Currently the most popular rating system for custom levels in Appel is the explosive/bomb system, based around jlp-141304's system, the agro system, which can be more than a bit complicated and controversial at times, so a new system is being made. This system is basically a revised and public form of the agro system.

I already have some thoughts and theorizations about the new system. Here is a list of the current ideas:
(subject to revision)

• Units of difficulty are relatively small, likely about the same amount as the agro system
  
• Each jump is given its own difficulty value, with a “jump” casually* being defined as from the moment you are touching the ground to going into the air by means of either falling or jumping to landing either on the ground, wall, a checkpoint or the end flag
  
• From the current checkpoint, each subsequent jump gets exponentially more units of difficulty added to it (for example, three jumps of difficulty 1 in a single checkpoint might theoretically be worth 1, 1.01, and 1.201 difficulty units respectively)
  
• Scaling down the difficulty of jumps when the difficulty of the total level is extremely higher, or scaling up the difficulty of jumps when the difficulty of the total level is extremely lower - this invites the idea of what I think of as “raw difficulty” which is just the sum of all the initial difficulty units of all the jumps, not counting the exponential multiplier for riskiness
  
• The path of least difficulty is used to judge the total difficulty of the level when there are multiple paths even if that path is obscure/etc.
  

* A more precise definition will probably be made, specifically for crouch tech (like crouch spam) that don't involve jumping or falling

Anyone is welcome to help if they have a good understanding of the game.

Here's an edited version of my original theorizations - honestly this might not make much sense if you haven't done like algebra before
(so that you know what’s going on - my original idea was to have each jump have a “base difficulty” and each base difficulties get manipulated and then added together to form the difficulty of each single checkpoint)

The difficulty units are rounded to the nearest hundredth place and always have two figures after the decimal point. Omitting one or more indicates that the difficulty has been rounded.

For difficulty riskiness in the jumps (the exponential increase), I originally had the idea to give each jump an associated “multiplier constant” (this was like half a year ago by the way), which, letting it be the nth jump, got raised to the n-1th power and then multiplied with the jumps base difficulty. (not sure if agro does this but i'm pretty sure it doesn't.)

We could try different things to see the best way but probably the constant should be a value that’s greater than 1 (obviously lol) and, for most (meaning like basically all), less than say 1.1. Having an arbitrary constant though for each jump is a bit lame and, well, arbitrary so it should probably be a scaled version of the base difficulty to be between 1 and like 1.5.

Here’s just a snippet from the original doc:

Another thing I noticed about other difficulty systems is that they don’t take into account the fact that if a level is, say, 50a on the agro scale, it doesn’t make sense to account for the easy jumps. The agro system seems to overcome this difficulty by simply disregarding the easy jumps (which is why Absurd Appel Level 1 is 0a). However, in easy levels, or levels aimed at a beginner audience, these “easy” jumps become hard and worth noting. [so i came up with the idea of] Raw Difficulty, the sum of all the jump difficulties in the level [to assess the overall difficulty of the level and then curve the base difficulties of the jumps]

Then after that was basically what I just said but repeated with more formal equations

So compendium of tech difficulties?
0 is appel's height and each following number is one tile (not block) up
so a lite jump would be Double Spike+0 Spike+3

Base difficulties

- Move -
Classic Jumps
2Spike+0
Double Spike Lite Jump (tas only)
Classic Lite Jump
Lite Jump (Invis spikes top)
Lite Jump (Invis spikes bottom)
Lite Jump (Invis spikes both sides)
2Spike+0 Spike+4
2Spike+0 Spike+5
Fullspike+0 Fullspike+4
Fullspike+0 Spike+5

at this point just add a difficulty increase factor (can be changed on a case by case basis) for changing between invis spikes and spikes

Misc
The Jump

- Entry -

- Exit -
(probably some forumla or something for the difficulty of a precise drop)
Spikejump
Classic spikejump
Banana spikejump
Burthaedge
Invis Spikejump
Sideways banana/classic spikejump
Sideways invis spikejump spike side
Sideways invis spikejump invis side



might be a *bit* overkill

here are my thoughts on why it's hard to make a ‘good’ system.

• you need some sort of difficulty modifier for a level's total length,
  
• exponentially more units for each jump in a checkpoint feels wrong somehow, unless the curve is pretty flat
  
• a single jump can be way more complicated than just leaving the ground and landing again
  

if you are going to commit to making this system, you should have some sample levels to apply it to, so you know how it feels to go up in difficulty on the scale and you can tweak it if the scaling feels weird.

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

(#4)
here are my thoughts on why it's hard to make a ‘good’ system.

• you need some sort of difficulty modifier for a level's total length,
  
• exponentially more units for each jump in a checkpoint feels wrong somehow, unless the curve is pretty flat
  
• a single jump can be way more complicated than just leaving the ground and landing again
  

if you are going to commit to making this system, you should have some sample levels to apply it to, so you know how it feels to go up in difficulty on the scale and you can tweak it if the scaling feels weird.

nice ideas
Yeah the exponential multiplier would be super flat (like 1.01 or something for most jumps) not sure if harder jumps should have greater multipliers
yeahh, my little brain didn't want to come up with a definition that encompasses all “jumps” so i just put a basic one

taliix wrote:

(#5)

thepurplebanana66 wrote:

(#4)
here are my thoughts on why it's hard to make a ‘good’ system.

• you need some sort of difficulty modifier for a level's total length,
  
• exponentially more units for each jump in a checkpoint feels wrong somehow, unless the curve is pretty flat
  
• a single jump can be way more complicated than just leaving the ground and landing again
  

if you are going to commit to making this system, you should have some sample levels to apply it to, so you know how it feels to go up in difficulty on the scale and you can tweak it if the scaling feels weird.

nice ideas
Yeah the exponential multiplier would be super flat (like 1.01 or something for most jumps) not sure if harder jumps should have greater multipliers
yeahh, my little brain didn't want to come up with a definition that encompasses all “jumps” so i just put a basic one

a harder jump has a higher difficulty so it inherently scales up “faster” with 1.01 than a jump with a lower difficulty

What about resting points? Also, what about levels with multiple solutions.

BringUpYourPost wrote:

(#7)
What about resting points? Also, what about levels with multiple solutions.

Resting points aren't that easy to define, so I'm thinking about leaving them out since they just add unnecessary complexity and are also kind of arbitrary (like just why)
The difficulty of a level with multiple solutions is the difficulty of the easiest one.

I assume level = average of checkpoints