Quote:
Originally posted by Diarrhoea
You're back yeah Weekly Countdowns are much easier. I remember my first one was like a daily one where I chose the positions for the giggles, it was way too hard iirc.
|
I kept it up for a good 5 or 6 months.
But yeah, this is just easier.
------
EDIT: My points system is so much more complex, but it's fine since I'm only doing this once a week now.
Old points system:
=SUM((21-(C3)) * (4*F3 + 3*G3 + 2*H3 + I3))
New points system:
=(D3*0.07)+((F3*1)+(G3*0.9)+(H3*0.85)+(I3*0.8)+(J3 *0.75)+(K3*0.7)+(L3*0.65)+(M3*0.6)+(N3*0.55)+(O3*0 .5)+(P3*0.47)+(Q3*0.44)+(R3*0.41)+(S3*0.38)+(T3*0. 35)+(U3*0.33)+(V3*0.31)+(W3*0.29)+(X3*0.27)+(Y3*0. 25)+(Z3*0.23)+(AA3*0.21)+(AB3*0.19)+(AC3*0.17)+(AD 3*0.15))
My old chart had a problem where it was difficult for a song to achieve a decent amount of points if it had peaked low, yet had incredible longevity. A quick-winded #1 would get more points than something that peaked at #12 but had spent like twice or even 3 times longer on the chart. Starving spent almost 50 days on the chart but peaked at #13. I Would Like peaked at #1, but only spent 10 days on the chart... and IWL ended up with double Starving's points
.
I think I'm taking a weeks > peaks approach to this. So higher peaks are still very important, but the lower positions on the chart aren't irrelevant now.