LIST: Alphamame Blocked Recordings

Chad · Post by **Chad** » Sun Jun 22, 2003 9:07 pm

yep i agree, but many may not, so we play it safe for a while. And it's not like they would be deleted they'd just be moved to a non tgmame place. And it's taken zwaxy 3 months to attempt blocking in the site and i doubt he's even made an effort at it because it's too complicated. I'll bet he could whip up a dual area site (tgmame, regularmame) a lot quicker, it would be basically like making a tournament area but the submits would go where the mame type tells it to go.

Francois Daniel · Post by **Francois Daniel** » Sun Jun 22, 2003 10:46 pm

Chad wrote:yep i agree, but many may not, so we play it safe for a while. And it's not like they would be deleted they'd just be moved to a non tgmame place. And it's taken zwaxy 3 months to attempt blocking in the site and i doubt he's even made an effort at it because it's too complicated. I'll bet he could whip up a dual area site (tgmame, regularmame) a lot quicker, it would be basically like making a tournament area but the submits would go where the mame type tells it to go.

It's hard but I think it's a good idea. That may give a new start for play and submit again on games we have already submit on reguar mame. And perhaps we cant break some records.

Francois

Mr. Kelly R. Flewin · Post by **Mr. Kelly R. Flewin** » Mon Jun 23, 2003 2:36 am

I hate doing this... sigh...

http://marp.retrogames.com/index.cgi?mo ... 00&tourn=0

http://marp.retrogames.com/inp/5/0/0/fg ... _win68.zip

meanwhile, I upgraded every single one of my MK recordings a while back with Alphamame compliant versions

so This requires a block

Kelly

Blost · Post by **Blost** » Mon Jun 23, 2003 6:12 am

Missed this one :

http://marp.retrogames.com/index.cgi?mo ... 00&tourn=0

http://marp.retrogames.com/inp/d/3/c/wo ... _win66.zip

Mickey · Post by **Mickey** » Tue Jun 24, 2003 10:55 am

Mr. Kelly R. Flewin · Post by **Mr. Kelly R. Flewin** » Wed Jun 25, 2003 3:27 am

sigh...

http://marp.retrogames.com/index.cgi?mo ... 00&tourn=0

http://marp.retrogames.com/inp/2/b/4/fg ... _win68.zip

I am really feeling like shit for this... the guy's got some serious talent.. but isn't using Alphamame... almost like everyone in the class is reading the new Harry Potter book and he's reading Cat In The Hat... well alright.. piss poor analogy.. so sue me.. butcha get what I mean...

Kelly

LN2 · Post by **LN2** » Wed Jun 25, 2003 2:45 pm

Instead of just noting it here in the forums....E-MAIL the guy and let him know what's going on so he doesn't "waste" more time playing with regular mame.

He does show his e-mail here at MARP.

Mr. Kelly R. Flewin · Post by **Mr. Kelly R. Flewin** » Wed Jun 25, 2003 3:15 pm

LN2 wrote:Instead of just noting it here in the forums....E-MAIL the guy and let him know what's going on so he doesn't "waste" more time playing with regular mame.

He does show his e-mail here at MARP.

Already been done, with no reply, to quite frankly, no big surprise.

Kelly

Chad · Post by **Chad** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 2:48 am

yeah i've blocked sakais twice and no response, he must only be able to read kanji. there's always a third time, oh it would be nice to have separated areas where blocking wouldn't be needed...

MDenham · Post by **MDenham** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 4:29 am

Mmm... can we just have the blocking work as "if there's an Alphamame recording on this game, all non-AM recordings get 0LB points, but show up with the correct scores", or would that require too much work?

LN2 · Post by **LN2** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 5:33 am

given the LB pts are automatically set based on the score...that's why blocking currently involves manual adjustment of the score so it's 1 point below the lowest alphamame score.

I agree though it would be nice if the score could still show etc. but just exclude that one from LB point calculations.

...hmmm....perhaps it could be treated like the K3 event etc. where you have a separate asterisk in front so it gets no points...although currently that would result in the score being listed separately from the normal game....but at least it would still show the actual score...and assign 0 LB pts. Plus, you wouldn't have to worry about readjusting blocked scores or LB points if alphamame scores that are doing the blocking are improved.

Post by **mahlemiut** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 5:40 am

Haven't I already suggested something similar, or was I dreaming it?

The TJT · Post by **The TJT** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:35 am

Yes, blocked score should not take number 1 spot at a game, even with 0 lb points. But question arises: Do we want everyone to use alphamame or not, and why? Do we use alphamame just because of leaderboard points?

Lb points are a little bit trivial imo, really do not tell much about playing skills

(Elitistic remark: Give first place 15 points, second place 2 points, third 1 point)
The Important thing is to have massive record on THAT game

...Including all the clones too!

TJT (Who still likes 3rd ass from the right)

diabolik · Post by **diabolik** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 1:08 pm

The TJT wrote:Lb points are a little bit trivial imo, really do not tell much about playing skills (Elitistic remark: Give first place 15 points, second place 2 points, third 1 point)

I don't really care too much about leaderboard points either, but I like your suggestion

Or maybe go back to the old 10-3-1 system. I think this would encourage some people to upload even better inps (quality over quantity). Maybe then the leaderboard would mean a little more. I've never really liked this "new" percentage scoring method, it's much too forgiving IMO.

Just ban everything except AlphaMAME --> no need for fancy blocking scripts --> problems solved!

Buttermaker · Post by **Buttermaker** » Thu Jun 26, 2003 1:23 pm

I agree. AlphaMAME needs to be mandatory and the leader board should go back to 10-3-1.

With the exception of games that only work on old versions of course.