View previous topic :: View next topic |
After reading the first post. Would you like scorehero to add a derived higher difficulty rating for 6-stars? |
Absolutely. This is an excellent idea. |
|
69% |
[ 114 ] |
Maybe. |
|
14% |
[ 23 ] |
No. Just stick with the game's ratings. |
|
15% |
[ 26 ] |
|
Total Votes : 163 |
|
Author |
Message |
JCirri
Joined: 04 Feb 2006 Posts: 4576
|
Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 5:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Huwonk wrote: | ...
So realistically, anything under 3 stars doesn't make sense without going outside the boundaries of the game's rules. THere isn't even such a thing as a 3* cutoff. |
I think you're looking at the calculations from a different perspective. You're calculating each cutoff relative to another cutoff. If you ignore other cutoffs and those fractional relationships, and calculate each one only depending on the base_score for the song. Then it's simply:
4-star cutoff = 2 * base_score
5-star cutoff = 3 * base_score
So, it is easily possible to define:
3-star cutoff = 1 * base_score
6-star cutoff = 4 * base_score
which allows for 2-star and 6-star ratings. If we add 7-star cutoff=5*base_score to the scheme then 7-stars would also be possible (at least for some songs).
But none of these derived cutoffs (even 3-stars) goes outside of the game's linear progression ratings system. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
ebayitup
Joined: 18 Jun 2006 Posts: 220 Location: Danville, IL
|
Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
don't know if anyone has already said this, but about 6* scores, take a song with a proven 4* cutoff, double that, and that's your 6* cutoff. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
krimsunmunkeys
Joined: 16 Feb 2006 Posts: 1333 Location: The Hall of the SH Council... watching... (not really)
|
Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Even if we already know that, it's still nice to have photo proof, just in case. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
JCirri
Joined: 04 Feb 2006 Posts: 4576
|
Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 3:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
ebayitup wrote: | don't know if anyone has already said this, but about 6* scores, take a song with a proven 4* cutoff, double that, and that's your 6* cutoff. |
The same can be said about taking 4/3 of the 5* cutoff. But as krim said, it's still nice to prove both cutoffs. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Huwonk
Joined: 26 May 2006 Posts: 2432 Location: Marysville, Ohio
|
Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 11:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
JCirri wrote: | Huwonk wrote: | ...
So realistically, anything under 3 stars doesn't make sense without going outside the boundaries of the game's rules. THere isn't even such a thing as a 3* cutoff. |
I think you're looking at the calculations from a different perspective. You're calculating each cutoff relative to another cutoff. If you ignore other cutoffs and those fractional relationships, and calculate each one only depending on the base_score for the song. Then it's simply:
4-star cutoff = 2 * base_score
5-star cutoff = 3 * base_score
So, it is easily possible to define:
3-star cutoff = 1 * base_score
6-star cutoff = 4 * base_score
which allows for 2-star and 6-star ratings. If we add 7-star cutoff=5*base_score to the scheme then 7-stars would also be possible (at least for some songs).
But none of these derived cutoffs (even 3-stars) goes outside of the game's linear progression ratings system. |
Oops, 2* would be anything between 0 and (base_score-1), yes? I was looking at it backwards. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
JCirri
Joined: 04 Feb 2006 Posts: 4576
|
Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 11:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Huwonk wrote: | Oops, 2* would be anything between 0 and (base_score-1), yes? I was looking at it backwards. |
Correct. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Copyright © 2006-2024 ScoreHero, LLC
|
Powered by phpBB
|