- One championship per game and a sub-championship for each category
I'm leaning towards this, with the game championship taking every record into account, and weighting each category (or maybe even each level) depending upon the number of players.
So submitting a load of rings records won't do much for your position unless everyone else is doing so as well.
[snapback]7934[/snapback]
^ What he said.
- One championship per game and a sub-championship for each category
I'm leaning towards this, with the game championship taking every record into account, and weighting each category (or maybe even each level) depending upon the number of players.
So submitting a load of rings records won't do much for your position unless everyone else is doing so as well.
[snapback]7934[/snapback]
This could easily be done right now by reversing the current system: instead of getting 1 point for each user who beats you (with points being bad), you get 1 point for each user you beat (and points become good). Ties would give 1/2 point for each other user in the tie, so City Escape 1 would currently award 74 points for 1st (awarding an extra point for the existence of non-players) while Final Zone 1:13 would be 28.5. These point values could be doubled to avoid nonintegral point values, but with sub-1 category weights being proposed, avoiding that might not be necessary.
This will lead to different point totals between games, so you can't always "aim for 900" like you can aim for 0 now, but percentages can be reworked under this system and will still be a consistent measure.
This could easily be done right now by reversing the current system: instead of getting 1 point for each user who beats you (with points being bad), you get 1 point for each user you beat (and points become good).[snapback]7936[/snapback]
Er... is this not just the inverse of what we have now? maxpoints - current points = those points, as far as I can tell
Also if y'all want a system like that which is functionally identical (assuming it is), I can just make it default and make the golf-style points a user setting.
Edit: Also I was intending that all versions of championships sum up the points for each constituent division, so Rings wouldn't be worth much if nobody played them. Though they could sum up sub-champ points instead and it still seems that it'd weight appropriately?
- One championship per game and a sub-championship for each category
I'm leaning towards this, with the game championship taking every record into account, and weighting each category (or maybe even each level) depending upon the number of players.
So submitting a load of rings records won't do much for your position unless everyone else is doing so as well.
[snapback]7934[/snapback]
I'm very much in favour of this idea. To have an overall championship and each category being subordinate to that makes sense anyway - but this idea matches the sort of weighting idea I was looking for when I first proposed an overall TSC rankings scheme.
Of course, to incorporate these into the rankings we need to reach a consensus on what they should be weighted. At the moment weighting them all equally seems the most likely, but that seems silly given the relative emphasis put on the different divisions over the past two years.
Actually, the more I think about this the more it makes sense. Since there're more players in time-based ranks this rankings scheme would favour time players for now, but the change in rankings would get players competing in all divisions and even them out over time.
On a final note, if we're serious about giving ring divisions a fair go, we need the ring picture next to ring submissions back. X)EDIT: Done already! Quick response time ftw!