Would you be interested in seeing the revival of the Adventure Building Challenge?

[Legacy_henesua]

               

I like it, and I agree with Magical Master. Just make it a 1 HAK limit - unless you meant to require people to use a particular HAK.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_rogueknight333]

               

I shall interpret it as meaning "no more than one hak" (i.e, none is also permissible). It might be interesting at some point to set up a challenge requiring use of a single specific hak (in that case, of course, fulfillment of the requirement would mean actually making use of the hak's contents is some meaningful way, not just attaching it), but we will not do so this time.

 

In other news, the official announcement of the Spring 2014 ABC cycle is up. Those interested in participating are encouraged to let us know what they plan to make.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MagicalMaster]

               

Might I suggest we limit the early submission bonus to something like 7 days?  Getting it in a bit early is great and encourages people not to build until the last second.  Having it incentivized to get it in a month early encourages people to make a smaller module to try to score more "points."

 

Also, in this case, 20 extra points would be the maximum for additional themes, right?  Warrior class, one or less haks, and either Plague or Blast from Past.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_CaveGnome]

               

Welcome to the ABC helm rogueknight333 !

 

Just skimming the new ABC posts (will look them in more detail later) my eyes catched a glimpse of the proposed point system. A good idea, but perhaps it could be made more friendly. Makers do modules for fun and give their time and skills free to the community, and sanctions with negative points are not cool, even for late botched work. My old master says "Be friendly to newbees and oldbees". As everybody knows these insects make delicious honey and build incredible wax structures, err... modules and young builder must learn. I suggest we only give positive points for goals reached, no negativity and perhaps use something simpler. Example: in place of substracting 10 points for a day late, 20 for 2 days, etc. add only a +10 point bonus for a module delivered right on time, add +10 for a module who respects the CC size limitations (no need to count excess megabytes), etc. etc. We could also have a symbolic prizes or medals system (like the old Vault) and make some graphic badges for it. my 2cents...

 

CG

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_rogueknight333]

               

Might I suggest we limit the early submission bonus to something like 7 days?  Getting it in a bit early is great and encourages people not to build until the last second.  Having it incentivized to get it in a month early encourages people to make a smaller module to try to score more "points."

 

I am not certain this is really a problem if it happens, given that in the past we had more of an issue with people taking on overambitious projects that could not be properly completed in a month, rather than the reverse. I suppose I could consider front-loading the early release award a bit more, by for example giving a big bonus for being early at all, and giving decreasing rewards for each day before the deadline, so as to create a diminishing returns effect. Note that the early bonus is also dependent on releasing a reasonably polished product, i.e., it is for a rush job that does not look too much like a rush job. If someone is actually able to produce such a thing I do not see why they should not.

 

Also, in this case, 20 extra points would be the maximum for additional themes, right?  Warrior class, one or less haks, and either Plague or Blast from Past.

 

Actually no. As currently set up, the maximum would be 30 points, for a Warrior class mod, with no more than one hak, whose storyline somehow combines elements from the "plague" theme and from one or more of the "Blast from the past" themes.

 

...the proposed point system...could be made more friendly. Makers do modules for fun and give their time and skills free to the community, and sanctions with negative points are not cool, even for late botched work..

 

 

My thinking was that subtracting a few points was a lot more friendly than, for example, just disqualifying a submission altogether. I suppose if people think it a good idea I could revise the system to make it less harsh, by, for example, giving a smaller initial reward for a module submission and substantial bonuses for each rule observed, rather than penalties for rules violated.

 

For now, I have simply edited the announcement with a warning that the point system should be considered provisional, but I will look into producing a revised system based on these suggestions, and any others people care to make.

 

...We could also have a symbolic prizes or medals system (like the old Vault) and make some graphic badges for it...

 

Certainly something to think about. One thing we might set up at some point is a "Best of the ABC" contest (or something like that) for people to vote on. I am inclined to think that should wait until we have a larger pool of candidates than is currently available, however.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MagicalMaster]

               

I am not certain this is really a problem if it happens, given that in the past we had more of an issue with people taking on overambitious projects that could not be properly completed in a month, rather than the reverse. I suppose I could consider front-loading the early release award a bit more, by for example giving a big bonus for being early at all, and giving decreasing rewards for each day before the deadline, so as to create a diminishing returns effect. Note that the early bonus is also dependent on releasing a reasonably polished product, i.e., it is for a rush job that does not look too much like a rush job. If someone is actually able to produce such a thing I do not see why they should not.

 

My point is that if we're giving two months to complete the module (theoretically one to build, one to polish) then we shouldn't be encourage people to have it built AND polished at the end of the first month.  We are effectively giving a penalty of -2 points per day after the first month -- which is NOT the intent, right?  I don't think people should feel penalized for using the two-month cycle as intended.

 

Actually no. As currently set up, the maximum would be 30 points, for a Warrior class mod, with no more than one hak, whose storyline somehow combines elements from the "plague" theme and from one or more of the "Blast from the past" themes.

 

Are we sure we want to allow overlap on the storyline themes?  Imagine if we had gotten All at Sea/Into the Abyss.  Sure, you could come up with some really twisted excuse maybe but the whole idea of "Go to the Abyss" and "Go to watery islands" have very little overlap.  If someone really wants to try to include both, more power to them, but I don't think we should be actively encouraging it.  I would suggest we only count one of the storyline themes, point-wise.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_rogueknight333]

               

My point is that if we're giving two months to complete the module (theoretically one to build, one to polish) then we shouldn't be encourage people to have it built AND polished at the end of the first month... I don't think people should feel penalized for using the two-month cycle as intended.

 

I suspect most people who try to have a module built and polished in just one month will fail, and end up using the second month exactly as intended: fixing up and putting the finishing touches on a project that already exists in a "rough draft" form. Alternatively, if it turns out a lot of people actually can produce a high-quality project in just a single month it would be good to know that: helpful for planning the times to allow in future cycles. In an earlier post you yourself indicated you might prefer a one-month challenge. This way you, and anyone else who feels the same, has a reason to actually treat the limit as a single month, if desired.

 

Are we sure we want to allow overlap on the storyline themes?  Imagine if we had gotten All at Sea/Into the Abyss.  Sure, you could come up with some really twisted excuse maybe but the whole idea of "Go to the Abyss" and "Go to watery islands" have very little overlap.  If someone really wants to try to include both, more power to them, but I don't think we should be actively encouraging it...

 

Yes, I could see this creating an incentive to design some really weird, convoluted plot in an attempt to combine themes that really do not belong together. An occasional module like that might be fun, but I am not sure I would want a steady diet of them.

 

Anyway, here's a suggested revision of the point system, that emphasizes rewards for getting things right more than penalties for getting them wrong, and provides less extreme incentives for early submissions and theme combinations:

 

+25 for submitting a module

+10 for using at least one theme

+20 for using at least one theme from each list

+5 additional bonus for using any additional theme(s)

+20 for respecting the custom content restrictions

+20 for not being late

+15 for being early

+1 per day additional bonus for being early

+15 for a submission with no game-breaking bugs (possibly we could have additional bonuses for a generally well-polished module, although that might involve us in making some more subjective and potentially controversial judgments).

-1 per day for being late

-1 per MB for exceeding CC restrictions

-5 for a submission that is seriously buggy

 

Thoughts?

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_simuseb]

               

 

I suspect most people who try to have a module built and polished in just one month will fail, and end up using the second month exactly as intended: fixing up and putting the finishing touches on a project that already exists in a "rough draft" form. Alternatively, if it turns out a lot of people actually can produce a high-quality project in just a single month it would be good to know that: helpful for planning the times to allow in future cycles. In an earlier post you yourself indicated you might prefer a one-month challenge. This way you, and anyone else who feels the same, has a reason to actually treat the limit as a single month, if desired.

 

 

Yes, I could see this creating an incentive to design some really weird, convoluted plot in an attempt to combine themes that really do not belong together. An occasional module like that might be fun, but I am not sure I would want a steady diet of them.

 

Anyway, here's a suggested revision of the point system, that emphasizes rewards for getting things right more than penalties for getting them wrong, and provides less extreme incentives for early submissions and theme combinations:

 

+25 for submitting a module

+10 for using at least one theme

+20 for using at least one theme from each list

+5 additional bonus for using any additional theme(s)

+20 for respecting the custom content restrictions

+20 for not being late

+15 for being early

+1 per day additional bonus for being early

+15 for a submission with no game-breaking bugs (possibly we could have additional bonuses for a generally well-polished module, although that might involve us in making some more subjective and potentially controversial judgments).

-1 per day for being late

-1 per MB for exceeding CC restrictions

-5 for a submission that is seriously buggy

 

Thoughts?

 

 

That is still encouraging people to use as many themes as possible. I mean, if i used one theme from each list, that would be 35 points right off the bat, right? Then I include the other 6 themes in the list, that would essentially give me 30 more points. That's almost double it! 

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_henesua]

               I think the points are an interesting idea, and I'll be watching to see how that plays out.

However the main thing for me in judging a module is how much I enjoy it.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MagicalMaster]

               

That is still encouraging people to use as many themes as possible. I mean, if i used one theme from each list, that would be 35 points right off the bat, right? Then I include the other 6 themes in the list, that would essentially give me 30 more points. That's almost double it! 

 

There's a maximum of four themes.  However, it still encourages combining "Into the Abyss" with "Island Adventures."  Rogueknight, I'd suggest just giving a +10 bonus for each technical theme and a +10 bonus for using EITHER story theme -- so maximum of 30 points.  I'd also suggest we up the base submission reward from 25 to 100.  Yes, there's technically no difference between scoring 30 when someone else scores 60 compared to scoring 120 when someone else scores 150 but it feels better from the lower score's point of view.

 

I suspect most people who try to have a module built and polished in just one month will fail, and end up using the second month exactly as intended: fixing up and putting the finishing touches on a project that already exists in a "rough draft" form. Alternatively, if it turns out a lot of people actually can produce a high-quality project in just a single month it would be good to know that: helpful for planning the times to allow in future cycles. In an earlier post you yourself indicated you might prefer a one-month challenge. This way you, and anyone else who feels the same, has a reason to actually treat the limit as a single month, if desired.

+1 per day additional bonus for being early

-5 for a submission that is seriously buggy

 

If that's your suspicion, then why would we want to encourage people to try exactly that?

 

On top of that, with that scoring system, you're better off submitting a week early with serious bugs -- you'll still wind up 2 points ahead.

 

I realize that the points don't ultimately matter -- but I also don't think we should structure them in a way that encourages behavior that we don't want to actually happen, if that makes sense.  For the first (renewed) ABC, at least, why don't we do something simpler?

 

+10 points for being at least a week early

-10 points for being seriously buggy

-1 point per day late

 

Put that all together and we would get...

 

+100 for submitting a module

+10 for each technical theme

+10 for using at least one storyline theme

+20 for respecting the custom content restrictions

+20 for not being late

+10 for being at least a week early

-1 per day for being late

-1 per MB for exceeding CC restrictions

-10 for a submission that is seriously buggy

+15 for a submission with no game-breaking bugs (possibly we could have additional bonuses for a generally well-polished module, although that might involve us in making some more subjective and potentially controversial judgments).

 

Does any of that raise concerns for you?  You're still encouraged to finish early but it's a smaller deal and you're still given theoretically three weeks to polish (as opposed to four).

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_rogueknight333]

               

I think the points are an interesting idea, and I'll be watching to see how that plays out.


However the main thing for me in judging a module is how much I enjoy it.

 

The idea was to to provide something like your distinction between "Completion Prizes" and "Honorable Mentions" that had more gradations and thus more flexibility. Hopefully the main concern for participants as well will also be making an enjoyable module, and they will not be overly concerned about precisely how many points they are getting.

 

On the chance someone does end up taking the system with more seriousness than it perhaps deserves, let us see if we can come up with something most people will find reasonable...

 

 

There's a maximum of four themes.  However, it still encourages combining "Into the Abyss" with "Island Adventures"...  

 

I realize it was not clear from the way I wrote it, but I intended that to be +5 (max) for any number of additional themes used beyond the one from each list that is recommended as the norm, not +5 per additional theme. Thus it would be fairly trivial and not much of an incentive. I also do not see a problem with (slightly) encouraging the occasional weird, convoluted plot, if someone wants to give something like that a shot (and of course in a given cycle it is also possible that one would end up with two story themes that actually did mesh quite well).

 

... I'd also suggest we up the base submission reward from 25 to 100.  Yes, there's technically no difference between scoring 30 when someone else scores 60 compared to scoring 120 when someone else scores 150 but it feels better from the lower score's point of view.

 

A good idea, I think.

 

If that's your suspicion, then why would we want to encourage people to try exactly that?

 

On top of that, with that scoring system, you're better off submitting a week early with serious bugs -- you'll still wind up 2 points ahead.

 

 

 The idea is to encourage people to plan projects they think can be completed in less than the maximum allowed time, so they will have a margin for error if it ends up being "behind schedule and over budget," as so many projects do. And though I did not explicitly mention it on my latest list, I was assuming that the cancellation of points for being early if the early module has serious bugs would still apply. If you plan for a one-month project, you can either 1) succeed and finish early (not much of a problem so far as I can see) or 2) fall behind schedule (also not a problem, you still have another month to catch up) - two acceptable outcomes. Whereas if you plan a two-month project, only one of those possible outcomes ends well.

 

Anyway, here is the 2nd suggested revised list (theme & earliness related bonuses are relatively even smaller, given the larger total # of points, and thus a still less significant incentive):

 

+100 for submitting a module

+15 for using at least one story theme

+15 for using at least one technical theme

+5 (max, not per) for using 3 or more themes

+20 for submitting on time

+20 for respecting CC restrictions

+20 for a submission without game-breaking bugs

+10 for submitting early

+1 per day before deadline for an early submission

-(15+early bonus, if any) for seriously buggy submission

-1 per day for being late

-1 per MB for exceeding CC restrictions

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MagicalMaster]

               

I realize it was not clear from the way I wrote it, but I intended that to be +5 (max) for any number of additional themes used beyond the one from each list that is recommended as the norm, not +5 per additional theme

 

So just to make sure we're all on the same page, what is the maximum theme score in this scenario?  Looks like 35.

 

The idea is to encourage people to plan projects they think can be completed in less than the maximum allowed time, so they will have a margin for error if it ends up being "behind schedule and over budget," as so many projects do.

 

I get that.  But right now you're imposing a PENALTY for not finishing in a month and on a per day basis.  You could rephrase it as

 

+10 points for getting it in within a month of the one month deadline passing

-1 per day over the one month deadline

- (15 + days before beginning of second month) points for a seriously buggy submission

 

Do you see what I'm saying?  It effectively makes the deadline one month rather than two and anything past one month is penalized point wise -- because you start losing possible points past that part.  And because each day after the one month part costs an extra point, my fear is that builders will feel obliged to submit it as soon as possible (even if there's some bugs remaining and three weeks prior to the "official" deadline) because they're losing points.

 

What precisely about docking a point per day after one month appeals to you?  It just seems that's going to stress people and make them feel rushed because every day costs another point.

 

On the flip side, something less gradient like "10 points for getting it in at least a week early" (or two weeks early or whatever) still offers an incentive to accomplish your stated goal but if you fall short of that deadline you don't feel a pressure to get it in as soon as possible after that -- you have another one or two weeks to finish.  It's not a constant pressure.

 

Again, I'm not questioning your goal, I'm worried that the given method is going to lead to extra stress and perverse incentives.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_rogueknight333]

               

So just to make sure we're all on the same page, what is the maximum theme score in this scenario?  Looks like 35.

 

 Correct, 35 would be the maximum.

 

But right now you're imposing a PENALTY for not finishing in a month and on a per day basis...It effectively makes the deadline one month rather than two and anything past one month is penalized point wise -- because you start losing possible points past that part...

 

What precisely about docking a point per day after one month appeals to you?

 

I thought I had already explained what I saw as the advantages of doing something like this: it gives people an incentive to plan to use less time than the maximum, so they have a margin for error if it ends up requiring more time than anticipated (as is likely). Secondarily, anyone who does not need the full time, and does not really want to devote two whole months has more reason to employ an effective time limit more appropriate for them. I do see what you are saying about it being an effective penalty for using the full time, and that not being what we want (I was assuming no one would care about this so much as to obsess over every lost point, but perhaps someone will). Not convinced it makes a big difference one way or the other, but perhaps we could set up a scheme like the following (exact numbers subject to tweaking):

 

+100 for submitting a module

+10 for using at least one theme

+15 for using at least one theme from each list

+5 (max, not per) for using 3 or more themes (so 30 max for theme related bonuses)

+25 for submitting on time

+25 for respecting CC restrictions

+25 for a submission free of game-breaking bugs

+10+(1 per day before deadline up to a maximum of 10) for an early submission (so a maximum of 20 for early submission)

-(15+early bonus, if any) for a seriously buggy submission

-1 per day for being late

-1 per MB for exceeding CC restrictions

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MagicalMaster]

               

I thought I had already explained what I saw as the advantages of doing something like this: it gives people an incentive to plan to use less time than the maximum, so they have a margin for error if it ends up requiring more time than anticipated (as is likely).

 

Sorry, I should have been clearer.  Why day by day penalties compared to thresholds (like weekly)?  Seems weekly is easier on people since if you miss it you don't feel pressured to get it in the next day, you have another week -- but you're still encouraged to try to do it in the first place.

 

Regardless, maximum of 10 days helps significantly in my opinion.  I could quibble over some other things but they're not really important and I'm trying to avoid that.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_rogueknight333]

               

Sorry, I should have been clearer.  Why day by day penalties compared to thresholds (like weekly)?  Seems weekly is easier on people since if you miss it you don't feel pressured to get it in the next day, you have another week -- but you're still encouraged to try to do it in the first place.

 

The advantage would be that it makes any degree of earliness meaningful, but I am actually not deeply committed to doing it that way. If it appeared I was stubbornly devoted to it, that was probably because I had got the impression (replying somewhat in haste) that the objections to my earlier points list were based on misunderstandings of it (like ignoring the cancellation of early points for a buggy submission) and thus it did not seem like significant changes were called for.

 

If no one raises any significant objections to the latest list of point rewards, I think I will go with it (perhaps with slight tweaks), and edit the official announcement post to incorporate it in a couple days or so.