Total ranking

Single Player dirkimopsgmx.de

Just thought, that it might be cool to have an additional ranking which combines the results of all level sets - a total ranking, as it were. This would show the read BD4 champion. (Well, who might be that?)

It shouldn't be just a summation of ranking points because Homelands is the most important level set, which is played most and which should therefore count most. For example each level set could be weighed with a factor like logarithm(number of games played) or something like that. So each level set would gain importance the more it is played.

Just a proposal. But I think it would be a nice feature.

Dirk

Single Player dream68gmail.com

Although Asarkila would be number one i bet Wil number two, i may scrape in for third, not sure there haven't played on the main levelsets for a while. But would you include all level sets, thats levelsets 5 and 6 as well as the others. I mean it would be the overall BD4 champion we are looking for am i right. The ranking table could be linked to the home page rather than going to homelands. You got my thumbs up.....hehe.

Single Player dirkimopsgmx.de

Hi DREAM,
yes, the total rankings would reveal the overall BD4 champion to us, you're right. I would include every levelset which you don't have to download seperately and which got a name like Homelands, Farmlands etc. I don't know much about levelsets 5 and 6 as I haven't played them very much til now, but as they are not included in the EXE-File I suppose many BD4 players don't even know of their existance. On the other hand the weight factor would be low as they haven't been played often. Well, let's give the decision to Wil (if he likes the idea of the ranking).
Dirk

Single Player ari.sarkilahtigmail.com

Sounds lika a great idea ...

Single Player wilamristar.com.au

Okay... I've given in. Here it is. Jungle level progression would seem fairly important now.

Single Player ari.sarkilahtigmail.com

Cool, being no. 2 seems to be my destiny

Single Player dirkimopsgmx.de

Excellent work! That's exactly what I proposed. It gets harder and harder to find any new propositions.
Asarkila, it seems you have to work a bit on Jungle and Fruity.

Single Player ari.sarkilahtigmail.com

I have a new proposition. bd4 server where two players can play teamwork levels even if they are from different sides of the globe. That would be great and I'm sure it would be very easy to implement

I would love the teamwork experience but unfortunately it has not been possible so far.

Single Player thoz.jaynebigpond.com

Hey Asarkila, I'll volunteer to be your teammate. That way I might learn some tricks! Thozz

Single Player ari.sarkilahtigmail.com

Single Player shockedfrogshockedfrog.com

The game relies too much on perfect timing for online play to be possible, I think. If it's played clientside like it is right now, the two players would go out of sync, which could possibly make some levels near impossible to play, or make some levels easier than they're supposed to be, thus totally messing up the highscores. If it's run serverside, then a player's movements would be at risk of not registering properly, meaning lots of deaths caused by a bad connection, or a player would not receive the newest version of the game field at the right time, meaning they could walk into a perfectly safe spot and be killed by a badger that is there according to the server, but is still a few tiles away according to the client.

Single Player ari.sarkilahtigmail.com

I know it's impossible but you never know with Wil

Single Player wilamristar.com.au

I did this in 1997 (first year of release). It was quite a design to get it right (in terms of assuming a connectionless / unreliable network and making sure both client and server stayed completely in sync). It worked fine, although you needed to "commit" your move about 40ms earlier than the current version ... so you got used to doing things a tad earlier. I thing I've lost the design and code. It was great locally but relied on a latency less than 40-80ms (can't remember which one) which is unrealistic (possible impossible) between continents.

I'll keep it in mind but you'd need fast low latency links - should be doable given network constraints in Europe?

Single Player wilamristar.com.au

Changed so that Jungle is not weighted heavier. Sure there's a disadvantage if you're up to level 52 that you can't get more points on this but there's only one player up to this level (that's me). If that player deems this a disadvantage they could always invest the time in creating levels 52-80! In the mean time players will still be greatly rewarded by getting through levels of Jungle (possibly the best way to improve a players combined ranking).

Single Player ari.sarkilahtigmail.com

I recently played quiet a lot of the new levelsets in order to get as much 1000 pointers as I could with reasonable effort. I think I did most of the "easy" 1000 pointers and it will be much tougher to find new ones.

As to the total ranking and being within 300 points of Wil, I know it's fool's gold since Wil just hasn't played the new levelsets as much as I have, but being second to Wil isn't a very bad thing in this game

Single Player wilamristar.com.au

If you really analyse it I'm only ahead because of Jungle and Fruity (and a little Mountains completion). Jungle's a big one since the levels are hard and progression is the key to a big score. I went really hard on Fruity trying to get all the number ones and expect to stay clearly number one for a while since the high scores are pretty good. Mountains is where you can pick up on me (your style of levels?). But, you're right I haven't played that much... but only on Reef and Mountains and I have played several levels thoroughly.

I'm still "addicted" to getting through level 80 Reef. Once I have I'm sure Mountains will fall easier.

It will get interesting when you get through the next Jungle level (the new few are midly easier I think?)