyone can be spoken for with your theory
. bluestar falls onto that list not ridiculously over it but on it.. so if you added survivor to the people who have a good kpg.. they'd fall amongst all of us. jordanlloydfan
Like I just posted, if you add all my merges as games then id be at 10, but then add everyone elses merges to there's and it would go down for them too?
KPG is a pile of crap. People that won't join games cause it will ruin their "KPG" well that's just kind of pathetic xx
My KPG is shit because I'd rather play games than care about KPG... I'm here to play games (giggle), why do people forget about this aspect of the game
Sent by Bo_oM
^ That is probably the best comment on this blog, I really don't get why people care about KPG :s
I have a kpg of 9.7, but thats only because of survivor.
And I don't really play games to build my kpg. Sure winning is nice, but I don't go out of my way to join games just for the sake of winning them.
I feel like the only reason I even stay on the site is because of tengaged song contest!
Hmm, yeah I'm not necessarily saying KPG is the most valid way of measuring who the good gameplayers are. KPG used to be super important to me, then the duel came along and I enjoyed it even though I was terrible at it. Now I'm 8-9ish.
But I do feel like there should be some sort of other formula for the Hall of Fame that takes more into account than how many gazillion games people play. Yes, there are some genuinely good players in there - and not all have high KPG - but there are some genuinely SHITTY players in there too! I think back in the day, when the games rewarded karma more evenly and such, it was a better indicator of who the good gameplayers were, overall.
I remember back in the day, when Lexxu was number one, and then when he left, it was a battle for number one between Emmaleigh and BioDork, and some others were closely trying to get into the top 4, haha yeah... good ole days.
