![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
symbioidljSo, I think I've figured out a bit more on the scoring concept, along with a potential "lose" situation.
1) To advance to the next level, you have to get 6*level_number connections. Combine this with the increase in difficulty by adding colors, and you might get some interesting possibilities. Then I have to figure out how to make sure I have space for someone to get 36 connections
2) To encourage the concept of hexagonal space saving, I figure I can divide the total score by the number of pieces played.
If you have 3 pieces, all played by 3 seconds, that's 9, and then if you stack them, connecting them, on top of one another, that's 2 connections. so 9*2 is 18, divide by 3, you get 6.
Now, if you tile them so the adjacent tiles form a "triangle" and it forms 3 connections (one piece matches 2 others, instead of merely one adjacent piece), that's 9*3 = 27/3 = 9. A 50% increase in score. This can add up quite nicely. Encouraging the efficient use of space that forms the key idea behind the game.
Thoughts?
1) To advance to the next level, you have to get 6*level_number connections. Combine this with the increase in difficulty by adding colors, and you might get some interesting possibilities. Then I have to figure out how to make sure I have space for someone to get 36 connections
2) To encourage the concept of hexagonal space saving, I figure I can divide the total score by the number of pieces played.
If you have 3 pieces, all played by 3 seconds, that's 9, and then if you stack them, connecting them, on top of one another, that's 2 connections. so 9*2 is 18, divide by 3, you get 6.
Now, if you tile them so the adjacent tiles form a "triangle" and it forms 3 connections (one piece matches 2 others, instead of merely one adjacent piece), that's 9*3 = 27/3 = 9. A 50% increase in score. This can add up quite nicely. Encouraging the efficient use of space that forms the key idea behind the game.
Thoughts?
