Post #1 · Posted at 2010-05-20 05:15:06pm 15.1 years ago
 discovigilante | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 49 Posts | |
 | |
| Reg. 2010-02-06 | |
 | |
| "チーム・ファイナリー" | |
I was wondering if it would be possible to implement Marvelous comparison into the Battle feature. A lot of us play on SN2 or X now, so this would help decide the winner in a lot of matches that resolve as ties now.
For instance, let's say Player 1 has 19p on a song and Player 2 has 20p. Player 1 wins.
Of course, in situations where Player 1 has 19p and Player 2 doesn't have a Marvelous count because his/her score is from a mix without Marvelous, it should be resolved as a tie.
How about it?
For instance, let's say Player 1 has 19p on a song and Player 2 has 20p. Player 1 wins.
Of course, in situations where Player 1 has 19p and Player 2 doesn't have a Marvelous count because his/her score is from a mix without Marvelous, it should be resolved as a tie.
How about it?
Post #2 · Posted at 2010-05-22 09:59:09pm 15.1 years ago
| al2k4 | |
|---|---|
 |
Admin |
| 9,402 Posts | |
 | |
| Reg. 2006-05-01 | |
 | |
| "BEMANI Sound Team" | |
I could do that, but that would be unfair to those that have access to only SuperNOVA or before as their MARVELOUS count would be 0.
Any AAAs got in an older machine would be ranked lower than ALL those that have the priviledge to play on a more modern machine.
Opinions on this would be welcomed.
Any AAAs got in an older machine would be ranked lower than ALL those that have the priviledge to play on a more modern machine.
Opinions on this would be welcomed.
Post #3 · Posted at 2010-05-22 10:21:00pm 15.1 years ago
| Exor | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 3,644 Posts | |
 | |
| Reg. 2008-05-29 | |
 | |
| "^ featured on Law & Order" | |
I have to agree with al here. Not everyone has access to SuperNOVA 2 and/or DDR X machines, especially in the United States. I personally have access to 3 EXTREMEs and 2 SuperNOVAs, depending on time of year. Dave & Buster's in Times Square, as far as I'm told, has a DDR X machine, but D&B doesn't maintain their machine well.
Post #4 · Posted at 2010-05-22 11:15:02pm 15.1 years ago
| DJ Sterf | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 90 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2007-06-18 | |
Maybe make 2 side-by-side columns, one for people w/ Marv and one for people w/o? You can do that with formatting code instead of having new entries in the database, so it wouldn't be too hard if you went this route (though it might look crowded, so there could be a better way for sure -- color coding might be another option, too -- Extreme & White = Green, Max2 = Black & Orange, Max = Teal & Yellow, 5th = Blue & Light Green, 4th = Black & Purple, 3rd = Black & Yellow, Solo2k = Black & Red; SN1 = Red & White, SN2 = Bright Blue & White or something like that lolololoolololooloolllllllllloloolloo).
Post #5 · Posted at 2010-05-25 04:53:24pm 15.1 years ago
| discovigilante | |
|---|---|
|
Member |
| 49 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2010-02-06 | |
| |
| "チーム・ファイナリー" | |
@first two replies:
Perhaps it was poor wording on my part, but what I meant was something like this:
Player 1 vs. Player 2
Song: JaneJana
Player 1 has a AAA on an Extreme cabinet.
Player 2 has a 19p PFC on an SN2 cabinet.
The score tracker resolves it as a tie because the Extreme player's score doesn't include marvelous.
Or what Sterling said, which is awesome.
Quote: discovigilante
Of course, in situations where Player 1 has 19p and Player 2 doesn't have a Marvelous count because his/her score is from a mix without Marvelous, it should be resolved as a tie.
Perhaps it was poor wording on my part, but what I meant was something like this:
Player 1 vs. Player 2
Song: JaneJana
Player 1 has a AAA on an Extreme cabinet.
Player 2 has a 19p PFC on an SN2 cabinet.
The score tracker resolves it as a tie because the Extreme player's score doesn't include marvelous.
Or what Sterling said, which is awesome.
Post #6 · Posted at 2010-05-25 07:16:45pm 15.1 years ago
| al2k4 | |
|---|---|
|
Admin |
| 9,402 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2006-05-01 | |
| |
| "BEMANI Sound Team" | |
Uh, could do that. But the ranking system cannot utilise such a system as there'll be multiple players with MARVELOUS scores, and which score would that tie to then?
Post #7 · Posted at 2010-05-25 09:06:22pm 15.1 years ago
| discovigilante | |
|---|---|
|
Member |
| 49 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2010-02-06 | |
| |
| "チーム・ファイナリー" | |
I'm not quite sure I understand your question, and furthermore I know I don't understand the inner workings of the ranking system. I was just talking about user-by-user comparison... the Battle feature.
Post #8 · Posted at 2010-05-25 09:18:57pm 15.1 years ago
| Telperion | |
|---|---|
 |
Member+ |
| 2,004 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2009-04-25 | |
| |
| "btor2osly" | |
Quote: al2k4
Uh, could do that. But the ranking system cannot utilise such a system as there'll be multiple players with MARVELOUS scores, and which score would that tie to then?
Maybe just have an option to incorporate marvs or not when ranking people. (And go alphabetically or something when not including marvs.) This could even be automatic - a faceoff between two SN2 scores would default to Marvs separate, and a faceoff between an SN2 score and an EXTREME score would be Marvs as Perfects.
e.g.:
Marvs as Perfects? N
Sigma: (SN2) 30 Marv, 70 Perfect, 0 Great [1st]
Alpha: (SN2) 20 Marv, 80 Perfect, 0 Great [2nd]
Beta: (X) 15 Marv, 85 Perfect, 0 Great [3rd]
Delta: (EXTREME) 100 Perfect, 0 Great [4th]
Zeta: (X) 10 Marv, 88 Perfect, 2 Great [5th]
Epsilon: (EXTREME) 98 Perfect, 2 Great [6th]
Gamma: (SN2) 10 Marv, 85 Perfect, 5 Great [7th]
compare with
Marvs as Perfects? Y
Alpha: (SN2) 20 Marv, 80 Perfect, 0 Great [1st]
Beta: (X) 15 Marv, 85 Perfect, 0 Great [1st]
Delta: (EXTREME) 100 Perfect, 0 Great [1st]
Sigma: (SN2) 30 Marv, 70 Perfect, 0 Great [1st]
Epsilon: (EXTREME) 98 Perfect, 2 Great [5th]
Zeta: (X) 10 Marv, 88 Perfect, 2 Great [5th]
Gamma: (SN2) 10 Marv, 85 Perfect, 5 Great [7th]
Sigma: (SN2) 30 Marv, 70 Perfect, 0 Great [1st]
Alpha: (SN2) 20 Marv, 80 Perfect, 0 Great [2nd]
Beta: (X) 15 Marv, 85 Perfect, 0 Great [3rd]
Delta: (EXTREME) 100 Perfect, 0 Great [4th]
Zeta: (X) 10 Marv, 88 Perfect, 2 Great [5th]
Epsilon: (EXTREME) 98 Perfect, 2 Great [6th]
Gamma: (SN2) 10 Marv, 85 Perfect, 5 Great [7th]
compare with
Marvs as Perfects? Y
Alpha: (SN2) 20 Marv, 80 Perfect, 0 Great [1st]
Beta: (X) 15 Marv, 85 Perfect, 0 Great [1st]
Delta: (EXTREME) 100 Perfect, 0 Great [1st]
Sigma: (SN2) 30 Marv, 70 Perfect, 0 Great [1st]
Epsilon: (EXTREME) 98 Perfect, 2 Great [5th]
Zeta: (X) 10 Marv, 88 Perfect, 2 Great [5th]
Gamma: (SN2) 10 Marv, 85 Perfect, 5 Great [7th]
Post #9 · Posted at 2010-05-26 01:21:30am 15.1 years ago
| DJ Sterf | |
|---|---|
|
Member |
| 90 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2007-06-18 | |
You could logic test for Marvelous = 0 and then split those entries off into another side list?
Post #10 · Posted at 2010-05-26 07:59:10pm 15.1 years ago
| Chi | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 290 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2009-02-05 | |
Quote: DJ Sterf
You could logic test for Marvelous = 0 and then split those entries off into another side list?
It is possible (albeit unlikely) to legitimately score zero marvelouses on a song. Just a thought.
Post #11 · Posted at 2010-05-26 08:18:40pm 15.1 years ago
| Oni-91 | |
|---|---|
 |
Moderator+ |
| 13,518 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2006-10-20 | |
| |
| "Popular bisexual disaster" | |
If they don't put in Marvellouses, make it a null value? Apparently from my Uni course on SQL, that can be done.
If the database involves SQL that is. If not, no bloody idea.
If the database involves SQL that is. If not, no bloody idea.
Post #12 · Posted at 2010-05-26 09:34:14pm 15.1 years ago
| Telperion | |
|---|---|
|
Member+ |
| 2,004 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2009-04-25 | |
| |
| "btor2osly" | |
Quote: Chi
Quote: DJ Sterf
You could logic test for Marvelous = 0 and then split those entries off into another side list?
It is possible (albeit unlikely) to legitimately score zero marvelouses on a song. Just a thought.
*raises hand*
Although none such scores of mine are in the tracker.Post #13 · Posted at 2010-05-27 12:00:02am 15.1 years ago
| DJ Sterf | |
|---|---|
|
Member |
| 90 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2007-06-18 | |
So you all have done this then (0 Marvelous, All Perfects)? lol...