

Counting system part 2
Some findings and further assumptions



Counting system part 3
This is an overlay of level 1 start and target reached. You will notice:  that ball in tails is higher than on ground level  path is slightly curved at beginning and end  perimeter of ball is one pixel lower than ground level (well, that is noticable in picture in part 2)  the target cat is one pixel lower than the start cat (I do not assume that this is intention.) I measured that distance between centres of ball is approx. 325 pixel. The counting stops at 752. Therefore 248 is deducted from 1.000. Therefore there is a contradiction to my assumption in part 1 that every crossed pixel deducts 1 point. I therefore adjust my theory as follows: The counting system counts every pixel crossed. The sum is multiplied by a constant. The constant is below 1. The constant may be dereived as follows: 325 direct line from centre to centre of balls 248 = 1000752 325:248=1:x x=248/325= 0,7630769230769231 0,76 and so on is to odd to be choosen by Ola. I assume therefore that Ola chose a nice constant as 0,75 = 3/4. 248*4/3= 331,66 ~ 332 I assume that the slight curve makes the path longer than the direct connection. Taking the second chart in part 2 into account you may add easily 67 pixel to the measured direct line of 325 and come to 332. And with an adjustment constant of 3/4 you come easily to 248 and finally 752. So my thesis is that the counting system uses the following formula: score = 1000  (number of crossed pixel * 0,75) It will not be easy to proof the formula, though. I did not believe that an analysis of level 1 provides so much remarkable observations. You may ask what is the purpose of this analysis. Well, for the time beeing it is only basic research. Maybe the findings/assumptions lead to something later. You may ask why should Ola chose a constant of 0,75. Well, I have no clue. Maybe the whole idea is bullshit after all. But anyhow, does anyone have a better explanation of the counting system? Last edited by Pfadfinder; 10232012 at 03:31 PM.. 


The distance computation is based on the original iPhone 3 screens, not on the retina display. This could cause the factor of 0.76...



Nope, I did not hold on to these ss...
Last edited by Cowboy.Henk; 10232012 at 05:11 PM.. 


Quote:
http://forums.toucharcade.com/showpo...postcount=9656 


Quote:



Quote:
thank u both for feedback discussion and contribution 


i could send you some ss with 815 on lvl 10
maybe you could check wether they look more lengthy than your solution lvl 10 does not look like an level where the smoothing effect of the dotted line postulated by me should have much influence . there are few bonces no zigzag path. I am confused by that information. 


Check out my album for 818 path on lvl 10



very strange
818 seems to be longer than my 815 at first glimpse. well it seems wiz is right the counting system is a mystery 

«
Previous Thread

Next Thread
»
Thread Tools  

