As expected I didn't even get close to troubling the standings although 1 of my solutions did feature in the video (haven't heard the audio so was probably shown as an example of how not to do it). I'm not entirely sure this competition is for me as I knew I could massively improve my MM solution by tailoring it to the input order but I just couldn't be bothered, I like my solutions to run indefinitely. The solutions I was most interested to see were for Fructose Factory and I was a little disappointed, I was expecting something a lot more outlandish, a bit like pseudodude's challenge solution. Round 2 challenges seem like quite a step up, much more challenging to complete, let alone optimise.
The first few were basically warm ups. These are tougher but they're not too bad. Ct100 is slightly deceptive, though entirely possible to do the hard way. Three just takes a little planning, though I'm sure my symbol count could be brought down a bit. Haven't done the challenge yet, but I've got the numbers down.
Even if you don't place in the top 8 or 16, it's still worth trying all the puzzles to improve your general skill - last year's tournament improved my SpaceChem aptitude by quite a bit.
I've got some solutions for all three of this round's puzzles, but I think it's a little difficult to talk about benchmarks without making obvious statements. Then again, that won't stop me from being proud of confirming that 1-waldo solutions to the challenge puzzle are indeed possible.
Yes I'm still going to take part as much as possible. This round I seem to be completely distracted by Ct100 which I think I've got a good solution for but I'm also sure someone will have done it in half the time so I keep trying to improve it instead of solving the other 2 problems. Think I'm close to a solution on the 2nd problem but I'm struggling to think in terms of symbols instead of cycles on it. Not put any time into the challenge 1 yet but I really hope to have a 1 waldo solution by the end.
Any solution is a good solution when you're starting out. Trying to figure out how a puzzle works at all helps you explicitly see what steps are necessary so that you can then move on to the optimization conditions for the specific puzzle at hand. So I'd recommend just trying to get any solution on Three without regard to symbol or cycle efficiency and just use both waldos when constructing Precious Oxygen. Besides, participation points are available for any working solution and in later rounds, it may be possible to land in the top 16 by default just for completion.
I gotta agree with MrB - get some solutions in, even if you know they're not the best you can do.
I've only got time to focus on one or two puzzles every week, so I knowingly put in sub-optimal solutions for the ones I'm not focussing on. Keeps me on par with the rest of the crowd!
Especially you folk. =P Geeze - keeping me on my toes, I tells you.
The Something Awful folks are talking about benchmarks on the challenge puzzle, with Serbaldrig (2012 tournament champion) claiming a sub-600 (presumably one-waldo) solution - in case anybody wanted something to shoot for. My current solution is at least 3rd place or worse, and I suspect there's a fundamental flaw that I need to tweak in order to cut off a chunk more.
It's way better than mine. It came down to the wire, but I managed to get a 1-waldo solution, early this morning. I was too stubborn to even try 2. It's ugly and spends a lot of time doing nothing, but it was such a relief when it finally worked.
It's way better than mine. It came down to the wire, but I managed to get a 1-waldo solution, early this morning. I was too stubborn to even try 2. It's ugly and spends a lot of time doing nothing, but it was such a relief when it finally worked.
Yeah - that was surprisingly difficult!
I did come up with a sub-600 1 waldo solution in the end, but who can truly say if it was good enough?
I suspect that, though I did not get to the top benchmark, my challenge solution is good enough for Top 8; hopefully I got my Counting to 100 solution to the limit and early enough to get Top 8 there as well. I am almost certain that I did not get Top 8 on Three, but I have never been all that great at pure symbol optimization. I'll probably be slapping my forehead over something stupid on that one once the results roll out.
Since the deadline has truly gone past, is there a faux pas if we post our solutions?
I don't see a problem with it. I'm interested to see how poorly I did, in comparison. Let me dig through my emails.
Ditto!
Ct100: 117/1/27 (participation points ahoy!)
Three: 2460/1/26
PO: 1/560/1/64
Step 1: Split Au into two parts - use Zr junction at top to place the split into a strategic location
Step 2: Go back and fetch Ag, and split that into two parts - use non-output (non-oxygen) path to fuse into Gd and Sm (flip flops used so that next three runs through this during the Gd split will not try to fuse anything)
Step 3: Discard Sm, so that we are guaranteed that any split into O will be O-O, instead of O-N
Step 4a: Split split split - every time there no oxygen as a result of the split, use the non-output path (this should happen three more times before the final O=O)
Step 4b: Split split split - every time an oxygen appears, use the oxygen path (this should happen exactly four times, so use 2 flip flops to count up and go back to step 1)
Edit: Man, these PO solutions need explanations! =P (including mine!)
(I definitely need to put your chain of flipflops at the bottom of the grid into SpaceChem to see what's happening - it's to count to something, I'm certain, but what and how?!)
Holy crap ecco, that Precious Oxygen solution is absolutely brilliant. Using the molecule chains like that is pseudodudean, to borrow a term from the 2012 Tournament. I'm also slapping my forehead at Three, where I wanted to mash one of the waldos on a bond symbol but never figured out which one or how.
I'll upload my pack of solutions for this round when I get home, but man, they just don't compare. (Except maybe Count to 100, to which I have a better cycle count than ContentContext.)
EDIT: ContentContext, I am having so much trouble following your Precious Oxygen solution on sight and I love it.
I knew I was at least 10 over what was possible on Three. Attemps to straighten things out just added symbols. Nice work on that one.
These challenges have been a real sore spot, and I can't imagine them getting any easier. I'll be less distracted in the upcoming rounds, so I hope I can step up my game.
Edit: Ecco, I don't even know how I got that to work. I was having the hardest time getting it to loop, so I threw flip flops at it, until things stopped crashing.
Ecco, I don't even know how I got that to work. I was having the hardest time getting it to loop, so I threw flip flops at it, until things stopped crashing.
Hahaha - you should have seen my earlier solutions! I had one where I was trying to count to 5 on the flip flops on the non-oxygen path. I tried all sorts of random configurations until I just gave up, and noticed that by using that Zr, I could actually "escape" the loop so that the non-oxygen path only had to count to 4.
I think that was at about 11pm last night.
...
and now... I feel like I need to catch up on my sleep.
Damn! I really need to pay attention to the deadline dates. 1st round I thought it finished a week earlier than it actually did, this round I thought it was finishing a week later. Only got a solution in for Counting to 100 and at 74 cycles I'm guessing it missed out.
Hearing you quote sub-500 from the other SA guys makes me wonder how they did it.
If I said sub-500, I must have misspoke. Sub-600 was the best benchmark that I saw reported in the SA thread, so I suspect you might end up in the top 3 again for this round on the upper tier puzzle.
Alright, my solution pack is here. Knowing individuals' scores kinds of takes a little bit of the mystery and anticipation out of waiting for the results, but I'm still very interested to see what the top solutions and other interesting variations look like.
Damn! I really need to pay attention to the deadline dates. 1st round I thought it finished a week earlier than it actually did, this round I thought it was finishing a week later. Only got a solution in for Counting to 100 and at 74 cycles I'm guessing it missed out.
I think the rest of the tournament has one week per round now?
Hearing you quote sub-500 from the other SA guys makes me wonder how they did it.
If I said sub-500, I must have misspoke.
I admit, I was pumped full of adrenaline and starting to see the matrix when we were talking - I may have misread things. All I saw really after a point were red waldos, blu... wait, single waldo solution, so no blue waldo. Just one red waldo.
Did you know that you can make molecules that shouldn't even exist? And furthermore, did you know that the game has a hidden atom? Well, this week is about those.
By the way, feel free to talk about particle smashing here. This is a weird concept, so if you want to help make it more clear, by all means. But let's not explain the atom in the upper tier puzzle.
Image:
Task: Generate Θ-tetroxide using hypothetite. What do you do with all that extra element theta?
Goal Priority: LEAST CYCLES/LEAST SYMBOLS/SUBMISSION TIME
Image:
Task: Double-bond hydrogen to carbon to create a rather unstable version of acetylene.
Goal Priority: LEAST CYCLES/LEAST SYMBOLS/SUBMISSION TIME
I was a little upset that the 3rd round of puzzles required knowledge of a glitch, but at least WildM put up a video explaining it. Of course, this was after I had already solved the first one, using The Google.
Even after watching the video, I still don't quite understand particle smashing, but at least I've been making some progress with trial and error. Maybe it will become more intuitive as the week goes on.
I'm actually kind of surprised that I placed in the Top 8 for two of the three puzzles on Round 2, and was close on the one I didn't get in on.
I've got preliminary solutions for all of Round 3's puzzles and finally have sort of a handle on particle smashing. The lower tier puzzles aren't so bad once you understand particle smashing a little bit, though I still have room to optimize. I'm most interested to see the variety of solutions on this week's challenge - my preliminary solution is obviously poor.
I've got preliminary solutions for all of Round 3's puzzles and finally have sort of a handle on particle smashing. The lower tier puzzles aren't so bad once you understand particle smashing a little bit, though I still have room to optimize. I'm most interested to see the variety of solutions on this week's challenge - my preliminary solution is obviously poor.
Oh, believe you me, I hate particle smashing too, and I hope I don't have to do any more of it after the end of this round.
Really though, we all know deep down that there's going to be one advanced particle smashing puzzle later in the tournament and we're all going to loathe it so much.
In case anyone needed some 'early' benchmarks to fret about, there's sub-130 on Hypothetical Synthesis and sub-200 on Superhydracetylene to think about.
About the same. Took me a while to get around to it, because I spent so much trying to get sub-130 on the first one. Still didn't get there, but the sub-200 benchmark was easy enough.
Seems a few others weren't happy with with this round, judging by the Steam forum. Looks like puzzles that require smashing are out, moving forward.
I cut past 400 cycles on Intro to Templates last night - I am tempted to believe that sub-300, or at least something very close to that next benchmark, is a possibility for the top scorers. I believe CannibalK9 over on SA is suggesting he has sub-180 on Superhydracetylene, so I'm probably going to have to take another look at that one.
I ended up focussing most of my spare time into Templates this week:
Hypothetical Synthesis 135/1/32
Superhydractylene 392/1/56 *
* My only excuse is that I put little effort into this one
Intro to templates 326/1/61 **
** There's actually a little direction arrow in the top left that's redundant, which I forgot to remove
Posts
I've got some solutions for all three of this round's puzzles, but I think it's a little difficult to talk about benchmarks without making obvious statements. Then again, that won't stop me from being proud of confirming that 1-waldo solutions to the challenge puzzle are indeed possible.
I gotta agree with MrB - get some solutions in, even if you know they're not the best you can do.
I've only got time to focus on one or two puzzles every week, so I knowingly put in sub-optimal solutions for the ones I'm not focussing on. Keeps me on par with the rest of the crowd!
Especially you folk. =P Geeze - keeping me on my toes, I tells you.
That's pretty darned impressive, actually
Yeah - that was surprisingly difficult!
I did come up with a sub-600 1 waldo solution in the end, but who can truly say if it was good enough?
Edit:
Ct100: 66/1/30, Three: 1880/1/39, PO: 1/2494/1/88.
/facepalm
Edit2: Idea didn't work - *phew* (or at least not without more tweaking)
Edit
Ditto!
Ct100: 117/1/27 (participation points ahoy!)
Three: 2460/1/26
PO: 1/560/1/64
Step 1: Split Au into two parts - use Zr junction at top to place the split into a strategic location
Step 2: Go back and fetch Ag, and split that into two parts - use non-output (non-oxygen) path to fuse into Gd and Sm (flip flops used so that next three runs through this during the Gd split will not try to fuse anything)
Step 3: Discard Sm, so that we are guaranteed that any split into O will be O-O, instead of O-N
Step 4a: Split split split - every time there no oxygen as a result of the split, use the non-output path (this should happen three more times before the final O=O)
Step 4b: Split split split - every time an oxygen appears, use the oxygen path (this should happen exactly four times, so use 2 flip flops to count up and go back to step 1)
Ct100: So neat! I knew that there was a ton of optimising that could be done there - so elegant
Three: Love your flip flop delays on the edge of the grid - I was all O_o !!? until I figured it out.
PO: Wow, that's... certainly something! Participation points ahoy!
Edit: Man, these PO solutions need explanations! =P (including mine!)
(I definitely need to put your chain of flipflops at the bottom of the grid into SpaceChem to see what's happening - it's to count to something, I'm certain, but what and how?!)
I'll upload my pack of solutions for this round when I get home, but man, they just don't compare. (Except maybe Count to 100, to which I have a better cycle count than ContentContext.)
EDIT: ContentContext, I am having so much trouble following your Precious Oxygen solution on sight and I love it.
These challenges have been a real sore spot, and I can't imagine them getting any easier. I'll be less distracted in the upcoming rounds, so I hope I can step up my game.
Edit: Ecco, I don't even know how I got that to work. I was having the hardest time getting it to loop, so I threw flip flops at it, until things stopped crashing.
I finalised my PO at roughly 2am local time (entry deadline is 5am local time). I was pumped with adrenaline!
Don't tell ahava, 'k? =P
Hearing you quote sub-500 from the other SA guys makes me wonder how they did it.
They're forces to be reckoned with!
Edit:
Hahaha - you should have seen my earlier solutions! I had one where I was trying to count to 5 on the flip flops on the non-oxygen path. I tried all sorts of random configurations until I just gave up, and noticed that by using that Zr, I could actually "escape" the loop so that the non-oxygen path only had to count to 4.
I think that was at about 11pm last night.
...
and now... I feel like I need to catch up on my sleep.
*yawn*
If I said sub-500, I must have misspoke. Sub-600 was the best benchmark that I saw reported in the SA thread, so I suspect you might end up in the top 3 again for this round on the upper tier puzzle.
I think the rest of the tournament has one week per round now?
I admit, I was pumped full of adrenaline and starting to see the matrix when we were talking - I may have misread things. All I saw really after a point were red waldos, blu... wait, single waldo solution, so no blue waldo. Just one red waldo.
Particle smashing?
W.T.F
I was a little upset that the 3rd round of puzzles required knowledge of a glitch, but at least WildM put up a video explaining it. Of course, this was after I had already solved the first one, using The Google.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BBNjYvpJu0
Overall Standings - Upper Tier
Code:
Pseudodude 11
ecco2 8
Carlbunk 8
Serbaldrig 7
GuavaMoment 7
CannibalK9 6
MrBlarney 6
gggol 5
Waypoint 5
ContentContext 4
csuzw 2
Everyone Else <=4
Overall Standings - Lower Tier
Code:
Serbaldrig 17
Pseudodude 16
gggol 16
CannibalK9 16
DariusRaider 16
GuavaMoment 15
Blueeyedrat 14
TheKnife 14
Leylite 13
Carlbunk 13
MrBlarney 13
ecco2 12
Waypoint 12
ContentContext 11
csuzw 8
Everyone Else <=11
Detailed Results
4: Counting to 100
Code:
Cycles Reactor Symbols
1st gggol 51 1 47
2nd Serbaldrig 52 1 51
3rd Cannibal9K 56 1 96
4th Waypoint 59 1 38
5th ToughThought 59 1 53
6th MrBlarney 62 1 37
7th TheKnife 62 1 46
8th Amphigorist 62 1 69
5: Three
Code:
Cycles Reactor Symbols
1st Blueeyedrat 1945 1 24
2nd CannibalK9 3019 1 24
3rd Amphigorist 2204 1 25
4th lardnar 2274 1 25
5th ecco2 2490 1 26
6th DariusRaider 3390 1 26
7th GuavaMoment 2177 1 27
8th Waypoint 1362 1 28
Histogram
Challenge 2: Precious Oxygen
Code:
Waldos Cycles Reactor Symbols
1st Carlbunk 1 482 1 58
2nd Pseudodude 1 517 1 67
3rd GuavaMoment 1 549 1 52
4th gggol 1 559 1 66
5th ecco2 1 560 1 64
6th Serbaldrig 1 573 1 67
7th MrBlarney 1 631 1 66
8th CannibalK9 1 641 1 54
I've got preliminary solutions for all of Round 3's puzzles and finally have sort of a handle on particle smashing. The lower tier puzzles aren't so bad once you understand particle smashing a little bit, though I still have room to optimize. I'm most interested to see the variety of solutions on this week's challenge - my preliminary solution is obviously poor.
That was a tough round.
I'm particle smashing as well
But I don't have to like it. =P
Really though, we all know deep down that there's going to be one advanced particle smashing puzzle later in the tournament and we're all going to loathe it so much.
And I think I have just come up with the craziest way of getting sub-130...
Edit: Nope, didn't work
How are you chaps doing?
Seems a few others weren't happy with with this round, judging by the Steam forum. Looks like puzzles that require smashing are out, moving forward.
I'm going to have to dedicate the rest of my free time to the challenge puzzle this week, and maybe if I have spare time I'll try a sub-130 solution.
Edit:
There, sub-370 on Intro to Templates.
Hypothetical Synthesis 165/1/51
http://i.imgur.com/UMoGnsT.jpg
Superhydractylene 181/1/31
http://i.imgur.com/zFcvNBe.jpg
Intro to Templates 368/1/55
Edit:
Seeing a few sub-130's and talk of using 1 input, I understand the mistake I made.
I ended up focussing most of my spare time into Templates this week:
Hypothetical Synthesis 135/1/32
Superhydractylene 392/1/56 *
* My only excuse is that I put little effort into this one
Intro to templates 326/1/61 ** ** There's actually a little direction arrow in the top left that's redundant, which I forgot to remove
Now that's a nice elegant solution!
Please don't judge my monstrosity of a solution to that problem too harshly =P