We would likely lessen the rules on methodology in this case, maybe only disallowing unassisted infinite loops and ACE. The proposed change to the rule here would just be to allow "maximum score" as a branch independently of full completion. Should we allow "maximum score" as a standard branch universally?Ĭurrently, we allow it as a form of full completion, but this does not catch 100% of cases, which is a bit ironic for full completion, really. There's two questions to ask regarding this run and the state of this category in general.ġ. Now if we are to make the branch "maximum display score" instead, then it would make more sense to game over at 65534.Īlright, let's get some discussion in here. Given this knowledge, its possible to get a much higher internal score, which can be kept track of with a lua script. The fact that the game knows that it is higher than the placeholder scores is further evidence that the game atleast internally keeps track of the score properly. The 4 byte address at the location 09E0 shows the correct score. However, from a little research, it seems like only the "display score" is overflown at this point. The author claims that the score overflows to 0 when 65536 is reached, so they have basically planned out the game over to happen at this exact value. The strategy used is not different from the published run, so it's also established to be fine especially given there is not much room for manipulation in this port. Waitaminute! This leads to a problem: having two of the same highest tiles doesn’t mean you are 100% of the way to a new high tile! Most of the work is done, though, so let’s say that getting two of the same tile is 90% of the work, meaning it should work out to 90% instead of 100%. The progress toward getting a new high tile is the second highest tile divided by the current highest tile. So let’s use the second highest tile to do that.
If we calculate the progress towards a new high tile and add it to 10, we can divide our new number by 12 to get a more accurate score. When we factor in the remaining tiles, the score should be in between 10/12 and 11/12. So, with a high tile of 10, the score should be at least 10/12 (83.33%). One full circle happens when you have made it to the 12th tile. Or, listed in a numeric value from counting around the circle of fifths, it would be: 10, 10, 8, 6, 5, 5 (Note: The game actually keeps track of the tiles as numbers like these, and translates them into the appropriate note to display on the screen). You might have the following tiles on the board: B ♭, B ♭, A ♭, F ♯, B, B. Let’s look at an example and I’ll show you how we use all the tiles to calculate a score that reflects the progress in the game. How far can you go? How do we calculate that score percentage? If your score is 100%, you’ve gotten one full circle! 200%? Two full circles! I’ve (Zach) gotten past 500% myself. To best reflect your progress in the game, the score is shown in a percentage of full circles completed.
As you play, what was once your high tile will eventually be your low tile. This also means that the score has to be calculated differently. However, in using the Circle of Fifths, the game becomes infinite, circular, and almost completely different from the original! With the tiles progressing in a circle, the game becomes mesmerizing. 2048 Infinite – The Circle of Fifths is obviously based on the popular game, 2048.
0 kommentar(er)
