accept online multi wrs?

milagros · Post by **milagros** » 16 Feb 2006, 14:15

should be multi wrs driven online accepted or we need some new table?
I made it detectable, so that's not a problem
ez move to Polls..

sierra · Post by **sierra** » 16 Feb 2006, 14:18

ez should be allowed

The_BoneLESS · Post by **The_BoneLESS** » 16 Feb 2006, 14:37

why not ?

zworqy · Post by **zworqy** » 16 Feb 2006, 15:04

Of course, it's not like it's easier online.

Chanoo · Post by **Chanoo** » 16 Feb 2006, 15:13

Lukazz · Post by **Lukazz** » 16 Feb 2006, 16:10

what would be the sense of it if not?

Xiphias · Post by **Xiphias** » 16 Feb 2006, 16:16

yes of course...

niN · Post by **niN** » 16 Feb 2006, 17:37

zworqy wrote:Of course, it's not like it's easier online.

erm, if I may correct you, it is a bit easier couse now both players have got their own keyboard

. Ez accept multi wr that are driven online

milagros · Post by **milagros** » 16 Feb 2006, 18:28

i've heard there are already some online wrzz..

Post by **SveinR** » 16 Feb 2006, 20:14

I guess I'm some kind of boss for this decision.

Multi WRs have already been driven on two screens with two keyboards, and I don't really see what the difference would be here, except that the two players would be several miles apart from each other. Plus, the multi part of the scene needs a reinvention, as it is pretty dead as of now.

OtorK · Post by **OtorK** » 17 Feb 2006, 08:31

SveinR wrote:Multi WRs have already been driven on two screens with two keyboards

heh, we drove our multi wr with one screen and one very laggy keyboard

Ramone · Post by **Ramone** » 17 Feb 2006, 09:29

[quote="SveinR"Multi WRs have already been driven on two screens with two keyboards.[/quote]

2 screens? thats cheat.. some records must be way ez then... I need internet... this will be rox revolution! Oh YEAH!

Luther · Post by **Luther** » 17 Feb 2006, 09:48

for those enjoying multiplaying, yea

petsen · Post by **petsen** » 17 Feb 2006, 13:44

a new table should not be made, this should be accepted to the current table as long as mila makes sure some new cheats wont be created undetected

dz · Post by dz » 17 Feb 2006, 14:10

I don't understand why we should vote for something like this?
I haven't seen a single reason that should prevent the records driven this way from being on the normal world record table. If you know one, please tell me.

milagros · Post by **milagros** » 17 Feb 2006, 15:18

dz wrote:I don't understand why we should vote for something like this?
I haven't seen a single reason that should prevent the records driven this way from being on the normal world record table. If you know one, please tell me.

i remember abula was against it because normal multi-playing lost sense

Ramone · Post by **Ramone** » 17 Feb 2006, 15:58

well.. normal elma lost sense when alo came. alo got accepted fast.
normal elma might loose sense but still playing in same room must help (talk irl).
This will speed up multi and make the wrs as good as they should have been long ago. I am sure many new tricks and stuff will be found... as long as this works good for me when I get inet I think its a Great idea.

sierra · Post by **sierra** » 17 Feb 2006, 17:37

4 people have voted against, can they tell their reasons?

Lukazz · Post by **Lukazz** » 17 Feb 2006, 18:32

sierra wrote:4 people have voted against, can they tell their reasons?

their name is t0r and they won't lose the records

berhabdul · Post by **berhabdul** » 17 Feb 2006, 22:31

Should be allowed, of course, but i guess its more and more easier to cheat now

DamRho · Post by **DamRho** » 18 Feb 2006, 01:39

I'm never a potential record breaker - online multiplayer or not - but I see no reason why online records should be banned or put into a new table. It still takes two players to finish the levels, there's the obvious advantage of the keypresses being registered as they should be but I don't see that as cheating or an unfair advantage, it's just as it should be from the start (unfortunately some keyboards prevent it from being so).

I say let them come, I'm dying to see some great MP replays.

Post by **Abula** » 21 Feb 2006, 18:31

I voted No because I like the idea people going to meetings to play.

But after reading your comments I guess I'm YeeS. More fair because less device depented and everybody has (almost) same opportunities. Pretty same as with alovolt back then.

Multi TT list will be crushed at least.

TorInge · Post by **TorInge** » 22 Feb 2006, 00:43

I admit, I was against the idea when I first heard about it. Like Abula said, one of the best parts of meetings is when you're able to play with others you normally can't play with.

Me and Tantal have played multi for a while now. Not recently though, after i moved from town. I've always loved it, some of the old wrs we got even beat the feeling of getting a single wr. We could talk and discuss different styles and routes for hours, even when we weren't playing.

But still, very few people played multi. Guys like Zweq & Juzam gave us a tough challenge, otherwise we would've probably quit. Maybe it didn't seem like a big deal, just "too unofficial". Not much happening in the scene these days, so I'll vote yes. There are still many new things to be found, and it'll be interesting to see what skilled players out there can come up with. That being said, we'll most likely start publishing our multirecs.

And if online multiwrs happens to be allowed, moposite should host the wr table.

Jake · Post by **Jake** » 22 Feb 2006, 01:21

is it tor do teh post?
i donÂ´t even remember did i post to this poll already,nat orka check ;D
imo iz goad to et new multi wrÂ´s by teh new way

John · Post by **John** » 22 Feb 2006, 02:25

eol gives strange tune though.. too hard suspension and no grip imo, hard to do good with that

petsen · Post by **petsen** » 22 Feb 2006, 15:12

TorInge wrote:I admit, I was against the idea when I first heard about it. Like Abula said, one of the best parts of meetings is when you're able to play with others you normally can't play with.

Me and Tantal have played multi for a while now. Not recently though, after i moved from town. I've always loved it, some of the old wrs we got even beat the feeling of getting a single wr. We could talk and discuss different styles and routes for hours, even when we weren't playing.

But still, very few people played multi. Guys like Zweq & Juzam gave us a tough challenge, otherwise we would've probably quit. Maybe it didn't seem like a big deal, just "too unofficial". Not much happening in the scene these days, so I'll vote yes. There are still many new things to be found, and it'll be interesting to see what skilled players out there can come up with. That being said, we'll most likely start publishing our multirecs.

And if online multiwrs happens to be allowed, moposite should host the wr table.

fine speach.. I agree and Iam looking forward to the recs... but why should moposite have the multi site.. ??

1 They already have so much work which results in
2 that they rarely update on time (at least records

)
3 sveinr is doing a great job already and the site is nice an filled with nostalgia

teajay · Post by **teajay** » 22 Feb 2006, 16:45

What about the table hosted on the moposite, being updated by Svein?
More people will find out about the multi wr table then.

petsen · Post by **petsen** » 22 Feb 2006, 18:09

to those who it concerns they know where to find the site.. so no more attention to the multi site due to that..

Raven · Post by **Raven** » 22 Feb 2006, 19:18

and there would be somekind of thing where you can see, that is it driven with eol or nat?

Crazy · Post by **Crazy** » 22 Feb 2006, 19:50

Raven wrote:and there would be somekind of thing where you can see, that is it driven with eol or nat?

milagros wrote:should be multi wrs driven online accepted or we need some new table?
I made it detectable, so that's not a problem
ez move to Polls..

edit: oh

teajay · Post by **teajay** » 22 Feb 2006, 22:18

Crazy, raven asked if it should be mentioned wether a WR is driven with EOL or not.

milagros · Post by **milagros** » 1 Mar 2006, 10:07

John wrote:eol gives strange tune though.. too hard suspension and no grip imo, hard to do good with that

the tune should be exactly same as master have when connection is ok(that means in LAN)
I've tried it yesterday for the first time and it was too laggy to tell something about tunning:)
anyway there are already some wrs driven with eol so maybe it's not that hard

John · Post by **John** » 1 Mar 2006, 10:55

maby those wrs didnt need THAT good grip and that shit
at least was impsy do one trick when played with juzam, then did it immdiatly alone and immediatley with Johan (we played old multi, same comp)

milagros · Post by **milagros** » 1 Mar 2006, 11:40

hmm, after some more thinking about it I think that vsync off is when both players have set it and it should work better with off than on

milagros · Post by **milagros** » 7 Mar 2006, 13:51

i still don't see any online wr in the table (not sent or no update yet?)

accept online multi wrs?

Should online WRs be accepted?

accept online multi wrs?

definitly