I'm attempting to design an achievement system in Ruby on Rails and have run into a snag with my design/code.
Attempting to use polymorphic associations:
class Achievement < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :achievable, :polymorphic => true
end
class WeightAchievement < ActiveRecord::Base
has_one :achievement, :as => :achievable
end
Migrations:
class CreateAchievements < ActiveRecord::Migration
... #code
create_table :achievements do |t|
t.string :name
t.text :description
t.references :achievable, :polymorphic => true
t.timestamps
end
create_table :weight_achievements do |t|
t.integer :weight_required
t.references :exercises, :null => false
t.timestamps
end
... #code
end
Then, when I try this following throw-away unit test, it fails because it says that the achievement is null.
test "parent achievement exists" do
weightAchievement = WeightAchievement.find(1)
achievement = weightAchievement.achievement
assert_not_nil achievement
assert_equal 500, weightAchievement.weight_required
assert_equal achievement.name, "Brick House Baby!"
assert_equal achievement.description, "Squat 500 lbs"
end
And my fixtures: achievements.yml...
BrickHouse:
id: 1
name: Brick House
description: Squat 500 lbs
achievable: BrickHouseCriteria (WeightAchievement)
weight_achievements.ym...
BrickHouseCriteria:
id: 1
weight_required: 500
exercises_id: 1
Even though, I can't get this to run, maybe in the grand scheme of things, it's a bad design issue. What I'm attempting to do is have a single table with all the achievements and their base information (name and description). Using that table and polymorphic associations, I want to link to other tables that will contain the criteria for completing that achievement, e.g. the WeightAchievement table will have the weight required and exercise id. Then, a user's progress will be stored in a UserProgress model, where it links to the actual Achievement (as opposed to WeightAchievement).
The reason I need the criteria in separate tables is because the criteria will vary wildly between different types of achievements and will be added dynamically afterwards, which is why I'm not creating a separate model for each achievement.
Does this even make sense? Should I just merge the Achievement table with the specific type of achievement like WeightAchievement (so the table is name, description, weight_required, exercise_id), then when a user queries the achievements, in my code I simply search all the achievements? (e.g. WeightAchievement, EnduranceAchievement, RepAchievement, etc)
The way achievement systems generally work is that there are a large number of various achievements that can be triggered, and there's a set of triggers that can be used to test wether or not an achievement should be triggered.
Using a polymorphic association is probably a bad idea because loading in all the achievements to run through and test them all could end up being a complicated exercise. There's also the fact that you'll have to figure out how to express the success or failure conditions in some kind of table, but in a lot of cases you might end up with a definition that does not map so neatly. You might end up having sixty different tables to represent all the different kinds of triggers and that sounds like a nightmare to maintain.
An alternative approach would be to define your achievements in terms of name, value and so on, and have a constant table which acts as a key/value store.
Here's a sample migration:
The
achievements.proc
column contains the Ruby code you evaluate to determine if the achievement should be triggered or not. Typically this gets loaded in, wrapped, and ends up as a utility method you can call:The
TriggerConstant
class defines various parameters you can tweak:Having the raw Ruby code in your DB means that it is easier to adjust the rules on the fly without having to redeploy the application, but this might make testing more difficult.
A sample
proc
might look like:If you want to simplify your rules, you might create something that expands
$brickhouse_weight_required
intoTriggerConstant[:brickhouse_weight_required]
automatically. That would make it more readable by non-technical people.To avoid putting the code in your DB, which some people may find to be in bad taste, you will have to define these procedures independently in some bulk procedure file, and pass in the various tuning parameters by some kind of definition. This approach would look like:
Adjust the
Achievement
table so that it stores information on what options to pass in:In this case
trigger_options
is a mapping table that is stored serialized. An example might be:Combining this you get a somewhat simplified, less
eval
happy outcome:You'll often have to strobe through a whole pile of
Achievement
records to see if they've been achieved unless you have a mapping table that can define, in loose terms, what kind of records the triggers test. A more robust implementation of this system would allow you to define specific classes to observe for each Achievement, but this basic approach should at least serve as a foundation.