Hexa Revamp

[ZCorsaire]

Here's an idea that I have to make it fair for all and for reb's original completion. I would scale the challenges points as you go based on how far you go if this was possible do it like a recurring challenge where the points are based on the difficulty so there would be more time before you would have to rerun and the leaderboard would be based on the number of challenge points. You would also get challenges by breaking barriers I don't know what would be fair for each of these but if I was to guess. white -> blue: 20 points blue -> green: 50 points green -> yellow: 200 points yellow -> orange: 400 points orange -> red: 800 points red -> black: 1200 points. This would also limit the problem as new maps are added. I think this sounds like a good idea but if it needs changes to be possible to implement or other things let me know thank you for your time!

 

[Alphaesia]

I very much dislike Hexa remaining as a "get as far as you can" challenge. For example, the current record holder lost their last life to Agni, while to beat their record, you don't even have to get through the yellow maps now (map #257 is now Traffic). Also, what Fire just posted above me.

I actually would really love if the Hexa leaderboard went like so, giving the last map the player died on to give more meaning to the level the player reached:

1: rebplane / 257 (Agni)
2: KimbosIPA / 245 (Agni)
etc.

I suggested a while ago to make the leaderboard a %, but that didn't seem to get a warm reception.

 

[ElectroUnderwear]

I support Fire’s idea of rewarding the player with more lives depending on the difficulty. I don’t think that just changing to another concrete number of lives would be a great idea, because hexa still wouldn’t adapt to new challenges in the future. Rewarding progress with lives would prevent hexa from becoming so easily outdated without necessarily making it too easy to get far.

 

[BTJRedwing]

The issue I see with that is maps have variable death possibility unrelated to difficulty, and we may find ourselves in the same boat in the future. For example, a map like departure takes many lives while being a low difficulty, and a map like Heartless, while rated black, still unproportionately takes lives. I don't see this scaling well unless measures are put into place to prevent it.

Regardless of what happens, I still think adding milestone rewards is a good idea so Hexa isn't a challenge only for a select few players.

 

[JonBimblesticks]

Here's an idea that I have to make it fair for all and for reb's original completion. I would scale the challenges points as you go based on how far you go if this was possible do it like a recurring challenge where the points are based on the difficulty so there would be more time before you would have to rerun and the leaderboard would be based on the number of challenge points. You would also get challenges by breaking barriers I don't know what would be fair for each of these but if I was to guess. white -> blue: 20 points blue -> green: 50 points green -> yellow: 200 points yellow -> orange: 400 points orange -> red: 800 points red -> black: 1200 points. This would also limit the problem as new maps are added. I think this sounds like a good idea but if it needs changes to be possible to implement or other things let me know thank you for your time!

As an alternative to nerfing the challenge to make it possible, I actually really like this idea. You see, if we use a leaderboard system that counts the number of maps a player has completed, then we end up with the problem that as soon as a few new maps are added to hexa a person's record becomes meaningless. This suggestion fixes the problem: have each difficulty of map worth a certain number of "hexa points" and then display those points on a leaderboard. This means that if somebody beats 17 maps then the "hexa points" for the maps they have beaten would be added up and that would be their hexa score.

To explain the benefit of this system, imagine player one running hexa and making it to the second red map and dying. Over the next couple weeks, three white maps are introduced. This means that player two, who isn't nearly as good at parkour, can play the challenge and beat player one's score without having to play a single red map, as the new white maps boost their score.

Now, imagine the new system, where player one makes it to the second red map and dies as well, ending up with a score of let's say 300 hexa points. Then, after the three white maps are added, player two dies on the last orange map. In the new system, even though player two completed more maps than player one, because the maps they completed were of a lower difficulty, they end up with less hexa points, and player one is ahead on the leaderboard. This gives speedrunners a sense of security as they know new maps being added to the challenge won't quickly make their run redundant.

A system like this also means we can keep hexa at 66 lives.

It may seem complicated, but it's actually quite straightforward, especially if the amount of hexa points a difficulty is worth is equal to their normal value in FFA points. Lmk what you guys think.

 

[Fire]

As an alternative to nerfing the challenge to make it possible, I actually really like this idea. You see, if we use a leaderboard system that counts the number of maps a player has completed, then we end up with the problem that as soon as a few new maps are added to hexa a person's record becomes meaningless. This suggestion fixes the problem: have each difficulty of map worth a certain number of "hexa points" and then display those points on a leaderboard. This means that if somebody beats 17 maps then the "hexa points" for the maps they have beaten would be added up and that would be their hexa score.

To explain the benefit of this system, image player one running hexa and making it to the second red map and dying. Over the next couple weeks, three white maps are introduced. This means that player two, who isn't nearly as good at parkour, can play the challenge and beat player one's score without having to play a single red map, as the new white maps boost their score.

Now, imagine the new system, where player one makes it to the second red map and dies as well, ending up with a score of let's say 300 hexa points. Then, after the three white maps are added, player two dies on the last orange map. In the new system, even though player two completed more maps than player one, because the maps they completed were of a lower difficulty, they end up with less hexa points, and player one is ahead on the leaderboard. This gives speedrunners a sense of security as they know new maps being added to the challenge won't quickly make their run redundant.

A system like this also means we can keep hexa at 66 lives.

It may seem complicated, but it's actually quite straightforward, especially if the amount of hexa points a difficulty is worth is equal to their normal value in FFA points. Lmk what you guys think.

That kind of sounds like it will have the same issue as number of stages alone, but taking just a bit more time instead. Since the points double per difficulty, it may take months, but just a few new maps in the previous difficulty bracket of where your record is at will bump it down considerably--your record still gets easier and easier over time.

 

[ZCorsaire]

No it gets harder with the system that you get more points for each barrier you break from yellow -> orange - 1000 points

 

[_Trains_]

A conversation with hex resulted in an outcome of an idea that takes many parts from ideas already presented.

1. A challenge by the name of 'Reb's Hexa' is created.
This challenge puts Reb in the spotlight, and gives all players the opportunity to see if they can beat the Hexa that Reb beat. She'll ofc already have a completion of this.
This allows:
- Players to play a 'beatable' version of Hexa in it's near-original form
- The conversation on how 'only one person has ever beaten Hexa and never again' becoming insignificant
- The original Hexa rules and concepts being usable
This will hopefully:
- Have more people 'beating Hexa a la Reb' due to the increased player performance of many Minr members
- OG hexa speedruns (?)
- Give reb more praise for being the first and only of her time to accomplish such a feat
- Keep the original vibe and idea behind the challenge

The following idea is what to do with the concept of a 'boss rush' of every map on the server with conditions. The biggest thing I want to note is that we can take this in two different directions. We can either make Hexa possible to beat but difficult, or Hexa becomes a 'how far can you get' mode.

2 (a). Hexa becomes possible to beat but difficult.

(i) An increased life count
- A larger number is added, perhaps triple digits ending in 66 to keep the Hexa name relevant, and players can then attempt the full-blown challenge just with more lives.
(ii a) An incremental growth in lives given throughout the challenge (easy to expert)
- Starting from white, every milestone or occasion a certain amount of lives will be added to the player's count in order to succeed in the challenge. The amount given can either be the same each time or relative to difficulty, and the amount of maps can be done difficulty wise, incrementally (each 25 maps as an example) or exponentially smaller as it gets more difficult.
(ii b) An incremental growth in lives given throughout the challenge (expert to easy)
- An idea Jon had was to start with the hardest maps and get easier from there allowing players to be able to complete the challenge a bit easier post-red. This could also be done difficulty wise, incrementally (each 25 maps as an example) or exponentially larger as it gets easier.

Benefits:
- Hexa likely becomes beatable
- More people can beat the challenge and reap challenge benefits (cosmetics)
- Speedrunning and times become possible

Cons:
- Maps continue to be added and the conversation on life balancing will forever be argued
- Difficult to implement (?)

2 (b). Hexa stays impossible but becomes 'how far can you get'
This idea is what is almost already presented when one does /ch Hexa. The goal of this new challenge would simply to, using the original Hexa conditions, get as far as you can through the boss rush of maps. Perhaps a single person currently sitting at the top would reap cosmetic benefits.

Benefits:
- A new mode and mindset not seen before in challenges
- A single cosmetic making it the most exclusive on minr
- Keeps the original Hexa conditions

Cons:
- As maps continue to be added, it will become easier to reach the higher numbers meaning top players will have to continuously run it to keep their place.
- Exclusive to one person only (it's honestly both a pro and con)

To conclude, Hexa can certainly go many different ways but has a lot of opportunities to lay far better than where it currently sits. The question of 'is there a challenge of every map on the server' should certainly be answered with 'yes' and these are all options to see that through. Personally I believe 1 and 2 (b) are the best ideas as it allows both concepts to exist in harmony (the og Hexa and the 'every map' Hexa), and is also probably the best way imo to have Hexa exist where maps can continuously be added to the system. Please let me know what you think, I'd love to see these ideas talked about.

- Trains

 

[Alphaesia]

I would like to, at the very least, retain a version of the challenge in its current form. So we have an "adjusted" hexa (or whatever else people want), and the original (which retains the title and completion).

 

[ElectroUnderwear]

I don't think anyone would mind if a version of hexa by the original rules stays up. I'm a fan of the "incremental lives from easy to expert" idea along with keeping the old hexa as a separate challenge. Best of both worlds

 

[Bailey06]

So,

Ricky, reb, and I have concluded that we shouldn't (and likely won't) make any duplicate versions of Hexa (the original Hexa, "Reb's Hexa," etc.). A challenge meant only to include the FFA/FFA+ maps available at the time of reb's completion will still evolve (maps rotating into and out of HC, breaking, moving from FFA -> Valley, etc.), thus defeating the purpose of duplicating it as it simply isn't sustainable. Hexa certainly needs to change, as beating Hexa with a fixed 66 lives will continue to grow more and more infeasible as time goes by. We need a scaled system that is decently flexible. The challenge is supposed to be a legendary feat that seems impossible, not one that is impossible. The addition of maps like Heartless, Chaoskampf, Nightmare, the general inflation of the black/red difficulty brackets, and the testimonies of some of our most skilled players strongly supports the idea that the challenge is unbeatable.

Our solution is to use reb's completion as a foundation for a scaling system (thank you, Fire, for initially mentioning a scaled system). This way, we can attempt to emulate the difficulty of her version, and by extension, preserve the idea that beating the challenge is an incredible achievement (though still possible). So, we made a list of how many maps in each difficulty bracket were in reb's Hexa. Reb had 66 lives to complete approximately 3 White, 19 Blue, 52 Green, 77 Yellow, 50 Orange, 19 Red, 3 Black maps. Excluding ~18 forced deaths, she had ~48 lives to complete ~223 maps. Considering that, our scaling factors should reflect these numbers.

Here's our scale:

• White maps are worth 0.01 apiece. 100 White maps = one new life.
• Blue maps are worth 0.05 apiece. 20 Blue maps = one new life.
• Green maps are worth 0.1 apiece. 10 Green maps = one new life.
• Yellow maps are worth 0.2 apiece. 5 Yellow maps = one new life.
• Orange maps are worth 0.3 apiece. ~3 Orange maps = one new life.
• Red maps are worth 0.75 apiece. ~1 Red map = one new life.
• Black maps are worth 2.5 apiece. 2 Black maps = five new lives.

This weighting system is actually slightly more generous than reb's Hexa, coming out to ~58 lives for her. However, we believe this leniency would be balanced out by the introduction of new maps with high death potential, like Nightmare.

Well, what about Heartless? It seems like one of the most significant issues is that Heartless takes disproportionately more lives to complete than any other map on the server. Most red and black maps allow you to lose a lot of progress but still maintain your life count (i.e., falling on Redstone Ready's double neos): Heartless doesn't. As such, we believe that giving the player 50 new lives upon reaching Heartless would help to balance out this irregularity. After all, the current completions of the Badlands challenge suggest that Heartless is the #1 death risk. These 50 lives would add to the number of lives the player has retained up to that point.

Also, forced deaths have always been a point of contention in conversations about Hexa. As such, we would start the player out with 18 lives. These 18 lives would account for most (if not all) of the forced deaths.

That brings Hexa up to approximately 168 lives, which will continue to increase as more maps are added. Reb believes that this number is comparable to the difficulty of her Hexa. Extremely difficult, but not impossible with enough time, effort, and strategy.

Another change is the presentation of the leaderboard. We can implement reb's suggestion of showing the last stage number and map a player reached, putting their record into perspective more effectively. While this won't work retroactively, unfortunately (people with a current Hexa record), it will work for any new attempts. It would look something like this:

1. rebplane: 240 (Agni)
2. KimbosIPA: 235 (Agni)

We currently don't have plugin support for a challenge with an evolving life modifier, but that's what Rick is for (bless your heart, Rick). If you want to see our math, you can check out the doc here.

The scale, along with its exceptions (Heartless), can be revisited and updated as needed, though we're hoping it'll hold up pretty well over time. We also tried to incorporate a lot of the suggestions from you guys. Let us know what you think! :' )

 

[Fire]

I really like the idea! I wasn't sure what the anchor for the scaling should be in my suggestion, but reb’s Hexa makes sense. There's a few things I'd like to ask about:

Well, what about Heartless? It seems like one of the most significant issues is that Heartless takes disproportionately more lives to complete than any other map on the server. Most red and black maps allow you to lose a lot of progress but still maintain your life count (i.e., falling on Redstone Ready's double neos): Heartless doesn't. As such, we believe that giving the player 50 new lives upon reaching Heartless would help to balance out this irregularity. After all, the current completions of the Badlands challenge suggest that Heartless is the #1 death risk. These 50 lives would add to the number of lives the player has retained up to that point.

I like this idea, but it does raise a few questions. Since you've now defined a certain map as "so deadly it has to give the player a bunch of extra lives to balance it out", does that mean if another map similar to or above Heartless's combination of deadliness and difficulty were introduced in the future, would it also get that same bonus? What about a map that’s slightly easier than it?

Also, forced deaths have always been a point of contention in conversations about Hexa. As such, we would start the player out with 18 lives. These 18 lives would account for most (if not all) of the forced deaths.

Will this increase in the future as more forced deaths are added in, or is the scaling meant to account for those?

And lastly, what will happen when you reach the end of a difficulty bracket, regarding the remainder maps when dividing the scale into the number of maps in the bracket? The white maps are the most notable example—since there of course isn't 100 white maps, do they give you nothing or will you get a life at the end of the bracket?

 

[Bailey06]

I like this idea, but it does raise a few questions. Since you’ve now defined a certain map as “so deadly it has to give the player a bunch of extra lives to balance it out”, does that mean if another map similar to or above Heartless’s combination of deadliness and difficulty were introduced in the future, would it also get that same bonus? What about a map that’s slightly easier than it?

Probably. I think Heartless is a very exceptional case. There's an abundance of evidence showing how ridiculously disproportionate it is to all other maps. We can take it as it comes, and probably won't ever assign criteria a map has to meet. As shown with Heartless, that kind of map will usually present itself quite clearly. If it isn't very obvious, it probably isn't worth a bonus.

Will this increase in the future as more forced deaths are added in, or is the scaling meant to account for those?

I don't see why not, as the central point of the argument around forced deaths is that it has nothing to do with skill and only serves as an unnecessary hindrance to the player.

And lastly, what will happen when you reach the end of a difficulty bracket, regarding the remainder maps when dividing the scale into the number of maps in the bracket? The white maps are the most notable example—since there of course isn‘t 100 white maps, do they give you nothing or will you get a life at the end of the bracket?

I think the best way to approach it is to have it be a decimal value that goes across difficulty brackets and resets every time it reaches 1.0. For example, you beat 2 Oranges and 1 Red = 1.35. A life gets added and the value remains 0.35, and the cycle continues, so on and so forth. So, you won't just be getting lives at the end of a bracket, you'll be getting them as you go whenever you pass a certain number.

Hopefully, that helps : )

 

[Alphaesia]

EntityWolf has a video where he does Heartless without checkpoints. So it is possible to do now, and will only get easier. How are you going to account for people getting better at Heartless in particular over time? What about other maps; how do you decide if they deserve special treatment? (this will create countless arguments). I don't think Heartless is an exceptional case with multiple greens intending to produce maps even harder than it.

Also why have the lives be added over time? Wouldn't it make more sense (and be more consistent and predictable/intuitable) if we were upfront about how many lives you get (and be a simpler implementation).

What about non-parkour maps? A black maze certainly does not need five lives.

 

[Bailey06]

EntityWolf has a video where he does Heartless without checkpoints. So it is possible to do now, and will only get easier. How are you going to account for people getting better at Heartless in particular over time? What about other maps; how do you decide if they deserve special treatment? (this will create countless arguments). I don't think Heartless is an exceptional case with multiple greens intending to produce maps even harder than it.

Using Entity as an example feels a bit silly to me. He's got 7,000 subscribers on YouTube just for being incredible at parkour. That kind of run is virtually out of reach for 99.9% of our player base. I also think it's a bit of an overstatement that other maps will create countless arguments; if it's something that becomes a problem, I'm sure we can address it when it arises. I have to disagree about Heartless and think that it is an exceptional case. Greens can create harder maps, sure, but maps with the same amount of kill potential combined with the difficulty? If that happens, then maybe it'll be worth a life adjustment. There's no real way to know, and I have no issue with allowing the challenge to evolve.

Hexa is meant to be a legendary achievement, as said in my original post. Right now, we're making the challenge easier to bring it back to legendary status (without being virtually impossible). If it becomes easy to the point of not being a legendary achievement anymore, I don't see why we can't adjust the challenge to reflect that.

Also why have the lives be added over time? Wouldn't it make more sense (and be more consistent and predictable/intuitable) if we were upfront about how many lives you get (and be a simpler implementation).

We don't want to decrease the difficulty of the front-end of the challenge just because the tail-end of the challenge has gotten more difficult.

What about non-parkour maps? A black maze certainly does not need five lives.

Well, we don't have any black mazes, and if there was one, I have no idea how much kill potential it would have. Also, it would be two black maps = five lives. Just one is 2.5. Though, if that became an issue in the future, again, I have no problem with re-adjusting the challenge as people see fit.

 

[Alphaesia]

Using Entity as an example feels a bit silly to me. He's got 7,000 subscribers on YouTube just for being incredible at parkour. That kind of run is virtually out of reach for 99.9% of our player base.

Hexa is meant to be a legendary achievement, as said in my original post. Right now, we're making the challenge easier to bring it back to legendary status (without being virtually impossible). If it becomes easy to the point of not being a legendary achievement anymore, I don't see why we can't adjust the challenge to reflect that.

Hexa isn't meant to be feasible for 99.9% of our playerbase.

I agree that it should remain legendary, but it will greatly diminish the challenge if several people beat it relatively quickly, even if we buff it later (which will generate plenty of complaints about fairness). If only one person on the server has a chance to beat the challenge right now, that's totally fine and what makes the challenge legendary.

I think we're overcompensating and neglecting that people will get better. We don't really want to be constantly performing maintence on this challenge every two months as new black maps come out and people improve at Heartless. It would be much better to leave Heartless as a goal for people to train towards, rather than trying to have it match their ever-changing skill level.

(Side note: has anyone tested this, and if not, can we get these changes tested to make sure it is of the appropriate difficulty?)

I have to disagree about Heartless and think that it is an exceptional case. Greens can create harder maps, sure, but maps with the same amount of kill potential combined with the difficulty?

Just curious, but why do you think it's unlikely that a harder map won't be death-happy (to, say, /kill back up to a checkpoint)?

We don't want to decrease the difficulty of the front-end of the challenge just because the tail-end of the challenge has gotten more difficult.

Understandable.

Well, we don't have any black mazes, and if there was one, I have no idea how much kill potential it would have. Also, it would be two black maps = five lives. Just one is 2.5. Though, if that became an issue in the future, again, I have no problem with re-adjusting the challenge as people see fit.

*Pure black maze, with no kill potential. Not just applicable to mazes, but a lot of non-parkour maps (which you can't reasonably die in), e.g. Vares.

 

[Bailey06]

Hexa isn't meant to be feasible for 99.9% of our playerbase.

And it isn't. Entity is excellent at parkour, but that doesn't include all other maps of all other genres. I very highly doubt anyone will beat it relatively quickly, especially considering the life counts of the people beating The Badlands (Kimbos used ~140 lives just on Heartless, and he's at the high-end of our parkourists). Considering a small fraction of people have done The Badlands (which is 300 lives for only the black maps), I don't think we need to worry about Hexa completions with less than 200 lives.

I have a decent amount of confidence that the rate of people getting better won't outdo the rate of maps getting harder, at least not for quite some time. Definitely not within a span of months, more like years, I would think. No one has tested it; we based it off of the lives needed for someone like Squid (7 on his best attempt) vs. someone like Kimbo, who is still in our higher skill level (~140). The scaling as it is now isn't meant to overcompensate, but rather match what it was like for reb. That's based on her own assessment of the changes, as well.

Just curious, but why do you think it's unlikely that a harder map won't be death-happy (to, say, /kill back up to a checkpoint)?

I don't think it's unlikely, per se. Just infrequent.

*Pure black maze, with no kill potential. Not just applicable to mazes, but a lot of non-parkour maps (which you can't reasonably die in), e.g. Vares.

That would really just be a case-by-case thing. Considering how ridiculously difficult the challenge is in the first place, I'm not sure the effect would be large enough to worry about it too much.

 

[Alphaesia]

That would really just be a case-by-case thing. Considering how ridiculously difficult the challenge is in the first place, I'm not sure the effect would be large enough to worry about it too much.

Don't get hung up on the black part, my point there was that non-parkour maps award a lot of lives when they typically don't have as much kill potential.

 

[Bailey06]

Don't get hung up on the black part, my point there was that non-parkour maps award a lot of lives when they typically don't have as much kill potential.

Yeah, I understand. I don't think that's a big issue in the grand scheme of things. Plenty of mazes and puzzles have kill potential, just as plenty of pure parkours have no kill potential. I actually wouldn't be too surprised if more pure or mixed parkours have no kill potential than mazes or puzzles, solely based off of how many more there are. Either way, I don't think it skews much (if anything).

 

[BTJRedwing]

I personally think this is a great compromise between the two opposing sides. The challenge becomes a bit less impossible for the more experienced players, determining the amount of lives based off of Reb's hexa ensures that her achievement would still be as impressive as always, and a plan to scale it for the future to ensure we don't end up in this situation again. As long as the kill potential of the maps is balanced with the amount of lives given (case by case would likely be needed), I believe this solution ticks off all of the boxes we had been brought up in this thread. I do think it's a fair point to bring up the kill potential between parkour and puzzle/maze, though I don't think this will become a noticeable issue in the near enough future to justify delaying the revamp with a black map only being worth 2.5 lives.

I'd like to bump my idea of some kind of reward for reaching certain milestones in hexa. With the admitted 'ridiculous difficulty', the challenge really offers nothing to anyone who isn't extremely skilled at parkour, as there isn't any kind of realistic goal for these players to attempt the challenge. The 'how far can you go' concept in the challenge can still be maintained for all players, by including goals that the average player can reach with enough persistence. I've talked about this in further detail before, so I won't be delving into it here. But again, great job to you guys for addressing hexa, and keep it up.