New feature - input needed!

[admin2]

Hi folks -

A common request for cryptograms.org is to make it so that a user can't use the same letter twice on the same puzzle. Right now the system will allow you to make A into T and B into T, and won't show you there's an error. Some find this annoying because the error often won't become apparent until they hit submit.

I'm working on two fixes for this, and would like your input on which you feel is most beneficial (and least intrusive) for gameplay. You can try out the two options via the urls given below, but note that these urls are STILL TIED INTO COMPETITION. If you want to test them out and are worried the change in gameplay may affect your solve times, be sure to log out first before trying any of these test urls.

First option: If a letter is re-used, it is placed into the new box(es) and automatically removed from all previous placements. (If A was already T, and you mark B as now also being T, all A's will revert to blanks.) No warning or error message acknowledges the change.

Test this at: http://www.cryptograms.org/play8.php

Second option: If a letter is re-used, all previous placements of that same letter are shaded in pink to give visual indication of the double-usage. But both old and new placements retain the same letter - the user must make a decision to remove one or the other manually.

Test this at: http://www.cryptograms.org/play9.php

I'm including a poll on this thread to allow you to vote for your preferred method - either "Auto Replacement" (1st option), "Visual Indication" (2nd option) or "Leave it the Heck Alone" (if you prefer things as they are).

Thanks for your input!

Stephen

[pootie49]

Hi

I prefer to leave things as they were.

However, the first change is less intrusive to game play, I find.

The second one would be excellent for new players.

[riceballattack]

Visual replacement!

Hey,

There are so many times I screw up a puzzle because I put in a letter that's already there, and don't notice (especially on the really long puzzles).

ANYTHING that's an indication that a letter is already there is better than nothing! No matter what puzzle site - sudoku, other cryptogram sites, dropquotes, etc - if you can't put in a letter or a number because it already exists, it doesn't let you. It's a basic user experience piece that's missing, and seriously detracts, from the cryptogram experience.

Especially for beginners, this will really help to make the puzzles more user friendly.

I'm choosing highlighting the previous letter in pink, because if letters are going to be removed, I want to be able to easily see where the letter is being removed from so I can correct the word that they were in! (Because if one letter in a word is wrong, chances are high other letters in the word are incorrect as well). For instance, if I have "the" and then end up using an "h" somewhere else, then I'll end up with t-e. Obviously, that word is now not "the" so another letter in it must be wrong. But what if I don't notice this right away, and later in the puzzle I have "b - t"? I'll put a "u" there, making that word "but". And then maybe I'll have "y - u", so I'll make that "you". And so on - until soon the whole puzzle is completely wrong and confusing. If the "h" in "the" were highlighted to begin with, then I'd notice "the" is wrong, change the "t", and then correctly get "bar" (instead of but) and "yet" (instead of "you"). And so on and so forth.

For sheer user-friendliness and ease of use, I'm choosing the highlighting method.

Thanks!!

[jimdgar]

I'm with Pootie on this one; leave things as they are. Making the game easier for newcomers is admirable, but it's already much easier than pen-and-paper cryptos due to auto-completion, letter counts, etc. Making a fundamental change like this breaks continuity with all the record times posted in the past.

-jimdgar

[dpm39560]

Give Us The Option

For registered users, it seems it would be a fairly easy programming matter to allow each user to have a set of PLAY OPTIONS that they can change. E.G., "Show duplicates? (Y/N)" and "Eliminate Previous Entry when Duplicated?" and "Don't Show Duplicates" (radio button to select one of the three). Since you've already done the programming to do each method, all you need to do now is to let each user pick which to use. Presto, no more "Which way to go?" dilemmas.

Another option could be "Show On-Screen Timer?" Etc.

dpm39560 in MS

[imported_Lurker]

I'm voting for the auto-replace because it's faster than scrolling down to hit the reset button. A lot of the time, I start with 3-letter words and just randomly type whatever words look like they work. Between that and typos, I often have to go back and clear words. This way, I could change my mind as I go along.

The only thing I don't like about the highlighting is that it cancels the auto-advance until you fix the problem. Other than that, it is certainly a useful option.

[Lily H]

I agree with Pootie and Jimdgar. I think we should just leave it the way it is. Some players may be complaining because their average times are high, but my advice is practice, practice, practice. When I first started playing three years ago, my average time was probably over 100 seconds, and now it is in the high 40s. I know I will never beat the fast players, but I'm content to keep my solve rate at 100%. I was thrilled to finally make it into the top 20 in speed, but I earned that medal. It would be taking the challenge out of the game if you make all these changes just so people can decrease their solve times. Sure it is frustrating to get stuck, but that's the nature of the game. Some of the puzzles you get right away, and some take a really long time. Plus if you change the options, the new stats will no longer be comparable to the existing stats.

[fishbum]

I opt for leaving things the way they are. I think the visual, with letters of choice, give the best view. If I see a combination that does not work I delete the offending letter. I have programed a mouse button to 'delete' to clear up the picture.

I have noticed that the "unused" letter list is often incorrect using this method.

[admin2]

Thanks for your input everyone!

At this point I'm leaning towards making the default behavior option #1 - and allowing a user-option setting to either enable or disable automatic duplicate removal, for those who like the site exactly the way it is. Hopefully that will address most people's concerns.

Cheers!

Stephen

[fishbum]

While I have your attention I would like to mention that apparently some folks feel that they should rate each category. I suspect that is why there seems to be many one star ratings.
Perhaps a note suggesting that one need only rate applicable items.

[bansaisequoia]

What are you worried about

I voted for the automatic replacement option. I tried both options and solved a few hundred puzzles with each, but I found it really doesn't make a difference to me. In fact, after solving a few hundred puzzles, I never saw the pink highlighted letters occur even once. Most people seem to be voting for the "Leave it the heck alone" option. I say, why should we be worried? Let's give all newcomers to the site every advantage that will help them to solve even faster. Everyone who has voted would have to admit that they have become much faster solvers after using the site for a while. If we look back at the monthly speed records, it's obvious we've all become much faster. I would encourage Stephen to introduce one of the two, just to make this an even more attractive, trafficked website. Ultimately, don't you want to have more solvers, Stephen? Two years ago, I asked the site administrator of the American Crossword Puzzle Tournament website if he would add a link to cryptograms.org. This site's link has been posted there since. I did my little part to try to bring super-fast solvers to the site. I have always welcomed ever faster solvers, and I would like to see one of these two new facilitations implemented, just to bring the new solvers up to speed. Leave it the heck alone? Heck, no!!

[pootie49]

Site Re name perhaps?

Following that line of thinking Bansai, lets suggest a site rename to:
Quick Solve Cryptograms.Org.

Since when has the onus shifted from just solving these things for the love of the game to speed?
Why is how fast we solve them so darned important?
Obviously yes there is a competition for it, I do realize that, however enticing new members
by making these puzzles faster and easier to solve, just doesnt sit well with me.
Sure we all got faster. We practiced and learned and played and played.
Wouldnt it be more fitting to entice new players to the site simply by saying challenge your brain, try these out. See how many points you can get, hey, why not see if you can get a perfect solve rate?
But above all come and enjoy the game for the love of the game. For the sheer bit of
satisfaction when you work a puzzle and figure it out and get that success screen come up.
Maybe that's a too simplified ideal ...to solve and learn and watch yourself get faster.
There is satisfaction in that as well.
Alot of us by word of mouth and in our own ways, have helped to get the site more players. We just dont feel the need to let everyone know.
When did speed become the be all and end all of cryptograms.org?
If admin keeps implementing changes to make it easier and easier, those new members or potential member with 'smarts' will wander away wondering where's the challenge?
Leaving us with demon speed solvers simply trying to be the fastest.
I would think Stephen would like to see this site grow and attract members simply because its challenging and fun.
I realize we live in a new world. "I want it all and I want it now."
I prefer to work for what I get. To learn. To enjoy. As most of us did.
The new solvers will get up to speed. We all did. By working at it...not having more and more options
offered to us so we could solve faster.
Perhaps I'm being too old-fashioned...bristling at change. I dont think so. I think I just want to see the
site grow and attract intelligent people who love puzzling...not by how fast they can do it but just the pure
love of solving.

[admin2]

To be fair, I've never made (and will never make) a change to the site to make a puzzle "easier to solve".

You have to keep in mind that there is a difference between making a puzzle easier to solve (i.e. providing hints, removing more difficult puzzles from rotation, etc.), and improving the mechanics of puzzle solving (i.e. auto-removing duplicate letters, or auto-copying letters from one box into all others, or auto-shifting the cursor to the next open square, etc.). The only changes I will ever make will be always in the latter category.

All I'm trying to do is to make the mechanics of solving as intuitive and irritant-free as possible. Copying a letter from one box into all other boxes is annoying - so we've automated it. Manually moving the cursor to the next open box is annoying (and was how the site was originally set up) - so now we've automated it. Having to remove duplicate letters when you change your mind on a decryption (or make a typo) is annoying - so we're now going to automate duplicate removal.

Auto-removing duplicate letters is never going to be the difference between someone solving a puzzle and someone not solving it. It doesn't make it easier, it doesn't give a hint... it just removes a minor annoyance that may occur once in every 100 puzzles you solve. Its impact on average/record solve times is almost certainly going to be infinitesimal at best.

I understand that there are often requests made on these forums for functionality that would allow unfair advantages in solving - and you're right to point these out as improper. But to lump this change in with all those others I believe is a bit unfair.

[pootie49]

Admin

I was in no way casting aspersions on the changes that you are implementing.
I do understand the need for them. And I completely understand that in no way would you make this site unfair ...Im sorry if you inferred that from my post.

My response was a reply to Bansai's post.

My apologies if it came across as an affront to you or the work you do.
That was not my intent.

I was only trying to put forth my opinion on the whole "speed solving" issue.

(will now spend five minutes in the naughty corner)

[admin2]

No worries, pootie - in the end we all want the same thing, the best possible cryptograms site. :-)