Here is why it should be fixed:
http://postimg.org/image/dqtls258t/
The latest game was me being thing on very short timeframe (hence he lost), every other game was minithor being picked by pro opt even though he didn't have the higher stats and whatnot and dying (hence he lost). But I digress, this isn't a bug report, since the whole pro opt needs to be replaced by the better system of:
Step 1: Collect all players who opted into a list.
Step 2: Sort all opting players by ThingRating * ThingPoints, descending, highest to lowest. This way the amount of points a player has matters, but if they're shitty or people keep downvoting them enough it won't matter as much.
Step 3: Pick a random number N from 1 to X, where X is defined farther below. Basically, a mechanism for saying "Pick from the top opting players".
Step 4: Pick opted-sorted player N as thing.
When you pick a random player in step 3, you have to have an upper limit otherwise everyone who opted has a chance of being thing, which would make it random opt essentially. So, make X be Min(floor(PlayerCount * .3), Opters). For example, in a 14-player game, if 10 people opt, they get sorted by their TR * TP, and one of the top 4 (14 * .3 = 4.2, floored is 4) players gets picked as thing. Hence, pro opt does its magic. If only 3 people opt, however, then one of the top three opters will get picked. This lets new players try to be thing as well, but if enough pros opt to be thing, then it stays at a relatively pro level. In a 13 player game, the top 3 (or 2 or 1 if only so many opt) would get potentially picked as thing, and so on.
There are no downsides to this system when compared with what we already have, and very little downsides to this system overall. Please go with this method. That way I can stop cringing at the reputation loss Thing has been suffering the past many hours.
http://postimg.org/image/dqtls258t/
The latest game was me being thing on very short timeframe (hence he lost), every other game was minithor being picked by pro opt even though he didn't have the higher stats and whatnot and dying (hence he lost). But I digress, this isn't a bug report, since the whole pro opt needs to be replaced by the better system of:
Step 1: Collect all players who opted into a list.
Step 2: Sort all opting players by ThingRating * ThingPoints, descending, highest to lowest. This way the amount of points a player has matters, but if they're shitty or people keep downvoting them enough it won't matter as much.
Step 3: Pick a random number N from 1 to X, where X is defined farther below. Basically, a mechanism for saying "Pick from the top opting players".
Step 4: Pick opted-sorted player N as thing.
When you pick a random player in step 3, you have to have an upper limit otherwise everyone who opted has a chance of being thing, which would make it random opt essentially. So, make X be Min(floor(PlayerCount * .3), Opters). For example, in a 14-player game, if 10 people opt, they get sorted by their TR * TP, and one of the top 4 (14 * .3 = 4.2, floored is 4) players gets picked as thing. Hence, pro opt does its magic. If only 3 people opt, however, then one of the top three opters will get picked. This lets new players try to be thing as well, but if enough pros opt to be thing, then it stays at a relatively pro level. In a 13 player game, the top 3 (or 2 or 1 if only so many opt) would get potentially picked as thing, and so on.
There are no downsides to this system when compared with what we already have, and very little downsides to this system overall. Please go with this method. That way I can stop cringing at the reputation loss Thing has been suffering the past many hours.