Author Topic: Post New WR Discussion here (Read 18431 times)

Cervone · « **Reply #400 on:** July 27, 2005, 02:00:00 pm »

I could see the Frigate SA WR being around 1:02-3 not too far from now (1:03 is the best I've failed with the strat Eise used--Alex's strat, and a time that someone like Wouter would target if he plays it). There are two strats that could surely get sub 1:00, although both would be hell (nearly impossible) to get hostage completions.

1: Bug throw, agent hostages, go downstairs, free both downstairs hostages, get out bomb defuser, defuse bomb, warp pipes without ever switching weapons, defuse engine bomb (no pause needed), exit. This is pretty much the current strat but without an extra pause or taking time to kill bridge hostage taker.

2: Bug throw, agent hostages, warp pipes, engine hostage, engine bomb, warp pipes, bridge hostage, bridge bomb. This strat is probably both faster and easier to complete than the above strat. Obviously, both strats would be hell to do.

Smit · « **Reply #401 on:** July 28, 2005, 02:04:00 pm »

I never thought about the second one man

Gonna give it a try soon ^^

Wouter Jansen · « **Reply #402 on:** July 28, 2005, 03:13:00 pm »

the 2nd one is very likely, assuming the engine hostage can escape on time. the other 3 hostages are no problem really. although if the engine one is very rare, you'd have to hope the bridge one does his fastest escape that same run, and the agent ones don't take over 1:05 or so to escape.

Wyst3r · « **Reply #403 on:** July 28, 2005, 03:55:00 pm »

You wrote wrong in the first one, Should say Bridge bomb instead of Engine bomb

bcks · « **Reply #404 on:** July 28, 2005, 06:43:00 pm »

For 2nd strat there, that's almost like my 107 fail vid online, also did a 111 complete with it. Imo, freeing the engine hostage 3rd isn't enough time for him to escape. Till someone proves he can escape that fast, i will doubt that strat will work fast.

SpiderWaffle · « **Reply #405 on:** July 28, 2005, 09:54:00 pm »

For a double warp I would think doing this would be better:

warp, engine stuff, warp, agent stuff, bridge stuff

I've heard warping from the other side is much harder though.

Wouter Jansen · « **Reply #406 on:** July 28, 2005, 10:48:00 pm »

yeah, there will be less lag the first time.

Cervone · « **Reply #407 on:** July 29, 2005, 04:37:00 am »

Not only less lag, but the way the pipes are structured makes it very difficult for you to hit the right spot that you can warp through. When warping from the engine area, the surface of the pipes is convex and it nicely guides you to the place you need to be to warp. From the other direction, the surface is concave, and if you miss the spot by even the slightest bit you'll end up way off th emark.

Imperfect Clark · « **Reply #408 on:** July 29, 2005, 02:48:00 pm »

Quote

Quote:
2: Bug throw, agent hostages, warp pipes, engine hostage, engine bomb, warp pipes, bridge hostage, bridge bomb. This strat is probably both faster and easier to complete than the above strat. Obviously, both strats would be hell to do.

If the engine hostage is a problem, perhaps you could save the hostage that's nearest the door to the engine room (who's going to get shot if you just run straight to the bomb). Whip around and wound his guy after coming down the stairs, kill him on the way back. Could be faster than the engine hostage?

Also, SW's suggestion has the advantage of clearing out the bridge of guards on the initial run around it, and you have to do the pipes backwards exactly once on any variation of strat 2, so why not try it? You'd get the backwards warp out of the way early in the run, too.

Wouter Jansen · « **Reply #409 on:** July 29, 2005, 03:09:00 pm »

the engine hostage is definitely the better choice, since the other one has to run to the engine room first anyway.

Imperfect Clark · « **Reply #410 on:** July 29, 2005, 04:07:00 pm »

I'll trust the Frigate guru

Cervone · « **Reply #411 on:** July 29, 2005, 06:31:00 pm »

SW's strat is the "classic" double-pipe-warping strat or something. Chances of hostage completions are a lot better, but its considerably slower than the other one I mentioned. Brandon failed like 105-7 (I think) with that strat, except only doing the first pipe warp and therefor doing close bug throw, then the agent hostages. Doing the second pipe warp and finishing the level with the current 00 strat is not too much faster (1-2 seconds), and it gives a better chance for the agent hostages to complete since you'd be doing them before the bug throw.

Boss · « **Reply #412 on:** August 07, 2005, 11:19:00 pm »

Just thought I'd get this into the right topic here.

Quote

Quote:
1 - Drawbacks to KF7 strat (other than getting the gun)?
2 - No explanation for why guards get mad on (apparently) clean Trev shots?

1. I didn't try it much except just completing the strat for the first time or so (best time is 223 with it). Basically it's slow to get and inaccurate anyways.

2. Just treat it as luck at this point. As long as you get shots that felt solid, eventually it won't fail you. What I do know is that Agent is the most annoying when it comes to B fails. SA/00A are just so much nicer to play.

Imperfect Clark · « **Reply #413 on:** August 08, 2005, 03:09:00 am »

I saw this after posting. I'll post future details in here.

wishiwasfamous · « **Reply #414 on:** August 09, 2005, 01:11:00 am »

<3 Chairvoon

bcks · « **Reply #415 on:** August 09, 2005, 01:18:00 am »

Dans the man!!!!!

Now you must kill a lion in africa with your bares hands to be pimp.

deletedprofile.u · « **Reply #416 on:** August 09, 2005, 01:32:00 am »

Go Dan!

Cervone · « **Reply #417 on:** August 09, 2005, 01:54:00 am »

Statue SA 2:20

With all the Statue talk recently I couldn't resist giving this a try. Even though my Val strafing took a major hit as I played this level on 1.2 (as this run shows to some degree), I was able to gain back time on other places, such as the Trev shot (which sucks to do on 1.1).

This had been the longest-lasting untied WR (tied with Bryan's 00 2:20), at around 820 days.

Wouter Jansen · « **Reply #418 on:** August 09, 2005, 03:46:00 am »

That's great, Dan!

bcks · « **Reply #419 on:** August 09, 2005, 04:26:00 am »

Let me be the first to say, play cradle/aztec 00 your on fire tonight :eek

, 2 wrs in tonight. :smokin

SpiderWaffle · « **Reply #420 on:** August 09, 2005, 05:59:00 am »

Ya seriously. What happened with surface 2 00? I've to see this, aztec and frigate get Cervowned,.. again.

Imperfect Clark · « **Reply #421 on:** August 09, 2005, 11:26:00 am »

Damn you, Dan.

haha

wishiwasfamous · « **Reply #422 on:** August 09, 2005, 11:38:00 am »

wow!

It's kinda odd that you couldn't see the ammo bar and ammo icons...

Wabs · « **Reply #423 on:** August 09, 2005, 12:02:00 pm »

congrats Dan ! :eek

Infected Mind · « **Reply #424 on:** August 09, 2005, 02:29:00 pm »

<3 Dan

bcks · « **Reply #425 on:** August 09, 2005, 02:37:00 pm »

Quote

Quote:
It's kinda odd that you couldn't see the ammo bar and ammo icons...

You can turn those off you know.

Dan copyed me.

Wouter Jansen · « **Reply #426 on:** August 09, 2005, 02:45:00 pm »

yeah, if people say using a dot is lame, then using ammo on screen is lame as well. it's not like Bond can see either by watching thin air. so whenever someone says using a dot is lame again, think about how lame you are yourself when you use ammo on screen, pwned!

Wabs · « **Reply #427 on:** August 09, 2005, 02:47:00 pm »

Ammo are in-game, dot isn't.
When you want to play a game for scores, you play on the original system with an original cartridge, and a regular pad (not turbo), you don't need ANYTHING else. (except a TV and some electricity

).
All people here can use dots, and many do so, but I'm sure 90% of people outside t-e.n, I mean those who download vids at SDA and don't know t-e.n, would consider that like cheating... and I can understand those people. :rolleyes

Wouter Jansen · « **Reply #428 on:** August 09, 2005, 03:01:00 pm »

you're still lame since it's the same idea. get over it.

Wabs · « **Reply #429 on:** August 09, 2005, 03:11:00 pm »

Yeah that's not your idea so that's lame.
It's easier than answering to what I said.
Congrats.

oh maybe you could add 'you suck' or 'bytyan', that would make your point even more convincing.

Jimbo · « **Reply #430 on:** August 09, 2005, 03:37:00 pm »

I would best 1st in GE without dot then, kick ass.

wishiwasfamous · « **Reply #431 on:** August 09, 2005, 03:42:00 pm »

it also sucks that they call the defection glitch a cheat as well...

Cervone · « **Reply #432 on:** August 09, 2005, 03:59:00 pm »

Using the dot isn't cheating, because everyone does it. One could consider it stupid, cheap, dishonest to the game, etc., but it's definitely not cheating. Think of baseball players catching the ball with gloves instead of their bare hands. Some people might think that's lame, and not the way the game should be played, but as long as everybody wears a glove, it's not cheating. Cheating isn't about doing something that's unnatural or insincere, it's about giving oneself an exclusive advantage over the competition.

And yeah, heh, I only turned off showing ammo just to fuck around. It's kind of fun on s2 because there's no visual distinction between unarmed/nade/remote mine, so there was always the tiny chance that when I would have tried to prime the nade a slap would have come up instead.

Wabs · « **Reply #433 on:** August 09, 2005, 04:02:00 pm »

Yeah but that's not the point, we could also allow cheats/gameshark for everyone and that wouldn't be cheating either since everyone would be allowed to use them. That still wouldn't have any sense for the main and regular competition and that's exactly what I think about using dots.

I wasn't saying it's cheating, I just used the example of people who don't know t-e.n and download GE vids at SDA. They don't know people use dots on those vids. And I can understand how they would think it's cheating if you suddenly let them know about dots.
When you play on your own for scores, you don't think about dots, you just get a tv, a system, a cartridge and a pad, because you don't need more ! That's the problem, people outside t-e.n don't know and couldn't think about dots being allowed for WRs because this has no sense.
There should be at least 1 sentence on the rankings page or somewhere on the site which says what are dots and that they are allowed.

You top GE guys are still the best, with or without dots, and obviously because everyone is allowed to use them, that's just not what I'm talking about.

Infected Mind · « **Reply #434 on:** August 09, 2005, 04:21:00 pm »

cruise would also be cheating then

Cervone · « **Reply #435 on:** August 09, 2005, 04:22:00 pm »

I think it might be a good idea to make a page for noobs that has stuff like that on it... tips, like the dot, cruise control, things that might not be evident just by watching vids. Adding a description about it to the World Rankings page would, in my opinion, be making a big deal out of something that is really only a tiny factor in the times we get. As an aside, I actually started using the dot before I knew the rest of the elite did (before I officially joined), so it's probably not that hard for people to realize (especially since on PD the game provides a "dot" for you).

Wabs · « **Reply #436 on:** August 09, 2005, 05:11:00 pm »

I was surprised to not read something like "it doesn't help that much" before... :rolleyes

This has nothing to do with this discussion... how much it helps is irrevelant here.
The rules have to be clear for everyone. People who're not active on the boards can't know about dots being allowed. They don't have to 'realize' that something OUTSIDE the game, a supplementary accessory (and CC isn't ... :rolleyes

) is allowed, we have to explain it .
I dare to think t-e.n is a bit more than just our small active community on boards, it's a website which is for everyone's eyes. Sure 'we' know dots are allowed so thats not cheating since we can use it , but people who just check the ranks or the vids can't know.
That's why I said, if someone outside t-e.n downloads GE vids, he won't think about dots being allowed, and then if you tell him about this, he can have the feeling of 'this is cheating'. If the rules are clear and explained on the site, that's different, visitors know what is allowed or not and then they can make their own opinion about what they watched. It's about t-e.n's legitimacy as a good ranking site to explain (and not hide) the rules. Else that's just some small community which only cares about itself (then why SDA should host t-e.n vids if we don't care about other people watching them ?) and I do think it would be a shame.

Adding a description about dots on the ranking site is not making a big deal about a tiny factor. Tiny or big, it's still a factor. The question is : what's the big deal about explaining precisely the rules ?
Hence, what's the big deal of just explaining that something allowed is allowed ?

Wouter Jansen · « **Reply #437 on:** August 09, 2005, 05:24:00 pm »

"When you play on your own for scores, you don't think about dots"

so you are telling me all these other strategies we come up with, everyone outside of the elite simply thinks of it like *poof* and they know the strategy without ever having any elite kind of help? Think of the aztec strat, statue strat, caverns 00, there's a million of strats that outside people will not know unless they are smart and find them out theirselves or if they find us and let us help them find things out.

How can it be a problem anyway? it makes aiming easier, it does not make impossible things possible. if I didn't use dot I'd still have most my PRs, and other PRs would only take longer to achieve, but I'd get the same times in the end.

"because you don't need more !"

you don't need clothes to live but do you ever go outside without clothes on? etc

"The rules have to be clear for everyone if you want something fair."

they can always simply ask us if they can do something they aren't sure about.

you don't need a dot anyway. if you're lucky enough to have a tv where the exact middle pixel is dead, works just as well. we're only adding a feature the programmers forgot to add ourselves. you're not going to win this...

Wabs · « **Reply #438 on:** August 09, 2005, 05:38:00 pm »

You're stupid wouter. You're making nonsense deductions about some isolated sentences and you answer stupid things as if you didn't get my point. Your post didn't answer to anything I explained.

Oh well there's still one sentence where you didn't answer bullshit so I'm gonna answer to this one.

'they can always simply ask us if they can do something they aren't sure about.'
Yup they can, but it's easier if they don't have to.

Isolating some sentences and answering bullshit to look clever (like the clothes stuff or the strat stuff which is 1000 miles away from what I was saying and you know it) is an easy game, I'm not going to play this we you. So yeah you won that stupid game. By far.

Wouter Jansen · « **Reply #439 on:** August 09, 2005, 05:43:00 pm »

actually you're too stupid to see the intellect behind my posts.

Wabs · « **Reply #440 on:** August 09, 2005, 05:48:00 pm »

Let's build some "who's stupidest" rivalry, I'm sure you'd win there too.

.. · « **Reply #441 on:** August 09, 2005, 05:50:00 pm »

We don't hide the rules if you actually bother reading enough of the forum, this topic included.

Maybe this would be a nice time for me to pick up where I left off on the GE Elite FAQ, but that would require me not being lazy. I'll remember this discussion for whenever I do bother with it, though.

Wabs · « **Reply #442 on:** August 09, 2005, 05:52:00 pm »

Yeah that's what I said, if you're not on boards, you can't know.
I'd be happy to help you about this kind of FAQ though if you're making one.

Wouter Jansen · « **Reply #443 on:** August 09, 2005, 05:53:00 pm »

at least I will win the best lesbian award, so everything else doesn't matter. I have my priorities straight (lesbian).

.. · « **Reply #444 on:** August 09, 2005, 05:55:00 pm »

I've already started, actually. It was a project of mine way back in 2003 or so, but I got sidetracked with others and never got around to picking it up again. I think I'll be okay doing it alone, though you can proofread like you did for Ngamer bio.

Amoore347 · « **Reply #445 on:** August 10, 2005, 10:18:00 am »

That was the only thing that Goldeneye lacked, an in-game crosshair. So we had to improvise and make our own. I look at it as simply giving the game a feature that should have been there anyway.

And on top of that, there is no point in complaining about it either, because you can do it too.

-Adam

Wabs · « **Reply #446 on:** August 10, 2005, 11:05:00 am »

I don't complain about not being able to use the dot, I could use dot, that's exactly not my point, just read again.

Edit :
Anyway, I've posted enough, I'm not gonna post anymore about dots in this topic. Better comeback to WR discussion.

Congrats for that 24 Wouter, I thought all your PRs were already proven.

And you know I like you

good job and good luck for this 23 !

Wouter Jansen · « **Reply #447 on:** August 10, 2005, 01:25:00 pm »

yeah, I'm not even planning to give up for another how many ever years

let's just hope it doesn't need to go that far though.

Wyst3r · « **Reply #448 on:** August 10, 2005, 01:33:00 pm »

That should be posted in the pr's gotten over again topic though. Or a post new wr's you got over again topic

Well anyways, Good job! And get 39/38 on runway too so you'll have everything proven

wishiwasfamous · « **Reply #449 on:** August 10, 2005, 01:49:00 pm »

May I have one of your 24s, Wouter?

News:

Author Topic: Post New WR Discussion here (Read 18431 times)