| Name | burns | smith | iron | beans |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| x speed | 1.219 | 1.188 | 1.125 | 1.246 |
| y speed | 3.750 | 3.500 | 2.250 | 3.625 |
y speed decrease 0.5 by every 4 frames.
Level-by-level Notes
- stage 1: 7035 frames saved.
Over than 1 second faster before I called the CPU. But cost a long time to do that. And that helps me to skip stage 2 and saves much more time.
- stage 3: 3 frames saved.
16 frames lost before boss fight. Due to worse lag avoided.
But saves 19 frames due to better boss fight.
But saves 19 frames due to better boss fight.
- stage 4: 34 frames lost.
Though I saved about 30 frames a the first plane. But lost them later. Maybe, it's hard for me to reduce lag in this type level.
- stage 5: 38 frames lost.
More lags. Though I got a faster boss fight.
Notes
I have to admit that Glitchman is good at reducing lags. I have admiration for him. I saved many lags in stage 1. But lost many more them in stage 4 and stage 5...
ThunderAxe31: Judging.
ThunderAxe31: Due to the existence of a movie that beats level 1 faster, this submission has to be rejected.
ThunderAxe31: Some people brought to my attention the fact that the judgment note I wrote above doesn't explain well the reason of my decision, and I have to admit that it caused some misunderstandings. Mostly was already clarified by Spikestuff and Mothrayas, in the thread for this submission, however I think it should be summarized here.
As HappyLee correctly noted, it's not in the site policy to reject a submission in favor of improvements presented after that the submission has already been made. However, in this case we had an improvement that worked as a proof that pointed out the mistakes made in this submission. Additionally, the author of said improvements, Xipo, also explained some mistakes in a post.
I originally wanted to avoid to directly denote this submission as a faulty improvement attempt, in order avoid being harsh towards the author, as a form of courtesy. But it seems that this only made the situation worse. Now I understand that it was my mistake to purposely write such a short and unclear judgment note, as it was unrespectful towards the hard work of the author. I deeply apologize for the inconvenience.