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.
31
Beef / What I want to do
« on: March 30, 2016, 02:17:28 pm »
It's been many years since I've considered building my own site from the ground up. The last time I tried, I got lost and exhausted and decided to take a break. When I came back, I didn't want to make the excuse of laziness; so I made a rather tasteless prank -- and lost a very good friend or three in the process. The project died then and there.
I think this time, I'm just gonna pull up my big-boy britches and try to pull the process off myself. I realize this is a huge undertaking, and I'm going to have to somehow manage this, my boyfriend, and my awesome career all on one plate, but in truth this is how my life always has been. Anytime I've found myself against something I wanted to truly do, I sat down, laid the plans out, and worked day-in and day-out until it was accomplished. Those of you who know me from when I competed in S3/Rush know what I'm talking about, but it goes beyond that.
I've handcrafted several aspects of SCD's website before, and Strong Bad taught me quite a bit about using WordPress for sitecrafting. In my career, it's taken me many years to get where I am now, but it would not have been that way without lots of painful sacrifices to hobbies (such as this one).
I realize the backlash of making a post like this without a site to show for it is going to get tons of negative feedback. That's why I'm going to look at this every day from now on -- my daily reminder that time doesn't heal certain things. Only dedication and devotion do.
That's what I'm pledging to give today. I may not have anything to show right now, but I'm done timewarping to avoid problems. I'm going to do the same thing I've always done to solve my life's problems -- drill onward and onward until i make my own light at the end of the tunnel.
I hope I succeed.
I think this time, I'm just gonna pull up my big-boy britches and try to pull the process off myself. I realize this is a huge undertaking, and I'm going to have to somehow manage this, my boyfriend, and my awesome career all on one plate, but in truth this is how my life always has been. Anytime I've found myself against something I wanted to truly do, I sat down, laid the plans out, and worked day-in and day-out until it was accomplished. Those of you who know me from when I competed in S3/Rush know what I'm talking about, but it goes beyond that.
I've handcrafted several aspects of SCD's website before, and Strong Bad taught me quite a bit about using WordPress for sitecrafting. In my career, it's taken me many years to get where I am now, but it would not have been that way without lots of painful sacrifices to hobbies (such as this one).
I realize the backlash of making a post like this without a site to show for it is going to get tons of negative feedback. That's why I'm going to look at this every day from now on -- my daily reminder that time doesn't heal certain things. Only dedication and devotion do.
That's what I'm pledging to give today. I may not have anything to show right now, but I'm done timewarping to avoid problems. I'm going to do the same thing I've always done to solve my life's problems -- drill onward and onward until i make my own light at the end of the tunnel.
I hope I succeed.
32
Leaderboard Disputes / Re: Hunters13's bad habit of posting world record times with no evidence
« on: March 30, 2016, 02:03:21 pm »
I've tried timewarping out of these problems. It just chips off another flake of this place every time I do it. Plus it ages me too. Not fun. The fuck are these gray hairs?
The only thing I can do is roll up my sleeves and create a new site with a different approach. That belongs in another topic.
The only thing I can do is roll up my sleeves and create a new site with a different approach. That belongs in another topic.
33
Leaderboard Disputes / Re: Hunters13's bad habit of posting world record times with no evidence
« on: March 30, 2016, 01:46:58 pm »
Okay first of all, where's your admin permission? Because they would have taken the initiative to start the thread as opposed to your way-too-accusatory tone. Just because a time is fast, that's not grounds to call BS.
Also how does this thread go unnoticed while this load of crap has taken the forefront of what little rules violations attention we have?
I need to whip this place back into shape.
Also how does this thread go unnoticed while this load of crap has taken the forefront of what little rules violations attention we have?
I need to whip this place back into shape.
34
Competition Central / Re: new hydrocity 1 level wrap NEED HELP!!!!!
« on: January 18, 2016, 11:52:10 am »
Okay that didn't take long.
While higher, it's still not good enough. The end result drops you in the same place. You would need a zip point even higher than this, I'm afraid. And judging by the way the level starts (Open vertical space with a wall on the left), that's probably slim odds.
While higher, it's still not good enough. The end result drops you in the same place. You would need a zip point even higher than this, I'm afraid. And judging by the way the level starts (Open vertical space with a wall on the left), that's probably slim odds.
35
Competition Central / Re: new hydrocity 1 level wrap NEED HELP!!!!!
« on: January 18, 2016, 11:34:40 am »
That looks easy to replicate, and considerably higher than the other zip point I was shown a few years back.
Give me time to playtest this a little. I'm known for taking stupid shit in this game and making it competitive.
Give me time to playtest this a little. I'm known for taking stupid shit in this game and making it competitive.
36
Competition Central / Re: Gathering thoughts and general ideas for the improvement of TSC
« on: June 01, 2015, 08:59:18 pm »
I hate to burst your bubble, but you're about ten years late.
37
News and Updates / Re: Administrator Title Change
« on: May 24, 2015, 10:59:21 am »
Any good ideas will simply be shot down by our resident Anti-idea turrets.
Any attempt to argue with Anti-idea turrets results in shenanigans.
Any attempt to destroy an Anti-idea turrets results in --- Let's find out!
Any attempt to argue with Anti-idea turrets results in shenanigans.
Any attempt to destroy an Anti-idea turrets results in --- Let's find out!
38
News and Updates / Re: Administrator Title Change
« on: May 20, 2015, 09:06:26 pm »
Is it just me, or are posts in here starting to sink to 4chan level?
I thought again about saying something five-paged and witty, but after I finished I just highlighted and backspaced. It's better that way.
I guess I really am not the same guy anymore.
* SpinDashMaster grab popcorn
I thought again about saying something five-paged and witty, but after I finished I just highlighted and backspaced. It's better that way.
I guess I really am not the same guy anymore.
39
News and Updates / Re: Administrator Title Change
« on: May 02, 2015, 11:24:21 am »
You know something, I think I've finally lost my give-a-damn for this place.
The SDM of 2014 and prior would have copy-pasted and taken shots at all of you for the drama you made, then retreat for a few days and do it again.
I don't even care enough to do that. I think I'm one of the lucky few who actually has better things to do.
Here's to not giving a shit, Thorn!
The SDM of 2014 and prior would have copy-pasted and taken shots at all of you for the drama you made, then retreat for a few days and do it again.
I don't even care enough to do that. I think I'm one of the lucky few who actually has better things to do.
Here's to not giving a shit, Thorn!
* SpinDashMaster raise glass
40
Beef / Re: How much longer am i supposed to wait
« on: March 13, 2015, 05:57:32 pm »
Why not let him submit the maximum number that can be held in the stat for now until the issue can be resolved?
41
Competition Central / Re: Is Brainstorm legit?
« on: February 10, 2015, 03:58:38 pm »
Brainstorm got BS-called because his videos reeked of splicing.
42
Competition Central / Re: WTF
« on: February 05, 2015, 02:02:16 pm »
Oh god, I about cried laughing.
43
Wikkity! / Re: Topic 1 - Your opinion of TSC
« on: December 22, 2014, 09:47:14 am »
I've been with TSC since 2006, and what got me so attached wasn't necessarily the competition, but rather the true friends that resided here. I found out just how true they were, one late night when I was 19.
My mother was out of town on business. I was up late, hanging out on the chat channel and playing Sonic 3. mike89 and I were discussing some things about it before my side of the input went cold. There was an unexpected visitor knocking loudly. He barely hid himself from the view of the front door panel. By the time I dialed 911, he had already attempted to charge the door and smashed three windows in quick succession.
Cops arrived shortly after, explaining it wasn't an isolated incident, and that the attacker had murdered seven others who unwittingly let him inside. While they searched my house for potential evidence, I sat my dizzy self back down in front of the computer, explaining my situation in chat. It may have been just conversation, but the solace they gave meant everything to me during my hour of need.
I learned two things from that eventful night: Inch-thick wooden doors are amazing, and so are the friendships you can forge at TSC.
My mother was out of town on business. I was up late, hanging out on the chat channel and playing Sonic 3. mike89 and I were discussing some things about it before my side of the input went cold. There was an unexpected visitor knocking loudly. He barely hid himself from the view of the front door panel. By the time I dialed 911, he had already attempted to charge the door and smashed three windows in quick succession.
Cops arrived shortly after, explaining it wasn't an isolated incident, and that the attacker had murdered seven others who unwittingly let him inside. While they searched my house for potential evidence, I sat my dizzy self back down in front of the computer, explaining my situation in chat. It may have been just conversation, but the solace they gave meant everything to me during my hour of need.
I learned two things from that eventful night: Inch-thick wooden doors are amazing, and so are the friendships you can forge at TSC.
44
News and Updates / Re: Social Media is a Thing
« on: November 05, 2014, 08:05:33 pm »
I wonder if this has anything to do with why Sonic 4 doesn't have an Episode 3.
45
News and Updates / Re: Social Media is a Thing
« on: November 05, 2014, 03:17:14 pm »
New element types for shields could be innovative; for instance, Earth shields that would let sonic plow through a thin floor to the space underneath (or make him float on mud like in Marble Garden), or perhaps a wind shield that can remove protective layers from nearby robots (like Orbinauts or those thingies from Mushroom Hill), or even an ice shield which freezes sonic in place and offers a temporary immunity to damage.
Could even go as far as to make the glitches into shields (minus the zipping) -- for instance, a slope glitch shield would be pretty badass. And it would be more balanced if it didn't combo so well with ceiling breaks and wallzips.
Wheel glitch shield could be fun too.
Could even go as far as to make the glitches into shields (minus the zipping) -- for instance, a slope glitch shield would be pretty badass. And it would be more balanced if it didn't combo so well with ceiling breaks and wallzips.
Wheel glitch shield could be fun too.
46
News and Updates / Re: Social Media is a Thing
« on: November 04, 2014, 11:19:06 pm »
OCRemix is a thing.
47
News and Updates / Re: Social Media is a Thing
« on: November 04, 2014, 09:09:07 am »Now, I can't imagine anybody on TSC would want such a thing. After all, a remake would have less glitches, and the current Sonic 3 & Knuckles competitors on TSC are all about splitting the game wide open and making the engine cry while preforming time attacks that avoid as much of the actual level as possible. Wouldn't making people play the levels from start to finish as intended spoil the fun?
You took that a little too far. It's not like the game engine has a soul, or a brain, or a heart, or anything. BUT WE DO! ;(
As for the assets, keep in mind that S3(K) has been re-released several times since 1995 with all of its music intact (SMC, Gems, etc).
Anyway, good luck getting SEGA to notice or care. I'll throw my support behind this, but I have my doubts.
48
General Sonic / Re: Sonic Unleashed Cool Edge 1 Score Attack Strat For Score Attackers
« on: November 03, 2014, 09:26:19 am »49
General Sonic / Re: Terminal Velocity Boss (SCWii) oddness
« on: November 01, 2014, 11:26:30 am »
You're posting from a Wii U, so I assume that's how you got the stat?
I know this is sort of unrelated but I've noticed some rather buggy gameplay when running Twilight Princess on the Wii U. Maybe Wii U's emulation of the Wii software is similarly inaccurate for Sonic Colors?
I know this is sort of unrelated but I've noticed some rather buggy gameplay when running Twilight Princess on the Wii U. Maybe Wii U's emulation of the Wii software is similarly inaccurate for Sonic Colors?
50
Competition Central / Re: S3K Ring Attacks questions
« on: October 31, 2014, 04:08:26 pm »
Close. We defined downtime earlier (though without directly highlighting it) as when the timer stops until the timer resets. Otherwise you have it right.
51
Beef / Re: Calling out The Kid .130. for breaking the scoreboard
« on: October 31, 2014, 10:23:08 am »
That... poor kid.
52
Competition Central / Re: S3K Ring Attacks questions
« on: October 30, 2014, 11:52:31 pm »
@ORKAL: That would be allowed. "Collecting the same rings twice" in the rules is more or less referring to a ring from the exact same location (Which is why transitioning to act 2 as knuckles in icecap 1 is banned, as one could open the same monitor twice.). A -1 +1 situation is fine, as opposed to a +2 situation.
For the record, you can get at most 32 rings this way, and the best way to do it (after a little experimenting) would be over solid, U-shaped ground. (Fat chance of luring a bot into HC2 without some debug though)
@TimpZ: Thank you for taking the time to hear me out and reach an understanding. Among your ideas posted, I particularly like the third one best.
As for alternatives, I would also be sated with having a simple honor system and not overkilling things, it's just that it's getting hard to keep track over in the domain of Sonic 3, what with the discoveries that mike89, werster, SB737, DsS, Romulo, and myself have made. Very few of us (if not me alone) know all of them by heart.
I've already almost forgotten that we still need to worry about IC1 again, now that we have new challengers in the ring. (No pun intended)
For the record, you can get at most 32 rings this way, and the best way to do it (after a little experimenting) would be over solid, U-shaped ground. (Fat chance of luring a bot into HC2 without some debug though)
@TimpZ: Thank you for taking the time to hear me out and reach an understanding. Among your ideas posted, I particularly like the third one best.
As for alternatives, I would also be sated with having a simple honor system and not overkilling things, it's just that it's getting hard to keep track over in the domain of Sonic 3, what with the discoveries that mike89, werster, SB737, DsS, Romulo, and myself have made. Very few of us (if not me alone) know all of them by heart.
I've already almost forgotten that we still need to worry about IC1 again, now that we have new challengers in the ring. (No pun intended)
53
Competition Central / Re: S3K Ring Attacks questions
« on: October 30, 2014, 04:24:56 pm »
That's all I need. Thanks for your time.
Okay so here's what TimpZ and I have culminated to in our discussion: As many saves as you wish, but only during the downtime between the timer stopping and the timer resetting.
TL;DR: This preserves prior stats while maintaining as much fair play in future setups as possible. Yes it's arbitrary, but it's a damn good compromise.
Anyone else have thoughts on this?
Okay so here's what TimpZ and I have culminated to in our discussion: As many saves as you wish, but only during the downtime between the timer stopping and the timer resetting.
TL;DR: This preserves prior stats while maintaining as much fair play in future setups as possible. Yes it's arbitrary, but it's a damn good compromise.
Anyone else have thoughts on this?
54
Competition Central / Re: S3K Ring Attacks questions
« on: October 30, 2014, 04:05:02 pm »
lolSM. I like it.
While you're here, what was the original intent behind banning Super/Hyper forms back in the time dinosaurs roamed the earth?
While you're here, what was the original intent behind banning Super/Hyper forms back in the time dinosaurs roamed the earth?
55
Competition Central / Re: S3K Ring Attacks questions
« on: October 30, 2014, 03:36:40 pm »
The misinterpretation in your first quote refers to you transforming my argument about inability to ban saves because of infeasibility within the charts (we would have to go back and uproot hundreds of stats to which we don't know who did and who didn't load an opening save, even 8+ years ago before I came here).
You rewrote it as "SDM doesn't want it banned because that's the way it has always been."
It really comes across as a slap in the face when you do that to someone's writing.
Let me make myself clear on that situation before I continue. I want to ban saves outright in light of what has arisen. We can't. The only choice moving forward is to allow saves to some extent, whether that amount is singular or plural.
Regarding your second quote: it's a good idea (in American English at least) to avoid the usage of the words "You" or even "I" when writing as much as possible, unless you're talking about personal experiences or are referring to something that actually happened. Instead of yelping "you think x" or "you think y," instead suggest something along the lines of "If x is the goal why not do this?"
Then we can at least address it by pointing out that either you have a good suggestion or x is not the goal. And then the discussion can continue in a positive manner, by clarifying our mutual goals respectfully.
Regarding "Who are you to judge," it wasn't necessarily the word you poking out this time, but rather in conjunction with the word judge (which is a very strong combo in the context you ended up writing). The way that was written, you made it sound like I was usurping control over the whole scenario, and from there we had the wrong idea on each other's stances.
As for English not being your first language, I understand where your struggles are in accidentally causing unwanted confusion. I remember having epic struggles when I was a teenager working at a restaurant with a Mexican and a Czech and translating for everyone. I have often sent someone to the bathroom when they were looking for the paprika. The most embarrassing part was he came back with toilet paper.
Of course you're definitely more fluent in your secondary languages than I am in mine, and it shows in the way you write in English, but I think you know what I'm getting at by now. Now that we know where the line breaks are, let's just both agree to ask for clarity before we jump to any conclusions like we both did earlier. We'll both be a lot better off.
I am also deeply sorry for causing you additional grief on top of the weeds you're trudging through.
Moving forward, to address your final paragraph fairly, it is a great thing that you brought up LR2, because in the spirit of preservation of prior stats we don't want to ruin that either.
It certainly does force us to shy away from the 1-savestate option. The underlying idea is that suggestions for rules for what can and can't be done before a level starts need to be made in light of what has happened, so that we are not so heavily mind-blown when something new arises. I merely presented one idea by suggesting the 1-save rule. I am open to any ideas you may wish to suggest.
EDIT: Your second edit has just appeared on my end. I wrote that potential solution (at least in a similar manner) as well in my previous post and I am inclined to agree with it.
You rewrote it as "SDM doesn't want it banned because that's the way it has always been."
It really comes across as a slap in the face when you do that to someone's writing.
Let me make myself clear on that situation before I continue. I want to ban saves outright in light of what has arisen. We can't. The only choice moving forward is to allow saves to some extent, whether that amount is singular or plural.
Regarding your second quote: it's a good idea (in American English at least) to avoid the usage of the words "You" or even "I" when writing as much as possible, unless you're talking about personal experiences or are referring to something that actually happened. Instead of yelping "you think x" or "you think y," instead suggest something along the lines of "If x is the goal why not do this?"
Then we can at least address it by pointing out that either you have a good suggestion or x is not the goal. And then the discussion can continue in a positive manner, by clarifying our mutual goals respectfully.
Regarding "Who are you to judge," it wasn't necessarily the word you poking out this time, but rather in conjunction with the word judge (which is a very strong combo in the context you ended up writing). The way that was written, you made it sound like I was usurping control over the whole scenario, and from there we had the wrong idea on each other's stances.
As for English not being your first language, I understand where your struggles are in accidentally causing unwanted confusion. I remember having epic struggles when I was a teenager working at a restaurant with a Mexican and a Czech and translating for everyone. I have often sent someone to the bathroom when they were looking for the paprika. The most embarrassing part was he came back with toilet paper.
Of course you're definitely more fluent in your secondary languages than I am in mine, and it shows in the way you write in English, but I think you know what I'm getting at by now. Now that we know where the line breaks are, let's just both agree to ask for clarity before we jump to any conclusions like we both did earlier. We'll both be a lot better off.
I am also deeply sorry for causing you additional grief on top of the weeds you're trudging through.
Moving forward, to address your final paragraph fairly, it is a great thing that you brought up LR2, because in the spirit of preservation of prior stats we don't want to ruin that either.
It certainly does force us to shy away from the 1-savestate option. The underlying idea is that suggestions for rules for what can and can't be done before a level starts need to be made in light of what has happened, so that we are not so heavily mind-blown when something new arises. I merely presented one idea by suggesting the 1-save rule. I am open to any ideas you may wish to suggest.
EDIT: Your second edit has just appeared on my end. I wrote that potential solution (at least in a similar manner) as well in my previous post and I am inclined to agree with it.
56
Competition Central / Re: S3K Ring Attacks questions
« on: October 30, 2014, 10:50:43 am »
Excuse me? Until you took these hurtful tones in this post, which I emboldened for you for clarity in case your tone detector is broken, I was happy as a clam.
Pair that with your prior history of posting and tell me why I shouldn't react to you in kind.
Your posts aren't worth reading when you make vague points and not bring them up directly -- unless I have to drag them out of you with this kind of discussion (It's taken you this long to suggest 1 save at the transition and mention the case of LR2, when you could have been way more direct, clear, and respectful about it.)
While you've brought LR2 to light, by the way, what's going on over there with the savestateing? Care to elaborate why S&K players are doing that in the first place?
And, assuming that whatever they are doing is possible on console, would this (unofficial and intentionally in layman's terms) rewording be a solution?
"As many savestates as you want, but only during the level transition (starting point = act clear screen from act 1, ending point = title card for act 2)"
EDIT: After some research in LR2 it seems players would be using a single save, since the flame shield tuck looks easy to set up.
EDIT2: After some more research, it's easy as tails but not so as Sonic or Knuckles. What's worse is that my proposed rewrite is no good. (Unless we redefine it to "starting point = flag begins falling.")
IMO the LR2 topic should be addressed in and of itself in another thread, because whoever's been doing that definitely did take savestate usage way out of hand, when it could have been clean enough to just get it done in a single save.
Also, just FYI, it's pretty shitty to come at me like I've been TASing prelevel and using that as an argument when it was actually you who did it all along.
Hold the hell up a minute. You knew about LR2, but you said this.
You have the record for LR2S and you said this.
AND YOU MEAN TO TELL ME YOU'RE NOT BAITING REACTIONS?!
I've been had.
Ok so you say that banning save-states in act 1 isn't an option because people have done that a long time. (Misinterpretation) You also think (Aggressive tone and an assumption) that banning more than 1 savestate is an option even though there's probably just as many stats that have had more than 1 savestate in act 1's. Also the rules clearly states that "if a new rule is enacted, anything already submitted in violation of that rule is void." and so all ring-attacks using more than 1 savestate pre-level is illegitimate which is the same problem you're trying to avoid.
Allowing more than 1 savestate doesn't raise any obvious concerns to me at all so I'd love for you to elaborate.(Aggressive tone)
"No setups that can't be replicated on human hands" is not a rule I can find so I'm guessing it's a proposition. (Shows you weren't paying attention when I said we're trying to propose a rule change). But a single savestate gives you the option to for example switch holding from right to left on the d-pad on a single frame which I believe is humanly impossible on a genesis controller without pausing in between. In any case every savestate gives you the option to buffer 1 TAS-input, which you generally seem to want to disallow pre-level.
Also who are you to judge (Aggressive tone) what is and isn't a feasible setup? The single-segment runs have evolved a lot because people took the time to research them and find consistent setups for what was previously thought of as being TAS-only. Even if a setup has only ever been TASed that doesn't mean it's unfeasable for a human to perform at least once.
So in short your arguments for allowing 1 savestate pre-level contradict themselves.
Having an arbitrary number of savestates at arbitrary times would hardly be more fair than any other number of savestates at any other arbitrary times. You think it's hard/time-consuming to setup so you need a savestate? Why not allow two so it's easier and less time consuming? You think having a lot of savestates defeats the purpouse of getting the stats? Why not ban it completely? (Aggressive and assumptive)
That's a discussion that doesn't lead anywhere but I think that if you truly want to be fair you either ban rings unaccessible from the level you're trying to RA altogether, allow people to TAS it and distribute a good save or you say that carrying rings from another level makes it part of "the run", thus it falls under the normal rules that disallow savestates. I don't consider 1 savestate a fair option in the sense that it doesn't solve anything.
Pair that with your prior history of posting and tell me why I shouldn't react to you in kind.
Your posts aren't worth reading when you make vague points and not bring them up directly -- unless I have to drag them out of you with this kind of discussion (It's taken you this long to suggest 1 save at the transition and mention the case of LR2, when you could have been way more direct, clear, and respectful about it.)
And, assuming that whatever they are doing is possible on console, would this (unofficial and intentionally in layman's terms) rewording be a solution?
"As many savestates as you want, but only during the level transition (starting point = act clear screen from act 1, ending point = title card for act 2)"
EDIT: After some research in LR2 it seems players would be using a single save, since the flame shield tuck looks easy to set up.
EDIT2: After some more research, it's easy as tails but not so as Sonic or Knuckles. What's worse is that my proposed rewrite is no good. (Unless we redefine it to "starting point = flag begins falling.")
IMO the LR2 topic should be addressed in and of itself in another thread, because whoever's been doing that definitely did take savestate usage way out of hand, when it could have been clean enough to just get it done in a single save.
Also, just FYI, it's pretty shitty to come at me like I've been TASing prelevel and using that as an argument when it was actually you who did it all along.
Allowing more than 1 savestate doesn't raise any obvious concerns to me at all so I'd love for you to elaborate.
Hold the hell up a minute. You knew about LR2, but you said this.
You have the record for LR2S and you said this.
AND YOU MEAN TO TELL ME YOU'RE NOT BAITING REACTIONS?!
* SpinDashMaster sigh
I've been had.
57
Competition Central / Re: S3K Ring Attacks questions
« on: October 28, 2014, 09:24:22 pm »
Your walls of mindless text have gotten to the point where I don't even want to give the time of day to deal with. You bait a reaction by barging into a conversation you know nothing about, addressing me directly, and when you get one you wonder why you got that reaction. Amidst the damage you have done, no one else wants to even seriously talk in this thread. Thanks for wasting everyone's time. In the future, please consider your tone (and hopefully your knowledge of the situation) before you post.
You've done the same thing here as in the emulation thread, reassuring your points without backing them up and completely ignoring anything anyone else has to say and scoffing it away as a fallacy by completely rewriting and misinterpreting the posts. In this most recent post the only thing I can make out of it without giving too much of a damn is that 1) you hate what I've proposed because I somehow have my hand in the cookie jar and 2) you're flaming mad about it. You don't even concede the points to which I hit the nail on the head. Instead you avoid them and keep on truckin' your complaints.
You also seem to think this discussion still has anything at all to do with ring wrapping when I've repeated twice that it does not. Rather ring-wrapping is what brought us to talk about pre-level actions because no rules are written, and everyone who has ever competed in Sonic 3, who has seen this thread, has raised concerns. So are you here to propose a solution, or to bitch more? Because you're not helping to accomplish the the intended goal.
And in case you hadn't been reading, I said already that I would otherwise be fine with banning pre-level savestates in light of what is possible now. WE CAN'T. GET OVER IT. I don't know what part of "banning saves is infeasible" you don't seem to comprehend, but if you think you can accomplish it, be my guest.
You've also started to splice quotes together as if they were a response to a different question, when the fact remains that 2 saves are less fair than 1.
There's a hint of this mathematical recursion mess. Your rebuttals to 1 being a good solution are nothing but randomly misplaced theory.
You also don't seem to want to drop these shenanigans about multiple saves prelevel already existing, when I already clarified there was never a motive to use one until this ring wrapping mess came up in the thread: IN OTHER WORDS THERE IS NOT ONE STAT ON THE CHARTS RIGHT NOW DOING THIS.
Lastly, if all you wanted to suggest is that the "1 save" takes place at the level transition, you could have left it at that and been maybe 5000000 times more gracious (and possibly respected) by doing so.
Hopefully while you're fucking off you actually ejaculate this time and come back with some research done on this state of affairs.
You've done the same thing here as in the emulation thread, reassuring your points without backing them up and completely ignoring anything anyone else has to say and scoffing it away as a fallacy by completely rewriting and misinterpreting the posts. In this most recent post the only thing I can make out of it without giving too much of a damn is that 1) you hate what I've proposed because I somehow have my hand in the cookie jar and 2) you're flaming mad about it. You don't even concede the points to which I hit the nail on the head. Instead you avoid them and keep on truckin' your complaints.
You also seem to think this discussion still has anything at all to do with ring wrapping when I've repeated twice that it does not. Rather ring-wrapping is what brought us to talk about pre-level actions because no rules are written, and everyone who has ever competed in Sonic 3, who has seen this thread, has raised concerns. So are you here to propose a solution, or to bitch more? Because you're not helping to accomplish the the intended goal.
And in case you hadn't been reading, I said already that I would otherwise be fine with banning pre-level savestates in light of what is possible now. WE CAN'T. GET OVER IT. I don't know what part of "banning saves is infeasible" you don't seem to comprehend, but if you think you can accomplish it, be my guest.
You've also started to splice quotes together as if they were a response to a different question, when the fact remains that 2 saves are less fair than 1.
There's a hint of this mathematical recursion mess. Your rebuttals to 1 being a good solution are nothing but randomly misplaced theory.
You also don't seem to want to drop these shenanigans about multiple saves prelevel already existing, when I already clarified there was never a motive to use one until this ring wrapping mess came up in the thread: IN OTHER WORDS THERE IS NOT ONE STAT ON THE CHARTS RIGHT NOW DOING THIS.
Lastly, if all you wanted to suggest is that the "1 save" takes place at the level transition, you could have left it at that and been maybe 5000000 times more gracious (and possibly respected) by doing so.
Hopefully while you're fucking off you actually ejaculate this time and come back with some research done on this state of affairs.
58
Competition Central / Re: S3K Ring Attacks questions
« on: October 27, 2014, 09:45:38 pm »Ok so you say that banning save-states in act 1 isn't an option because people have done that a long time.
I love how you come at me with all this "You think" garbage when I list facts.
And for you to come at me like we've all been TASing prelevel (by saying we've been using more than 1 savestate before the act) is also complete bullshit and hugely disrespectful. Leave aside the fact that, until now, there hasn't even been a motivation to use more than 1.
And for the record, banning saves outright is not an option because we literally can't discern who did and did not use saves, not to mention prune the charts accordingly. Want to prune them yourself? Be my guest! Have fun and good luck with that research!
You're making these weird attacks like I'm trying to twist logic. Logic isn't in play because the logical options are out of the equation. The propositions I've made are purely ethical and arbitrary. Whether the logic seems poorly structured or not, you can't sit here and tell me it's not a working solution, because it is.
Allowing more than 1 savestate doesn't raise any obvious concerns to me at all so I'd love for you to elaborate.
...
Have you been reading this thread? Or did you just come here to fuss at me randomly? Please scroll up and watch the youtube link for your first example. If you don't think players aren't going to be motivated to TAS to maximize that ringcount you're way off.
"No setups that can't be replicated on human hands" is not a rule I can find so I'm guessing it's a proposition. But a single savestate gives you the option to for example switch holding from right to left on the d-pad on a single frame which I believe is humanly impossible on a genesis controller without pausing in between. In any case every savestate gives you the option to buffer 1 TAS-input, which you generally seem to want to disallow pre-level.
If you want to show me where that miniscule-as-hell and corner-case kind of TASing would even apply to competitive play, please do so. Because otherwise it's a moot point.
And as for your remark about rule vs. proposition, try to keep yourself attached to the big picture here: I brought this up so we could talk about what to build as a solution to what is and is not allowed pre-level, because there are no rules at the moment. You're not helping much with your current attitude.
Also who are you to judge what is and isn't a feasible setup? The single-segment runs have evolved a lot because people took the time to research them and find consistent setups for what was previously thought of as being TAS-only. Even if a setup has only ever been TASed that doesn't mean it's unfeasable for a human to perform at least once.
So in short your arguments for allowing 1 savestate pre-level contradict themselves.
Who the fuck said I was judging anything? I brought this up to be open forum and you're coming out here not only guns-ablazin' but with homing rockets and nuclear bombs too! Unless you know anything about the setups that are taking place here, you've really undersold yourself.
If a player makes a setup that cannot be replicated on console by their own hands, it should not be permissible as a setup in any run. Plain and simple. You make this weird counterargument by dragging me into the equation when I have nothing to do with what makes a setup TAS-only and what doesn't. In fact, what makes a setup TAS-only and what doesn't is irrelevant. The idea is to block the usage of TASing or other banned activities pre-level (bar the one savestate we can't do anything about), whether they are TAS-only or not.
Having an arbitrary number of savestates at arbitrary times would hardly be more fair than any other number of savestates at any other arbitrary times. You think it's hard/time-consuming to setup so you need a savestate? Why not allow two so it's easier and less time consuming? You think having a lot of savestates defeats the purpouse of getting the stats? Why not ban it completely?
Was this just emotional banter? You're attacking (again) an arbitrating proposition by calling it arbitrary. GG, sir, you get the tautology of the year award!
Oh, wait. There's the slippery slope argument in there too. Fun. Protip: we're already allowing at least 1 no matter what, and allowing more than one makes matters worse. That's why the proposed cap is 1.
That's a discussion that doesn't lead anywhere but I think that if you truly want to be fair you either ban rings unaccessible from the level you're trying to RA altogether, allow people to TAS it and distribute a good save or you say that carrying rings from another level makes it part of "the run", thus it falls under the normal rules that disallow savestates. I don't consider 1 savestate a fair option in the sense that it doesn't solve anything.
Actually allowing just 1 save solves a lot. It permits the fair usage of saves as convenience, while still blocking TAS abuse. It also preserves the chart status.
Allowing no saves at all is ideal. Don't get me wrong, I agree with you on that. But that option isn't possible. So we've got to allow at least 1. You bet your ass I'm going to do everything in my power to make sure it stays at 1.
59
Information Kiosk / Re: The Sonic Center Twitter Bot
« on: October 27, 2014, 11:17:03 am »
I wonder if it would be possible, from the site's side, to curb "New champion" announcements for a game entirely until its charts have been out for, say, a month.
60
Competition Central / Re: S3K Ring Attacks questions
« on: October 27, 2014, 11:04:43 am »Isn't the only reason that super/hyper-forms are banned because they would mess with time-attacks? Sure it does say incidentally in the rules that you can't use them in time-attacks but that's just because there has never been an incentive to use them before so no'one cared.
No one's really sure why they were banned in the first place. Maybe SM can shed some light.
Adding savestate-caps is a dumb idea because it's arbitrary. If you're gonna have savestate-caps then make them 0 or infinite. Any argument you could come up with to legitimize 1 savestate could be used to argue for 2 and 3 up to infinity. Any arguments you would make to limit the number of savestates could be used to limit it to 0. So how did you come up with the number 1?
Elementary. Zero (in other words, banning savestates pre-level) is not a solid option because it would entail completely uprooting not only exactly half of my Ring stats, but half of the ring stats of every single TSC user to ever use an emulator while competing in those Act 2's. Even before I came along, players were using saves for the convenience factor of just the ringboxes being dug up. And we certainly don't know who all did and who all didn't use saves.
Essentially speaking, banning pre-level saves is infeasible for the same reason banning emulation was infeasible earlier this year.
That means we have to allow at least 1 pre-level save. Allowing more than one raises obvious concerns, so there's not even a need to delve into that. We don't want to allow any setups for a level that can't be replicated on console by human hands.
I'm aware it sounds arbitrary, but 1, imo, is the best solution.
Making act 1 apply to the same rules as act 2 could be fair but I'd still like a motivation as to why you would ban super/hyper in rings since all they would do is drain your rings as you get them with the only exception being the wrapping rings example here. If you don't like the rings wrapping then ban it and write it in the rules, but make it clear instead of trying to fit it as an after-effect of many rules that don't make sense taken one by one.
To re-clarify, as I have stated before, and I hope I'm not being redundant by emboldening my previous post, I am not against ring-wrapping at all (because it is possible without the help of super/hyper forms in most cases). I just want there to be some ground rules as to what we can and can't do before a level starts.
That's why I asked to raise this discussion about rules for actions performed pre-level. I realize that in doing so it has caused enough backlash against using saves in the first place, but we're going to have to accept that the undoing point for that had long passed well before even I became a TSC member 8 years ago. All we can do now is ensure the savestate usage stays in the domain of fair play.
The Sonic Center v3.9
Copyright 2003-2011 by The Sonic Center Team.