Crew Antinomy Posted July 31, 2010 Crew Share Posted July 31, 2010 I just wanted to say that the problem about Massman's words people join because the want to do some overclocking with hardware they already own.exists not only in the suggested system but does now and it did with rev. 2. A number of guys from my team had lousy submissions in rev. 2 but they've got some boints for them with rev. 3. The results of novices will go in their personal account. And then if they want to make a team to gain boints, they'll have to plan a strategy - either beat the results they can or find team's weak categories an go there. Nothing wrong in making the game more intelligent. As I see from now (I didn't make the analysis so I'm not sure about different aspects) - they'll be less brute force in team rankings, when a team that is able to get 4-8 members in one place on a joint session with one binned GT will go high in rankings by benching a bunch of videos. I don't even take into account situations when they can bin one card and make photo of a bunch - though the suggested rule will fix this too in team rankings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 0.1 is a mokery, not an award Not if you don't have any points yet. There are 13 HWBOINT benchmarks currently, which means that every starting member would get 1.3p for just running all benchmarks. - new member sees point increase with every benchmark - new member sees that he supports a team - new member learns how to run benchmarks/verification - new member looks how he can improve (maybe forum members say: 'buy something very cheap') From the eyes of someone who is used to see 300p in the profile, 0.1p may be mockery, but from the eyes of who has no points 0.1p is already something. Possibly enough to maintain or increase the level of interest for the overclocking hobby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eeky NoX Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 Proud to be a 0,1 pt collector Quite right Massman ! 1year ago I was so dissapointed to loose my time in trying to get points without earning anything. Until the rev3 and that I own a SS it encouraged me so much that I could'nt have enough time to bench everything oO For novices it was a great improvement for sure, for others maybe it made sadly "thier ego" grows up with emphasys... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Beier Posted July 31, 2010 Author Share Posted July 31, 2010 (edited) I am pleased about the discussion, I sense that its not just me who sees this as a problem, and I hope somehow a solution can be found this quater. I think M.Beier is boring. If you were a hot chick, that might would have been a problem for me. Edited July 31, 2010 by M.Beier Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobnova Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 I definitely liked that i got .1 when i started benching (not long ago, really). Now i don't care especially much about that result range, but that is to be expected, the .1 isn't there for me anyway. .1 global i'm still pumped about, it's worth a few places here in the 300s. The concept of only the best result for a given piece of hardware counting for the team would make it quite difficult for newbie types to help the team. Not an issue at all for PURE and other elite teams, but on OCF one of our recruiting methods is that everybody who joins up is helping. If limiting the team gain for given hardware is the goal, a better (though yet again more complicated) way IMO would be to put a cap on the amount of points a team can earn from a single part. Put the limit at the max the hardware can be worth, whatever a gold cup is worth. If i have a e6600 good for a bronze and 33 boints and i sell it to a team mate, he can only get the difference between my 33 and the max of 49.7. If he then sells it to someone else they get none (or maybe a maximum of 5?). If i lose my bronze and drop to 22 points the second guy gets more, and the third gets whatever are left over. Alternatively you could do it so that each successive team member with an E6600 gets half the score ahead of them. I got 33, next lowest person can only get 16.5 or less, person after him can only get 8.25 or less. Changing the team hardware thing has the opportunity to shake the teams up hugely, it benefits teams with a lot of misc. hardware hugely, teams like PURE that have a ton of globals would have a huge drop in points. Third option: Just restrict globals, treat the team's globals like a single persons, they get globals only from the best submission for each bench. EDIT: Anyway, i think the minimum of .1 boints is important for newbies, it makes it possible to gain ranks even with junk hardware, and the first .2 they get is every bit as exciting as the first .1 would have been back when there wasn't a minimum. Once they don't care about .1s anymore they're already hooked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monstru Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 As I said here I do not think this is the way to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaJ0r Posted August 1, 2010 Share Posted August 1, 2010 I am pleased about the discussion, I sense that its not just me who sees this as a problem, and I hope somehow a solution can be found this quater. If you were a hot chick, that might would have been a problem for me. It's Danish humor? Many words from you, so i thought you are boring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Beier Posted August 1, 2010 Author Share Posted August 1, 2010 It's Danish humor? Many words from you, so i thought you are boring. Nope, I think it is a misunderstanding in your English, sorry... You say I am borring, yet you know nothing about me, you might find the given topic boring, but that is not related to me.... My snappy comment was a neat response to someone finding me borring, that it only would matter in some cases if its a cute chick ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoF Posted August 1, 2010 Share Posted August 1, 2010 It's Danish humor? There is no "danish" humor...there is only m.beier humor and you need some time to get used to it...past that point: everything he writes or says will make you laugh or at least smile (similar to albrecht or jp hahahahaha) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperhorn Posted August 1, 2010 Share Posted August 1, 2010 All in all I´m fine with the sharing rules atm. If >I< had to decide about the CPU sharing in 3D benchmarks and could ensure no CPU will be ever shared again (= supposition only) I think I would not allow sharing. But it is allowed right now and I can´t see a stunning domination of a team caused by this rule. Even if there would be THE uber-chip out there (7 GHz @ 3D i7-980X or so ) it will degrade or die after 5, 10 or even 50 LN2-sessions and out-performed by a new chip generation. So excessive sharing might boost a team/group of users in the rankings, but in the long-term they would need an almost infinite source for golden cherries. But if that happens, I see no reason why you shouldn´t be able to get 5,10 oer 20 of these kind of CPUs as you will need powerful insider-contacts or a truckload of money and at this stage just a sharing rule will not bring brack "the balance". btw 1Day, long time no see Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Antinomy Posted August 2, 2010 Crew Share Posted August 2, 2010 Massman, Eeky NoX, Bobnova, thanks for your opinions, I might have been wrong on the 0.1 points award. Maybe it really was worth implementing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
franknos90 Posted August 13, 2010 Share Posted August 13, 2010 I disagree with M.Beier some persons can't afford complete bench systems.. so, no 3d fun for them? I think that these new rules can damage above all no-sponsored teams Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenchZowner Posted August 14, 2010 Share Posted August 14, 2010 The obsession about points, teams and co is one of the sources of all the bad things we're looking at nowadays happening in the OC community & "hobby". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hondacity Posted August 15, 2010 Share Posted August 15, 2010 there are lots of submissions....by some guys... you have to give them some sort of credit... some guys like turican have benched 10yrs continuously while some like bodar benched like 1yr only but ranked higher is well...ok as well....he got records... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canna1988 Posted August 15, 2010 Share Posted August 15, 2010 (edited) I disagree with M.Beier. But i think will be nice have different user ranking for different Cooling.. For example an user ranking for Air Cooling and Liquid Cooling. Another user ranking for Xtreme Cooling (LN2, Dry Ice, SS, Cascade and etc...) So also people that are not able to use LN2 or another extreme cooling solution can have fun and try to fight for take a good position in a ranking. This surely will encourage lot person to begin in this fantastic world. Edited August 15, 2010 by canna1988 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted August 15, 2010 Share Posted August 15, 2010 but... if there was such a ranking i would certainly fight for some cups there as well, even if it's just mainstream cooling. And I use Ln2 alot:p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.