Re: Should Raw Scoring be used to calculate Grandtotal?
Hmm so honestly I'm fine with any option, since personally I'm not too attached to my GT. I'm reading this thread to try understanding the pros/cons for each option, though. Also, it seems like the purpose of proposing this poll was to try making GT more relevant, or more reflective of, skill/PA?
If so, then I'm wondering if GT is necessarily irrelevant (strong word, just trying to say "something that should be phased out")? Already pointed out, but vRofl and Vet both depend on the current GT formula, so how would those requirements change if GT formula changed, if at all?
Just considering, since the strategy for racking up GT would change depending on a user's skill level (it might be better to play the densest song you can PA rather than quadmashing Boss Battle)? I got similar results to ThunderFlip here.
Given a PA spread for maybe D3? of something like (159-17-0-28), the combo score is 1,356,250, whereas the raw score is 1,140,070. Getting to 1billion would take the combo scorer 12.3 hours vs. 14.63 hours for the raw scorer. It becomes even harder for the second PA set for maybe D2? with (300-109-0-75). With combo scoring, it would take 13.12 hours to reach 1billion, but 21.28 hours with raw scoring. (Ehh alright, made lots of assumptions on PA spread and not taking any breaks).
Also, if the GT formula changed, what would the implication be for people who have already reached huge GT milestones? The very meaning of GT would also change somewhat (skill vs. effort), so would that make past achievements seem any less significant, since they would be compared to a different definition in the future? Or, depending on the GT amounts in using combo vs. raw scores, would top ranked GT users need to play even more to stay ahead (which would be the case if it becomes easier to get GT points)?
Given a 1000-note song, raw scoring would give 7500 fewer points than combo scoring if the PA is 6g clean. For any score with good PA basically, combo scoring would give more points. On the other hand, this is where raw scoring gives more points:
In your same 1000-note song, having 1 miss at note 900, all other notes perfects, would already give 99,300 points less using combo rather than raw scoring. Missing at note 500 would give nearly 500,000 points more using raw scoring, out of a total of ~1,550,000. Not that everyone is always missing right in the middle, but ~500,000 out of ~1,550,000 seems significant enough to consider? Especially if the "third" option is possible, how much easier would it be to get GTs this way?
Anyways, just agreeing with most things said already haha, it's understandable where they're coming from, and just restating some questions I had to consider, even though they might not be hugely concerning or be all that applicable.
Hmm so honestly I'm fine with any option, since personally I'm not too attached to my GT. I'm reading this thread to try understanding the pros/cons for each option, though. Also, it seems like the purpose of proposing this poll was to try making GT more relevant, or more reflective of, skill/PA?
If so, then I'm wondering if GT is necessarily irrelevant (strong word, just trying to say "something that should be phased out")? Already pointed out, but vRofl and Vet both depend on the current GT formula, so how would those requirements change if GT formula changed, if at all?
Just considering, since the strategy for racking up GT would change depending on a user's skill level (it might be better to play the densest song you can PA rather than quadmashing Boss Battle)? I got similar results to ThunderFlip here.
Given a PA spread for maybe D3? of something like (159-17-0-28), the combo score is 1,356,250, whereas the raw score is 1,140,070. Getting to 1billion would take the combo scorer 12.3 hours vs. 14.63 hours for the raw scorer. It becomes even harder for the second PA set for maybe D2? with (300-109-0-75). With combo scoring, it would take 13.12 hours to reach 1billion, but 21.28 hours with raw scoring. (Ehh alright, made lots of assumptions on PA spread and not taking any breaks).
Also, if the GT formula changed, what would the implication be for people who have already reached huge GT milestones? The very meaning of GT would also change somewhat (skill vs. effort), so would that make past achievements seem any less significant, since they would be compared to a different definition in the future? Or, depending on the GT amounts in using combo vs. raw scores, would top ranked GT users need to play even more to stay ahead (which would be the case if it becomes easier to get GT points)?
Given a 1000-note song, raw scoring would give 7500 fewer points than combo scoring if the PA is 6g clean. For any score with good PA basically, combo scoring would give more points. On the other hand, this is where raw scoring gives more points:
In your same 1000-note song, having 1 miss at note 900, all other notes perfects, would already give 99,300 points less using combo rather than raw scoring. Missing at note 500 would give nearly 500,000 points more using raw scoring, out of a total of ~1,550,000. Not that everyone is always missing right in the middle, but ~500,000 out of ~1,550,000 seems significant enough to consider? Especially if the "third" option is possible, how much easier would it be to get GTs this way?
Anyways, just agreeing with most things said already haha, it's understandable where they're coming from, and just restating some questions I had to consider, even though they might not be hugely concerning or be all that applicable.
Comment