What would would you guys rather have implemented?

News about StepMania Online.

Which do you prefer?

Timing removed, server always calculates as if judge 4.
16
46%
Server has a command like \judge to set higher judge with xp bonus
14
40%
No change from how it is now.
5
14%
 
Total votes: 35

StephenIsFast
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 8:00 pm
Location: Enfield, CT

Re: What would would you guys rather have implemented?

Postby StephenIsFast » Sun Dec 09, 2012 1:58 pm

How long will option 1 take to implement, since option 1 is easily going to win?

User avatar
Cube
Site Admin
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 10:18 am

Re: What would would you guys rather have implemented?

Postby Cube » Sun Dec 09, 2012 7:01 pm

StephenIsFast wrote:How long will option 1 take to implement, since option 1 is easily going to win?


Not very long. Few hours, plus testing.

houkouonchi
Site Admin
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 1:12 pm

Re: What would would you guys rather have implemented?

Postby houkouonchi » Wed Dec 19, 2012 3:02 pm

StephenIsFast wrote:How long will option 1 take to implement, since option 1 is easily going to win?



This is implemented in the beta server on port 9999. Can a few people test it and let me know if they notice any problems or give some comments?

Keep in mind it does have a few pitfalls (doesn't give anyone advantage but some disadvantage at a higher judge level):

1) When you play a higher judge level and get a miss, it stays a miss. This is because when its a miss the client (unfortunately) does not send the offset to the server and instead sends a static value in the case of misses so its impossible to tell if it was not a miss server-side. This means you will likely get a few more misses but all the rest of the notes should be ok. The reverse is not true. If you are on J1 then the server can change notes that were given as 'boos' to misses.

2) Toasties/juimps: When on a higher judge level getting toasties will possibly be harder (depensd on the judge level). If your on a judgement level where even the beggining of the great judgement window is less than a perfect on J4 then it is possible for you to have jumps not calculated right due to your combo breaking on one judge difficulty but not if it was on J4. Jumps are calculated by what the client is sending to the server (combo wise) so obviously what constitutes a combo on will be different different judge levels. This is unlikely to effect toasties much unless you are at an extreme judge level.

User avatar
foxfire667
Moderator
Posts: 551
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: What would would you guys rather have implemented?

Postby foxfire667 » Wed Dec 19, 2012 11:02 pm

houkouonchi wrote:This is implemented in the beta server on port 9999. Can a few people test it and let me know if they notice any problems or give some comments?


I'm testing it out right now, I'll post some screenshot to SMO score comparisons when I'm finished. What I can tell you so far is that the J7 to J4 conversion seems mildly flawed in the sense that it occasionally gives me an extra Marvelous or two I shouldn't have obtained. It really isn't a game changer or anything, but say I get like 7p on a file, the database might read it as 6p. Typically it's either accurate or 1 perfect off, but with longer songs it seems to get a little further off track (like maybe 5p on file a little over 4 minutes).

EDIT: It appears that J4 scores also get this treatment with the minor bonus Marvelous notes. You probably just need to tighten the window a little to fix that, I'm not quite sure if anything needs to be done with the greats / goods / bads though. They look alright but I'll update you if I see anything off.

I think this sums up what I mean in two images:
Image
Image
Image

houkouonchi
Site Admin
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 1:12 pm

Re: What would would you guys rather have implemented?

Postby houkouonchi » Thu Dec 20, 2012 4:51 am

Not sure what extra's you are talking about. its not obvious from your screenshot as obviously J4 vs J7 results gonna be way off. A better comparosin would be a screenshot when set at j4 and the server-side not giving the same values?

User avatar
Izzy
Moderator
Posts: 531
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:03 pm
Location: Leawood, Kansas
Contact:

Re: What would would you guys rather have implemented?

Postby Izzy » Thu Dec 20, 2012 6:43 am

foxfire667 wrote:
houkouonchi wrote:I think this sums up what I mean in two images:
Image
Image


I think its a common misconception that J7 scores translate into J4 scores exactly by perfects being marvelous and greats being perfects. It is "close", but not exact. There is nothing wrong with the server side judging because it just takes your offset for that note and applies it to a J4 timing window. If anything your screenshots prove that the J7 timing window isn't what everyone thought it was.

User avatar
Cube
Site Admin
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 10:18 am

Re: What would would you guys rather have implemented?

Postby Cube » Thu Dec 20, 2012 11:49 am

J1 - x1.50
J2 - x1.33
J3 - x1.16
J4 - x1.00
J5 - x0.84
J6 - x0.66
J7 - x0.50
J8 - x0.33
JUSTICE - x0.20

User avatar
foxfire667
Moderator
Posts: 551
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: What would would you guys rather have implemented?

Postby foxfire667 » Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:00 pm

Izzy wrote:There is nothing wrong with the server side judging because it just takes your offset for that note and applies it to a J4 timing window. If anything your screenshots prove that the J7 timing window isn't what everyone thought it was.


I'm pretty sure that the entire StepMania community wouldn't get this wrong.

Also this happens when I play J4 as well, and I'll be sure to post some scores when I play later on to show you the evidence. It usually isn't this extreme on either judges (like usually 2 or 3p max) but yeah.

EDIT: I'm not sure what is up at the moment, but I've been alternating from J7 and J4 for around 40 minutes now and every score is 100% accurately recorded. Perhaps something messed up on my end somehow last night, I have no idea. I'm going to keep testing and alternating though to ensure I'm not just getting extremely lucky.
Image

User avatar
TheVCRMan
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 2:06 am
Location: Orlando, FL
Contact:

Re: What would would you guys rather have implemented?

Postby TheVCRMan » Sat Dec 22, 2012 3:56 am

I like the idea of an exp boost for having a harder judge. It gets my vote. :3
i dont know what to put here

User avatar
Izzy
Moderator
Posts: 531
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:03 pm
Location: Leawood, Kansas
Contact:

Re: What would would you guys rather have implemented?

Postby Izzy » Sat Dec 22, 2012 4:44 am

I've noticed that if your client skips it will record a bad note client side but somehow the server records it correctly, assuming you still hit the note onbeat.

StephenIsFast
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 8:00 pm
Location: Enfield, CT

Re: What would would you guys rather have implemented?

Postby StephenIsFast » Sat Dec 29, 2012 11:43 am

I'm sorry to be asking this, but is the judge timing removal already done? I am asking if the timing for lower judges is finally removed like voted for.

User avatar
foxfire667
Moderator
Posts: 551
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: What would would you guys rather have implemented?

Postby foxfire667 » Sat Dec 29, 2012 12:15 pm

StephenIsFast wrote:I'm sorry to be asking this, but is the judge timing removal already done? I am asking if the timing for lower judges is finally removed like voted for.


Since everything is recorded server side as J4 now, it doesn't matter what judge difficulty you play on. Just bear in mind that your scores will look far worse server side than they will on your results screen if you play lower than J4.
Image


Return to “StepMania Online News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest