forums.marpirc.net

Back in the day... when the dirt was young for the most part ... we used to add games for our tournaments with a prefix, and it wouldn't count on our leaderboards. So, if we prefixed our current game of the MAME Championships, we would have added k8-turbofrc. I wonder why we stopped using that practice, because... while we can force our users to add, in our example, "K8" to our descriptions, what would happen if somebody was uber good at it? He probably would have to delete his old "super good" recording just so he can upload a championship recording. Additionally, it would be more beneficial to say that this person really is first in the current game of the tournament, not "4th but actually 1st".

We really should re-implement this practice, be-it using the k8- prefix (or o3- (olympiad), t10- (tournament) w9- (WCC), or whatever), or adding an asterisk(*k8-turbofrc, for example) so it won't count on the regulation leaderboards. Although I'm not sure how many people really care about the regulation leaderboards...

Worst case scenario? In the MAME Championships, where the game isn't known, you can add games such as... k9-round1part1, k9-round1part2, k9-round1part3, k9-round2, k9-quarters, k9-grandfinal, or whatever.

Food for thought.

gameboy9 wrote: what would happen if somebody was uber good at it?

He just post there (forum) ...
Contrarily to you, I don't think it's necessary to have k8-, w9- etc entries : more work for Zwaxy or Pat.
And it's so easy to have rankings just by adding "k8" in the "description field contains"

Of course, it's an issue if you already have a score for the game in question, you can't upload unless you beat it, or delete it beforehand.

Do note that the original tournament does still do this.

Phil Lamat wrote: He just post there (forum) ...
Contrarily to you, I don't think it's necessary to have k8-, w9- etc entries : more work for Zwaxy or Pat.
And it's so easy to have rankings just by adding "k8" in the "description field contains"

Well you do raise a good point in that you could post to the forum, but I find the issue being that a coordinator and, more importantly, observers, and, more importantly still, other players, are currently forced to look at two different places. I would think that it would be better to look at only one place.

You also raise a good point in that it's more work, but for one, the database would be more organized (i.e. the one place argument above)... two, you can see a history of scores in a competition (provided they don't move scores to "deleted" )... and three, from past experience, I don't recall it being that much of a pain to add games to the DB list... unless it's changed over the years. I could add the games myself if leadership wanted me to do so... hey, if I'm thinking that this is an issue, then I should at least offer assistance to resolve the problem myself, yes?

there are pros and cons either way. It also seems like a waste of space when people upload for t4-pacman then also upload the same recording for pacman, double the zip for one recording. There have been very few instances of recordings made in tourneys that don't wind up in regulation anyway. I can argue that there is a place for people to look and this link always good during the tournament, if the coordinators would provide it for each game...

chikij For K8

But as gb9 has pointed out, this is no good for a historical reference. Splitting the games from regulation play would provide a clear history.

Hmmm... well there are plenty of good arguments for and against... so how about I propose this:

If a coordinator wants to continue doing it so you can submit in both the forums and MARP's regulation play, then it's really not that huge of a deal. But if a coordinator wants to use, as an example, the "t10-" method, that person should have to type out the games in a text file and send it to Pat for processing. That way, the coordinators have to do most of the work, and all Pat has to do is review and load the file. How's that sound?

There are pros and cons, and I have no opinion what is the best way.

But it's highly necessary to have a page/section in MARP site (not in forum) with all the final results/matches of these competitions. It need to be organized and with details. A default/pattern page for competitions (with the possibility in the future to link automatically the current results of the current round) would be good. The "automatic" part is not hard to introduce, but as it demands knowledge and time, it don't need to be today . I remember Sawys' page used on K6 (made since Excel sheets?), with a nice look.

Hmmm... the main advantage would be in rounds of head-to-head, or "multiple parts" rounds like K8 R1 that demands a scoresystem, or yet Olympiads or Tournaments that demands % or other scoresystem.

Currently,
- WWC section: seems fine (all editions);
- Knockout section: on 1st page has K2~K4. Some Archives of K1 and K2 (very good, with many details and stats);
- Tournament section: as T is prefixed, it has his own "page" (Tournament or Regular MARP, what is the reason of this division? Just technical?). Leaderboard good. Archives has T1~T4 and Overall stats so far, very interesting, but need to be updated.
- Olympiads section: how many editions were done? The links are broken: linking to "marp.retrogames.com" old site instead of "replay.marpirc.net" . Please, who can edit it?
- Weehawk's GEGOTW is not officially a MARP competition, but it deserves a section too.

Well, a lot of work to do, but only one place to see competitions history and that are running, would look great. PS.: Some Archives pages I discovered that they exist only TODAY

PS.: The links on UPLOADS page also need update to new site (replay.marpirc.net).

Ideas...

TRB_MetroidTeam wrote:PS.: The links on UPLOADS page also need update to new site (replay.marpirc.net).

It's related to the "UP" link on UPLOADS: http://replay.marpirc.net/upload.htm

And I forgot about "Time Trial" competition. There are links on MARP site? I think it's only on forum.