SOKOBAN

to MnLsDad: You're right, I didn't read your suggestion well enough... sorry! In fact your idea is better than mine. Number of people who win first place is a very good indication of complexity, so division of one winnerpoint per game is probably the best base for new list!

To Arnold: I suppose I wasn't clear. I'm not suggesting removal/changing of the list of # 1st places. I was suggesting the inclusion of 1st place by complexity. You note that Spiros Sets is rated an average complexity 2, but is a win on level 12 (7/884) (71 people solved in 12 moves) worth the same as a win on level 13 (8/884) (only 2 of 63 solved in 285 moves)? I was just trying to think of a way that each puzzle would be weighted by complexity without asking Admin to rank each puzzle.

to jormawitick: I think all anonymous players must be ignored. They don't contribute to the site whatsoever and contaminate the winnerlists.

To Arnold: How you should deal with the anonymous players. Over time the anonymous players takes all the first places. Some of them are really good, but they are too shy to registering. There should be a rule, that all players must be registered. Same rules for everyone. It's frustrating, that multiple anonymous players, playing as a team against us individual players. (I'm talking about single level "Best results" table)

to admin1: I think the two winnerlists that we have now (that you made) are great and should stay: a winnerlist of completed levels and a winnerlist of first places won. What misses still, is a third winnerlist in which complexity is included. My twofold suggestion for that extra list: 1) each player that completes a game, receives as many points as the complexity of the respective collection; 2) each player that wins the first place in that game, receives the double amount of that points. For example: player completes a game in collection Spiros sets, complexity 3, so he earns 3 points. If he also wins the first place in that game, he earns 2 * 3 = 6 points. I think this method would put the very best players on top. I mention player luyan, who plays the most difficult games on the highest levels. He completed 46 games in Sasquatch VIII (complexity 12) and won first place in all that games, so for that performace only he would receive 46 * 12 * 2 = 1104 points.

to MnLsDad: Why should a point be divided if more than one player wins first place? First place is a fact of it's own, no matter how many players reach it. Moreover, if only one player wins first place, the others are automatically put to second place and thus loose their point. In other words: I think it's fair now. The inclusion of complexity is something else... on that matter I have some ideas that I will share hereafter.

On the subject of Wins Vs complexity, I'd suggest that 1 point per puzzle be divided among those with the shortest solution. When two people tie, each get 1/2 point, 3 winners get 1/3, etc. "Easy" puzzles would be worth much less than "hard" puzzles and the "difficulty factor" would be self-adjusting. A bookkeeping nightmare, I know, but that's why they make computers. ;) I recognize this calculation falls apart on newly released puzzles, so perhaps exclude new releases from the count for a certain time period.

To Jormawitick: Thanks. If I can keep up my pace, I'll be done with those 10,000 before Admin can grow the site to 25,000.

To MnLsDad: Welcome to list (30), only way is up... (10000 to go still)

to admin1: The complexity-table on page http://www.game-sokoban.com/index.php?mode=about contains 43 collections, out of the 59 collections in total. Is there any reason to hide the missing 16 ones?