What's new
By:
FORUMS - COASTERFORCE

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Which park for you has the highest average for all its coasters?

You could also call this "the park with the least amount of crap coasters" :)

I'd venture at Holiday World and Dollywood. Both have a number of great coasters with their middle slots filled by above average rides that wont blow you away but you can marathon for a while and not be mad about it.
 
zazobo said:
Really..?
Click to expand...

To be fair, I can see where he is coming from. Thorpe has a really decent lineup, without any rattly old Arrow/Vekomas, rickety woodies from the days before CAD software, mass cloned Reverchons or Pinfaris, or excessive numbers of unimpressive family coasters. Its big coasters are all fairly modern and thrill-focused, and the park has a really high bottom level, even though there are no really top-of-the-line aces in there.
 
Pokemaniac said:
To be fair, I can see where he is coming from. Thorpe has a really decent lineup, without any rattly old Arrow/Vekomas, rickety woodies from the days before CAD software, mass cloned Reverchons or Pinfaris, or excessive numbers of unimpressive family coasters. Its big coasters are all fairly modern and thrill-focused, and the park has a really high bottom level, even though there are no really top-of-the-line aces in there.
Click to expand...

Maybe it’s because Thorpe is my home park but I find the coasters very short and underwhelming, Saw is just painful, flying fish is depressing, NI is average... Stealth is great as is Swarm (if very short) and Colossus used to be great but now is a bit decrepit.
 
There's only Flying Fish and X that really bring the numbers down and there's also two B&Ms and even the weakest B&M will score better than most 'meh' attractions from other manufacturers. For the most part, the rides at Thorpe are average (often 'meh' versions of potentially great coaster types) and this results in an average, but far from bad score. That's why Thorpe ended up 12th on my rankings and why I admitted that this rating system is severely flawed, however fun it might be to calculate!
tpexcel.jpg

Equally, if Phantasialand opened this year otherwise unchanged, but with a new Wacky Worm, they would fall to #2 on my list. Europa will be similarly penalised when I finally get on Baaa Express.

I wonder if @Hixee / @roomraider or another excel enthusiast could come up with a better way of doing this?
 
Last edited:
Don't see how it's flawed that Thorpe comes out with an alright average, you've already explained that quite well. What more are you trying to achieve?
 
HeartlineCoaster said:
Don't see how it's flawed that Thorpe comes out with an alright average, you've already explained that quite well. What more are you trying to achieve?
Click to expand...
I might be off here, but I read his point as 'my rating system is flawed' rather than 'averaging my ratings is flawed'. In other words, his consistency or accuracy of his rating are throwing the average out. Of course, averaging you ratings is a great way to determine the best park - on average. ;)

I think it's important to emphasise the question being asked here - "Which park for you has the highest average for all its coasters?". This will give different results to your favourite park. The problem with Thorpe is that it's not a very good park (in my opinion) in terms of a place to be, but it does have a reasonably good coaster line-up (well, Stealth, Nemesis Inferno and Swarm, the rest are pretty ****e). It'll climb up the rankings fairly easily in terms of 'average coaster', but that'll feel odd for people who don't really like the place. If that makes sense?

Will said:
I wonder if @Hixee / @roomraider or another excel enthusiast could come up with a better way of doing this?
Click to expand...
One thing that does jump out to me is something to do with the total number of coasters at a park. A park with one amazing coaster and two rubbish coasters doesn't necessarily feel better than a park with two amazing coasters and five rubbish ones. Of course, in black and white "=AVERAGE()" terms it is, but maybe having more coasters should factor in a bit too? It's all about the creds, after all. ;)
 
Or multiply the cred by a 'thrill factor' before averaging so that a small number of good coasters are not dragged down by a large number of kiddie creds.
 
Yeah some form of weighting might do the trick. Give more power to the truly outstanding rides.
Try exponential points for the higher rated stuff (try raising all your rankings to the power of something between 1 and 2 before averaging).

Here's mine squared:

Liseberg (without Kanonen): 13 - 193.83
Wanda Nanchang (without the caterpillar): 12 - 193.5
Phantasialand: 12.71 - 181
Happy Valley Wuhan: 11.5 - 175
Efteling: 11.57 - 160.14
Universal Japan (with VR): 11 - 152.6
Djurs: 11.33 - 152
Parque Warner (without the woodie or GIB): 11.25 - 143.75
Europa (without the sheep): 11.17 - 137.17

At a glance, Thorpe would drop out of the top ten, losing to Universal Singapore, Aussie Warner, Tivoli Gardens, Happy Valley Beijing & Tianjin.

Thorpe :D: 11 - 131.29

Thorpe dethroned. Better?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top