The TJT wrote:What? Maybe my reading is bad...
Are you talking about "solution 4" now?
I was talking about what I quoted from you there. I didn't look up if that was your solution #4 or #4977305
All games are not so popular and competed for a fact. Mainly because some games just suck...
Yes, so those should have NO bearing on what we do with the leaderboard. No matter what scoring the leaderboard has some games just plain suck so it logically follows not near as many will play it and thus not as likely to have a very high score as the top score.
I was basicly meaning that 100-85-70 etc gives too much lb points.
Let's solve 1 issue. The issue is changing the leaderboard scoring to reduce or eliminate the ABC submitters who seem to play each rom set a couple times and submit whatever score they happen to get on the game...even if good for only 1-2 LB points....just to accumulate LB points.
We like the guys even in 2nd place and 3rd and even 5th and 6th that are close to the top score. Whether they get 85 pts or 75 pts or 50 pts for second isn't the issue and reason we are discussing the scoring system of the leaderboard.
Use circus charlie as an example perhaps instead of 1942. If 6 players have 999,990 for score...and 7th place is 982,520, are you saying that 7th place score sucks to the point it deserves ZERO LB points? That is still an excellent score.
Ok, you could change that 50% criteria to 75% or even a higher number...it was the concept I was introducing...not the exact numbers to be used. Adjust them. I just threw out 50% as a figure. For most games, getting 50% of the top score is still a pretty decent showing.
if it wasn't for the ABC submitters I don't think we would be having this leaderboard discussion...so let's stick to that issue for now.
I like more for first place oriented system. Changing to 100-85... really does not change much, atleast for lb.
It's still 15 more points. If that isn't enough incentive plus getting that first place score...fine. it will still be enough for others...plus the competitve aspect.
In competing with you for Balloon Fight, it's competing to have the top score. It's not about those 15 extra LB points. I could be playing other roms going for points where I have zero and easily get 15+ Lb points versus competing at Balloon fight still...but I like the competition. My goal for that game is to reach 1 million. You see there is 1 more dot to the left of our scores....so I think it will show 1 million. It would be interesting to see....plus require a high level of skill to reach...likely nearly mastering the game at that point.
But I know that to get from 2nd to 1st does not give you really leaderboard advantage, and therefore discourage improving your position...leaderboard-wise thinking.
I don't think adding more weight to 1st place would change the competition for first place in most cases...especially cases like 1942.
You could end up strongly discouraging trying to get 2nd or 3rd place though if you devalue those much versus what they currently are. How many games do you see a top score that is nearly perfect or you might think is unreachable...yet you think you can get the second place score. That still might be enough for you to go for that second place score. ...similar for 3rd place. Devalue 2nd and 3rd place and suddenly for many games unless someone thinks they can get the top score they won't even bother trying.
That's sad if that happens IMHO.
This is all about the guys submitting tons of average or so-so scores. Those competing for second and third place if submitting only so-so scores likely won't stay in those places in the longer term.
Ofcourse main aspect for many a gamer to be the first is "honour". The scores are so close because of huge end bonus at the game. Scoring is not linear at 1942.
Of course....many games fall under this.
do you think all finished games should be given nearly 100% lb points?
No..and that is still the case with 1942 also. if it gets where 10+ have finished the game, the guy in 10th isn't going to be getting that many points even under the current system. if my calculation is correct even if 10th place was 99.999% of the top score, they would get 23 LB points. That's not all that bad.
That still is a replay showing skill though...to complete the game...so doesn't fall under the issue at hand here. Please get off this 1st-3rd place stuff and stick to the issue that has caused many to not like the leaderboard.
Different games have different scoring. Thats is why
your thinking is flawed
hardly...ANY scoring system will be flawed when the game scoring system is flawed.
Nothing is perfect. Any scoring system will have certain games where that system just doesn't work for it.
The system we want to make is a system to discourage ABC submitting. It's not about anything else at this point. You have added 2-3 more aspects to it. It's making things cloudy.
It's very easy to get 50% at trackfld.zip...yet 96k score requires much much more skill than 90k score. Also note that there must be atleast 20 players that have "finished the game"(one round), is it fair all 29 players get lb points.
That system I gave won't work for every single game. ...but will it stop assigning LB points to the 100s and 1000s of replays submitted by ABC submitters with so-so scores for most games? yes it would.
Therefore that would be a possible solution.
Fine, maybe they still take a few Lb pts here and there on some games where it's easy to get 50+%....fine. That won't be enough to get them up into the top 10 or 20 though.
Also opposite example to 50% suggestion... There can be a game where top score is just very high, like Galaga. If you want to give lb points for players who have 6th places, an exceptionally high top score prevents that, no matter how solid competitition there is after 1st place.
Well, if there is only 1 masterful player of the game and no other masters exist...so be it. I don't think it's unfair at all in that manner. It awards that 1st place score for it's degree beyond all the other scores.
Your strict place system would give the same extra LB points of 1st vs 2nd place when 1st place is only 0.1% higher in score than 2nd place or when 1st place is a factor of 10 higher than 2nd place. That's not fair to that great accomplishment by the 1st place player.
If you give 10 first places for 1942 good lb points, for finishing the game...Then you'll need to make same for other games too, like Trackfld.
Unless making different lb point system for each game
All suggestions above I always have assumed are for ALL games. We want a SIMPLE system...not something so damn complex most are confused by it. So you want the same for each game... Yes, any system will be flawed for certain games. We are talking about a system that applies to most though and would stop encouraging ABC submitters.