Angband.oook.cz
Angband.oook.cz
AboutVariantsLadderForumCompetitionComicScreenshotsFunniesLinks

Go Back   Angband Forums > The real world > Oook!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 16, 2013, 00:47   #1
MattB
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Berkshire, UK
Posts: 1,095
MattB is on a distinguished road
Some ladder thoughts...

Some thoughts on the ladder (with apologies to Pav)...

I was thinking that the ladder doesn't really work any more, so I was wondering what angfolk thought about these ideas.

1> There should be completely separate ladders for different variants


This seems obvious to me. Combining them makes for nonsense. It just puts Furyband at the top. I could create a variant where every character starts at clvl 101 and claim the top spot instantly. (Well, I couldn't create my own variant, but you get my point).

2> Furthermore, there should be a separate ladder for each release of Vanilla

This would serve not only to make it fairer (some V's are harder than others), but also keep things fresh and interesting by encouraging people to submit their characters. The only reason I posted my first character onto the ladder this week (only my third winner, as it happens) was because I was thinking about this post. It had never crossed my mind to do so before now, to be honest. Think how much fun it would be when 3.5 is released and there is a fresh, blank ladder to fill. It would be just like a competition!
At the moment we have 3,500 Vanilla entries all jumbled together, but separate ladders for ZceAngband, FayAngband and Frazband with 9, 8 and 1 entries respectively. (All brilliant variants, I'm sure).
This would also filter out all of the dirty and dev versions into some kind of 'other' category, which makes sense to me.

3> Characters should be sorted by fastest win (then by clevel for non-winners)


At the moment the top of the v-ladder is fixed for all eternity. Those first people who bothered to xp their characters up to 99,999,999 will stay at the top. If it were sorted by least turns for a win then the top spot, however brilliant, will always be beatable. I should add that I will never be at the top on that criterion as I play very slowly (last win 176k turns), but it would be cool to try and get a higher position on the ladder by winning faster. Yes, this will encourage people to retire the moment they kill Morgoth rather than explore levels 101-127, but isn't that kind of the idea? Get Lantern, kill Morgoth, live out the rest of your life sitting in your kitchen, wearing your Power Dragon Scale Mail, slicing rations of food with Sting and spending your million gold on fine wine from the general store and the odd hallucination mushroom from the black market?

4> I also agree with what Nick said in another thread that the default settings should be the easiest.

This would mean that if anyone wants to tinker with the birth settings it's only going to make their ladder attempt harder, not easier.
Having said that, I believe that the masochists who want to play Ironman should be recognised for their madness. Perhaps the ladder should recognise those options as a separate variant (although I doubt that's possible). Maybe it could simply be a matter of changing the version number in the savefile?

I don't know if all/any of this is possible but, more importantly, do people want this?

That's my two cents' worth, and I'd be interested to hear what people think...
MattB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 16, 2013, 20:05   #2
pav
Administrator
 
pav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Prague, Czech republic
Age: 38
Posts: 777
pav is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to pav
1) I agree. Anyway, it's easy to ignore global ladder rankinks mentally, already.
2) Here I don't agree, it would lead to massive fragmentation. We could settle a middle ground on a separate ranking for each decimal release, ie, 3.0.x, 3.2.x, 3.4.x, ...
3) I agree, at least for Vanilla current ranking scheme obviously outlived its usefulness. The major problem with fixing this is that older Vanilla releases didn't include turncount in the dump. The minor problem is that you're implicitly encouraging certain playstyle (minimize turncount) -- merely replacing current encouragement of XP grinding, thus only a minor problem.
4) No opinion.
__________________
See the elves and everything! http://angband.oook.cz
pav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 16, 2013, 21:01   #3
Derakon
Prophet
 
Derakon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 8,469
Derakon is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by pav View Post
3) I agree, at least for Vanilla current ranking scheme obviously outlived its usefulness. The major problem with fixing this is that older Vanilla releases didn't include turncount in the dump. The minor problem is that you're implicitly encouraging certain playstyle (minimize turncount) -- merely replacing current encouragement of XP grinding, thus only a minor problem.
The simplest way to handle this would be to default to assuming infinite turns if not otherwise specified. I do agree that such a sort order is assuming preferability about a playstyle that not everyone goes for...but it is one that some people go for, so lacking any reasonable alternatives I think it's a decent default. If someone comes up with an alternate metric for sorting dumps, then presumably it could be added as an option somewhere, your time and interest permitting of course.

And since I haven't said it anywhere near recently enough, thanks for running the ladder and these forums! You rock, Pav.
Derakon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 16, 2013, 23:18   #4
MattB
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Berkshire, UK
Posts: 1,095
MattB is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by pav View Post
1) I agree. Anyway, it's easy to ignore global ladder rankinks mentally, already.
Then why not do away with it?

Quote:
2) Here I don't agree, it would lead to massive fragmentation. We could settle a middle ground on a separate ranking for each decimal release, ie, 3.0.x, 3.2.x, 3.4.x, ...
That's actually what I meant (i.e. 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5 etc.). There are already 58 Variants on the ladder, I don't think that an extra entry for each decimal release would significantly add to that.

Quote:
3) I agree, at least for Vanilla current ranking scheme obviously outlived its usefulness. The major problem with fixing this is that older Vanilla releases didn't include turncount in the dump.
All the more reason to start afresh with 3.5 .
(And what Derakon said)

Quote:
The minor problem is that you're implicitly encouraging certain playstyle (minimize turncount) -- merely replacing current encouragement of XP grinding, thus only a minor problem.
As I said, I don't minimise turncount, but I would still prefer things to be ranked that way. Anyone, even me, could eventually get to 99million XP wielding Grond and the ICoMorgoth, but could I win in under 100k game turns? No way. But one is something I simply can't be bothered to do, and the other is an aspiration.

And yes, you rock, Pav! Thank you. This forum brings joy into my life.
MattB is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question re: new variants to the ladder Avenger Variants 2 December 11, 2013 18:31
Ladder Update UglySquirrell Vanilla 2 September 20, 2011 04:50
Ladder equation grassy Vanilla 1 January 9, 2011 07:29
The ladder Fendell Orcbane Vanilla 3 July 3, 2010 23:45
Sorting the (non-competition) ladder buzzkill Oook! 1 February 5, 2009 02:14


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:59.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.