Limit between bounces and bugs

General discussion about the games and the scene.

Moderator: Moporators

Post Reply
Ikop
Kuski
Posts: 54
Joined: 18 Sep 2002, 23:30

Limit between bounces and bugs

Post by Ikop » 9 Jul 2003, 22:03

now, when i saw clouds new world record on enigma on the world record table( 19.62).
i have to say it,
cloud is one of the best players ever,
but i dont know how can you do such good time without small bug bounce.
just look at ciph record (20.01 i think) once that rec was a mopo rec, he used in that rec a bug bounce but the replay was accepted .
or look at micks replay (19.76) it also looks like bug.

where is the limit between bug bonce and noraml bounce? what is the diffrense between normal bounce and very small bug bounce? i dont know if anybody can answer that.
we must define a clear limit between bounces and bugs .

MopoGirl
Kuski
Posts: 632
Joined: 25 Aug 2002, 21:26
Location: Kiriat Tivon, Israel
Contact:

Re: The problem of enigma

Post by MopoGirl » 9 Jul 2003, 22:52

Ikop wrote:we must define a clear limit between bounces and bugs .
what for?

onlainari
Kuski
Posts: 824
Joined: 19 May 2002, 19:13

Post by onlainari » 9 Jul 2003, 22:54

yeps, have you guys pondered that nostra's 19.4x on enigma. Why do you choose to call it a bug bounce or why don't you? Would that be a WR if nost wasnt banned ?

User avatar
Karlis
Höylä Optimus
Posts: 1081
Joined: 26 Jun 2002, 09:11
Location: Hellsinki

Post by Karlis » 10 Jul 2003, 06:12

well in that rec there's clearly so called "kick-bounce", first seen on mengerle's h00ked rec long time ago
Tomorrow's Lucky Run Solutions Today
Flowertouching Men
Image

Flyrre
Kuski
Posts: 382
Joined: 26 Nov 2002, 20:33
Location: Malmberget / Sweden
Contact:

Post by Flyrre » 10 Jul 2003, 13:16

Karlis wrote:well in that rec there's clearly so called "kick-bounce", first seen on mengerle's h00ked rec long time ago
Upload some rec showing this :D
[GF] ;)

2fast
Kuski
Posts: 866
Joined: 2 Apr 2003, 08:21
Location: Estonia

Post by 2fast » 10 Jul 2003, 13:30


User avatar
Abula
Moposite admin
Posts: 4396
Joined: 16 May 2002, 23:00
Team: FM
Location: Helsinki
Contact:

Post by Abula » 10 Jul 2003, 14:21

Seems it's me and px who decides if the bounce is legal or not untill we have a better solution.
40:02,71 (104.) | WCup4: 8. | 3x WR | 3x GAA | 9x FEM | KOM | Article | UPLOAD

Mick
Kuski
Posts: 313
Joined: 19 May 2002, 14:47
Location: melbourne
Contact:

Post by Mick » 10 Jul 2003, 17:08

"cloud is one of the best players ever"

no offence to cloud (and i am sure he thinks this as well) but he is not one of the best players ever.

anyway. you can normally see the different between bug bounces and normal bounces. my bounce was quite fast but nothing compared to a bug bounce. many people have got bounces like mine. just check stini's rec and my 20,29, and ciphs 20,02 and ........ blah. you can't call them bug because everyone gets them.

i am not saying this because i got a good time on enigma, i dont really care because that was a fluke anyway. but i think there is a definite difference between a normal bounce and a bug bounce.
team EM - why not ok?

MagnusB
Kuski
Posts: 1472
Joined: 12 Nov 2002, 19:43
Location: INTERNET

Post by MagnusB » 10 Jul 2003, 20:05

Mick wrote:"cloud is one of the best players ever"

no offence to cloud (and i am sure he thinks this as well) but he is not one of the best players ever.
If being in the top5 in the totals list and taking 4 wrs in one table doesn't make you one of the best players ever, what does?

About the bounces, it's obviously impossible to determine an exact border between bugs and bounces, each rec has to be viewed individually. Since suspicious bounces are very rare it offers little extra work for whoever accepts the recs.

Mick
Kuski
Posts: 313
Joined: 19 May 2002, 14:47
Location: melbourne
Contact:

Post by Mick » 11 Jul 2003, 05:41

i was third in total time (or maybe even second?) at one stage. that doesn't make me one of the best players ever. no way near. there is no doubt he is one of the best at the moment, but not ever.
team EM - why not ok?

Flyrre
Kuski
Posts: 382
Joined: 26 Nov 2002, 20:33
Location: Malmberget / Sweden
Contact:

Post by Flyrre » 11 Jul 2003, 09:52

Mick wrote:i was third in total time (or maybe even second?) at one stage. that doesn't make me one of the best players ever. no way near. there is no doubt he is one of the best at the moment, but not ever.
Yeah, you got a point there! IMO the best player ever in across / Elma History is Champi0n! Damn I was impressed when I first saw his WR style on Ziggy in across :wink:
[GF] ;)

User avatar
MP
Hat Tricker²
Posts: 528
Joined: 21 May 2002, 14:07
Location: Vaasa, FIN
Contact:

.

Post by MP » 11 Jul 2003, 10:46

wow I just love so much micks attitude, kisses :*

..hmm now must find something on topic ...thinking .....thinking ...
.. .. oh ye;
I had trouble with this "bug bounce limit" in wcup11. There in the beginnning I sometimes got these so called kick bounces but they were too fast so I couldn't handle the bike hehe. Once I almost finished with really good bounce (died 1pixel from the flower) and after that I wondered would it have been accepted.
Position in wc | total time | site | hi

User avatar
Abula
Moposite admin
Posts: 4396
Joined: 16 May 2002, 23:00
Team: FM
Location: Helsinki
Contact:

Post by Abula » 11 Jul 2003, 11:26

Yes, if you get some bounce many times (mm, over 3..?) it should be accepted I think.
40:02,71 (104.) | WCup4: 8. | 3x WR | 3x GAA | 9x FEM | KOM | Article | UPLOAD

teajay
Donator duck
Posts: 10041
Joined: 3 Apr 2003, 17:53

Post by teajay » 7 Jan 2005, 18:12

OK, just in reply of milagros in replay sharing thread:

With your explaining you say that a bounce is not the usual bouncy effect you get when wheel is pressured, but it is a different thing, and a bug. (A numerical one). Did I got that right?

Then I am completely wrong about what I thought how I understood the physics of this game. Shit. :wink:

Phillip
Kuski
Posts: 95
Joined: 12 Sep 2002, 14:59

Post by Phillip » 7 Jan 2005, 18:33

Continuing the discussion from the replays sharing thread:
(on "unstable" differential equations)

I have seen the same kind of numerical effect in a small gravity program I created. When two objects get close, the force between them gets very large. In my simulator I used a fininte time step, and assumed that the force was constant in this time interval (this usually is a good approximation). However, when objects are close, the approximation is very bad (the force is large and varies very much with time), and some times the objects shoot out with enormous speed :lol:

I don't think every bounce that can be done more than 3 times should be allowed, controlling conservation of energy is at least one way of distinguishing between "legal" and "illegal" bounces. (You would have to include the work don by the wheel + the energy gained from volting)

My suggestion is:
1. Energy after bounce must be less than:
energy before bounce + work done by wheel + energy from volting
2. No strange wheel movement (wheel jumping to a different part of the screen), just clean moves

There could be problems with this suggestion that I don't know about, of course. But it doesn't seem too hard to do.
Last edited by Phillip on 7 Jan 2005, 20:41, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
8-ball
39mins club
Posts: 4479
Joined: 9 May 2003, 13:30
Team: BAP
Location: Valmiera, Latvia

Post by 8-ball » 7 Jan 2005, 18:46

Try Gravity game at homokaasu.org and ez get it
39:37,91

User avatar
milagros
Cheatless
Posts: 4479
Joined: 19 May 2002, 17:05

Post by milagros » 7 Jan 2005, 19:04

balazs should have used variable time-step (like for example matlab is using)
that would be harder to program and won't fix this problem only makes is less probable
[carebox]

Phillip
Kuski
Posts: 95
Joined: 12 Sep 2002, 14:59

Post by Phillip » 7 Jan 2005, 20:51

I wasn't trying to fix the problem, I just tried to explain it and then suggest a way to decide which bounces should be legal.

I like bouncing, Elma wouldn't be the same without it :)

Post Reply