Stepmania Online

[quote="StephenIsFast"]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.[/quote]

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.

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.

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.

I like the idea of an exp boost for having a harder judge. It gets my vote. :3

[quote="Izzy"]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.[/quote]

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.

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

[quote="foxfire667"][quote="houkouonchi"]
I think this sums up what I mean in two images:
[img]http://i360.photobucket.com/albums/oo50/foxfire667/Stepmania%20Scores/2012-12-20_021704_zps97a5bec3.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i360.photobucket.com/albums/oo50/foxfire667/smobug_zps85ea0064.png[/img][/quote][/quote]

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.

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?

[quote="houkouonchi"]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?[/quote]

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:
[img]http://i360.photobucket.com/albums/oo50/foxfire667/Stepmania%20Scores/2012-12-20_021704_zps97a5bec3.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i360.photobucket.com/albums/oo50/foxfire667/smobug_zps85ea0064.png[/img]

[quote="StephenIsFast"]How long will option 1 take to implement, since option 1 is easily going to win?[/quote]


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.

[quote="StephenIsFast"]How long will option 1 take to implement, since option 1 is easily going to win?[/quote]

Not very long. Few hours, plus testing.

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

It finally dawned on me how option 1 would actually work. The method I was thinking of extremely convoluted and probably impossible when in fact it is incredibly simple and almost foolproof.

Option 1 is definitely the way to go.

[quote="Izzy"]I'm still not convinced that kind of score translation between judges is even possible based purely on offsets.

Are the timing windows even linear going up and down by 1? I don't know how they would convert other than 4 to 7. Actually I don't even know what evidence there is that J7 scores convert the way they think they do to J4. If it is linear than I would imagine it is actually J8 that converted how we think J7 does. But J8 doesn't actually exist since it jumps right to "justice".[/quote]

SM5 has j8 and justice. I don't think it would be very hard to test if judging purely by offsets is something we can do. I am almost certain that it will work without any issues.

I thought option 2 was good for xp boosting, but as I read Cube's post above, it would be a super mess.

So I pick option 1, seems easier for all stepmania online users.

I'm still not convinced that kind of score translation between judges is even possible based purely on offsets.

Are the timing windows even linear going up and down by 1? I don't know how they would convert other than 4 to 7. Actually I don't even know what evidence there is that J7 scores convert the way they think they do to J4. If it is linear than I would imagine it is actually J8 that converted how we think J7 does. But J8 doesn't actually exist since it jumps right to "justice".

[quote="CuDi"]Saffy here. Voted for option 2.

I didn't read through the comments but...

I don't see how option 1 would play through at all. Wouldn't this affect the current ranking system per song? I think it'll just make comparing scores, and the scoreboards a mess. Or maybe I am not understanding quite completely.[/quote]

Actually option 1 would make the scoreboard very clean, option 2 would kind of make it a mess.

The server gets the offsets of every note played from the client. This means that the server can have a set judgment and it does not matter what the client has theirs set to. For example is someone was playing on j1, the client would reflect a really good score. The site would show their score as if they played on j4, so it would be much lower. The same thing would work for j7. The client would show a lower score then the server since the site would be going by j4. This means people could play on different judgements and still be ranked the same way on the site with comparable scores.

Saffy here. Voted for option 2.

I didn't read through the comments but...

I don't see how option 1 would play through at all. Wouldn't this affect the current ranking system per song? I think it'll just make comparing scores, and the scoreboards a mess. Or maybe I am not understanding quite completely.

[quote="EvilAngel00"]A /judge would be great. Imo, the best way to be able to do decent scores on decent songs (not ridiculous one I mean :p ) is to play some time (couple of months) with a higher judge and then come back to 4. The skill of accuracy just sky rockets without you necessarily noticing :lol:[/quote]
With option 1 though, you would not need to go back to judge 4. The scores on the site would show as if you were playing judge 4, instead of j7 mixed with j4 scores, but your client would still record it as judge 7. So either way you get the advantages of doing back and forth.

A /judge would be great. Imo, the best way to be able to do decent scores on decent songs (not ridiculous one I mean :p ) is to play some time (couple of months) with a higher judge and then come back to 4. The skill of accuracy just sky rockets without you necessarily noticing :lol: