12 Apr 2016 19:54 GMT
I'm new to this game. On which site you play it?
05 Apr 2016 03:08 GMT
Do any of you guys play "The Witness", if so, what you think.
21 Feb 2016 20:10 GMT
I learn from you at new levels (horizons) MnLsDad
21 Feb 2016 17:26 GMT
admin1, thanks for the new formula in table 5!
16 Feb 2016 22:31 GMT
KyHarold: Hi neighbor! I'm only 7 yrs younger, so I'm recognizing the need to keep mentally agile. Just teasing about a balance that I sometimes lack. Best regards to KyCheryl.
16 Feb 2016 14:32 GMT
MnLsDad, when you're as old as I am, spending some time everyday in a, "... pointless pursuit of pushing little, digital boxes around a phantom maze ..." could help ward off dementia in later life. Keep up the good work.
15 Feb 2016 21:49 GMT
admin1, can you change the computation of Points in table 5, column 2? The algorithm must be: Completed levels (table 1, column 2) divided by Average place (table 5, column 4).
15 Feb 2016 08:23 GMT
MnLsDad, It's a nice challenge to kick the king (queen) off the hill - if you are not the king, and if you got only a few solo-first-places - like me - you don't want that a really good player is attacking your position. So for the average player it will be mostly a frustating challenge.
15 Feb 2016 07:52 GMT
Arnold, I thought about the same new-points-system to get it more balanced - the old system is overrating the good places and underrating the bad places. So solved levels divided by average place will be better - a bad score damage more your overall-performance. Thanks for your support.
14 Feb 2016 20:42 GMT
My idea for table 5 in July 2013 was to estimate more than first places (shortest solutions) only. A player that consistently scores second places is very good, but can't be found in tables 2 and 4. However I agree that the current computation of points in table 5 is not entirely fair and objective. For instance, in the spirit of utimm and MnLsDad: two players solve 2 levels each and score the same average place 5. The first player scores places 1 and 9, and gets 1.1 points now. The second player scores places 5 and 5, and gets 0.4 points only. So maybe this is a more fair and objective formula: total solved levels divided by average place per level. In the above example both players would get the same amount of points: 2/5=0.4 points each.
Please login to add comments!