Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

First place scores on user profiles don't consider lazer scores #27

Open
1 task
bdach opened this issue Mar 15, 2024 · 4 comments
Open
1 task

First place scores on user profiles don't consider lazer scores #27

bdach opened this issue Mar 15, 2024 · 4 comments
Assignees

Comments

@bdach
Copy link
Contributor

bdach commented Mar 15, 2024

In addition, the recent event section doesn't show when a user gets a high rank on a beatmap for lazer scores.

@bdach bdach converted this from a draft issue Mar 15, 2024
@bdach
Copy link
Contributor Author

bdach commented Mar 15, 2024

I made this an issue here because it seemed like the best place - feature is likely going to span multiple components.

The key question for me here is what we expect to happen, i.e. are "lazer mode off" rank no. 1s supposed to be accounted separately from "lazer mode on" rank no. 1s? The "no" answer simplifies implementation but kind of violates the "lazer mode off means lazer basically doesn't exist" premise; the "yes" answer addresses that concern but will also make implementation.... interesting?

@peppy
Copy link
Member

peppy commented Apr 11, 2024

To keep everyone happy and the toggle working, I'd propose that we just have a second table with lazer mode included in first place considerations, at least for an initial fix. This would also likely make implementation much simpler for us.

@bdach
Copy link
Contributor Author

bdach commented Apr 11, 2024

Well the current implementation uses four tables (osu_leaders, osu_leaders_fruits, osu_leaders_mania, osu_leaders_taiko), so would that mean four more? Or a new unified one? I think we could even get away with adding a lazer column to each of those...

@peppy
Copy link
Member

peppy commented Apr 11, 2024

Since we've been combining things until now, I'd probably lean towards a combined new table for storage.

@peppy peppy self-assigned this Aug 6, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants