forums.marpirc.net

Now we have voted:
1.place + percentage based LB point-calculations
2.have cutoff

...Let's get on with the voting. Enough said already....

Good Morning,

TJT

Kelly Flewin wrote:But what I don't like about this proposal is the fact that there's a lot of games where the first 3-5 spots are really high... virtually having to master the game... this means if any player submits.. even if they come close to it, but just falls short.. they get no reward for their efforts... which I might point out, is VERY discouraging.

From my perspective this is a rather warped and sad viewpoint.

One might as well ask why anyone who is not one of the three fastest men in the world would compete in the 100m dash in the Olympics. They won't get a medal for it.

Baron Pierre de Coubertin (the founder of the modern Olympic Games) answered this question when he said:

The most important thing in the Olympic Games is not to win but to take part, just as the most important thing in life is not the triumph but the struggle. The essential thing is not to have conquered but to have fought well.

Those that don't understand this are to be pitied.

George Mallory, on the subject of attempting to reach the peak of Mount Everest said:

The first question which you will ask and which I must try to answer is this, 'What is the use of climbing Mount Everest ?' and my answer must at once be, 'It is no use'. There is not the slightest prospect of any gain whatsoever. Oh, we may learn a little about the behavior of the human body at high altitudes, and possibly medical men may turn our observation to some account for the purposes of aviation. But otherwise nothing will come of it. We shall not bring back a single bit of gold or silver, not a gem, nor any coal or iron. We shall not find a single foot of earth that can be planted with crops to raise food. It's no use. So, if you cannot understand that there is something in man which responds to the challenge of this mountain and goes out to meet it, that the struggle is the struggle of life itself upward and forever upward, then you won't see why we go. What we get from this adventure is just sheer joy. And joy is, after all, the end of life. We do not live to eat and make money. We eat and make money to be able to enjoy life. That is what life means and what life is for.

Mallory gave his life in the attempt, for which he would not have gotten a single leaderboard point.

viewtopic.php?t=11404

The poll is TIED, two people forgot to vote. Therefore the current system stands, NO cutoff.

Not big deal.
To compare score is nonsence.especially at MARP.

other place has many 500 million points players.
do "20 thousand points" and "30 thousand points" have big difference?

LB also nonsence simply many clones and many course game have big boring advantage.
(unless introduce epeclail rule like outrun.)

Excellent post Weehawk.

Everybody should read and understand his post. Then we could set cut-off after 3 without a poll.

Buttermaker wrote:Excellent post Weehawk.

Everybody should read and understand his post. Then we could set cut-off after 3 without a poll.

Excellent post. I fully agree. Nothing more to add about that.
But....
Maybe you should try and understand that people doesn´t have to agree even if they read and understand Weehawk´s post. It all comes down to different opinions. I think most of us are fully capable of reading and understanding everything that is discussed here, so that´s not the problem.

LordGaz wrote:viewtopic.php?t=11404

The poll is TIED, two people forgot to vote. Therefore the current system stands, NO cutoff.

It's not tied anymore (15-13 as of now). Perhaps a cutoff date/time for the poll would be a good idea. Otherwise, it could go back and forth indefinitely.

Hi all

First, sorry for my long absence on this board. It seems many things have been decided

Mr. Kelly R. Flewin wrote: But what I don't like about this proposal is the fact that there's a lot of games where the first 3-5 spots are really high... virtually having to master the game... this means if any player submits.. even if they come close to it, but just falls short.. they get no reward for their efforts... which I might point out, is VERY discouraging.
Mr. Kelly R. Flewin

I agree with you, make 2M on 1942 is very difficult, but the 10M bonus ofr ending the game ruin all. As for many Cave games where many great records will be not rewarded.

Mr. Kelly R. Flewin wrote: It's sad this poll and discussion even had to occur... I honestly figured removing the ABC uploaders would've been a lot easier, as there was only a few and they were quite obvious. [Regretfully most of the JVRM players... though there are a few good ones, like Sawys, who actually upload quality scores not worth 2 points]
Mr. Kelly R. Flewin

It seem you speek of me S, I'll try to explain me because it's seem you don't understand what I made. First, never I imagine I trouble someone when I post little records. I don't make it for points or anywhere, but because I always think that we can post our records, the best one and the lesser one. Beside, why I post manytimes alphabetically ? Because I made an Arcade Database since 1986 and mame s the best thing for complete it. And the best method for make it is check the games alphabetically. So, when I make 2 or 3 levels on any game when I check it, I post the score on marp, not for the LB points, but because it's marp and I like it.

Beside, you mean jvrm's members are ABC's players but you're wrong, because only 2 of us make that. But our best players have great scores here at marp. Blost, RedStar, Mickey, Sawys, LCF, me and some others have all some first places here, and many 2nd or 3rd places. So don't lower us (or me) because only two of us use ABC's method. And don't forget I've win Olympiads in year 2001 and Team France (with many JVRM's member) finish 2nd team in this Olympiad. So, I don't think I'm (and JVRM's members) a little player with only silly records.

This answer is just for explain my position, not for begin a war. Nothing personal against you, Kelly

Mr. Kelly R. Flewin wrote: Ah well... cut off at 7th place does seem reasonable... gives people a decent chance to actually get something if they fall short of godliness in some games
Mr. Kelly R. Flewin

I agree, 7th place is good. I just expose here JVRM's system for our tournament.

1st place : 12 points
2nd place : 8 points
3rd place : 6 points
4th place : 5 points
5th place : 4 points
6th place : 3 points
7th place : 2 points
8th place : 1 point

It's near for the systems who are showed here. Except we don't use pourcentage system, because we think it give too many adventage for those who masterised some games. Imagine points given in Formula One GP are made with pourcentage of time. I'm not sure it will be good for a fair competition

Just my 2 Euro Cents

Francois

boxter wrote:It's not tied anymore (15-13 as of now). Perhaps a cutoff date/time for the poll would be a good idea. Otherwise, it could go back and forth indefinitely.

That was the result when the poll closed. Two people forgot to vote so it is now 15 all. Once you view the post for the first time it no longer appears on the "View posts since last visit" link unless someone posts in the same thread so it's easy to forget.

You can look at this at any angle you want, the poll is tied that shows 50% expressed a preference for one system and 50% expressed a preference for the other. You could rephrase the poll to say "Do you think it is right to cutoff leaderboard points after the first three places?" then I think you would get a difference result.

Another thing, you can use the Olympic medal analogy where Gold, Silver and Bronze medals are awarded but Gold, Silver and Bronze are not points, they are awards. Or you can use the Formula One Racing analogy where points are awarded thus 10, 8, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, that's eight places get points but three get on the podium.

In an Olympic decathlon, athletes get points on a proportionate basis for each event then after ten events the top three get awards. There would be a huge uproar if only the top three got points in each event.

Gaz

Francois Daniel wrote: I agree with you, make 2M on 1942 is very difficult, but the 10M bonus ofr ending the game ruin all. As for many Cave games where many great records will be not rewarded.

No way!
10M bonus for ending is "BASE".
2M on 1942 is not worthy score at all.
3M is not worth too.
I think 4M point is greater score than 12M, but the player who makes 4M can make 13.5million with ease.

1942 system is not bad.
most score of 1943 depends on movi-chan. but it is not a big system at marp.
finisher can beat all other MARP score.(even if very few movi gets.)

LordGaz wrote:

boxter wrote:It's not tied anymore (15-13 as of now). Two people forgot to vote so it is now 15 all. Gaz

Since when do people get to vote after a poll (ANY poll) closes? What if more people post now and vote for it? Are you going to count their votes?

Sorry, but that's ludicrous and simply quite silly. Attempting to manipulate a poll after the fact simply because you don't like the result completely undermines its credibility. Why bother having a poll in the first place?

Novice wrote: No way!
10M bonus for ending is "BASE".
2M on 1942 is not worthy score at all.
3M is not worth too.
I think 4M point is greater score than 12M, but the player who makes 4M can make 13.5million with ease.

You misunderstood me I agree with you. I just say the 10M bonus ruin all, only for the LB system points, not for the game itself

Novice wrote: 1942 system is not bad.

Novice wrote:
Yes, I agree again because I think finish a game is more important than any scoring system during the game (its for that at JVRM we rank by level reach then by score). So, giving a huge bonus for finish a game is good. And the best player is the one who make the best score during the game and who finish it.

Francois

You are right boxter, but some people missed the vote and are coming in expressing late opinions. It would be better if the poll could be reopened for a while over the long weekend to get a truer picture of what people think which is what a poll is supposed to be for.

LordGaz wrote:

boxter wrote:It's not tied anymore (15-13 as of now). Perhaps a cutoff date/time for the poll would be a good idea. Otherwise, it could go back and forth indefinitely.

That was the result when the poll closed. Two people forgot to vote so it is now 15 all. Once you view the post for the first time it no longer appears on the "View posts since last visit" link unless someone posts in the same thread so it's easy to forget.Gaz

Actually, you might want to look at the poll thread again yourself. Another person has posted voting for the cutoff, so if all "preferences" are counted, as you're suggesting, it's at 16-15.

And, by the way, I'm fully aware of the issues and functionality of the "View posts since last visit" function. I didn't miss the added comments in the thread. I just felt that a poll is a poll, and if it's closed, the voting should be over.

QRS wrote:It all comes down to different opinions.

Sure, if those opinions are backed with facts and logic. As it stands right now there is no sound argument for anything but cut-off after 3.

Francois Daniel wrote:As for many Cave games where many great records will be not rewarded.

Buttermaker wrote:

LN2 wrote:Maybe they don't get that from the Olympics, but if you have an athlete from a country that only is able to send a few to the Olympics and that person gets 4th place they will likely be a hero in their home country....and get awards, metals etc. Just participating is often enough...

You just proved my point. If you have a great recording on 4th place you will be a hero (hehe) whether you get leaderboard points for it or not. Great recordings come to MARP because they're great and not because the uploader wants to move up the leaderboard.

LordGaz wrote:Another thing, you can use the Olympic medal analogy where Gold, Silver and Bronze medals are awarded but Gold, Silver and Bronze are not points, they are awards. Or you can

Forget all analogies. 3 is the right cut-off point because

Buttermaker wrote:

Buttermaker wrote:

Buttermaker wrote: No. Just think about the 100 (yes, 100) Atari clones added in a recent version. There are way too many games/clones in MAME for MARP to have 7 decent scores even for a fraction of all games. I also want those inps to not even get uploaded in the first place.

Why limit it to 3? That makes the leaderboard out of bounds to the majority of players on each game.

Wrong.

Buttermaker wrote:There are 4877 games in MAME .81u4 and more are getting added each week.

So we're still waiting for arguments for cut-off points other than 3rd. If nobody can argue for 5th or 7th there shouldn't be a poll. 3rd place should just be set as the cut-off point.