manojalpa 1171487741|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
So I'm starting to work on the algorithms and was wondering what methods you had in place, Ben.
Also, I figured the sort of non-linear progression should work as such
Level …..Amount
1……………1
2……………3
3……………6
4…………..10
5…………..15
BenHumberston 1171502849|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
What exactly is "Amount"? What is it affecting?
manojalpa 1171504979|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
Amount is how many "points" in a certain category you need in order to get it to the corresponding level.
IE in the beginning you want players to be able to level up quickly —- not so much at the end.
manojalpa 1171488158|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
So, in each level you should be able, if you focus mainly on one thing, to get at least 1 point in that category. So if we start with that basic idea and go from there, we should be able to get rough leads. The current issue with doing things this way is that people can just play lots of chords, out of key notes, large intervals, sixteenth notes, and either high/low notes and get lots of points in all the categories simultaneously. Still trying to figure out how to balance this….
Attitude:
Major-
Minor-
Weight:
For every tick where a note is played, tally how many notes were played simultaneously and just add them up -
Get percentages for each of them.
if(NFive > .5) weight += 1
if(NFive+NFour > .5) +=.9
if(NFour > .5) weight += .8
if(NFive+NThree >.5) += .75
if(NFour+NThree > .5) += .7
if(NFive+NTwo > .5) weight += .65
if(NThree > .5) weight += .6
if(NFour+NTwo > .5) weight +=.55
if(NThree+NTwo > .5) weight +=.5
if(NTwo > .5) weight +=.4
if(NOne > .5) weight +=0, sneak += .2
If any of these are the largest percentile, but not necessarily >.5, add weight += (whatever-.1)
Note that all of these should be "if else" statements, I believe.
Speed
Similar to weight, tally up how many of each kind of note were used, and then find the percentages. Use a schema similar to with Weight
OVERALL
Note how a very low weight boosted the sneak. Very low scores in any of the attributes will help to boost another one. I'm also thinking that very high attributes in any one score should hurt another one too. View here:
| Original | Low Boost | High Cut |
|---|---|---|
| Weight | Sneak | Toughness |
| Speed | Toughness | Sneak |
| Sneak | Jump | Speed |
| Ferocity | Attack | Attack |
| Toughness | Ferocity | Weight |
| Jump | Weight | Dive |
| Dive | Speed | Sneak |
| Attack | Dive | Ferocity |
BenHumberston 1171502820|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
I can understand the whole speed thing… but for weight, why can't we just take the number of notes, divide by the number of "ticks" (my term for them is note spots, I think), so we get the average number of notes per spot? Just a thought. I think it would serve the same purpose.
