This topic is for discussion of map #2571: Speedy skiller
(http://knucklecracker.com/creeperworld3/queryMaps.php?query=thumbnailid&id=2571)
Author: Karsten75
Size: 128x84
Desc:
This is a no-play map and I apologize in advance. I made this so Tero could test his slower computer vs other computers if different speeds to see if computer speed makes any difference to the completion time. All you have to do is unpause the game. Discuss here: http://knucklecracker.com/forums/index.php?topic=19237.0
I found .3 seconds of play in your no play map.
Quote from: warren on September 24, 2015, 08:48:27 PM
I found .3 seconds of play in your no play map.
didn't take me long either.
and I'm not running this on a fast machine :D
Quote from: warren on September 24, 2015, 08:48:27 PM
I found .3 seconds of play in your no play map.
You could tell us how...
Spoiler
packets take time to travel distance
My thanks to Karsten75 for creating this map and everyone who's downloaded, played and submitted their score.
Most humbly,
Tero
Who-ho! The first map where I get the same score as Alter Old :-)
Quote from: isj4 on September 25, 2015, 04:55:34 AM
Who-ho! The first map where I get the same score as Alter Old :-)
This. :)
As the purpose of this map is to display how timing works, I feel this is not really a spoiler, but I'll stick it in a spoiler tag anyway. It's how to get 1:09.6 on this map. It has to do with build order and packet travel distance.
Spoiler
Packets take time to travel. You can move the nullifier closer to the command node to reduce the travel distance.
However, that also places it in range of the command node, and if that's all you do, both the collector and nullifier will attempt to build at the same time from the start, causing the collector to take twice as long to build and preventing you from getting that extra bit of energy. That keeps the time back to 1:09.9. The key is to build the collector first, have the nullifer as close as possible, and not waste any time between finishing the collector and starting the nullifier.
Move the nullifier closer to the command node. DISABLE the nullifier.
Let the game start. Pause as soon as 2 or 3 packets leave the command node.
Go frame-by-frame until the 5th build packet for the collector leaves the command node.
ENABLE the nullifer and unpause.
And that is an excellent example of the "Skill" aspect of CW3. :)
Unfortunately, this also exposed a small deficiency (that will NOT be corrected) in how scores are displayed.
The score table is sorted, first by lowest score, and then within that for timestamp. In an ideal world, that would lead the first player to post the lowest score to always be displayed on the top of the leaderboard.
Unfortunately, if a player improves his time, the timestamp of his score submission is not updated. This leads to me having a better position in the score leaderboard for this map than radd, AMH, War, Alter Old, grayzzur, and isj4 - all who pioneered this technique on this map before me - I got my position by virtue of posting the playtest score and then improving my score. :)
And I got my position by posting the 2nd score ever for this map, period, and then going back and improving it.
Basically, if 2 people have the same score, the person who finished the map first wins. Not the person who finished the map first with that time.
Quote from: Karsten75 on September 25, 2015, 10:45:58 AM
And that is an excellent example of the "Skill" aspect of CW3. :)
Unfortunately, this also exposed a small deficiency (that will NOT be corrected) in how scores are displayed.
The score table is sorted, first by lowest score, and then within that for timestamp. In an ideal world, that would lead the first player to post the lowest score to always be displayed on the top of the leaderboard.
Unfortunately, if a player improves his time, the timestamp of his score submission is not updated. This leads to me having a better position in the score leaderboard for this map than radd, AMH, War, Alter Old, grayzzur, and isj4 - all who pioneered this technique on this map before me - I got my position by virtue of posting the playtest score and then improving my score. :)
I always wondered how it would order those who finished with the same times.
Quote from: applemachome on September 25, 2015, 01:15:27 PM
I always wondered how it would order those who finished with the same times.
The intent was to recognize the first person to achieve a specific method that got the best time. Something went awry and it's probably not worth revisiting a 2-year old game to simply revise an edge case scenario. It won't happen in the next game, I'm sure.
I love how someone found a quicker way to finish a map that was designed to only have one possible outcome. well done!
I guarantee that it was found by at least three people independantly, as I shared with no one, and I was the second person to make the score.
Well congrats to all three of you! :D