A place where the Joyent community can gather, help each other out, and stay informed.
You are not logged in.
I only recently discovered Jawbreaker (aka Same Game) on a friends palmtop, and got so addicted I decided to write a version I could play anywhere. The concept is simple. Click on 2 or more of the same colored dots to remove them from the board (first click selects, second click removes). Connect more dots to score more points.
Check it out.
-- Steve
Offline
Not bad! Fun game.
Offline
My best score after few dozens tries was 736. Is that OK?
Offline
mattymcg wrote:
Woo hoo! New record at 1572!
Ahhhh! You beat my high score of 1510. That took me weeks and hundreds of games :-(
For fun, I've added a graph showing the number of games played. The number has really taken off in the last week. Don't know if the search engines discovered it or the increase is from my post in this forum.
www.bigfrog.net/jawbreaker/graph.php
-- Steve
Offline
sspencer wrote:
Ahhhh! You beat my high score of 1510. That took me weeks and hundreds of games :-(
Sorry Steve! 22 games under my belt when I cracked that. The first half of them I couldn't work out why my score was so low when I was getting rid almost all of the discs. Then I realized that the big points come from chaining them together to create a mass exodus of one colour in one hit. I think in that highest score I managed to arrange things so that I got rid of 36 discs with one click.
sspencer wrote:
For fun, I've added a graph showing the number of games played.
I'm assuming this is games completed, not games begun and then abandoned in favour of the hope that the next random assignment will contain an arrangement likely to yield some big numbers. I must confess I've been guilty of that a couple of times...
Offline
Yep. The number reported is for the games completed. I had it for the games started but then it would be too easy to "game" the system, by just hitting reload everytime instead of New Game.
Offline
Hey Steve would you consider repositioning the "New Game" button away from the "Undo" button? I've misclicked just one too many times...!
Edit: Make that the Undo away from all other buttons! I didn't need to read Help, I was so close to beating my own high score! Arrgh!!! :-D
Last edited by mattymcg (2006-01-04 10:35:44)
Offline
I would suggest that:
1. Multiple Undo
2. Game level.
Offline
mattymcg wrote:
Hey Steve would you consider repositioning the "New Game" button away from the "Undo" button? I've misclicked just one too many times...!
Edit: Make that the Undo away from all other buttons! I didn't need to read Help, I was so close to beating my own high score! Arrgh!!! :-D
I could space out the New Game button...
But, it's easy to get out of Help and continue playing the same game. Either click on the [X] in the upper right hand corner or click on the Help button again.
-- Steve
Offline
ngungo wrote:
I would suggest that:
1. Multiple Undo
2. Game level.
Game level could be a bigger board or more (or less) colors. What are you thinking?
All the other versions of Jawbreaker I've seen just have 1 level of undo. I don't know if this is for ease of implementation or just the spirit of the game. So you have a little fudge factor, but not too much.
-- Steve
Offline
sspencer wrote:
I could space out the New Game button...
Thanks for that Steve, much better.
sspencer wrote:
So you have a little fudge factor, but not too much
I agree that one level of undo is best. As much as I've cried and cursed when I've blown a huge score because I tested the water with one option too many and couldn't roll back, that is part of the fun of it.
Offline
It's impossible. My highest is 1336. What a shame!
Offline
There is a game like this in the Gnome Games collection called Same Gnome (screenshot). It uses three colors instead of five and is a bit more flashy (i.e. the adjacent colored marbles rotate when you hover your mouse over one of them). It seems a lot easier with three colors than 5... :)
Offline
mattymcg wrote:
Curses! 1,992!! Who on earth got that score?? Is that for real???
The theoretical high score is 17,492 given every single piece is the same color. The algorithm is (n * (n-1)), so for the 11x12 board, that's 17,292 + 200 bonus for clearing all pieces.
I'm still trying to beat mattymcg's 1572 :-(
Offline
ILikePi wrote:
There is a game like this in the Gnome Games collection called Same Gnome (screenshot). It uses three colors instead of five and is a bit more flashy (i.e. the adjacent colored marbles rotate when you hover your mouse over one of them). It seems a lot easier with three colors than 5... :)
Same Gnome is a bit more flashy cause it's a real application, not Javascript. But 3 colors is too easy.
I could add options for more (or less) colors and a different board size, but I like the simplicity of the interface. Last night I briefly added a legend that showed the count for each of the different colors, but the screen just got too busy. So for now, the game remains optionless.
Offline
I got up to 1540 this afternoon. Well not too bad!
1. Should not be (11*12)*(11*12-1) + 200 = 17,292 though, because it is true if there is only one color. I thought we have 5 colors randomly arranged.
2. You might consider the time factor into it too. Things like more time will deduct points propotionally with the size of cluster. Or something like that.
Offline
sspencer wrote:
Last night I briefly added a legend that showed the count for each of the different colors, but the screen just got too busy.
I would definitely make use of such a stats table, and keep on hitting new game until I got the right spread. And then I'd wonder if it was such a good idea while I became more and more obsessed with getting the perfect spread.
Here's why it has such an impact on the result: I did some maths on that current high score (not that I'm bitter or anything! :), and discovered that to get a score like that is almost impossible. I say almost because I doubt that someone would be bothered fudging some JavaScript app to artificially send a score, as I'm sure that is possible if one could be bothered. But assuming it is legit, then the score for removing one batch of connecting discs follows the formula y = x^2 - x. These are the scores for your one main wipe-out:
38 - 1406
39 - 1482
40 - 1560
41 - 1640
42 - 1722
43 - 1806
Of course in order to line things up just how you want them, you will probably remove a block of 4 here, or 5 there. A few blocks of two. But one can assume that no more than 200 points would contribute to your overall score.
Now for most random spreads, there isn't even that many of one colour on the board, let alone being arranged so as to be able to connect them all. So what chance do any of us have at beating it? Well, you keep hitting "New Game" ad finitum, until you get that perfect spread where 42 discs are practically lined up to touch each other, and the other discs are clumped together above them all.
i.e. Next to none.
Last edited by mattymcg (2006-01-12 13:21:11)
Offline
By the way, I'd hate my last post to end with a whining tone. The game is freaking awesome Steve, thankyou for porting it!
Offline
Offline
Yay for not using flash.
Boo for, well, me sucking at it. I can't get higher than 270. :(
Offline
ngungo wrote:
Dammit, just when I was finally shaking my addiction, and you throw a glimmer of hope my way that it might be possible to reach the unobtainable.
By the way ever since I blogged about it I've gotten my friends and family hooked on Jawbreaker. My mum never plays computer games and she's wittling away hours on it.
Oh, and if you have any strategy tips please post them ngungo!
Last edited by mattymcg (2006-01-16 11:39:10)
Offline
mattymcg wrote:
Oh, and if you have any strategy tips please post them ngungo!
High scored games were most likely depends on good initial setup, i.e. you need to have at least 40 of the same color, which is statistically very rare.
Offline
ngungo wrote:
mattymcg wrote:
Oh, and if you have any strategy tips please post them ngungo!
High scored games were most likely depends on good initial setup, i.e. you need to have at least 40 of the same color, which is statistically very rare.
New feature added ... now show the different colors and their respective counts. So you can rapidly cycle thru game boards until you have a 40+.
Also, now show Top 5 scores in game stats.
Question. I'm thinking of adding a feature that requests your name when you get a high score, so we know who's the champ. But if I'm to add this, I'm going to wipe out all the current high scores. Is it OK to wipe out all the current high scores?
Thanks,
Steve
Offline
sspencer wrote:
Also, now show Top 5 scores in game stats.
Just want to brag. Two 1824s are mine.
Offline
sspencer wrote:
Question. I'm thinking of adding a feature that requests your name when you get a high score, so we know who's the champ. But if I'm to add this, I'm going to wipe out all the current high scores. Is it OK to wipe out all the current high scores?
I think it's OK. Keep it static or offsite.
Offline
I don't know how you do it ngungo, my best score was 656 and I cleared them all!
Offline
sspencer,
Sorry to see Mixed Grill overshadows your Jawbreaker. :) Well, they are not chopped liver either, right?
Offline
Offline
True. But ... everyone strides for the stats-listerd.
Offline
And you know what? I spend too much time for it. I need to stop this addiction.
Offline
sspencer,
There is something strange in the scoreboard.
But if you look at my personal score there was not a 2130 in there; and now with a new champion of 2484, where is my score of 2310?
Cry wolf!!!
Offline
Hi,
i don't know where your scores went, but the number of games played overall seems to be broken, too. For me it shows 90.950 games played.
New record was mine, there were 49 red balls. Cleared 44 or 45 at once, with only 4 balls left at the end. Took me almost 3 hours...
red.rooster
Offline
Congrats! red.rooster
The champion is well deserved.
Mine was the co-effort of the family team :)
Offline
