The topic is for polls for adaptations to the level design contests.
For the discussions themselves please stick to the discussion topics.
So far we had the following two:
1.) https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=6807.0
2.) https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=6622.0
I won't change major things like the whole entry system before I know that at least a significant portion of people is behind certain ideas.
The first poll I want to make is about people feel if the basic entry structure should be changed.
Before touching the voting system let's first see how people fell about the rule/entry system, as it may effect the degree in which the voting should be updated.
1st poll: How many entries/rules should level design contests have?
- (As before) Multiple rules with possible multiple entries per author. (6 votes)
- Only one rule with only one entry per author. (2 votes)
Note: Only one rule with only one entry per author will not automatically lead to much more frequent contests as even then sufficient time to (mainly) design, play and (to a lesser extend) vote needs to be accounted for.
2nd poll: With muliple rules/entries: How shall the winner be determined?
- The best levels of each rule survive and we determine the winners in a mixed round. (as before) (1 vote)
- Only 1 level survives each rule and those 3 levels determine the top 3 in one final round. (Finding the top 1 for each rule may require 1 tiebreaker round) (7 votes)
3rd poll: Shall the "choose the next contest's rules" prize be split up between the top 3 levels?
- Yes (8 votes)
- No (0 votes)
If an author has multiple levels in the top 3 they then get to choose as many rules as they have levels in the final round.
4th poll: Which levels from a level design contest should automatically qualify for LOTY?
- Only the winner (3 votes)
- Winner and runner-up (1 vote)
- The top 3 (7 votes)
- No one (0 votes)
Result - new format of the contest:
Structure:
- 3 different rules to design levels for.
- Each person can design 1 level for each of the 3 rules.
- We will list the current rule/bucket size in the contest topic during the submission phase.
- A level that statisfies multiple rules can only be submittet to one. The author can choose which one though.
- Levels for different rules need to be completely different levels and not just minor modifications of each other (if not the current ruleset strictly requires this).
Voting:
- Voting takes place for all 3 rules at the same time.
- Only the level with the most votes in each rule moves on. Each person only gets 1 vote for each rule.
- Dertermining the top level in a rule might result in a tiebreaker. (Edge case: A tiebreaker between tied levels results in another tie where nobody is eliminated -> All move on.)
- The top 3 then consists of the top level of reach rule. The placement is then determined in a single voting round. Each person only gets 1 vote. A tie here simply results in a tied 1st or 2nd place.
Prize:
- The "choosing the rules for the next contest" prize will be the only one you can get.
- The authors of the top three levels will each get to choose a rule. If an author got multiple levels in the top three they get to choose multiple rules accordingly.
- If people choose (near) identical rules we will sort things out through pm communication so that the rules are different.
- The top 3 of a contest automatically qualify for that years LOTY.
QuoteNote: Only one rule with only one entry per author will not automatically lead to much more frequent contests as even then sufficient time to (mainly) design, play and (to a lesser extend) vote needs to be accounted for.
My suggestion in this regard was basically to get rid of the mixed rounds. So, still running three rules at once (just like we currently do), but we just find a winner from each individual rule, instead of having any mixed rounds. As such, it shouldn't be much different to the status quo in terms of time needed.
I suspect the response to this poll is going to be
very different depending on whether an approach like this, vs basically just "keep the same frequency but one entry and one rule per contest", is the proposal.
Quote from: namida on September 12, 2024, 11:08:56 PMQuoteNote: Only one rule with only one entry per author will not automatically lead to much more frequent contests as even then sufficient time to (mainly) design, play and (to a lesser extend) vote needs to be accounted for.
My suggestion in this regard was basically to get rid of the mixed rounds. So, still running three rules at once (just like we currently do), but we just find a winner from each individual rule, instead of having any mixed rounds. As such, it shouldn't be much different to the status quo in terms of time needed.
I suspect the response to this poll is going to be very different depending on whether an approach like this, vs basically just "keep the same frequency but one entry and one rule per contest", is the proposal.
Then I will adress this in a separate poll.
So first if we should keep the multiple rule structure at all and then if we should treat them as in your suggestion.
Then my vote is - keep multiple rules (but for the next poll: treat them as three contests running in parallel, with seperate winners, no mixed round).
+1 for no mixed rounds and 1 winner from each rule (assuming 3 rules is kept - from the current poll results, it's most likely).
The final round can then simply pit the 3 winning levels against each other to determine 1st, 2nd and 3rd place.
Ok, 2nd poll: With muliple rules/entries: How shall the winner be determined?
- The best levels of each rule survive and we determine the winners in a mixed round. (as before)
- Only 1 level survives each rule and those 3 levels determine the top 3 in one final round. (Finding the top 1 for each rule may require 1 tiebreaker round so that only 1 level moves on and the final round is only 1 vote as a result)
In any case: I will host the voting for all 3 rules simultaniously in 3 dedicated rule voting topics to save time!
As we are currently on it anyway, I will make an extra poll at the end if the rule prize shall be split up between the top 3.
If the rule prize is split between the top 3 it's worth noting, since 1-survivor-per-rule would result in exactly 3 finalists, that it would be possible to announce rules for the next contest during the vote(s) to determine the order of the top 3.
Alright, I've put up a 3rd poll regarding the prize split up between the top 3 levels.
If an author has multiple levels in the top 3 they then get to choose as many rules as they have levels in the final round.
So far this would be the new format of the contests:
Structure:
- 3 different rules to design levels for.
- Each person can design 1 level for each of the 3 rules.
Voting:
- Voting takes place for all 3 rules at the same time.
- Only the level with the most votes in each rule moves on. Each person only gets 1 vote for each rule.
- Dertermining the top level in a rule might result in a tiebreaker. (Edge case: A tiebreaker between tied levels results in another tie where nobody is eliminated -> All move on.)
- The top 3 then consists of the top level of reach rule. The placement is then determined in a single voting round. Each person only gets 1 vote. A tie here simply results in a tied 1st or 2nd place.
Are there any more ideas that I should put up to a poll?
Did I make any big mistakes here?
Please feel free to comment. :)
Just dropping off a quick post to say thank you to all who have dropped off suggestions/feedback for Icho and me in order to potentially make improvements to the contest system :thumbsup: I will be reading over the discussion topics Icho linked to in the OP over the next few days and will drop off my thoughts once I do so just to make sure that I too am understanding everything correctly :) Thanks again all! :thumbsup:
Ditch the money prize (USD 5).
What happens when two different people choose practically identical rules? Will you run two buckets with identical rules? What happens if an author submits only one level (instead of two), does he have to guess beforehand which bucket has bigger chances to win? Or will you merge the two buckets and authors get to submit two levels? Will you declare one winner or two from the merged bucket?
Or do you ask one of the rule choosers to choose a different rule? Which chooser do you ask? (Each previous contest produces only equal winners, one per rule, that you never rank against each other.)
-- Simon
Quote from: Simon on September 17, 2024, 09:07:56 AMDitch the money prize (USD 5).
Ditching the money prize and only offering the rule prize I fully agree with. It suits the theme better!Thanks for bringing up the edge cases! :thumbsup:
QuoteWhat happens when two different people choose practically identical rules? Will you run two buckets with identical rules?
I will then contact both people and offer solutions via pm. It could be that person choose to change the rule voluntarily for example, or they both together can create another rule both agree with.
There won't be two buckets with identical rules though.
in general, I think this can be solved through pm discussion.
QuoteWhat happens if an author submits only one level (instead of two), does he have to guess beforehand which bucket has bigger chances to win? Or will you merge the two buckets and authors get to submit two levels? Will you declare one winner or two from the merged bucket?
Yes, this is the thing I am most unsure about.
Most of the time the rules have roughly the same number of entries and when differences occured the adjusted survival rate kicked in.
For small rule/bucket differences I would say the 1 survvivor rule is fine, but we should talk about the special case of large differences in bucket/rule size.
Some options I thought of:* List the current rule/bucket size in the contest topic during the submission phase. -> Promotes smaller rules/buckets and can lead to equalization.
I highly tend to include this.* Merge the voting for 2 rules and have 2 survivors in that bucket (ensured by a tiebreaker if needed). - This could still be unequal.
* Keep the system and have that inequality - This would make harder rules more alluring and somewhat reward people tackling the more obscure rules, but it is unequal!
I will have aother thought about it, but in the meantime I am happy to hear more suggestions! :)
QuoteYes, this is the thing I am most unsure about.
Most of the time the rules have roughly the same number of entries and when differences occured the adjusted survival rate kicked in.
For small rule/bucket differences I would say the 1 survvivor rule is fine, but we should talk about the special case of large differences in bucket/rule size.
I thought that Simon was following on from the "if you run two identical rules at the same time" starting point here. IE: If the same rule exists twice, but a level creator only wants to enter once, how is that handled?
Quote from: namida on September 17, 2024, 08:31:09 PMQuoteYes, this is the thing I am most unsure about.
Most of the time the rules have roughly the same number of entries and when differences occured the adjusted survival rate kicked in.
For small rule/bucket differences I would say the 1 survvivor rule is fine, but we should talk about the special case of large differences in bucket/rule size.
I thought that Simon was following on from the "if you run two identical rules at the same time" starting point here. IE: If the same rule exists twice, but a level creator only wants to enter once, how is that handled?
Ok, if that is the case I would simply say "There won't be two identical rules".
Quote from: IchoTolot on September 17, 2024, 02:02:29 PMvia pm. It could be that person choose to change the rule voluntarily for example, or they both together can create another rule both agree with.
There won't be two buckets with identical rules though.
Right, on practically identical rules, you can PM both rule choosers. Or PM one of them at random.
Quote from: namida on September 17, 2024, 08:31:09 PMSimon was following on from the "if you run two identical rules at the same time" starting point here.
Right, this is solved because Icho will prevent two practically identical rules.
This brings
Quote from: IchoTolot on September 17, 2024, 02:02:29 PMYes, this is the thing I am most unsure about.
There is indeed a worry here even with all-different rules, and I haven't thought about it before now: An author creates a level that satisfies two different rules. This has been less important in previous contests because the buckets merged eventually into a single bucket for the semifinals.
Now, buckets for different rules won't merge. Should the author commit the two-rule-satisfying level to only one rule? Can the author submit the level to both rules? If we want to forbid this: Can the author submit variants of the level that differ only minimally? How big a difference is enough?
My first hunch is to allow the same level to enter both rules and possibly win both. It's boring but clear, it leaves no room for arguments.
-- Simon
Quote from: Simon on September 18, 2024, 12:34:37 AMMy first hunch is to allow the same level to enter both rules and possibly win both. It's boring but clear, it leaves no room for arguments.
Totally agree with this. :thumbsup:
QuoteNow, buckets for different rules won't merge. Should the author commit the two-rule-satisfying level to only one rule? Can the author submit the level to both rules? If we want to forbid this: Can the author submit variants of the level that differ only minimally? How big a difference is enough?
My first hunch is to allow the same level to enter both rules and possibly win both. It's boring but clear, it leaves no room for arguments.
It can be quite easy to make a level for multiple rules. Especially if one rule is to simply use a certain tileset. They still merge for the final round.
Until now the author could choose for themselves to which rule the level should count towards.
I would be against letting a level enter in multiple rules. It just feels wrong to me to have a level be voted on in multiple brackets and possibly win and move on more than once.
Also I have a feeling that this will be abused and we get a lot of double-rule entries in the future.I would still suggest to let the author decide to which rule the level should count towards.
QuoteCan the author submit variants of the level that differ only minimally? How big a difference is enough?
This I would catch and prevent during the submission phase. In terms of how big of a difference is enough -
It needs to be a completely different level and not just a modification.
As input dries up: I've listet the new format in the first post here.
If I get no further objections or further edge cases we should define, I plan to start a new contest in about a week from now.
I will not try out anonymizing the authors names in this one though as we already have quite a few changes and let's see how the new format goes first. :)
I suppose if an author wanted to create a level which satisfies all rule sets, they could then choose a rule for which to submit their level. No bonus points for doing so, of course, but contest players might regard it as a nice easter egg if nothing else ;P
I will lock this topic for now.
It will be reactivated when more discussions regarding possible rule changes arise and the need fur further polls is there. :)
I want to clarify the "Note that levels that won a level design contest during the eligible timeframe get an automatic nomination, unless their author requests otherwise." point for LOTY as the runner-ups did also fall under the winner clause the last years.
So: Which levels of the top 3 shall automatically qualify for LOTY? I've put up a poll. :)
So, the top three will always be one level from each rule, right (except perhaps in very specific edge cases with tiebreakers?).
If so, then IMO, from most to least preferred:
All three > 1st place only > None of them > 1st and 2nd place
Quote from: namida on February 16, 2025, 11:18:06 PMSo, the top three will always be one level from each rule, right (except perhaps in very specific edge cases with tiebreakers?).
If so, then IMO, from most to least preferred:
All three > 1st place only > None of them > 1st and 2nd place
Exactly.
2+ levels from a rule would be an edge case where even in the optional tiebreaker round we have a tie and then in the final round those 2+ levels would all do better than the ones from the other rules.
Alright, I've put the result in the first post and according to it the top 3 qualify for LOTY. :)
One thing occurs to me when reading over this topic and the discussion topics: it's still possible for the same designer to take all 3 of the top spots.
The main goal of the discussion topic I started was to see more designers in the top 3, for the reason that it might help to encourage more participation in the contests. And OK, polling and general discussion seems to reflect a lack of interest in this happening for its own sake, fine.
I do still wonder, though, whether it might be worth at least mentioning the next 2 highest-placing designers when publishing the final result of the contest. That is, if there are < 3 designers in the top 3 spots.
It's then up to the winner if they want to share the prize of determining the next contest's rules, of course ;P But, getting a mention in the final result post can be a decent enough reward if your level has done particularly well in the contest.
You can't reliably state the next places after the top 3 in this format.
We would need to go into the 3 seperate results from the rule votings and here we would have 3 (or more) equal sencond places.
As then the final result post would tend to simply shout out most of the designers, my suggestion would be to give a general thanks to all participants by name in the results topic. That way everybody gets a mention.