Game change suggestions, thoughts, questions
|Opened by:||Steven Pletsch|
|Opened on:||Monday, July 15, 2013 - 07:43|
|Last modified:||Wednesday, July 17, 2013 - 09:17|
Finally get back into the swing of things and been thinking a bit about how the game has evolved the past couple of years. I wanted to offer up a couple of thoughts, mostly in the form of questions because I don't know if they would be effective solutions or not:
I think freestyle design types of puzzles are a lot of fun, but I wonder if they are producing the desired results ? Since the highest scoring solutions seems to be helix only designs, I wonder if reducing scores for helix bonds slightly, and increasing slightly the sheet, loop, and sidechain bonds for these types may yield more diverse results ?
I also wonder if it would be possible to create semi-targeted freestyle design puzzles, like simply providing a locked structure, and a separate freestyle design with a large degree of variance in length, say starting with 50 segments, and allowing a variance of +/- 40, and seeing what people come up with for interactions. Or is this ineffective or just too general ?
and finally, on the beginner puzzles, rather than having a repost of something, I wonder if it would be more effective to offer a simple, but unsolved protein structure. I think the real hook to this game is being able to have a shot at "making a difference" and that a lot of new people may be disillusioned by spending hours on a puzzle only to find out it was already done before, or doesn't really "help" in the way they expected.
Just some thoughts I wanted to share ;)
Thanks for all you do, I <3 FoldIt