what the hell are you goin on about? haha.
anyways, what stats would you need in relation to exp and bp to have an exp of under 100, but a vp of 2?

At 11/1/04 10:01 PM, M-A-R-C-U-S wrote: what the hell are you goin on about? haha.
anyways, what stats would you need in relation to exp and bp to have an exp of under 100, but a vp of 2?

Who? Me or Bonus?

Anyway, what stats? Exactly what I said already. A b/p rank high enough to get you over 2 VP.

For instance, someone with 90 exp has 1.90 base VP, and then all they need is 6% bonus to take them over 2.00 total VP (to 2.01 VP more precisely). 6% bonus = ... police officer. So, between 300 and 400 b/p. That answer yer question?

At 11/1/04 10:15 PM, BonusStage wrote: ugh i meant to say i was looking around the 2.0's but THEY are the level 3's thus confused was me, but i'd say with 90 XP, you'd need to be police officer correct? And that is at the least, meaning some account was made with under 100 XP, and they just got a lot of b/s (not alot ... but enough to make it elligible for only 1 of the lists of course) and then stopped ...

Yep, police officer. If both you and I came up with that off the top of our heads, it's probably accurate. Now of course that's assuming the person has 90 exp. They might have less. They might have stalled at 80 exp, or even less. What about Crimson_Edge or whatever? The dude with 40 exp? I dunno what his b/p rank is, but someone like him who doesn't want to leave level 1 or level 2, and thus remains under 100 exp... but doesn't mind getting b/p... could easily get a VP over 2.00.

And there ya go.

Oh, and I should add that they didn't necessarily stop getting exp, either. It could be a week-old account that hasn't had time to break past 100 exp yet, but the guy is doing tons of b/ping with it. :::shrugs:::

whoa, i was really confused.
i can see what you're saying, thats fair enough.
but i was thinking that we were talking about someone with a VP of exactly 2.00, and exp under 100....
man i was confused. i was thinking 'what VP rank would give you just the right amount of percentage to boost your VP up to 2.00 if your exp is under 100!?!' hahahaha
im an EEDEEOOT!

At 11/1/04 10:48 PM, M-A-R-C-U-S wrote: whoa, i was really confused.
i can see what you're saying, thats fair enough.
but i was thinking that we were talking about someone with a VP of exactly 2.00, and exp under 100....

ahhh, I see. Heh. No. Not exactly 2.00. Over 2.00. #;-}>

At 11/1/04 07:38 PM, gfoxcook wrote: Yes, but ramagi wasn't able to get b/ps the way we can NOW get b/ps for all 3.5 years. Just for the past 2 years or so.

ramagi 29 47753 Elite Guard Supreme Commander 1303 36.65

So yeah, 29th kinda bites considering she's #2... and that when the current system began, she was #1 in pure final-vote blams... before the first save on NG was gained.

Accually had such a list done the day before this current sytem I was tied at the top of the blam list. My avg would of been #2 on the list cause the person who was tied with me had a lower sign up date.

Yeah, but compared to how easy points are to get now, as you've often reminded people, people hardly had any blams at all back in those days. Weren't there like 2 people over 1000 blams?

Yep there were 2. Sizzler and me both with 1337, Thejoe and Junon had 800 some.

The current, modern blam + save system should be the measuring stick. Not the old one-blam-per-entry system. Thus, October whatever-th 2002.

Well, and not just that. It would favour the people with the most b/p PER ACTUAL DAY THE SYSTEM EXISTED. That's the key part.

Anyone who signed up prior to October 2002 is being massively penalised on the BP Lifetime List due to their account existing for however long when blams were hard to get and saves didn't even exist yet. Those were days when you simply COULDN'T get the amounts of b/p you can get these days.

Yeah, and I don't even make the top 50. seventy-fucking-nine. Seventy-fucking-nine. ;_;

Still, it's an interesting list, even if SK doesn't find a fairer way to make it from when the system started... instead of when the profile system started. 1999 /= 2002.

Scary thought my avg gone from 2.3 two years ago to what SK list showed it at.

At 11/1/04 11:59 PM, gfoxcook wrote:

At 11/1/04 10:48 PM, M-A-R-C-U-S wrote: whoa, i was really confused.
i can see what you're saying, thats fair enough.
but i was thinking that we were talking about someone with a VP of exactly 2.00, and exp under 100....

ahhh, I see. Heh. No. Not exactly 2.00. Over 2.00. #;-}>

yeh now that you say OVER 2, not just 2 on the dot, im happy.. and i understand :)
*recieves pats on head* haha.

At 11/2/04 12:20 AM, M-A-R-C-U-S wrote:

At 11/1/04 11:59 PM, gfoxcook wrote:

At 11/1/04 10:48 PM, M-A-R-C-U-S wrote: whoa, i was really confused.
i can see what you're saying, thats fair enough.
but i was thinking that we were talking about someone with a VP of exactly 2.00, and exp under 100....

ahhh, I see. Heh. No. Not exactly 2.00. Over 2.00. #;-}>

yeh now that you say OVER 2, not just 2 on the dot, im happy.. and i understand :)
*recieves pats on head* haha.

The odds that someone would have a 2Vp exactly are highly unlikly. It is possible, but rare.

Consider

Safety Patrol - 100 (+100) 2%
Security Guard - 200 (+100) 4 %
Police Officer - 300 (+100) 6 %
Police Sergeant - 400 (+100) 8%
Police Lieutenant - 500 (+100) 10%
Police Captain - 1000 (+500) 12%
Elite Guard Private - 1500 (+500) 14%
Elite Guard Private First Class - 2000 (+500) 16%

No need to go farther cause the bonus would cause it to go over 2VP

Well the one with the best chance is someone with 1.5 accually with 10% bonus. It came out to 2.003776 . Math is fun.

At 11/1/04 07:49 PM, BonusStage wrote:

At 11/1/04 05:54 PM, ShittyKitty wrote: # EXP Profiles | 65866 | 68536 | +2670
# VP Profiles | 65867 | 68537 | +2670

just tell me how that work, WHO has 2+ Vp, but not more than 100XP o.0

Ay caramba, you people had a field day with this concept, didn't you? Well, interestingly enough, out of the tens of thousands of profiles, there's only one person who has less than 200 experience, but enough b/p's to have over 2.00 VP. What, you wanted to know who? Sheesh, you want everything handed to you on a silver platter, no? Heh, without further ado: Zfire (user #697734). He's got 80 experience, but he's an Elite Guard Private.

thanks for working that one out, Ram :)

Ay caramba, you people had a field day with this concept, didn't you? Well, interestingly enough, out of the tens of thousands of profiles, there's only one person who has less than 200 experience, but enough b/p's to have over 2.00 VP. What, you wanted to know who? Sheesh, you want everything handed to you on a silver platter, no? Heh, without further ado: Zfire (user #697734). He's got 80 experience, but he's an Elite Guard Private.

haha, yeh we sure did like disecting it! and its all thanks to Boner, i dont think anyone would have picked that lil number up :)
hahah, that guy ROCKS! send him an email, telling him he's been the topic of converation here for a few hours, hahah.

At 11/2/04 01:20 AM, M-A-R-C-U-S wrote: haha, yeh we sure did like disecting it! and its all thanks to Boner, i dont think anyone would have picked that lil number up :)

Actually, I spotted that guy last month, when I first started the VP list. I figured out who it was, and took a look, but nobody picked up on it last month, so I didn't post anything about it. I guess BonusStage is just too perceptive for his own good. And he's the world's biggest loser. Have I mentioned that before? Oh, I have?...good. ;-)

At 11/2/04 01:34 AM, ShittyKitty wrote: Actually, I spotted that guy last month, when I first started the VP list. I figured out who it was, and took a look, but nobody picked up on it last month, so I didn't post anything about it. I guess BonusStage is just too perceptive for his own good. And he's the world's biggest loser. Have I mentioned that before? Oh, I have?...good. ;-)

oh, im sure that you picked it up, because you compile all of this shit. im saying that Boner has a good eye :) haha.
hahaha, yes, you have mentioned it, and its true, also :P hahah.
man, is that the MOST B/P's over a period of 4 days you've ever seen?

At 11/2/04 01:54 AM, M-A-R-C-U-S wrote:
oh, im sure that you picked it up, because you compile all of this shit. im saying that Boner has a good eye :) haha.
hahaha, yes, you have mentioned it, and its true, also :P hahah.
man, is that the MOST B/P's over a period of 4 days you've ever seen?

Hmm if you really want to know, I can post the msot B/P I have seen over a 4 Day period. I have the info at home, and can post it later.

At 11/2/04 05:18 PM, BonusStage wrote: pfft wait, so it's a stalled account correct, because he doesn't look like he's going much more than where he is :\

Well, I can remember that he was the same "only person" last month, and I believe he still had the same amount of experience. So yeah, I think he's stalled, and he'll probably be the one person causing a difference for quite a while.

Well, when I was playing around with my profile numbers to check out my b/p per hour count, I just remembered something: Daylight Savings Time. If I had neglected this, tomorrow's update would have been missing that extra hour, boosting everyone's b/p per hour numbers. However, I caught this little complication and have fixed it. Aw, darn, huh?

At 11/2/04 07:46 PM, ShittyKitty wrote:

At 11/2/04 05:18 PM, BonusStage wrote: pfft wait, so it's a stalled account correct, because he doesn't look like he's going much more than where he is :\

Well, I can remember that he was the same "only person" last month, and I believe he still had the same amount of experience. So yeah, I think he's stalled, and he'll probably be the one person causing a difference for quite a while.

That is interesting. I would think if they are voting they would lcik the deposit linlk. I mean it be one thign if they wern't votign at all, but to vote and not cclick that depossit link. unthinkable.

At 11/2/04 11:29 PM, ShittyKitty wrote: Well, when I was playing around with my profile numbers to check out my b/p per hour count, I just remembered something: Daylight Savings Time. If I had neglected this, tomorrow's update would have been missing that extra hour, boosting everyone's b/p per hour numbers. However, I caught this little complication and have fixed it. Aw, darn, huh?

DAMN! hahaha. that would have been cool, alright... eh... bugger.
also, how accurate and quick is the quickdraw listings? i mean, now that its 12:04am ng time, will the NG quick draw have already run and been listed up?
eh, i recken i was close to getting it today... maybe, ill go check it out :)

At 11/3/04 12:05 AM, M-A-R-C-U-S wrote: DAMN! hahaha. that would have been cool, alright... eh... bugger.
also, how accurate and quick is the quickdraw listings? i mean, now that its 12:04am ng time, will the NG quick draw have already run and been listed up?
eh, i recken i was close to getting it today... maybe, ill go check it out :)

Yeah, the program had already run by the time you posted, but it took me a little bit to check everything. If I'm paying attention, I'll usually have the pages up by 12:10 NG time, tops.

At 11/3/04 12:37 AM, ShittyKitty wrote: Yeah, the program had already run by the time you posted, but it took me a little bit to check everything. If I'm paying attention, I'll usually have the pages up by 12:10 NG time, tops.

fair enough.
eh, thats 2 days in a row that i've stuffed it up now. im not sure how its possible to deposit right on 12:00:00... thats just incredible.
eh, i came 10th today, but should have come in the top 5 had i not have stuffed it up...
BLEH, ill try again tomorrow i guess! haha.

Sorry about the late update today. I went digging through the code (adding a couple of stat lists for Sunday's Batting Average list) and I found a nasty little bug in the Blam/Save Lifetime and Alt Sort lists that would have messed up the tables. You see, earlier this week I cleaned up the code a bit (combined a few duplicate things) and I made a little typo. I started the list program up again a few minutes ago, so it should be posted by 5PM EST.

Now the Batting avg I am interested in that one. More than I was the B/S life time.

At 11/3/04 03:54 PM, ramagi wrote: Now the Batting avg I am interested in that one. More than I was the B/S life time.

Oh yes indeed, i think it would give me an incentive to make a new flash and hopefully climb the rankings. I will wait for it though. The shit master has really outdone himself on this one i think.

At 11/3/04 03:34 PM, ShittyKitty wrote: I started the list program up again a few minutes ago, so it should be posted by 5PM EST.

No worries. It gets here when it gets here. Just out of curiousity, how are new people designated in the list (if at all). Just trying to see if your program will make my life easy in hunting down my current blanks or if I actually have to work ;)

At 11/3/04 07:20 PM, D0GMA wrote: No worries. It gets here when it gets here.

Yeah, the program took a lot longer than expected. I blame two things for this: network bogged down because I ran the program late, and a massive chunk of new profiles for the review list. I'll have it uploaded shortly, though.

Just out of curiousity, how are new people designated in the list (if at all). Just trying to see if your program will make my life easy in hunting down my current blanks or if I actually have to work ;)

New people are indicated with the word "NEW" in the "rank change" slot.

At 11/3/04 07:25 PM, ShittyKitty wrote:
Yeah, the program took a lot longer than expected.

Thanks much!!

New people are indicated with the word "NEW" in the "rank change" slot.

Excellent. I like it when my life is made easier =)

/me readies Ctrl+F

Welcome to the Wednesday, November 3, 2004 update of the Total Listing.

Stupid program took a lot longer than I thought it would. Oh well, such is life.

New list! Today marks the debut of the Reviews list. Remember, you have to have had 25 reviews before October 31, 2004, in order to be listed here.

Note that something happened with the Blam/Protect Lifetime list. For some reason, it thinks everyone has ranked down once. For this list, just add one to the Rank Change column. Hopefully this should resolve itself; if this happens again Sunday, I'll take a look at the code.

A new poll on the website: "Should I add Blam and Save Ratio lists?" This would be two lists, one for blams/saves and one for saves/blams. I know that D0GMA has these already, but they're only top 50, if I'm not mistaken. Anywho, I just thought I'd throw that out there.

At 11/3/04 07:47 PM, ShittyKitty wrote: Welcome to the Wednesday, November 3, 2004 update of the Total Listing.

Heh ... looks like I have to work anyway. It looks like vagrant4 IS a vagrant. Just have to go through and make sure now.

A new poll on the website: "Should I add Blam and Save Ratio lists?" This would be two lists, one for blams/saves and one for saves/blams. I know that D0GMA has these already, but they're only top 50, if I'm not mistaken. Anywho, I just thought I'd throw that out there.

Yep, A-D lists at the EGRL are all top 50 only.

At 11/3/04 07:47 PM, ShittyKitty wrote: Welcome to the Wednesday, November 3, 2004 update of the Total Listing.

Cheers SK. I'm feelin' lonely and blue, uh huh </elvis>

At 11/3/04 07:53 PM, BonusStage wrote: Omg i am tied for king of green people's with j00bie,

uh-ok I'm above the kings :P Be tied with j00bie isn't something that I would enjoy...
GO BACK TO YOUR INSANE PACE BONUS!!!! Even I beat yours, that's a bad sign :O

but he was listed first, DAMN YOU SIGN UP DATE,

Guess why sk is always ranked lower than me in experience.
To be exact, since I started I was always ranked higher (bigger number) all the people that had the same amount of experience as me. My missed deposits didn't really affect my position in the ties.

</hate sign-up dates>

oh yeah, sexy update josh

OGFM he has a name? WOOOOAH! The update was indeed secksi but josh isn't, just look at his picture :D

At 11/3/04 07:47 PM, ShittyKitty wrote: Welcome to the Wednesday, November 3, 2004 update of the Total Listing.

YES.

Stupid program took a lot longer than I thought it would. Oh well, such is life.

indeed, it doesnt matter, as long as us stat whores have something to look at.

New list! Today marks the debut of the Reviews list. Remember, you have to have had 25 reviews before October 31, 2004, in order to be listed here.

YES!!!
thats it, im homepaging your freakin site dude. you rule.
i remember 'reviews' being marked as 'never' a few weeks ago :P

Note that something happened with the Blam/Protect Lifetime list. For some reason, it thinks everyone has ranked down once. For this list, just add one to the Rank Change column. Hopefully this should resolve itself; if this happens again Sunday, I'll take a look at the code.

eh... the BSL is a really good addition. it would be sad to see it screw up. i hope you've fixed it! *shakes fist*

A new poll on the website: "Should I add Blam and Save Ratio lists?" This would be two lists, one for blams/saves and one for saves/blams. I know that D0GMA has these already, but they're only top 50, if I'm not mistaken. Anywho, I just thought I'd throw that out there.

eh, you know what would be good?
you put the actual ratio! haha. if thats not what you're suggesting, that is.
just a simple colum with say '2' b-s, if you had 200 blams and 100 protects, etc.
i think mine is at around 2.5-2.8 atm...

At 11/4/04 01:57 AM, EKRegulus wrote: oh yeah, sexy update josh

Isn't it, though?

OGFM he has a name? WOOOOAH! The update was indeed secksi but josh isn't, just look at his picture :D

I'm gonna smite you for that one ;-)

At 11/4/04 01:58 AM, M-A-R-C-U-S wrote: i remember 'reviews' being marked as 'never' a few weeks ago :P

Yeah, well, policy changed. Notice, too, that "Review Response Rate" was "current" a week or two ago, but it's "never" now. Heh.

eh... the BSL is a really good addition. it would be sad to see it screw up. i hope you've fixed it! *shakes fist*

We shall see on Sunday.

eh, you know what would be good?
you put the actual ratio! haha. if thats not what you're suggesting, that is.
just a simple colum with say '2' b-s, if you had 200 blams and 100 protects, etc.
i think mine is at around 2.5-2.8 atm...

Yup, that would be what the list would consist of: blam count, save count, and b/s ratio (or s/b ratio, for the saviors list).

Hey, Marcus, check this out: http://www.newgrounds.com/bbs/topic.php?id=192121 I think you might enjoy the last couple of posts.