[Luxray]

This topic has come up in the past, and since activity is starting to boom again on this site, I would like to bring up our sitewide formula.

√(maximum points / number of charts) × (10 × (fractional percentage)3 + leaderships + 2 × championship)

While I do like how it parabolically curves out as the chart gets more popular, there's one particular part of it that doesn't sit right with me; The leadership bonus.

For those reading that don't quite understand this formula, basically, if you take a leadership in a game's category, you are rewarded with points based on how many submissions and how many charts a game has. The championship bonus is 2 times the leadership amount, however i feel that this misrepresents the way certain categories are submitted to. Games that have hefty weighting and with categories that have far, far less activity/competition are rewarded heavily for little for less competition (One prime example I can think of from the top of my head is SRA Extra).

So, I propose that the formula be changes so that the leadership bonus that is awarded gives points equal to √(maximum points of that category / number of charts in that category). This will make more competitive categories pay off more than smaller and less active categories.

[Strong Bad]

I agree with this. Only problem I see is like... 3DBlast Rings or S1 Special where 800 people get it because it's easy, then it gets weighted because a ton of people are in it. Perhaps something in the formula to give fewer points if more than 1 people have the leadership?

[Luxray]

I agree with this. Only problem I see is like... 3DBlast Rings or S1 Special where 800 people get it because it's easy, then it gets weighted because a ton of people are in it.

Nothing wrong with circle jerking. If everyone benefits from it, no-one truly benefits for it. Because it's essentially a non-chart if everyone has it.