Ocarina of Time Leaderboard Tiers Discussion

[Apasher]

Main Completion Goal Categories
-Any% (beat the game, glitched, minimalist, w/e)
-All Dungeons
-100% (or "completionist")

Race Categories
-MST
-No IM/WW
-Glitchless

Legacy Categories
-Ganonless
-No WW
-5 boss

Challenge Categories
-Minimalist (Low%) MST
-Reverse Dungeon Order
-No Doors

Alternative Categories
-All Medallions
-MSB
-"Glitched" 100%
-No RBA/WW

Other Categories
*everything else*

[Jbop]

I'm not in favor of tiers.

[cafde]

What is even the point of tiers? To say x world record is better than y? What's suppose to be the least arbitrary? I don't see the point.

[scaramanga]

Well, for me the point is, that runners of more categories want to be represented on ZSR. But with the current layout, that wouldn't be feasible, it would be an overload of the drop down menu. With tiers, or by introducing secondary leaderboards, as suggested in the thread in the TWW-section of this forum, we could preserve the current system of highlighting certain categories, while still allowing other ones (which would fall under the definition of "race categories") to be represented on ZSR.
With tiers we had the opportunity to bring back categories that do not finish (like Child Dungeons), without distract from the more prestigious ones.

See, I personally want to start running, but don't have much time to practice. As I want to focus on glitch less, learning short runs like Any% or Ganonless is not an option. A good starting point would be Child Dungeons Glitchless, maybe with a leaderboard, I would try to begin streaming earlier. I know that nothing is hindering me, to run CD nevertheless, but having my name ion a leaderboard is definitely one of the first goals, that comes into my mind.

I mean, we already have the WR Spreadsheet, why not have more leaderboards here? Again, they don't have to interfere with the "big" categories, but it would be nice, if people could see more categories on ones profile.

[iamradiox]

Not in favor of Tiers either (no matter what they're called). I don't see the point of categorizing things when everything is already well-organized in a dropdown menu.

However, the "popularity highlight" idea that was mentioned in the ZSR discussion today was interesting IMO. (categories with the highest submissions average per week (or month) would get highlighted in red for example)

[Saltor]

Do any of the people against tiers support adding more categories to the leaderboards?

One of the presiding arguments in favor of tiers seems to be that the current set up doesn't work as well if we add any more categories. I wonder if everyone against tiers is also against adding more categories.

[Qweczol]

I am against adding tiers, but like radio said I would be for highlighting popular categories, as well as having the categories listed from top to bottom by number of runs submitted. I would also not be in favor of adding more categories.

[Sveet]

I like grouping by categories, but I agree that defining them as "tiers" poses it in a way to make Category X sound better than Category Y. This will just lead to fighting about things like whether MST and AD are top tier or 2nd tier or what. On the other hand, if we group them by their rules (Completion, Restriction, Non-completion, etc) there is nothing to argue about, because it is objective.

Mostly, I just hope that there are more categories on the leaderboards. I really enjoy seeing different routes and the incredibly diverse and interesting things that can be done with this game, but without it on the leaderboards I won't find the videos at all.

[Apasher]

Agreed with sveet. The whole concept of "tiers" would just lead to developing category elitism. Just dropping the word "tiers" into this and just grouping the categories by "main goals, restriction, race, legacy, challenge, etc" would be ideal.

[nighthawkraven18]

category elitism already exists tho. adding tiers wouldnt change anything

[Saltor]

Agreed with sveet. The whole concept of "tiers" would just lead to developing category elitism. Just dropping the word "tiers" into this and just grouping the categories by "main goals, restriction, race, legacy, challenge, etc" would be ideal.

So would for example MST and No Doors both be in "restriction" or would MST be in restriction and No Doors in "challenge"? Seems important to get the different classifications right so that we don't have too many buckets but also don't exclude interesting stuff.

[Apasher]

That's why I put MST under "race categories." I don't really like using "restriction"

[Sveet]

Yeah "Restriction" is too vague. Everything that isn't any% is restriction. Perhaps a more descriptive terms would be "Sequence Restriction" which would include Any%, 100%, AD and MST (and others, like Ganonless) and "Glitch Restriction" which would umbrella all the No RBA/WW/IM combinations and glitchless, and then the 3rd category "Non-completion" which would cover anything else.

[ING-X]

I don't know if "tiers" is the best way to go about this, but I think something needs to be done to make sure that the uncontroversially "legitimate" categories (any%, 100%, etc.) are highlighted over the arbitrary ones (no rba/ww, etc.) that people complain about. A lot of the complaints from opponents of arbitrary categories seem to come down to the concern that, if arbitrary categories are tracked on par with "legitimate" ones, there will be so many categories of equal importance that competition and development will stagnate across the board. I've talked to a few of these people and most of them have said that making it more explicit as to which categories are "legitimate" and which ones are "just for fun" would alleviate the majority of their issues with the creation of new categories. And besides wanting as many people as possible to be happy, I'm tired of seeing category drama on my twitter timeline.

[Otaku]

Just as long as All Medallions is officially supported somewhere along the line, I'd be pretty happy because then I can utilize the official ZSR leaderboards. Even if it's on a lower tier.