April 2013 Time Trial - Item Fetchers

[M11k4]

Here are the levels for this month's time trial:

http://cczone.invisionzone.com/index.php?/files/file/225-ccz-tt-1304ccl/

Important! The levels were updated to version 2.0. Do not use the initial release for the competition!


Everyone knows what an item swapper level looks like, but these are not quite like that. I wanted to make some easier levels this time, but still keep the optimizing a challenge. The result is these three levels that I'm dubbing "item fetcher" puzzles, as you keep fetching free items after losing your earlier ones (as opposed to an item swapper, where you are rewarded with new items for using your old ones). I have seen this concept explored in at least the custom levels Full Houses
(#43 of geodave3.dat) and Combinations
(#32 of ajmiam-pit-or-100-tiles.ccl), but would be interested in hearing of more examples. I'll post more on the creation of this set once I start receiving submissions.

The scoring is a bit different this time, so you might want to read the specifics below, but basically if you have the fastest time you'll win. Enjoy!


EDIT:
The first versions of the levels were a bit too complex to be as fun as they could be, so two of them were updated. Make sure you have version 2.0, which includes more levels but only three for the competition. See details in posts below. (Red text in this post highlights changes during the update.)

Details:

1) Instead of looking at the combined time remaining on the three levels (Freshmen Fetcher
, Sophomore Fetcher
, Junior Fetcher
), this time we will focus on the relative placement of entrants for each individual level. The full method I have in mind is a bit complicated, as it takes into account all sorts of ties, but the idea is that first place on a level is worth a little over twice that of second place, which in turn is worth more than two third place finishes on a level and so on. The winner will thus be someone who has the best time on at least on of the levels, and if someone has the best time on two levels (not tied), it won't matter what time they scored on the third level. Once the winner is decided, the remaining players will be examined as if they were the only entrants and the winner out of this group will come second overall, and so on until everyone's placement is settled. If there are unforeseen problems with this method, I will settle it as fairly as I can.

2) You may enter in either Lynx or MS, with the latter being the primary rules, meaning that any Lynx solution times that exceed the best MS solution time will be considered equal to that MS time, but otherwise all the times will be compared together in one category. There may be a tie in the overall score.

3) Please send your solutions (either the tws file or avis) to CCZoneNextLevel at gmail dot com, or to my own email valeosote at hotmail dot com. Do not post your solutions or solution times or share them with others. All times will be published at the same time, and the quickest solutions will eventually be released. I will strive to respond to your message by a confirmation that your score has been recorded.

4) The levels shouldn't be too hard to solve. Don't be afraid to send in your solutions even if you sense they aren't perfect, and simple casual solutions are also appreciated. You may enter if you solve at least one of the levels, but solving more will obviously place higher. The levels have time limits of 120, 240, and 240, and you most likely can complete each one on your first try if you are careful. (The original versions had time limits of 120, 360, and 360 seconds
, which might not have been enough to guarantee that you could solve them all on your first attempts, but competitive runs should still have left over half of that time unused.)

5) This is part of the 2013 season of the Chip Cup. Winner will be awarded 15 points, second place 12, third 10 points, and so on. If you win a competition here for the first time, you receive the "You're Winner!" award. All participants who haven't participated in a time trial earlier receive the "Run, Chip, Run" award. If your name is James, I will write you a short poem in my CC blog.

6) Submission deadline is at the end of the month. During the last week of April, I will announce a precise cut-off time that will be at the start of May, after which no more submissions will be accepted, and judge the competition soon after that. To avoid losing on time (it is a time trial after all), get your solutions in early rather than later! You can send in improvements while the competitions is running, so there is no downside to sending in something you know might not be your best effort if you had forever to work on it. This is subject to change due to the update on the levels. Specifics to follow in good time.


7) I reserve the right to update the levels within the first week of release. If you find any odd things about the levels, please give me a nudge. I will only apply changes that make the competition better, which means I might fix a ridiculous bust or some other aspect that is obviously meant to work in some other fashion. If any updates are made, I will alert you in this thread. However, no updates will be made after April 11th in any case. (See? I knew I'd need this rule some day.)


Report any problems or ask any questions here! Have fun!

-Miika

[jblewis]

Good gravy, these look even more insane to optimize than the ones from last month! Does the scoring work such that we'll get something like Chip Cup points for each level depending on our placement, and the final scores will involve totaling those up?

[M11k4]

Yeah, I hear what you're saying, J.B. These levels are not intuitively optimizable and require quite a bit of work. I intended them to be easier than they currently are.

Taking into account that the survival competition this month also has three levels, we should simplify this a bit. One option would be if we only used one of these levels this month, and saved two of them for later, like maybe next month's levels? Or used two now and added some easier ones into the mix for next month? What would you guys prefer?

Another option would be for me to rework the two last levels and make them simpler, removing half the keys in Sophomore Fetcher
, and some of the options in Junior Fetcher
. I think the first level is fine. The levels still wouldn't be an absolute joy to work on, but at least somewhat more manageable.

Or we could change the scoring such that scores within some amount of seconds of each other would be considered tied, allowing for more relaxed routes. Normally we consider scores within the same second as equal, but this window could be enlarged, maybe keeping it at one second on the first level, five seconds on the second, and ten seconds on the third.

I'll expand on the points system once we sort this out first. For that I really need you guys to weigh in on how you'd like me to change this competition and make it better.

-Miika

[random 8]

I vote to

use two now and add some easier ones into the mix for next month

[jblewis]

Another option would be for me to rework the two last levels and make them simpler, removing half the keys in Sophomore Fetcher
, and some of the options in Junior Fetcher
. I think the first level is fine. The levels still wouldn't be an absolute joy to work on, but at least somewhat more manageable.

This would be my vote.

I guess my issue with these levels - particularly the latter two - is that optimization for them is pretty much all about trial and error. Last month's TT levels, as well as most of the others, required some amount of logic in determining what was fastest and what wasn't. On Hexominos, for example, tracing certain portions of the route that can be deduced as optimal and then piecing together those portions to form a fast final product both involve logic, even if there's some experimentation involved. On Nested Replay, optimizing is about trial and error, but the endpoint of the experimentation is certain, as you explained the objectives yourself: finding which three rooms in each quadrant were the fastest, and from that, which three quadrants were the fastest. And along the way, secondary objectives could come into play, such as which differences between collecting one, two, and three keys in each room were worth exploiting. But even those were uncomplicated. The challenge was in making sure that you had the definitively fastest route for each room. Here, though, barring a computer program, you'd almost need to create a fairly lengthy decision tree just to cover every possibility to absolutely ensure that your route is optimal, not unlike Tool Box or especially Which One Next? It's just not as fun.

[James]

Another option would be for me to rework the two last levels and make them simpler, removing half the keys in Sophomore Fetcher
, and some of the options in Junior Fetcher
. I think the first level is fine. The levels still wouldn't be an absolute joy to work on, but at least somewhat more manageable.

I like this option. The "larger scoring window" idea is workable but I'd rather avoid that if possible.

[M11k4]

I also feel simplifying the levels will make the most sense. I will post an update within a day or so.

Sorry for the inconvenience to everyone. Let's hope pieguy isn't awake and we'll still get to see the optimal routes for the original levels from him

[M11k4]

Ok guys, I've posted an update of the levels. Check them out. The first level is unchanged. The second one has half the amount of chips. The third level has much less elements to worry about. I kept the original versions of the two latter levels in the set for reference, but not for use in the competition. If these are the final versions, should I extend the deadline to account for this hassle?

I worked over an hour on optimizing each of the new versions of Sophomore Fetcher
and Junior Fetcher
, so I should have a better grasp of what kinds of results I can expect on those levels than earlier. I also worked on optimizing the original versions after this and they weren't quite as daunting as they might have seemed at first glance, but I admit that squeezing the absolute best route out of them would be a tremendous task. Nevertheless, I think the new versions are better for the competition, and should prove more interesting than the originals. It's not simple to find the fine line between too easy to optimize and way too complex, while still being an otherwise interesting TT level.

Now I'm going to sleep and I expect constructive feedback upon waking again

[jblewis]

Miika, you previous stated that you'd set a deadline for this competition by the end of April. Do you have a general idea of when you'd like to set the cutoff date? I've got fairly optimized solutions, but I'm still working on the last level.

[M11k4]

I apologize for dropping out of the loop for the end of April. Let's set the deadline at the end of the week, shall we? So I'll judge the entries four days from now, on Monday morning at about 10 (GMT+2, which is about midnight for most of you on Sunday). I'll try to figure out what to do with the March create results by then too. Anything else I'm behind on?

EDIT: yes, I have to start the new TT of course!