Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
91
Competition Central / Version differences
« on: August 18, 2008, 08:53:13 pm »
So far, I feel that we at TMC haven't been very confident about our decisions regarding different versions of the classic Mario games. These decisions include what versions could be ranked together, what versions should be ranked separately, and what versions shouldn't be ranked at all. Basically, we lacked enough knowledge of the games and their different versions to come up with sound judgments about these issues.
So what I'd like to have here is a big compilation of version differences, for each of the multi-versioned Mario games that we rank here. Of course, I mean the differences that we need to know about - the ones that may affect competition in our charts. This list is intended to help us make decisions about how to rank the various versions of each game. Hopefully, it should also serve as a helpful resource for competitors.
Some notes on terminology used - this list may be updated whenever the need arises:
J,U,E - at the beginning of each game's post, all the official versions of the game are listed. J stands for Japan, U stands for United States, and E stands for Europe. JU indicates the single version released in both Japan and the US, and so on.
NTSC - the video standard used for televisions in Japan and North America, among other areas. NTSC video games run at 60 frames per second, meaning that the game screen can be updated up to 60 times per second. When I refer to the NTSC versions of a game, I'm referring to the Japanese and American versions of a particular game.
PAL - the video standard used for televisions in Europe, among other areas. PAL video games run at 50 frames per second. When I refer to the PAL versions of a game, I'm referring to the European versions of a particular game.
Ticks - one tick is what one might call a "game second" as defined by the game's timer, though I call them ticks because they're never really a second long.
So what I'd like to have here is a big compilation of version differences, for each of the multi-versioned Mario games that we rank here. Of course, I mean the differences that we need to know about - the ones that may affect competition in our charts. This list is intended to help us make decisions about how to rank the various versions of each game. Hopefully, it should also serve as a helpful resource for competitors.
Some notes on terminology used - this list may be updated whenever the need arises:
J,U,E - at the beginning of each game's post, all the official versions of the game are listed. J stands for Japan, U stands for United States, and E stands for Europe. JU indicates the single version released in both Japan and the US, and so on.
NTSC - the video standard used for televisions in Japan and North America, among other areas. NTSC video games run at 60 frames per second, meaning that the game screen can be updated up to 60 times per second. When I refer to the NTSC versions of a game, I'm referring to the Japanese and American versions of a particular game.
PAL - the video standard used for televisions in Europe, among other areas. PAL video games run at 50 frames per second. When I refer to the PAL versions of a game, I'm referring to the European versions of a particular game.
Ticks - one tick is what one might call a "game second" as defined by the game's timer, though I call them ticks because they're never really a second long.
92
Mario News / Re: Welcome to The Mario Center!
« on: July 29, 2008, 07:01:16 pm »
So, actually, I had a change of heart about the SMB3 differences, as to whether or not SNES and GBA could be ranked together. After all, even the numerous small differences can make for annoying version gaps in the rankings, if the competition gets pretty solid down the line. Even if we can't see this sub-site getting incredibly popular, I think it's safer if our ranking system won't break down in the event of tight competition.
Also, after looking at The Mushroom Kingdom's impressive list of SMB3 differences, it makes one wonder whether we missed a bunch of subtle SNES/GBA changes in Super Mario World. Many of the SMB3 changes that we missed were changes to adapt the levels to the smaller GBA screen. SMW would probably face similar difficulties going from SNES to GBA.
There are lists of SMW changes out there, but none that I know of are nearly as thorough as TMK's SMB3 changes list. So I personally played the two versions of SMW alternatingly to look for differences.
Here's a document with a decent list of level differences in the first 3 worlds of SMW. I also listed some general differences in there, as well as some points copied from The Original L5's Changes FAQ at GameFAQs. There's probably a bit of redundancy between my points and the FAQ's points, but anyway:
http://www.vortiginous.com/yoshifan/SMW_differences_v1.rtf
So far, Stefan and I think the SMW differences are probably similar in magnitude to the SMB3 differences. Unfortunately, that may mean Mario World's SNES and GBA versions shouldn't be in the same charts after all (and they currently are). Still, now's as good a time as ever to think about what we should really do about these version differences.
As it stands, it looks like we have three options for each of SMB3 and SMW:
- Rank SNES and GBA in the same charts
- Rank SNES and GBA separately
- Rank only SNES and not GBA
The third option's rationale is that the versions are too different to be ranked together, but a bunch of slightly different sets of rankings isn't very appealing - it would be a shame to see skilled players competing on separate versions, with times that may or may not be comparable. Thus, we might consider "forcing" everyone to play on one version or the other. This is actually possible because the SNES versions are accessible to nearly everyone - with the help of, well, emulators.
Also, after looking at The Mushroom Kingdom's impressive list of SMB3 differences, it makes one wonder whether we missed a bunch of subtle SNES/GBA changes in Super Mario World. Many of the SMB3 changes that we missed were changes to adapt the levels to the smaller GBA screen. SMW would probably face similar difficulties going from SNES to GBA.
There are lists of SMW changes out there, but none that I know of are nearly as thorough as TMK's SMB3 changes list. So I personally played the two versions of SMW alternatingly to look for differences.
Here's a document with a decent list of level differences in the first 3 worlds of SMW. I also listed some general differences in there, as well as some points copied from The Original L5's Changes FAQ at GameFAQs. There's probably a bit of redundancy between my points and the FAQ's points, but anyway:
http://www.vortiginous.com/yoshifan/SMW_differences_v1.rtf
So far, Stefan and I think the SMW differences are probably similar in magnitude to the SMB3 differences. Unfortunately, that may mean Mario World's SNES and GBA versions shouldn't be in the same charts after all (and they currently are). Still, now's as good a time as ever to think about what we should really do about these version differences.
As it stands, it looks like we have three options for each of SMB3 and SMW:
- Rank SNES and GBA in the same charts
- Rank SNES and GBA separately
- Rank only SNES and not GBA
The third option's rationale is that the versions are too different to be ranked together, but a bunch of slightly different sets of rankings isn't very appealing - it would be a shame to see skilled players competing on separate versions, with times that may or may not be comparable. Thus, we might consider "forcing" everyone to play on one version or the other. This is actually possible because the SNES versions are accessible to nearly everyone - with the help of, well, emulators.
93
Mario News / Re: Welcome to The Mario Center!
« on: July 18, 2008, 01:53:35 pm »
Wow, nice find, this list of differences looks really thorough. It should be enough to rely on this list alone.
I guess there are more differences than I thought, and a few of them do seem likely to give the upper hand to one version (mainly the GBA one). I'm particularly thinking of 2-3, 7-Piranha-1, 7-7, and 7-8. Still, it's probably okay to rank SNES and GBA together, if we did it with Super Mario World. There really isn't enough difference to rank them separately, and both versions should be popular enough that we ought to allow both in some chart or another.
If anyone noticed this part about BOOM-BOOM and was wondering if it made the GBA disadvantaged: I noticed that the timer doesn't run as the wall is forming, so SNES and GBA are most likely the same there.
elecmouse: Yeah, we were also considering coin charts in those 3-D games. In SM64, SM64DS, and Sunshine, we should look over the infinite-coin tricks so that we might choose to disallow them or not. In Galaxy, I recall we were trying to decide whether to have one coin chart per level, one chart per star, or something in between. Besides those issues, I don't think there's a problem with adding them.
I guess there are more differences than I thought, and a few of them do seem likely to give the upper hand to one version (mainly the GBA one). I'm particularly thinking of 2-3, 7-Piranha-1, 7-7, and 7-8. Still, it's probably okay to rank SNES and GBA together, if we did it with Super Mario World. There really isn't enough difference to rank them separately, and both versions should be popular enough that we ought to allow both in some chart or another.
If anyone noticed this part about BOOM-BOOM and was wondering if it made the GBA disadvantaged: I noticed that the timer doesn't run as the wall is forming, so SNES and GBA are most likely the same there.
elecmouse: Yeah, we were also considering coin charts in those 3-D games. In SM64, SM64DS, and Sunshine, we should look over the infinite-coin tricks so that we might choose to disallow them or not. In Galaxy, I recall we were trying to decide whether to have one coin chart per level, one chart per star, or something in between. Besides those issues, I don't think there's a problem with adding them.
94
Rules Revisions / Re: Rules Committee topic
« on: July 17, 2008, 01:30:48 pm »
Actually, it goes something like:
But I think the problem you're trying to illustrate is still there. While this algorithm makes the system A/D point difference lower gradually toward the bottom of the chart, there's really no point in having any difference midway down the chart or lower. Particularly in this level, the main system advantage isn't going to matter midway down the chart or so, since the advantage yields such low times. It's a good point... I'm not sure how to address it right now.
| Rank | Time | Points | System |
| 40th | 3:01:83 | 39 | A |
| 41st | 3:18:51 | 34.67 = 31 * (85/76) | D |
But I think the problem you're trying to illustrate is still there. While this algorithm makes the system A/D point difference lower gradually toward the bottom of the chart, there's really no point in having any difference midway down the chart or lower. Particularly in this level, the main system advantage isn't going to matter midway down the chart or so, since the advantage yields such low times. It's a good point... I'm not sure how to address it right now.
95
Rules Revisions / Re: Rules Committee topic
« on: July 16, 2008, 07:31:20 pm »
Stefan brings up a good point, I think. I'm not sure how to arrange the ranking order to not look strange, but I might have another idea to fix the chart-point system. It's similar to mike's idea, but still based on rankings instead of percentages from the top time.
Suppose we have a chart in a game with two possible systems - A and D - and A has an advantage over D in this chart. Then for that chart, we could apply a chart-points algorithm like this:
- any submission under system A uses the same points system as the current one: one point for each player ahead of you.
- any submission under system D uses the same points system, except it only takes into account the stats from the top system-D time to the bottom of the chart. However, it's not one point for each player ahead of you: it's scaled so that if you're last place in a chart of 75 people, you'll still get 74 points.
Here's an example, not-so-subtly based off of Final Egg (Sonic):
Like mike's algorithm, this algorithm would leave the top few system-D times with pretty good (low) point values, and overall system-D players would be boosted a bit compared to our current simple algorithm.
There's another significant thing that I think both algorithms address: toward the bottom of the chart, the system-A and system-D algorithms come closer together in point value, which is consistent with fewer players taking advantage of system differences near the bottom of the chart.
One large conflict between mike's idea and this idea is how a system-A time of 0:50:00 would be treated. In this algorithm it would be about equivalent in points to the 9th-best system-D time, 1:20:75. In mike's algorithm, which is based on percentage, I think it would be equivalent to a system-D time of about 6:18:86. (7.83 / 50.00 is approximately 59.33 / 378.86.) What do you think this kind of time should deserve?
Suppose we have a chart in a game with two possible systems - A and D - and A has an advantage over D in this chart. Then for that chart, we could apply a chart-points algorithm like this:
- any submission under system A uses the same points system as the current one: one point for each player ahead of you.
- any submission under system D uses the same points system, except it only takes into account the stats from the top system-D time to the bottom of the chart. However, it's not one point for each player ahead of you: it's scaled so that if you're last place in a chart of 75 people, you'll still get 74 points.
Here's an example, not-so-subtly based off of Final Egg (Sonic):
| Rank | Time | Points | System |
| 1 | 0:07:83 | 0 | A |
| 2 | 0:08:51 | 1 | A |
| 3 | 0:08:63 | 2 | A |
| 4 | 0:09:44 | 3 | A |
| 5 | 0:09:48 | 4 | A |
| 6 | 0:14:84 | 5 | A |
| 7 | 0:16:06 | 6 | A |
| 8 | 0:17:96 | 7 | A |
| 9 | 0:19:98 | 8 | A |
| 10 | 0:59:33 | 0 | D |
| 11 | 1:00:96 | 1 * (85/76) | D |
| 12 | 1:02:66 | 2 * (85/76) | D |
| 13 | 1:03:60 | 3 * (85/76) | D |
| 14 | 1:05:58 | 4 * (85/76) | D |
| 15 | 1:06:40 | 5 * (85/76) | D |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
| 82 | 9:02:63 | 72 * (85/76) | D |
| 83 | 9:17:48 | 73 * (85/76) | D |
| 84 | 9:39:58 | 83 | A |
| 85 | 12:18:68 | 75 * (85/76) | D |
| 86 | 12:37:10 | 76 * (85/76) | D |
Like mike's algorithm, this algorithm would leave the top few system-D times with pretty good (low) point values, and overall system-D players would be boosted a bit compared to our current simple algorithm.
There's another significant thing that I think both algorithms address: toward the bottom of the chart, the system-A and system-D algorithms come closer together in point value, which is consistent with fewer players taking advantage of system differences near the bottom of the chart.
One large conflict between mike's idea and this idea is how a system-A time of 0:50:00 would be treated. In this algorithm it would be about equivalent in points to the 9th-best system-D time, 1:20:75. In mike's algorithm, which is based on percentage, I think it would be equivalent to a system-D time of about 6:18:86. (7.83 / 50.00 is approximately 59.33 / 378.86.) What do you think this kind of time should deserve?
96
Competition Central / Re: 2:13 on Wildflower Fields
« on: July 16, 2008, 03:43:10 pm »
Yeah, time is pretty tight for a 2:13. Whenever you break out of your run to do a normal jump, try to jump as soon as possible after you stop running. That way, while you're jumping, you'll maintain most of your momentum from running. Also, you should hope to fall to the lower level immediately after stomping the fragile ground.
I managed to get this time again just now - my times between screens were 2:28, 2:23, 2:22, and 2:15. I guess target times don't help so much in such a short level, though.
I hope something here will help; if not, I can go into the fine details, since it's such a short level.
I managed to get this time again just now - my times between screens were 2:28, 2:23, 2:22, and 2:15. I guess target times don't help so much in such a short level, though.
I hope something here will help; if not, I can go into the fine details, since it's such a short level.
97
Mario News / Re: Welcome to The Mario Center!
« on: July 16, 2008, 02:11:31 pm »
Been a while since the last post here, but I figured some of the issues presented here may not have been addressed yet, so I'll address them to the best of my ability.
Yoshi's Island: the only thing we could track are the item-percentages for each level, and they each max out at 100 points. That fact alone isn't a problem, but unfortunately I think there are other reasons why they shouldn't be ranked. First, the maximum scores are relatively easy to achieve compared to other "maxable" stats in other games. I don't mean that this is an easy game to complete, but I mean it's an easy game to compete in - they're two different definitions of difficulty. And on that note, I think competition in a game should go beyond its definition of completion.
On the other hand, the newer Yoshi's Island DS would be a good addition: it has mini-games and a time attack mode that don't have any of the problems that the percentages do. We haven't added it yet because time attack times go into the negatives, and we haven't yet found a good way to represent negative times on a chart. It should be possible to resolve this sooner or later, though.
Super Mario Advance 4: actually, I've confirmed that there are some slight differences between levels in the SNES and GBA versions. For example, 1-4 has some wider platforms in the GBA version, and I think I remember very slight changes in 1-6 and 1-Fortress too. I've only checked the first 3 worlds for differences like these, but it's likely that we'll only see very slight differences that will have a minimal effect on fairness. Super Mario World probably has bigger SNES/GBA differences, and we ended up merging SNES and GBA stats in that game. So it's likely that SNES and GBA will be ranked together for Super Mario Bros. 3, as well. At any rate, I'll organize some of the specific level differences so we can really determine whether it's fair to rank them together.
Mario vs. Donkey Kong: the only thing that makes me hesitate on adding this is that high-level competition is already very well-established in sites like Cyberscore and VGR. Maybe it's just me, though, since I did compete in that game for a while... if you guys find it new and exciting, then there's no problem. >_>
Yoshi's Island: the only thing we could track are the item-percentages for each level, and they each max out at 100 points. That fact alone isn't a problem, but unfortunately I think there are other reasons why they shouldn't be ranked. First, the maximum scores are relatively easy to achieve compared to other "maxable" stats in other games. I don't mean that this is an easy game to complete, but I mean it's an easy game to compete in - they're two different definitions of difficulty. And on that note, I think competition in a game should go beyond its definition of completion.
On the other hand, the newer Yoshi's Island DS would be a good addition: it has mini-games and a time attack mode that don't have any of the problems that the percentages do. We haven't added it yet because time attack times go into the negatives, and we haven't yet found a good way to represent negative times on a chart. It should be possible to resolve this sooner or later, though.
Super Mario Advance 4: actually, I've confirmed that there are some slight differences between levels in the SNES and GBA versions. For example, 1-4 has some wider platforms in the GBA version, and I think I remember very slight changes in 1-6 and 1-Fortress too. I've only checked the first 3 worlds for differences like these, but it's likely that we'll only see very slight differences that will have a minimal effect on fairness. Super Mario World probably has bigger SNES/GBA differences, and we ended up merging SNES and GBA stats in that game. So it's likely that SNES and GBA will be ranked together for Super Mario Bros. 3, as well. At any rate, I'll organize some of the specific level differences so we can really determine whether it's fair to rank them together.
Mario vs. Donkey Kong: the only thing that makes me hesitate on adding this is that high-level competition is already very well-established in sites like Cyberscore and VGR. Maybe it's just me, though, since I did compete in that game for a while... if you guys find it new and exciting, then there's no problem. >_>
98
Gaming and Grazing / Re: Advance Wars By Web
« on: December 02, 2007, 09:35:00 pm »
The weekend is just about over, so it'll probably be pretty slow going for the next few days. Still, I don't want to hold anything up unexpectedly, so I'll post approximate times that I'll be at school for the next week (in my timezone, US Pacific time).
Monday, 9:30 AM - (7:00 PM or maybe 9:00 PM)
Tuesday, 11:30 AM - 4:00 PM
Wednesday, 2:30 PM - 7:00 PM
Thursday, 11:30 AM - 4:00 PM
Friday, 2:30 PM - 5:00 PM
Monday, 9:30 AM - (7:00 PM or maybe 9:00 PM)
Tuesday, 11:30 AM - 4:00 PM
Wednesday, 2:30 PM - 7:00 PM
Thursday, 11:30 AM - 4:00 PM
Friday, 2:30 PM - 5:00 PM
99
Gaming and Grazing / Re: Advance Wars By Web
« on: November 30, 2007, 05:13:04 pm »
The game has been created; come into the TSC chat for more info.
100
Gaming and Grazing / Re: Advance Wars By Web
« on: November 29, 2007, 07:53:24 pm »
http://awbw.amarriner.com/percent.php
If this is accurate, then Sturm has 80% offense and 120% defense in AWBW, so I don't really think he'd be broken. His powers (check the AWBW CO info chart) and movement may still make him fairly powerful, though.
If it's agreed that some COs are broken or too overpowered, we could just leave them open for any less experienced players.
If this is accurate, then Sturm has 80% offense and 120% defense in AWBW, so I don't really think he'd be broken. His powers (check the AWBW CO info chart) and movement may still make him fairly powerful, though.
If it's agreed that some COs are broken or too overpowered, we could just leave them open for any less experienced players.
101
Gaming and Grazing / Re: Advance Wars By Web
« on: November 28, 2007, 11:46:53 pm »
I'd like to try a game. I registered as Yosh.
102
Information Kiosk / Re: someone needs to fix the tails score rankings on SADX
« on: November 18, 2007, 03:02:33 pm »
Yeah, there used to be charts for Tails' Sky Chase, but they were removed because Sonic's Sky Chase levels appear to be identical to Tails'. (Technically the charts have been "hidden" instead of removed, but that isn't causing the problem here.)
Now, any scores you have submitted for Tails' Sky Chase won't count toward your total score, just as intended. The problem is that a player's total score is only updated when that player submits a score for that division. Thus, anyone who hasn't submitted a Tails score since the charts were removed will still have an incorrect total score. This is one thing that this topic's suggestion can fix.
Now, any scores you have submitted for Tails' Sky Chase won't count toward your total score, just as intended. The problem is that a player's total score is only updated when that player submits a score for that division. Thus, anyone who hasn't submitted a Tails score since the charts were removed will still have an incorrect total score. This is one thing that this topic's suggestion can fix.
103
Competition Central / Re: The Random .giz Topic
« on: November 18, 2007, 03:53:51 am »
One of the challenges in mike's tournament involved defeating Robotnik in Launch Base 1. Normally you're supposed to defeat a robot at the end of the stage instead, so the process is fairly strange, as seen in eredani's video (done in S3&K) in the following archive: http://www.soniccenter.org/tournament/R8L1.zip
I tried this challenge myself. I also had a lightning shield handy. This resulted in a strange sight after defeating Robotnik:
I tried this challenge myself. I also had a lightning shield handy. This resulted in a strange sight after defeating Robotnik:
104
Tournament Central / Re: Tournament 1: Here we go!
« on: November 04, 2007, 01:24:43 pm »
For anyone doing challenges 14 or 15, an elevator looks like this:
105
Non-Sonic Site Discussion / Re: Mario Center discussion
« on: October 14, 2007, 04:11:14 am »
I don't think we've drafted rules yet, but some of the rules issues are kind of tied into the chart choice issues (for example, dealing with stages with multiple exits, and bringing power-ups into levels).
I've looked through the Super Mario Bros. 3 charts and attempted to bring up all the relevant issues about competition for this game. I've attached an Excel file, with the charts Mike posted on the left, and my additions and comments on the right. Blue cells indicate unresolved issues. Of course, discussion may be brought up about other points as well.
Oh, here's one issue I forgot to mention - are there any gameplay differences between the original SMB3, the All-Stars version, and the Super Mario Advance 4 version?
I've looked through the Super Mario Bros. 3 charts and attempted to bring up all the relevant issues about competition for this game. I've attached an Excel file, with the charts Mike posted on the left, and my additions and comments on the right. Blue cells indicate unresolved issues. Of course, discussion may be brought up about other points as well.
Oh, here's one issue I forgot to mention - are there any gameplay differences between the original SMB3, the All-Stars version, and the Super Mario Advance 4 version?
106
Rules Revisions / Sonic Adventure 2 (B) - adding Mission 4 Rings and/or Scores
« on: September 09, 2007, 03:33:40 pm »
Recently there's been a bit of interest in SA2(B) Mission 4 ring attacks, so I thought I might bring this up again. Should Mission 4 rings or scores be added to TSC's charts?
With the exception of Routes 101 and 280, Mission 1 and Mission 4 of every stage have just two differences: only Mission 1 has checkpoints, and Mission 4 adds a time limit (or a stricter time limit for Green Forest, Security Hall, and White Jungle).
Implications on Mission 4 ring attacks:
- There's no checkpoint manipulation. In Sonic/Shadow and Tails/Eggman levels, M1 and M5 ring runs often involve creative and risky backtracking tricks to maximize checkpoint bonuses. M4 has no such thing - this may be good if you think backtracks are tedious and/or annoying, or bad if you think ring runs become bland without the backtracking tricks.
- Time limits may or may not present a good challenge. All but 2 of the M4 ring attacks are already known to be 'maxable', but some levels are much more difficult to max than others. Levels like Prison Lane, Mission Street, and Iron Gate don't add too much difficulty to the Mission 1 RA, but levels like Wild Canyon, Pyramid Cave, and Radical Highway may require a lot of practice and planning to max in M4.
- M4 ring attacks may feel like a direct extension of M1 ring attacks which don't involve checkpoint manipulation. In particular, all Knuckles/Rouge M1 ring attacks have no checkpoints, so those M4 ring attacks simply add a time limit. Is this a bad thing or not?
Implications on Mission 4 score attacks:
- No checkpoints to get points or shields from. This will slightly lower M4 scores compared to M1 scores, but this probably won't affect strategies much.
- Speed is already an important element in M1 scores, but time limits still may make a difference. In many Sonic/Shadow and Tails/Eggman levels, a few time consuming point sources may have to be skipped in favor of time. In other levels, though, the top M1 score runs may already meet the M4 time limits. In particular, Knuckles/Rouge score attacks will likely be exactly the same in M1 and M4.
Edit: I'm not considering Mission 4 stats for Routes 101 or 280 in this topic, as those are different from M4's of other stages and would thus be argued for or against differently.
With the exception of Routes 101 and 280, Mission 1 and Mission 4 of every stage have just two differences: only Mission 1 has checkpoints, and Mission 4 adds a time limit (or a stricter time limit for Green Forest, Security Hall, and White Jungle).
Implications on Mission 4 ring attacks:
- There's no checkpoint manipulation. In Sonic/Shadow and Tails/Eggman levels, M1 and M5 ring runs often involve creative and risky backtracking tricks to maximize checkpoint bonuses. M4 has no such thing - this may be good if you think backtracks are tedious and/or annoying, or bad if you think ring runs become bland without the backtracking tricks.
- Time limits may or may not present a good challenge. All but 2 of the M4 ring attacks are already known to be 'maxable', but some levels are much more difficult to max than others. Levels like Prison Lane, Mission Street, and Iron Gate don't add too much difficulty to the Mission 1 RA, but levels like Wild Canyon, Pyramid Cave, and Radical Highway may require a lot of practice and planning to max in M4.
- M4 ring attacks may feel like a direct extension of M1 ring attacks which don't involve checkpoint manipulation. In particular, all Knuckles/Rouge M1 ring attacks have no checkpoints, so those M4 ring attacks simply add a time limit. Is this a bad thing or not?
Implications on Mission 4 score attacks:
- No checkpoints to get points or shields from. This will slightly lower M4 scores compared to M1 scores, but this probably won't affect strategies much.
- Speed is already an important element in M1 scores, but time limits still may make a difference. In many Sonic/Shadow and Tails/Eggman levels, a few time consuming point sources may have to be skipped in favor of time. In other levels, though, the top M1 score runs may already meet the M4 time limits. In particular, Knuckles/Rouge score attacks will likely be exactly the same in M1 and M4.
Edit: I'm not considering Mission 4 stats for Routes 101 or 280 in this topic, as those are different from M4's of other stages and would thus be argued for or against differently.
107
Leaderboard Disputes / Re: RPGNUTTER'S CONFESSIONS (TM)
« on: September 04, 2007, 10:12:52 pm »
I can't approve of your past actions, but I think it's quite admirable that you had the courage to confess. Personally, I think you shouldn't be punished beyond the relevant stat deletion. I hope that this sort of confession can be encouraged, because we want our rankings to be as accurate as possible.
108
Competition Central / Re: Choose my next SA2B target time(please?)
« on: July 01, 2007, 01:47:04 pm »
The current Mad Space 2 record didn't involve any pausing. I think the only record that might actually require pause abuse would be Security Hall 3, assuming that it's really close to perfection.
By the way, great job on that Final Chase time!
By the way, great job on that Final Chase time!
109
Hiya Folks / Re: sup
« on: June 07, 2007, 11:35:47 pm »
In the meantime, there's no reason to worry about me taking SA(DX); I only have a few improvements left in me right now.
110
Non-Sonic Site Discussion / Re: Mario Center discussion
« on: May 24, 2007, 06:14:33 pm »
I'd say Mario vs. Donkey Kong qualifies as a platformer, even if it's somewhat more puzzle-oriented and less action-oriented than most other Mario games. As for competitive value, the scores are largely based on your time bonus, which is determined by a timer that counts in seconds. There's bound to be a fair number of record ties, but I think "easy records" will be somewhat rare. The best strategies are usually not obvious, and in many levels it's quite a challenge to cut that last second needed to tie the record.
Alternatively, you can look at a few videos to get a better idea about this.
Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2 deviates more from the typical platformer: you use the DS's stylus to direct Mini-Mario toys around obstacles and to the goal, without controlling anything directly. I haven't played this game as much as the original, but I think it's definitely competition worthy. It's just that around World 3 I stopped trying to form optimal strategies for high scores, since the levels were getting so complicated.
Also, Yoshi's Island DS has quite a nice Time Trial mode. There may be a difficulty with adding it though: since you earn time deductions for the stars, red coins, and flowers that you finish with, times can easily go into the negatives (my time for the first level is something like -1:16.xx). I'm not sure if this could be implemented in the rankings.
Alternatively, you can look at a few videos to get a better idea about this.
Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2 deviates more from the typical platformer: you use the DS's stylus to direct Mini-Mario toys around obstacles and to the goal, without controlling anything directly. I haven't played this game as much as the original, but I think it's definitely competition worthy. It's just that around World 3 I stopped trying to form optimal strategies for high scores, since the levels were getting so complicated.
Also, Yoshi's Island DS has quite a nice Time Trial mode. There may be a difficulty with adding it though: since you earn time deductions for the stars, red coins, and flowers that you finish with, times can easily go into the negatives (my time for the first level is something like -1:16.xx). I'm not sure if this could be implemented in the rankings.
111
Non-Sonic Site Discussion / Re: Mario Center discussion
« on: April 21, 2007, 02:30:26 pm »
For Mario vs. Donkey Kong, I think the 102 score charts (48 normal, 42 plus, 12 expert) should be sufficient. The game only tracks scores and not times, and time is a big factor when playing for scores anyway.
One interesting thing I found about this game at Cyberscore: Level 2-4 has some sort of version difference. In this level, I believe some version(s) of the game are given 30 more seconds on the countdown timer, giving them a clear 3000-point advantage when the time bonus is tallied. Though I'm not sure what one could do about it; I'm not sure that it's reason enough to remove the chart.
One interesting thing I found about this game at Cyberscore: Level 2-4 has some sort of version difference. In this level, I believe some version(s) of the game are given 30 more seconds on the countdown timer, giving them a clear 3000-point advantage when the time bonus is tallied. Though I'm not sure what one could do about it; I'm not sure that it's reason enough to remove the chart.
112
Gaming and Grazing / Re: The SMBBB Competition Thread
« on: March 17, 2007, 01:55:41 pm »
Nice, many of those scores look impressive. Monkey Wars especially, but some of the main game world scores look great too.
About Ultra Heaven 5, I still haven't cleared that one either. Easily the hardest level of any Monkey Ball game. It seems that some people are able to beat it consistently, though!
About Ultra Heaven 5, I still haven't cleared that one either. Easily the hardest level of any Monkey Ball game. It seems that some people are able to beat it consistently, though!
113
Gaming and Grazing / Re: The SMBBB Competition Thread
« on: February 18, 2007, 08:03:27 pm »
About bananas in the main game, I've completed Worlds 1 and 2 just as you have. I've also done a large part of World 5, though I'm not sure exactly how much.
In chat you were asking about the single banana in 5-1, right? I think I managed to collect it by bumping the side of the bridge where the banana was. It took some trying to finally get it.
Anyway, this will do for now:
Monkey Island - All
Jumble Jungle - All
In chat you were asking about the single banana in 5-1, right? I think I managed to collect it by bumping the side of the bridge where the banana was. It took some trying to finally get it.
Anyway, this will do for now:
Monkey Island - All
Jumble Jungle - All
114
Gaming and Grazing / Re: The SMBBB Competition Thread
« on: February 14, 2007, 12:40:46 am »
Cool, good job on setting up the rankings. Here are some more stats from me:
Jumble Jungle - 129250
Banana Thief - 5700 (you missed this one)
Disk Golf - Holes 1-3 - 10
Fish Catcher - 33
Free Throw - 310
Frog Ball - 0'47"00
Fruit Basket - 65
Hammer Throw - 102.17
Home Run Derby - 806.85
Hovercraft Battle - 3504
Hovercraft Race - Course 1 - 0'30"06
Hovercraft Race - Course 2 - 0'44"48
Hovercraft Race - Course 3 - 0'47"95
Monkey Wars - Jungle Attack - 11550
Monkey Wars - Pyramid Maze - 16155
Monkey Wars - Cosmofield - 11450
I managed to get one decent Disk Golf score, though I agree that it's one of the toughest minigames. Also, you're really good at Monkey Wars. I thought my last two scores were awesome!
As for other Wii games, Monkey Ball is really the only one I've been playing, so I don't have any suggestions right now.
Jumble Jungle - 129250
Banana Thief - 5700 (you missed this one)
Disk Golf - Holes 1-3 - 10
Fish Catcher - 33
Free Throw - 310
Frog Ball - 0'47"00
Fruit Basket - 65
Hammer Throw - 102.17
Home Run Derby - 806.85
Hovercraft Battle - 3504
Hovercraft Race - Course 1 - 0'30"06
Hovercraft Race - Course 2 - 0'44"48
Hovercraft Race - Course 3 - 0'47"95
Monkey Wars - Jungle Attack - 11550
Monkey Wars - Pyramid Maze - 16155
Monkey Wars - Cosmofield - 11450
I managed to get one decent Disk Golf score, though I agree that it's one of the toughest minigames. Also, you're really good at Monkey Wars. I thought my last two scores were awesome!
As for other Wii games, Monkey Ball is really the only one I've been playing, so I don't have any suggestions right now.
115
Gaming and Grazing / Re: The SMBBB Competition Thread
« on: February 09, 2007, 12:59:15 pm »
Well, I'll just add in any missing levels to the list.
Main Game
Monkey Island
Jumble Jungle
Smooth Sherbet
Detritus Desert
Pirates Ocean
Cobalt Caverns
Volcanic Pools
Space Case
Sinking Swamp
Ultra Heaven
Credits
Party Games
Alien Attack
Asteroid Crash
Banana Catch
Banana Thief
Bugs Balance
Dangerous Route - Level 1
Dangerous Route - Level 2
Dangerous Route - Level 3
Disk Golf - 9 Holes
Disk Golf - Holes 1-3
Disk Golf - Holes 4-6
Disk Golf - Holes 7-9
Fish Catcher
Free Throw
Frog Ball
Fruit Basket
Hammer Throw
Home Run Derby
Hovercraft Battle
Hovercraft Race - Course 1
Hovercraft Race - Course 2
Hovercraft Race - Course 3
Hurdle Race
Jigsaw Puzzle - Jungle Walk
Jigsaw Puzzle - Space Wars
Jigsaw Puzzle - Monkey Carnival
Jump Rope
Keepy Up
Monkey Bowling
Monkey Darts - Count Up
Monkey Golf - 18 Holes
Monkey Golf - Outer 9 Holes
Monkey Golf - Inner 9 Holes
Monkey Race - Island Road - Circuit
Monkey Race - Island Road - Lap
Monkey Race - Jungle Highway - Circuit
Monkey Race - Jungle Highway - Lap
Monkey Race - Sand Storm - Circuit
Monkey Race - Sand Storm - Lap
Monkey Race - Pirate Circuit - Circuit
Monkey Race - Pirate Circuit - Lap
Monkey Race - Fire Ball - Circuit
Monkey Race - Fire Ball - Lap
Monkey Snowboard - Sorbet Slope
Monkey Snowboard - Snow Slider
Monkey Snowboard - Ice Spiral
Monkey Target
Monkey Wars - Jungle Attack
Monkey Wars - Pyramid Maze
Monkey Wars - Cosmofield
Monkeysmith
Number Ball - Normal
Number Ball - Random
Paraglider - Target
Paraglider - Landing Time
Paraglider - Checkpoint Race
Racing Birds
Ring Toss
Scoop the Goldfish
Seesaw Ball - Course 1
Seesaw Ball - Course 2
Seesaw Ball - Course 3
Shepherd
Simon Says
Sling Shot
Space Monkey Attack
Spaceship Landing
Treasure Submarine
Trombone - Frog Song
Trombone - Stars
Trombone - Butterfly
UFO Capture
Whack-a-Mole
Yacht Sailing
To get things started, here are a few of mine:
Monkey Island - 80651
Credits - 275
Alien Attack - 16300
Asteroid Crash - 28400
Banana Catch - 43
Banana Thief - 5700
Bugs Balance - 2.04
Dangerous Route - Level 1 - 1:17.98
Dangerous Route - Level 2 - 1:42.61
Dangerous Route - Level 3 - 2:28.60
Number Ball - Normal - 9900 (game froze just as I hit the 99th ball, it didn't actually show this score)
Number Ball - Random - 6800
Main Game
Monkey Island
Jumble Jungle
Smooth Sherbet
Detritus Desert
Pirates Ocean
Cobalt Caverns
Volcanic Pools
Space Case
Sinking Swamp
Ultra Heaven
Credits
Party Games
Alien Attack
Asteroid Crash
Banana Catch
Banana Thief
Bugs Balance
Dangerous Route - Level 1
Dangerous Route - Level 2
Dangerous Route - Level 3
Disk Golf - 9 Holes
Disk Golf - Holes 1-3
Disk Golf - Holes 4-6
Disk Golf - Holes 7-9
Fish Catcher
Free Throw
Frog Ball
Fruit Basket
Hammer Throw
Home Run Derby
Hovercraft Battle
Hovercraft Race - Course 1
Hovercraft Race - Course 2
Hovercraft Race - Course 3
Hurdle Race
Jigsaw Puzzle - Jungle Walk
Jigsaw Puzzle - Space Wars
Jigsaw Puzzle - Monkey Carnival
Jump Rope
Keepy Up
Monkey Bowling
Monkey Darts - Count Up
Monkey Golf - 18 Holes
Monkey Golf - Outer 9 Holes
Monkey Golf - Inner 9 Holes
Monkey Race - Island Road - Circuit
Monkey Race - Island Road - Lap
Monkey Race - Jungle Highway - Circuit
Monkey Race - Jungle Highway - Lap
Monkey Race - Sand Storm - Circuit
Monkey Race - Sand Storm - Lap
Monkey Race - Pirate Circuit - Circuit
Monkey Race - Pirate Circuit - Lap
Monkey Race - Fire Ball - Circuit
Monkey Race - Fire Ball - Lap
Monkey Snowboard - Sorbet Slope
Monkey Snowboard - Snow Slider
Monkey Snowboard - Ice Spiral
Monkey Target
Monkey Wars - Jungle Attack
Monkey Wars - Pyramid Maze
Monkey Wars - Cosmofield
Monkeysmith
Number Ball - Normal
Number Ball - Random
Paraglider - Target
Paraglider - Landing Time
Paraglider - Checkpoint Race
Racing Birds
Ring Toss
Scoop the Goldfish
Seesaw Ball - Course 1
Seesaw Ball - Course 2
Seesaw Ball - Course 3
Shepherd
Simon Says
Sling Shot
Space Monkey Attack
Spaceship Landing
Treasure Submarine
Trombone - Frog Song
Trombone - Stars
Trombone - Butterfly
UFO Capture
Whack-a-Mole
Yacht Sailing
To get things started, here are a few of mine:
Monkey Island - 80651
Credits - 275
Alien Attack - 16300
Asteroid Crash - 28400
Banana Catch - 43
Banana Thief - 5700
Bugs Balance - 2.04
Dangerous Route - Level 1 - 1:17.98
Dangerous Route - Level 2 - 1:42.61
Dangerous Route - Level 3 - 2:28.60
Number Ball - Normal - 9900 (game froze just as I hit the 99th ball, it didn't actually show this score)
Number Ball - Random - 6800
116
Gaming and Grazing / Re: The SMBBB Competition Thread
« on: February 04, 2007, 12:07:16 am »
Do you know about Elite Scores? They have rankings for Banana Blitz, including times for the 100 main game levels.
Of course a competition topic here doesn't hurt, but I was just wondering if you knew about that site.
Of course a competition topic here doesn't hurt, but I was just wondering if you knew about that site.
117
Hiya Folks / Re: I'm New Here.
« on: November 12, 2006, 07:11:49 pm »
It's probably worth noting that this topic is 3-4 months old...
118
Competition Central / Re: The Maxed Time Discussion Topic
« on: October 22, 2006, 02:26:15 pm »
Cannon's Core 1 and 3, from what I can remember:
T 0:09:20, E 0:41:20, R 0:51:30, K 1:12:80, S 1:18:15
T 0:09:20, E 0:41:20, R 0:51:30, K 1:12:80, S 1:18:15
119
Competition Central / Re: The Top Ten Sonic videos in TSC's history! [IN COUNTDOWN MODE]
« on: October 21, 2006, 01:01:19 am »
Wow, didn't expect Westopolis to be so high on the list. I honestly didn't think it would make it after seeing some of the other choices.
And congratulations to everyone else who made the list. Until this idea came about, I hadn't thought much about the sheer number of great videos on the site; there are easily more than 50 that would really impress me. I'm looking forward to seeing what the top 3 choices will be.
Also, thanks to everyone for the support.
And congratulations to everyone else who made the list. Until this idea came about, I hadn't thought much about the sheer number of great videos on the site; there are easily more than 50 that would really impress me. I'm looking forward to seeing what the top 3 choices will be.
Also, thanks to everyone for the support.
120
Information Kiosk / Re: New Competition Suggestions
« on: October 19, 2006, 01:05:31 am »
Kart M3: A significant part of getting a fast time in Mission 1 is to avoid the cars, so adding Mission 3 seems a bit repetitive to me.
Kart M4: Personally I'm not too interested (preferring to go all-out like in M1), but I guess it would work.
M4 time rankings in general: Well, in the Tails/Eggman levels in particular, you'd actually lose a bit of time from restarting at checkpoints, as you'd have to restart from a standstill. So that lost time would somewhat balance out with the gained time from better execution, meaning the M1/M4 rankings wouldn't be much different. I can see where you're coming from for some Sonic/Shadow levels, Cannon's Core, and maybe Eternal Engine and Cosmic Wall. Still, it would look kind of odd if Mission 4s were only added for certain levels (even if we just left out hunting). Also, I don't think a lot of people abuse checkpoints, at least not to an extreme.
Kart M4: Personally I'm not too interested (preferring to go all-out like in M1), but I guess it would work.
M4 time rankings in general: Well, in the Tails/Eggman levels in particular, you'd actually lose a bit of time from restarting at checkpoints, as you'd have to restart from a standstill. So that lost time would somewhat balance out with the gained time from better execution, meaning the M1/M4 rankings wouldn't be much different. I can see where you're coming from for some Sonic/Shadow levels, Cannon's Core, and maybe Eternal Engine and Cosmic Wall. Still, it would look kind of odd if Mission 4s were only added for certain levels (even if we just left out hunting). Also, I don't think a lot of people abuse checkpoints, at least not to an extreme.
The Sonic Center v3.9
Copyright 2003-2011 by The Sonic Center Team.