west.logan
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 608
Registered: 03-09-2011
IP: Logged

One minor point here: I don't think anyone would do pure random trial and error so it's not quite so unlikely as you might think. It's always guided (at least I would hope so).

If turning to the left makes me die, I won't choose it. That narrows the "search tree" considerably to "reasonable moves". This makes backing up a few moves and trying a different path much more feasible.

____________________________
-Logan

west.logan
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 608
Registered: 03-09-2011
IP: Logged

I think we should all welcome unlimited undo. It would make Pearls' LPs that much more erratic and hilarious to watch

____________________________
-Logan

Tahnan
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 2460
Registered: 11-14-2005
IP: Logged

Schik wrote:

Tahnan wrote:
Tiger Woods may practice all he likes--in some sense, standing on a driving range is like taking mulligan after mulligan and just redoing your first shot over and over again; someone practicing for tournament Scrabble might keep a dictionary on-hand because they find it helpful when practicing. All the same, when tournament time comes around, they have to do it again without that relaxing of the rules, and the same would apply here. If you're the kind of optimizer who wants to practice a room with UU until you get it right, and then try to repeat that performance without, then hey, go for it (the same way you could do so now, using the editor).

Those aren't very good analogies. Hitting the same shot in golf over and over requires skill, and using the different letters you have in every game of scrabble requires skill. Replaying a DROD room you optimized requires zero skill - I could watch a demo, write down every move, and then hit those keys again. As such I think not allowing scores for demos where UU was enabled is kinda silly.

No, they're not very good analogies. Analogies are bound to be imperfect. But I think they're at least mildly decent analogies. In any case, it's at least an extra step that people would have to take if they want to use UU in their high scores.

The most vocal opponents of UU aren't even saying that high scores are a big issue, anyways.

I might have been reading too much into what people were saying.

However, I will state fairly boldly that anyone who says "If other people do Activity X alone, in the privacy of their own homes, in a way that doesn't remotely affect anything about the way i do Activity X, it will nevertheless thoroughly ruin my own enjoyment of Activity X and so they must be stopped!" can be safely ignored. (Speaking, of course, about playing DROD. Or, I don't know, poker; if professional poker player Phil Hellmuth finds out that I play poker with my friends with one-eyed jacks wild, and he says "That ruins the game! I quit!", then he's got much bigger problems than the way I play poker.)

stigant
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 1182
Registered: 08-19-2004
IP: Logged

However, I will state fairly boldly that anyone who says "If other people do Activity X alone, in the privacy of their own homes, in a way that doesn't remotely affect anything about the way i do Activity X, it will nevertheless thoroughly ruin my own enjoyment of Activity X and so they must be stopped!" can be safely ignored.

This. You win the internet today!

(Speaking, of course, about playing DROD. Or, I don't know, poker; if professional poker player Phil Hellmuth finds out that I play poker with my friends with one-eyed jacks wild, and he says "That ruins the game! I quit!", then he's got much bigger problems than the way I play poker.)

Dude, that guy DOES have issues. I can totally see him saying that.

____________________________
Progress Quest Progress

Schik
Level: Legendary Smitemaster

Rank Points: 5413
Registered: 02-04-2003
IP: Logged

Tahnan wrote:
No, they're not very good analogies. Analogies are bound to be imperfect. But I think they're at least mildly decent analogies. In any case, it's at least an extra step that people would have to take if they want to use UU in their high scores.

Okay. But why do we want people to have to take an extra step? It's some sort of punishment?

There's this puzzle game, Flow. Connect the different colored endpoints without crossing paths. It's a fun game, but... to get a Perfect on a level, you have to draw continuous lines without making mistakes. So for hard levels, you play around until you solve it, then memorize it and re-do it perfectly if you want to get a Perfect Score. Super annoying, it doesn't add any sort of value to the game (though I admit that's subjective and perhaps some people find it super interesting). I would hate to add that sort of thing to DROD.

However, I will state fairly boldly that anyone who says "If other people do Activity X alone, in the privacy of their own homes, in a way that doesn't remotely affect anything about the way i do Activity X, it will nevertheless thoroughly ruin my own enjoyment of Activity X and so they must be stopped!" can be safely ignored.

Agreed 100%.

____________________________
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way it treats its animals.
--Mahatma Gandhi

---

[Last edited by Schik at 11-21-2012 09:58 PM]

Tahnan
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 2460
Registered: 11-14-2005
IP: Logged

Schik wrote:

Tahnan wrote:
No, they're not very good analogies. Analogies are bound to be imperfect. But I think they're at least mildly decent analogies. In any case, it's at least an extra step that people would have to take if they want to use UU in their high scores.

Okay. But why do we want people to have to take an extra step? It's some sort of punishment?

Not so much "punishment" as "discouragement". As in, "you want to go through the extra effort? Eh, fine, we can't stop you".

As I said (or at the very least implied), setting aside the question of demos for high scores, I'm perfectly fine with adding UU; indeed, I'd love to see any argument for not letting people play with UU at all. (Small caveat: I'd also prefer for it to be an option you can turn on or off, because I'm not sure I'd want to use it.) The only real discussion to be had, IMHO, is whether UU can be used for high score purposes--that is, those cases where it's not just a matter of how you play the game on your own, and where instead you using or not using UU does affect me. At this point, my inclination is, as I think I implied but didn't particularly argue for, to not allow it for high scores. My reasons for that have been put forth variously by others already, though, so I'm somewhat disinclined to hash them out again.

Schik
Level: Legendary Smitemaster

Rank Points: 5413
Registered: 02-04-2003
IP: Logged

The best optimizer out there said that UU would make optimizing "slightly, slightly faster". If we accept that as true, I can't think of any good argument why UU shouldn't be allowed in high scores.

I'm also against not allowing UU-high-scores because of the many ways, of various difficulty, of getting around the restriction.
1. Re-enter moves with UU turned off
2. Record your moves with a macro recorder, use a simple script to remove the undos, then play it back.
3. Use tools provided on this forum to decode a demo, change the "UsesUU" flag to false, and use those tools to re-encode the demo.
4. Change the freely available source code to save all demos as not using UU.
5. Use a different tool found here (I think) to edit the .dat file directly, changing that UsesUU flag.

That's just off the top of my head. We could make changes to how demos are saved and make 3-5 a lot harder, but 1-2 are always going to be possible. If UU doesn't trivialize optimization, it seems like a lot of work to try to block people from using it in highscores, with little to no benefit.

____________________________
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way it treats its animals.
--Mahatma Gandhi

Beef Row
Level: Smiter
Rank Points: 471
Registered: 12-28-2005
IP: Logged

Schik wrote:
The best optimizer out there said that UU would make optimizing "slightly, slightly faster". If we accept that as true, I can't think of any good argument why UU shouldn't be allowed in high scores.

I'm also against not allowing UU-high-scores because of the many ways, of various difficulty, of getting around the restriction.
1. Re-enter moves with UU turned off
2. Record your moves with a macro recorder, use a simple script to remove the undos, then play it back.
3. Use tools provided on this forum to decode a demo, change the "UsesUU" flag to false, and use those tools to re-encode the demo.
4. Change the freely available source code to save all demos as not using UU.
5. Use a different tool found here (I think) to edit the .dat file directly, changing that UsesUU flag.

That's just off the top of my head. We could make changes to how demos are saved and make 3-5 a lot harder, but 1-2 are always going to be possible. If UU doesn't trivialize optimization, it seems like a lot of work to try to block people from using it in highscores, with little to no benefit.

UU also isn't going to allow for optimization on its own, even at best. Many, many rooms can only be optimized perfectly from a specific entry point and sword position. Often this is obvious, but certainly not always.

Even once your in, the optimal path often involves doing things in a less than obvious order, another thing UU won't change much. Precision is important for optimizing, yes, but you have to be doing the right thing precisely. And UU won't really help find the right thing.

If it changes anything in optimization, it'll be the final micromanaged attack on the level among players who are already good at optimizing. Anyone who's relying on it to place well, won't be placing well. So that's another point for not needing to block UU generated scores.

(As an aside: Thinking about UU + Fool's Errand shows UU may not even always help with solving rooms at all! It'll only help if you have some notion of how the room works in the first place. And occasionally of something else that's really really really cheap. )

____________________________
"Now I will repeatedly apply the happy-face rule"

The spitemaster
Level: Smiter
Rank Points: 354
Registered: 06-09-2005
IP: Logged

Aside: I still hold to there may be a few rooms that are possible in fools errand without figuring it out.

But would this be a good time to ask for a reintroduction of timed DROD? What I want is not the old "death" countdown but just a stopwatch to see how long from entering a room it took to solve. That would be indicated in high scores.

____________________________
Last night upon a stair
I met a man that wasn't there
He wasn't there again today
I wish that man would stay away

Tahnan
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 2460
Registered: 11-14-2005
IP: Logged

Beef Row wrote:
UU also isn't going to allow for optimization on its own, even at best. [...] (As an aside: Thinking about UU + Fool's Errand shows UU may not even always help with solving rooms at all! It'll only help if you have some notion of how the room works in the first place. And occasionally of something else that's really really really cheap. )

This is a straw man. No one is claiming that UU will make all, or even many, optimal solutions trivial to find, and no one is claiming that UU will always help. (Transparent tar doesn't always help, either; not all rooms have tar.)

Beef Row
Level: Smiter
Rank Points: 471
Registered: 12-28-2005
IP: Logged

Tahnan wrote:

Beef Row wrote:
UU also isn't going to allow for optimization on its own, even at best. [...] (As an aside: Thinking about UU + Fool's Errand shows UU may not even always help with solving rooms at all! It'll only help if you have some notion of how the room works in the first place. And occasionally of something else that's really really really cheap. )

This is a straw man. No one is claiming that UU will make all, or even many, optimal solutions trivial to find, and no one is claiming that UU will always help. (Transparent tar doesn't always help, either; not all rooms have tar.)

Eh, it would be a strawman as far as the overall debate on adding UU or not.

But I don't think it is when looking at whether rooms completed using UU should be scorable *if* UU is added though, since my point is I don't think it will do much to trivialize the optimization game, or to diminish the creativity required to be good at it, and so I see little to be gained by blocking UU'd scores from counting, if UU is implemented.

____________________________
"Now I will repeatedly apply the happy-face rule"

Zch
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 503
Registered: 05-15-2007
IP: Logged

stigant wrote:
Zch said

I think it would encourage rapidly trying random stuff instead of thinking and planning ahead. The player would get results in easier rooms, but then get stuck in harder ones... Unlimited undo would make Drod more frustrating to play, not less. That's what I think anyway.

The first reasonable objection to UU in this thread. I disagree, however. The search tree is too wide (branching factor of 10 at every move) and too deep for even moderately long rooms for this to be a practical solution to solving rooms. If this was practical, we'd already have robo-solvers.

The problem is not that people could "search tree solve" rooms. The problem is that they would try it and fail. Single undo encourages you to stop and think, which leads to more enjoyable play.

Repeat after me: If you don't like it, THEN DON'T USE IT!

Of course people use it, it's really useful. Kinda like quicksaving in fps-games. Level-designer thinks that the player will sneak around cautiosly and try to approach enemies strategically, but in reality player runs forward guns blazing and quickloads every time he takes damage.

I don't oppose UU because it would totally ruin the game or be somehow unfair or ruin optimizing or anything like that. I just think that single-undo encourages player to play game in a way that is more enjoyable for him/her.

Jatopian
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 1842
Registered: 07-31-2005
IP: Logged

That is a fair point, although quicksaves sure don't seem to hurt the enjoyment of most Source engine games. Especially puzzle ones. *cough*Portal*cough*

Anyway, perhaps the kind of person who runs in guns blazing could have the default 1-3 undoes, and only when they look in the settings find out there's an unlimited option? I don't know what the Venn diagram on that would look like.

____________________________
DROD has some really great music.
Make your pressure plates 3.0 style!
DROD architecture idea generator

---

[Last edited by Jatopian at 11-22-2012 11:41 AM]

Dischorran
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 3413
Registered: 09-10-2005
IP: Logged

Or maybe make the number of undos an undocumented option in drod.ini but not the main game? That way, those who want it can have it, and the objectors can ... just not be told it's there?



____________________________

Trickster
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 662
Registered: 07-03-2007
IP: Logged

Dischorran wrote:
Or maybe make the number of undos an undocumented option in drod.ini but not the main game? That way, those who want it can have it, and the objectors can ... just not be told it's there?

I'd personally be fine with a random implementation. Say the first undo is free, and each subsequent undo increases your score by 1. Or maybe it just has a 10% chance of increasing it by 1. Either way is fine and perfectly reasonable, as I am certain Jatopian will agree.

____________________________
Trickster

Official Hold Progress
Favorite Unofficial Holds (I need to play more!)
My Holds

Rheb
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 1211
Registered: 08-04-2006
IP: Logged

Yes. Actually you shouldn't even receive a score if you ever use the undo or restore function in a room.

Personally I'd go even further and make it so that you're caravel net account will be permanently blocked from getting high scores at a room if you ever cheated by using an undo.

Using undo could also have a 10% chance of giving you negative score for a room.

This would solve all problems and make playing DROD with high scores super fun!

SECRET EDIT:


____________________________
Voligner is my very own DROD-like game. Please check it out!

---

[Last edited by Rheb at 11-23-2012 12:30 AM]

Trickster
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 662
Registered: 07-03-2007
IP: Logged

Rheb wrote:
SECRET EDIT:

Click here to view the secret text

×Ok, so re-reading I'm guessing Trickster was ironic too. (I'm a little confused here). Either way my post is really not contributing. I'll just say that I have pretty much the same position as Schick on this one. If you have a feature there, but for no reason penalize the player for using it, it's just going to make people angry.

Ugh. Killjoy.

Heck, we haven't even elicited a fourth call for The Challenge yet.

In seriousness, I don't care what kind of UU gets implemented at all.

I think it would be nice if you could get a little asterisk (*) next to your room score whenever you completely score a room while UU is turned off (or vice versa if simpler that way). That way you could still UU to help you solve a hard room to find the solution, go turn UU off, then redo the room without UU for the (*) score; but it would be advantageous to keep UU off if you're expert and don't want to toggle back and forth to the settings menu. That'd be more than enough to make me happy, but I'm honestly happy either way.

(A more severe solution people would probably not agree with is just to have a non-UU version of a room always beat a UU version with the same score when 1st is scored. You'd still need the * so you could tell if a 1st was topple-able though.)

But let's not be stupid for just one post. I'm not going to threaten to stop playing my favorite game on Equestria because a new feature is added. Jegus that's silly. But keeping some of your hard-core peeps satisfied with defense of some scores they've put a few thousand hours into? I think that's worth some consideration as long as it doesn't trample toes.

____________________________
Trickster

Official Hold Progress
Favorite Unofficial Holds (I need to play more!)
My Holds

Rheb
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 1211
Registered: 08-04-2006
IP: Logged

Trickster wrote:
Ugh. Killjoy.

Ha, yeah, sorry about that. I guess I got pretty confused about what was going on in this thread for a while there. So from what I gather there are three positions you can take when it comes to UU:

1. You feel that UU implemented would seem like a convince, but would actually take the experience of DROD further away from the DROD core, ultimately making the game less fun to play.

2. You're fine with UU being implemented but don't want players competing for highscores to have an easy access to UU. (As shown above, completely denying UU access to optimizers would be imposible).

3. You'd like to see UU added, no restrictions.

I guess I'm fine either way, arguments on all sides make good points. The option I'd like least would be 2, I'm always somewhat angry when architects place their checkpoints in a way that is obviously at a disadvantageous spot for optimizing. I know some architects just doesn't consider optimizing, and some want the optimizers to be hardcore, that's fine. But knowing that you are missing out on intended helpful checkpoints or having to replay rooms step by step (excluding the checkpoints) is not fun IMO.

What I'm saying is that we should decide what playstyle is most fun, and then let optimizers do that.

____________________________
Voligner is my very own DROD-like game. Please check it out!

Dischorran
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 3413
Registered: 09-10-2005
IP: Logged

Trickster wrote:
Say the first undo is free, and each subsequent undo increases your score by 1.

That's not a bad idea, actually.

____________________________

Jatopian
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 1842
Registered: 07-31-2005
IP: Logged

Trickster wrote:
keeping some of your hard-core peeps satisfied with defense of some scores they've put a few thousand hours into? I think that's worth some consideration as long as it doesn't trample toes.

If their scores are truly optimized they'll be fine. If not, they were only keeping their scores due to artificial inconveniences.

Besides, would it be so bad for the high score list to uncrystallize, however briefly, while we figure out a more long-term reinvigoration strategy?

____________________________
DROD has some really great music.
Make your pressure plates 3.0 style!
DROD architecture idea generator

---

[Last edited by Jatopian at 11-23-2012 07:24 PM]

Trickster
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 662
Registered: 07-03-2007
IP: Logged

Dischorran wrote:

Trickster wrote:
Say the first undo is free, and each subsequent undo increases your score by 1.

That's not a bad idea, actually.

The "serious" version I offered is less of a penalty than this. It effectively increases each score by 1 iff you use more than one undo in a row at any time. But only once, and only if it scores you 1st.

The main problem is you have to note that the score is inflated somehow. Otherwise demos and scoring won't make sense, so it adds a whole cumbersome layer to the implementation. It's basically a lot of nitpicking trouble providing no real benefit to players (i.e., a perfect recommendation for DROD).

____________________________
Trickster

Official Hold Progress
Favorite Unofficial Holds (I need to play more!)
My Holds

mrimer
Level: Legendary Smitemaster

Rank Points: 5106
Registered: 02-04-2003
IP: Logged

I'd just like to jump in for another moment to say that this is an excellent discussion with many well articulated points. It is quite helpful for me personally to more clearly and deeply understand the practicalities and principles involved in the DROD undo mechanism.

Edit: oh, and now I'm actually considering the amount of effort it would take to implement a caber toss in TSS.

____________________________
Gandalf? Yes... That's what they used to call me.
Gandalf the Grey. That was my name.
I am Gandalf the White.
And I come back to you now at the turn of the tide.

---

[Last edited by mrimer at 11-24-2012 07:16 AM]

Syntax
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 1218
Registered: 05-12-2005
IP: Logged

If we forget about scores for a moment... what are we trying to fix and who for?

There are thousands of game out there these days which hold your hand if that's your thing. Drod is Drod because it is tough and unforgiving. Let's not lose that and dilute some of the greatest puzzles ever made.

hyperme
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 1143
Registered: 06-23-2006
IP: Logged

Syntax wrote:
If we forget about scores for a moment... what are we trying to fix and who for?

There are thousands of game out there these days which hold your hand if that's your thing. Drod is Drod because it is tough and unforgiving. Let's not lose that and dilute some of the greatest puzzles ever made.

Not this nonsense. There is a fine, fine line between 'unforgiving' and 'pointlessly tedious'. Unfortunately, since reasonable checkpoint placement is not a requirement for the holds board, many holds that would stay on the better side of that line instead get flung to the other side. If a room is in a state where one of these two reactions can happen:

'whoops better undo okay now I'm safe'

or

'whoops better undo oh wait I'm still stuck now I have to do the whole room/large parts of the room again screw this noise'

People aren't going to be continuing. While one undo is fine for most situations, there are many in which a two or three step undo would be helpful. Of course, many of these situations would be solvable would be solvable with portable checkpoints, however the kind of people against more undo seem to be against those too, despite the fact they improve the game.

____________________________
[Insert witty comment here]
Qzvlkx?

Jatopian
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 1842
Registered: 07-31-2005
IP: Logged

DROD's uniqueness comes from its interesting puzzles and versatile, complex puzzle implementation engine. It does not come from having to redo things pointlessly or having huge setbacks for small mistakes.

Suppose that DROD was magic and when you realized what was wrong with your strategy it would undo exactly the amount of moves you needed to correct yourself and no more. Suppose also before it would do this, it would make you wait 30 seconds for no discernible reason. Would this be fun?


Portable checkpoints are fine and good but the thing about them is that you still have to place them. And if you later realize you've placed them wrong, you still have to restart. Many rooms have more than one decision node at which you have to choose which strategy to pursue. So they're not enough.

____________________________
DROD has some really great music.
Make your pressure plates 3.0 style!
DROD architecture idea generator

Syntax
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 1218
Registered: 05-12-2005
IP: Logged

"People aren't going to be continuing."

DROD has the longest surviving dedicated fanbase compared to most niche games and that's because it's the way it is.

Changing a formula which works makes no sense to me.

hyperme
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 1143
Registered: 06-23-2006
IP: Logged

Syntax wrote:
"People aren't going to be continuing."

DROD has the longest surviving dedicated fanbase compared to most niche games and that's because it's the way it is.

Changing a formula which works makes no sense to me.

Better wording would be "people aren't going to be continuing that room". The point is that a three step undo is hardly going to ruin the game. Giving slightly more leeway to get out of situation is hardly a bad thing.

Really, you're argument seems to be along the lines of "Different? Things can't be different! People will have fun wrong!"

As Tahnan said, if you're going to quit over some trivial mechanical change you don't even have to use, you have bigger problems than DROD.

Also seriously how on Earth can going back 3 moves destroy the game? You can usually only fit one screw up into 3 moves.

____________________________
[Insert witty comment here]
Qzvlkx?

Pearls
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 772
Registered: 12-21-2009
IP: Logged

If I'm going to contribute, I'm going to need to break down a few primary hurdles.

As someone who doesn't feel the need to optimize, my contribution to this will be largely hypothetical. I generally think 1 undo is sufficient in environments where checkpoints are reasonably (read: liberally) placed. I very much understand Trickster's concept of heightened tension that comes from careful planning, and I wouldn't feel much fun in employing, but since bragging rights becomes a relative thing (Well *I* didn't use H&S! Well *I* didn't backspace at all!) in this kind of "Hey I solved it" environment, I think most people would just continue to play what's fun for them, and having the undo be an option (just like the tar alpha slider, which I don't play with either) seems fairly reasonable.

My primary issue with UU is it kind of takes out the purpose of the checkpoint, but whatever.

You have no idea how many orphans I'd sacrifice to Bael just to be able to undo after restarting to a checkpoint to the point before I hit R.

Warning: Hypotheticals incoming!

It seems to me we are arguing over primarily the relationship between score and difficulty. and that the introduction of a change to the current system would upset the fragile balance regarding how we interpret that inside the DROD universe, mostly because it's not happened yet, and forecasting is always risky business.

"I want to continue to work under these conditions so I feel X pride when I earn Y score."

"I think that having UU would not drastically change the enjoyment of DROD and X pride gained from earning Y score would be similar minus the tedium required."

"Why, why can't we undo checkpoint restarts?"

The idea of discouraging behavior somewhat makes sense to me. After all, I could systematically beat rooms, copy mxvladi's solution perfectly and get a fairly reasonable score with minimal thought at the cost of a high amount of tedium, so there's some innate honor-system chink in the score-system's armor. But it's discouraged because of how annoying it is to do.

The difference here, is if I copy Mxvladi's score, everyone knows and my X Pride takes a bit of a penalty as everyone calls me out on it. If I use UU and UU is considered a bad behavior, it's hard to tell, because I came up with a solution fairly quickly, but was it my brilliance or the crutch of UU? So, time to solution becomes a factor as well.

The last, most important thing here is how we quantify and optimize the importance of planning. The single undo helps hedge against finger fumbling. 2 undos might hedge against it better. But infinite undo starts playing against the need to plan a little bit and I feel that's a very important part of DROD that would suddenly become...less of an issue. I'm not sure how I feel about this one, but I think it can be taken care of somewhat as I detail below because I can do this all day and this is getting ridiculous.

This is what I want:

1) UU is only unlockable after completing a room normally. This helps require planning to solve the problem initially, while permitting a different kind of solution exploration for solved rooms when people want to optimize.

2) Hold Administers get on people's cases if checkpoints aren't suitably abundant, minimizing the difference between using UU and using checkpoints.

3) UU is not retroactive. That is, you can't use it (use meaning, use freely without discouragement) on rooms designed before 5.0. What stops people from building the room in the hold editor and trying it out? Nothing, but this is not a wholly different scenario than what we currently enjoy with the hold editor's built-in UU. This helps keep the playing field even for old stuff (and old timers with old timer scores) while exploring the option for new stuff.

This singular point might be subject to change depending upon an evaluation of a deployed UU for 5.0 holds and beyond by the community, but I think this current model makes the effort supplied for older holds to stay in check and remain fair I guess.

4) For uncompleted rooms, the amount of undos you are permitted (not unlimited) isn't a crazy number. I found it didn't detract from my experience in Flash DROD in the least. 2 would probably be optimal but I can't really explain why so ignore this point. In general, maybe this can be a slider in the options? I'm not super sure here. I fairly strongly feel that unlimited undos in uncompleted rooms takes away an important part of DROD's challenge for me. The checkpoint system makes for nice little vignettes of planning that are fun to accomplish.












____________________________
Hey, w-wait, that's the guy who shamelessly promotes his own...

---

[Last edited by Pearls at 11-24-2012 05:41 PM]

Schik
Level: Legendary Smitemaster

Rank Points: 5413
Registered: 02-04-2003
IP: Logged

Pearls wrote:
1) UU is only unlockable after completing a room normally. This helps require planning to solve the problem initially, while permitting a different kind of solution exploration for solved rooms when people want to optimize.

Can't you choose to just leave your setting at 1 undo or whatever you find appropriate? I don't think UU is useful solely for optimizing.

2) Hold Administers get on people's cases if checkpoints aren't suitably abundant, minimizing the difference between using UU and using checkpoints.

HAs are already overworked and underpaid, and everything they have to do is very black and white, a hold is okay or it's not okay. This is a lot more subjective criticism and would be inconsistent between HAs.

3) UU is not retroactive. That is, you can't use it (use meaning, use freely without discouragement) on rooms designed before 5.0.

We didn't do this when we added the clock, 1-move undo, or transparent tar. Seems weird to suddenly have the user experience change depending on what version the hold they are playing was created with.

4) I fairly strongly feel that unlimited undos in uncompleted rooms takes away an important part of DROD's challenge for me.

Then just like with transparent tar, you can opt out of using it. Change your option to only allow 1 undo (I'm fairly sure that if we change Undo, there will be an option so people can use the type of Undo they prefer, and I'd suggest keeping the default at 1 undo.)

____________________________
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way it treats its animals.
--Mahatma Gandhi

west.logan
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 608
Registered: 03-09-2011
IP: Logged

Pearls wrote:
The last, most important thing here is how we quantify and optimize the importance of planning. The single undo helps hedge against finger fumbling. 2 undos might hedge against it better. But infinite undo starts playing against the need to plan a little bit and I feel that's a very important part of DROD that would suddenly become...less of an issue.

That has been my main concern as well. I'm afraid it would encourage more sloppiness and less planning, especially in new players who would then plateau earlier and miss some of the really beautiful and challenging holds.

Leaving a default at 1 with the option to increase, as Schik suggests, would probably mostly solve this.

____________________________
-Logan