United StatesI've started playing around with this a bit since it seemed pretty neat.
¤ Could the reset message be customizable? It's a bit too specific in its current form and definitely not something that I would use personally. The other messages give the information and are generic enough that it's not an issue. ¤ I set it to a Best Segment comparison and had the following results on a testing splits file: IhavenonameSDA Place your bets for one! Best segment for this split is 2.25 IhavenonameSDA The time for this split was 2.86 IhavenonameSDA Place your bets for two! Best segment for this split is 4.92 <-- this IhavenonameSDA The time for this split was 3.45 IhavenonameSDA Place your bets for three! Best segment for this split is 6.49 IhavenonameSDA The time for this split was 1.99
It shows the total of the best segments to that point, which isn't really useful for betting on the length of a specific split. I'd prefer if this showed the length of the best segment instead.
¤The same issue applied to Personal Best: total time up to that split, but with betting on the length of specific splits. Though, this would be useful for betting the global time, wouldn't it be better to have the bot choose the total time to that point for global bets and only the split length for split length bets?
Really nifty bot though-once the information display is sorted out a bit I'll definitely be using this :P
"or there is evidence of a secondary motive (cheating etc.) " Just noticed the times have been completely removed now. Was there a secondary motive or did someone else remove them?
Hey, this thread hasn't seen use in a bit.
http://www.speedrun.com/Chips_Challenge to a new "Chip's Challenge" series-with the sequel released 2 days ago, I want to add it but can't since there's no series.
Still, the definition should be in the rules of the category and not in the forums-it took someone asking what the difference was for it to be anywhere on-site.
Alright, so there have been some weird categories showing up on the front page that it's not exactly clear what they are, and the rules don't explain. Either a standard name like "any%", "100%", "Hard Mode any%", etc. etc. or a more game specific category name (can't think of any offhand) with descriptive rules would fix this-is there anything in place for making leaderboards more accessible? Other than bringing it to mod attention, I can't think of any.
This has "any%", "100%" (both good enough) and... "Better any%". What makes it better? The rules are exactly the same as any%, so those aren't helpful. What makes it different?
This isn't the only example of an objectively bad category name/description, but it's the only one on the frontpage right now.
I think some of the reason for the category naming conventions is that there are no moderator guidelines anywhere on the site, no "so now you're a game moderator" type things. Just having a standard of any type, some what to do and what not to do point, could alleviate some of the general moderator difficulties.
It seems that in the case of RE4 it's not that people want their times off of leaderboards, period, but off of the speedrun.com leaderboard specifically. If there already were leaderboards, why was the request put through? (seems to be a semi-common issue, I know it happened with a Crash/Spyro usurp around the inception of the site). If there weren't, then there wasn't really a problem on creation but if the community wants the leaderboards elsewhere, why keep them here? (note: this is from skimming some of the discussion and definitely isn't a fully informed opinion).
One centralized leaderboard > one up to date and one partially updated/filled out > 2 partially updated leaderboards. Speedrun.com doesn't really have ways to remove leaderboards when others exist. The best way around this without destroying information would probably be have the game in the games list, but having it link the community leaderboard.
Kind of a bit of an off-topic ramble, but I think it gets my general concerns across.
At least in my opinion, if you want a video or comment taken down, that should be fine. But times are public knowledge and taking them off a leaderboard makes the leaderboard inaccurate. Just because of that, I'm against known times being not added/removed.
The mods actively running the games they're modding is less important than actually being active in general. Active runners are more likely to care, but putting down a game due to getting a satisfactory time while still being active with the community (to me) shouldn't be grounds for rotating out the mods.
"(Jumpy is an Ape Escape mod why?)" Because he helped set up time attacks on AE2 and AE3. Having another person able to look over submissions (and it's not like Jumpy is unfamiliar with the runs) gets them through faster on average, as well.
"Crash 3 - Saboom" Just going to say that he was offered a moderator position on the old google doc and turned it down, so it's unlikely he'd want to here either.
An inaccurate leaderboard with more exposure hurts the community-centric one by being the first that new runners (and non-runners!) see, and assume is accurate.
In this case, it makes it look like Super Metroid is a game no one cares about running.
Short answer: no. Slightly longer answer: No separate category, but feel free to run without it. Even longer answer: NSJ ing optimally isn't the same timing every time, sometimes you'll want to land sooner, and so the timing is nuanced throughout the run. In that respect, using the NSJ adds to the gameplay as instead of walking/sliding everywhere except when jumping over obstacles, you have to keep the same movement technique going throughout the level.
Lastly: No matter what, if you want a good time in a game/category you're going to have to master the movement of the game, with all that entails. For Crash 3, that means NSJ. In other games, it means other tricks.
Game pages are case sensitive. I'm not sure how simple that would be to fix/implement case insensitivity, but it's somewhat annoying.
An idea occurred to me today. Having a filter option for runs with early Ripto is a bad solution (due to overwriting faster times without, making the leaderboard less useful). Since the community is completely split on this (58 for allowing, 57 for disallowing at the moment), why not make 100% (early Ripto) a miscellaneous category for now? I'd expect opinions to change as runs are done and putting a category with it out there would encourage those runs.
If this is done, one of three things will happen.
- No one's opinions change. In this case, tracking 100% with early Ripto separately keeps 100% as it is and still creates a place for runs with early Ripto.
- Most people agree that early Ripto should be allowed. In this case, fold the early Ripto times into normal 100%. This is irreversible, though, which is why an even split doesn't make this a good idea as opinions are fickle.
- Most people agree it shouldn't be allowed. In this case, it can still stay as a misc. category for those who want it, and it's not allowed in 100%.
It's not a perfect solution, but it's better than the proposed filter.
Game: http://www.speedrun.com/Peggle_Deluxe Series: http://www.speedrun.com/peggle
It's a bit strange that games requested don't have a field for "part of existing series" or something to that effect.
As good as it would be to have that consistent endpoint, changing the definition there has the problem of invalidating every single run up to this point, since the existing runs don't.
Spyro 1 120% endpoint is on triggering the ending, not on collecting 120%. Otherwise you could stop the timer about 6 seconds sooner on collecting the last gem. Spyro 2 100% was on triggering the ending, but this was done at the same time as collecting 100% by beating Ripto (at least I'm pretty sure Ripto adds to %) Spyro 3 117% endpoint is on triggering the 2nd ending, but this also happens at the same time as collecting 117%. Perhaps Enter the Dragonfly is the best example, here. "Timing ends when dealing the last hit to Ripto." However, the final phase of Ripto is unlocked when the % counter is at 100.
There's arguments for both sides, but ending on Ripto is consistent with other Spyro games.
As a final note: not allowing this can always be changed later, but allowing Ripto to not be the endpoint can't be undone without invalidating runs. This last point is why I'm against the Dragon Shores fireball door idea.
I was just updating a time on an individual level but on submitting it, I was redirected to (first letter of level name)#Time_Attack instead of (levelname)#Time_Attack. This has removed my time from the leaderboard itself (and since it'd Ape Escape, it should have updated). The reason I resorted to editing is the site would not let me submit a new run for an individual level. Finally, I tested the submission feature on a normal category with a dummy run I was intending to delete immediately after, but there was no delete option. I edited the run to be under a category with no runs presently, but would like the option to remove a run back.
I didn't add it when I set up the Ape Escape section originally because I wasn't aware of its existence. It seems that BMan put it up since then, though, but there are still no runs for it.
Spyro 1 cheat% is kind of really silly, but as a Gnorc Gnexus skip category practice thing it has some purpose. No real preference here. Spyro 2 10 portal is also silly, but it's a part of the history and has some nifty tricks you don't see elsewhere. I'd say this should be kept just because it's part of the history. Spyro 3 noodles%, on the other hand, though it's part of the history is any% for 20 minutes, diverge for about 7 seconds. In light of the Sorceress skip, this probably shouldn't stick around.
