Donkey Kong Forum
Other Lists => Steve's List Forum => Topic started by: homerwannabee on April 25, 2018, 06:37:24 am
-
I decided to finally use my math formula on whose the greatest of the Kong games. Donkey Kong, Donkey Kong Junior, Donkey Kong 3, and Crazy Kong. My formula is simple. It's total number of submission for a game divided by the ranking of that particular player. So for instance, since there are 437 submissions for Donkey Kong, Robbie Lakeman gets 437 points. McCurdy gets 218.5 points because 437 divided by two equals 218.5.
So here are the 20 best players. And yes Barra you'd be ahead of me if you beat my Donkey Kong 3 score. Kappa
1. Robbie Lakeman-663.4 points
2. John McCurdy-292.2 points
3. George Riley- 229.2 points
4. Wes Copeland-223.1 points
5. Mark Kiehl-210.9 points
6. Phil Tudose-139.6 points
7. Andrew Barrow- 122 points
8. Dean Saglio-109.3 points
9. Ben Falls-96.7 points
10. Dwayne Richard- 96.1 points
11. Jason Wade- 87.4 points
12. Jeff Wolfe-86.5 points
13. Mike Kasper-81.2 points
14. Hank Chien-72.9 points
15. Corey Chambers-72 points
16. Estel Goffinet-54.5 points
17. George Strain- 54.1 points
18. Ross Benzinger-52.8 points
19. Chris Psaros-52.6 points
20. Steve Wagner-49.3 points m
-
https://donkeykongforum.net/index.php?topic=1994.msg32537#msg32537
-
lol
-
The most egregious error in this is that it is not in the List Forum
-
I like the idea but the formula is too top heavy. You could be top of Jr, DK3 and CK and still be below whoever the DK record holder is even if they haven't submitted on any of the other three.
-
I like the idea but the formula is too top heavy. You could be top of Jr, DK3 and CK and still be below whoever the DK record holder is even if they haven't submitted on any of the other three.
A better formula maybe would be if each score was normalized, by dividing your score on the best score (getting a number from 0-1 on each game) and adding these four numbers.
-
The problem with your formula Vicente is I dominate Donkey Kong 3 to the point where your formula gives me an unfair advantage.
-
The most egregious error in this is that it is not in the List Forum
Fixed. <YSG>
-
The problem with your formula Vicente is I dominate Donkey Kong 3 to the point where your formula gives me an unfair advantage.
How is that unfair? ;)
Normalize over the rankings then. To score a player, take his/her rank divided by total number of submissions - giving a number between 0 and 1 - and then add these four numbers. Then the dominant players don't get an unfair advantage, and it also doesn't give an unfair advantage to have a high score in a game with lots of submissions.
-
The most egregious error in this is that it is not in the List Forum
Fixed. <YSG>
Thanks mate! MP <Pigger>
-
Because Donkey Kong 3 doesn't have a killscreen. The other three do. If Donkey Kong 3 had a killscreen, it would work.
-
Because Donkey Kong 3 doesn't have a killscreen. The other three do. If Donkey Kong 3 had a killscreen, it would work.
What's the Repetitive Blue Screen on DK3 then?
-
A repetitive blue screen Kappa
Because Donkey Kong 3 doesn't have a killscreen. The other three do. If Donkey Kong 3 had a killscreen, it would work.
What's the Repetitive Blue Screen on DK3 then?
-
Because Donkey Kong 3 doesn't have a killscreen. The other three do. If Donkey Kong 3 had a killscreen, it would work.
What's the Repetitive Blue Screen on DK3 then?
Since there is no hard stop to the game, there is no theoretical limit on points as well.
-
Because Donkey Kong 3 doesn't have a killscreen. The other three do. If Donkey Kong 3 had a killscreen, it would work.
What's the Repetitive Blue Screen on DK3 then?
Since there is no hard stop to the game, there is no theoretical limit on points as well.
Ding ding ding! THAT'S what I didn't understand. Thank you sir. Carry on...
-
Since there is no hard stop to the game, there is no theoretical limit on points as well.
I've heard that DK3 crashes at the 10 million mark on the score counter.
I guess we'll know that for sure soon enough when Barra gets there.
I know he's close.
-
Since there is no hard stop to the game, there is no theoretical limit on points as well.
I've heard that DK3 crashes at the 10 million mark on the score counter.
I guess we'll know that for sure soon enough when Barra gets there.
I know he's close.
If he feels like it, I don't think any score is safe really, just a matter of time for the kiwi on this one I reckon.
-
Please fix the title. Who's, not whose. <confused>
-
Since there is no hard stop to the game, there is no theoretical limit on points as well.
I've heard that DK3 crashes at the 10 million mark on the score counter.
I guess we'll know that for sure soon enough when Barra gets there.
I know he's close.
Except I got 13.9 million on easy settings. So not true.
-
Well, I love charts and lists and Riley threads....so where to start?
1) There are people on Riley's list that don't have any submissions or official scores on anything but DK...so how they could they possible be among those considered as greatest of the Kongs?
2) Which of the 8 DK3 tracks should be considered for something like this, and why? All of them?
3) If you normalize by ranking and use DK3 Marathon on Difficulty 1, then the top 5 are Ben, Riley, Barra, ChrisP, and Brian Allen. If you use Difficulty 3 then the top 5 are Wes, Riley, Ben, Barra, and ChrisP. Which...wow...look at that...closely matches:
4) https://donkeykongforum.net/index.php?topic=1994.msg32537#msg32537
-
How are you normalizing the ranking Jry? It seems the original idea was percentage of high score. You seem to just be adding the rankings which is different.
-
The reason I like my formula better because a person could have number one scores in three different games, and because they didn't touch one of the games, they get heavily penalized due to the ranking system. Robbie Lakeman has two number one scores and isn't in your top five. My formula takes into account his supremacy in two of the games. Mark Kiehl also gets screwed by this.
As for me, it doesn't matter what system you use. I'm still top five in almost all of them.
Edit,maybe it would be better to have a max of 143 for the top number since Donkey Kong Junior has the least submissions. That way, no game is given a huge advantage.
-
there really isn't a perfect way to do this
-
How are you normalizing the ranking Jry? It seems the original idea was percentage of high score. You seem to just be adding the rankings which is different.
For each game: Rank ÷ Number of Players
Then sum of all four of those. A lower score is better.
The reason I like my formula better because a person could have number one scores in three different games, and because they didn't touch one of the games, they get heavily penalized due to the ranking system. Robbie Lakeman has two number one scores and isn't in your top five. My formula takes into account his supremacy in two of the games. Mark Kiehl also gets screwed by this.
As for me, it doesn't matter what system you use. I'm still top five in almost all of them.
If you only consider some games and not others, then what's the point of a list like this? "Greatest of maybe some of the Kongs, or not, or whatever." is what you're talking about.
there really isn't a perfect way to do this
It's certainly no WSI.
-
there really isn't a perfect way to do this
It's certainly no WSI.
[/quote]
even WSI is terrible lul
-
<confused>