After a big interchange of mails (about 10 in 3 days) between Skito and me, and a complete study of the game PRIMELLA, we have unhappily different points of view ; so this message is to ask all marpers (and especially those who have already played the game like Frankie or Renzo Vignola) their advices to choose the way of scoring they prefer ... Skito prefers awarding good combos than high level reached : scoring A, when I prefer awarding higher level reached (which implies anyhow to make good combos IMO even when reciproque is not always true) : scoring B

To be simple, you have to choose between 2 scorings : (A) score = (last level finished)x1000 + (last positive score ending a level) (B) score = (last level finished)x10000 + (final score, eventually corrected if negative)

For precisions on the game, its way of counting and scoring type B, you can consult http://mapage.noos.fr/marpkt/scoring.html where I explained a few things.

Preaching for my chapel, I will give ... Advantage of scoring B : *it rewards mainly the highest level reached (which was the first way of scoring naturally choosen by first players : remember scores of 7 or 8) *you can easily see at first sight what this level is (that explains the choice of 10000 where Skito prefers 1000, but as score could reach some values as +5000 or -5000 I think 10000 is better) *cohesion with game Sadari which is similar *you can know your score only looking the LAST screen (all is written there when your game is over to calculate it) : no need to take notes during game

Inconvenients of scoring A : *it doesn't reward the player who goes farest (look actual rankings on marp : frankie -only level5- is 1st & Renzo -level6- is 2nd) *it incites to "suicid"... let's take Frankie's game : end of level 1 : 2420 2 : 3220 3 : 4150 4 : 3330 5 : 2020 6 : -250 (6cards left on screen)

So if he suicides just after level 3 he get 7150 which is better than his actual score !! so it's useless then to try to go to higher levels (max score is always around 3 or 4 , after that substracted cards are too heavy)

Of course I will let Skito preaching for his own scoring ; just waiting for all of you voting A or B

-- Phil (plamat@club-internet.fr), June 12, 2001

Answers

And of course I vote B !!!

-- Phil (plamat@club-internet.fr), June 12, 2001.

The main reason I like (A) is that it rewards players who "win" the levels getting a better per level score. The key is that you can lose a level but still conintue the game, but you dont get to see the lady of that level. You "win" a level when your current score on that level bests the VS computer players score.

Disadvantage of method B: take two scores, one score (Rex) who gets to level 7 but only wins 3 of the 6 levels completed will get a higher score than someone (ZZT) who wins 5 of the 6 games played.

Getting to a higher level in this game is easier than winning the levels so that's why I want to vote B.

-- Chad (churritz@cts.com), June 12, 2001.

i was reading Phils message to much on that last sentance, I want to vote A. but marp players should decided this.

-- Chad (churritz@cts.com), June 12, 2001.

Interstingly enough (A) has the same Advantages phil says of B,

(A) rewards players with a score of level reached as well just not as much.

(A) also allows you to retain your previous levels score if you happen to make a mistake big time in your last level. With B, You can LOSE almost half you entire previous score if you accedentally put a card at the breaking point, since you have to subtract ALL the cards that are left, potentially 50 cards left times 700 if you reach the 8th level, so if you made it to 8 got 70000 or so points, you would have to take off 50x700 = 35000 if the card went to fast, bringing you score down to half it was previously.

Another disadvantage of B is what do you score

-- Chad (churritz@cts.com), June 12, 2001.

No Skito max nb of cards = 30 (not 50) , and it's very improbable to full the screen ; and remember that we only make subtraction if level has been finished ...

-- Phil (plamat@club-internet.fr), June 12, 2001.

You forget the situation if your card is placed at the top of the screen (no where left to put it) you must subtract the cards in your deck because the game ends at this point. so you can still have 6 cards on the screen and 40ish cards left in the deck when ending your game. this is why the last level should not be counted because it can reduce you score of a previously well played game. even if you get to level 12, you leave 10 cards on the screen and you have a worse score than your previous level, -12000 score for the final level.

(i think you and i are the only one that care anyway in this debate :)

-- Chad (churritz@cts.com), June 12, 2001.

Wrong ... if you have cards left in your desk, it means that you have died by crossing the horizontal deadline and then NO SUBTRACTION, just score=10000x(PREVIOUS level) + final score (positive) ; please re-read scoring at propose at http://mapage.noos.fr/marpkt/scoring.html (I have re-updated it)

Concerning the case you spoke about FINISHING level 12 with a negative score with 10 cards left, so there, yes, there would be a subtraction of -11000 (not -12000) ... but to a score like 120000 or so ; I don't see any problem (excepting reaching level 12 !! :)

And if you look at Ozz comment on his recent recording, he also found some problems with your scoring

I gonna take a rest : a good old shooter which counts for me :))

-- Phil (plamat@club-internet.fr), June 13, 2001.

I have to correct my previous post : ending level 12 with 10 cards left is not -1100x10=-11000, but -1100x9=-9900

-- Phil (plamat@club-internet.fr), June 13, 2001.

Hi Guys.

Sorry for my late vote on this one :-)

I have to admit that I wondered why I was ahead of Renzo as he got longer into the game as I did. Even though it's going to hurt myself, I vote B.

However, I think Skito is right about his completing of level talk. So, why not take vote B and on top of that score add 1000 points for each level completed (seeing pretty girl)? That way you get some award for this as well.

This is my vote.

-- Frankie (frankie@image.dk), June 13, 2001.

Frankie you might be right, after seeing ozz's recording which proves you can not see the ladies and still get a high score with method A, makes method A bad and method B worse.

you are missing my point entirely just to prove me wrong, phil. What if you are at level 20 and you have 10 cards left on the screen that means you loose ~19000 points and thus you lose almost two levels of scoring just because you tried to finish out the last level. There is too much of a disadvantage for including the scoring of the last level.

Ok, for B now you've changed your scoring to not subtract the cards if you finish the level prematurely? So you are benefiting people who commit suicide to finish a level and penalizing people who try to finish the last level. This seems wrong. Here are the issues in this game:

(1) winning a level should give you points (each level you gain a certain # of points in that level, if that point total is better than the computer players point total you get to see a picture, if not you see the losing picture.) Both A and B do not account for this specifically. A does a better job because B's large points for completing a level is given to players who "lose" a level but still continue the game by default.

(2) completing a level should give you points. (B) does a good job in giving you a good bonus for each level, but does not take into account that some players can "win" more levels than others.

(3) playing the last level should not hinder your point total if you happen to lose, because then people who commit suicide will get more points than people who try to play the last level. (A) does the best job on this issue because it ignores the final level which is ALWAYS a negative score application.

Can anyone come up with something other than A and B.

-- Chad (churritz@cts.com), June 13, 2001.

Well, the only one I can come up with, which does not want players to commit suicide is:

level reached*10000 + levels won*1000

This might mean that some players end up with the same score, but so what? This method also means that you have to fight to get as fare as possible scoring as many points in each round as possible.

I might be wrong, but why not keep it simple.

The chance of two players getting to the same level getting the same score is not that big I think.

Let's keep it simple :-)

Bye.

-- Frankie (frankie@image.dk), June 13, 2001.

i'm casting my vote for option B as the lesser of two evils ;>

while i do not think we should complicate things too much (e.g. "power combination" rewards, differentiating between levels played / levels won etc.),

i move that the amount of points for "levels completed" should be kept down to, say, maybe 5K instead of 10K.

advantages of this: as intended, you reap ample rewards for reaching the next level (be honest: how often do you score more than 5K in one level anyway?) thus preventing the "suicide option", while good playing still effects the outcome - the difference between so-so play and really good play would probably be another 5K points max or about 65% (1000 points left + 5K bonus vs. 5000 pts left + 5 K = 6K vs. 10K instead of 11//15 using the proposed 10K per level ruling which would give only about 30% advantage for good playing)

disadvantages: there's only one i can think of - you can't deduce the "max level reached" from the score at first sight

ok, [BLAH] mode off!

-- ozz (OZ@BYTEWATCH.de), June 13, 2001.

First to Frankie : you idea was good, but there is problem ... Frankie and Skito, WHAT DO YOU CALL "WIN A LEVEL" ? Skito says previously :"The key is that you can lose a level but still continue the game, but you dont get to see the lady of that level. You "win" a level when your current score on that level bests the VS computer players score"

IT'S WRONG ! Look at renzo's level 2 (1500 ; cpu:1600 he won) or my own level 4 (3260 ; cpu :2070 and I don't get the girl)

To Ozz : 5000 is too short, 10000 is better. Why ? Skito also says : "Ok, for B now you've changed your scoring to not subtract the cards if you finish the level prematurely? So you are benefiting people who commit suicide to finish a level and penalizing people who try to finish the last level"

With 10000 no real chance of benifite by suicide ; let's take an example ... with a little practice of the game you will see that higher scores reachable are around 5000, and subtraction with my formula (after a lot of games played doesn't exceed -3000 or -4000 for level 6-7-8) ; let's say I finish level 6 with 4500 : if I suicide at 7 score will be 64500 ; if I play and finish level 7 but lose and get -3000 by my subtraction method I will have 67000 ... with only 5000 it would be not good ; of course if I reach level 20 like Skito says (but IMO it's impossible) it might give advantage to suicid, and to prevent that we should take 10000+ but not 5000

-- Phil (plamat@club-internet.fr), June 13, 2001.

you like the english word "WRONG" a lot don't you phil? well this time you are "WRONG." It is not your COMBINED score where you win, it is the score for the "CURRENT" LEVEL that you win each level. First level, you get 1000, computer gets 500: you win that level. Second level, you get 500 (your score becomes 1500) computer gets 700 (computers score becomes 1200) the computer wins that level because it's 2nd level score is higher than yours 700 to 500.

-- Chad (churritz@cts.com), June 14, 2001.

Phil, you're confusing me on (B), I think you are say if you finish a level prematurely (breaking the horizon) you do not subtract the cards left on the screen and in the deck. This decision (and not the 10000) is benefiting suiciders.

You say "if I suicide at 7 score will be 64500 ; if I play and finish level 7 but lose and get -3000 by my subtraction method I will have 67000 ", i'm not talking about comparing scores with someone who suicides level 7 and someone who finishes level seven. Obviously the person who finishes level 7 will get a better score in (A) and (B) methods. But in (B) if you do not finish level 7 your score will be LESS than 64500 by the cards that put you below 0 in your score, thus penalizing you for attempting to finish the level, this is unfair for people who try to complete the game compared with those who suicide.

-- Chad (churritz@cts.com), June 14, 2001.

Voting Choice (C). There seems to be problems with both (A) and (B) voting choices, since those who voted for either each added a clause to change it. Here's is method (C) hopefully a good mix of voting choices (A) and (B) and including comments from the voters.

* you get 10000 points for completeing a level.

* you get 1000 points for wining a level (that means you level X score was better than the computers level X score.)

* your score at the last completed level is added to this total which is always a positive score.

The only disadvantage of this scoring method is that your final level score does not count, but at least this means that someone who plays up to the same level as you and commits suicide does not get a better score than you. Phil, can you think of a away around this?

-- Chad (churritz@cts.com), June 14, 2001.

ahh, i see, you can still finish the last level and get the 10000 bonus. thus but still get the negative score applied to your final score. that works up untill you get to a very high level in which you may lose your 10000 score with the large negative bonus. I do think it is possible to get to a high level, all you have to do is concentrate on winning ALL cards so you do not get a large subtraction... I think I still like C for this reason.

-- Chad (churritz@cts.com), June 14, 2001.