richba5tard

It's 75%, not 70%. So score needs to be at least 14s671ms or better to get more points. This 75% cutoff is under discussion for the next revision.

Who feels the same way about increasing the top xxx scores for year career and/or seasonal ranking? I don't have any specific feeling about this. Global/hardware/mobile masters are as-is, so unrelated to career/seasonal rankings. Leagues, National, Team and Country rankings are all seasonal in current rev0 build. Only your career ranking is based on all time submissions.

Well, reducing the complexity of the algorithm (remove team power points, competitions points, different selection of which points matter for which kind of member points, etc) makes it easier to test the whole thing and make more robust and reliable. The exact mathematic algorithm which decides how many points a specific submission is worth is not the cause of complaints, but it should not be bugged that often.

Ok i'll change it - edit: done

When the HTTPS SSL certificate is renewed it often breaks our load balancer in front of the engine (nginx). This has occurred multiple times but never just when I went to bed, hence the 5h dowtime. Sorry about that!

Check mails

Can I have some more opinions on changing the % cutoff for global and hardware points? Maybe both 75%? Removing points for who has between 50 and 75% of best score for global will not go well with the community, but adding points is never an issue.

Simplify the rankings and how the points you get for a submission contributes to your personal/team/country total is the goal. The actual algorithm of how many points are awarded for a specific submission is less of a factor. IMHO

It's 50% for global and 75% for hardware currently. Or are we talking about something else. Any touching to the point algorithm itself means a full recalc needs to occur, which is messy and takes a lot of time. So I'd like to avoid it if possible.

Adjusted team page, corrected the labels on the career and season rankings, and made the whole rev0 a bit mobile responsive. Looks good!

Tweaked the rev0 'classic' design and adjusted the user profile points section to reflect the career & season points on uat server. Next up: team pages.

Ok

For me, adding/removing points to benchmarks is unrelated to the points algorithm used, but I do recognize it is easier to do this at the start of a season then in the middle of it. Do we let the community decide or decide our selves?

So, imho ranking look good. The aspiration to use less computation power and simplify the rankings is achieved. Seasonal rankings in addition to all time rankings will cause a ripple in the community but i'm pushing this forward. No other sport has only all time rankings. Shall I start polishing the code and labels so we can give the rev0 a public test run?

I've changed the team ranking to be based on the seasonal member points instead of all time, same for country ranking. The generic teams are now removed from the team ranking.

Yeah writing a plugin is the proper way but it's just too time consuming getting to know the invision pb framework, setting up a dev mode invisionpb to develop and test the plugin, etc etc. I just hacked the theme to include the info into an iframe. It's dirty but it works.

It's not a fix, it a plugin that needs to be written for invisionpb.

I'm not saying the power points where a bad idea, but it was complex both to explain as to implement/maintain/compute. Easy explainable rankings and simplicity should be key in rev0.

When competition points are included, rev0 proposal seems to produce quite decent rankings, no?

Yes, it has already been decided hardware master stays. Should we keep global masters too? Yes, just like in any other sport. Afaik there are no major sports where your achievements continue to contribute to your ranking for ever. Indeed, it would be an addition: we keep the all time ranking but also offer a view on the same algorithm/ranking scoped to this year only. Team points = sum of member points. So yes, sum of top 10 submissions+competition points for all members of that team. Same for country. I know "power points" where designed to prevent hardware sharing, but it just too complex to explain and maintain. Some are, some are not. Problem is that the achievements can be added at runtime, most are not coded by me. Pieter could write a query and it the query matched the achievement was awarded. But most queries are heavy and don't use db indexes, hence take a lot of db power. I like them though, will do my best to keep them. Maybe remove the once which are too db hungry? PS when commenting, check the first post as it reflects the current proposal adapted to the feedback here.

Edited first post to reflect current implementation on uat. It now also includes competition points.

Why don't we award less points for 3D then? I don't like the idea of giving a lot of points for "expensive but easy" 3D benchmarks, and then saying they don't count as much as it has less skill involved.

How does rev0 proposal differ that much from rev3 to you, except for the suggested competition points addition and seasonal rankings?

No, the database is no longer compatible with rev3... Let me tweak it a bit more.