Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

richba5tard

Administrators
  • Content Count

    6878
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    23

Everything posted by richba5tard

  1. Please select which benchmarks should still receive global points in 2019. If a new one really needs adding, select other and specify.
  2. As I don't have sufficient time to maintain the complex algorithm of hwbot rev6/7 and the rankings are too complex to explain: here is my suggestion for rev8. It's dubbed "classic" as it is as easy to explain as rev1/2/3. Submission points (mostly as is): benchmark as-is global points if score is 50% of WR, not top 75% hardware as-is More focus on medals, a bit less on points. Member points rankings: Career Ranking: Sum top 30 submissions all time Season Ranking, split into leagues: Sum top 30 submissions + top 10 competition entries made in current year, split into leagues Team points rankings: as-is team power points. As TPP includes 1/10th of the total points made by submissions linked to the team, there is a small impact from the global points change. Country points rankings: Sum member points current year Hardware / global masters rankings As is. Competitions: Top 10 entries of current year (seasonal ranking) and top 10 all time (career ranking) count for member points, no more oc-esports/road to pro/challenger points. Achievements: TBD, good concept but takes too much computational power? oc-esports.io Rankings scrapped, only to be used for read only view of schedule and the competition/stage pages. Thoughts?
  3. richba5tard

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    I have no strong opinions on which should get points and which not. Obviously I prefer benchmarks which integrate well with HWBOT, but no point in stuffing benchmarks down your throat. 😋
  4. richba5tard

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    I shall make a poll whether inactive members should contribute to rankings or not, as it seems to divide the community. I'll also make one for which 3d benches need to keep global points. Are polls needed for hardware points too? Or is that fine as is?
  5. Semantics... Yes, will make poll soon. Not discussed yet. No clear winners so far, but there is a clear loser. I also selected other for hwbot prime... but I might just be a little bit biased.
  6. richba5tard

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    Removing buggy benchmarks is fine by me, but is unrelated to the point algorithm.
  7. richba5tard

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    Then do it in private.
  8. richba5tard

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    No, this suggestion is not of me. I still think it's worth discussing as it means you are competing against active members. It's hard to see that as a negative.
  9. richba5tard

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    Please explain because i'm a bit slow. If we had seasonal leagues since day one, you could see a legendary overclocker would take a top spot every year he was active. That's awesome. But in rev7 his legacy slowly declines as every year his records are beaten, and he has less and less points.
  10. richba5tard

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    Well, the legends would not mind as they are not active. To be serious, if we had seasonal leagues since day one legends would never fade.
  11. richba5tard

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    We are not talking about removing it from the ranking, nor from stripping points from the old submissions. What is under discussion is whether inactive members should receive member points / have an impact on team and country ranking.
  12. richba5tard

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    I think this is an interesting idea. Why limit it to teams though? Why not base member & country rankings too on active members. They can't complain, otherwise they would be active. Computation wise it would not be that big a difference though, because the submissions of inactive members would still impact the rankings.
  13. richba5tard

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    Practically, no. We could enforce it for benchmarks using the API, but not of manual submissions.
  14. richba5tard

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    What would be the impact of inactivity? No member points nor league points? What is inactivity? No submissions or not visiting HWBOT?
  15. As discussed here, what is the preferred way forward? I have a slight favor of simplifying, as it's less code to maintain and cooling can not be enforced anyway.
  16. Always so much in the offense, ozzie. Chill down or you will get a perm ban. For me the suggestion with 3 leagues is best, with 4 would also be ok (non sponsored split into extreme / not extreme cooling) but there is no way to verify the actual cooling used. Hence this will be always a cause of discussion and heated arguments. Regarding the load / code complexity on the server: for each submission we need to check the cooling used, the current users league, and see whether they should move or not. If so, a total recalc is required for this user. It's not problematic but the more I can throw away, the less I have to maintain, the less bugs there will be.
  17. richba5tard

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    I don't see why anyone would lie about being sponsored. it's the other way around people might lie.
  18. Yeah, sponsored / non sponsored / rookie seems like a very good solution. Newcomers are not overwhelmed, no burden of proof on cooling.
  19. richba5tard

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    Temperature can't be proven but neither can pro/sponsored, so..... novice league is nice imho, as you are competing with new members. There is less need when you have seasonal rankings though. Can I inline a poll for this or do I need to create a separate post?
  20. richba5tard

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    Well yes I'm not changing the rev8 proposal for each comment made. Without comp points: With comp points:
  21. richba5tard

    hwbot "classic" rev8

    @ozzie i didn't ban you from asking a question, i temp banned you for a few days to cool down after being inappropriate. I don't host this forum to get scowled at. I'm not going to spend any more time answering the same question over and over. @bigblock990 thanks for noticing, fixed. I find your suggestion very reasonable not to make competition points count for career rankings. All in favor?
×