Question for clarity. For the arcade ladder segments specifically, why do we have both Real Time and In Game times listed if we only utilize the In Game timer, yet the Real Time estimate is listed beforehand? I find it rather strange to see both yet only use 1, especially since in some cases peoples RL Times are sigificantly slower than their in game time
Real Time is shown for the sake of comparison and to keep the board uniform. I'll poke Habble about maybe removing the column as it currently doesn't have any actual barring on the record / score.
As for why some are significantly slower... PS4, PS4 Pro and PC all have very different load times. :(
Yeah, that's more of a clerical issue than anything. When we went to swap around the priorities the first time around I tried removing the RGT field entirely but couldn't find a way to enable IGT without keeping RGT showing up as a field - you can't just leave both fields blank either otherwise SRC won't let you submit - so it's awkwardly presented in the submission form.
If all else fails I could just delete the RGT that people provide and replace it with our manual IGT if a mod needs to time it for someone - if no runs in a category show RGT the field should disappear from view.
I'll have another poke at things and see if there's a solution we can come up with.
I wouldn't recommend outright removing the real time though, as it could be used as a means of tie-breaker.
Now that you mention it, I think it does do that as a baked in leaderboard feature when both are present. Maybe we can upload a few test times and see what happens.
Alright, RGT should no longer show up on the leaderboard. I took a look at the leaderboards for the other games gamewiz mentioned and it seems they the same problem with being unable to actually disable RGT in the submission form so that must be on SRC's side of things.
For our purposes please think of RGT as a pending time for those who need to submit something but don't have the time to manually find the IGT themselves - for those people we can manually replace it with the IGT during the verification process - I will clarify the written rules to reflect all this in mind too.
When we implemented IGT for the boards we wern't sure if it having both listed would cause extra confusion but now that we know it does there's no reason to keep RGT listed so thanks again Subzero for bringing this up. c:
Sadly we can't use RGT for a tiebreaker either since there are vastly different load times per console so we'd like to hear the community's thoughts on tiebreakers in general for SFV since IGT for the Story and Arcade categories are currently calculated on round time which doesn't account for milliseconds at all - it's possible that it may even be best to simply allow a tied WR's to stay tied if feedback leans in that direction.
That's a shame. This may cause more workload for you guys, but if you don't want to use real time as a tiebreaker, maybe have ps4 and pc as separate boards? Idk, I think a WR should have both a real and IG time shown.
Seperate boards for PS4 and PC would be interesting, as its very well known that the PS4 versions take significantly longer to load between fights than the PC version
Platform split was a thought but, IGT lets more people compete with each other and doesn't split the boards in half.
Also we'd have to split it PC/PS4/PS4 Pro since I believe that also has different load times xD
We'll keep our ears to the ground while we listen to feedback but it seems like at least for the time being until the current leaderboard times become more optimised the issue doesn't seem too urgent rn as far as tiebreakers go. It'd be nice to set the precedent early on but it's hard to make a long lasting call like that going forward without more community opinions.
If there's still a majority desire to change things up after that's happening more regually and we've had time to consider some options of approaching it that's probabbly when we'll make such a change.
As some food for thought, the current best potential alternative is to change how IGT is timed (except for survival) to match simillar to how we handle timing the Trials which don't have an in-game round timer. This would allow us to have an accurate millisecond count to prevent a tiebreaker but we would need to do that for every single run for that method to be consistently accurate, not just the tiebreaker itself - also it would make it impossible for runners to determine their own IGT before the mods framecount themselves which makes it even more difficult for runners to know if a run is worth submitting or not.
We're looking forward to hearing everyones thoughts on this and any other potential solution alternatives that may arise from discussions. c:
After taking another look at things now that some time has passed it turns out that not keeping RGT listed after verification has been just as confusing for people since it makes it more difficult to know at a glace after a completed run if you've PB'd or not before you actually take the time to go out of your way to calculate for IGT.
IGT is something we implemented as a way to even the playing field between platforms - and it works very well - but at the same time we don't want to force more complex submitting structures unnecessarily on our runners, so I've decided to bring back RGT in the form of "Time with Loads". Please use this as a reference time when submitting for your own convenience so the burden of IGT retiming falls on the moderators rather than the runners themselves - leaderboards will still correctly prioritise IGT as the true distinction for ranking purposes.
Our mod team is now retiming existing runs to include both the new "Time With Loads" and the calculated IGT so you should see all submissions finalised within the coming days. Thank you again for your time and I hope this additional alteration to submissions helps everyone out.
