Impact is a rudimentary measure of the effect a macro has on the score. I'm afraid it was expressed in different units than the game score; this has now been fixed. The measure will be explained once it is improved. Until then, I might hide it entirely to save confusion.

because there are macros that
- aren't there for score gain (or don't do it in themselves)
- use different methods
- with different size of the macro

e.g. You can use the same macro with click-start-click-start-click-start or you have an entry "wait for user click" that would work start-click-click-click - thats just a matter of what you like more.

I don't think that score makes any sense for downloaders. Perphaps for the scripters in test of different versions of their script with minimal changes, but that is the only point where I can see that is could be at least a bit useful.

@LennStar:
I think the av. score CAN show, how effective a macro is, BUT it depends on the puzzle.
If a player uses a macro on the wrong puzzle, it will be crushed, dropping the av. impact value.

At this point, I give the idea to calculate the average impact with the RMS method.
Maybe with one calculating window, using all values, and another, respecting only the last x actions,
or show minimum, maximum and average RMS.

It's nice to have the clickable headings for sorting.

However, if "Player" heading is clicked, the data all disappears. It re-appears if one of the other headings is clicked.

Good call, Brick. I'll fix that. Thanks.

-Ilya

done

How about checking, if the macro was run completely and not cancelled, to get more reliable impact score?
Or you can simply watch and compare the "very best score"-content before and after the script to get a more valuable impact data.

closed. Implemented, resolved, no comments or votes since 2009