New boards added

[admin]

Just a quick post to confirm that we've added just about 10,000 new game boards to Wordtwist this week - increasing both 4x4 and 5x5 library sizes each by about 7-10%. So you may see a larger-than-normal number of boards with no existing solve data for the next few weeks.

[bwt1213]

I hope the new boards will go back into circulation soon after they are removed (because someone scored more than 600 on them). Otherwise, those new boards will melt away like snow in a blowtorch. I know I've scored well over 600 on a number of them already.

[admin]

They will be recycled, but in either case I'm likely going to get rid of the 600 point retire rule and decide retirements only by # of times played. Like you said, the new boards will likely be recycled after almost every game since so many words are playable.

[Naboka]

They will be recycled, but in either case I'm likely going to get rid of the 600 point retire rule and decide retirements only by # of times played. Like you said, the new boards will likely be recycled after almost every game since so many words are playable.

The 601 point retirement rule seems fair in 4x4.

Probably should be considerably higher in 5x5.

If it didn't exist, a player like Megaword would put the chance of setting records pretty much out of the reach of all of us. When he plays, he sets a record on every game he plays--save anomalies. You can see him playing near-600-point games of exceptional players and destroying their scores--often by more than 500 points!

He'd set the record and you'd have all following games on that board become an exercise in "why bother?"

I know that my interest in the game would shift away.

Without some limit, all high-game records would tend to funnel to one player.

[Razorflame]

I think a limit like 1,000 or 1,100 points on 5x5 would be reasonable. There aren't too many players that can hit those kinds of numbers.

[bwt1213]

They will be recycled, but in either case I'm likely going to get rid of the 600 point retire rule and decide retirements only by # of times played. Like you said, the new boards will likely be recycled after almost every game since so many words are playable.

I've already noticed that many of the new boards must have been dropped into the recycling area. The nice new boards are becoming noticeably rarer. Instead of seeing one every six to ten boards, it's now more like one in thirty or so. Perhaps recycling (and returning) would be more vigorous if the times-played-before-recycling were dropped to 30 instead of 40.

[admin]

I've already noticed that many of the new boards must have been dropped into the recycling area. The nice new boards are becoming noticeably rarer. Instead of seeing one every six to ten boards, it's now more like one in thirty or so. Perhaps recycling (and returning) would be more vigorous if the times-played-before-recycling were dropped to 30 instead of 40.

1 in every 30 or so is about right - the new boards only comprise about 5% of the total puzzle library, so 1 in 20 would be a rough average.

I've taken Razorflame's advice and bumped up the 5x5 recycle limit to 1,000 points per board. We'll see how that goes and tweak if needed.

[Naboka]

Here's an odd factor to the recycle equation.

I cause about 200 games a month to be recycled. For me there's a combined sense of pride and generosity.

It's like gifting the game back into the community. I feel like I cleaned the slate so others could have a chance at those records.

My background in science, chemistry and medicine give me an unfair linguistic advantage. Even against Megaword on small boards.

I don't particularly like seeing my record games pop up. Seeing my games linger for 30 more plays provides little satisfaction or incentive. I just want them erased.

When I first started playing, those fresh boards were a thrill. A gift. Even beginners or mid-level players could find the best/longest word that couldn't be beaten.

Recycling games involves fairness and opportunity. What is most fair? What provides more opportunities?

It also involves benefit. Who will benefit? Why? And to what degree?

A liberal recycle format seems to have a broader benefit distribution.

The problem is finding that balance between cost/benefit.

[mjzerella]

The two new ones I noticed recently have a GIANT number of words. Like over 1000. Interestingly, I tend to do worse on those than ones that have 400-500. I guess I get overwhelmed with too many options.