ye olde mystical majikal formula:
snarkmarks = ceil[5*(#tutorial or map comments) + 10*(#tuts)*(#average tut rating) + 5*(#answered qs in editing forum) + [(#forum posts)+(5*(#topics started))]*(#your user rating) + 10*(#average map rating)*(#no.of maps you've made)] + (#profile hits)
[addsig]
| ? posted by Myrk- |
| It ends out giving you a pretty random number, but gives us a chance to say we have a number thats greater than both Orpheus' post count and age in years |
sounds to me like, even if i had no maps no tuts was the worst enemy around with a score of 1 rating, i could still whip your socks off with shear post count figures..
last round the closest member was less than 1/2 of my 7000+ total 
chomp on that myrkman
| ? posted by Myrk- |
| Well in that case your snarkmarks will only ever reach a maximum of like 7000... you only get 1 for each post you make... |
you make it sound like a bad thing 
so, you think somehow you can exceed 7000 
besides, you think cause lep is your bro, you have a chance?
/slips lep another fiver
NOT
/me points to comparitive totals between us at present , post counts doesnt account for that big a gap buttmunch
[edit] i didn't intend for everything to be bold type
I must appologise to everyone, Orph, does have his many moments of insanity.
i may suffer from things but vision isn't among them..
my snarkmarks went from 700+ to 300+ in 30 minutes, while andrews went from 500+ to 1500+ in the same time frame... what gives?? a glitch? now or then 
no i am not saying andrews is to much, but the number switch between just our two is phenomenally large..
i cannot recall many others.. leps changed little or none and a few others seem unaltered..
lep, you got any clue?
[addsig]I think a few people have gotten obsessed over these SnarkMarks. Maybe if you could exchange the SnarkMarks for fabulous prizes I could understand the obsession, but it really doesn't make sense to me.
And how the heck did KFS get 1500?! Burn the witch! Burn him!
[addsig]
| ? posted by Leperous |
|
ye olde mystical majikal formula: snarkmarks = ceil[5*(#tutorial or map comments) + 10*(#tuts)*(#average tut rating) + 5*(#answered qs in editing forum) + [(#forum posts)+(5*(#topics started))]*(#your user rating) + 10*(#average map rating)*(#no.of maps you've made)] + (#profile hits) |
you think that's something, let me put up my parameter list for the stretchblt function for MFC for my tile editor.
[addsig]
But if it brings in more user comments on maps, great.
[addsig]
Perhaps it should be 10*(1+#average map rating)*(no. of maps) since so few maps have been rated as of yet.
I think that may be how KFS has done it, he has a whole bunch of rated maps for somehow. I think I'm gonna check.
Edit: Well, my timing was awkward once again
| ? posted by KungFuSquirrel |
Quote And how the heck did KFS get 1500?! Burn the witch! Burn him! I have had one person rate one of my maps at 5/5. I have 25 maps listed as well. The map average therefore rests at 5, and the formula then takes 10*(5 average map rating)*(25 maps made) - you do the math from there.  It seems Lep has made rating content even more important for those who care about this sort of numbering system. I myself was rather surprised to see myself up that high. But if it brings in more user comments on maps, great. |
altho i think its strange still, i am happy none the less for you andrew.. but let me get this straight, you got only one map scored, and all 25 counted?
still it doesn't explain mine going backwards 300+ points..
i think maybe mine was overinflated to begin with, because it was close to 800 and thats a bit soon for this early in SP's new life.. but then again you now have 1500 so that kinda blows a hole in my theory 
I had nearly 400 last night, now I'm down to 60.
| ? posted by KungFuSquirrel |
Quote but let me get this straight, you got only one map scored, and all 25 counted? There's an "average map score" that averages all the scores of your maps - but if only one has been averaged, only that score shows and is figured into the equation. So if I had two maps rated, one at 5 and one at 3, the value for the formula would be 4, as that would be the average of the scored maps. |
man.. then it would behoove anyone to get one good score, instead of many others.. where the average could only go down..
hmmm, somehow that doesnt seem to me like it would encourage people to comment.. it seems to me that only the scored maps should be actively included..
*waves a fiver around..*
someone score me one 5 please
Yesterday you wanted everyone to rate you lower, now you want 5's!!! Orph, your consistently inconsistent!!!
| ? posted by Edge Damodred |
|
Yesterday you wanted everyone to rate you lower, now you want 5's!!! Orph, your consistently inconsistent!!! |
yeah, busted..
actually, i wanna see if the theory andrew posed holds up.. you can edit the score later if you like, but i need one 5 to see..
[addsig]You had 280 snarkmarks squrrial, then i rated u a 5 and it went up to 1460.
Lolage.
[addsig]
