I agree with some of your points but not with "#3". The chess game is a zero sum game - the sum score of both sides is always 1 point - but there is no reason to treat puzzling in the same way since there is no human opponent who demands "justice". There is no need to "solve for 10 points" unless people find it attractive. The idea comes from the physical law of conservation of energy. All energy got to go somewhere It can't be lost. But puzzle points are no energy packages and there are good reasons not to treat them that way. For instance, I know a puzzle site where your rating stays the same when you solve 2/3 of the challenges. Puzzle solvers commonly reach a ceiling in their solving strength and solve puzzles to "stay in shape". It's more fun to succeed in solving 2 out of 3 puzzles once you are there than to fail in 2 out of 3 puzzles. So the rating of your average puzzle challenge ought to be a little (about 100 points) lower than your own puzzle rating!
Puzzle system in the site
Sort:
Does anyone else also feel that the puzzle system in this site is wrong?
1. You have only one try, you fail, no points. What is the point in continuing then? It makes you just want to see the solution immediately. Instead, as penalty, you should get fewer points.
2. The speed "bonus" is not a bonus, but a punishment. If you don't get the puzzle correct by the "estimated" time, you get so few points, that it is not even worth continuing. A bonus is, as the name says, a bonus. If you get the correct response and only get 5 points, but lose 15 points if you miss it, then it is not a bonus anymore. To merit that name, it should be: solve this puzzle right and get 10 points, miss it, and lose 10 points, do it below a certain time, and get 2,3, 5 extra points.
3. Which comes down to the last point. If you play for 10 points, you should lose 10 points. Sometimes we solve more puzzles than miss them and still end up with fewer points than when we started. That doesn't make sense to me.