richba5tard
-
Posts
6082 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
37
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by richba5tard
-
-
14 hours ago, zeropluszero said:
2 Leagues
Pro/Sponsored
Everybody else
Stop with the silly leagues by cooling method in which temperature can't be proven anyway.
Want to move up the ranks? Move up your game. It doesn't get any simpler than that.
Can we do this?
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?
-
Well yes I'm not changing the rev8 proposal for each comment made.
Without comp points:
With comp points:
-
@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?
-
5 hours ago, ozzie said:
why is rev 8 even needed, can you not sort rev 7 out ?, if no then why? you arranged it and put it in place, im well aware that you were left with a mess from massman, and others, thinking all is good, and im not trying to make that mess any bigger, im not a dickhead mate, dont treat me like them
Hi ozzie,
The reason has been posted multiple times in this topic. TLDR; it's too complex for me to maintain with the limited resources we have. 685.000 lines of code written in the span of 14 years is no joke to maintain. Not that rev8 suddenly makes this a walk in the park, but it's a move in the right direction. Both for me, as for new overclockers for which the concepts are overwhelming.
The current rev8 proposal (first post) is not a drastic change from rev7. It (mostly) removes the oc-esports rankings - which no one cares about anyway, and introduces seasonal rankings which some like and some not. If you don't like it, don't watch it.
-
10X GEFORCE RTX 2080 TI RANK :o
-
36 minutes ago, GeorgeStorm said:
The point of the example was the idea that it wouldn't work like that
That since User A had better scores in the past, he would get nothing despite beating User B this 'season;
One can argue if you did the 100m sprint in 8 sec last year, but did it in 9 sec this year, you are not better than someone who did it in 8.5 sec this year.
I know the comparison does not fully make sense, but still a topic that can be discussed.
-
8 minutes ago, mickulty said:
But if he achieved even 20,000 on the same hardware this year it wouldn't count because he got 20,630 in 2016? Or am I missing something?
I see your point. It would indeed only count if you break your previous record. To have this make more sense a seasonal league should also be restricted to recent (eg past 2/3 years) hardware.
-
3
-
-
Just now, GeorgeStorm said:
I think the potential issue would be in the (very unlikely) situation that user a has 10 old records, and user b subs 10 new 2nd place scores, user a could sub 10 scores that were all better than user b's, but not quite better than their old scores, and they would get nothing whilst user b would get everything. And whilst this isn't an issue in one way, it doesn't represent how 'good' someone is doing in a season type thing, as they're always being compared to their best, whereas in a normal seasonal ranking, you're just compared to others in that season I would think?
Yes, as in any sport! You are always comparing to those who participate in that season.
-
2 minutes ago, mickulty said:
Probably makes more sense, thinking about it. Otherwise people who have got top scores in the past are at a huge disadvantage not because they're less active now, but because they can't get points for scores this year when they already got a better score last year (unless people sandbag...).
This actually seems like it may be a problem for seasonal rankings in general. Say me and nachtfalke both posted a fairly low-effort HD 4890 vantage score of 16K, probably not too difficult on modern physics platforms, I'd get 5 seasonal points but nachtfalke would get 0 because he already made an amazing score on cascade in 2016 - that doesn't seem fair.
Some kind of dynamic ranking would be good though. Maybe a "champion's ranking" based on globals + recent competitions?
It does count for his career though. It does not count for what he achieved this year. Seems ok to me.
-
1
-
-
First page reflects UAT yes.
I made a mistake, team rankings is already based on total amount of points made by members of all time. Seasonal ranking has no effect on TPP.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Yeah I know but I need a simplified codebase in order to maintain it better. A codebase of 685.000 lines started in 2004 is no fun to maintain.
-
1 minute ago, Fasttrack said:
Even a 10 year old kid with average IQ should be able to understand this Frederic
Personally, being a "marathon" athlete, I prefer to concentrate on what I have achieved in the long run. But that is just me.
As for Team rankings, IF I understood correctly, the "long run" effort will represent the ranking of the Team.
Looks very reasonable
Hmm, currently the team points = sum TPP + 1/10th of seasonal member points. Change it to 1/10th of career member points? Maybe makes more sense. I don't really care.
-
2
-
-
How difficult is it to explain "this is what you achieved this year" and "this is what you achieved since the beginning"?
-
Now that team power points are restored, would it be beneficial to use the same logic for country rankings? Power points of a country would take a computational toll, but it would be nice if both country and team rankings are based on same logic.
-
1
-
-
UAT will be down for half an hour. I'm restoring a production copy of the db and team power points.
- edit restore failed. I'll try it again tomorrow morning.
- edit restore ok
- first post edited to reflect rev8 state on uat
-
2
-
2
-
-
You have been warned ozzie. I'm letting you cool down until Sunday.
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
The TPP is a drain on resources and maintenance, but if the concept is loved I'd consider maintaining it. The big drawback(imho) is that it is quite static but so be it.
-
1
-
2
-
-
What fundamental change to gl/wr do you suggest?
Less benchmark which give points is ok by me, but a separate discussion.
-
Warning, don’t pollute the topic with off topic rambling. Thanks.
-
The only ranking I changed temporarily where the ones with screenshots above.
-
The change has been reverted again, screenshots above show what the effect would have been.
-
Top 50 submissions, using hw points:
-
3 minutes ago, FireKillerGR said:
still shows top 10 comp and top 30 subs so I guess it takes a while to get updated?
Can you also fix UAT so it does proper calculations?
That way it will be less confusing and easier to get the full picture of whats going on.I did not change the labels, just the calculation of the rankings.
Top 30 submissions, using total points:
-
30 minutes ago, richba5tard said:
Just a hypothesis, but what would be the effect if no points were awarded for wr/gl, only hw? It would significantly reduce the money factor, while skill is still involved in getting high hw points. People who go for world records have less "points" awarded, but I doubt they do it for the points anyway.
For shits and giggles let me try this out on uat.
It's active on UAT. Member points = top 50 hw. Take a peek if you are interested because I'm reverting it later tonight.
Should we simplify the leagues in 2019 and on or not?
in HWBOT Development: bugs, features and suggestions
Posted
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.