Change the Scoring

Case number:699969-984947
Opened by:phi16
Opened on:Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 13:30
Last modified:Sunday, July 3, 2011 - 17:59

Please read forum entry "Self-Fulfilling Prophecy" for background info. It might not be as much fun to play (if you're into immediate gratification) but if the scoring was done differently, it would encourage people to think more globally.

For example, add the rule to scoring --"Increases in scores can only be achieved in 100 point increments." Small incremental advances wouldn't count until a player could put together 100 points worth. In this case, people would opt for the major rebuilds and spend several hours trying out different strategies to achieve them rather than wiggling pairs of amino acids going up and down the backbone. The scoring change would encourage players to take a wider view of the protein and examine major structural relationships rather than focusing too quickly on minutiae.


1. Change the scoring so that, like in the game of darts where a special score is required to 'break the ice', no scoring is allowed until 100 points have been achieved in a single wiggle. Continue this type of scoring until 1000 total points have been added. (100 was an arbitrary number and must be careful considered)


2. Change the scoring so that only 100 point increments are allowed for the first three days of play. (again, 100 was an arbitrary number and alternates must be considered)


3. Change the scoring so that improvements to score are only allowed if the player is wiggling structural changes or major changes in spacial relations between chain segments. I'm not sure what the score algorithm is like but there are probably different valuations for relationships between neighbors and relationships between sidechains, etc. To encourage players to think globally, discount scoring between neighbors and smaller values in scoring in the early game giving more weight to relationships of side chains and positions in space. (Developers will have a better understanding of the possibilities than I do.)

(Thu, 02/12/2009 - 13:30  |  1 comment)

Joined: 06/17/2010
Status: Open » Closed

We have 2pts evo gap. In solo all points are count. Closing.


Developed by: UW Center for Game Science, UW Institute for Protein Design, Northeastern University, Vanderbilt University Meiler Lab, UC Davis
Supported by: DARPA, NSF, NIH, HHMI, Amazon, Microsoft, Adobe, Boehringer Ingelheim, RosettaCommons