But there are fixes that should, in theory, be pretty easy. In theory. Thing is, I don't know if the code for Tidal Trouble is even accessible anymore. I seem to remember there being something about some fairgrounds game(s) being inaccessible because the original coder left, or something? I can Tidal Trouble a quick search in the suggestions forum but came up short on this specific issue. Whatever the case, sometimes Tidal Trouble just decides that you lose. So I'm gonna write about it because I want to.
Certain board layouts make the complete inability to win not only entirely possible, but somewhat likely. These are exceptions that can be easily fixed by being simply culled, for example one layout that has a flat layer of earth orbs close to the bottom of the screen, and a line of eight entirely unique orbs at the top (if anyone can find and screenshot that one that'd be lovely, I refreshed for awhile but was unable to find it). There are even submission guidelines against this kind of level, but a few managed to slip through the cracks anyways. However, the RNG of the game presents this inherent flaw that on almost any level, it can be impossible to win outright. It's just kind of frustrating, especially when the game has a score feature that implies that you should be able to go on infinitely with enough skill. I hereby present a few hopefully simple solutions that should, at the very least, make impossible-to-win RNG outcomes slim;
-Add a maximum number of consecutive orbs when playing. No more 10 arcane orbs in a row when you need an ice, thereby wasting precious turns.
-Move up the bottommost possible orb placement in the editor.
-Add a guideline where at least two orb types need to be accessible from the get-go. I mean, I've seen every single possible layout at this point I'm pretty sure so I don't even know if new layouts get added, but for the sake of argument again I'm just going to pretend this fairgrounds game isn't abandoned.
-Add a hard limit on how many different orb types can be put in a submitted puzzle. Either mechanically in the editor, or just as a guideline. Mechanically is what I had in mind. Maybe six or seven? Even that is a bit much but can be done in an effective way, anything more than that is probably too much no matter how you build it.
-Again, cull existing layouts and get rid of the especially egregious ones.
This entire post is massively just me spitballing. While I don't have high hopes for anything actually being changed I have had many ideas pop in my head on how this game could just be made less RNG scuffed and figured it was better off written down than not. Also I had another not-moderation-related idea regarding randomized orb choice when playing but can't remember it right now, if I do remember then I'll edit at some point.
But there are fixes that should, in theory, be pretty easy. In theory. Thing is, I don't know if the code for Tidal Trouble is even accessible anymore. I seem to remember there being something about some fairgrounds game(s) being inaccessible because the original coder left, or something? I can Tidal Trouble a quick search in the suggestions forum but came up short on this specific issue. Whatever the case, sometimes Tidal Trouble just decides that you lose. So I'm gonna write about it because I want to.
Certain board layouts make the complete inability to win not only entirely possible, but somewhat likely. These are exceptions that can be easily fixed by being simply culled, for example one layout that has a flat layer of earth orbs close to the bottom of the screen, and a line of eight entirely unique orbs at the top (if anyone can find and screenshot that one that'd be lovely, I refreshed for awhile but was unable to find it). There are even submission guidelines against this kind of level, but a few managed to slip through the cracks anyways. However, the RNG of the game presents this inherent flaw that on almost any level, it can be impossible to win outright. It's just kind of frustrating, especially when the game has a score feature that implies that you should be able to go on infinitely with enough skill. I hereby present a few hopefully simple solutions that should, at the very least, make impossible-to-win RNG outcomes slim;
-Add a maximum number of consecutive orbs when playing. No more 10 arcane orbs in a row when you need an ice, thereby wasting precious turns.
-Move up the bottommost possible orb placement in the editor.
-Add a guideline where at least two orb types need to be accessible from the get-go. I mean, I've seen every single possible layout at this point I'm pretty sure so I don't even know if new layouts get added, but for the sake of argument again I'm just going to pretend this fairgrounds game isn't abandoned.
-Add a hard limit on how many different orb types can be put in a submitted puzzle. Either mechanically in the editor, or just as a guideline. Mechanically is what I had in mind. Maybe six or seven? Even that is a bit much but can be done in an effective way, anything more than that is probably too much no matter how you build it.
-Again, cull existing layouts and get rid of the especially egregious ones.
This entire post is massively just me spitballing. While I don't have high hopes for anything actually being changed I have had many ideas pop in my head on how this game could just be made less RNG scuffed and figured it was better off written down than not. Also I had another not-moderation-related idea regarding randomized orb choice when playing but can't remember it right now, if I do remember then I'll edit at some point.
oh big agree
this is why i dont play tidal trouble at all, its infuriating
at least there are other fg games that are easier and solved so we can get our 75k daily but yeah. i agree with everything you've said here
oh big agree
this is why i dont play tidal trouble at all, its infuriating
at least there are other fg games that are easier and solved so we can get our 75k daily but yeah. i agree with everything you've said here
The Tidal Trouble puzzles are all user-submitted, and there were initially no guidelines for making/accepting puzzles.
A few too many unfair puzzles slipped through, typically with some combination of: play area starting too low on the board, too many different types of bubbles in play, layouts that require "picking away" at single or very small bubble clusters.
Unfortunately, even fairly designed puzzles can sometimes lock you into a lose state due to the bubble RNG...
It would be nice if the way the bubble queue worked were altered to make puzzles less "RNG says you lose!", but I'm not sure how viable it would be to change it - that might require quite a bit of tweaking of the mechanics.
There was a suggestion in the past for better puzzle scrutiny (as many of them don't follow the guidelines that were eventually created), and I suggested back then that there be a "report" button or something of the sort that you can click to send a "this puzzle needs a fairness check" to whoever's in charge of managing Tidal Trouble puzzles.
... but it doesn't seem that Tidal Trouble actually has any active development or puzzle maintenance going on these days, so I suppose that having such a button wouldn't do much if there's no staff to manage it.
I don't think I'd like to see the entire catalogue of puzzles scrapped - many of them are completely fine, and these submissions from so long ago are a nice time capsule from the active users at the time.
I'm mostly thinking about users who are no longer with us - I wouldn't want for their (fair) puzzles to be wiped out.
A bit ago, Undel actually streamed the testing of some Tidal puzzles! She got through, I want to say maybe 30 in the two hours the stream went? (Numbers are approximate since there wasn't a VoD and my memory can be sketchy).
There were over 12k in the queue; I want to say this was even getting poked at because there had been a massive lagspike/possibly a small outage from the quantity earlier in the week.
(Side note, I am just now realizing how good FR's uptime is- I can remember like, three unscheduled outages in my entire time playing since 2015. Very impressive!)
I almost wonder if it would be worth having some sort of automated tool for checking for like, a solid row within X of the base, a solid row anywhere with more than X colors, that sorta thing. Stick it in the editor too, nip some problems in the bud. Could at least get the to-do pile a bit smaller, yeah? It feels like Tidal might be in a place where it's intimidating to even start, which is an eminently relatable situation.
(and, as far as gameplay goes, I'd just like the game to check to make sure there's still bubbles of a given element on the board before it gives me one. Clearing the last of something and then immediately getting another is frustrating, especially in the endgame. I haven't run into most of the other issues mentioned, though; it's probably just a luck thing; I don't doubt they happened)
A bit ago, Undel actually streamed the testing of some Tidal puzzles! She got through, I want to say maybe 30 in the two hours the stream went? (Numbers are approximate since there wasn't a VoD and my memory can be sketchy).
There were over 12k in the queue; I want to say this was even getting poked at because there had been a massive lagspike/possibly a small outage from the quantity earlier in the week.
(Side note, I am just now realizing how good FR's uptime is- I can remember like, three unscheduled outages in my entire time playing since 2015. Very impressive!)
I almost wonder if it would be worth having some sort of automated tool for checking for like, a solid row within X of the base, a solid row anywhere with more than X colors, that sorta thing. Stick it in the editor too, nip some problems in the bud. Could at least get the to-do pile a bit smaller, yeah? It feels like Tidal might be in a place where it's intimidating to even start, which is an eminently relatable situation.
(and, as far as gameplay goes, I'd just like the game to check to make sure there's still bubbles of a given element on the board before it gives me one. Clearing the last of something and then immediately getting another is frustrating, especially in the endgame. I haven't run into most of the other issues mentioned, though; it's probably just a luck thing; I don't doubt they happened)
|
|
She/Her, FR +0
No worms in my username-
R e n a i w o m
I like being pinged, but not mass ones.
I often process thoughts by writing... Trying to TL;DR more.
_______________________________
|
Hatchery
|
Support! I agree they need a rework, and I know that puzzle with the earth orbs in a line about 3/4 of the way down the field. I hate that one, and there are others that are just jumbled messes where it can be hard to get RNG to serve you the right orbs. I haven't played in a while because of how frustrating it is. Artifracture and jigsaw puzzles are far more fun, and far less frustrating.
If we need to remove some unfair puzzles, it may mean the whole thing be recoded from the ground up in order to fix things. I suggest that maybe there's a user voting system upon beating a puzzle (which can be toggled on or off). Very simply ask: did you like this puzzle? Puzzles with overwhelming "no"s can get the boot. In order to avoid harassment of users based on their puzzles, all puzzles should be anonymous. As it is, puzzles ought to be anonymous anyway, since there's some possible resentment among some users over the makers of difficult/impossible puzzles.
And as far as approving puzzles, why not call for beta testers? Have people enter to be a beta tester, have admins blindly choose a certain amount (a lottery?), have them do X amount of puzzle of X amount of hours testing things, and then pay them in gems as a reward for their work.
Just some ideas. Tidal Trouble really does need some help, though. I used to love the game when the site was new, but not so much anymore.
Support! I agree they need a rework, and I know that puzzle with the earth orbs in a line about 3/4 of the way down the field. I hate that one, and there are others that are just jumbled messes where it can be hard to get RNG to serve you the right orbs. I haven't played in a while because of how frustrating it is. Artifracture and jigsaw puzzles are far more fun, and far less frustrating.
If we need to remove some unfair puzzles, it may mean the whole thing be recoded from the ground up in order to fix things. I suggest that maybe there's a user voting system upon beating a puzzle (which can be toggled on or off). Very simply ask: did you like this puzzle? Puzzles with overwhelming "no"s can get the boot. In order to avoid harassment of users based on their puzzles, all puzzles should be anonymous. As it is, puzzles ought to be anonymous anyway, since there's some possible resentment among some users over the makers of difficult/impossible puzzles.
And as far as approving puzzles, why not call for beta testers? Have people enter to be a beta tester, have admins blindly choose a certain amount (a lottery?), have them do X amount of puzzle of X amount of hours testing things, and then pay them in gems as a reward for their work.
Just some ideas. Tidal Trouble really does need some help, though. I used to love the game when the site was new, but not so much anymore.
