yea i agree with cyber its a perfect middle ground

Okay guys, I don't run this game, but I have watched it for years, so I sort of have a unique perspective if you like to think that way. The truth is that this discussion is really messy. We're talking A Link to the Past messy, when they found a new trick, wanted to make a new category without the new strat, and became a laughing stock overnight.

I think that there should not be an old strats category, and if there is, it should be put in misc. The category would be laughably arbitrary, as gcah pointed out. Beyond that, there is actually no need for it.

For those who have been running with RNG manip, they've already jumped ship and will most likely never return except for races, which is not for leaderboard purposes. For those who don't want to use RNG manip, you don't have to. Technically, any run of a game is an any% run, and your pb with old strats is just as welcome on the leaderboards as the runs with new strats, and you can keep running and improving on your pb with zero negative consequences. For the few who have moved on to the new strats but want to keep their old pb for sentimental value, it can and should be stored in a miscellaneous category.

While this is a big improvement, it's an improvement, and that's what speedrunning is all about. Not to mention the fact that the new strats make this game more accessible than ever. You have to do four tricks, and then you run the rest of the game. No one-to-four-hour farm sounds like a good thing to me.

Anyway, that's my opinion, and since I am not a runner of this game for now, feel free to totally ignore me. But I felt that I should state my case, since I care about this game and its community, and I want the best for it.

EDIT: I also thought I should weigh in on my opinion of Cyber's idea, because it is the obvious compromise and will probably happen. The thing about subcategories is that they were meant to be a home for runs of different game modes of the same game, eg easy or hard mode, but are still any%. However, that doesn't apply to this game. This is a single game mode with a single difficulty, and the core gameplay is identical between old and new strats.

Additionally, I can't tell whether the rule of thumb of "a new category should be made if new strats halve the run" can come into play here. With the inherent randomness of this game, a run using old strats could theoretically break toto's rng manip world record. So, technically, this strat saves no time at all. It just adds consistency that is so lacking in this game. It could save either zero time or six hours, just like luck in an old run could make for a run of three hours or ten hours with no additional skill involved.

You guys are missing an opportunity by not calling the proposed 'Legacy' category 'Traditional' in keeping with the TCG format.

(But then would you refer to the RNG manip category as Advanced???)

Think about the reasons categories exist in the first place. It's not because the game provides them for us (except some games that have modes such as "Easy" and "Hard"); it's because people enjoy certain styles of play more than others. Defining glitches, manipulations and the like is often arbitrary, but that hasn't stopped other communities from successfully doing so. If more people want to run this game with manipulation than without, there should be a place for them to do so. Also, there is no point in having runs with an average completion time of 2-3 hours on the same leaderboard as runs that beat the game in 6-8 hours. These things are just common sense.

I don't care whether the non-manip category is made miscellaneous, but I like Cyberdemon's idea.

Exarion's point about vastly differing times on a leaderboard being pointless due to "common sense" clashes with the current state the leaderboard is in prior to RNG Manipulation in Any% No CD.

I personally prefer speedrun leaderboards with runs that have large ranges. It gives me an idea that I can enter it and try it and still make a dent on the leaderboard. It also shows a reflection of how people can progress through a run. Looking at the Super Metroid leaderboards and seeing 300+ times ranging everywhere from 42 minutes to an hour and a half. It's history. Some of those times don't have the skips and strategies that new optimizations have. You need long times just as much as new times. New skips, new strategies, new optimizations - a leaderboard can tell a story that way. Putting RNG manipulation with runs that aren't RNG manipulation is a reflection of this history. Having a column that specifically depicts which runs use it and which don't can further paint that picture for onlookers to see how far of a jump this discovery is making, and how far it can continue to be made. I feel that neither portion of this run should be pushed off to the side as they're both important.

Keep them on the same leaderboard. Show the history of the game's progress this way.

I don't see why Cyberdemon's proposal is such a great compromise (besides, when only people on one "side" are saying it's a great compromise ... maybe it isn't a great compromise). In fact, I claim it completely fails to address any of the fundamental concerns at play here and just has the veneer of a good compromise without any of the substance. As an aside, I feel it's worth making a post specifically about this because GFC has been promoting this view as a good one. That's why I'm not covering more here.

Let's first look at the people who want separate categories. This is not the side I'm on, so please tell me if I'm misrepresenting that position. So okay, they want separate leaderboards (I'm not going into whether it should be misc or not here). Why? Here's a common line of argument I've seen, perhaps put more coherently:

RNG manipulation fundamentally changes the way the game is played, turning FM from a combination of luck and improvisation into frame-based tricks. Furthermore, a lot of the community was built around a love for the former, and so without a clear separation we risk fracturing or killing the community. As a result, separating into distinct leaderboards is the most sensible option for saving the community and the game as we know it, even if ultimately the distinction between the categories must be at some level arbitrary.

With that said, let us now analyse how Cyberdemon's proposal fails to address this hypothetical person's concerns and desires. By unifying things into an any% category (and then split into subcategories from there), we are in effect treating all of these categories as equivalent. Now okay, treating manip and non-manip (however we define those, if at all) as equal may be a fair compromise. But do these people also want to treat CD/NoCD on the same footing? Do they really? I seriously doubt it. Surely at the very least a Yes/No option for manip, like Spectre suggested, would do everything this proposal does that these people like, and I claim it would also be better for those who don't want a separation of categories. The only things I see going for Cyberdemon's proposal, for such a person, are:

1. The appearance of a compromise.
2. Keeping the popular category as main in some capacity.
3. Keeping a distinction between manip and non-manip.

Again, a yes/no switch for manip on Any% NoCD does all of these things, and better.

With that said, now let's turn to the other side. Like before, here's a line of argument:

Speedgames need to evolve, and playing a game in "the wrong way" in order to beat it as fast as possible is part of this. Therefore arguments that the game has "changed" aren't very persuasive, and furthermore all we are doing is improving our luck. The reason separate categories aren't a good compromise is because it's just a poor attempt to hold back the evolution of this game. Furthermore, this is distinct from other separations because there's no objective way to define RNG manipulation. At best we could say ban resets mid-run, but even that can be worked around.

How does Cyberdemon's proposal even remotely satisfy this person? We still have an arbitrary distinction, we're still doing the separation, and on top of that we're lumping in things like CD which we can easily objectively define and separate. What does this proposal get right? Well ...

1. The appearance of a compromise.
2. It sort of keeps the two categories together, but not really?

And you still get all of this with a yes/no manip flag, and you don't start piling on stuff like CD. It's still not a satisfactory resolution, but anything Cyberdemon's proposal gets right, so does this, and it does it better.

In conclusion, anything good from Cyberdemon's proposal you also get from Spectre's proposal of a yes/no flag for RNG manip. It still has a lot of problems for everyone (and I still don't like it, and lots of people on both sides won't), but if you like Cyberdemon's proposal, why not like Spectre's more? Please tell me what Cyberdemon's idea does better.

I am wondering where this discussion will go if/when a solid-ish full game manip is found. Should you start having separate categories for various levels of manip? What if the manip route ends up resembling the no manip route? And where was this discussion when I completed my Sacred Cards run with my brute-forced full game manip?

I'm being half-facetious there, but this discussion appears to stem from people unwilling to change with the times and wanting to give their not-fully-serious-about-going-fast runs with no manip the same weight and recognition as the fully-serious-about-going-fast runs with the manip. (Let's face it, if you have the option to control some of your luck and you don't take it, the objective of going as fast as you can through the game cannot be your number one priority.) I, for one, could care less. In fact, this was the kind of development I was looking for to finally get into this game. I had no interest in running a game with so much RNG--I have plenty of those runs and am now looking for ways to mitigate the RNG in those games. This is now the kind of game I can actually start to get behind as a speedrunner. Maybe I can get motivated to start running sometime this year, perhaps when people who actually know the game can refine the route further.

Of course there won't be new categories for different "levels of manip", that's stupid to say.

Zero manip is also a "level of manip." Thank you for making my point for me. (And for taking one of my facetious points seriously.)

I don't think anyone wants to give equal weight to manip-less. Any% will allow RNG manip and be the main category. Any% (no RNG manip) is being considered as a side category, possibly filed as miscellaneous.

This attitude of "speedrunning is about going fast, manip is faster than no manip, therefore manip-less shouldn't be taken seriously" is incredibly short-sighted and could end up damaging the community. By this logic, if we found a glitch that warped to credits in the first 5 minutes and skipped every duel, we should all run that to preserve the integrity of our speedgame. Categories exist to preserve the fun, challenging ways of speedrunning. Manip-less FM has an extremely high skill cap and offers many routing possibilities. Many people enjoy that in spite of the often brutal RNG. If you don't enjoy it, no one is taking you less seriously for running the game with manip.

+1 for having a Yes/No RNG Manip option under the main Any% No CD category

I just don't find no manip to be interesting as a category. It's part of why I have stayed away from this game all this time. (That and I do not have the kind of available time block to commit to being able to finish such a run.) I have seen enough runs for me to determine that no manip has no appeal to me. That was most damaging to my prospects of getting involved with this community. I tend to revel in games with RNG and, even as a YGO fan, the RNG of this game is a massive turnoff.

As someone who comes from a series of games where the most appeal from a running perspective has been in the hardest and most random categories, I find the idea of a no manip category to be baffling because I see no upside to that. The euphoria from overcoming so much RNG is exciting as all get out, but the most satisfaction I ever got from a speedrun was figuring out the Sacred Cards manipulation and managing to apply it to a run on console. Does any runner of that game ever bring up the idea of making a no manip category? No. Then again, that's not a community that I would ever describe as "vocal." The word I would use, instead, is "stagnant." It's disappointing because advances in a speedgame should not turn people away, yet it's an advance in this speedgame that is doing just that. #FMisDED

I am getting the sense that my sensibilities as a future runner of this game clash a lot with the status quo of runners that would rather continue to fight against RNG in their own way in the face of information that could potentially help them with, you know, running the game. I just want to go fast. That's my primary goal. I also want to explore how fast I can go playing the game in interesting, different ways. No manip runs just don't look interesting to me in their current form. But wait, don't tell me: it should be a separate category because it shows off more interesting, intellectually challenging gameplay. Right? Sure, just keep calling that extra farming "interesting" and "intellectually challenging" and "fun" because I will never use any of those words to describe the differences between manip and manipless. I see no merit to even make a notable mention, much less make a separate caregory.

But what's my opinion worth, anyway? I don't even run the game. Yet. And that "yet" is only because of the manip. And that manip is poised to create a rift in this community. Funny how that works like that.

Exarion, I don't think that's a valid comparison. What you described would be a glitch that is guaranteed to save a whole bunch of time on the run. That's more like OoT breaking any% and creating a new category which doesn't allow for the incredible time save, turning 17 minutes into an hour and change of gameplay. And if such a thing were found here, it would be separated immediately.

However, what we have here is a manipulation (NOT a glitch) that saves an absolutely indeterminate amount of time. It doesn't skip a part of the game, it just adds consistency. Running a slower version of the exact same game with no skips (except seto 2 amirite?) should not be rewarded with a high spot on a leaderboard unless it gets incredible luck. Therefore, creating a separate non-miscellaneous category or subcategory would, in my view, hurt the community more than it would help it. We can't stay let's-play zero-execution hipsters forever. There is a chance to put FM in the proverbial books as a legitimate speedgame here. Let's not throw it away because we want an old PB to stay relevant.

All the posts here have been very good, except for CardsOfTheHeart. I'm not sure what he came to this thread to say other than to tell people who enjoy "no manip" that they are wrong. I mean, I don't even enjoy running that category these days, but sheesh man. Also, if you say your primary goal is to go as fast as possible, we already have a category in place at this moment that goes faster than the best run with manip so far.

I'm not going to speak for Cards as I am not his attorney, but I feel that Kollin's interpretation of what he said and my interpretation were vastly different. I can't be the only one.

Reminder that my primary speedgames, the Puzzle League series, have several different categories for each game and I have enjoyed playing the games in each of those different ways.

I do want to have something clarified based on likely misinformation on my part: what is different about manip NoCD vs no manip NoCD? The other categories have notable differences and promote different objectives. Right now, it just looks to me that manip and no manip are trying to achieve the same means to the same end. Does the extra farming promote fundamentally different gameplay? What gameplay is worth preserving in a separate category? I'm grasping at straws trying to find quality answers to these questions.

I am now putting forth support to having a run variable for "Manip" Yes/No.

Cyber's idea does indeed better benefit those who are supporting Any% Legacy more so than those who do not. While I am one of those supporters, I understand a middle ground needs to be found in which both ends see as compromise, and I feel having a run variable is as close to a middle ground that exists.

Of course, I would love implementing Cyber's idea because it is better for my own personal wants, but for the sake of both sides I am supporting the run variable instead.

I also find the option of putting in another category a LOT better and organized. I feel like just adding a simple flag might be too chaotic in the long run with filtering and looking through the whole leaderboard, especially for people that start to run the game.

In my opinion the RNG Manipulation Route should be in the Any% category and the current Any% should be named Any% (Card Duplication) (and moved to misc preferably) and maybe the Any% (No Card Duplication) renamed to Classic% or Any% (Glitchless).

So you want to switch a slower category into the category for the fastest possible run? Seems good.