Donkey Kong Strategy > Advanced Donkey Kong Strategy
Board Score Distribution
xelnia:
--- Quote from: hooch66 on November 14, 2017, 07:02:27 am ---This is great!
What software did you use to create the graphs?
--- End quote ---
Thanks! I used Excel 2013.
danman123456:
Awesome sauce here. Yeah luck is a huge factor on the rivet board and now we know cuz SCIENCE!! 8) Kreygasm
krehztim:
LOVE the graphs and the stats. Phenomenal posts lately.
You have time for all this, but couldn't throw together an IGBY? Kappa
xelnia:
--- Quote from: krehztim on November 14, 2017, 03:55:01 pm ---You have time for all this, but couldn't throw together an IGBY? Kappa
--- End quote ---
Barra:
A few observations:
Barrels
Its pretty clear there's 4 different clusters of data and we can easily attribute these to gameplay specifics to answer the how/why.
<1m - purely running boards with mostly top hammers
1-1.1m - grabbing the bottom hammer with varying degree of efficiency and limited grouping
1.1-1.16m - bottom hammer, moderate grouping and again varying in efficiency.
1.16m+ - bottom hammer, heavy grouping and efficiency of the highest order. You could say luck plays a factor here too if the fireball climbs or not but the distribution is pretty standard. I guess that makes sense.
Pies
As Jry mentioned pies are played very similarly between all players and is evident in the distribution. This suggests the pies aren't figured out yet in terms of how to score higher points, or that it is too risky and not sustainable for a full-game.
Would be interesting to see Robbie's (?) technique stacked up against this graph.
More research/messing around on this board is required. The negative skew suggests too many points are lost when not a free-pass, and we haven't found a way to combat that.
Springs
Same as barrels regarding clusters.
No prizes, first 2 prizes, all 3 prizes, everything with efficiency + fireball leeching.
More points available (top-shelf and right-side) but again maybe not sustainable for a full-game.
Rivets
No specific grouping to suggest anything other than playing for survival.
It would be interesting to see this split into the different techniques (star, weave, <Allen> etc).
---
Most of this stuff is pretty obvious and in some cases complete generalizations, but its nice to see some math/data behind how we play and aim for a specific goal.
<3 it Jry. Always
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version