Here's a thought about leaderboard scoring. How about only giving confirmed recordings points, those that are unconfirmed should get no points or have reduced (by 75% or so) points. Or perhaps at least add an option to the leaderboard to discount unconfirmed recordings. Maybe this will help curb some of the "lame recordings" and "points leeching".
<p>
I await everyone's thoughts...
--
bsr@hn.pl.net
Idea regarding leaderboard scoring
Moderator: Chad
-
Chad
That's a good idea, but there are just too many good recordings that
would go unconfirmed since there are not many confirmers.
Effectivley it'll just reduce the scoring to who ever can get 1rst or
second place.
<p>
I think since there are a limited number of confirmers and recordings
should be innocent untill proven guitly, the way to do it would be to
strike the score of recordings if they use a banned technique. This
could be applied only to the new tgmame leaderboard for the people
who want to keep the regular leaderboard the way it is.
--
churritz@cts.com
would go unconfirmed since there are not many confirmers.
Effectivley it'll just reduce the scoring to who ever can get 1rst or
second place.
<p>
I think since there are a limited number of confirmers and recordings
should be innocent untill proven guitly, the way to do it would be to
strike the score of recordings if they use a banned technique. This
could be applied only to the new tgmame leaderboard for the people
who want to keep the regular leaderboard the way it is.
--
churritz@cts.com
-
Gameboy9
Yeah... that's what I think we need to do:
<p>
1. Keep the regular leaderboard as it is - with a more leinient rule
structure.(there's still no autofire allowed and the like...) The
leaderboard markdown shouldn't take place here.
<p>
2. The TG MAME leaderboard will have a MUCH greater strictness
involved. Like no autofires period, keep your speed at a decent
level, etc. This MAY be where the unconfirmed markdown could take
place, except the markdown should be... 25 %?(so if you get 100 pts
and it's unconfirmed, you would get 75 pts until it was confirmed)
<p>
3. The tournament is the same thing as 2, except you have to use TG
settings, whatever they will be. No markdown here, because we
confirm all of the games here.(or pretty darn close to it)
<p>
Of course that's only how I look at things...
--
goldengameboy@yahoo.com
<p>
1. Keep the regular leaderboard as it is - with a more leinient rule
structure.(there's still no autofire allowed and the like...) The
leaderboard markdown shouldn't take place here.
<p>
2. The TG MAME leaderboard will have a MUCH greater strictness
involved. Like no autofires period, keep your speed at a decent
level, etc. This MAY be where the unconfirmed markdown could take
place, except the markdown should be... 25 %?(so if you get 100 pts
and it's unconfirmed, you would get 75 pts until it was confirmed)
<p>
3. The tournament is the same thing as 2, except you have to use TG
settings, whatever they will be. No markdown here, because we
confirm all of the games here.(or pretty darn close to it)
<p>
Of course that's only how I look at things...
--
goldengameboy@yahoo.com
-
A.D. SAKURAGI
I think that a good solution to avoid broken inp to take points is
adding a flag to the confirm option.
Now we can confirm it (if it is good) but we cannot do nothing if it
is broken.How about adding a confirm bad option?
If a game is confirmed bad it won' t take points until the owner of
the record will demonstrate that it works (or someone will demonstrate
it).
This idea is to avoid (like it is happened) that if someone posts a
message
on the board about broken inps nothing happens.
If you see the current leaderboard you' ll see that BBH is 2nd for
about 300 points
and German Krol is 1st with 3 broken inp (invinco - invds - invho2)
that assign to
him 300 points.
With a confirm bad option it wouldn' t been happened.
I think this is better than lowering (25% or 75% i don' t remember)
because it will be probably first not the best player but only the
player that have more confirmed scores (I can also create a virtual
player and confirm them and if the inps are correct noone can stop
this)
--
adeidda@newmail.net
adding a flag to the confirm option.
Now we can confirm it (if it is good) but we cannot do nothing if it
is broken.How about adding a confirm bad option?
If a game is confirmed bad it won' t take points until the owner of
the record will demonstrate that it works (or someone will demonstrate
it).
This idea is to avoid (like it is happened) that if someone posts a
message
on the board about broken inps nothing happens.
If you see the current leaderboard you' ll see that BBH is 2nd for
about 300 points
and German Krol is 1st with 3 broken inp (invinco - invds - invho2)
that assign to
him 300 points.
With a confirm bad option it wouldn' t been happened.
I think this is better than lowering (25% or 75% i don' t remember)
because it will be probably first not the best player but only the
player that have more confirmed scores (I can also create a virtual
player and confirm them and if the inps are correct noone can stop
this)
--
adeidda@newmail.net
-
Chad
If we (zwaxy 
ever get a chance to impliment a good confirm/bad
confirm in the scoring, there should also be the storage of who
confirmed it good/bad, to possibly prevent the virtual player
confirming scheme.
--
churritz@cts.com
ever get a chance to impliment a good confirm/bad confirm in the scoring, there should also be the storage of who
confirmed it good/bad, to possibly prevent the virtual player
confirming scheme.
--
churritz@cts.com