Hi,
I'm curious why RadarBox does not consider the quality of data being delivered to it with respect to leaderboard ranking.
The scoring is displayed as "Uptime^2*(Avg Range + (Max Range/5)). So obviously ranges and uptime are important. But what about the data quality itself?
I ask because looking at packet delivery into RadarBox and comparing it against the packets containing actual positional data, I can see the station ahead of me is delivering positional data only 49% of the time, and the station behind me is even worse at 44%. Meanwhile, my station consistently delivers positional data 83% of the time.
Surely data packets containing positional data have a higher value than a simple sighting of an aircraft. Otherwise we can all crank up the gain on the receivers in order to drive up the packet count, hoping to increase the range values and at the same time filling the system with less valuable data - data which RadarBox would ignore as it opts to take positional data from a receiver that is actually delivering it!
Wouldn't it be fair to reward stations that deliver higher quality data by considering this and giving them a heavier weighted value in the leaderboard than another station that delivers less positional data?
