Role difficulty and number of ascensions

Ohle Claussen wrote:

> On 2008-02-08, Doug Freyburger wrote:
>> Ohle Claussen <ohle.claus....DeleteThis@ds.mpg.de> wrote:
>>> Going from 78291s statistics, if he/she really is a perfect
>>> sample, healers should be the easiest class. Do you really think
>>> they are?
>>
>> For most frequent ascenders? It would take comparison with other
>> frequent ascenders
>
> Exactly.
>
>> but it wouldn't be surprising.
>
> I'm not sure, but healers don't seem to have any specific advatege
> going for them that could make them so much better than, say,
> tourists, which according to those stats would rank third to last.
>

As an expert player i find healers one of the easiest class because it
is the opening game that kills me the most. Once i get past sokobon
and minetown, i rarely die. Healers are the easiest to do this with
because of their starting potions. playing a lvl one character with
around 25 hp is a really huge advantage, and this goes for conduct
games and non-conduct games. If i get 30 hp it is like a walk in the
park.
 >> Stay informed about: Role difficulty and number of ascensions 

On 2008-02-08, Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanagnou DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
> Derek Ray wrote:
>> On 2008-02-08, cdi <cdinchauste DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>I wonder, has anyone looked at 78291's NAO ascension rates by class?
>>>He has over 200 ascensions within the past year and, by himself, might
>>>provide a good read on the real degree of difficulty for each class.
>>
>> He would be the absolute worst subject, actually, for two reasons:
>>
>> 1) He doesn't play for ratio (win every game), he just plays extremely fast
>> and restarts if it ends in death.
>
> Mind, his ascension ratio is _64%_! That's quite different to someone who
> doesn't mind sacrificing a sequence of characters just to ascend 1 in 10.

The point here is that he's capable of 13 out of 13 if he cared to spend
the effort; the fact that his ratio is 64%, though, indicates that he
just doesn't put in the effort consistently, and as such isn't useful
for our purposes compared to the player who still is wrestling with the
non-Valk/Wiz/Barb roles, and who really _does_ make his best effort to
win every time.

>> 2) His skill level renders all classes equally 'easy'
> Quite true. I think that is a good base for a non-biased "Which class is
> hardest?" question.

His skill level also renders all classes equally 'hard'. You really
don't get meaningful numbers out of him no matter how you slice it, but
this is also part of the problem with trying to do statistics based on a
single person's games. Either you spend a great deal of time setting up
pre-play controls ("play 5 of each role, try to ascend with no conducts
on any, only play one per day so you don't get tired"), or you end up with
what is effectively garbage.

> >>>> Except that beginners view things differently than serial ascenders.
> >>>> If a class has a higher chance of surviving sokoban and the mines
> >>>> even with a strategy worse than what a serial ascender does, then
> >>>> that class is easier to a beginner.

Beginners don't ascend, ever, and as such aren't useful in this
comparison -- this is why the stats chart I posted only considered
players who had at least ascended a single time.

--
Derek

Game info and change log: http://sporkhack.com
Beta Server: telnet://sporkhack.com
IRC: irc.freenode.net, #sporkhack
 >> Stay informed about: Role difficulty and number of ascensions 

Derek Ray wrote:
>
> His skill level also renders all classes equally 'hard'.

I think the classes are just "[quite] equally 'hard'" compared to less
skilled players; and we are looking for the delta, which I am sure is
existing.

Janis
 >> Stay informed about: Role difficulty and number of ascensions 

On Feb 8, 9:12 am, Ohle Claussen <ohle.claus....DeleteThis@ds.mpg.de> wrote:
> I'm not sure, but healers don't seem to have any specific advatege going for
> them that could make them so much better than, say, tourists, which according
> to those stats would rank third to last.

Healers misplace pets, but have no excuse to lose them in combat and
leave the first room in the dungeon with a lot more HPs, in addition
to cash for the protection racket. Plus no instant kill from crude
arrows and dart traps.

Tourists start with things that seem like they ought to be nice, but
the total package doesn't add up. Flashing defeats their own writing
and without stealth they're hunted down anyway while their only
starting weapon doesn't last long. And no tourist ever has
infravision.

I'm real tempted these days to do the mines to minetown first as a
Tourist, just for the daggers and armor. With Sting in hand those
crude arrows are a little easier to deal with. (Don't stumble around
in the dark, read the maps and keep off angle from gnomes while Fido
chews on them.)

-HJC
 >> Stay informed about: Role difficulty and number of ascensions 

> On Feb 8, 9:12 am, Ohle Claussen <ohle.claus....DeleteThis@ds.mpg.de> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure, but healers don't seem to have any specific advatege going for
> them that could make them so much better than, say, tourists, which according
> to those stats would rank third to last.

My approach to tourists and healers is a little odd. I pick up the
first tolerably good unrestricted weapon I find and ease into wombat-
SMASH! as soon as possible. FWIW, my last healer spent most of the
game declaring "I'm the Invincible Silver Spear Prince!". I didn't
practice either darts or daggers enough to #enhance either past
unskilled.

-cdi
 >> Stay informed about: Role difficulty and number of ascensions 

sjdevnull.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Here's my "difficulty for non-experts who know how to play" stat.
>
> Take all the players on NAO who have ascended at least 3 times but no
> more than 12 times.
> Throw out all the games (ascended or not) up to and including their
> 2nd ascension.

Another interesting approach!

> Those numbers are arbitrary, but it's basically eliminate all the
> "just learning to play" games and the "I've totally mastered things"
> games.
>
> Ascension percentage by class for the remaining games:
> 13.37 Bar
> 13.30 Val
> 10.51 Sam
> 10.30 Cav
> 9.20 Kni
> 6.01 Rog
> 5.96 Ran
> 5.08 Tou
> 4.74 Pri
> 4.18 Hea
> 4.00 Mon
> 3.52 Wiz
> 2.58 Arc

I wonder about the Tourists rank.

Janis
 >> Stay informed about: Role difficulty and number of ascensions 

On Feb 8, 9:39 am, cdi <cdinchau... RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
> An "expert, well rounded player" sample could consist of those players
> who meet 6 of the following:
>
> - have at least 13 ascensions
> - have ascended each class
> - have no more than 2/13 of their games in any given class
> - have no more than 2/13 of their ascensions in any given class
> - have no less than 1/26 of their games in any given class
> - have no less than 1/26 of their ascensions in any given class
> - have an ascension rate of at least 5.00%
>
> There is a pool of 100 players on alt.org who meet the first
> requirement. I wonder how many meet another 5 requirements.

If it helps, only 50 meet the second, fourth, and sixth combined.
(stats at http://www.box.net/shared/svkewxwoo8)

--Jessica
 >> Stay informed about: Role difficulty and number of ascensions 

Jesssica wrote:
>
> If it helps, only 50 meet the second, fourth, and sixth combined.
> (stats at http://www.box.net/shared/svkewxwoo8)

(What a pitty it's an *.xls file.)

If the data set is not too large, would you mind posting it here
in RGRN as plain text? (Or else upload it to the server as html?)

(Just a couple suggestions in favour of standards. Please ignore
if inconvenient.

Janis
 >> Stay informed about: Role difficulty and number of ascensions 

On Feb 8, 6:28 pm, "sjdevn...@yahoo.com" <sjdevn....RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 8, 3:41 pm, Derek Ray <de....RemoveThis@moot.its.only.a.spamtrap.org>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 2008-02-08, funcrunch <web-goog....RemoveThis@funcrunch.org> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 8, 9:23 am, Derek Ray <de....RemoveThis@moot.its.only.a.spamtrap.org>
> > >> The label "serial ascenders" is reserved for
> > >> those who have at least 13 ascensions, and more implies that they've
> > >> reached a point in the game where they tend to win, as opposed to vice
> > >> versa.
>
> > > I was wondering what your definition of "serial ascender" was. I would
> > > have thought it had at least something to do with ascension
> > > percentage, because even though I had 17 ascensions last year, I had
> > > only around 15% winning percentage, and didn't consider that all that
> > > great an accomplishment...
>
> > Great compared to zipcode? No. But realistically, once you've done
> > "one of each", it is a safe bet to say you've mastered Nethack -- and
> > once you've ascended 13 times _regardless_ of class, it's safe to say
> > that you're more than familiar with what it actually _takes_ to ascend,
> > whether or not you've bothered to do it with any given role.
>
> Here's my "difficulty for non-experts who know how to play" stat.
>
> Take all the players on NAO who have ascended at least 3 times but no
> more than 12 times.
> Throw out all the games (ascended or not) up to and including their
> 2nd ascension.
>
> Those numbers are arbitrary, but it's basically eliminate all the
> "just learning to play" games and the "I've totally mastered things"
> games.
>
> Ascension percentage by class for the remaining games:
> 13.37 Bar
> 13.30 Val
> 10.51 Sam
> 10.30 Cav
> 9.20 Kni
> 6.01 Rog
> 5.96 Ran
> 5.08 Tou
> 4.74 Pri
> 4.18 Hea
> 4.00 Mon
> 3.52 Wiz
> 2.58 Arc

So after playing around a bit, there are a few vague groupings that
seem pretty steady across skill level. No matter whether you look at
1st ascensions, 2nd-10th, 10th-30th, 5th-15th, or whatever:
Bar/Val/Sam/Kni/Cav are easiest
Ran/Tou are next
Rog/Pri are next, though Rog sometimes groups with Ran/Tou
Mon/Wiz/Arc/Hea are hardest, though for more experienced players Hea
moves up maybe even as high as Ran/Tou (while for newbies it's the
toughest)
 >> Stay informed about: Role difficulty and number of ascensions 

On Feb 8, 6:54 pm, Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanag... DeleteThis @hotmail.com>
wrote:
> sjdevn... DeleteThis @yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > Here's my "difficulty for non-experts who know how to play" stat.
>
> > Take all the players on NAO who have ascended at least 3 times but no
> > more than 12 times.
> > Throw out all the games (ascended or not) up to and including their
> > 2nd ascension.
>
> Another interesting approach!
>
>
>
> > Those numbers are arbitrary, but it's basically eliminate all the
> > "just learning to play" games and the "I've totally mastered things"
> > games.
>
> > Ascension percentage by class for the remaining games:
> > 13.37 Bar
> > 13.30 Val
> > 10.51 Sam
> > 10.30 Cav
> > 9.20 Kni
> > 6.01 Rog
> > 5.96 Ran
> > 5.08 Tou
> > 4.74 Pri
> > 4.18 Hea
> > 4.00 Mon
> > 3.52 Wiz
> > 2.58 Arc
>
> I wonder about the Tourists rank.
>
> Janis

Tourists improve quickly, have good missiles early on, and can
twoweapon and do decent ranged attacks.

It seems steady, they're not that hard for newbies, middle experience,
or very experienced players. Basically as I said in another post no
matter who you look at:
Val/Sam/Bar/Cav/Kni are easiest (no particular order)
Ran/Tou are next, and maybe Rog
Pri is next, and maybe Rog
Hea/Mon/Wiz/Arc are toughest, though for very experienced players Hea
is a bit easier than these and maybe up with Ran/Tou

To me personally, the first group are all classes I think are easy.
I'd probably say Ran/Rog/Wiz would be intuitively the next group, with
Pri/Tou after that and Hea/Mon/Arc definitely the hardest.

But it's entirely possible that I mentally overrate Wiz because they
are fun and if they survive the early game the late game is a total
breeze for them.

Indeed, looking at my actual numbers my asc% are (at least 2 asc per
role):
9.09 Arc
12.50 Hea
15.00 Pri
16.67 Wiz
25.00 Mon
25.00 Val
40.00 Cav
40.00 Kni
40.00 Tou
42.86 Ran
50.00 Rog
50.00 Sam
100.00 Bar

So I'm definitely perceiving Wiz differently from where they actually
rate. From Mon on up I don't think these numbers mean much (being 2/8
vs. 2/4 is pretty open to luck), but the classes from Wiz down I die a
fair bit more than just luck would warrant--probably shouldn't have
tried to go with a Priest in the middle of a 6-ascension streak last
year (ending it), though I did do both a Wiz and an Arc in the midst
of it.
 >> Stay informed about: Role difficulty and number of ascensions 

On Feb 9, 4:21 pm, "sjdevn...@yahoo.com" <sjdevn....TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 8, 6:54 pm, Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanag....TakeThisOut@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I wonder about the Tourists rank.
>
> > Janis
>
> Tourists improve quickly, have good missiles early on, and can
> twoweapon and do decent ranged attacks.
>
> It seems steady, they're not that hard for newbies, middle experience,
> or very experienced players.

Tourists are fun because they do almost everything well. Getting one
past infancy isn't all that difficult (tossing darts, anyone?). After
that, it's mostly smooth sailing.

> But it's entirely possible that I mentally overrate Wiz because they
> are fun and if they survive the early game the late game is a total
> breeze for them.

Looking at my own games:

Ran: 100.00% (3/3)
Val: 80.00% (4/5)
Pri: 75.00% (3/4)
Hea: 60.00% (3/5)
Arc: 50.00% (3/6)
Bar: 50.00% (3/6)
Tou: 50.00% (2/4)
Rog: 42.86% (3/7)
Cav: 33.33% (2/6)
Mon: 33.33% (3/9)
Sam: 30.00% (3/10)
Kni: 27.27% (3/11)
Wiz: 25.00% (3/12)

I don't overate wizards. I'm well aware that Wiz and Kni are my worst
classes. To me, those two are hard. Sam and Mon are towards the
bottom, I think, because I like trying/doing silly stuff with them (7+
conducts, weaponless, &c) and not because of any intrinsic
difficulty. For the rest, I have two groupings
"cakewalk" (ran,val,pri,hea) and "easy" (arc,bar,tou,rog,cav).

-cdi
 >> Stay informed about: Role difficulty and number of ascensions 

On Feb 9, 2:17 am, Janis Papanagnou <Janis_Papanag... RemoveThis @hotmail.com>
wrote:
> Jesssica wrote:
>
> > If it helps, only 50 meet the second, fourth, and sixth combined.
> > (stats athttp://www.box.net/shared/svkewxwoo8)
>
> (What a pitty it's an *.xls file.)
>
> If the data set is not too large, would you mind posting it here
> in RGRN as plain text? (Or else upload it to the server as html?)
>
> (Just a couple suggestions in favour of standards. Please ignore
> if inconvenient.
>
> Janis

Here you go, hopefully it's readable =)

http://www.box.net/shared/zv8im42kg8

-Jessica
 >> Stay informed about: Role difficulty and number of ascensions 

Ohle Claussen <ohle.claus... DeleteThis @ds.mpg.de> wrote:

> Going from 78291s statistics, if he/she really is a perfect sample,
> healers should be the easiest class. Do you really think they are?

Yes. For an experienced player, the huge boost of HP at the
beginning and being able to cast healing on self and pets and
monitor the health of pets is probably an overwhelming
collective advantage. These also make Healer an excellent
choice for protection running, but you can both protection run
all classes successfully, and also play Healers successfully
without any protection run orientation.

xanthian.
 >> Stay informed about: Role difficulty and number of ascensions