Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

Recommended Posts

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?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would keep the competition points, Frederik, its a motivator to participate... but keep it simple, like 50-48-46 for challangers and team cup and co

 

Don't like the per year thing, especially not for the hardware masters, that's the work of an OC career going up for grasps... not done Frederik, a very bad idea

 

Whats the impact on server load if we attribute points again for all benchmarks

Edited by Leeghoofd
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't good to hear that there's a need to change the point algorithm again, but I understand where you're coming from, Frederik.

I need to think about some things before I post them, but here are some thoughts:
- Keep the competition points, as Albrecht said they're a nice motivator for people to participate in the competition.
- Do I understand correctly, that for the new league position, you want to sum up all the points made in the respective year? I would propose the same approach for user, team and country ranking.
Calculate Top 20 Global Points (/WR Points) + Top 20 Hardware points + Top 10 Competition Points. For the user ranking just the user in their respective league, for the team ranking the highest scores of all team members and for the country ranking the highest scores of all the countrymen.
- Should we discuss getting rid of some of the benchmarks? PCMarks come to mind, or some of the many variants of the 3D benchmarks (lower end 3DMark and Catzilla).
- Would it save coding work to get rid of oc-esports.io and host the competitions on HWBOT again? I mean, we use the normal HWBOT design etc. instead of the oc-esports.io one.
- Can we get the global points back for 3DMark 06? :D

Edited by Don_Dan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fully against any approach per year for members/teams/..., this makes about half of the members/ teams loose massive points, which makes motivation to continue to bench non existing... 

Only thing the bot will reflect who is still actively benching (probably the latest and greatest hardware) not about what they have ever achieved. Makes climbing the ladder even easier than it is now...

Especially for the hardware masters, well just skip the category and loose it all..

 

 

Edited by Leeghoofd
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, after all a great score worth many points is still a great score after many years. This is especially true for the hardware points, where many records are many years old.

In my opinion and as Albrecht has edited above, removal of the Hardware master league would cause a major outrage among the users. Is it that difficult to maintain and causing so much server load that it's better to cut it off?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you go per year approach it will reflect who's actively benching, and that's basicly it...

It is no longer about who's being skilled, just the same as it is now, bench the latest and greatest and get top ranking per member/team and Hardware all for the same price... I don't see the point in it... It will kill the Bot once and for all,  especially if the Hardware Masters gets the same treatment...

Might be interesting from a server load perspective but we just need to roll back to a simple algorythm: where the top  score  is 50 points and roll down, do a cut off at 50% to reduce server load...

Edited by Leeghoofd
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scraping eoc sports ranking is ok, if you want to simplify points distribution go to a system that mixes rev3 and later - up to 20 subs maybe 2, 50 then 10, 100 25 points etc up to 50 points for top spot and award less up to 50% of subs, lower 50% get zero (just an example). You ave all hwresults in the database anyway, why do you want to scrape masterleague? Won´t say more at the moment, Albrecht and Daniel made some points already so maybe you can get to them first so we have a base for discussion without me adding to chaos, Frederic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Don_Dan said:

- Keep the competition points, as Albrecht said they're a nice motivator for people to participate in the competition.

While I don't like that your member points are not the sum of your submission points it is easy to explain you can get points for competitions too. I'll take it into account if we can keep it simple.

19 hours ago, Don_Dan said:

- Do I understand correctly, that for the new league position, you want to sum up all the points made in the respective year? I would propose the same approach for user, team and country ranking.
Calculate Top 20 Global Points (/WR Points) + Top 20 Hardware points + Top 10 Competition Points. For the user ranking just the user in their respective league, for the team ranking the highest scores of all team members and for the country ranking the highest scores of all the countrymen.

Yes, that is my suggestion. The team and country points would be the sum of the member points of that team/country so would be based on the same logic.

I can live with your top 20 suggestion, but only if we apply the same logic for the yearly rankings as the all time rankings. Much harder to code (without needing much computational power) than using just the sum though.

19 hours ago, Don_Dan said:

- Should we discuss getting rid of some of the benchmarks? PCMarks come to mind, or some of the many variants of the 3D benchmarks (lower end 3DMark and Catzilla).

No specific feelings towards enabling/disabling points for benchmarks. :)

19 hours ago, Don_Dan said:

- Would it save coding work to get rid of oc-esports.io and host the competitions on HWBOT again? I mean, we use the normal HWBOT design etc. instead of the oc-esports.io one.

Like suggested, I want to keep the schedule and round/stage pages, but just read only view. The oc-esports pages are currently already optional, you can view the competitions on hwbot.org too.

19 hours ago, Don_Dan said:

- Can we get the global points back for 3DMark 06? :D

No specific feelings towards enabling/disabling points for 3D06.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Leeghoofd said:

I'm fully against any approach per year for members/teams/..., this makes about half of the members/ teams loose massive points, which makes motivation to continue to bench non existing... 

I don't see why you oppose so much to a seasonal ranking, next to an all-time one. The all-time one is way too static and not that interesting. A seasonal one is much more interesting, and resets each year.

Your all time efforts would not be lost, they would be displayed in the all-time rankings.

About hw masters, it makes sense to keep it if we do as Don_Dan suggested, to do a top 20 for normal league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Don_Dan @Leeghoofd i've edited the first post:

  • use top 20 submissions instead of all, both for yearly as for alltime
  • keep hw masters
  • give points for official competitions

"Calculate Top 20 Global Points (/WR Points) + Top 20 Hardware points + Top 10 Competition Points."

I'd rather keep it more simple and say "top 20 submissions" count toward your league points (so wr+gl+hw), top 10 competition points. It avoids confusion about the different types of points you have, which is overwhelming for new overclockers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As usual, a testrun of the algorithm can be seen on http://uat.hwbot.org/

Currently it shows the member ranking based on top 20 total points of each user for year or all time. Teams are currently based on total of member points of current year, not all time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is the same with the OCers Frederik... Bob did some runs with 1080Ti and 1080Ti in SLi, so he is the fastest OCer in the world... sorry but not by far...

This yearly thing is too vulnerable to the latest and greatest hardware... That will either motivate some with the cash and piss off prolly more OCers... The currrent system with the competition points (yearly too) is a far better approach to keep them motivated

Edited by Leeghoofd
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. If OGS (Bob?) does not deserve to be marked as the most noteworthy overclocker of 2018, his submissions are not worth the points. It's not the fault of the seasonal ranking. An all-time ranking just hides the flaws a bit more because it is more static.

Please note I'm not saying we should abolish the all-time rankings. I'm just highly in favor of seasonal rankings too.

The current algorithm on UAT does not yet take competition points into account.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OGS (firekiller and Phil) has benched a multitude of platforms in 2018, while Bob (Peter) just benched a dozen of benchmarks in a matter of two weeks or such lol... So that effort makes him better just becasue he did a better selection of which 3D to bench...

Well we can debate this endlessly, this is not the way to go... it doesnt reflect anything... can we reload rev 3 and see what that does on UAT...

Edited by Leeghoofd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the database is no longer compatible with rev3...

Let me tweak it a bit more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to get back to the basics here with some added competition points, something that truly reflects what an OCer achieved, which was in my eyes rev3...

All the rest was way too complex to explain, I don't even get the current algorythm at all, hence why I just focussed on hardware masters. The support for E-sports was total overkill  and a deadborn child from the start.

I like normal hardware rankings with a cut off of points at 50%, sorry we can't please everybody here. For the OCers leagues some award system (with cups) and a bonus for those that participate in competitions...  nothing more nothing less... as simple as it gets plz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

seasonal ranking might need to be eg the best 10 3D and 10 2D points for an OCer, just to take the focus off expensive GPUs... 

I don't like the seasonal concept as it will be another extra ranking on top of all the rest... and in its current state it reflects zilch zero... maybe you don't liek static rankings, but it takes along time to get to the top and to stay there is even harder... with seasonal rankings it takes 3 weeks to get there and shit loads of cash, but  on one GPU generation and CPU architecture...

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Leeghoofd said:

seasonal ranking might need to be eg the best 10 3D and 10 2D points for an OCer, just to take the focus off expensive GPUs... 

I don't like the seasonal concept as it will be another extra ranking on top of all the rest... and in its current state it reflects zilch zero... maybe you don't liek static rankings, but it takes along time to get to the top and to stay there is even harder... with seasonal rankings it takes 3 weeks to get there and shit loads of cash, but  on one GPU generation and CPU architecture...

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.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not the solution as it iwll triger something else Frederik, if you want to do an annual ranking it has to be based on 2 and 3D  and maybe single card subs only or specific benchmarks only...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought #1 - keep hardware master, both ranking/league and calculations (sum of all). It has it's fun in benching all those obscure and/or old CPUs/GPUs. Something like collecting hardware, don't take it from people (and me too).

As for season rankings - worth a try in addition to all time. It's pretty much like those US football season games and rankings, isn't it (I'm not big in to sports)?

Team points you mean -sum of members Global+Hardware+Competition?
Dumping oc-esports - fine for me, couldn't find anything there anyway.
Are current achievements really this resource consuming?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Antinomy said:

Thought #1 - keep hardware master, both ranking/league and calculations (sum of all). It has it's fun in benching all those obscure and/or old CPUs/GPUs. Something like collecting hardware, don't take it from people (and me too).

Yes, it has already been decided hardware master stays. Should we keep global masters too?

4 hours ago, Antinomy said:

As for season rankings - worth a try in addition to all time. It's pretty much like those US football season games and rankings, isn't it (I'm not big in to sports)?

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.

4 hours ago, Antinomy said:

Team points you mean -sum of members Global+Hardware+Competition?

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.

4 hours ago, Antinomy said:

Are current achievements really this resource consuming?

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.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×