Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
Forum username has been changed.
Your Wiki profile may need updating; someone else is responsible for that. Tell us if anything else is broken from the username change.
Edit: For reference, previous username was rasengan0.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
I watched the TAS, and it just doesn't seem optimized (the pause trick seems to kill a lot of momentum and is used in places where simple evasion would have probably been better). I also think that pause tricks and pulling Guts blocks out of nowhere shouldn't be abused in a "low glitch" version.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
henke37 wrote:
The verification movie seems to doing too much work. It doesn't just unlock all the questions, it relocks them as desired.
Some questions require the locking of other questions to occur. For example, question 818 (TOOTSIE) in the bonus round requires locking all questions 800-817 (and a few others). Without that, question 818 cannot be called up. The routines that the game uses are at http://tasvideos.org/GameResources/NES/WheelOfFortune.html .
Anyway, this TAS was intended as a demonstration of how fast Wheel of Fortune can be completed from a reset (allowing for whatever you want beforehand as a set-up; I don't know if this tactic has been used by speedrunners in other games, since they are obviously so used to pressing the reset button). I cannot prove that this arrangement of RAM can occur immediately upon power-on on a real NES, but I don't really care.
I recall that adelikat has programmed a way in BizHawk to start from any RAM and register state upon power-on. If anyone likes, I can try to convert the TAS to BizHawk format using this feature to make it seem more authentic, though personally, I don't see what the point is (see the last sentence of the previous paragraph).
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
feos wrote:
Looking at the recent edit in the pub description I want to ask FractalFusion: did you really listen to that solo? :D
I never thought much about that ending theme.
It is better than the noise in the level, but that's not saying much.
Actually, the whole thing makes me wonder if the sound is really just an emulator glitch.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
saomoore94 wrote:
Warp wrote:
AKheon wrote:
Based on a quick test, a single flawless victory screen wastes 107 frames. If you could take damage in under 107 frames, you would save time.
I wonder if the time wasted getting hit could be avoided by having both characters hit each other simultaneously, with the computer opponent losing on that hit. (It might not save time at all, or it might even lose time, but just an idea to try.)
I don't even know what your talking about.
Warp is wondering:
1) if both player and computer can be hit at the same time,
2) if the computer can be KOed at the same time,
3) if it saves time compared to the player getting hit only.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
Patashu wrote:
when yellow any% and yellow 'pi day' also start the same?
Technically, they don't quite start the same (the any% does not give the rival a name, but the pi day one does).
They also differ in glitch execution; the any% does not use arbitrary execution.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
New video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-d9mgo8FGk
There's still some hand-waving going on (statements such as "Set x=-1" are not valid) but it touches upon analytic methods, and the Riemann zeta function of course.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divergent_series
I can't really say much about this subject considering it is far afield for me. All I can say is there are credible theories out there that agree on 1+2+3+4+...=-1/12, complex analysis being one (note: when I say theory, I mean theory, not a wild guess or anything like that).
You could make an argument like: Let 1+2+3+4+...=T and 1+1+1+...=U. Then T+U=2+3+4+...=T-1, so U=-1. On the other hand, T-U=0+1+2+3+...=T, so U=0. This may fit into the idea of "you can prove anything with infinities". Or rather, something in the theory should be considered wrong (since most of us believe that a theory that proves that every number is equal to every other number is a bad theory). For example, any one of "1+2+3+4+...=T", "1+1+1+...=U", "T+U=2+3+4+...", "2+3+4+...=T-1", could very well be considered a wrong statement, and that would actually improve the theory.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
For me, Sonic the Hedgehog TASes have become so broken that it is very difficult, if not impossible, for me to be impressed by glitched runs anymore. Almost nothing in this TAS impressed me, so I voted no. Just my feeling that times have changed.
This TAS definitely should be published though, because it is an improvement to an already existing one.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
Is the battle RNG like in Black/White where it only advances when it needs to make a decision? If so, is it possible to manipulate better starting seeds before entering battle?
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
nico30620, in the future, please indicate that the game is a hack if it is (I edited the title this time), and which game it is derived from. I seriously did not know that this game had anything to do with SMW or hacks until I saw kaizoman666's last sentence.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
Flip's post is assuming that you know that the host will only ever use either the random strategy or the Monty Hall strategy each round, even if you don't know which of the two is used. Without this assumption, the argument does not hold.
Let's say the player knows that the host uses the strategy of opening the goat door with probability p and the car door with probability 1-p, if the player initially selected a goat door. Expectation is player win=1, loss=0.
Exp(switch)=Prob(switch wins)/Prob(host opens goat)=[(2/3)p] / [1/3+(2/3)p]
Exp(stay)=Prob(stay wins)/Prob(host opens goat)=[1/3] / [1/3+(2/3)p]
Random strategy is p=0.5, Monty Hall is p=1, host always opens car door (mentioned in my previous post) is p=0. 0≤p<0.5 means that it is best to stay, and 0.5<p≤1 means that it is best to switch. p=0.5 is neutral.
- Player knows that host will always use strategies each round with 0.5≤p≤1 (as in Flip's post): Always switch.
- Player knows that host will always use strategies each round with 0≤p≤0.5: Always stay.
- Above two do not apply and no other information: 50% switch/stay.
Warp wrote:
My mind just refuses to accept that one single round (where a goat was revealed) can have different probabilities depending on what the host's strategy is over all rounds.
The host's strategy (even if it will be applied to all rounds), as applied to one round, is the host's one-round strategy. It can be complicated like "Play random strategy (p=0.5) with 30% probability, play Monty Hall (p=1) with 30% probability, open a goat door 10% of the time (p=0.1) with 30% probability, open a goat door 80% of the time (p=0.8) with 10% probability," but it is still a strategy used in one round.
Probability has a strange way of working that goes against intuition. In regards to the question "If you are playing one single round, and the host reveals a goat door, is it advantageous to change?", information (whether the player knows anything about what the host's strategy is or not) is very important to answer this question. It is possible for the statements:
- "It is advantageous to switch."
- "It is advantageous to stay."
both to be false (e.g. player has no clue of the host's strategy), since the advantageous strategy is to play a mixed strategy (50% switch/stay). Thinking that it is always the case that one of the two must be true is a false dilemma. Assuming that "advantageous" means "there is no better strategy", then it is also possible for both of the statements to be true (e.g. host plays random strategy p=0.5); in this case, all player strategies are equally advantageous.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
Warp wrote:
If you are playing one single round, and the host reveals a goat door, is it advantageous to change?
Let's say you don't know if the host opened the door randomly or knowingly. How would you even know, if nobody tells you? How do you know if you are in the standard Monty Hall setup, or in the randomized version? There's no way of knowing.
Let's also assume that the host is allowed to use any strategy whatsoever, not just the two strategies mentioned (random, and Monty Hall/always open goat door) and the player has no way of knowing. This becomes a game-theoretic question.
The player can never do worse than 50%. Flip a coin. Don't switch if heads, switch if tails. No matter what strategy the host does, given that the opened door is a goat, switching is either right or wrong. Assigning 50% probabilities to switch or not switch gives 50% success rate, no matter what.
On the other hand, the host can set it up so that the player can never do better than 50% (random door strategy).
So the solution based on these assumptions: Flip a coin. Don't switch if heads, switch if tails. 50% success rate always.
On the other hand, if the player knew exactly what the host's strategy was, then the player may gain an advantage. If the host's strategy gives a higher-than-50% success rate for switching (such as Monty Hall), then the player switches. If the host's strategy gives a lower-than-50% success rate for switching (such as, host always opens car door if player initially selected goat door), then the player does not switch.
Warp wrote:
More puzzlingly, even if you do know, why would that make any difference?
It's called strategy. It exists just about everywhere (we're on a gaming site, even).
Whether only one round is performed or not is irrelevant. Every round has a success probability, even when there is only one.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
For those wondering what the new improvement is, here is a video of the TAS from when HM04(Strength) is obtained (speeding up some long parts):
Link to video
By the way, if Charmander is chosen, as well as fighting Blastoise instead of Venusaur, one fights Exeggutor instead of Gyarados.
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
I'm pretty sure that "the better of two endings" is a form of "best ending".
That being said, I think Braid's "ending" is glitched and doesn't qualify for best ending (doesn't that require collecting all stars or something?).
I also think that if a run's best ending is the fastest version, then no branch name is necessary (although it can be reflected in movie categories).
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
I haven't watched anything, but there is a TAS on Nicovideo.
http://www.nicovideo.jp/watch/sm20299607
(...and so on. The above video is just the first part of the whole thing.)
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
After obtaining Mega Punch and Mega Kick, what is the next opposing Pokemon not to be OHKOed? Answer: Lorelei's Lapras. In fact, it is the only opposing Pokemon after obtaining Mega Punch and Mega Kick not to be OHKOed.
I find this TAS pretty interesting, with all the strategies. However, I found it a bit strange to that both Blizzard and Metronome were used, since I thought Metronome would have covered everything that was required for Blizzard. It could be faster this way though.
HP_Power=(5*(v+2w+4x+8y)+Z)/2 + 31
where
* v is 1 if SpcIV>=8; otherwise 0,
* w is 1 if SpeIV>=8; otherwise 0,
* x is 1 if DefIV>=8; otherwise 0,
* y is 1 if AtkIV>=8; otherwise 0,
* Z=3 if SpcIV>=3; otherwise Z=SpcIV.
However, I have verified that it is possible for SpcIV=11 to have a higher max damage than SpcIV=12, 13, or 14, assuming all other IVs are the same and all other circumstances equal. So the above formula is incorrect. If anyone can verify the actual formula, that would be welcome.
(I swear I remember somewhere 6 years ago where it said that Z=SpcIV mod 4.)
Editor, Experienced Forum User, Published Author, Expert player
(2159)
Joined: 6/15/2005
Posts: 3303
I watched this TAS just now. Interestingly, this hack remixes a lot of well-known video-game music pieces. However, the hack seems to drag on for too long. I noticed that reviews for this hack are mostly negative.
As for TAS quality, I'd say that the result is just as expected for a TAS that has 1771 rerecords where the game is a Super Mario World hack that lasts over an hour. I can explain which specific parts look bad from a TAS point of view, but I will only do it if asked.
