MexicoI have not seen yet any signs or proof that such a difference exists.
I still can't make sense of your sentence. I would suggest an advanced English course.
l4m2, I do not mean this in an offensive way, but I am having a seriously hard time understanding your English. I truly have no idea what your latest posts actually mean.
yes. If a run is rejected, a retimed video could be resubmitted.
what I mean by that is to point out exactly at that points in the run it would have made a difference from nothaving it. Like, if all he did would have been justthe same if he had not had that setting, then he did not get an advantage from it an the run is legit.
That's not how you appeal, l4m2. Please point out examples of points in the run where such a thing gives an advantage (with timestamps) and justify why.
Yes, that's what I mean April, thanks. Although realistically doing that for a NG+ could be pointless AND that could change depending on the type of glitch. For example, if it would make normal any% be pretty much the same run except you time the set up, then we would redefine some stuff in a way that invalidates doing that in order to not make main categories trivial.
I guess hardwaer mod does not really apply to a PC game given the wide range of available hardware options for a computer. My bad on that. I typed that on reflex thinking of console video games.
I don't understand your question sorry. Please word it better ot explain it further, because I feel like I can almost understand what you say but your english is just broken enough that I can't get it.
Scripts are discouraged, and can sometimes be counted as inputmods that give an advantage (keep in mind the rules disallow all mods that give advantage, including system mods, input mods, java VM mods, hardware mods, as well as, of course, minecraft mods). So if a run you submit has obvious use of scripts doing stuff a human would not be able to, it will be rejected.
for new game plus you should only time the last world.
Also, you'd not be allowed to switch worlds during the run, you start your last new world and finish the run in it without ever entering another world.
It does show detail. If a run waited for more than one second and a mod determines that it was unfair, the moderator can choose to either reject or retime the run. If the moderator determined that it was trivial, then it's ok. If you disagree with a run in specific you are welcome to try contacting another moderator to get a second opinion on it and maybe change its accepted/rejected status.
A rough paraphrasing that is less specific but maybe a good summary would be: you should only wait more than one second if you think the moderators will not mind it. If they do, though, they can and will reject it.
The duping glitch is, well, a glitch. It can differ for everyone depending on hardware and performance of your computer because it's an unintended result produced by some defect in either the program being run or the environment it runs in. I could, in theory, even be impossible to do for some people.
It could happen with a glitch that does not involve using commands to keep some sort of progress from the previous world. It would most likely be a misc category.
It is to the moderator's discretion how strongly to enforce this rule. 2-3 seconds to f5 may be OK depending on the run, but if a mod says you waited too long and you did wait more than the 1 second allowed then they can reject your run.
The rule is too difficult to clarify and too annoying to enforce, therefore it's defined in a case by case basis because it's just not that big of an issue. If you disagree with what the moderator who reviewed the run has said, you are free to appeal.
The rule does make sense, the rule is just a more expanded version of "don't abuse the waiting time", if you read it carefully.
Updated the links on the resources section of the leaderboard. The shortener broke, so I just put on the direct links instead. Sorry for the inconvenience.
I don't see a reason to even do it to begin with. We should stick to the "no commands" rule.
I am going to agree with paris here, and also add that the Pocket Edition also has controller support, which means that, even running in a phone, using a controller would still be way better than using the touch controls. Might as well keep everything in a board, because splitting by that kind of arbitrary "advantages" just leads to a lot of unorganization.
You can still divide categories by variables/subcategories, and with the chance to use misc categories added to that, I think it will be a much better look if the axis change is going to happen.
I believe the big site updates came through 2016, so yeah, at the time it was really an irrelevant, and probably good change.
I think only WRs, or maybe top 3 runs of each category, should be preserved really.
