Olymbits - A couple of inaccuracies in the statement

Hi, I believe I’ve found an error in the statement. In the part concerning the diving minigame:

The combo multiplier starts at 1 and increases by 1 for each consecutive turn where the player’s action matches the diving goal. It also resets to 1 when the player’s action does not match the diving goal.

As per my experience, the combo multiplier is reset to 0 and not one.

Then, for roller speed skating:

What’s more, if after a move a player finds themselves on the same space as an opponent, both their risk is increased by 2!

After reading this, I wondered: is this penalty applied for each opponent or only for one opponent? I.e. If the three players end in the same cell, will they get a penalty of 2 or 4? After checking the code, it’s the former. I.e. two or more players in the same cell means that each of the players involved get a penalty of 2.

1 Like

Regarding Diving:

When description say

The combo multiplier starts at 1 and increases by 1 for each consecutive turn where the player’s action matches the diving goal. It also resets to 1 when the player’s action does not match the diving goal.
Means that the combo is a factor of a product: 1 point * Actual combo = Points of round. If the combo is reset, it is: 1*1=1 point this round.

Regarding Skating:

In my experience, if there is at least 1 player in your cell, you get a 2 risk penalty, but it doesn’t accumulate for each player in that cell.

P.S.: Excuse my English, it’s not my main language.

Means that the combo is a factor of a product: 1 point * Actual combo = Points of round. If the combo is reset, it is: 1*1=1 point this round.

No, not in my experience. If that were true, it wouldn’t be possible to get an in-game score of 0 by the end of the diving match. It is possible if you don’t follow any of the given directions. Even the example in the statement confirms this: reg2, player 2 combo, 0 (i.e. you can keep the combo multiplier at 0, summing 0 each turn).

In my experience, if there is at least 1 player in your cell, you get a 2 risk penalty, but it doesn’t accumulate for each player in that cell.

Yes, that’s what I said . My point was to make this clear in the statement.

Just to be clear, I wasn’t asking questions (i.e. does this work like this?). I have a clear idea of how each minigame and the whole game work, both from experience and from reading the source code in the parts I was unsure. I was asserting some facts and arguing that these two points could be expressed better in the statement (i.e. this positively works like that and the statement is ambigous or misleading in that regard), both for the contest and for those who come later. This post is aimed at the organizers so they fix the statement if they agree with me.

P.S.: Excuse my English, it’s not my main language.

I think your English is fine! Not my main language either, so maybe I’m not the best to judge.

To support my claim that the combo is reset to 0 and not to 1:

In the code, points are scored after increasing the combo multiplier (first matching action scores 1, second scores 2, etc.), so it would be misleading to state that the combo starts at 0 and resets at 0.

I think the current statement is clear as is.

I have to repost because I replied to myself instead of you.

I’m sorry for being insistent, but I have to strongly disagree.

In the code, points are scored after increasing the combo multiplier (first matching action scores 1, second scores 2, etc.), so it would be misleading to state that the combo starts at 0 and resets at 0

If that were true, it’d be impossible to get an score of 0 at diving. If the combo started at 1, the final score would be at least 10 (the number of turns). Try not following any of the given directions. Or just watch the default, random bot. You’ll see that it won’t score any point in most of the turns. The combo is increased only when the action matches the current direction, else it’s never increased, and if it starts at 0 (which it does), it keeps being 0:

Also, again, see the example given in the problem statement: reg2 (which corresponds to the second player combo) is 0. So at the very least you’ll have to give me that the statement is wrong in the example or in the explanation of the rules.

I did not pay attention to the registries, now I agree there is a confusion.
Interestingly, the French statement is much more accurate about how the code works :

Les joueurs doivent réaliser une série de figures correspondante à la séquence de directions donnée au début de chaque partie. On appele cette série l’objectif.

À chaque tour où l’action d’un joueur correspond à la direction de l’objectif de ce tour, le joueur augmentera son multiplicateur de combo puis gagnera des points égaux à celui-ci. Le multiplicateur de combo commence à 0 et augmente de 1 pour chaque tour consécutif où l’action du joueur correspond à l’objectif. Il se réinitialise à 0 lorsque l’action du joueur ne correspond pas à l’objectif.

I still think it would be clearer if the combo registry started at 1, and if you play a matching action you get the points shown in the registry then your combo increases. But I guess this behaviour would break some bots that currently use the combo registry in their strategy.

I still think it would be clearer if the combo registry started at 1, and if you play a matching action you get the points shown in the registry then your combo increases. But I guess this behaviour would break some bots that currently use the combo registry in their strategy.

Yes, I agree.

To not break any existing bot, probably it’s best to just modify the problem statement appropriately.

I had the same interrogation reading the statement, it is not clear. And +1 for modifying the statement as the French version is clear and explicit (for the current observed behavior), English version should be as well.