Very late to the discussion, but I would second Mhmd_FVC's comments that we shouldn't be exchanging files between the two versions. It seems like the original version of the game is often faster to run. The leaderboards nevertheless keep track of which version is played, so there's no harm in keeping the two separated. Note that AoM:EE still gets patched every now and then, which makes things much trickier.
Hey there, If you'd like I can add the rules into the LBs. Do you have a concise description of everything involved? What you mention sounds reasonable, in any case. How big of a deal is the Sonic Heroes save file? I'm not an active runner, so it's not really my call, but it seems kinda awkward to use other game saves instead of keeping it contained to just PSO E3.
Gave you a follow; looking forward to your runs!
When are we adding <All Trees>? It's the most legit category of all.
Fatzke has already mentioned most of my thoughts on the matter.
Having said that, if the e.g. 100% routes ever change to the point where nonlinearity is necessary and tools like the checklist would provide additional insight beyond just being nice for stream viewers (but useless to the runner), I would be in favour of banning it.
I'm not a fan of the phrasing for option 2, since technically almost anything could be done on pen and paper (e.g., you can have an RNG table along with the printed out code and figure out whether at time X a car is going to be locked or not).
Considering that the discussion started off as one about runs being tool assisted, the widespread use of programs like wsplit or livesplit have already made them that. I'm not in favour of outright banning all useful tools for speedrunners (that let them know when they should reset and thus lets them complete higher quality runs). I don't believe that autosplitters or the GTA3 and VC checklist provide any insight that would result in a better run than if the run had been performed without said programs.
I would like to vote for a more narrowly defined version of 2; i.e., allow the use of autosplitters and the checklist as long as they provide no advantage beyond just being nice for streams/recordings.
Cool to see someone's interested in MonHun running!
I haven't played MH3U yet, but I've played MHTri very extensively. If Cha-Cha is unlocked as early as he is in Tri, I'd suggest making that more of a misc category (since it's a pretty arbitrary ending). In any case, it's definitely not "any%", since one does not reach the credits.
Regarding the village quest ILs, it'll become a pretty big mess and it's hard to imagine much competition in it. Arena ILs would make a lot more sense. Alternatively, don't separate by weapon, or there'll be extremely little competition (and optimisation). Just think about who's gonna fill those 300 spots in the quest leaderboards...
While skipping cutscenes would be great, it's pretty dodgy to modify game files (or remove them). As Charlie said, it sets a precedent for allowing other modifications as well (e.g., removing AI files). Even if we'd all agree to only allow one such modification, others can easily come in and take it a bit further (if X is allowed, why not Y?)
Sorry I had to reject the runs, bigbug, but it would only lead to a possible modification mess.
Hopefully, there's an alternative way to skipping these cutscenes.
The split between glitchless/glitched is pretty much entirely based around meseta duping/item duping/weapon stacking. It's by far the biggest set of glitches in the game that entirely change the style of gameplay and the speedrunning strats.
I don't see why turning around would count as a glitch; monsters miss because you physically move away from them, after all. Don't really see why the situation with Resta you described would be a glitch either; it's just how spells work. Resta dodging might be a trickier one to classify.
Perhaps a better name for the "glitchless" run would be "(No dupes)". Would avoid a lot of semantics that way.
Had a wonderful time at ESA, and I wish I had been able to be there for more of it this year. If I'd want to write down all the things I loved about the event, I'd be writing this for quite a while, so I'll limit it to the things that could use improvement.
-- The two streams being run from the same place worked out well, I think. I'm sure it made the tech crew's life a lot easier no having to go all over the place. However, I think having both streams /and/ all the casual gaming in the same room wasn't all that nice. There was an awful lot of background noise, which may not be picked up by the stream mics all that much, but is definitely very distracting when you're trying to do a run. I think the dual stream setup should be kept, but it would be nicer to have the streams take place in either a separate room, or with at least some sort of sound isolation (- the former seems a lot more feasible).
-- Before the marathon started off, I learned that runners and co-commentators would all get headsets, so they could hear each other along with the game. This is an excellent idea (and should probably be somewhat extended to the audience behind runners via speakers). The problem is that when, e.g., Mhmd and I did AoE, we only had one headset at our disposal and we had to switch around. The idea behind the system is great, but how come there weren't any headsets available for it?
-- As mentioned by others, mass housing didn't work out well this year. It was just too far away. I slept there once, and couldn't be bothered to go back there again. The room that was used for Mafia would probably still have been sufficient as a sleeping spot (since not all attendees go to sleep at the same time).
-- Having a fixed check-in station would be good. There were a bunch of people I welcomed to the venue and showed around, but when I actually wanted to give them their wristbands + air mattresses, nobody knew where they were.
Just want to add that both my Live Gamer Portable and PEXHDCAP (via Sync Strike) have a similar issue.
It seems that it's an issue with OBS itself, as I've found no way to fix it.
But they can post them on their own website. The problem is that everything was literally copy-pasted onto TG. If they had written out their own rules (which can or cannot coincide with the ones used for speedruns on speedrun.com) then that's perfectly fine.
Note that TG could just copy-paste guides and resources over to their website as well, without giving proper credit to the authors. We want to prevent that from happening. This doesn't mean that TG can't feature any kind of guide on its website, but it shouldn't just copy the exact thing from elsewhere without permission.
That's really bad news, that it glitches out on 4.0. I hope it's isolated to this map being broken...
On maps like Oppression, villagers move considerably faster in AoE compared to RoR. Yamato villagers must've been changed somehow.
Actually, there's a fair bit of difficulty switching throughout the runs, so it's not really done on "Easy" -- more "mixed difficulties". The main problem with Expert runs is that you're essentially never going to finish a clean run on that difficulty. RNG is already hellish enough when you play only on Easy, and Expert only makes it worse. Strategies don't really differ, other than the fact that you probably have to forfeit several strats where players split up, simply because you're very likely to get killed off.
Anyway, perhaps it would be an idea not to create a separate leaderboard, but to add a variable under the existing one saying what difficulty it was on? (e.g., Mixed, Easy, Normal, Advanced, Expert) We'd avoid creating arbitrary categories this way, but the runs would still show up on the LBs.
Don't see any reason to ban the monk glitch. It will have a big impact on only a handful of maps (I can only really think of 4 maps), and seems to work on all versions. If it turns out that there are many game-breaking glitches that completely change the runs, we could always add a variable that says whether the IL was glitchless or not, but I don't think AoE2 is anywhere near needing that just yet.
How did you find out about the glitch, btw, SiFly? I only found an AoCZone thread from 2012 or so about it, but no other references. Would be cool to hear if you know any other glitches that we're probably unaware of.
Pretty sure the AI director's behaviour is affected by kicking bots instead of killing them at the start of a map. There's also the fact that kicking bots is a gameplay-altering command that's simply not available in the game other than via console access (much like director_report; director_stop; z_spawn tank; give health; etc). If kicking bots is allowed, what would be the logic behind not allowing other console-only commands, such as the aforementioned?
Imo, console commands should be limited to starting demo recordings and rebinding keys.
Just tried mashing through, but to no avail. Reinstalled the game and now I can get through very easily. This is a bit puzzling, to say the least.
In AoC, the first castle in Montezuma 4 doesn't attack on Standard difficulty, but in HD it does. I just re-tested it to make sure.
S̶p̶e̶a̶k̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶m̶a̶j̶o̶r̶ ̶d̶i̶f̶f̶e̶r̶e̶n̶c̶e̶s̶,̶ ̶I̶'̶m̶ ̶s̶u̶r̶e̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶'̶v̶e̶ ̶n̶o̶t̶i̶c̶e̶d̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶ ̶s̶a̶v̶e̶d̶ ̶1̶1̶ ̶s̶e̶c̶o̶n̶d̶s̶ ̶o̶n̶ ̶h̶t̶t̶p̶:̶/̶/̶w̶w̶w̶.̶s̶p̶e̶e̶d̶r̶u̶n̶.̶c̶o̶m̶/̶a̶o̶e̶2̶/̶r̶u̶n̶/̶5̶2̶1̶3̶5̶ ̶ ̶
T̶h̶e̶ ̶H̶D̶ ̶v̶e̶r̶s̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶d̶o̶e̶s̶ ̶n̶o̶t̶ ̶p̶e̶r̶m̶i̶t̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶r̶u̶n̶ ̶t̶h̶r̶o̶u̶g̶h̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶b̶a̶t̶t̶l̶e̶,̶ ̶m̶a̶k̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶i̶t̶ ̶a̶ ̶s̶l̶o̶w̶e̶r̶ ̶v̶e̶r̶s̶i̶o̶n̶.̶
EDIT: Reinstalled, and now it works.
Preferred way to time it is to use demos (for any category), since there's no hardware dependence then. The old 4p co-op run of all campaigns was added as RTA because we had no demos for the whole thing. Any new submission should use demo timing, if possible, though.
