Atorrante:
make it puzzle based instead of collection based
Would you have it that users submit/create puzzles for a main puzzles section that they can maintain/withdraw, or possibly say that certain ‘trusted’ users (mods+others like Joseki explorer) could edit the puzzles?
I agree with this completely. I read an article by a professional Go player who recommended, for the best improvement of Go skill, that 90% of your Go time should be spent doing tsumego (the other 10% playing games presumably) and that the tsumego time should be split evenly between problems that are easy, medium and hard. I mention this as it is some professional support for the idea that a broad range of difficulty is probably a good thing.
But all that is more a discussion of how puzzle sol…
opened 03:18PM - 12 Oct 20 UTC
closed 12:16AM - 28 Sep 22 UTC
feature request
stale
**Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.**
Some puzzles… creators would prefer not to have have to choose a precise rank eg. 10kyu for the difficulty of a puzzle, since it is quite likely that this rank has little to do with either the OGS rated game rank or any other rank from another go server or Go Association. It difficult to be *that* definitive on whether a typical x kyu or y dan should be able to solve a given problem even if one imagines limiting the scope/meaning to one particular rating system.
**Describe the solution you'd like**
As per the discussion in [this topic](https://forums.online-go.com/t/make-tsumego-great-again/16959/79?u=shinuito) on the forums it is suggested that extra labels be added for use by puzzle creators that don't want to have to choose a precise difficulty rank for the puzzles.
The suggested additions are the following sets of difficulty labels {Elementary, Easy, Medium, Hard, Very hard} and {30-20 kyu, 19-10 kyu, 9-1 kyu, 1-9 dan} suggested by user stephen-biggs-fox, and {TPK, DDK, SDK, Dan} by user Samraku.
**Describe alternatives you've considered**
An alternative is of course to rework the Puzzles system, in such a way as to eliminate the subjectivity of user assigned difficulty ratings to user uploaded puzzle sets. One such way discussed in the same forum is to assign ratings (ELO, glicko etc) to either {users} or {users and puzzles} and then update the ratings after each puzzle attempt. This is clearly a much more time consuming venture.
**Additional context**
The last sets of suggested labels {30-20 kyu, 19-10 kyu, 9-1 kyu, 1-9 dan} and {TPK, DDK, SDK, Dan} follow the same idea that broad rank bands should be better descriptors of a puzzle difficulty than specific ranks. There is debate as to which of the two is better (again see the thread). Possibly adding both along with the set {Elementary, Easy, Medium, Hard, Very hard} gives the puzzle collection uploader/creator more flexibility in describing the relative difficult of a puzzle within a set. This has at least a chance of being consistent locally within a collection, while globally among all puzzles, some large change would need to be implemented to accurately assess puzzles difficulties.
Hopefully a request that’s a step toward that, but probably way down the priority list
Atorrante:
see to it that the puzzle ranking is adequate
I guess if there’s one centralised collection like in 1. this is more doable, with a puzzle Elo or other idea.
Atorrante:
delete the idiot puzzles
Maybe some people like their idiot ones
