API tools faq
paste
Advertisement
Exarion

Responses to SWB

Exarion
Jan 6th, 2017
292
0
Never
Add comment
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 8.63 KB | None | 0 0
raw download clone embed print report
  1. "By creating this "non-manip" category, you are basically saying this to the outside community -- "We don't want OUR way of playing the game to be changed/compromised, so anything that threatens the way WE want to play the game is just going to be separated." Not only are you stifling progress of the game as a speedrun, you're FURTHER chasing away potential community members who actually want to run (and maybe even, I dunno, COMPETE in) this game because the manipulation appeals to them. You're basically telling everybody else that people finding new strats are not welcome."
  2.  
  3. We are not arguing for the separation of RNG manip runs. These runs should comprise the main leaderboard, and manip-less runs should be moved to a side leaderboard if they can be reasonably defined.
  4.  
  5. -----
  6.  
  7. "I know everyone is probably fucking tired of hearing this but -- you have NO grounds to enforce non-manip vs manip runs. Let's take an example that has a chance of actually happening.
  8.  
  9. Player is failing manipulation by hitting the wrong frame but hits a deck that might be good in the nonmanip category
  10. Is this player allowed to run with the deck in the nonmanip category or not?
  11. (Example from GFC's stream chat yesterday, whoever sent that to me)"
  12.  
  13. This is a possible snag in separating the categories, yes.
  14.  
  15. -----
  16.  
  17. "~If you say he/she IS allowed to run with the deck, that sets a bad precedent because then you have no grounds to reject another run that manipulated a deck that isn't the current manipulated deck. Someone could pull another Mergy or whatever and be able to manipulate a deck that works for the nonmanip category (I don't know why someone would do that, but let's say it did, for argument's sake). This is a slippery slope to go when your enforcement allows for cheaters to get through. If you'd rather go this way, that's some integrity you have there."
  18.  
  19. The FM community was strong for years in spite of obvious cheating opportunities. Only recently was a method to detect cheaters found. Don't let cheaters run your community.
  20.  
  21. -----
  22.  
  23. "~If you say he/she is NOT allowed to run the deck, then technically you should never allow ANY deck. This has to do with the "intention" argument that's bound to come up. You have no way of properly enforcing "intention." Sure, you can have some trust system set up, but what about new runners ~outside~ of the community? Would you reject new runners' runs on that basis as well? They could easily say "I didn't mean to RNG manipulate THAT deck, I just happened to get it" and you have absolutely no way of disproving, no matter if they waited X amount of frames to get it or not."
  24.  
  25. This is another potential snag. It's probably worth discussing further. But almost all of the time, common sense will tell whether a run was manipulated, and thus cheaters remain the only concern.
  26.  
  27. -----
  28.  
  29. "@Exarion: I'm sorry, but I can't agree with your post. Comparing RNG manipulation and glitching your way through the game is comparing apples to oranges. You, of all people, should know this."
  30.  
  31. And by the same logic, comparing a 2-hour run to a 7-hour run is apples and oranges. In both cases, you are playing the game using no external tools, so it is technically the same. And you are dramatically altering the length and style of play, so it is practically much different.
  32.  
  33. -----
  34.  
  35. "But is this REALLY a different style of play? Granted, you are no longer farming since 3 MBDs exist in your deck, but you're still trying to blitz your way through the game and hope the Final 6/7 doesn't wreck you with bad RNG."
  36.  
  37. Yes, it is. I can tell you that as a runner who has spent dozens of hours on the Final 6 with and without MBD. Having just one MBD completely changes your strategy. Having three, plus a deck that can't do much else, is a dramatic shift. The farming strategies (which I posted in the thread) are gone too.
  38.  
  39. -----
  40.  
  41. "Strategies evolve over time, and the strongest times on the leaderboard should reflect improvements to the route. In fact, having those 1-3 hour times put alongside 5+ hour runs reflects a history of the game."
  42.  
  43. A single leaderboard can't realistically show the full history of the game. There are much better ways to accomplish this, if we think it's important.
  44.  
  45. -----
  46.  
  47. "As Cards said before (although I guess it came out more harshly to others than it did to me), if your intent of speedrunning this game is to go faster, then you embrace the new strategy. If you reject the new RNG manipulation, maybe you really don't care ~that~ much about going fast. Bringing up the Pocketstation category isn't exactly the best response to this natural desire to go as fast as possible, simply because you could say that about literally every category that exists.
  48.  
  49. "Oh, I'm trying to go as fast as possible in this category."
  50. "Nah, just run the faster category"
  51.  
  52. See?"
  53.  
  54. >>>>> "Oh, I'm trying to go as fast as possible in this no manip category"
  55. >>>>> "Nah, just run the faster category"
  56.  
  57. How is my example any different than yours?
  58.  
  59. -----
  60.  
  61. "@karolmo: Your post is probably the most disagreeable thing I've read in this entire thread. Strategies evolve over time. What, are you going to make a different category every time something faster is introduced? That's asinine."
  62.  
  63. No one is suggesting this. A new category is a reasonable suggestion because of the massive difference between manip and no manip, not because new strats normally lead to new categories.
  64.  
  65. -----
  66.  
  67. "Should Pokemon Red separate its leaderboards just because the current route no longer uses Squirtle through the entire run? The Nidoran times are ~generally~ faster than the Squirtle times. Of course not because, fundamentally speaking, the run is still the same. The strategies may arise from using a different Pokemon, but completion of the category is still the same. Comparing glitchless and glitched categories is not comparable to this current situation because those are fundamental changes to how the game is played."
  68.  
  69. RNG manip is a fundamental change to how FM is played and a 5-hour time save. Nidoran is a route improvement and a 3-minute save.
  70.  
  71. -----
  72.  
  73. "Shouldn't respect of new strategies make them be on the same leaderboard?"
  74.  
  75. Respect has nothing to do with it. It's not practical to compare times that are 5 hours slower on average. If the leaderboard stays intact and no filter is added, I will remove my time from the leaderboard because it is no longer a competitive time. Others approach this differently, and I don't understand why.
  76.  
  77. -----
  78.  
  79. "EDIT: Is it really wrong for people with better strategies to want their times to compared to older ones? It's a SPEEDRUN leaderboard, which is competitive by nature. Comparing them makes ABSOLUTE sense. Otherwise, what the leaderboard now represents is really who got more lucky."
  80.  
  81. Yes, just as comparing apples to oranges is wrong. Also, luck is not the only factor in the no manip route, nor is execution the only factor in the manip route. The top runs for both categories will feature a combination of luck, skill and knowledge; they will just have a huge gap in the final time.
  82.  
  83. -----
  84.  
  85. "@Exarion: The strategies that pop up from (willingly, now) not manipulating your drops are not ~fundamental~ changes in gameplay. You are technically "farming" for the MBDs, now knowing exactly what to do and what you're going to get. The farming is essentially "routed" down to only 3 duels which is a strategy change, not a gameplay change. Proposing that the challenging aspect of the current non-manip route vs the ease of beating the game with MBDs is not a compelling argument at all."
  86.  
  87. Yes, it is a fundamental change. The most important part of the run -- farming -- is being removed entirely. I don't really care to argue this point further, though, because it will just come down to semantics (like what defines "fundamental"). If you are caught up in semantics, you are missing the point.
  88.  
  89. -----
  90.  
  91. "What difference in the Final 6 is there, really? You still throw away the majority of your hands to get a THTD + equip/Raigeki/Umi or whatever suits your needs at the time. You HAVE to throw away the majority of your hand in the manipulation route because your deck is trash because you don't have anything else worth using."
  92.  
  93. There is a massive difference. Just because some similarities exist (mainly the importance of easy modes) doesn't mean the two routes are comparable.
  94.  
  95. -----
  96.  
  97. "The presence (or lack thereof) of strategy does not merit a category split at all -- that's merely a consequence of (arguably better) routing."
  98.  
  99. A large part of the community doesn't want to route with RNG manipulation. It's not fun. Just like a lot of runners don't want to glitch hunt. Categories have long existed so that we can go fast in a fun way.
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Advertisement
Public Pastes
Advertisement
We use cookies for various purposes including analytics. By continuing to use Pastebin, you agree to our use of cookies as described in the Cookies Policy.  OK, I Understand
Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!