Quote from: Tyler21 on April 06, 2015, 09:21:14 AM
Andy, seriously, what is the point of these maps?
Tyler21: This is a textbook example of computer speed matters. Just land and build a nullifier. I've looked up the scores. The first 54 players have times between 1:00 and 1:00.9 minutes. The next group take somewhat longer. While merely seconds it's hard to believe every player finished the game in an unique manner.
Quote from: Tero on September 21, 2015, 12:33:20 AM
This is a textbook example of computer speed matters.
Seriously Tero, what do we have to do to convince you that computer speed is irrelevant to CW3 (except that lag becomes annoying). The clock measures game time, which advances at 30 frames per second of game time. On a slow computer, frames are generated slower, so 30 frames will take more than one second of real time. You can prove this: open a large laggy map and let it run. Compare the game time with a stopwatch - see it runs slow.
The difference between the best times and the others is skill (and occasionally luck with runners etc) and perhaps the result of playing the map multiple times. Alter Old, for example, does not use a supercomputer to get those astoundingly low times!
Quote from: Tero on September 20, 2015, 11:41:43 PM
... I would strongly disagree. ...
Dear Tero:
It is strongly inadvisable to disagree with scientific facts as if they are opinions.
Sincerely,
A scientist.
(P.S. You should disagree with them like a scientist. By shouting PROVE IT!)
Dear Scientist Warren,
Are you saying (Gasp!) that a map with 24 scores is not "unwinnable"?
Pesky things those facts.
:)
H
Quote from: Tero on September 20, 2015, 11:41:43 PM
I would strongly disagree. A number of times there have been maps up loaded where the player only needs to land a CN and place a Nullifier next to something like a Spore Tower. Once the scores are listed, the time tend to very. A LOT!
That's because there's a specific technique to building a nullifier as quickly as possible. You have to build two collectors (using the N button to advance frames so no energy is ever wasted) and then build a nullifier, and the distances between the CN and the buildings matter, and everything must be set into action one at a time the immediate frame a packet is launched for that last point of construction.
Quote from: Asbestos on September 21, 2015, 09:48:56 AM
Quote from: Tero on September 20, 2015, 11:41:43 PM
I would strongly disagree. A number of times there have been maps up loaded where the player only needs to land a CN and place a Nullifier next to something like a Spore Tower. Once the scores are listed, the time tend to very. A LOT!
That's because there's a specific technique to building a nullifier as quickly as possible. You have to build two collectors (using the N button to advance frames so no energy is ever wasted) and then build a nullifier, and the distances between the CN and the buildings matter, and everything must be set into action one at a time the immediate frame a packet is launched for that last point of construction.
Map 1842 by Andy as an example. Place Nullifier in PZ. Select LZ for CN. Click on Pause or press "P" to begin. The scores/times are surprisingly different. Of course there are those who may choose to build a Nullifier and land a CN after clicking on Pause.
Quote from: Tero on September 21, 2015, 10:20:32 AM
Quote from: Asbestos on September 21, 2015, 09:48:56 AM
Quote from: Tero on September 20, 2015, 11:41:43 PM
I would strongly disagree. A number of times there have been maps up loaded where the player only needs to land a CN and place a Nullifier next to something like a Spore Tower. Once the scores are listed, the time tend to very. A LOT!
That's because there's a specific technique to building a nullifier as quickly as possible. You have to build two collectors (using the N button to advance frames so no energy is ever wasted) and then build a nullifier, and the distances between the CN and the buildings matter, and everything must be set into action one at a time the immediate frame a packet is launched for that last point of construction.
Map 1842 by Andy as an example. Place Nullifier in PZ. Select LZ for CN. Click on Pause or press "P" to begin. The scores/times are surprisingly different. Of course there are those who may choose to build a Nullifier and land a CN after clicking on Pause.
You might want to find a better example.
In the example you cite, the first 54 scores "very" (sic) by only one half of one second.
Further, 85 (or 2/3) of the scores range from 1:00.3 to 1:01.9
Statistically, the Standard Deviation is almost meaningless; much less "surprisingly different".
H
Quote from: RrR on September 21, 2015, 03:00:47 AM
Quote from: Tero on September 21, 2015, 12:33:20 AM
This is a textbook example of computer speed matters.
Seriously Tero, what do we have to do to convince you that computer speed is irrelevant to CW3 (except that lag becomes annoying). The clock measures game time, which advances at 30 frames per second of game time. On a slow computer, frames are generated slower, so 30 frames will take more than one second of real time. You can prove this: open a large laggy map and let it run. Compare the game time with a stopwatch - see it runs slow.
The difference between the best times and the others is skill (and occasionally luck with runners etc) and perhaps the result of playing the map multiple times. Alter Old, for example, does not use a supercomputer to get those astoundingly low times!
The fact I can't finish a great many maps! If all things are equal, which I doubt. I should be able to get a foothold on every map I play. The ones I can't have one thing in common. Lack of time to build. Despite making multiple attempts to restart.
If I'm wrong, as you state, shouldn't the download count and scores be nearly the same number?
Quote from: Tero on September 20, 2015, 11:41:43 PM
I would strongly disagree. A number of times there have been maps up loaded where the player only needs to land a CN and place a Nullifier next to something like a Spore Tower. Once the scores are listed, the time tend to very. A LOT!
Do you think I gave you an opinion or a fact that Virgil expressed many times on these forums? It's not up to debate. It is how the software platform is designed to work. Some small variance in simple maps is achieved by people actually floating the CN directly over the nullifier they build, thus reducing packet travel time. Again, technique, not speed of processor.
If you want to disagree some more, move this debate off a map discussion thread.
-- End of non-map specific discussion. Further discussions on processor speed and map completion times will move to a new thread. --
Quote from: Tero on September 21, 2015, 10:46:15 AM
... If I'm wrong, as you state, shouldn't the download count and scores be nearly the same number?
For the record, posting score is optional. Until I got really into cw3, I never posted. I could not even begin to guess how many people still do that.
But I will anyway. About 50%.
Plus, there is the number one reason why people don't finish maps: boring. Every map is boring to someone. Especially busy people. The more busy, the more stuff gets boring.
Quote from: Tero on September 21, 2015, 10:46:15 AM
If all things are equal, which I doubt. I should be able to get a foothold on every map I play. The ones I can't have one thing in common. Lack of time to build. Despite making multiple attempts to restart.
Tero all things are equal in computer speeds affecting this game. 30 frames is one game second.
that is a fact. please don't accuse us of lying to you. this is a friendly forum and if you want to improve your times people here will help you if you ask.
it is possible that you are missing some data.
do you play using "n" to advance frame by frame? (you can use this function to prove that we are not lying to you, open a map, press "n" 30 times and watch the timer. at press 30 you will see 1 sec on the clock)
playing paused with "n" can save a lot of microseconds, which add up. and early time saving is worth a lot later on.
Quote from: Tero on September 21, 2015, 12:33:20 AM
Quote from: Tyler21 on April 06, 2015, 09:21:14 AM
Andy, seriously, what is the point of these maps?
Tyler21: This is a textbook example of computer speed matters. Just land and build a nullifier. I've looked up the scores. The first 54 players have times between 1:00 and 1:00.9 minutes. The next group take somewhat longer. While merely seconds it's hard to believe every player finished the game in an unique manner.
The point is that the people who scored at right about a minute DIDN'T just land and build a nullifier. They used a more efficient strategy, resulting in a better time. If you just build a nullifier, you don't have enough energy to supply the packets as fast as the nullifier can take them. Building a collector in one of the PZ's first and THEN building a nullifier only after the collector is completed results in a quicker time, even though you don't actually start building the nullifier until several seconds have gone by.
Your assertion that this is a clear textbook illustration of computer speed mattering is based on the assumption that you are using the optimal solving method for the map, and that the people with the better scores used the same strategy as you, just with a faster computer. If that assumption was correct, you'd have a point. However, it is NOT correct. Those people used a superior strategy, and that is why they have better scores.
To add to that, computer speed doesn't matter at all - the game is frame-locked, meaning both graphics and calculations on done one after the other, so a faster computer will not make a difference in times.
Tero, you should just check Alter Old's scores. If those won't convince you that superior skills can reduce completion times drastically, then I don't know what could.
Along these lines, one of my favorite pop-scientist:
"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it." — Neil deGrasse Tyson
Edit: Tero, I see that you even include this speed issue on your profile. My suggestion for you is to play while the game is paused. There is a key (default "n" I think) with which you can play frame-by-frame. This way you shouldn't experience the performance issues that might occur during "real time" and you can complete maps much quicker (in game time of course, not in real time).
Quote from: Karsten75 on September 21, 2015, 11:24:36 AM
... -- End of non-map specific discussion. Further discussions on processor speed and map completion times will move to a new thread. --
And so it was. But now that the thread is more appropriate, I have more to say.
I would like to start by saying that there are indeed many games out there that have computer dependent behaviour. Most notably, 3D games with multiplayer support often implement frame skip for better synching behaviour. So this is definitely a valid hypothesis.
It would be quite inappropriate for a strategy game without multiplayer support, however. It is a fact that the design goals of this game are against computer dependent behaviour. This, however, only means that if there is computer dependent behaviour, it is a bug.
TLDR: CRPL evidence
Spoiler
Playing around with CRPL gives insight into how the game guarantees computer independent behaviour. Each CRPL script on each CRPL core executes only once per frame. This is reproducible behaviour that can be measured, and was in fact a necessary truism for the correct functioning of some of the maps I made.
If they executed in a more haphazard manner, race conditions would be one manifestation. This game is singlethreaded. This is how race conditions are prevented. At the start of each frame, each script is executed, one after the other. Until the scripts finish, nothing else happens. Designers who place multiple threads of execution into their products are far more likely to accidentally or purposely add computer dependant behaviour. (see next spoiler section)
A more interesting question is: Is it possible to in any way to invoke computer dependant behaviour in CRPL?
And here the answer is: I don't know. There is a huge amount of possibility inherent in CRPL. But for the most part, it is unusually difficult.
We have a concept known as exposed functionality. the language of CRPL does not expose the system clock. This means, no map can look at the computer's clock and change its behaviour accordingly. Other things that are not exposed are the computer's make and model, the file system, and just about anything else that I can think of that might allow me to change a map's behaviour based on computer.
It is worth noting, that the computer's screen resolution *IS* exposed. As some people use computers that are not capable of some resolutions, this does sort of allow for the possibility of computer dependant behaviour.
In addition to that, the game seems unaware of the actual time. All times in the system are actually measured in frames, and translated into seconds only for display to the user.
In fact, a coder sort of has to go out of their way to make computer dependant behaviour.
TLDR: timey wimy stuff
Spoiler
All modern computers are based on the Turing Machine model of computation. A Turing Machine is a deterministic machine. This means that every time a program runs, the exact same thing happens.
Now, CW3 runs on both Windows and Linux machines. These two machines use very different under the hood architectures. The game had to be translated, to a degree, to work on both platforms. This results in some necessary difference in behaviour, mostly to do with how the game draws to the screen. But the game logic itself exists in a sort of emulated space. This means that the game logic is being "run" on a third "computer". This helps with porting, and guarantees that the game runs the same on both platforms, with only differences in execution speed.
This emulated space concept is central to the idea of a Turing Machine. Any Turing program can run on any computer. And it will run the same, with only differences in execution speed.
So how would you make a program run differently based on computer? The easiest way is to look at the system clock. Because the program will run at different speeds on different computers, looking at the system clock will give different times on different computers.
You actually see this a lot on cheap platformers. Some platformers will implement frame skip, and worse, some sync some functionality to game frame, and some to video frame. This can create really broken computer dependant behaviour.
The other way would be multiple threads. This is like one computer having two brains inside it. Slight variances in the speed at which each brain think mean they may finish at different times relative to one another. This is a race condition.
On computers that implement threads, it is a general rule that the exact speed of each thread cannot be known. This breaks the general contract of determinism created by Turing Machines. Without determinism, we can make no hard guarantees about computer independent behaviour. In order to restore determinism, a programmer has to write in appropriate synchronization code.
This game is single threaded.
The other major cause of computer dependant behaviour in games is dropped input events on slow computers. This is particularly a problem in flash games. Depending on the computer, sometimes if the computer gets busy, the keyboard and mouse will stop working in games for a few frames. This is really annoying.
This is not a problem for strategy games, particularly ones where you are allowed to do stuff while paused, and ones that implement a frame step key.
In summary, the game runs the same on all computers, because of the way it was built. Each frame it: Moves the creeper; moves the packets; executes CRPL; draws the game to screen. It does each step in order, and never skips any.
Quote from: Tyler21 on September 21, 2015, 10:05:25 PM
"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it." — Neil deGrasse Tyson
I disagree. The good thing about science is its reproducibility. You can confirm everything I said through trial and experiment.
Postscript: But you CAN make stuff happen white the game is paused.
Spoiler
In CRPL, there is a function that allows you to make a script that runs while the game is paused. This is supposed to be used for creating animations, but it has some extra uses for the really exotic CRPL maps.
There is even a bug associated with this. If a script is set to operate while paused, and is then destroyed, a newly created script may inherit the operate while paused status.
This is only a problem on the really advanced CRPL maps, those that use operate while paused, and dynamic creation. However, if you play one of the early sleeper maps, you may notice that sometimes one or two enemies will continue to move or fire while the game is paused.
Quote from: Asbestos on September 21, 2015, 09:48:56 AM
Spoiler
Quote from: Tero on September 20, 2015, 11:41:43 PM
I would strongly disagree. A number of times there have been maps up loaded where the player only needs to land a CN and place a Nullifier next to something like a Spore Tower. Once the scores are listed, the time tend to very. A LOT!
That's because there's a specific technique to building a nullifier as quickly as possible. You have to build two collectors
Spoiler
and then build a nullifier, and the distances between the CN and the buildings matter, and everything must be set into action one at a time the immediate frame a packet is launched for that last point of construction.
I just learned something!
For
Sid Meier's Civilization computer speed is indifferent.
For
Warcraft: Orcs & Humans moderately weak computer gave advantage.
For
DooM strong computer (again, not indefinitely) gave advantage.
Since then practically nothing has changed. If you use a mode 'step-to-step' (Pause and key 'N') we have analogue of a
Civilization (only the opponents make their moves simultaneously, rather than sequentially). If not use, we have analogue
Warcraft. Not in one case there is no advantage of a strong computer before weak.
Spoiler
For CW1 I sometimes specially slowed down a computer background problems to have time to use a pause. : )
Quote from: Alter Old on September 22, 2015, 08:04:09 AM
For Sid Meier's Civilization computer speed is indifferent.
For Warcraft: Orcs & Humans moderately weak computer gave advantage.
For DooM strong computer (again, not indefinitely) gave advantage.
Since then practically nothing has changed. If you use a mode 'step-to-step' (Pause and key 'N') we have analogue of a Civilization (only the opponents make their moves simultaneously, rather than sequentially). If not use, we have analogue Warcraft. Not in one case there is no advantage of a strong computer before weak.
Spoiler
For CW1 I sometimes specially slowed down a computer background problems to have time to use a pause. : )
Yep.
I'm getting old and my reactions aren't what they were.
So, I play the Creeper World games as though they were turn based rather than real-time.
Pause, issue commands, unpause.
Repeat.
The 'n' key option is an extreme variation of this - I don't need to issue commands thirty times a second!
But that's just me.
Everyone has their own play style.
Some more successful than others.
I read an interesting reply the other day. Apparently cheating is possible. Specifics weren't given. But based on what I have encountered with CRPL, it is a reasonable explanation for unwinnable maps being uploaded and finished by other like minded individuals.
I tried the "N" method on a new (never played by me) custom map. When I begin any map, I study it and create a plan of action. Often the plan works with the expected set backs. After finishing the map and submitting my score, I replayed again using pause as needed. While I can't repeat each move/step I took, I still followed the plan and got much better score. Some might suggest the first time was longer because I hadn't played this map before. But I'm using the "N" method and following my original plan.
Often the maps I struggle with have two things in common. Very little space or time to build. Like build half a dozen weapons and as many beams. Then keep them powered. In under 4 minutes. Why some of you consider this type of map fun is beyond me. I'm patient, analytical and willing keeping trying.
The comment about members being friendly is debateable. I commented to map maker/uploader/author an aspect of CW1 that I miss. And that didn't recall something else about CW1. One of the Kool-aid sippers quoted me and wrote a factoid about CW1. In real life, if this conversation were between two people. And the kool-aid sipper over heard the conversation and blurted out a comment, it would considered rude.
Before the cheating revelation, I wondered if skill could be removed from the equation. And what the submitted scores might look like. Custom map 1842 seemed to me like a good candidate. But has it been pointed out, there a number of ways to finish this map.
So I put it those in the skills camp: Is there a map that can be played only one way. I'm on the fence if the player should have no control or limited control because of reaction times.
Tero, I just uploaded a no-skill map - Speedy Skiller - to Colonial Space. It has my time on a relatively fast computer recorded on it. You can watch if others get different scores. http://knucklecracker.com/forums/index.php?topic=19261.0
In due course I will delete the map from CS, we don't really want maps like that there.
Tested the map. Lucky number four. 10/10, would test again. Got beat by Karsten, Virgil and Gray be 0.0 seconds! DAMN YOU SPEEDFREAKS! ;D
Cheating typically involves hacked clients posting fake scores, but that usually applies to impossibly low times.
Timing, placement of nodes, floating the command node, adding a relay (packets travel faster), all adjust how quickly a thing can be built and charged.
The maps you say you struggle with, a lot of people struggle with. I struggle with many of those myself -- and I find some of them fun, and some of them frustrating, and I probably have several dozen that I've started and never finished. (I have a very fast computer, too.)
Karsten, FYI: If someone were to move the collector a hair to the right, giving it a bit more area and a smidge more power... the final time is 1:08.7 instead of 1:09.5. Moving the nullifer a hair closer to the CN doesn't seem to make a different on this map. I say this because someone is probably going to post that 1:08.7 time, and it won't be because of the speed of their computer. (They moved the collector a little to the right.) :)
Quote from: Tero on September 24, 2015, 12:21:07 PM
I read an interesting reply the other day. Apparently cheating is possible. Specifics weren't given. But based on what I have encountered with CRPL, it is a reasonable explanation for unwinnable maps being uploaded and finished by other like minded individuals.
cheating is possible in almost every computer game. cheaters scores hold no relevance to a discussion of skill vs pc speed
Quote
I tried the "N" method on a new (never played by me) custom map. When I begin any map, I study it and create a plan of action. Often the plan works with the expected set backs. After finishing the map and submitting my score, I replayed again using pause as needed. While I can't repeat each move/step I took, I still followed the plan and got much better score. Some might suggest the first time was longer because I hadn't played this map before. But I'm using the "N" method and following my original plan.
well it really is probable that your experience is the difference. perhaps try using the same settings in the DMD to generate a pair of maps, just select a different terrain seed to get a variation. still no way of double-blind testing this, so there will always be some influences distorting comparisons
Quote
Often the maps I struggle with have two things in common. Very little space or time to build. Like build half a dozen weapons and as many beams. Then keep them powered. In under 4 minutes. Why some of you consider this type of map fun is beyond me. I'm patient, analytical and willing keeping trying.
if you don't like em don't play em.... ;)
plenty of choice and i invite you to submit some DMD of CS maps too!
Quote
The comment about members being friendly is debateable. I commented to map maker/uploader/author an aspect of CW1 that I miss. And that didn't recall something else about CW1. One of the Kool-aid sippers quoted me and wrote a factoid about CW1. In real life, if this conversation were between two people. And the kool-aid sipper over heard the conversation and blurted out a comment, it would considered rude.
this isn't a private talk. this is a open forum for debate, discussion and conversation.
you are not having private discourse unless you use the PM function. anything posted on these fora is free for others to chime in as they please.
"Kool-aid sipper" is a bit. not very nice really. i don't recall anyone insulting you, please do us the courtesy of being civil here. this is a friendly forum, just because you don't like the answers you get doesn't mean anyone is a "Kool-aid sipper" ::)
Quote
Before the cheating revelation, I wondered if skill could be removed from the equation. And what the submitted scores might look like. Custom map 1842 seemed to me like a good candidate. But has it been pointed out, there a number of ways to finish this map.
use the editor and make a map with an air exclusion zone.
play it (use n for frame by frame comparison) and see the score will be the minimum 46 secs or so.
install CW3 on a slower or faster PC (V is happy for you to install on multiple PCs, http://knucklecracker.com/forums/index.php?topic=14165.msg103893#msg103893)
play the map again, perhaps alongside the other copy on the other machine.
using n will show you it is frame locked.
Quote
So I put it those in the skills camp: Is there a map that can be played only one way. I'm on the fence if the player should have no control or limited control because of reaction times.
yes, simple insta-kill maps are "playable" only one way. single helpless enemy and one nullifier. 46.something secs every time!
also, welcome to the forums, hope you are enjoying the game?
8)
Quote from: Grayzzur on September 24, 2015, 02:42:06 PM
Karsten, FYI: If someone were to move the collector a hair to the right, giving it a bit more area and a smidge more power... the final time is 1:08.7 instead of 1:09.5. Moving the nullifer a hair closer to the CN doesn't seem to make a different on this map. I say this because someone is probably going to post that 1:08.7 time, and it won't be because of the speed of their computer. (They moved the collector a little to the right.) :)
Thanks - fixed it. :) I hope.
I've gone a step further and made a more complicated map. Here it is, press play, and optionally you can speed it up with the 1x, 2x, 3x, or 4x options. Feel free to tweak the Forge options for more storage or faster firing speed. I don't know if there are any options to actually change anything and improve map completion time.
I've asked Virgil if there is a way to check completion times without uploading the map to CS, since I'd not want to clutter CS with meaningless maps.
My time is 43:29.1 and my score is 5797.
Virgil kindly donated some assistance:
Quotehttp://knucklecracker.com/creeperworld3/scoreQuery.php?gameUID=ff1bffb67fa0fa2a7c38e397b6be387a
That will return XML with the score record. If you do it in a browser, select "view page source" to see the actual xml
That will separate out the numbers
;)
Quote from: Tero on September 24, 2015, 12:21:07 PM
... Apparently cheating is possible. ...
The number of cheaters always seems to be quite low. In addition, cheaters never seem to upload maps. (Unless you count J's initially unwinnable maps, or that 300x300 map by zeroster.)
Quote from: Tero on September 24, 2015, 12:21:07 PM
... I'm patient, analytical and willing keeping trying.
Then one day you too will master the force. And the game.
Quote from: Tero on September 24, 2015, 12:21:07 PM
... Kool-aid sippers ...
Although that sounds like a pg insult, it is in metaphor to <just google it>. Please don't use on this forum.
Jesus Christ. That... is not something welcome here at all. I'm not sure I want to keep reading that user's posts now. /offtopic
References to Kool-aid has entered the general lexicon and is understood by most people in context of "blindly following and supporting a cause, sports team, religion, protest, political figure, etc. without first looking into it or researching it."
No need to delve deeper or attribute ulterior motives. Let the grass grow.
Apologies. I really should not have brought that up. :-X
Craziest thread I've ever seen on knuckle cracker. I enjoyed reading the discussion, and I learned a few things.