Board Thread:Questions and Answers/@comment-29776358-20170222172151/@comment-93.232.211.202-20170317182654

My point was to include the risk of being declined. If you are challenged, the opponent always wants to play, otherwise he wouldnt challenge. If you are challenger the opponent may be inactive or dont want to fight you.

3x264 +25 <- this corresponds to every fourth challenge beeing declined. In this case challenging is better. In my case, every  second  challenge is declined, then being challenged is better. Question is what is a realistic assumption?

Example from Right now: I used 12 points for nearly nothing. Played two obviously inactive player and used 6 energy points to shuffle, all I get was inactive. 12 Energy points  for 2*25 Points as challenger. Would two guys have challenged this 12 energy points would have been 300 Points.

Maybe I will note down this for the next season: challenger vs challenged Points, absolute and average values. Seems interesting. Or I quit completely, the match making is worse than ever.