Standardizing Difficulties

Community Made Guides
1

So we have a difficulty system. It is very bad since it is based on opinions currently, and not strict requirements. This post will try to solve that. You’ll notice that this is a wip since we’ll get better and better solutions for this.

So we have our good old 10-point rating system. This is good, but let’s try to standardize this.

1 - Anybody with a brain can do this.
2 - Requires some knowledge of GKC DEVICES to use
3 - Requires extensive knowledge of GKC to use
4 - Starts to bring in somewhat technical wires.
5 - Moderate intensity of both wires or channels.
6 - Starts to bring in concepts like AUO, Pseudo-Teams, and Pseudo-Properties
7 - Moderate use of concepts
8 - Customizing the system is very difficult to do correctly
9 - The system is very difficult to replicate, with a mass of wires and channels
10 - Replication is Gimpossible

Now, that system’s flaw is that it uses specific scenarios. Here is the rubric system:

Channel category: 0-1.5 points
Wire category: 0-1 point
Concept Category: 0-4.5 points
Device Knowledge Category: 0-2 points
Replication Category: .5 points
Customization Category: .5 points

Note: These category weights can be tweaked.

Now here is the vaguest system in here. This system uses how many days after starting to use GKC a mapmaker can do this. This is pretty vague, so it gets 2 sentences.

And that’s it! Keep in mind that this can still change based on YOUR ideas!

11 Likes
2

Wait… do you think you can make this a wiki post in <30 days?

3

I can’t make a wiki.

1 Like
4

Yes you can. Good. You get regular in 24 days and you therefore can make it a wiki post.

2 Likes
5

I don’t know. What are the requirements for regular?

1 Like
6

Ok.

1 Like
7

New exit poll(s) format:

Points for “Channel Category” (out of 15)?
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
0 voters
Points for “Wire Category” (out of 10)?
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
0 voters
Points for “Concept Category” (out of 45)?
  • 0
  • 3
  • 6
  • 9
  • 12
  • 15
  • 18
  • 21
  • 24
  • 27
  • 30
  • 33
  • 36
  • 39
  • 42
  • 45
0 voters
Points for “Device Knowledge Category” (out of 20)?
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
0 voters
Points for “Replication Category” (out of 5)?
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
0 voters
Points for “Customization Category” (out of 5)?
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
0 voters
8

i think it shouldnt be judged based on how easy it is to replicate it because a good guide is concise and clear about how to replicate it, because if smth was repetitive or wasn’t clear at all, itd get a higher rating (unfair). do agree though that some of the infrastructure here needs to be changed (slowly)

2 Likes
9

Once again- in my opinion difficulty is decided by how much the reader has to understand and learn to follow the guide.

2 Likes
10

What difficulty would a guide be that I barely get, even though I was the one who made it?

11

(here we go again, “i aint readin all that :skull:”)
yeah, this system might not really work since difficulty is broad, and controversial, so we can’t really have specific numbers to define the difficulties, it might also overwhelm new users too. i dont really think the old cryptoraider emoji system should be changed in terms of visuals, but we could define it more so we understand why something is rated that way. i feel like if we continue having the difficulties the way they are, we should understand that its based on the learning curve (NOT A BAD THING AT ALL /GEN) and have our guides better reflect that. most people don’t do that currently because the focus is more on the general users of this forum which means guides are more catered to complex(er) thinking.

like

– beginners learning curve –

:green_square: - no advanced knowledge is needed, and concepts are introduced gently. guides are fundamental and straightforward. mostly uses basic devices (or devices become more complex over time but for now, introduce them simply), little wiring, and no intricate concepts.
:yellow_square: - Introduce a few more devices or concepts but remain accessible to most ppl. more wiring, may introduce the basics of a concept.

– more frequent, but still relatively new learning curve –

:orange_square: - more involved steps, advanced devices (or learning how devices can become more complex). learning deeper concepts or going more into detail of how these concepts become deeper, multiple devices and wires (or channels) as the standard.
:red_square: - may challenge your thinking of gimkit creative for intermediate users, the standard for long-term users, block coding, how devices influence each other on a larger scale, and high-concept gameplay mechanics. using block code, and understanding and implementing medium~hard concepts as the standard. requires understanding of most concepts, and interactions of devices.

– long term user learning curve –

:red_square: - again.
:purple_square: - the most difficult out of all of these. proving why things work, connection with abstract concepts, exploring devices to a deeper unseen level, and creating new concepts as the standard.

this is really just how the learning curve works though and what the ppl should know when reading a guide of that difficulty, so other ppl understand the nature behind our current system and can adapt their guides to it

problems? red is repeated, this is like a school math curriculum (not a big problem though), assumes the knowledge gradient, could possibly lead to isolated parts of the forums (unlikely because of the amount of people who want to provide help), everyone learns differently (possible problem but this just means they climb up the ladder quicker), could become outdated if way more discoveries are made, i was very vague abt what i mean according to time like “beginners”, “the standard for long term users”, if someone really wanted to, they could clear that up, misunderstandings due to mislabeling in guides.

sure, its a little bit flawed, but i think this is the best we’ve got for now, and unless someone made a fully fledged research paper about a different system and how it benefits over others according to "the abductive psychology of all the users on here! :nerd_face: " and other logic, then yeah, we can change it, but we should just keep it as this for now.

4 Likes
12

okay goodbye forever everyone

13

If you can’t understand a guide you wrote, then the guide wasn’t written well enough.

14

What if I barely understand the concept?

15

Idk what concepts are in ____land. I looked through it and just saw instructions to be followed.

16

I’m not talking about _____Land.

I made this overly complicated system to prevent my racing game from breaking apart if someone gets lapped at 10 PM.

I found a way better method, and still don’t understand the first one.

17

@getrithekd, I suggest adding the color of the difficulty and adding 0/10 and 11/10. Nice wip!

18

It was mainly removed because in theory- as @Blackhole927 says- no guide is worth 11/10.

19

Ok, that makes sense.

20

0/10 is really just useless sense that just means that the guide has no difficulty and maybe isn’t even considered a guide!

2 Likes