AndyDuongPhong wrote:

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

AndyDuongPhong wrote:

Where do you think matter of void is placed?

probably ???????
but like the bottom level of ???????, it's not nearly as hard as the misery trio or ink in my coffee

I mean the ahll

oh it's probably harder than the instant, but good luck convincing anybody

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

(#101)

AndyDuongPhong wrote:

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

AndyDuongPhong wrote:

Where do you think matter of void is placed?

probably ???????
but like the bottom level of ???????, it's not nearly as hard as the misery trio or ink in my coffee

I mean the ahll

oh it's probably harder than the instant, but good luck convincing anybody

probably? i thought it was definitely
also has the scheeep scale been like ‘curved’ down since two years ago?

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

(#101)

AndyDuongPhong wrote:

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

AndyDuongPhong wrote:

Where do you think matter of void is placed?

probably ???????
but like the bottom level of ???????, it's not nearly as hard as the misery trio or ink in my coffee

I mean the ahll

oh it's probably harder than the instant, but good luck convincing anybody

what's the instant

scheeepchit_remix wrote:

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

(#101)

AndyDuongPhong wrote:

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

AndyDuongPhong wrote:

Where do you think matter of void is placed?

probably ???????
but like the bottom level of ???????, it's not nearly as hard as the misery trio or ink in my coffee

I mean the ahll

oh it's probably harder than the instant, but good luck convincing anybody

what's the instant

Absurd Appel level 19, the level that is so NOT 8 BOMBS that it's funny that he hasn't changed that yet

taliix wrote:

(#102)

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

(#101)

AndyDuongPhong wrote:

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

AndyDuongPhong wrote:

Where do you think matter of void is placed?

probably ???????
but like the bottom level of ???????, it's not nearly as hard as the misery trio or ink in my coffee

I mean the ahll

oh it's probably harder than the instant, but good luck convincing anybody

probably? i thought it was definitely
also has the scheeep scale been like ‘curved’ down since two years ago?

not really for me I just decided to be more “evil” and underrate the difficulties of my recent levels

scheeepchit_remix wrote:

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

(#101)

AndyDuongPhong wrote:

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

AndyDuongPhong wrote:

Where do you think matter of void is placed?

probably ???????
but like the bottom level of ???????, it's not nearly as hard as the misery trio or ink in my coffee

I mean the ahll

oh it's probably harder than the instant, but good luck convincing anybody

what's the instant

very funny

I felt like lel 19 is just a reaction test

if this post gets quoted i'll beat the instant and prove everyone that it is not 8 bombs :)
cause honestly at this point my skills are so low since i haven't been playing appel

edit: also i remember michael saying that the explosives/bombs was a logarithmic scale to ‘a’ the main units of difficulty, so i'm probably going to actually calculate the number of bombs it should be

definitely not 80 explosives tho

taliix wrote:

if this post gets quoted i'll beat the instant and prove everyone that it is not 8 bombs :)
cause honestly at this point my skills are so low since i haven't been playing appel

edit: also i remember michael saying that the explosives/bombs was a logarithmic scale to ‘a’ the main units of difficulty, so i'm probably going to actually calculate the number of bombs it should be

definitely not 80 explosives tho

I might try the instant again too
also Micheal NEEDS to make a video explaining ‘a’ so people who use his scale can accurately rate their level's difficulty

edit: purple banana ninja'd me by like 10 minutes lmao

'a' vs e# - as you can see, levels 1-14 & 18 follow a nice logarithmic curve, but 15-17 (19 not included btw) are wayyy off the curve.
https://www.desmos.com/calculator/adarrsyqvw

using logarithmic regression built into desmos, michael probably uses a formula along the lines of e# = 1.51ln(a) + 2.79.
this is the first twelve levels since the bomb rounds down to the 10th explosive.
https://www.desmos.com/calculator/uvgt8doerd

here's the regression curve WITH the bomb levels plotted. You can make your judgements for yourself.
https://www.desmos.com/calculator/cqhqhwszje

Michael somewhat obviously switched from an exponential scale of ‘a’ to a linear scale of ‘a’. Why? maybe to make the bomb ranking higher? so that people would think he's super super good?

don't get me wrong, yeah he is good, but switching to a linear scale to PROVE that he's good just isn't umm… good.

here are the values of the hard levels that i got following the logarithmic regression of the first twelve levels (assuming the ‘a’ values are all correct):

• momentum edges: 7.05 explosives
  
• monstrosity: 7.92 explosives
  
• concyclic: 8.07 explosives
  
• collapsing: 8.92 explosives
  
• radiation: 9.36 explosives
  
• key to success: 9.90 explosives
  
• the instant: 1.085967014 bombs.
  

which i know looks super stupid but that's just because bomb/explosive ratings follow absurd appel. which messed up its ratings for the harder levels.

The good thing is - I was probably right rating Black Lite at 1 bomb :DDD

edit 2: and this type of scale would actually probably be better than absurd appel's current one - radiation and key to success, i've heard, are very similar in difficulty, and the instant - well, i guess we'll just have to see how my completion goes :p

edit 3: i probably should have waited for like king of 10 or something but idc lol

taliix wrote:

edit: purple banana ninja'd me by like 10 minutes lmao

'a' vs e# - as you can see, levels 1-14 & 18 follow a nice logarithmic curve, but 15-17 (19 not included btw) are wayyy off the curve.
https://www.desmos.com/calculator/adarrsyqvw

using logarithmic regression built into desmos, michael probably uses a formula along the lines of e# = 1.51ln(a) + 2.79.
this is the first twelve levels since the bomb rounds down to the 10th explosive.
https://www.desmos.com/calculator/uvgt8doerd

here's the regression curve WITH the bomb levels plotted. You can make your judgements for yourself.
https://www.desmos.com/calculator/cqhqhwszje

Michael somewhat obviously switched from an exponential scale of ‘a’ to a linear scale of ‘a’. Why? maybe to make the bomb ranking higher? so that people would think he's super super good?

don't get me wrong, yeah he is good, but switching to a linear scale to PROVE that he's good just isn't umm… good.

here are the values of the hard levels that i got following the logarithmic regression of the first twelve levels (assuming the ‘a’ values are all correct):

• momentum edges: 7.05 explosives
  
• monstrosity: 7.92 explosives
  
• concyclic: 8.07 explosives
  
• collapsing: 8.92 explosives
  
• radiation: 9.36 explosives
  
• key to success: 9.90 explosives
  
• the instant: 1.085967014 bombs.
  

which i know looks super stupid but that's just because bomb/explosive ratings follow absurd appel. which messed up its ratings for the harder levels.

The good thing is - I was probably right rating Black Lite at 1 bomb :DDD

edit 2: and this type of scale would actually probably be better than absurd appel's current one - radiation and key to success, i've heard, are very similar in difficulty, and the instant - well, i guess we'll just have to see how my completion goes :p

edit 3: i probably should have waited for like king of 10 or something but idc lol

I'm more annoyed that he has this “more accurate” system that he then converts into bombs/explosions but he doesn't tell us how he actually decides how much aggro a level has

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

taliix wrote:

edit: purple banana ninja'd me by like 10 minutes lmao

'a' vs e# - as you can see, levels 1-14 & 18 follow a nice logarithmic curve, but 15-17 (19 not included btw) are wayyy off the curve.
https://www.desmos.com/calculator/adarrsyqvw

using logarithmic regression built into desmos, michael probably uses a formula along the lines of e# = 1.51ln(a) + 2.79.
this is the first twelve levels since the bomb rounds down to the 10th explosive.
https://www.desmos.com/calculator/uvgt8doerd

here's the regression curve WITH the bomb levels plotted. You can make your judgements for yourself.
https://www.desmos.com/calculator/cqhqhwszje

Michael somewhat obviously switched from an exponential scale of ‘a’ to a linear scale of ‘a’. Why? maybe to make the bomb ranking higher? so that people would think he's super super good?

don't get me wrong, yeah he is good, but switching to a linear scale to PROVE that he's good just isn't umm… good.

here are the values of the hard levels that i got following the logarithmic regression of the first twelve levels (assuming the ‘a’ values are all correct):

• momentum edges: 7.05 explosives
  
• monstrosity: 7.92 explosives
  
• concyclic: 8.07 explosives
  
• collapsing: 8.92 explosives
  
• radiation: 9.36 explosives
  
• key to success: 9.90 explosives
  
• the instant: 1.085967014 bombs.
  

which i know looks super stupid but that's just because bomb/explosive ratings follow absurd appel. which messed up its ratings for the harder levels.

The good thing is - I was probably right rating Black Lite at 1 bomb :DDD

edit 2: and this type of scale would actually probably be better than absurd appel's current one - radiation and key to success, i've heard, are very similar in difficulty, and the instant - well, i guess we'll just have to see how my completion goes :p

edit 3: i probably should have waited for like king of 10 or something but idc lol

I'm more annoyed that he has this “more accurate” system that he then converts into bombs/explosions but he doesn't tell us how he actually decides how much aggro a level has

if everyone knew how agro worked it would be so easier to compare/judge/determine difficulties of levels
bombs and explosions are good for me, but agro seems to be better if we can figure how he figures it out lol
if i knew how agro worked, i would use it

LionCoder10 wrote:

(#112)

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

but he doesn't tell us how he actually decides how much aggro a level has

if i knew how agro worked, i would use it

he explained it to me sort of.
so each jump has a specific number of ‘a’, with the basis being a litejump = 3a.
what he said was that (if i remember correctly) you sum up the ‘a’ of all the jumps, and then somehow divide it by the number of resting places.

honestly thinking back this makes no sense (the dividing part) which i think was what triggered me to theorize my own system (i might actually continue it)
well anyway i'd better start on the instant :)

i just realized i forgot level 20 in my giant post lol

taliix wrote:

LionCoder10 wrote:

(#112)

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

but he doesn't tell us how he actually decides how much aggro a level has

if i knew how agro worked, i would use it

he explained it to me sort of.
so each jump has a specific number of ‘a’, with the basis being a litejump = 3a.
what he said was that (if i remember correctly) you sum up the ‘a’ of all the jumps, and then somehow divide it by the number of resting places.

honestly thinking back this makes no sense (the dividing part) which i think was what triggered me to theorize my own system (i might actually continue it)
well anyway i'd better start on the instant :)

oh yeah i think i remember reading that conversation
but then technically almost anywhere is a resting place, not to mention if checkpoints should be a “superior” resting place or something
a new system would be cool

LionCoder10 wrote:

taliix wrote:

LionCoder10 wrote:

(#112)

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

but he doesn't tell us how he actually decides how much aggro a level has

if i knew how agro worked, i would use it

he explained it to me sort of.
so each jump has a specific number of ‘a’, with the basis being a litejump = 3a.
what he said was that (if i remember correctly) you sum up the ‘a’ of all the jumps, and then somehow divide it by the number of resting places.

honestly thinking back this makes no sense (the dividing part) which i think was what triggered me to theorize my own system (i might actually continue it)
well anyway i'd better start on the instant :)

oh yeah i think i remember reading that conversation
but then technically almost anywhere is a resting place, not to mention if checkpoints should be a “superior” resting place or something
a new system would be cool

If(when) I make an Appel list thing, I will just go through each level and decide how hard it is.
nothing can calculate the difficulty of an appel level, and I'd probably use scheeep's scale with arbitrary limits of what level qualifies as what difficulty.

edit: also almost done with semisolids :O
I think

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

taliix wrote:

if this post gets quoted i'll beat the instant and prove everyone that it is not 8 bombs :)
cause honestly at this point my skills are so low since i haven't been playing appel

edit: also i remember michael saying that the explosives/bombs was a logarithmic scale to ‘a’ the main units of difficulty, so i'm probably going to actually calculate the number of bombs it should be

definitely not 80 explosives tho

I might try the instant again too
also Micheal NEEDS to make a video explaining ‘a’ so people who use his scale can accurately rate their level's difficulty

If you start attempting The Instant, I will try to beat Concyclic.

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

(#116)

LionCoder10 wrote:

taliix wrote:

LionCoder10 wrote:

(#112)

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

but he doesn't tell us how he actually decides how much aggro a level has

if i knew how agro worked, i would use it

he explained it to me sort of.
so each jump has a specific number of ‘a’, with the basis being a litejump = 3a.
what he said was that (if i remember correctly) you sum up the ‘a’ of all the jumps, and then somehow divide it by the number of resting places.

honestly thinking back this makes no sense (the dividing part) which i think was what triggered me to theorize my own system (i might actually continue it)
well anyway i'd better start on the instant :)

oh yeah i think i remember reading that conversation
but then technically almost anywhere is a resting place, not to mention if checkpoints should be a “superior” resting place or something
a new system would be cool

If(when) I make an Appel list thing, I will just go through each level and decide how hard it is.
nothing can calculate the difficulty of an appel level, and I'd probably use scheeep's scale with arbitrary limits of what level qualifies as what difficulty.

edit: also almost done with semisolids :O
I think

I would imagine that to calculate the difficulty of a level:
1. each jump would have to consider the entry, setup (time for entry), the actual jump, and the exit
a. setups and consistency tricks lower the difficulty of certain jumps
2. each jump further away from a checkpoint exponentially increases the difficulty
a. each segment (don't separate if there is a one attempt mechanism or something) has its own difficulty
b. the level as a whole has a difficulty that summarizes the assessed difficulties of the segments
3. any visual complications (like BIG apples) would impact the difficulty
4. non-respawning enemies and unlockable doors (including with moving platforms and such) may make the level easier or harder

also then add a personal difficulty rating

also on an unrelated note imagine a boss fight where you
1. fight and defeat the boss
2. exit the arena, hit a button, and die
3. respawn and fight the boss again, but with some new stuff from the button
4. beat the boss, and the cycle continues until the exit after beating the boss doesn't lead to death

cwktao15764 wrote:

(#118)
I would imagine that to calculate the difficulty of a level:
1. each jump would have to consider the entry, setup (time for entry), the actual jump, and the exit
a. setups and consistency tricks lower the difficulty of certain jumps
2. each jump further away from a checkpoint exponentially increases the difficulty
a. each segment (don't separate if there is a one attempt mechanism or something) has its own difficulty
b. the level as a whole has a difficulty that summarizes the assessed difficulties of the segments
3. any visual complications (like BIG apples) would impact the difficulty
4. non-respawning enemies and unlockable doors (including with moving platforms and such) may make the level easier or harder

also then add a personal difficulty rating

also on an unrelated note imagine a boss fight where you
1. fight and defeat the boss
2. exit the arena, hit a button, and die
3. respawn and fight the boss again, but with some new stuff from the button
4. beat the boss, and the cycle continues until the exit after beating the boss doesn't lead to death

alright so points wow youre thought process was actually so similar to mine lol
i agree with 1/1.a/2/2.a but for 2.b my initial thought was for a level with multiple checkpoints to just be the difficulty of the hardest one plus a tiny bit from the others. it depends what you consider ‘hard’.

also i had this idea of curving the difficulty down once it reaches a point. 100 checkpoints, each one the difficulty of a single litejump, except the last which is ink coffee difficulty? the first 99 wouldn't matter. at all. a less extreme example is a wallclimb wall that's really high - initially for beginners each sidejump is super hard, and (as in point 2) the difficulty of each subsequent one would be exponentially harder. however - if the level is like kts hard, you have a tall wall to climb, it's basically ‘easy’. hopefully someone understands my yapping :skull:

i should probably create a forum for this :p

taliix wrote:

cwktao15764 wrote:

(#118)
I would imagine that to calculate the difficulty of a level:
1. each jump would have to consider the entry, setup (time for entry), the actual jump, and the exit
a. setups and consistency tricks lower the difficulty of certain jumps
2. each jump further away from a checkpoint exponentially increases the difficulty
a. each segment (don't separate if there is a one attempt mechanism or something) has its own difficulty
b. the level as a whole has a difficulty that summarizes the assessed difficulties of the segments
3. any visual complications (like BIG apples) would impact the difficulty
4. non-respawning enemies and unlockable doors (including with moving platforms and such) may make the level easier or harder

also then add a personal difficulty rating

also on an unrelated note imagine a boss fight where you
1. fight and defeat the boss
2. exit the arena, hit a button, and die
3. respawn and fight the boss again, but with some new stuff from the button
4. beat the boss, and the cycle continues until the exit after beating the boss doesn't lead to death

alright so points wow youre thought process was actually so similar to mine lol
i agree with 1/1.a/2/2.a but for 2.b my initial thought was for a level with multiple checkpoints to just be the difficulty of the hardest one plus a tiny bit from the others. it depends what you consider ‘hard’.

also i had this idea of curving the difficulty down once it reaches a point. 100 checkpoints, each one the difficulty of a single litejump, except the last which is ink coffee difficulty? the first 99 wouldn't matter. at all. a less extreme example is a wallclimb wall that's really high - initially for beginners each sidejump is super hard, and (as in point 2) the difficulty of each subsequent one would be exponentially harder. however - if the level is like kts hard, you have a tall wall to climb, it's basically ‘easy’. hopefully someone understands my yapping :skull:

i should probably create a forum for this :p

I somewhat understand your yapping lol

A new forum would be good, we haven’t actually had a level code in this “forum for codes and stuff” lol for at least a page and a half

Taliix has an about me/WIWO yay, now he’s not completely ghosted lol