Note to the admins: This may or may not be in the right place. Go ahead and move it if need be.
There has been a lot of complaints about how tracks are rated. So, fear not, my little coaster loving maniacs!
Step One
The first thing you want to do is ensure that the file you're downloading is for the program you think it is. I don't know how many times I've downloaded a coaster for Scream Machines and realized it after downloading. For reference:
NL - NoLimits Coaster
SM - Scream Machines
RCT - Roller Coaster Tycoon
RCT2 - Roller Coaster Tycoon 2
RCT3 - Roller Coaster Tycoon 3
Step 2
Step 2 is simple. Read the description! Too many times has a coaster been rated based on manufacturer characteristics that the track in question is not even supposed to possess. If the uploader says it's a B&M, rate it like a B&M.
Step 3
Once you've downloaded and ridden the coaster, you may or may not want to rate the coaster. Hopefully, if you're reading this, it's the former. Some people have their own system for rating, and they're not likely to read this. Chances are, you have no idea how to give a reasoning for a rating. I've seen some very effective rating methods, and you can try those if you don't like mine. Here's my template for rating:
Technical
- Shaping based on manufacturer(if any), or shaping based on industry standards. Basically, are the elements shaped properly to keep the forces in check. Barrel rolls are not flat, loops are consistent with the intended style, and hills are parabolic in shape or otherwise accurate with the style. When rating cool5's jet coasters, the hills are typically a little more triangular in shape, to conform with other jet coasters. Check with manufacturer standards when it comes to corkscrews. B&M corks are nice and round with the rider not being thrown around, while Arrow bases their corks on the shape, and very little on the forces. [2 possible points]
- Supports are structurally sound, and consistent with the intended manufacturer. If there's no intended manufacturer, the supports are able to support the track and train with the forces being exerted over any given position. [2 possible points]
- Smoothing. Every element flows nicely from one to the next, and there's no pumps, bumps, or sharp points. Pumps are more noticeable in the editor, as they occur at the vertices. They are best explained like this: The rider can easily notice the change from one segment to the next; it's not seamless as it probably should be (See: Arrow Dynamics). [2 possible points]
- Forces. The vertical forces do not get too high, which can cause discomfort of the rider, or too far in the negative, which can cause damage to the coaster/riders over time. Lateral forces do not get very high unless the intended coaster style has consistently high laterals. [2 possible points]
- Does it pass the tunnel test and e-brake test. [2 possible points. 1 for each test]
Adrenaline
- This is the only place you're allowed to make a comment about the use of speed. Unless it's a recreation, in which case the speed can be addressed in the "accuracy" section. [5 possible points]
- Near misses, and very twisty track also count towards the adrenaline score. [5 possible points]
Originality/Accuracy
- The layout is original/accurate (for recreations) [3 [possible points]
- The element selection, and placement. It's not good to put 5 inversions back to back. There should be some non inverting elements in there. [3 possible points]
- Custom scenery. Is the style of the scenery consistent with the coaster? Realistic coasters likely have realistic scenery, and fantasy coasters may or may not have realistic scenery. It's important to consider what the uploader has set for the style of coaster (realistic/fantasy/recreation). [4 possible points]
There you have it, a guideline for rating tracks. Hopefully, we won't be seeing anymore ratings that have stupid high numbers and very little reasoning for the points.