I’m assuming that “30% of score” means a “maximum of 30% of the final score.”  As in, if the band gets perfect scores from all the judges in all the categories, the boost to their final score will be equal to 30% of their final score.

There is only one way to make this mathematically valid:

We need:  Final Score = Bandscore + Judges_Score

Thus each single point of a judges score should be equal to:

((Bandscore *30)/70)

——————————————————————————–

((#judges)*(#categories)*(max rating per judge per category))

So for example:

A band plays “White Wedding” and scores 1,400,200 points

Assuming we have 3 judges, and 2 categories (costume and performance) and a 10-point scale to judge each on, we plug the band’s score into the equation and figure out that each point the judge gives in each category is worth:

((1400200 *30)/70)/ 3*2*10

600085.714… / 60

= 10001.429 points.

If all 3 judges give a perfect 10 for both categories, the band racks up:  600085.714 points from the judges

Add this to the band score and you get 2000285.7143 total points.

Lets check our math.  30% of 2000285.7143 = 600 085.714 (which is exactly what the judges gave – woot! The math works!).

Whats wrong with this, though?  It hugely depends on the actual in-game score (because we just want to add a “judges score” to the “band score”)  A band with an amazing stage presence that scores very terribly on the song will get crap for points from the judges just to mathematically ensure that the score from the judges doesn’t exceed 30% of their final score.  Then again, this ensures that the band that wins will both score very highly and have a relatively decent stage presence (two bands that score close to equal (within say, 10000k) will come down to the judges scores).

Lets break it down with an extreme example, and you decide if the “correct band” wins using this method.

We will use 3 judges, 2 categories, and a 10-point scale for each category.

Our 4 bands and their scores are:

Band A – Scores 1,500,000 points but doesn’t do much for costumes and performance.  The judges give them a combined total of 20points (I guess we’re talkin’ that they just showed up in jeans and tshirts and maybe walked around a bit).  Their total score would be: 1714285.714

Band B – Scores 1,200,000 points and does some for costumes and performances The judges give them a combined total of 30 points (so, they maybe have a couple of wigs on, generic rock t-shirts, and they moved around and interacted with each other a bit).  Their total score would be:  1457142.857

Band C – Scores 900,000 points and does a fair amount of costume and performance work.  The judges give them a combined total of 45 points (costume and moving really damaged the game score a bit).  Their total would be: 1189285.714

Band D – Scores 500,000 and does a TON of costume and performance work (to the detriment of their score).  Judges give them a combined total of 57 points.  Their total would be:  703571.429

Band E – Scores  1,350,000 points (second place score overall) – but did a bunch of costume and performance work (not as much as D, but definitely more than any other band) – and the judges give them 50 points.  Their total:  1832142.857

We see that what this (really) means, is that it ends up being a score competition with bonus points for costumes/performance that really don’t effect much unless the point totals between bands are fairly close (in this case, E wins by having the 2nd highest score and the 2nd highest performance/costume total).  But that’s the way that anything is, especially when you have such a wide range in possible scores.

For reference, If a band can score over 2.5 million points odds are, they really don’t even need to bother dressing up – if they do, they can just stand there and get the score.   Want to push it towards having the performance scores effect things more? We would have to do something like cutting the in-game score (to like ¾ of the in game counts towards the final score) and still basing the costume/performance off of the uncut in game score.

A discussion came up on twitter over what method will be used to score.  Here’s my opinion on it… First, I took a look at the  rundown of the known information about the way they want to score:

• Percentage of notes hit
• Level of difficulty of song (as determined by highest score recorded on Scorehero.com)
• Longest run of notes hit

Yea.. it made no sense to me either… but then I found out this tidbit:

• Since all qualifiers will be within a full band during normal events, we’re going to take your % and weight it to how hard song is

Ahh ha!  Okay, so I asked:

So MyScore would be My% of the Top on SH? Or just higher score songs = harder than lower score (visions doesnt break top10?)

They asked for an opinion after that, so I commented:

Would prefer @cybercircuit scores using My% of Top Score w/NS tiebreaker

and linked to this post to explain why this would be the most fair given the circumstances… Heres why:

If a ranking has to be formed based on % and Note Streak alone, there needs to be some way to mathematically evaluate the differences between two performances.  Score exists for a reason, and is generally what all competitions are based on.  This makes sense.  So how would I do the math?  Take the % that the player receives, and calculate that percentage of the top score from scorehero.  Then use Note streak as a tiebreaker.  This works great if you assume that everyone will FC every song (as Note Streak would differentiate who got the squeezes under the activations, because they aren’t counted in %).

Whats the disadvantage here?  Well if you assume that all the top players will be able to 90% or higher each of the songs, the only ones worth playing are Panic Attack, Painkiller, Teen Age Riot, Ramblin’ Man, Battery, Bodhisattva, Let There Be Rock, Lazy Eye (everything else would give you a score of less than 300k even if you FC the song).  Also, this scoring completely ignores OD usage (the scores on SH are top scores with perfect paths, and often also have the under-OD squeezes also) – but that is really the price that has to be paid to take scores from BQP.

But, if we want to even out the competition a bit, there could be a wonky way of giving extra points based on Note Streak.  Still calculate the %, but then, for each note in the the players NS, add 25 points to that score.  How would this work out in practice?  Lets look at some examples (note that the difficulty of each song is increasing with each player):

Player A plays “Eye of the Tiger” and scores a 100% with a 1331NS
they score 158375+33275 = 191650

Player B plays “Shooting Star” and scores a 98% with a 50NS
they score 209279 + 1250 = 210529

Player C plays “Carry On Wayward Son” and scores a 98% with a 640NS
they score 210675 + 16000 = 226675

Player D plays “Let There Be Rock” and scores a 99% with a 2500NS
they score 378037 + 62500 = 440537

Player E plays “E-Pro” and scores 100% with a 1449NS
they score 181775 + 72450 = 254225

Player F plays “Spoonman” and scores 99% with a 500NS
they score 192233 + 12500 = 204733

Player G plays “Panic Attack” and scores 95% with a 200NS
they score 416741 + 5000 = 421741

What do we see here?  Player D wins.  Why?  Because while player E may have FC-ed a song within the same approximate difficulty range, “e-pro” has no-where near as many notes to hit.  Similarly, player G went for broke and played a rediculous song, but because he couldn’t hold a combo (despite doing very well) – he comes up short.

This system rewards players for playing at/slightly above their skill level, on complex songs that have large volumes of notes.  A player who can 98-100% any of the aforementioned top scoring songs will still probably win, but a player who can 96-97 a fairly challenging song within his skill level will still have a chance if an “elite” player doesn’t show up…

Just my thoughts… take em for what you will..