Why the scoring system doens't work

[curlydave]

I understand the importance of a maximum combo to exemplify and reward consistency, but just relying on one number isn't the best way to do this.

It doesn't strike me as right that someone who combos about half the song, and bombs the rest scores better than someone who gets perfects and keeps up good combos for the entire song with a few scattered misses. It's just nto right.

Also, it's kinda demoralizing and takes the fun out; let's say you're doing great, but you get one miss towards the middle. If you're trying to get a decent score, you might as well mash the buttons and restart the level. Perhaps a system could be impelemented to include your top 2 or 3 combos?

[zajac]

ooooooooh weeeeeeell.........

Just don't miss any arrows.... That is my strategy....

[Brainmaster07]

Yup, and everyone hates it. Everyone's hated it for a long time now. They might fix it with R2, but I haven't heard anything about it so I doubt it.

[Reach]

Yea, combo is dumb, and means nothing.

It shouldn't be worth anything because its easy to mash on ffr and keep combo...hence why you get lots of people that can get highscores on ffr but arn't nearly as good at stepmania.

[jimerax]

yeah, so the "SCORE" is way more important than the "TOTAL" in the result screen for me.

[zajac]

actually.... jimerax gave me an idea... instead of changing the combo system, just change how the ranking works... have it so the ranking is based on what score the person got.... instead of being based on what someone got for total.... hmmmm.... i think that sounds like a good idea, eh?

[Doug31]

I agree with jimerax. I always think I did my best when I get my best score, not best total. Max Combo should be worth about 5 points for every 1 in it. This way a combo of 1000 would only give 5000 points.

[Brainmaster07]

actually.... jimerax gave me an idea... instead of changing the combo system, just change how the ranking works... have it so the ranking is based on what score the person got.... instead of being based on what someone got for total.... hmmmm.... i think that sounds like a good idea, eh?

That's actually a good idea.

Damnit .

[burtonboardr]

my problem is that when i get a FC with 327 perfects, 36 goods and 5 averages i get 10000 points lower than the lowest highscore on the song

[Dronak]

You know that people hack their scores to get on the top 10 lists, right? A lot of those are unattainable if you play fairly. Not much you can do about it though, just wait for the next version which is supposed to have much better security to prevent hackers from doing this.

This is really the only DDR style game I've played. I don't know if the combo scoring here is standard and used in other games or not. I can see a reason for it, to reward consistently good play, but I think you have a point here. I've seen my best total score change mainly because of the combo; I could get less perfects and more goods or averages, but still get a better score than before because I got a longer max combo. Something does seem a little off about this. Perhaps things would be a bit more accurate if you worked off the "score" rather than the "total" and left out the combo bonus. You might want to post this idea to the Suggestions forum to make sure it gets noticed (if you haven't already done so).