new RoundRobin accounts on NAO
Michael Lehotay
RoundRobin account. Here is my proposal:
RoundRobin - for players who have never ascended
SquareRobin - for players who have ascended a few times
DiamondRobin - for players who ascend all the time
The password for all three accounts is robin.
d
"Michael Lehotay" <mleh...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1116009756.7...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Janis Papanagnou
> I have just created two new accounts on NAO,
Good :-)
> to complement the RoundRobin account. Here is my proposal:
>
> RoundRobin - for players who have never ascended
> SquareRobin - for players who have ascended a few times
> DiamondRobin - for players who ascend all the time
I am missing some differentiation in the non-ascender grades.
But there are a few landmarks, measured in dungeon levels, where
people seem to die a lot; that might be an appropriate metrics.
My suggestion; reach on a regular basis and in good health...
RoundRobin: the bottom of mines / past Oracle
SquareRobin: the castle / the valley of the dead
DiamondRobin: endgame / ascending
Janis
Seraphim
$1...@online.de:
> But there are a few landmarks, measured in dungeon levels, where
> people seem to die a lot; that might be an appropriate metrics.
> My suggestion; reach on a regular basis and in good health...
>
> RoundRobin: the bottom of mines / past Oracle
> SquareRobin: the castle / the valley of the dead
> DiamondRobin: endgame / ascending
I would suggest reaching the quest level be the deciding factor for the
middle level, otherwise I think there won't be many people in the middle
level. If you can get to the VoTD regulary, then you probably can make it
to the endgame regulary.
Michael Lehotay
> My suggestion; reach on a regular basis and in good health...
>
> RoundRobin: the bottom of mines / past Oracle
> SquareRobin: the castle / the valley of the dead
> DiamondRobin: endgame / ascending
Yes, that's better than my idea.
Andy Johnson
As a word of warning, let's be careful not to dilute the concept too
much. When I first set up RoundRobin as an 'open' game I did not expect
so many people to be interested (thank you all!), but the idea was still
to mix all sorts of skill levels. The more we split it up, the less each
character will get played, and I am a wee bit afraid people will lose
interest (as if that's possible with NetHack).
Three accounts seems like about right though, thanks. It would be cool
if we could somehow get better publicity, but I guess everyone who plays
on NAO probably reads rgrn at least occasionally, so there's not much
else to do.
Boudewijn Waijers
> RoundRobin: the bottom of mines / past Oracle
> SquareRobin: the castle / the valley of the dead
> DiamondRobin: endgame / ascending
Shouldn't there be an account for people that usually get killed early,
but still enjoy a round-robin game?
--
Boudewijn Waijers (kroisos at home.nl).
The garden of happiness is surrounded by a wall so low only children
can look over it. - "the Orphanage of Hits", former Dutch radio show.
ihope
round-robin, will it?
> the idea was still to mix all sorts of skill levels.
Uh, anyway, how about a TopologicalRobin for everybody? (Nah, sorry,
but maybe add a new one anyway?)
Boudewijn Waijers
> I have just created two new accounts on NAO, to complement the
> RoundRobin account. Here is my proposal:
Just a question.
What's the suggested number of turns to play? I played approximately
1000 turns, but it seems people are playing some 2000 on average. 1000
does seem little, but in a round robin game, it's probably better...
Michal Brzozowski
Boudewijn Waijers wrote:
> Michael Lehotay wrote:
>
> > I have just created two new accounts on NAO, to complement the
> > RoundRobin account. Here is my proposal:
>
> Just a question.
>
> What's the suggested number of turns to play? I played approximately
> 1000 turns, but it seems people are playing some 2000 on average.
1000
> does seem little, but in a round robin game, it's probably better...
I think some play many more turns.
By the way, the first, historical, round-robin ascension is almost
completed :) The rogue just left the sanctum...
Janis Papanagnou
> Just a question.
>
> What's the suggested number of turns to play? I played approximately
> 1000 turns, but it seems people are playing some 2000 on average. 1000
> does seem little, but in a round robin game, it's probably better...
The fixed values above are good as a rule of thumb. But how many moves
you should do actually very much depends on the concrete game situation
(and the player).
Janis
Andy Johnson
I suggested a few hundred to a few thousand, depending on your
efficiency. You just have to make sure it's still just a turn. Plus,
small turns will help keep people from getting upset when a character is
killed off, I think.
Janis Papanagnou
> Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>> Boudewijn Waijers wrote:
>>
>>> Just a question.
>>>
>>> What's the suggested number of turns to play? I played approximately
>>> 1000 turns, but it seems people are playing some 2000 on average. 1000
>>> does seem little, but in a round robin game, it's probably better...
>>
>> The fixed values above are good as a rule of thumb. But how many moves
>> you should do actually very much depends on the concrete game situation
>> (and the player).
>
> efficiency. You just have to make sure it's still just a turn. Plus,
> small turns will help keep people from getting upset when a character is
> killed off, I think.
Keep in mind that 1000 turns often is not more than 10 minutes in a
non-beginner game.
The last DiamondRobin game, an ascension, lastet 50000+ turns and
required 2 complete days, inclusive idle times! That's approximately
175 turns per 10 minutes including all the phases where no one played.
Janis
Benjamin Lewis
> The last DiamondRobin game, an ascension, lastet 50000+ turns and
> required 2 complete days, inclusive idle times! That's approximately
> 175 turns per 10 minutes including all the phases where no one played.
It's too bad there's no record of who played the character for which turns.
--
Benjamin Lewis
Although the moon is smaller than the earth, it is farther away.
Janis Papanagnou
> Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>
>>The last DiamondRobin game, an ascension, lastet 50000+ turns and
>>required 2 complete days, inclusive idle times! That's approximately
>>175 turns per 10 minutes including all the phases where no one played.
>
> It's too bad there's no record of who played the character for which turns.
I could reconstruct at least my sessions.
But I've played only 8% of all turns. ;-)
Janis
Pasi Kallinen
> Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>
>> The last DiamondRobin game, an ascension, lastet 50000+ turns and
>> required 2 complete days, inclusive idle times! That's approximately
>> 175 turns per 10 minutes including all the phases where no one played.
>
> It's too bad there's no record of who played the character for which turns.
Well, if people want to keep tabs on who is playing, they could type
some identification information for example at the extended commands
prompt when they start playing.
The ttyrec files will contain everything shown on screen, including
that.
--
Pasi Kallinen
pa...@alt.org
Benjamin Lewis
Or they could #name some useless item, so that it could be read from the
dumplog.
Janis Papanagnou
Hmm.. - is that really interesting? - well..
> Well, if people want to keep tabs on who is playing, they could type
> some identification information for example at the extended commands
> prompt when they start playing.
Actually it often occurs that observers ask who is playing, so I suppose
it's already implicitly documented that way.
Janis
Benjamin Lewis
> Pasi Kallinen wrote:
>> Benjamin Lewis <bcl...@cs.sfu.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> It's too bad there's no record of who played the character for which
>>> turns.
>
> Hmm.. - is that really interesting? - well..
Well, I think it is. For example, if I knew that in DiamondRobin's latest
ascension the entire post-quest game was played by a single person, I'd be
a little less impressed. (I'm not implying that this was the case).
Janis Papanagnou
> Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>>Pasi Kallinen wrote:
>>>Benjamin Lewis <bcl...@cs.sfu.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>>It's too bad there's no record of who played the character for which
>>>>turns.
>>
>>Hmm.. - is that really interesting? - well..
>
> Well, I think it is. For example, if I knew that in DiamondRobin's latest
> ascension the entire post-quest game was played by a single person, I'd be
> a little less impressed. (I'm not implying that this was the case).
My _impression_ (not knowledge) is that the late game was indeed dominated
by one or two players. Though I also think that all the players would have
been capable to ascend the character we all built up.
Re-reading your posting... - I wouldn't undervalue the skill for the early
game.
Janis
Benjamin Lewis
Indeed not; I think skill is quite significantly more important in the
early-middle game. If I found out that the entire *pre-quest* game was
played by a single person I'd be even less impressed.