Feedback thread
9 years ago
Dolnośląskie, Poland

Moderators on moderators list of the game are sorted by how long ago has been the account created. This is not really fair. It would be better it they were sorted for example by for how long they are moderator for this game.

Oxknifer likes this
Antarctica

With all due respect, why does the order with which moderators appear listed on a game matter at all? All that matters is that you can see the mods, not what order they’re displayed in.

If they’re going to be sorted in any way, the best sort order would probably be based off their type - supers first, regulars second, verifiers third - as it makes the most sense.

Edited by the author 3 years ago
Oatflaker and Pear like this
Finland

small thing i think would be cool to make the linked website icon be the one that the actual website uses. for example my website has the same icon i have next to my name so that would replace the "globe" icon or whatever youd call it

totally useless but i think it would look cool : D

Oxknifer and Quivico like this
United States

So um, I'm far from the best person when it comes to fine tuning the leaderboards I mod for Serena usually the only person that speedruns the games or is the first person to speed run a game and I'm trying to set up leaderboards for it

NOW that being said a preview option for looking at how things like variables will look so you can get a feel and experiment little to make it them look better would be nice

Speaking of variables, possibly having a few of the larger or more commonly used ones like difficulty and the like as a quick click to add it would be nice.

Again sorry if some of the ideas sounds stupid and or I have been suggested or are things that already exists but figured I'd throw my 2¢ in.

Israel

@Mageius For a "preview" of the leaderboard after changes, you can open the leaderboard on two separate tabs - on one you can edit any settings/categories/variables, and on the second you can refresh and see the changes.

For having a "quick select" of variables, that won't work. First, you can't really determine like that what variables are commonly used in the site. Second, each game is unique, and variables with the same name (like difficulty) can have totally different values across different games. Third, you can just create the variables quickly yourself as the game moderator, you should know best how the leaderboard should be configured.

Gaming_64 likes this
California, USA

I'd like to request a way to sort leaderboards by a number, then by time. This would help for Low% categories. For example, In Super Mario Odyssey's Minimum Captures Category Extension, the leaderboards currently only allow times that use the minimum amount of captures possible. A way that it could be made easier to submit to this category if you don't know how to do every capture skip in the run, is by ordering runs by how low their capture count is first, and then by time. For example, 3 captures runs would always be ahead of 4, but it would be sorted from best 3 captures time to worst 3 captures time, then best 4 captures time to worst 4 captures time. This wouldn't only help for Mario Odyssey's low% category, but it would also help for Low% Categories in a lot of games, if we had the ability to sort runs by something other than time first, then by time second.

Symystery and Oxknifer like this
Israel

@miiwii I think the common way to handle this is by creating a new category for each number or percent that is used in low% runs. For example, if you have a bunch of runs with 10 total captures, and then new strats were found for 3 total captures, you can create a new category called "3 captures", while keeping the old category with the name "10 captures".

The reason I can think of for the separation of leaderboards that way, is that runs with different completion goals are not really comparable. Example: If someone worked their way and optimized a "3 captures" run to the point it's almost perfect, and then someone else finds new strats and do a super unoptimized speedrun that is 5 hours longer, but with 2 captures instead. Which run is better?

I do agree though, that there could be scenarios that can benefit from the possibility to sort by a variable. The one I could think of is https://www.speedrun.com/rce#Damageless , where you are penalized for getting hit, while also trying to be fast.

Edited by the author 3 years ago
Gaming_64 and Pear like this
Israel

Interesting scenario. In this game https://www.speedrun.com/choppy_orc/resources Someone added a new resource in my name, as I couldn't do it myself (because I didn't had any verified runs at the time). After getting runs verified on the leaderboard, I can add new resources but can't edit the specific resource that was added in my name. I guess that only moderators and the "original author" can edit that? Maybe make it so that also the "secondary author" can edit the resource, as long as they have runs on the leaderboard?

Gaming_64 likes this
Germany

@Oreo321 In that scenario the run with 2 captures would be better which is why it's a good feature request.

Israel

@Saradoc Well, you say that, I say otherwise. I gave an hypothetic example of a super-optimized run by a very skilled runner which have "3 captures"; and a super unoptimized run by a new runner that goes with a new route for "2 captures". But the new run with 2 captures is, say, 5 hours longer than what the skilled runner could get.

Why would that very slow run be "better" than the very fast run? Because it has one capture less? That goes to show that you can't objectively compare those 2 runs because each one has different routes and different goals, and so they should be separated by different categories.

I did agree that there could be scenarios where sorting runs by variables would be useful, but that is not one of them.

Edited by the author 3 years ago
Gaming_64 likes this
Germany

Well, technically finding a way to beat a game with less stuff would obsolete all previous runs. So a run with 2 captures is always better than one with 3 captures, even if it takes 5 hours longer. That's just the definition of low%, beating the game with as little as possible. And if later a way gets found to complete the game with even less, so 1 capture in this example, then it would automatically by definition be better than the 2 capture runs, no matter what time it gets. Low% is foremost about getting as little stuff as possible, time is secondary(or rather only relevant if the amount of stuff is the same). Otherwise it would just be any%.

edit: Gymnast86 talks about this in this Twilight princess low% explanation video:

Edited by the author 3 years ago
United States

@Laxxus The video you linked is a great watch, but I feel its explanation is incomplete. While any lower percent run generally has more attention drawn to it, and is considered a greater achievement in the battle against the game for lowest percentage, runs aren't directly comparable and thus should be split into subcategories, as @Oreo321 mentioned. Indeed, some viewers may consider certain individual runs from higher percentage categories to be more impressive (although since lower percentage runs tend to require more tricks, I don't think this is too common). Still, new developments shouldn't invalidate older achievements.

Oreo321 likes this
Italy

I like the new rejection form ! Good Job :P

Quivico, XeroGoFast, and Oreo321 like this
Wales

I'm sure this has been suggested many times before, but the ability for multiple IL leaderboards would be an absolute game changer for the games I moderate (and I'm sure some others too), as it stands I need to have multiple different kinds of individual levels on the same board so there are some levels for which there will always be empty spots in the table.

Israel

Feedback about the new rejection form - it's great, but line breaks in the form should also be translated to the rejection message when viewing the rejected run.

Gaming_64, Walgrey, and Habreno like this
United States

(the like is that I also wish for that, not that anything is being done about it. That I know of)

French Southern Territories

Make a way to uncrowd the statistics page. https://www.speedrun.com/hcr/gamestats is unreadable.

Edited by the author 3 years ago
Israel

That "double posting" also sometimes happen when submitting runs, or requesting new games.

Gaming_64 and Oatflaker like this
California, USA

I wish there was a "View Rules" button while verifying a run, it's really inconvenient to have to go to the category board, view the rules, then go back and verify the run.

Amaz, xwillmarktheplace and 2 others like this
Pennsylvania, USA

We need to be able to individually select what categories a variable applies to. Currently you can only select that a variable be applied to 1 category or all categories; If you need a variable to apply to all but one category, there is no great solution. You can either

  1. make multiple identical variables that apply to every other category individually. This involves manually updating every run to have the new variables (for the game I moderate this is about 2000 runs, and the api doesn't let you update fields) or,

  2. have the variable be optional and tell everyone to leave it blank for the exception category, but to make sure it's filled in for the others (this is confusing for people submitting runs and extra work for moderators)

skyweiss, 1UpsForLife and 6 others like this