Author Topic: organize multiplayer levels  (Read 543 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mobius

  • Posts: 2375
  • relax.
    • View Profile
organize multiplayer levels
« on: October 07, 2019, 12:46:14 am »
It seems like every time we play lix (multiplayer) I at least, but others sort of alluded to this as well, struggle to find levels we're looking for. And almost every session we end up playing through at least a few levels that are out date and unbalanced, from back in the day when people didn't know better. Playing through some of these is always good for a laugh but the main issue is there are so many levels that it seems difficult to find new stuff or 'good stuff'. Perhaps a re-organizing them or getting rid of some is in order?
"All things are empty... Whoever can see this no longer needs anything to attain."
-The Heart Sutra

"Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man"
-the Dude


Offline Forestidia86

  • Posts: 551
    • View Profile
Re: organize multiplayer levels
« Reply #1 on: October 07, 2019, 03:38:44 pm »
As far as I remember has Simon even tried to sort the better levels to the top of at least some of the folders.

But I agree, that one has to click through a big folder structure that is mainly sorted by the name of the creator.
So rearranging the structure could help to better find levels, e.g. sort them thematically or sort out the older levels in a legacy folder etc.

Offline Forestidia86

  • Posts: 551
    • View Profile
Re: organize multiplayer levels
« Reply #2 on: October 07, 2019, 07:38:39 pm »
One thing that could lead to a wider range of maps being played is a possibility to draw a random map for a set player amount. But this would lead to get outdated unblanced maps as well, but I can imagine it being interesting.

Offline Flopsy

  • Posts: 701
  • Gotta Go Fast
    • View Profile
Re: organize multiplayer levels
« Reply #3 on: October 07, 2019, 11:54:59 pm »
Drawing a random map could be interesting if it was possible to implement :)
SEB Lems (160 levels)
MegSEGAbytes (40 levels)
Gotta Go Fast (in progress)

Offline Forestidia86

  • Posts: 551
    • View Profile
Re: organize multiplayer levels
« Reply #4 on: October 08, 2019, 06:29:53 am »
Just to clarify it for myself: I meant with drawing to pick a random map from the existing ones, but probably you already understood it that way. I confused myself with the wording. (Creating a random map is interesting too, though probably much harder to implement.)
« Last Edit: October 08, 2019, 06:45:51 am by Forestidia86 »

Offline geoo

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1336
    • View Profile
Re: organize multiplayer levels
« Reply #5 on: October 08, 2019, 08:29:53 am »
Considering the old outdated maps that we sometimes choose to play, I feel like some randomly generated maps wouldn't be that much worse than those for the occasional round. NaOH was working on randomized maps at some point, at least a basic version of that shouldn't be too hard.

As for organizing the actual maps, if more custom content comes in (currently there's a lull, but who knows) it would probably better to come up with a scalable solution. One such thing could be the server collecting users' ratings of maps after a games, and/or statistics of how often a maps gets played, and the offer to browse maps by popularity or select a random map proportional to popularity. Of course that'd need quite a bit of extra infrastructure.

Tbh I tend to be able to find quite quickly the maps I'm looking for, so it doesn't seem like a big issue to me. And then there's also the search functionality, right?

Offline Forestidia86

  • Posts: 551
    • View Profile
Re: organize multiplayer levels
« Reply #6 on: October 08, 2019, 07:50:05 pm »
From IRC:

[20:41] <Forestidia> Is there kind of a plan with the multiplayer maps?
[20:42] <@SimonN> No. Quality ideas in the topic.
[20:43] <Forestidia> okay, say if I can do sth to help
[20:43] <@SimonN> Directory structure need not be best (is only familiar). Really we should think of levels as if they were in a database, sortable/groupable by all kinds of features.
[20:44] <@SimonN> I feel like any good idea will lead to more code for a new feature.
[20:45] <@SimonN> I don't feel like collecting stats on the server.
[20:46] <@SimonN> Random map will still work as a client-side feature.
[20:47] <Forestidia> yeah getting some buried down maps, so one can see which ones are good
[20:48] <@SimonN> Right, uniform distribution will uncover lost gems.
[20:48] <@SimonN> Popular maps, I believe people will pick them anyway.
[...]
[21:01] <Forestidia> I really think a different folder structure would be good, since the creator's names don't tell anything to non-LF people and even newer people from LF.
[21:01] <@SimonN> Hmm.
[21:01] <@SimonN> Author name is part of the level anyway.
[21:02] <@SimonN> Popularity is dangerous sorting criterion, who decides what is popular? Is it dynamic (levels move on their own)?
[21:03] <@SimonN> Easy/Hard is problematic, what is easy or hard? Downward Reduction is easy because the route to the exit is easy to build assuming no resistance?
[21:03] <Forestidia> good would categories that tell the character of the map in some way
[21:03] <@SimonN> Hmm
[21:04] <@SimonN> We had a latenight directory ocne.
[21:04] <@SimonN> I think somebody made an LSD directory and I didn't want to merge that name into the main release.
[21:04] <Forestidia> eg. the lenghth of usual play
[21:04] <Forestidia> hehe
[21:05] <@SimonN> "Exhausting"
[21:05] <@SimonN> Stepping Stones, Chasing Upwards are exhausting
[21:05] <@SimonN> Frog Hotel is pure dexterity
[21:06] <Forestidia> or if it's highly tactical or rather straight forward
[21:07] <Forestidia> then there are asymetric maps
[21:07] <@SimonN> Yeah, how viable is the first strategy that might come to beginner's mind.
[21:07] <@SimonN> Ah, handicap maps. Important missing feature too.
[...]
[21:17] <Forestidia> There are even maps that have no interaction.
[21:19] <@SimonN> Yeah
[21:19] <@SimonN> Not sure if I want to encourage that by making dirs for them :P
[21:19] <Forestidia> okay
[21:20] <Forestidia> yeah a folder for unusual maps that have strange gimmicks
[21:20] <@SimonN> Hmm, possible and can become necessary. Merely open to interpretation.

Offline Forestidia86

  • Posts: 551
    • View Profile
Re: organize multiplayer levels
« Reply #7 on: October 26, 2019, 09:02:32 pm »
For a first sorting, my category idea/suggestion would be: short play, long play, asymetric and races. It's few but maybe doable in reasonable time.
Rubix' attack-defense maps could fall under asymetric or be its own category. Would maps with no interactions fit to race maps?
« Last Edit: October 26, 2019, 09:07:56 pm by Forestidia86 »

Offline Forestidia86

  • Posts: 551
    • View Profile
Re: organize multiplayer levels
« Reply #8 on: October 28, 2019, 05:51:59 pm »
In IRC there was the suggestion to handle the maps via tagging system.
I agree that this would be the best solution since one map could fit in multiple categories. But I don't know how hard it is to implement.

Offline Simon

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 2737
    • View Profile
    • Lix
Re: organize multiplayer levels
« Reply #9 on: November 02, 2019, 05:18:08 pm »
Yeah, better sorting and better presenting is important.

I've opened github issue #392, Organize multiplayer levels.

Finding the newest maps would be cool.

A tagging system sounds better than any hard directory structure. We order by player count, except that we also collect all races in a single extra directory. The existing directory structure is not consistent anymore, and levels feel like they belong in a widely-searchable database (thus the tagging system), not in a directory tree.

-- Simon