Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

HoF design flaw

Fifth

Fifth

Elite
Joined
Jan 26, 2012
Posts
2,761
Avatar Name
The "Fifth" Entity
The design of the HoF board is a little sloppy.

Currently after 24h a HoF times out leaving a "vacancy" (the table will have 99 entries instead of 100). This effectively means at this moment the treshold value = 0 ped. Any global will fill the void (and thus also qualify as HoF) - which leads to those ridiculous results: 9-11 ped HoFs.
Those "baby-HoFs" will be pushed out of the board almost instantly by the next global, and that in turn with the next until someone gets a real HoF that lands somewhere in the middle of the table and thus pushes the current 99th down to the 100th position. At this point we will have a real HoF table again, where the lowest entry loosely reflects the overall level of activity for the profession during the last 24h.

The "unstable periods" and all the misleading messages they generate are unnecessary. Most ppl won't understand the mechanics behind this and will make conclusion OK looks like loot is bad atm, I'll better take a break.
While actually it's a random event and has nothing to do with overall activity level or loot in general (the lowest "normal" HoF does).

It's clearly a design flaw and easy to fix.
( eg. keep the last 10 HoFs that were "pushed out" in the "HoF buffer"; whenever some HoF times out don't just leave a vacancy but replace it with the highest one from the buffer ... or sth along these lines ).

Cheers!
 
Fifth said:
The design of the HoF board is a little sloppy.

Currently after 24h a HoF times out leaving a "vacancy" (the table will have 99 entries instead of 100). This effectively means at this moment the treshold value = 0 ped. Any global will fill the void (and thus also qualify as HoF) - which leads to those ridiculous results: 9-11 ped HoFs.
Those "baby-HoFs" will be pushed out of the board almost instantly by the next global, and that in turn with the next until someone gets a real HoF that lands somewhere in the middle of the table and thus pushes the current 99th down to the 100th position. At this point we will have a real HoF table again, where the lowest entry loosely reflects the overall level of activity for the profession during the last 24h.

The "unstable periods" and all the misleading messages they generate are unnecessary. Most ppl won't understand the mechanics behind this and will make conclusion OK looks like loot is bad atm, I'll better take a break.
While actually it's a random event and has nothing to do with overall activity level or loot in general (the lowest "normal" HoF does).

It's clearly a design flaw and easy to fix.
( eg. keep the last 10 HoFs that were "pushed out" in the "HoF buffer"; whenever some HoF times out don't just leave a vacancy but replace it with the highest one from the buffer ... or sth along these lines ).

Cheers!
Click to expand...

i'm not sure exactly how it works, but ive seen the table end at 97, ive globaled 50+ and it wasn't an HoF or in table, so i'm guessing there is some kind of safeguard. i do see some silly ones slip in tho
 
They should just take the HOF board back to 10 (hell even 25 is fine) spots and remove the 100. HoFs really lost their glamour after expanding the list out to 100. No one gives a shit about HoFs after 10-15 position.. I mean who honestly scrolls through the whole list?
 
Hypnotyk said:
They should just take the HOF board back to 10 (hell even 25 is fine) spots and remove the 100. HoFs really lost their glamour after expanding the list out to 100. No one gives a shit about HoFs after 10-15 position.. I mean who honestly scrolls through the whole list?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think u right, HoF should be something special.
I would love HoF table with only 25 entries! :yup:
 
On the other hand, it works just fine if you take a hof for what it really is - just a normal global that made it to top100, nothing special about it, so a 10 ped loot has the same right to be there as a 1000 ped, even if just for 1 minute.

Probably it leads to frustrations and disappointments to get 10 ped hofs, and the system needs a change. By from a technical perspective, I see no problems :)
 
But I enjoy getting the extra special swirlies. So I would be sad if the hof list shrank.
 
Hypnotyk said:
They should just take the HOF board back to 10 (hell even 25 is fine) spots and remove the 100. HoFs really lost their glamour after expanding the list out to 100. No one gives a shit about HoFs after 10-15 position.. I mean who honestly scrolls through the whole list?
Click to expand...

HOFs lost their glamour to me when MA introduced "forced global" mobs... Mobs with 10k+ HP which swirl continuously.

1500PED on a KING KONG? Don't care. 1500PED on a Allophyl? Congratulations.
 
Svarog said:
On the other hand, it works just fine if you take a hof for what it really is - just a normal global that made it to top100, nothing special about it, so a 10 ped loot has the same right to be there as a 1000 ped, even if just for 1 minute.

Probably it leads to frustrations and disappointments to get 10 ped hofs, and the system needs a change. By from a technical perspective, I see no problems :)
Click to expand...
You do realize there's lots of ppl (prolly majority) who perceive it as a message "economy is in bad shape right now"?
If you understand how it works you won't be affected but your not alone here and everyone isn't as smart and level-headed as you... ;)
 
The way I see it, this is technically correct behavior. (the topic of the OP not the size of the list lol).

The thing is, if it wasn't a HoF when it happened, it doesn't "become a HoF" from some runner up buffer 23 hours later. At the time it happened, it didn't make the cut.

So when the oldest HoF drops from the list, it does in fact open up an empty spot in the current chart, and a global of any size can take that spot.

It should still work the same no matter what size the list is.

Also it would be wierd to suddenly get HoF swirlies while you're standing around doing something else for a global you hit at sometime in the last 24 hours.



EDIT: Wasn't there a time when the HoF list was empty after each maintenance too?
 
Last edited:
It's called an if-else statment
 
Svarog said:
On the other hand, it works just fine if you take a hof for what it really is - just a normal global that made it to top100, nothing special about it,
Click to expand...

^^ This
Atrax said:
The way I see it, this is technically correct behavior. (the topic of the OP not the size of the list lol).
Click to expand...

^^ And this

A HOF is "Largest globals over the past 24 hours" Nothing more, nothing less.

I've personally had 312ped globals and 170ped hofs. (My 1st ever hof was 177ped)

Those that make more of it are just being silly.
 
I think...

They should maybe have planetary HOF table for each planet, and the largest of those makes up Universal hof table.That way we would see more old planetary mobs in by planet table and for big boys a universal with maybe different animation.

Would maybe encourage people on smaller mobs/bp's that used to be commonplace within table, and also for big rollers universal entry and different swirl factor.
 
Well Mindark could bring back the 50 spot hof list.
But then we are back to square one, as people will complain again, they can't hof.

As I said before, for me the solution would be, put a minimal value on a hof, let's say 300 to 400 peds ?
Anything below that value will be a global.
 
MA just need to set a mininal value of the HoF, atleast 250 PED (or maybe 500). My smallest HoF was 54 PED, and I agree, it is ridiculous
 
I think the desired effect would be achieved by an aging algorithm. Let the ranking value for each entry diminish by e.g. 10% every week. A continuous formula could be used to calculate it on the fly, which avoids having to add an extra field to the database and a cron job to update it:

ranking value = hof value * 0.9 ^ (age in seconds / (7*24*60*60))

A 1000 PED HoF would be ranked with 900 after a week, 810 after 2 weeks, 656 after 4 weeks and so on, including momentary in-between values, and fall out of the list when it gets superseded by enough newer entries.

Not sure if it might cause confusion if a newer, lower entry is shown on a higher rank because of that and the method is not understood by the viewer. Unnecessary support cases would cause economic damage this feature is certainly not worth. A way of clarification which does not demand counterintuitive thinking may be needed.

Ideas you get when you're forced to logout... :scratch2:

Edit: These low-value hofs are for rare item discovery, which is a different category. I had them for armour pieces worth as little as 6 and even 2 PED, which ended up TT food after three lost auction fees.
 
Last edited:
Gewitter said:
MA just need to set a mininal value of the HoF, atleast 250 PED (or maybe 500). My smallest HoF was 54 PED, and I agree, it is ridiculous
Click to expand...

I can beat that - 52 ped HoF :D
 
Atrax said:
EDIT: Wasn't there a time when the HoF list was empty after each maintenance too?
Click to expand...

There was... I remember everyone racing back in-game after downtimes to try and get a HoF from a normal global.
 
HOF board should be limited at 25 entries - 100 is a ridiculous number. ATH board limited at 10 entries.


Bring back global cap at 50 ped for all professions, I don't care that someone somewhere looted a 14 ped dak. Globals need to be something special.

That is all :).

(oh yeah and MA stop messing with things that don't need to be changed :)).
 
The only way to get rid of this micro HoFs is to introduce a minimum value for HoFs like someone else said.

Reduceing the lenght of the list will not help.
Event when it is only a list with 5 entrys it could happen that you land on it with a very small global.

If you do not understand this behaviour you should stop to care about stuff that needs understanding of logic :laugh:
 
bah, it's by design. Go ahead and expand it... Make it go to 999 globals on the list. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top