Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
We don't bite newbies here... much

Re: A Proposal for Additional Levels

by grinder (Bishop)
on Oct 25, 2004 at 21:27 UTC ( #402330=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to A Proposal for Additional Levels

I wish to register a complaint!

I think this is a great idea and a Good Thing. My only regret is that even with the new scale I won't enjoy the fun of gaining a level. What about sliding the scale out to 50K so that everyone bar vroom gets the chance to rise at least one level again? Checking SioB right now says there are 49 other accounts that are over the 10K cut-off, of which only 6 could be considered inactive.

I'd also be happy to settle for being able to name your own level at a certain amount of XP. Sure, you'd still be a saint ever after and tallied as so, but at some further amount, e.g. 'saint' * 2, you'd have the privilege of being about to edit the "level" string on your home node. So rather than being a saint, you could change it to shōgun or whatever. Clever minds will put it to good use.

Anyway, ++ for the proposal, I hope it goes through in some shape or form. But I won't lose any sleep over it, mmkay?

- another intruder with the mooring of the heat of the Perl

Comment on Re: A Proposal for Additional Levels
Re^2: A Proposal for Additional Levels
by demerphq (Chancellor) on Oct 26, 2004 at 07:11 UTC

    On reflection im going to second your complaint for the same reasons. As I say elsewhere this change should affect us all (except for maybe vroom just to respect ancient tradition). Thus we need a level suitably above merlyns to start from and then go down in XP. That way even the lofty ones get at least a level above to work for. If we adopted a geometric progression for the higher levels and started at say 128k, and reduced by half each time for the about 5 levels or so all the user base would be affected. The lower levels could be ordered a little more naturally. (I should say however that IMO the top levels should all be considered to be saints. So merlyn would become some sort of uber saint, with tilly close on his heels, you and I would barely clock in as serving-deputy-assistant-under-saint's or something like that :-)


      First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
      -- Gandhi


      Here is an alternate proposal that leaves no one at the top level right now so the ladder will be reasonable for a while to come. It shoots for about 40% more XP gain required at each step (the second-to-last column).

      XP %Gain Gain %Diff Diff 25 +25 60 +140.00% +35 +40.00% +10 110 +83.33% +50 +42.86% +15 180 +63.64% +70 +40.00% +20 275 +52.78% +95 +35.71% +25 400 +45.45% +125 +31.58% +30 580 +45.00% +180 +44.00% +55 840 +44.83% +260 +44.44% +80 1200 +42.86% +360 +38.46% +140 1700 +41.67% +500 +35.14% +130 2400 +41.18% +700 +40.00% +200 3400 +41.67% +1000 +42.86% +300 4800 +41.18% +1400 +40.00% +400 6700 +39.58% +1900 +35.71% +500 9300 +38.81% +2600 +36.84% +700 13000 +39.78% +3700 +42.31% +1100 18200 +40.00% +5200 +40.54% +1500 25500 +40.11% +7300 +40.38% +2100 35700 +40.00% +10200 +39.73% +2900 50000 +40.06% +14300 +40.20% +4100

      I'd set the votes at 2 per level, 0..42. 2 extra votes per level is plenty little reward. I think going lower than that is more likely to end up with people being so conservative about casting a vote that you'll get lots of nodes with no votes. That will mean no reward for simple, run-of-the-mill contributions.

      "Inflation" of the rep of good nodes will not be reduced by reducing the number of votes. So reducing the number of votes will mean that the top-rep nodes will keep inflating as the number of users increase and the ordinary nodes will get less, widening the gap and increasing the motivation for XP whoring.

      Update: This may have the wrong number of levels. The problem with listing the borders between items in the same line with the items is that it isn't clear if you are listing the upper border or lower border. I didn't think Petruchio was proposing "level vroom" be renamed (yes, I only skimmed the text). We could name "level vroom" as "gods" which would solve the problem of the hard-coded 11s in the code and make for a fun message for top-level members.

      - tye        

        Yeah, this is pretty much what I had in mind, I think I would have ramped up a touch harder on the top three or four levels, but I wouldn't go further than mentioning the fact. Given the choice id take this grading over Petruchio's although I think his names are better than yours ;-)

        Thanks for that,


          First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
          -- Gandhi


        I'm partial to the 2nd edition rules for druid class level advancement that required a druid with enough xp to level-up to find, challenge and defeat a druid of the level he/she wished to advance to. Frankly, I'm disappointed that this system is not in use here, but then, this is perlmonks, not perldruids. I don't remember if such a system applied to monk levels, but I wouldn't be surprised.



        You said you wanted to be around when I made a mistake; well, this could be it, sweetheart.

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://402330]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others exploiting the Monastery: (15)
As of 2014-07-24 18:02 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite superfluous repetitious redundant duplicative phrase is:

    Results (163 votes), past polls