Web Design Discussion > General Web Design Discussion

Proposal: Bonus systems category for making regular stats games easier to play

(1/3) > >>

si404:
An issue with some of the systems proposed/implemented on TM is that some people have no interest in clinching them and feel that they get in the way of their game of clinching all the routes they want to clinch in a region (normally Interstate, US, state and bannered variants thereof) and want a filtering system to remove them.

In order to filter these systems out simply, I propose a new categories for systems, alongside the existing active, preview and devel - 'bonus' (not-yet ready bonus systems would remain plain 'preview' or 'devel'). 'active' might want renaming 'regular' or something similar.

Bonus systems would be the freeway grab-bags, tourist routes, city routes, etc that are nice to have in the database, but aren't everyone's cup of tea. It would also allow the creation of grabbag-style systems that cover unsigned routes and/or major local/private roads that don't fit into the freeway grab bags (eg the entirety of the Sugarloaf Parkway could be in the database, etc) without having the statistics issue.

Stats, would - instead of 'active-only' and 'active & preview', would be 'active-only', 'active & bonus', and 'active, bonus & preview'. I imagine that would add quite a lot of time to the update process to create the 3rd set of statistics and this is the big problem I can see with my proposal.

Thoughts?

si404:
Putting it in web design though it's more a data/data processing proposal, because the Highway Data boards are too narrow - feel free to move if you think there's a better home for the discussion.

But there are web design issues
* what colour would bonus systems be displayed as (some sort of light blue, or an orange, are two options I've thought of and think might work)
* would the table be too wide with three sets of statistics columns?

mapcat:
I like the general idea but fear that arguments will continue, as users debate which systems qualify as active. How well would this work for a user who, for example, wants to track named freeways but not historic highways? Would this be easier to code than the previous suggestion of providing users with the ability to select all sets of interest to them?

si404:

--- Quote from: mapcat on January 04, 2022, 09:52:41 am ---Would this be easier to code than the previous suggestion of providing users with the ability to select all sets of interest to them?
--- End quote ---
I'm definitely not a coder, but I reckon even I would be able to do it with the tools of copy-paste! As far as I can see, it wouldn't be adding anything new, just doing the same stuff an extra time.

The selection is much more complex as it's a whole new function. It also seems much more intensive as the server would have to calculate bespoke stats.


And, yes, there would be the issue of what's bonus and what's not - it's not a flexible solution that can be tailored to individual users. Someone wanting to track named freeways would look at active stats and then the stats for the bonus system (should those named freeways be in bonus systems*).

*usasf would likely be considered bonus, but would, say, usakyp?

michih:

--- Quote from: si404 on January 04, 2022, 10:16:17 am ---And, yes, there would be the issue of what's bonus and what's not - it's not a flexible solution that can be tailored to individual users.
--- End quote ---

Yep, that's why the proposal has more disadvantages than advantages IMO. Solve a problem but open another one.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version