[Shadow Jacky]

can you really blame him SkyLights?  I admit I do this sometimes >_>

[Magnezone]

i can and i have <_<

also might i note that there is a difference between using my last post on Flying Fox and using it on Shadowfan

[flying fox]

i can and i have <_<

also might i note that there is a difference between using my last post on Flying Fox and using it on Shadowfan

Sorry  SkyLights but I can't tell if your making fun of me or not, because of my aspergers (autism) I can misunderstand what people say. Due to the autism I don't post in forums as much as other people do because I have a tendancy to make a complete idiot of myself which is what I probably have done now looking back at my posts :(

[Rolken]

HELLO I AM SOMEONE AND I THINK I WILL IGNORE READING THE TOPIC BECAUSE IT IS TOO LONG FOR ME AND JUST MAKE A POST BASED ON THE FIRST POST IN THE TOPIC REGARDLESS OF ANY DISCUSSION CURRENTLY OCCURING OR WHETHER OR NOT MY POINT HAS ALREADY BEEN MADE

On a semi-related note, I doubled the posts per page from 15 to 30.

[Magnezone]

Sorry  SkyLights but I can't tell if your making fun of me or not, because of my aspergers (autism) I can misunderstand what people say. Due to the autism I don't post in forums as much as other people do because I have a tendancy to make a complete idiot of myself which is what I probably have done now looking back at my posts :(

Which is why I didn't ridicule you directly before when you posted after we reached the conclusion that we weren't going to remove score/ring charts completely :(

[Aitamen]

Rolken, I find your point on secrets in competition odd.

I can't think of many people who wouldn't share strats if they were asked, and this goes double for high-level players.

And on another note, yes, Rings are maxable, in many games, without too much effort and a ton of patience (much more patience for 3D games).  But if you aren't willing to put the time into nabbing all the rings, then what gives you the right to call yourself "master" of any game?

If you can't get a good score in GH1, no matter how hard you try, but you can get :24, are you then better or worse than someone who can get that max score but can never get :24?

And if you're so terrible that you can't net the 225 rings, then it's kinda terrible that you can get :24...

Also, before people go ranting about "max and tying" on records, how about 1:13? or 5'50?  You can't expect to beat those, yet it's a ton of points on you if you don't get them...

So we should nuke every level that has a defined max?

[Stefan]

I'm not sure what points you were trying to make there. Really, I'm not.

[flying fox]

Sorry  SkyLights but I can't tell if your making fun of me or not, because of my aspergers (autism) I can misunderstand what people say. Due to the autism I don't post in forums as much as other people do because I have a tendancy to make a complete idiot of myself which is what I probably have done now looking back at my posts :(

Which is why I didn't ridicule you directly before when you posted after we reached the conclusion that we weren't going to remove score/ring charts completely :(

Ok then sometimes I have been known to get the wrong idea so just ignore me :D

[Thorn]

I'm finally going to stick my two sense in. I'll receive bets on how much against the public opinion I am later.

It seems to me that everybody's agreed that in most games the sheer participation in the Times category makes it so that even if Rings and Scores are piss-easy, their weight in the overall game is minimal, serving only to provide a boost in Sitewide Points via a leadership. The exceptions to this are Sonic 3D Blast, and most 3D games because they track Ring submissions and lead to massive filler stat submissions. The problem comes in that there's no common difficulty across divisions e.g. attaining a max score in Sonic Rush Adventure -- go fast, get rings, mash buttons for points and to stay near invincible -- is a lot simpler than a max score in Genesis Sonic games -- get most all rings without getting hit, combo enemies, learn the location of hidden caves in the level, and chain all of that as fast as possible.

So, since game championships differ in value Sitewide, would anybody disagree with giving different weights to divisions in different games, instead of trying to create one standard system like "Rings/Scores have 25% weight, Times 50%"? As far as I can tell from setting up TUSC rankings it's not hard to implement; we'd just need some notice as to the weights on the game's rankings pages. Since the Rules Committee hasn't had anything to do but mope about Heroes Scores, I think they'd (or "we'd", if I still have any say after having no opinion on the last umpteen points of discussion) have no problem sitting down, trying to obtain various stats for this game and seeing if it was difficult or just required patience. If we reviewed a game every two days we'd be done within two months, which is as long as this topic could possibly roll on for, and in actuality we already know which games don't need review, so it'd be done much quicker.

So, I'm heading off to university for a class now, and I'll see if I get shot down, ignored, argued, agreed with, etc. upon return.~

[douglas]

I'm finally going to stick my two sense in. I'll receive bets on how much against the public opinion I am later.

It seems to me that everybody's agreed that in most games the sheer participation in the Times category makes it so that even if Rings and Scores are piss-easy, their weight in the overall game is minimal, serving only to provide a boost in Sitewide Points via a leadership. The exceptions to this are Sonic 3D Blast, and most 3D games because they track Ring submissions and lead to massive filler stat submissions. The problem comes in that there's no common difficulty across divisions e.g. attaining a max score in Sonic Rush Adventure -- go fast, get rings, mash buttons for points and to stay near invincible -- is a lot simpler than a max score in Genesis Sonic games -- get most all rings without getting hit, combo enemies, learn the location of hidden caves in the level, and chain all of that as fast as possible.

So, since game championships differ in value Sitewide, would anybody disagree with giving different weights to divisions in different games, instead of trying to create one standard system like "Rings/Scores have 25% weight, Times 50%"? As far as I can tell from setting up TUSC rankings it's not hard to implement; we'd just need some notice as to the weights on the game's rankings pages. Since the Rules Committee hasn't had anything to do but mope about Heroes Scores, I think they'd (or "we'd", if I still have any say after having no opinion on the last umpteen points of discussion) have no problem sitting down, trying to obtain various stats for this game and seeing if it was difficult or just required patience. If we reviewed a game every two days we'd be done within two months, which is as long as this topic could possibly roll on for, and in actuality we already know which games don't need review, so it'd be done much quicker.

So, I'm heading off to university for a class now, and I'll see if I get shot down, ignored, argued, agreed with, etc. upon return.~

Difficulty is dictated by what others have been able to achieve, which is better than some few deciding what stats are appropriately difficult on some arbitrary and subjective scale.  Once again, it's a self-correcting problem (or in fact not really a problem at all).

[X-5]

I like thorn's idea

On SA2B, most rings are maxable and just take patience, I think those should count less, it is eight million times easier to get 482/470 rings on CE than it is to beat my time because the time can always go lower. and I spent a whole heckuva lotta effort getting it lower than anybody expected, cause I have unlimited free time and I love that level. The rings should be worth less than my time because you can max the rings in an hour if you explore for the first time, but it will take you at least 200-1500 hours of practice to beat my time depending on how good you are. Really the ONLY thing rings have going for them is some are very hard to find, I would have never found many that everybody knows.. but I still doubt that is enough reason.

Scores on the other hand, for SA2B, should be worth as much as times. Ryo beat everybody on CE1 with 30k, and the thing is his run is very improvable, I see 31 or 32k but both of those are extremely hard to get. Getting it as close to perfect as possible would take as much effort as going for a fast time, since you can always improve, whether it be from not missing some trick points or just doing everything faster and more efficiently. If you ask me the score will always be less maxed than the time, so scores definitely deserve to give as many points as times, for SA2 anyway.

that is just one game, but I really like your idea. For SA2B my opinion is make times and scores the same value, with rings being less. That is if this idea is seriously being considered, I thought it was a joke poll?

[Bilan]

On SA2B, most rings are maxable and just take patience, I think those should count less, it is eight million times easier to get 482/470 rings on CE than it is to beat my time because the time can always go lower.

Thats almost the same as the example Aita gave in his first, so Ill address it in the same way.

That might be true for CE, but this is harder than this this.

[Aitamen]

Sorry about that last post... I was very very tired when I wrote it...

:24, 1:13, 5'50, :08...  I'm sure I'm not the only person who considers these the max stats for these levels, yet they are records, and while they vary in difficulty, they're maxed, and in at least one case, they CANNOT BE BEATEN. 

So should any level that maxes also be lessened in the rankings?

No.  If there's a defined max and you can't obtain it, then try harder until you can, then show you're better than those people by doing awesome elsewhere.

Now granted, because of the level of abilities of sonic given to him in different games, I will wholeheartedly agree that I can't see having people tying 57'46 on EC anytime soon (if that is indeed the max), because there's a separation of talent and skill (and multi-tap) among humans, but that doesn't mean that these levels are to be the only ones we compete in.

Otherwise, we might as well take the online "how fast can you press a button" test and post our rankings instead of our sitewides... >_>

[Alondite]

The poll seems to be a bit skewed.  It's pretty obvious that RAing and SAing are easier than TAing, and people like easy records, or getting high ranks easily. 

TAing is pushed very far, and it requires a lot more time to place high in the standings because the strats are so well developed and require such a degree of skill.  Of COURSE RAers and SAers would want to keep those charts, that's all they have, they don't want to devote the time to TAing, whereas most TAers it seems, want to ditch the other charts because it's easy, or it's not worth bothering with other than for a better ranking, and in that case, the rankings get skewed to because you get a lot of great players who just TA ranking low because they don't care to submit in other charts.

 Yeah yeah..I know all about the whole "each group only wants to do their thing, so by your (my) logic that means we should remove TAing for the SA/RAers." I got that, you don't even need to say it.  However, Mike has pointed out that RA/SA charts were already voted to be removes however long ago it was (I don't know if I was here or not), and now it's come up again.

 I personally don't think SA/RAing needs to be tracked. For one, RAing can easily be maxed (and at least one game gives you a huge score bonus for perfect rings, so there is a Score submission too, a 2 for 1).  SAing I don't have as much of a problem with, because you need to be fast, collect a lot of rings, and destroy enemies for a good score, but it's still far easier than being competitive in TAing.  If people are here to compete, doesn't that mean that they should want a challenge?  I mean isn't that the whole point of being competitive? 

I don't know, it seems to me like most people don't care whether or not they are removed, but there seems to be more people who want these charts to stay than there are those who want them to be removed.  But who are these people? The TAers for one, seem to be more TSC regulars, the people who've been around longer and done more, and shouldn't we cater to those people before every other person who comes in here and just does RA/SAing because it's easy ranking points? And this is something I'm unsure of, because I wasn't here in the beginning, but wasn't TSC strictly TAing at one point (I honestly don't know, so if I'm wrong then ignore that)?

Anyway, that's my 2 cents.  I know what I say doesn't mean a whole lot, but I'm pretty sure I'm not the only person who feels this way.

[Aitamen]

I think that the difficulty of TAing vs RA and SA is what's different here...

Yes, RAing isn't that hard, and requires only dedication (and perhaps route planning, if nessecary)
TAing, as it's more entertaining to most, is where the greatest challenge is, indeed.
SAing, depending on game, can be either rediculously easy or rediculously hard.  you go beat/tie EH2K time and EH2K score and tell me which is harder...
Or AR2K
but we're not here for just competition, otherwise we'd track very different things... here at TSC we track mastery of sonic, not just fastest sonic.

In a more recent example, let's take "Test Zone"
Grab knuckles and go run my TAS/TA path (videos available on my Youtube)
Not too bad... a little tricky, at times, and there's two bind drops, but sub-20 should be attainable with little or no HL skill.
Now, switch to sonic and get all 325 rings in the level...
the former took me 34 tries to vid, once I had the TA (non-TAS) route down and started recording...
the latter took me 236 tries (after the couple hundred where I didn't think it was possible, and then found it via luck)

So if we were to rank TA/SA/RA by difficulty, it varies from level to level.
And while generally TA is hardest, and RA is generally easiest, this isn't always the case.
As such, marking them by difficulty based on what your tracking isn't fair.

This is the case I was trying to make.

I love all three, honestly, with SAing being the hardest in my mind, for most games.

If we're just measuring who has the fastest sonic, then this site isn't half of what I wanted, and I'll only pay attention to the great people here.
But to me, TSC tests mastery of sonic, and as such, rings and scores must be included.