• Play
  • About
  • News
  • Forums
  • Yppedia
  • Help
Welcome Guest   | Login
  Index  | Recent Threads  | Register  | Search  | Help  | RSS feeds  | View Unanswered Threads  

Quick Go »
Thread Status: Normal
Total posts in this thread: 4
[Add To My Favorites] [Watch this Thread] [Post new Thread]
Previous Thread This topic has been viewed 9280 times and has 3 replies Next Thread

Joined: Jan 12, 2014
Posts: 3
Status: Offline

Generalizing Puzzles Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

Puzzle Pirates is a game where people entertain themselves by playing puzzle games in order to gain poe and cosmetics, but, not many people I know will play the game all the time in order to understand the puzzle. Let me clarify before you make any hasty implications about that statement. If I am the best at bilging, I might know a lot about bilging, but, what about why bilging exist in the state of which it does or how it was conceived. Bilging is a bad example because it is obviously a derivative of bejeweled. Instead, I will state how I believe the puzzle making process should be done, why, and how to make it more enjoyable for everyone who plays it.

If you were raised in any part of the world, you will seek to not be rejected by peers and end up becoming or doing what they do or believing what they believe iZombie style(book reference). People who have played puzzle pirates might like the game for what it is now because that is what they are use to, but, the game for what it is now adds a "chaotic randomness" that does not always reflect off the skill of a person as much as luck or algorithmic naturality within the person. How natural a persons habits might lead to an advantage in one puzzle over others is what algorithmic naturality is by my definition; yes I just word smithed that. What if getting the best result in the puzzle you are playing is guaranteed if you have the skill and knowledge? What if there was a way to apply this to all puzzles in the entire game for someone intelligent enough to get a perfect every time? I have the idea of how it is done and have generalized puzzles in a way that I could do so.

All puzzles should have a perfect solution, therefore all puzzles should start from the perfect solution(this doesn't include games difficult to do this like bilging). Take a puzzle board and break it into pieces, squares or hexagons, whichever kind of puzzle you are attempting to make. Let us pretend that the board is glowing gold as a signification that the board is in its "perfect state". This is the most potential the board has that it can actually be solved toward. The player cannot score any higher because the board doesn't allow it do to the limits in size of the board and pieces.

Now that we have a glowing board broken into pieces, let us add the functionality of the pieces, such as the fact that they can be turned, pulled, or misplaced. Remember that this board is creating the puzzle in its maximum perfect state giving the player an opportunity to make a perfect puzzle every single time(Patching doesn't allow for this despite how easy it would be to make it in this manner). Now that we have the rules to the puzzle, such as "piece color/type", "flexibility or effect on other pieces", and "triggers for a score", we can now displace the perfect solution. All displacements must be done in such a manner that the steps toward displacing it will not score points if the puzzle being created was a player playing the game. Now that the board is displaced in whatever manner it had to be displaced in, including the random generation of certain spaces that pieces fill not being as random, it is ready to be played. Once the player tries to solve the puzzle for the best solution possible, if the player is intuitive enough, they will instantly see the best solution and go for it, but, if they make a mistake, the perfect score may no longer be possible. The player has a chance for a perfect score, but, is not going to get it if they make a mistake.

I stated that pieces that are randomly generated when others are destroyed could be not as randomly generated for a chance to make a perfect score. This doesn't necessarily mean that in a completely rigged for potential perfection sense, but, the player at least has the chance for a perfect score. If the player doesn't get a perfect score, then everything beyond what was pregenerated for the player to get a perfect score becomes randomized after that. This means that the player can no longer get a perfect score like they wanted once they messed things up.

How far should the pregeneration go in what appears to be randomized? Puzzles end once a player gets all the stars filled and the board resets or when someone finishes their labor for the crafting puzzle they are doing. The limit should be that the player can score up to the end of the puzzle by doing the best thing they could possibly do in order to get a perfect score. After the puzzle is estimated to be perfect and over, the random generation will be really random instead of set in stone so that the player has a chance for a perfect puzzle. A lot of puzzles do not allow for perfect scores in the game puzzle pirates, but, could easily be implemented and will take out the random success factor.

I know this could be done with patching and I know that this could be done with future crafting puzzles as well as smithing. Please tell me what you think about the idea including the reason. All thoughts without reason (example: It sucks, they will never implement it, you will never amount to anything in life, you will never blah blah blah) will be interpreted as trolling as it is simply a person attempting to negate the solution to other peoples by putting down the idea, probably for their own entertainment.
[Jan 17, 2014 2:50:55 PM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 

Joined: Jul 22, 2015
Posts: 13
Status: Offline

Re: Generalizing Puzzles Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

[Edit 1 times, last edit by Atropos at Jul 24, 2015 10:24:01 PM]
[Jul 24, 2015 8:48:01 PM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 

Member's Avatar

Joined: Dec 25, 2005
Posts: 2065
Status: Offline
Re: Generalizing Puzzles Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

Damn man, in the year and a half that's past since you wrote that, I can guarantee you no one has given a bunny's tail and read it.
I think you gave at least one single -insert curse word here- to reply lol

When quoting something that breaks the forum rules, please edit it so that it no longer breaks the forum rules. Thank you.
Tinycat on Cerulean
Kattzzy on Emerald
[Edit 1 times, last edit by Gaea at Jul 25, 2015 9:33:02 AM]
[Jul 24, 2015 9:50:55 PM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 

Joined: Jul 24, 2015
Posts: 11
Status: Offline

Re: Generalizing Puzzles Reply to this Post
Reply with Quote

-insert curse word here-

[Edit 1 times, last edit by Gaea at Jul 25, 2015 9:32:10 AM]
[Jul 25, 2015 7:48:41 AM] Show Printable Version of Post        Send Private Message [Link]  Go to top 
[Show Printable Version of Thread] [Post new Thread]

Puzzle Pirates™ © 2001-2020 Grey Havens, LLC All Rights Reserved.   Terms · Privacy · Affiliates