https://www.tus-wa.com/leagues/game-139969/
final shot of dt at 01:00:24
someone told me nade didnt move for 0.26 seconds and theres just a sprite change in last frame.
im rather interested in the judgement because it was kinda close as possible. no need to delete game if its a sitter.
That's a sitter to me. If you'd like, you can void your 1 hour game :)
Rules for TuS state 0.25s for it to be a sitter, however this grenade stops moving at 0.24, so it's a valid shot.
If you press "S" during replay just as the grenade goes over the head of PeJa or Kyho, can't remember who it is lol... And then keep pressing S until it gets to 0.26.
Press S one more time, and you will see that the grenade moves from 0.26-0.24.
So yeah, it's allowed I am afraid, besides, I wouldn't say this is really a lame shot, it was a good bounceback that unfortunately got caught on that small part.
MI - Did you even watch the replay? Rules state it is not a sitter.
The shot was good, dunno why Peja was so frustrated by it, just bl with that sticky nade :)
Quote from: beer on August 04, 2009, 07:04 PM
bng sucks
Sprite change is not a movement, Komo. Its like you had a rule to stop moving your worm, and then there was animation of him making some expresion or whatever even if you stand still at this point. Ofc it was unlucky sticker, but you may expect it sitting when throwing almost flat 4s nade with min bounce, thats the part i dont like. You get sitters most often coz of that.
How is it not movement? It moved... It clearly moved clockwise... Which means it was still in motion and settling so to speak.
Worms are different from weapons, weapons don't have arms and faces, they don't yawn or rub their chin... At least grenades and bazookas.
If a grenade has infinite fuse, and it's clearly not moving, it doesn't start doing things on it's own like the worms do.
Unless I am misunderstanding what you are saying, or this last movement where the grenade turns clockwise doesn't count for some reason, the grenade clearly moves from 0.26 - 0.24.
What i mean is its stuck in 1 place, no matter if its making circles.
on the strength of w:a physics the nade is rolling if it have active vertical or horizontal speed. I didnt watch the replay but I guess grenade got stuck with pretty high speed variable. Its sounds hilarious but there is difference between real world and worms physics. On reality if grenade will get on tight place without a chance to move it will loose all it force at the next moment, meanwhile on W:A nade will keep bouncing till it loose all the speed even when it looks like it stay on the same place.
On sitter if you hack the replay and remove all terrain grenade will just fall down because of gravity.
But here it will probably fly off to the one of the sides because of it hspeed
Yes I can see that it's stuck.
- Sitters are not allowed. (Sitters are grenades that sit for 1/4 second or longer). The penalty for a sitter is a Grenade or Bazooka to and from yourself in an attempt to cause the same damage you previously inflicted.
So I guess this means when the grenade is locked in position, and not when the grenade stops moving.
If that's the case then maybe it's a sitter, as it locks into place at 0.26.
But we could also argue, using the literal term of the word "sit":
sit:
1.
to rest with the body supported by the buttocks or thighs; be seated.
2.
to be located or situated: The house sits well up on the slope.
3.
to rest or lie (usually followed by on or upon ): An aura of greatness sits easily upon him.
4.
to place oneself in position for an artist, photographer, etc.; pose: to sit for a portrait.
5.
to remain quiet or inactive: They let the matter sit.
I mean, the grenade is upside down so it isn't sitting(plus the fact nades don't have an ass), we can't use the 2nd definition, the 3rd definition isn't very accurate either, or the 4th really, and if we use the 5th, then the fact the grenade was still moving clockwise means it was still active...
We would have to change the definition of the sitter rule to define something like "Once the grenade is locked into position (when it stops moving, up, down, left, right, diagonal), rotation of the grenade sprite is not included."
But I feel like the rule should be based on complete movement, because as you notice, from 0.32 - 0.30 it moves 1 pixel from right to left, from 0.30 - 0.28 it stays still and it doesn't move at all, weird, then from 0.28 - 0.26 it moves 1 pixel from left to right, and finally from 0.26 - 0.24 it rotates I guess 1 movement clockwise...
Even using the term "sit" I still think this is a valid shot... The grenade is in the process of "sitting down" until 0.24s. It still hasn't officially "locked into place" until 0.24s. If we were timing this professionally I reckon the timing would start on 0.24.
I mean, how do you think of someone sitting in a chair? Back leaned forward, head down, arms holding onto arms of the chair? Or already settled down calm and comfortable? Would you start timing someone sitting in a chair from the very second their ass touches the chair, or actually sit up straight?
I really don't think this is fair to call this a sitter, the rule isn't accurate enough in my opinion to judge the decision purely on the wording of the rules, I don't see either team playing "lame" at any point in the game, this was a good shot at the end, you can clearly see the grenade is still moving until 0.24, to me he was just trying to throw a grenade to take around 20-30 damage, and this type of shot is usually perfect for this...
Of course this is not my choice, I guess i've went into ridiculous detail here, but i've always been under the assumption a sitter is when the grenade stops moving, this includes rotation... And these guys played good enough they made the right shot at the right time.
I did not watch the replay [or the game, even though i was there)
If monkey island says its void, then void it.. Thanks for your input komo, if what you say is true,.and you have no reason to make it up (regarding replay facts) i agree with you. Nade stops when sprite stops.. Its the only fair way to accurately determine a sitter every time.
But if monkey island thinks otherwise, void it.
I know that was not your intention peeja, but we don'twant wins like this.
and i dont want games void for an accident, like komo said the shot was fine, just bl it got stuck. really the main reason i posted is because this stuff is weird and somehow not fully covered by the current rules.
Well I downloaded replay today. Void isn't needed there imo. Nade could bounce on right or left after Sebha shot, just a bl it sitted right in the perfect place.
I don't know about you guys but that's a perfect sitter to me. The TUS rule with that 0.25sec thing (there isn't even odd-numbered steps in W:A because of 50fps) is strange anyway, if it doesn't move it's a sitter.
Quote from: Komito on March 02, 2013, 10:33 AM"I mean, how do you think of someone sitting in a chair? Back leaned forward, head down, arms holding onto arms of the chair? Or already settled down calm and comfortable? Would you start timing someone sitting in a chair from the very second their ass touches the chair, or actually sit up straight?"
Hahaha, nice comparision Komo! I was trying to come to a conclusion over this game as well, but it was difficult. Granade still has a movement from 0.26 to 0.24. But I think you have to look on the overall picture. They had already played this game for 1 hour (duh!), and sebha didn't intend to do a sitter on purpose. At the same time throwing a 4 sec nade without any lg or maxbounce in that angle is a bit risky...
Does the rules regaring sitter need to be more specific? I dunno, we rarely see special cases like this one. Usually we can use common sense to solve it I guess
Quote from: darKz on March 02, 2013, 11:31 AM
I don't know about you guys but that's a perfect sitter to me. The TUS rule with that 0.25sec thing (there isn't even odd-numbered steps in W:A because of 50fps) is strange anyway, if it doesn't move it's a sitter.
Ok so you say, if it doesn't move it's a sitter, then this isn't a sitter because it is still moving until 0.24s.
I'm saying the 0.25 sec rule is stupid and should be removed. It's a sitter in my book no matter how I look at it.
1 thing is true, bng cant be fixed so we see no further complains or whines xd
Quote from: darKz on March 02, 2013, 11:38 AM
I'm saying the 0.25 sec rule is stupid and should be removed. It's a sitter in my book no matter how I look at it.
Ok fair enough, but, would you allow it as it was a fair and honest shot?
havn't watched this, but as the almighty huskov I will give my verdict if void or not, soon =)
Quote from: darKz on March 02, 2013, 11:38 AM
I'm saying the 0.25 sec rule is stupid and should be removed. It's a sitter in my book no matter how I look at it.
Either the whole rule should be removed or keep it as it is and add the definition of a sitter.
Might as well go all the way and make it NRBnG. But:
The original BnG rule was 1/4 second. I don't know how that got changed to 0.25 seconds? It was not a shot intended to be a sitter, the sitter just happened. 0.24 is a sitter to me. (It's rounded 1/4 second)
Yes the rules need to be changed for this.
Edit: just checked, the rule still states 1/4 seconds. Where did 0.25 come from then?
Quote from: darKz on March 02, 2013, 01:11 PM
Might as well go all the way and make it NRBnG. But:
ae m8 if u rly want to make a difference let's host cups with these scheme variations? all I see is talk but no action )=
Quote from: MonkeyIsland on March 02, 2013, 01:36 PM
The original BnG rule was 1/4 second. I don't know how that got changed to 0.25 seconds? It was not a shot intended to be a sitter, the sitter just happened. 0.24 is a sitter to me. (It's rounded 1/4 second)
Yes the rules need to be changed for this.
Edit: just checked, the rule still states 1/4 seconds. Where did 0.25 come from then?
Lol MI, what drug did you take? 1/4 and 0.25 is the same number :) Also since when is 0.24 rounded 1/4? The opposite is true, but this isn't a reversible function :D I think it's perfect that 0.25 isn't actually showing up in the frames. You check if the last movement/position change (this needs to be declared) happened until 0.26. If not, then it's not a sitter, because the last movement/position change will last at least until 0.24. No borderline cases.
Yeah you will have to change the number from 0.25 to 0.24 or 0.26 or something else...
When did "host cups with the scheme" become the new "it's not gonna happen anyway"? :P
Yeah, Prank is right, 0.25 is perfect this way lol.
I read it like you said summin else :D
Quote from: Prankster on March 02, 2013, 02:16 PM
Lol MI, what drug did you take? 1/4 and 0.25 is the same number :) Also since when is 0.24 rounded 1/4? The opposite is true, but this isn't a reversible function :D I think it's perfect that 0.25 isn't actually showing up in the frames. You check if the last movement/position change (this needs to be declared) happened until 0.26. If not, then it's not a sitter, because the last movement/position change will last at least until 0.24. No borderline cases.
1/4 and 0.25 are the same. To me 0.25 sounds an exact number while "1/4 second" indicates "about".
0.24 is rounded 0.25, if you look at it 50 frames per second. We're talking W:A world not pure mathematics.
If I have to draw a line, I'd choose 0.24 as sitter line, not 0.26 (0.26 being a bit higher than 1/4)
I don't know where you learnt that 1/4 indicates "about", but in school I was taught 1/2 1/4 1/8 1/16 etc are true values, if you want it to indicate "about" then you would have to say something like, "a sitter is a grenade that sits for roughly 1/4 of a second" but then this would cause even more arguements...
Quote from: MonkeyIsland on March 02, 2013, 03:48 PM
Quote from: Prankster on March 02, 2013, 02:16 PM
Lol MI, what drug did you take? 1/4 and 0.25 is the same number :) Also since when is 0.24 rounded 1/4? The opposite is true, but this isn't a reversible function :D I think it's perfect that 0.25 isn't actually showing up in the frames. You check if the last movement/position change (this needs to be declared) happened until 0.26. If not, then it's not a sitter, because the last movement/position change will last at least until 0.24. No borderline cases.
1/4 and 0.25 are the same. To me 0.25 sounds an exact number while "1/4 second" indicates "about".
0.24 is rounded 0.25, if you look at it 50 frames per second. We're talking W:A world not pure mathematics.
If I have to draw a line, I'd choose 0.24 as sitter line, not 0.26 (0.26 being a bit higher than 1/4)
Technically, everything constructed on a computer is pure mathematics. ;)*
0.25 = 12,5 frames, which you round to 13, not 12, so it would mean 0.26 actually, not 0.24. But anyway, 0.25 or 1/4 is perfect (as a number for this purpose), read my previous post.
*I mean that it can be described with pure mathematics.
"Host cups less talk", what has hosting cups changed in Classic really other than amount of girder in T17, and there was no need for cup for that change, as far as I rememeber.
Quote from: Free on March 02, 2013, 06:27 PM
"Host cups less talk", what has hosting cups changed in Classic really other than amount of girder in T17, and there was no need for cup for that change, as far as I rememeber.
how else r u going to get people to try ur new scheme then?
u host a cup with ur new scheme idea, ppl like it. maybe 1 season in trl, ppl like it some more. maybe enough players like it enough for it to make changes for bng in classic
Quote from: Husk on March 04, 2013, 08:02 AM
Quote from: Free on March 02, 2013, 06:27 PM
"Host cups less talk", what has hosting cups changed in Classic really other than amount of girder in T17, and there was no need for cup for that change, as far as I rememeber.
how else r u going to get people to try ur new scheme then?
u host a cup with ur new scheme idea, ppl like it. maybe 1 season in trl, ppl like it some more. maybe enough players like it enough for it to make changes for bng in classic
You replace it just like that. Sometimes there are logical arguments/changes, while asking the people just end up in pointless, biased flamewars.
And actually, you should host a cup with the current official scheme too, at the same time to be fair. I just doubt 1.: there are enough people who give enough shit to play all of these cups; 2.: it's the best solution. Democracy isn't always the answer. *
If you want to change something like this, just change it, wait for a few months and check how people's attitude develop.
*I mean this is democracy as well, the point is the form. A longitudinal study gives much better image in this case, than a sectional.
How 0.24 or 0.26 really matters ? Are you guys willing to invent a new way to notch so it sit exactly 0.24 ?
It is pretty clear that the way MI wrote the rule was to explain roughly that a sitter is a nade that does not move for a small amount of time which could be avoided.
Yes, if you take the rules by the words it is exactly 0.25 but isn't this league supposed to be for mature people that can sort things by themself and figure out that 0.24, 0.25 in this specific case shows it was a sitter ?
QuoteSitters are grenades that sit for...
Don't confuse "to sit" with "to move". Tha nade was moving sitted on a spot. A dog can be sitted in a place, and of course he can be moving his eyes, tail, head, but he's sitted. That nades was sitted, rolling/moving in a spot.
Cow.
Quote from: zippeurfou on March 04, 2013, 06:12 PM
How 0.24 or 0.26 really matters ? Are you guys willing to invent a new way to notch so it sit exactly 0.24 ?
You are a little bit of paranoid, aren't ya?
Quote
It is pretty clear that the way MI wrote the rule was to explain roughly that a sitter is a nade that does not move for a small amount of time which could be avoided.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but 1/4 second is a very exact period of time AFAIK.
Quote
Yes, if you take the rules by the words it is exactly 0.25 but isn't this league supposed to be for mature people that can sort things by themself and figure out that 0.24, 0.25 in this specific case shows it was a sitter ?
Sure. And who are those mature people? How would those mature people decide consequently, without a clear and precise consensus?
Every single "sitting amount" can happen from 0.02 to 5.00. If you want to keep that rule, you have to draw a line that doesn't depend on someone's subjective opinion.
Aren't we wanna get more people into playing W:A and TUS? The more they are, the greater the diversity grows, the more precise rules you'll need.
Twyrfher has a point, btw.
We dont need more rules, we need less of them. It was already brought up somewhere that sitter (or a special nade motion if it was up to me, just before it sits) should just dissapear causing no damage. But that has to wait obviously xd
Quote from: Twyrfher on March 04, 2013, 07:06 PM
QuoteSitters are grenades that sit for...
Don't confuse "to sit" with "to move". Tha nade was moving sitted on a spot. A dog can be sitted in a place, and of course he can be moving his eyes, tail, head, but he's sitted. That nades was sitted, rolling/moving in a spot.
Cow.
Yes, you're right imo :).
@Prank: You seems to like to quote sentence by sentence posts so I'm going to do the same :D
Quote from: Prankster on March 04, 2013, 11:05 PM
Quote from: zippeurfou on March 04, 2013, 06:12 PM
How 0.24 or 0.26 really matters ? Are you guys willing to invent a new way to notch so it sit exactly 0.24 ?
You are a little bit of paranoid, aren't ya?
Don't get me wrong, I thought it was quite obvious I was ironic about it to prove the fact it doesn't matter 0.24 0.26 or 0.2456778889994334456778
Quote from: Prankster on March 04, 2013, 11:05 PM
Quote
It is pretty clear that the way MI wrote the rule was to explain roughly that a sitter is a nade that does not move for a small amount of time which could be avoided.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but 1/4 second is a very exact period of time AFAIK.
Thanks for the math doc.
Quote from: Prankster on March 04, 2013, 11:05 PM
Quote
Yes, if you take the rules by the words it is exactly 0.25 but isn't this league supposed to be for mature people that can sort things by themself and figure out that 0.24, 0.25 in this specific case shows it was a sitter ?
Sure. And who are those mature people? How would those mature people decide consequently, without a clear and precise consensus?
How were you playing bng before there was tus ? How were you playing bng in fb/xtc/wl... ?
Was there much more complaint ? not really. Was people crying because of 0.01 sec ?
Who are those mature people you ask me ? Well, everyone that does not need a rule to tell them how to walk in life. How to decide with a precise consensus ? Use your brain. Analyse the situation, ask yourself the good question. Could he have hit with a nade with less second ? Would this shoot be lamer than the one he attempted? What were the chance with the shoot he attempted to commit a sitter ? Would I have done the same ? Does it really affect the game ?
You know that's not so hard to try to be fair and not only rely on rules.
Quote from: Prankster on March 04, 2013, 11:05 PM
Every single "sitting amount" can happen from 0.02 to 5.00. If you want to keep that rule, you have to draw a line that doesn't depend on someone's subjective opinion.
I also disagree on this one. The idea of these rules is to be able to play this game in a fair and competitive way because some people would be very cheap if there weren't these rules. If you can manage to play fair and competitive but your not following by the letter these rules (ex: someone did a sitter of 0.26 but you allow him to go on because you know there was no other way of attacking and that was the best he could have done and hell it was a ns !). Does it really matter ? It reminds me a perfect example of how rules can be good but also bad against some "cheap" players. I played a bng long time ago after a very long break. I think it was a clanner with peja. The game was very very tight and we were both on each side of the map and my opponent had a very good hide. The only way I could hit him was to launch a 5 sec grenade (min bounce) which had to bounce on a very specific (small) part of the map to allow a bounce and explode without touching the floor. Well it was a very hard and skilled shoot to do. I did it and since both worms was at 20 it ended up the game. The funny part is that I asked peja if it was allowed and by a misunderstanding he said yes. Anyways, I couldn't have hit otherwise and it was just a matter of waiting him to kill me. Guess what happened, even if my shot was very nice they didn't even argue and said ok cow we report. I didn't complaint because I was the one breaking the rule but let me ask you, as a b2b player that enjoy nice and skilled shot do you think it is normal ? Isn't bng about skills with bazooka and grenade and wasn't it a damn nice shot ? That's all the paradox about having too much, too strick rules. If you ask me, people should more think about the meaning of the rule than the rule itself.
Quote from: Prankster on March 04, 2013, 11:05 PM
Aren't we wanna get more people into playing W:A and TUS? The more they are, the greater the diversity grows, the more precise rules you'll need.
More rule=more complicated for a new comer.
Don't you think that the actual amount of rules already scare new comers ?
It is a game, if the game rules are too complex I'll just play another game.
edit: take that in your face komo ! xD
Quote from: Twyrfher on March 04, 2013, 07:06 PM
QuoteSitters are grenades that sit for...
Don't confuse "to sit" with "to move". Tha nade was moving sitted on a spot. A dog can be sitted in a place, and of course he can be moving his eyes, tail, head, but he's sitted. That nades was sitted, rolling/moving in a spot.
Cow.
I already said the grenade was not sitting, people don't sit upside down, grenades don't either. And it wasn't resting because it was still moving.
I copied and pasted exact dictionary definitions of the word "sit" and if anything, using the dictionary terms it proves it actually was not a sitter.
Edit: Lol zipp, nice post :)
Quote from: Prankster on March 04, 2013, 05:39 PM
Quote from: Husk on March 04, 2013, 08:02 AM
Quote from: Free on March 02, 2013, 06:27 PM
"Host cups less talk", what has hosting cups changed in Classic really other than amount of girder in T17, and there was no need for cup for that change, as far as I rememeber.
how else r u going to get people to try ur new scheme then?
u host a cup with ur new scheme idea, ppl like it. maybe 1 season in trl, ppl like it some more. maybe enough players like it enough for it to make changes for bng in classic
You replace it just like that. Sometimes there are logical arguments/changes, while asking the people just end up in pointless, biased flamewars.
And actually, you should host a cup with the current official scheme too, at the same time to be fair. I just doubt 1.: there are enough people who give enough shit to play all of these cups; 2.: it's the best solution. Democracy isn't always the answer. *
If you want to change something like this, just change it, wait for a few months and check how people's attitude develop.
*I mean this is democracy as well, the point is the form. A longitudinal study gives much better image in this case, than a sectional.
good luck with that =) when can we expect this change?
Quote from: zippeurfou on March 05, 2013, 03:25 AM
Quote from: Prankster on March 04, 2013, 11:05 PM
Quote
Yes, if you take the rules by the words it is exactly 0.25 but isn't this league supposed to be for mature people that can sort things by themself and figure out that 0.24, 0.25 in this specific case shows it was a sitter ?
Sure. And who are those mature people? How would those mature people decide consequently, without a clear and precise consensus?
How were you playing bng before there was tus ? How were you playing bng in fb/xtc/wl... ?
Was there much more complaint ? not really. Was people crying because of 0.01 sec ?
I don't know anything about previous leagues, but one thing I doubt is that there were more people than now.
More people have more different points of view, more opinions on the same matter, ergo if you have a rule, it should be precise in case to avoid flamewars.
If there were more people, you can forget about what I said.
Oh, and no, I didn't know this league was for only mature people.
Quote from: zippeurfou on March 05, 2013, 03:25 AM
Quote from: Prankster on March 04, 2013, 11:05 PM
Every single "sitting amount" can happen from 0.02 to 5.00. If you want to keep that rule, you have to draw a line that doesn't depend on someone's subjective opinion.
I didn't complaint because I was the one breaking the rule but let me ask you, as a b2b player that enjoy nice and skilled shot do you think it is normal ? Isn't bng about skills with bazooka and grenade and wasn't it a damn nice shot ? That's all the paradox about having too much, too strick rules. If you ask me, people should more think about the meaning of the rule than the rule itself.
I said several times that BnG should have less rules, even in this topic.
But if you want to keep a rule, it should be precise.
Btw, in your story, taking the current rules, your opponents were darksiding.
Quote from: zippeurfou on March 05, 2013, 03:25 AM
Quote from: Prankster on March 04, 2013, 11:05 PM
Aren't we wanna get more people into playing W:A and TUS? The more they are, the greater the diversity grows, the more precise rules you'll need.
More rule=more complicated for a new comer.
Don't you think that the actual amount of rules already scare new comers ?
I said several times that BnG should have less rules, even in this topic.
The expression "more precise rules" means "preciser" rules, not more and precise rules, FYI.
I'll have this with bold here, just in case:
I am against this amount of rules. I'm against loose rules too (in an official league).@Husk: probably never, you know MI.