![]() Not because of base-64 or Tetris it's the long unbroken lines. Ok you guys, all the base-64 Tetris lines in here are breaking the layout of this page. Perhaps the bot's "meanness" of selection could escalate as you get into higher scores, with some kind of checkpoint system to start the game at certain milestones/hardnesses once you've proven you can consistently achieve them through ordinary play. This has raised an interesting question for me about what it would look like to have a version of High Rise with an adversarial bot choosing your pieces. I don't think the creators of it quite anticipated how effective the center-merge strategy could be at keeping the board clear, at least based on their surprised Twitter reactions to users (including myself) achieving scores into the low 7 figures.īut given that the game has no timer or really anything that explicitly escalates the difficulty over time, once you figure out how to maintain steady state, you can theoretically play indefinitely (though it does very occasionally crash). Vaguely related, but I've found the tetris-y mobile game High Rise to have a surprising amount of depth: No idea what that heuristic would look like, but the result would stay the same so the replays could still run as before. But as the author fears, that would definitely invalidate replays (you'd get slightly different results each time).Īnother optimisation is some kind of prunning heuristic- some kind of intuition about which pieces P don't need to be considered once a certain piece S has been rejected as the worst possible, because those other pieces P can only yield better boards then S (better for the player). In that case, I suspect its performance could be improved quite a bit by replacing it with a Monte Carlo search. Judging from the comment about "weighing" possibilities (which I interpret as evaluating boards) I'm further guessing it's an ad-hoc implementation of Best-First Search. The author says that the algorithm couldn't be changed without invalidating the replays so I'm guessing that means it's a deterministic algorithm. The algorithm for "weighing" possibilities is to simply maximise the highest point of the "tower" after the piece is landed. If you can figure out a way to accelerate the algorithm without diminishing its hate-filled efficiency, do let me know. The method by which the AI selects the worst possible piece is extremely simple to describe (test all possible locations of all possible pieces, see which of the pieces' best-case scenarios is the worst, then spawn that worst piece), but quite time-consuming to execute, so please forgive me if your browser chugs a little after locking each piece. It's actually explained in the link on the github page after all. ![]() It kept giving me S pieces and threw a Z in there and then an l I couldn't get one line and I consider myself a damn good tetris player. And Id say that the majority of people in the world start on level 6 with the board halfway filled with a bunch of gaps and the pieces move at a speed that is barely controllable (im thinking of the classic gameboy version when I imagine these boards) While the normal version where you start from zero on level one is probably an upper middle class life. You're in control, you have a good job, a great partner, and yall are saving to buy a house - basically waiting for an l piece to complete your `Tetris`."Īnyway, this game of (ha)Tetris is a lot like a lot of people's lives, just roadblock after roadblock. This might be an unexpected car repair bill or a death that you aren't emotionally capable of addressing. ![]() You have to decide where you'll put that blocking piece so that you can hopefully clear it later. "Things are going good, you're given an S piece that doesnt fit anywhere. For about 15 years I've been trying to figure out how to articulate a `Tetris is life` essay.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |