Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

[Mans0n]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

Step a more perfect file that somehow pleases all 4 judges equally the same.

Oh wait that won't even work, because 4(+.) = 16/20 luls

I didn't make a stepfile Im the one who made the song.

[Plan_Bsk81127]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

Halo, question regarding my file, this note here:

"- The jumps when the piano plays by itself are also unnecessary since it's a single hand playing on the piano."

Are you suffering to the middle section of the song?

[AsphyxZero]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

Kirlian Changes: 3/4/1/5 (13)

oops

[Mans0n]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

Ah I'm mistaken, Halo gave it a + and the other 2 judges +. So it's all up to i love you who im guessing gave it the same grade as the majority which was +. so that would be 17/20 which is a passing score ftw

[qqwref]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

I'd like to let you all know that my file is actually a borderline file.

[+][+][+?][+?] = 16 not 17.

EDIT: May I still send in a resubmission, or will I have to wait for next batch?

Can I give it an extra point? I mean, it wasn't in my batch, but if it was I would have [++]'d.

EDIT:

EDIT: @ Rushy:
Dropping a score completely is rude to their notes and ideas. Sorry, but if they have a legitimate excuse, it shouldn't be completely thrown away. It's up to the stepartist to appeal ratings they think are complete crap, present a case so that JX and bmah can see it, and then have THEM decide, because they are the head judges.

1) How often does a judge have an opinion so powerfully correct that the file needs to be rejected based on them alone, even though everyone else liked it? How do you know that one judge isn't looking for something no FFR player (and none of the other judges) cares about, or being totally subjective about the stepartist/difficulty/song?
2) First off, it seems pretty mean to say "your file is incredibly shitty and you should just stop stepping, oh but if you disagree maybe jx will be nice to you"; second, giving it to jx/bmah is basically changing from four judges' opinions to two, and I thought the whole four-judges system was supposed to avoid having one or two people personally decide your fate.

[iironiic]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

Can I give it an extra point? I mean, it wasn't in my batch, but if it was I would have [++]'d.

The main reason why two of the judges gave me a [+?] was because of the lack of technicality when it was purposely made to be a fun file in the first place.

[ichliebekase]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

The main reason why two of the judges gave me a [+?] was because of the lack of technicality when it was purposely made to be a fun file in the first place.

And wouldn't you be a little upset if your file didn't get in because of that reason?

Do we need to start tagging our files as "meant as an easy file" or "meant to be fun"? Not all files need to have every little buzz or drum hit stepped and apparently that's a problem to some judges.

[krunkykai22]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

W_C's didn't count -- shit. That was my bad because he was the person you were going against.

It would be a 16 after all.

EDIT: @ Rushy:
Dropping a score completely is rude to their notes and ideas. Sorry, but if they have a legitimate excuse, it shouldn't be completely thrown away. It's up to the stepartist to appeal ratings they think are complete crap, present a case so that JX and bmah can see it, and then have THEM decide, because they are the head judges.

Example for two files where my ratings trumped out:
Illumination -- this one can have a presented case and probably win because my notes were fairly vague, the structure feels incomplete but other judges don't seem to believe so.

HOWEVER:
He's a Pirate -- (and Mario, you know I like you as an artist, so don't take this offensively) this file is poorly structured and is generically syncopated. It doesn't follow specific things for a large majority of the song, and has a double-BPM section where the bass-drum isn't doubled in BPM -- the energy of the song doesn't serve as a reason to multiply the BPM and make all of the notes red and blue. To me, a structure mishap is necessary fix.

I agree if they have a LEGITIMATE excuse, but if everyone else gives them a 5 and for example you give them a 1, how is that a fair legitimate excuse? Shouldn't the whole judge team, since you are all elitist step artists apparently, shouldn't you all have and see the SAME errors? Or overlook a couple of them by mistake? To simply review something and mark it a 1 when NO ONE ELSE in the team sees the same error(s)? 3 -> 1 there.

personally, there shouldn't have to be a reason to PM JX cause of a discrepency. Should not even be there in the damn first place if you ask me.


EDIT: Also, I can see giving someone a 1 due to a horrible file. Off sync, missing notes, PR is off, so on and so forth. I could see this with a horrible horrible file. But, 5/5/5/1? That 1 should be marked a 3. Seriously. There you go, if its like 5/5/5/1 put it to 5/5/5/3. If its 4/4/4/1, put it to 4/4/4/4. Put the files to passing grade. Seriously. You don't grade a file that low if the file really isn't that bad.

[TC_Halogen]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

You wanna know rude? See Dossar's 5/5/1/5. That's just a huge kick in the ass. The way one person thinks shouldn't dictate the outcome of a file especially in a 4 judge team, jsin. This is a problem, and it needs a solution, whether mine is valid or not.

Metro made it in this time, so the whole 5/5/1/5 point is irrelevant. To be perfectly honest, I wanted to see Metro get rejected because it's going to be the next RATO: looks good as a stepchart, but when you play it, it turns out to be complete and utter aids (my own opinion).

Halo, question regarding my file, this note here:

"- The jumps when the piano plays by itself are also unnecessary since it's a single hand playing on the piano."

Are you suffering to the middle section of the song?

YES, I AM SUFFERING TO THE MIDDLE SECTION OF THE SONG, THANKS FOR ASKING

Assuming suffering means referring in your language, no, I'm not talking about the middle.

I'm actually referring to the introduction, where you have repeated descending scales, and the first note is accented with a jump. It's just a descending 4-3-2-1-4-3-2-1 (etc.) scale that repeats over and over again. When the strings come in, you could have an actual excuse to use jumps if you so chose to.

A lot of the pitch relevancy in the song is generally incorrect in terms of following the piano, and while I understand the accenting of jumps for heavier sounds or a louder piano, you should still try to improve upon the general pitch because the song itself is relatively short.

oops

wasn't me -- I gave you a 4, haha

[iironiic]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

And wouldn't you be a little upset if your file didn't get in because of that reason?

Do we need to start tagging our files as "meant as an easy file" or "meant to be fun"? Not all files need to have every little buzz or drum hit stepped and apparently that's a problem to some judges.

Eh.. to be honest, I don't really care. They worked really hard to come up with these ratings, and they are accurate for the most part. I can always resubmit it again.

[qqwref]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

The main reason why two of the judges gave me a [+?] was because of the lack of technicality when it was purposely made to be a fun file in the first place.

Really? It's decently hard as it is; putting 48th rolls all over the place would just be stupid. Does anyone think the judges would give a *better* score if Passage D was stepped with every possible sound? They wouldn't - it would have "too hard [?]" all over it.

Do we need to start tagging our files as "meant as an easy file" or "meant to be fun"? Not all files need to have every little buzz or drum hit stepped and apparently that's a problem to some judges.

Ugh, yeah, agree. I think some judges just completely ignore that there are different styles of stepping, and take off points for something that is objectively fine, but different from how they would have done it.


EDIT: Hey, hang on. The point of the four judges is to see what the general consensus is, right? So we *should* be eliminating clear outliers. A single very good or very bad result shouldn't affect a song's rating, because it's clear that that judge is seeing something most other people wouldn't.

[krunkykai22]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

Why not take the 3 highest ratings and add them up and average them out.

5-3-4-4

5+4+4= 13/3 = 4.3333333~ = Pass.

Anything above a 3.5 passes. Weeee <3

or 3.7 / 3.8

[bmah]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

Ah I'm mistaken, Halo gave it a + and the other 2 judges +. So it's all up to i love you who im guessing gave it the same grade as the majority which was +. so that would be 17/20 which is a passing score ftw

I'll be updating the notes in a moment, and yes, you're right.

[qqwref]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

Maybe it would be easier to just add another symbol for the grading: [jx], which means "I don't care what the other judges think, jx should personally decide whether to accept this song or not".

[TC_Halogen]

Re: Queue/Batch Discussion Thread v2

Averaging out to the minimum acceptance rating (4 out of 5) wouldn't be a bad idea in theory, actually. The only issue is when TWO judges have harsh opinions on a file (like 5/5/1/1 = 12 -> 3) and if two judges have that many notes to stack upon to give out a 1, then there might be a problem as well.

EDIT: didn't realize you were taking the highest three ratings -- that doesn't eliminate the problem at all, in fact, I think it might magnify it in the instance of two judges giving a poor rating (5/5/1/1, as mentioned before). And again, it nullifies the thoughts of the other judge, even if they were legitimate or not. It should be up to one of the head judges to choose whether or not they want to discard notes.