+4
Spinners are fine as they were before the non-functional "update". Well, maybe they had a somewhat too high influence on PP but I guess it's too difficult to neglect that when it comes to rankings & stuff.
Example:
A : 5650 Score
B : 5649 Score (1 Spinner less than A)
C : 5647 Score (2 spinners less than B, 3 less than A)
D : 5644 Score (3 less than C, 6 less than A)
E : 5640 Score (4 less than D, 10 less than A)
Let's assume they have all HD 100%.
I think A would get way more PP than the rest in the last sytsem (while D would get next to no PPs) which had to do with the rankings of the map. I can't think of a way to make the spins' influence lower.
More interesting in terms of spins are the following two:
No-spinner-map:
A, B, C & D: 5650 Score, HD 100%
E: 5650 - 10 Score, HD 99,xx%
Here, E'd get absolutely no PPs for FCing the map since he didn't get SS while A - D would get the full amount of PP since they're theoretically all on the same position in terms of ranking.
It'd be much easier if there would be a definite PP for Rank X - Y (100%) on zero-spinner-maps and a penalty for those who didn't get SS, but not that huge.
Another one's this:
A: 5651 Score, 100%
B: 5650 - 10 Score, 99,xx%
C: 5649 Score, 100%
A'd get the most PP here, that's for sure I guess, while I think C'd get more PP than B because he got 100% on the map.
That's a pretty basical problem the new system has to deal with - what's worth more? 100% or more spin?
It surely has been 100% in the old system.
Spinners are fine as they were before the non-functional "update". Well, maybe they had a somewhat too high influence on PP but I guess it's too difficult to neglect that when it comes to rankings & stuff.
Example:
A : 5650 Score
B : 5649 Score (1 Spinner less than A)
C : 5647 Score (2 spinners less than B, 3 less than A)
D : 5644 Score (3 less than C, 6 less than A)
E : 5640 Score (4 less than D, 10 less than A)
Let's assume they have all HD 100%.
I think A would get way more PP than the rest in the last sytsem (while D would get next to no PPs) which had to do with the rankings of the map. I can't think of a way to make the spins' influence lower.
More interesting in terms of spins are the following two:
No-spinner-map:
A, B, C & D: 5650 Score, HD 100%
E: 5650 - 10 Score, HD 99,xx%
Here, E'd get absolutely no PPs for FCing the map since he didn't get SS while A - D would get the full amount of PP since they're theoretically all on the same position in terms of ranking.
It'd be much easier if there would be a definite PP for Rank X - Y (100%) on zero-spinner-maps and a penalty for those who didn't get SS, but not that huge.
Another one's this:
A: 5651 Score, 100%
B: 5650 - 10 Score, 99,xx%
C: 5649 Score, 100%
A'd get the most PP here, that's for sure I guess, while I think C'd get more PP than B because he got 100% on the map.
That's a pretty basical problem the new system has to deal with - what's worth more? 100% or more spin?
It surely has been 100% in the old system.