Difference between revisions of "Talk:Bingo geohash achievement"

From Geohashing
imported>Greenslime
Line 13: Line 13:
  
 
:'''support''' - [[User:Greenslime|Greenslime]] 20:22, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 
:'''support''' - [[User:Greenslime|Greenslime]] 20:22, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 +
:'''support''' - Black_Hat_Guy
  
 
== What on earth is a "free space"? ==
 
== What on earth is a "free space"? ==

Revision as of 20:10, 1 August 2010

All right, folks. Pretty basic idea. Go forth and vote below.

support - I like it to be an alternative to the minesweeper. It's in the same spirit of exploring beyond your own grat, and the different configuration might make it easier for some people who never even considered a minesweeper. --relet 20:35, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
support - what about intermediate steps like other achievements have (3, 4) ? --Crox 13:40, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
support --mykaDragonBlue [- i have no sig -] 15:10, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
support - I like the intermediate steps idea Jiml 20:56, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
support - One idea of an intermediate step is five contiguous that aren't in a line. Sara 01:36, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
support - The ru 08:36, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
support - Greenslime 20:22, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
support - Black_Hat_Guy

What on earth is a "free space"?

Honestly, I can only guess what that part of the rules should mean, and I don't like guessing if it comes to rules, since experience shows that people take different guesses as the only possibility. Can someone change the wording into something that does not require being firm with the rules of a specific flavour of that specific game to be understood? --Ekorren 16:00, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Edited. Better? Sorry, Bingo's so common over here I didn't even think that it wasn't universal. - Wmcduff 18:07, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. The basic concept of Bingo is known (we played it in some variant as children). Also my guess was probably right about the white space, but since this is not an integral and unavoidable part of the basic ruleset - and could mean just the opposite as well - I think it's much better to define it well. However, I'm not sure whether that part adds any quality to the achievement. --Ekorren 18:52, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Just to make this clear to non Bingo experts like me: Does it also count to have 5 graticules in a row without including your home graticule in that line?! --HiroProtagonist 06:46, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes - as I understand it in "traditional" Bingo, you only get the "free" square if you go through the center of the card, but you can get Bingo with any line of 5 squares. Jiml 07:18, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Idea: Levels

What about having the possibility to customize the number of graticules hashed? There should be a minimum (5 looks good) to claim the achievement but in case you succeed in a larger number, it would be nice to be able to insert that into the ribbon as an optional parameter. --Ekorren 18:52, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

One way of upgrading this ribbon is to change the required sqares, just like real bingo. Some rounds you're playing for 5 in a row (horizontal, vertical and/or diagonal), an x-shape, a square around the edges of the 5x5 square, or the total blackout (super-mega minesweeper??). --Meghan 21:33, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

"Home" Graticule

Does it need a definition? Can we even define it? I'll favor letting the person define it as they wish, knowing that the concept is that it is where you live/work/spend lots of time. Besides, after a while geohashing, you probably will get your Home graticule. Jiml 20:56, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

You have a point. For most people, defining the place of permanent residence as home graticule would be perfect. All other definitions I can think of are too ambigous or likely to change. However, also the permanent residence isn't always that permanent. What happens if someone uses the "white space" by not hashing in his/her home graticule, claims the achievement and then moves away? I think (s)he should be allowed to keep the achievement but not upgrade it by adding further graticules (if we introduce levels) until the space has been filled up. My own opinion about this is that the white space rule should be removed since I can't see how it makes the achievement any better - it's just another rule without any apparent effect but with some definition problem. People will go to lengths to get a hash in their home graticule if it's a difficult one anyway, and it will hardly happen that someone would be able to take advantage of the white space rule. If someone's home graticule is so difficult that it's virtually impossible to hash there, the neighbouring ones probably are not so much better, so the Bingo line to get won't probably include the home graticule at all. --Ekorren 21:13, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree, the white space rule should be removed in my opinion too. --Crox 22:13, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

I'd actually say to leave the free space in. The point is to give someone a different configuration of graticules and the free space fits with the bingo game. One of the aspects is to let people who have a difficult home graticule have a bit of a break. I think you're too worried about making things "easy." We don't have that many people geohashing on any sort of regular basis. An "easier" achievement might encourage them. Besides, without the free space, it's "Gomoku"/"Five in a row", not Bingo.

On all the Bingo cards I've ever seen, the free space is the middle one, so why not do it that way to avoid the "what is your home graticule" problem (although I think everyone can easily identify his home graticule). In my opinion the white space rule is unnecessary, but it should stay in because it's funny, makes it more like Bingo and it makes no difference. -Robyn 02:35, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

If someone wants move "home" to make themselves eligible for something or other, let them. How does it hurt you? If the community can't tell the difference between mean-spirited "cheating" and someone who is trying to honor the spirit of geohashing but isn't meeting the letter of the rule, than Geohashing has a much larger problem than the fact that a rule is or isn't being violated. Jiml 00:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

The achievement description needs to be explicit that the five in a row may be horizontal, vertical or diagonal. I also think you should exclude airhashes, because otherwise pilots do it too easily. -Robyn 02:35, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Really? We have maybe two pilots in 2.5 years of geohashing all over the world. We've had maybe 3 airhashes in all that time. Doesn't seem like anyone is interested in burning their own Jet A for this. Jiml 07:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
I say it specifically because I'm a pilot and I feel badly about my smash and grab airhashes. I don't even do them anymore unless they absolutely can't be helped. The other day I my track took me up the right side of the highway and the hash was on the left side of the highway but I left it there, unhashed. -Robyn 12:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Also, taking care of it as a potential issue now could help to avoid confusion in the future Alex 12:37, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
I see no reason to exclude air hashes. If someone thinks they're too easy, then they can restrain themselves as Robyn is doing. once we get into limiting achievements by the mode of transport we start to enter all sorts of interesting and annoying places. I drive to hashes a lot, particularly those outside my home grat (and enjoy doing so), should that be considered too easy as well? Should only bikes and public transport get achievements? I don't personally do this for the ribbons, but I do think this sort of ruling makes the whole thing too complicated and adds too much potential for conflict. once we start, it would be hard to go back. --mykaDragonBlue [- i have no sig -] 07:26, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Ahhh - I didn't know you were restraining yourself. I assumed they just weren't working out for you. I guess then it might make sense to add the restriction. Jiml 18:19, 19 April 2010 (UTC)