forums.marpirc.net

QRS wrote:If that is the only reason top players are playing the game I can't help you. I find it hard to belive that the rest of the game doen't matter.

of course that matters too...but nvram doesn't affect the score from any of the other events. If it did, then you would be hearing about it.

True, but on a leveled base. Without NVRAM you are 100% sure that all players start from scratch with NO advantages.

It's the same versus having a standard/required nvram file be used for official scoring also.

Yes, but that is irrelevant. If you compete in MARP rules you compare your score to MARP, not TG.

QRS, look at it like this. We are both masters of HS to the point we both fail at the 9.60 horse vault(has anyone ever passed this...hmmm) but you are just a tad faster at running than I am.

...so let's say from all those running type events you can outscore me typically by 5000-10000. That's all we are talking here. I remember my top 5 scores all being within a 5000 range!

Ok, without nvram, you can outscore me by 5-10+k. Ok, let's say I have mastered the pole plants in the pole vault a tad better than you have. With nvram, I can potentially outscore you by 8k, 16k, 24k, etc. Without any nvram use, I can't outscore you at all as those would all be good for "records" so no mole points awarded.

Without the nvram, you have totally taken away an aspect of playing and scoring at the game...but without affecting the actual gameplay at all.

For other games BBH and others have given as precedents, it's not the same cuz in each case the gameplay is somewhat changed also. ie. can warp or use a different character or experience gained from previous plays etc.

As stated above, half the point is to emulate the arcade games...

HS Arcade games--set to reset the records on reset...

Any player going for a top score would certainly play the game at least a couple times to get at least all 5.93s on the pole vault records before even thinking about playing serious games.

...cuz to do differently means they have no chance of beating the top score on that machine...or WR attempt etc.

Each and every gamer gets to do this on each arcade machine. So you could allow this for MAME...which means each makes their own nvram file...or you can have a standard nvram to use to at least keep things level there.

As noted, using cheats like autofire etc. you can set heights higher than what others not cheating could set...thus potentially gaining an advantage from cheating in setting the heights for the nvram.

I and likely all the HS players can totally understand wanting that to NOT happen.

However, not using any nvram file does give an advantage...to those that are slightly faster runners....but not so great at the pole vault.

On the other hand, if only one person really are good at the game, should only he decide about that game?

Of course not...but he should state his argument in a forum post to inform all of us so then we each can decide.

After those discussions, even an average HS player can easily make a judgement decision in regards to nvram without thinking of their own potential benefit.

...make a purely objective decision in the fairness of gaming.

Also, none of the editors are "scared" of similar requests.

Hardly...BBH clearly stated this above. He doesn't want that can of worms opened.

BBH didn't validate his decision based on HS...but based on other games...not wanting to open a can of worms for this potentially becoming an issue for other games.

IMHO that invalidates his vote. I wonder how many other editors thought similarly.

LN2 wrote: QRS, look at it like this. We are both masters of HS to the point we both fail at the 9.60 horse vault(has anyone ever passed this...hmmm) but you are just a tad faster at running than I am.

Yeah of course people have passed this, it's not hard in theory. Or something.

6th round is 9.80, which AL has a screenshot of it being a record, if not being passed. This will be the limit of the game I think for MARPers. From an event on one round, to the same event next round is about 100k points on later rounds. So the TG record is possible without but unlikely cos of 45s swimming at the start of the sixth round, 18m triple jump in the fifth and to an extent 9.6 horse. All moles did was even the field TG wise and give us a realistic chance. As AL said, the TG record was set failing at 5th round skeets. 538k is a helluva lot of points by then lol but easily doable by the same point in the 6th round.

It could be argued that no moles add a round to a typical game of similar score in this case.

Note, I'm not arguing against the decision, just continuing the discussion - decision is accepted and I'm getting on with it as far as I'm concerned.

How do you get the secret bonus in the triple jump? Is it 3 perfect angles or what? It was certainly a rare sight in the arcades. Just wondering because surely you would also be denied of this bonus with no nvram.

Good point.

I believe it's 35, 41, 45, perfect take off, no world record = bonus.

So without high records this is not (easily/likely to be) available on the first round (at least).

LN2 wrote:BBH, show me where you claim that thing for SF3? I remember no such thing. I never remember even participating in any SF3 discussions. I might have totally forgotten about it though...so refresh my memory. I can then review and tell you why I decided that for that game.

SF3 is SF3. HS is HS. Each game is its own game. Special rules can apply for different games. It happens on a case-by-case basis.

I can see you'd care about it... it's SFA3 (If anyone says "same diff", they're getting a swift beating...) SF3 is not emulated by any emulator (except the console version, but that's irrelevant). You can see the extra modes available in SFA3 at CPS2Shock (http://cps2shock.retrogames.com - Game List -> Codes)

I've brought this up at least once, and Buttermaker has brought it up at least once. Shouldn't be hard to find, that's what the forum search function is for.

EDIT: Quick search reveals these:
viewtopic.php?p=7120#7120
viewtopic.php?p=22223#22223
viewtopic.php?p=27774#27774
viewtopic.php?p=19471#19471

I have gotten that triple jump bonus with mame. It's a long time though, so don't remember perfect. I think it was those perfect angles +qualify at third jump. I'm quite sure records didn't matter. You will lose more points than gain, because if you don't qualify -your jump is too short for good points. 3000 points for the trick.

youre prolly right tommi, I dont remember really.



is it rare or what? can you explain?

mahlemiut wrote:I can see you'd care about it... it's SFA3 (If anyone says "same diff", they're getting a swift beating...) SF3 is not emulated by any emulator (except the console version, but that's irrelevant).

In any of those thread links given above, my discussions/posts were about using or not using nvram in general. I wasn't addressing that specific game at all. It seems like BBH thought I was.

I have not played that game so I DQ'd myself from voting on it.

My comments there are still valid though...

How can you have a vote for a special rule to allow nvram for that game/rom set....yet NOT allow it for Hyper Sports where the editors make the decision themselves bypassing any poll and special rule process?

It's not consistent when it should be.

BBH clearly stated above he made his decision based on other games...NOT the specific HS case. Who cares if nvram in HS was allowed that potentially starts discussions for allowing nvram for other games? Each game is different...each requiring it's own separate decision, ruling, and potentially polling of the membership.

I think the editors felt there could be 100s of these so decided to nip it in the bud by not allowing it for HS only for that reason...which isn't a valid reason IMHO. BBH clearly stated this is why he voted against it.

I have no problem with whatever decision is made...as long as the protocols of MARP that have long been followed...are again followed in this case.

At this point for HS it seems like that hasn't happened...but maybe that's just me and I missed something prior to this thread.

LN2 wrote:BBH, show me where you claim that thing for SF3? I remember no such thing. I never remember even participating in any SF3 discussions. I might have totally forgotten about it though...so refresh my memory. I can then review and tell you why I decided that for that game.

As Barry mentioned, it was Street Fighter Alpha 3, not Street Fighter 3. But anyway, I'm referring to your posts on this page:

viewtopic.php?t=10491&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15

even though you obviously had no interest in ever playing SFA3, you made it known that you thought NVRAM shouldn't be allowed at all, while we were trying to make an established read-protected NVRAM file usable for all recordings. You kept coming up with excuses as to why that would be a bad thing, especially for "new" users. Now you've had a complete about face and think that for Hyper Sports, an established NVRAM file would be allowable....

(and then of course there's that part about where you thought a different NVRAM file would be required for every version of MAME... it's like you were looking for any possible excuse to shoot this proposal down for no reason at all)

LN2 wrote:

Also, none of the editors are "scared" of similar requests.

Hardly...BBH clearly stated this above. He doesn't want that can of worms opened.

BBH didn't validate his decision based on HS...but based on other games...not wanting to open a can of worms for this potentially becoming an issue for other games.

IMHO that invalidates his vote. I wonder how many other editors thought similarly.

Hahahaha, you've decided that invalidates my vote. That's rich.

I made my decision based on the fact that it's better for all players to be on even ground by deleting the NVRAM so there aren't any differing records. I personally did not believe it was worth going to the trouble of using NVRAM just for the sake of some extra points, just for the sake of compensating for a very flawed bonus system that Konami decided to use. Especially when it's violating the rule that only one credit should be used on the machine, so that subsequent games are not allowed to benefit from a game previously played on the machine. My decision was based on that rule, not other games. I honestly didn't feel that it was worth breaking that rule just for some bonus points.

LN2 wrote:In any of those thread links given above, my discussions/posts were about using or not using nvram in general. I wasn't addressing that specific game at all. It seems like BBH thought I was.

I have not played that game so I DQ'd myself from voting on it.

My comments there are still valid though...

How can you have a vote for a special rule to allow nvram for that game/rom set....yet NOT allow it for Hyper Sports where the editors make the decision themselves bypassing any poll and special rule process?

Because the extra modes in SFA3 are not a matter of some extra points. They are time-based unlocks for legitimate gameplay modes that have already been split for other games. And unlike Hyper Sports, it is not dependent on "advantages" gained from previous games. The unlocks are entirely time-based. A machine could be turned on for a few months with a game never played on it, and the survival mode would be playable on the first credit on the machine. We just don't have the luxury of waiting months and months for a single .inp, so the purpose of the NVRAM is to speed up that process.

BBH clearly stated above he made his decision based on other games...NOT the specific HS case. Who cares if nvram in HS was allowed that potentially starts discussions for allowing nvram for other games?

INCORRECT. I MADE THAT DECISION BASED ON A STANDING MARP RULE. IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OTHER GAMES, THEY WERE MERELY PROVIDED AS AN EXAMPLE TO PROVE MY POINT.

Each game is different...each requiring it's own separate decision, ruling, and potentially polling of the membership.

You know what happens when we start polls? People place their votes without being fully educated on the issue, and it skews the results. Look at the case where tar was doing infinite leeching on Saturn. dskys voted No and later admitted that he did not actually watch the recording in question. (it ended up not making a difference since the technique was banned, but I'd still like to know why so many people said no) And then of course the infamous SFA3 NVRAM poll had people like Alex voting against it purely out of spite because NVRAM use was being denied for Hyper Sports. I wish every person was well-informed before casting a vote in a poll, but it never happens.

I think the editors felt there could be 100s of these so decided to nip it in the bud by not allowing it for HS only for that reason...which isn't a valid reason IMHO. BBH clearly stated this is why he voted against it.

I love how you keep putting words in my mouth.

I have nothing more to add or discuss regarding Hypersports here. Nor will I bother to answer any of the claims or "valid" points as they are only valid in that persons opinion not regarding to the MARP rules. Sorry guys, that's the fact.

What I would like to say is that I find it very sad that some people think that the editors are biased or stating examples.. read my earlier posts (and the other editors posts) and you will find that we are neutral in this.

To make it more clear.. I have not even stated my PERSONAL opinion about this.. just as an editor. Can the rest of us try to do the same? Regardless if you like the game or not?

And another thing... TG is TG, MARP is MARP. If I chose to participate in both of the communities.. fine! My PERSONAL opinion is that we all should dwell and have fun, trying to do things together etc. That might not be the voice from MARP though! Or from TG either!

What I decide to do is up to me (or any other person of course..)... what I try to decide for MARP as an editor is not the same. Please try and understand that. Personal opinion vs editor opinions.. it is not that hard is it?

Can we please move on now?

BBH wrote:even though you obviously had no interest in ever playing SFA3, you made it known that you thought NVRAM shouldn't be allowed at all, while we were trying to make an established read-protected NVRAM file usable for all recordings.

nah, I didn't make that judgement at all. I merely pointed out MARP rules and potential reasons of why that was the case.

The default is nvram isn't allowed. My pointing that out doesn't mean I would be against using nvram.

Ok, for SFA3, if using nvram allows you to use a special character etc. that changes how the game plays...AND... MARP had a separate track for the game playing it with that character, then yes, using nvram for that seems reasonable to me without even knowing more specifics.

I never stated that in those posts cuz as you stated..I had no interest in that particular game. I have long been told by Hisa and a few others to not butt in and vote on any games that I don't play myself and/or aren't an expert on. I have never played any of the SF series of games...so I kept my comments in that thread general to all games...not SFA3.

Now you've had a complete about face and think that for Hyper Sports, an established NVRAM file would be allowable....

nope...not an about-face at all. First, it's a different game...a different case. You can be against one and not another. You can be against something for 100s of other games yet have a case where you are for it.

I have stated exactly my opinion about nvram and HS. I never stated my opinion for nvram use with SFA3.

(and then of course there's that part about where you thought a different NVRAM file would be required for every version of MAME... it's like you were looking for any possible excuse to shoot this proposal down for no reason at all)

I gave that as a poser. I have little to no idea how nvram format has changed over the tons of versions of mame. I was assuming odds are it has changed many times...just like replay files, cfg files etc. have changed.

I made my decision based on the fact that it's better for all players to be on even ground by deleting the NVRAM so there aren't any differing records.

yes, I never had proposed each submitted score have their own nvram file. I said a standard nvram file that all use so the exact same height records are set for all keeps this even for all players...yet allows them to score more similarly to the arcade version. If this means for some cases the player has to make their own nvram file with the right heights so be it..might be necessary for me since I play using macmame if the nvram file format isn't the same as for pc-mame versions.

The special rules can clearly state scoring will be based on having three 5.93 height records for the pole vault prior to starting the game. That's clear. Any gamer that has heights beyond 5.93 at the start can be zeroed or potentially rewatched using a valid nvram and the score adjusted if necessary. Anyone using a lwoer height or no nvram file at all would be stuck with their score....versus watching versus the other nvram file and likely increasing their score. This will make the gamers check.

Either way, I agree it should be the same initial heights for all players...since in MAME we can somewhat easily do that...unlike the actual arcade game.

Especially when it's violating the rule that only one credit should be used on the machine, so that subsequent games are not allowed to benefit from a game previously played on the machine.

Actually, the rule is that a replay file can only show 1 credit/game played. Any games played beyond that first game in the replay file will be ignored.

That's quite different from your above interpretation.

I honestly didn't feel that it was worth breaking that rule just for some bonus points.

you look at them as bonus points. Others look at those points as points rewarded from having skill at the game.

Ok, in 1942, do you count each of those 1500 pt planes or 5000 pt asterisk-like shape, POWs, etc. type things you get as bonuses or as part of your overall score playing the game?

funny..all the "bonus" points for the other HS events are allowed to still be awarded...and even the pole vault bonus pts if you nail the pole plant and that height isn't a new record.

...so you are getting specific and not allowing the awarding of very specific points.

At least it's a show of skill to get those points..and does add to the game.

You seem to totally understand this is all because of a flaw in the game code. That's clear....so let's make it an even competition avoiding the flaw as much as possible.

Since you want to go on rules...let's look at rule 2 more closely.

a) goal of MARP to emulate playing in an arcade as closely as possible.

b) these rules clearly aren't absolute...cuz let's look at a couple of them:

Rule 2-a: 1 credit per game.

There are MANY games that have special rules where you are allowed to pop several credits to play 1 game.

Rule 2-h: This one notes TG settings are "preferred" and will gain you more recognition. Ok, so if TG settings allow for nvram use for HS, how will MARP handle that given their own decision to not allow it?

it seems like MARP needs to make a special rule now saying TG settings for HS at MARP are not allowed.

----
ok, so there are 100s of examples of special rules for games which make exceptions to those listed in the scope of rule 2.

...so why couldn't this happen for rule 2d...with special rules also?

instead...you state there is this rule...so no possible exception to it.
ok, so let's zero out ALL of those sports games and games that are played popping more than 1 credit...since that clearly is NOT allowed.

This means archiving or setting up special dip switch settings for many more games...so you can play it on only 1 credit.

Instead of going to that trouble, we already have special rules for certain games which just state the exception and that for this game you are allowed to pop as many credits as you need to to complete a 9 inning game...or 18 holes of golf...or complete a basketball game etc.

How would MARP handle an example like Crush Roller? MAME default settings are for 3 start men. For this rom set, TG has the settings for 5 start men.

These TG settings are clearly easier than default MAME. There is a conflict there with the MARP rules...as those rules assume the TG settings will be the same or harder vs MAME default or MARP settings.

if you apply them as blanket rules...as you do for the nvram rule, there will be issues for other games.

Ok...so instead of that you make special rules for those games to solve any issues.

dskys wrote:Good point.

I believe it's 35, 41, 45, perfect take off, no world record = bonus.

I remember getting that a few times. It results in a nice 3000 point mole "bonus".
of course you only get it if the distance isn't a new record.

For some reason, I remember it being angles of 42, 42, 42 but your above makes more sense so I might be remembering it wrong. Given it has been 20 years since I last did or saw that my memory of it is vague at best. hehe

"For some reason, I remember it being angles of 42, 42, 42 but your above makes more sense so I might be remembering it wrong"

It's 35,41,45 on the line without getting a WR, as stated.

42,42,42?? Where the f**k did that come from?


"people like Alex "?

Yeah thanks. I love you too. But you are correct. I voted for a rule change in a game which I know f**k all about, and don't compete in. Sound familiar? Such is life....


Cheers,

AL

AL wrote:It's 35,41,45 on the line without getting a WR, as stated.

42,42,42?? Where the f**k did that come from?

I have no idea...here. It's why I said take it with a big grain of salt. For some reason the angle of 42 was stuck in my head.

Is that valid for other aspects of HS and/or T-n-F?!? 42 just kept popping into my head. hehe

Perhaps I was thinking long jump in T-n-F? Don't you get farthest distance and that 1000 point bonus by getting an angle of 42 degrees for all 3 trials? Maybe that's what I was thinking of. If not..then who knows why "42" is stuck in my head.