can someone answer please MAP DIFFICULTY

[[SoE]_Zaitsev]

Why the difficulty. Freakz, who made tons of walkthroughs and one of those with most experience is totally neglected? Best off taking the best jumpers rate the maps. They can beat practically every map while beginners can not.

[Drofder2004]

Much better now in fairness We record each rating as an event, with the persons user ID and what they have rated, and how much.

If there are 140 maps to compare against each other, that is a lot of potential events...

[Drofder2004]

Why the difficulty. Freakz, who made tons of walkthroughs and one of those with most experience is totally neglected? Best off taking the best jumpers rate the maps. They can beat practically every map while beginners can not.

Yes, there is the simplicity of just letting one man give the ratings for every map, but then we are neglecting everyone else.
Also, he is currently neglected at this stage because we are no further beyond the idea of concept only. Consider it a brainstorming session for ideas on how we can include everyone and if it is a feasible concept.

[fre4kZ]

Why the difficulty. Freakz, who made tons of walkthroughs and one of those with most experience is totally neglected? Best off taking the best jumpers rate the maps. They can beat practically every map while beginners can not.

Yes, there is the simplicity of just letting one man give the ratings for every map, but then we are neglecting everyone else.
Also, he is currently neglected at this stage because we are no further beyond the idea of concept only. Consider it a brainstorming session for ideas on how we can include everyone and if it is a feasible concept.

I still think it would be good if there were 2 ratings next to eachother. 1 is done with selected people, who have experience in almost all of the maps, and the another is user-voted rating, everyone can vote for that.

I am quite sure, a rating system, which offers option to rate the maps for everyone, would turn out really wrong, cause there are too many shades of skills of codjumping. The number of the less-experienced jumpers are way more higher than the highly - experienced jumpers, in this case, every map will be overrated by difficulty, maps would get much more average higher rating then theyre meant to have. It would be a total mess.

There is no Toplist of maps, ranked by difficulty, and this has to change. Many of the jumpers are stuck at a point of codjumping, cause they have no idea what map to invest in for getting higher skill, cause so many possibbilities. If they see list, they can go 1 by 1, be able to get better, be able to progress their skills higher and faster.

I believe the average difference of the average scores between the objective and the user-voted scores would be around 2, and it can cause lots of mess.

[h8in]

well thanx so much .
this will really level up the site ( and it will be a good opportunity for new players to explore and enjoy cod jumping mods without getting too frustrated over some maps . )

[Mirko]

i think alot of people will choose differently on maps such as sonic and average. freakz and many others may agree that sonic is easier but a few people including me can flog average and struggle on sonic. 125 fps only makes whole different challenge. i can jump 318 and i still struggle on it.
another thing not to forget is free roam maps. e.g. mp_mega
also i love the rating idea

[Goro92]

imo nevada and sonic should be in the "Upper-Intermediate" group

[Vartazian]

I actually like this idea. I think that the rating should be rated by advanced jumpers only however, as they can determine the skill of many maps while people who cannot complete every map would not know where to place the harder ones. I think it should be up to a group of 10 or so top jumpers to rate the maps in an unbiased manner to allow other players to view the difficulty the way a normal jumper would see the map themselves. I also think that maps with multiple difficulties should have their rating more than once, according to the number of paths it has. So for example, mp_to_the_moon has 3 paths so therefore it has 3 maps in one and thus each path would get its own rating. This I say because if a map has 3 ways, not every player will take the hardest way. Some players will take easy, or intermediate paths. So this way, to_the_moon would have 3 seperate difficulty ratings, as for other maps. mp_to_the_moon (basic), mp_to_the_moon (intermediate), mp_to_the_moon (advanced) I just say this to be fair because not everyone views the same map for the same difficulty path.

[[SoE]_Zaitsev]

You make good points. Shouldn't be an issue noting when a map has seperate routes.

[Drofder2004]

...

You cannot rate a difficulty with bias, its just simply not logical. So this is never going to be a problem. IF someone is rating a map as "harder" just because their friend made it, then they are a moron.

In regards to route options, this over complicates matters both in database form and table layout.
Is is far simpler to rate a map based on its most difficult route.

[Mirko]

i dont think it should open to "all public"
there are still many jumperes who think something like mp_cave is as hard as mp_destroyed, which is clearly not.
and for maps with different routes i agree with vartaz

[Mirko]

But if they are being asked which is easier or harder they will pick one. It's not like they are saying "that is a hard map and that is also a hard map" - they will pick the one that is the hardest which is what matters.

fair enough

[Drofder2004]

Possible issue. With many combinations (~20000) to vote and the amount of people who will vote the maps will not average out quickly if we base the numbers at 0.

With such a little "work force" we need to speed up the process and use a league based system.
Get one person to assign an order of difficulty to EVERY map.
Each map is given a number equal to that order.
Each vote adds -offset (0.25?) or +offset to the winning and losing maps (negatives being an advance in levels).

Random number maps are chosen and are placed against the NEXT map to their side (either +1 or -1)

Using this method will force maps to be compared only against similar level maps.
There becomes a significantly lower combination possibility (an Easy map will never be against an expert map).

Also, a lot of similarly difficulty maps will be jumping between positions as they contend against each other.

The only issue would be duplicate voting, which would be impossible to track due to a constant change in map positions, however I feel this will not be a problem as the maps will average themselves out, even if only 1 person does all the voting.

[Vartazian]

This really seems over complicated and i think that it is only fair to have seperate ratings for the different difficulties of a map..otherwise your rating system is already biased towards the higher skill jumpers by rating each map according to the hardest path. whatever though.

[Mirko]

Possible issue. With many combinations (~20000) to vote and the amount of people who will vote the maps will not average out quickly if we base the numbers at 0.

With such a little "work force" we need to speed up the process and use a league based system.
Get one person to assign an order of difficulty to EVERY map.
Each map is given a number equal to that order.
Each vote adds -offset (0.25?) or +offset to the winning and losing maps (negatives being an advance in levels).

brilliant idea drofder
this will work better because if people get 2 random maps and keep voting the hardest one then some inter maps could be really hard. e.g. if canyon is compared to heaps of easy maps and say polar is compared to the insane maps then canyon is going to be harder than polar