The True Max & Max Exceptions Debate

[purist]

Here's 5 UV MAX rules we can all live by!

1. Max means killing all the monsters and finding all the secrets that start on the map

2. If this isn't possible then the person that achieves the most sets the precedent for what Max means on that map

3. If it means trebling the length of a demo to kill one extra imp then that demo sucks. .. but it's still max

4. If you plan to dedicate months of your life perfecting a max record on a map that does not kill all the monsters or find all the secrets know what you are getting yourself into and accept there may one day be an asterisk next to your demo time if some douche finds a way to kill that extra zombie man.

5. Some maps suck for some demo categories. Max is not exempt from this. Luckily there are plenty more maps to try and max instead.

[Andrea Rovenski]

I just wanna say I'm not getting 100% on Monster Condo and you can't make me.

[Yousuf Anik]

Same. I'm fine with dcv31 max which has 99% kills :)

[j4rio]

purist said:

Here's 5 UV MAX rules we can all live by!
...

Well, you've just invalidated all e1m8 and pl11 maxes.


Another funny thing to set max rules on - th3 l33t m4p. To get 100% secrets you need to do 4 linedef skips iirc, each for one secret. Two of those linedefs are insta-death triggers.

[Azuruish]

purist said:

1. Max means killing all the monsters and finding all the secrets that start on the map

Except Lost Souls

Cyberdemon531 said:

I just wanna say I'm not getting 100% on Monster Condo and you can't make me.

You can... But if you are super lucky or use Tas Tools.

I hope that mega idea doesn't affect on TNT MAP15? There are really unreal to kill everyone.

[vita]

It's possible with splash damage, at least with -solo-net. Keyboard_Doomer wanted to record it a long time ago... (your MAP01-30 Max will become invalid if he does unless you redo it, jk :P)

[purist]

j4rio said:

Well, you've just invalidated all e1m8 and pl11 maxes.

Wouldn't they fall under rule 2? I was just trying to make the point that maybe some levels just aren't max suitable just as they may not be pacifist or tyson suitable.

[Azuruish]

38_ViTa_38 said:

It's possible with splash damage

I would like to see it if it possible.

[ZeroMaster010]

Cyberdemon531 said:

I just wanna say I'm not getting 100% on Monster Condo and you can't make me.

Too late, I've shown over 20 years after the release of doom 2 that it is actually easy and not lucked based to get 100% secrets on lv27, so now the only real solution is to invalidate all uv max and nm100s d2all runs for doom 2. Of course a solution has been proposed, separat category, I believe the correct category is called uv-speed ;)

Of course I am not being serious, my suggestion is just simply put it in the .txt and people can make up their own mind if it is a complete waste of time to watch a run because it misses an imp that didn't have an obvious way of being killed at the time.

[dew]

purist said:

Wouldn't they fall under rule 2? I was just trying to make the point that maybe some levels just aren't max suitable just as they may not be pacifist or tyson suitable.

Your rules suggest that the person who kills the most monsters in the exit rooms of e1m8, pl11 or p211 gets the record no matter the time. This goes against 20 years of speedrunning, because those monsters are canonically ignored - you aren't meant to kill them by design, you're supposed to be "killed/captured" yourself. It is a luck-based hassle anyways. p211 in particular would become an exercise in futility, because the players would have to compete in who makes the most viles flinch with every bfg shot in order to stave off inevitable death for another second/bfg shot.

The, um, founding fathers of the speedrunning community already knew it was possible to kill all the monsters in e1m8, but they made killing them optional on purpose and it's a good thing. I won't support a policy change on this, however everyone's free to record "true maxes" if they wish, just don't expect a separate category on the wiki/DSDA. It seems far too niche to me. A footnote/asterisk should do, but I suggest something less provocative and insulting to the main category, perhaps "completionist" or something. You don't want a deranged person handing in a demo with 100% items, calling it "the truest max", heh.

Then again, there's an undeniable historic tendency to pull off the "impossible" and obsolete the old thinking. The best example is probably Looper's obscene max of Lutz's Inferno e1m8. Those cybs weren't meant to be killed either, heh. This is why I believe creating new exceptions to the 100% kill rule should be very rare and if someone finds a way how to surpass the old kill count, it should also "disqualify" the older demos in most cases. Relegating them to Other in DSDA tables is probably inevitable unless they're also slower, because putting asterisked comments to them while they still hover above the new record seems awkward.

HOWEVER I believe certain exceptions are important to keep around to keep us sane. A legit max absolutely shouldn't necessitate ridiculous fringe cases like, let's say...

• Out of bounds monsters.
  
• An unguided glide, because a mapper mistagged a pointless 32-units wide alcove.
  
• Catching a secret on a lowering platform before it's eaten by the surrounding sectors - unless reasonably reachable.
  
• Anything requiring skipping linedefs. That's such a nasty hack to put into maxes.
  
• Something stupid like W1 monster closet teleporters that fail in 99% of attempts, because first a manco teleports and then a vile is supposed to join him, but the manco simply isn't fast enough to leave their shared teledest. Unless maybe if the player quickly runs to a faraway corner and performs the entire dance from MJ's Thriller, which may or may not distract the vile from triggering his line.
  
• Fringe cases similar to pl2 map32 where an arena full of monsters gets quickly flooded by IoS spawns and there's no realistic way to clear everything or recognize the "correct" demons to kill.
  

I bet anyone could think of more, but anyone should get the idea from these. Unless those are intentional by design of a crazed mapper bearing a grudge towards humanity, there's no point in shooting our collective foot by being overly pedantical when dealing with the absurd, most out there cases. I haven't put hard-to-reach monsters on the list for a reason though. If there's a way to reach those imps in su10, then yes, that should be the legit record - after it is recorded. The general practice should be (and pretty much already is) to trust people when they say monsters or secrets are impossible to reach until the opposite is proven. Then a new standard is upheld unless "the elders", "the consensus" or "a psychotic mod with a fiery banhammer" declare an exception. :)

Don't take this as the definitive ruling, I like this debate and it actually helps me sharpen my own opinion on the matter. Maybe some other time we can tackle the most dreaded beast of pacifist exceptions!

[Rayziik]

Probably a more proper way to rule the E1M8 and PL11 exit room monsters as 'not-required to kill' would be to say that: 'Any monsters accessible after entering a Sector with "Damage 20% and End Level / Type 11", and that sector being the intended exit of the map, are not required to be killed for a UV-Max or derivative demo.'

The 'intended exit' part is in order to rule out things like Sunder MAP14, where some of the inescapable honeycomb traps are mistakenly given "Damage 20% and End Level / Type 11" instead of the regular "Damage 20% health / Type 16" like it should have been. This is an example of a mapping error exception. (which probably would've been fixed had I_G not *poofed*, RIP mate)

[4shockblast]

Rayzik said:

Probably a more proper way to rule the E1M8 and PL11 exit room monsters as 'not-required to kill' would be to say that: 'Any monsters accessible after entering a Sector with "Damage 20% and End Level / Type 11", and that sector being the intended exit of the map, are not required to be killed for a UV-Max or derivative demo.'

The 'intended exit' part is in order to rule out things like Sunder MAP14, where some of the inescapable honeycomb traps are mistakenly given "Damage 20% and End Level / Type 11" instead of the regular "Damage 20% health / Type 16" like it should have been. This is an example of a mapping error exception. (which probably would've been fixed had I_G not *poofed*, RIP mate)

Still not a rule that can necessarily be applied across all wads; for instance, this wad has a sector type 11 exit that only has one mastermind and you have a BFG to kill it: http://doomedsda.us/wad2448.html. Of course, beyond that, it's always difficult to determine intent. While I never expect anyone to max it non-TAS, iddad.wad from here has several 20% damaging floors, and all of them are level-ending. How can you say if they are or aren't intentional? :)

[Rayziik]

Well, for case one, (E1M8* of 'truetest') that spider mastermind wouldn't be necessary to kill under this rule. Might be easy to kill him I guess, but I can't imagine any scenarios where a demo would be that much more impressive by killing it.

Case two: There's a switch exit in the map. Kinda easy to determine that intent. :P

EDIT: perhaps maybe there should be further clarification: 'If the only way to exit the map is via a Type 11 sector, but you can enter that sector prior to killing all monsters on the map, you can only use the exit once all monsters are dead. If entering the exit at that point otherwise releases other monsters, and the player cannot leave the Type 11 sector, those monsters are exempt for killing.'

[4shockblast]

Rayzik said:

Well, for case one, (E1M7 of 'truetest') that spider mastermind wouldn't be necessary to kill under this rule. Might be easy to kill him I guess, but I can't imagine any scenarios where a demo would be that much more impressive by killing it.

Case two: There's a switch exit in the map. Kinda easy to determine that intent. :P

E1M8, actually. A su10 demo that kills the extra imps isn't more impressive than one that doesn't either. :D There's even soul spheres right before the tele to the exit, so there's no reason to have too little health for the kill.

iddad.wad doesn't just have a switch exit, it also has a Romero. The intended way to exit that map isn't so clear.

Besides, it is not difficult to come up with more contrived cases of a rule like this not working. For example, you could have a map where a secret exit with more monsters is located beyond a sector with type 11, and the intentional route to get to it is finding an invuln or megasphere.

[Rayziik]

su10 max should require those imps to kill anyways, since there are demonstratively simple ways to get to them and kill them. For the 'truetest' map... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I still argue my previous stated rule would work in a vast majority of cases, but if it's really that simple to kill, perhaps we can make a... *gasp* exception.

===

Wow, there's really a Romero Head in there. Freaking 90s mappers man.

Regardless, it's not a monster that is required to kill, nor is it the only way to exit, so I still argue that the switch exit is the intended, and if not intended should be considered on 'max' demos as the "true", exit. It might not be obvious to an FDA player or a casual player, but a speedrunner should have enough map knowledge to determine that that is the logical route requirement to fulfill the 'max' conditions.

For 'Speed' runs OTOH; fuck it, just go for the Type 11 sectors :D

EDIT: ^^^ In regards to that, obviously, the player wouldn't have to use the exit switch for a valid demo, just that there's no justified reason why they can't fulfill 'max' requirements before using one of the other exit methods.

EDIT AGAIN: If a map like the one you suggest were to actually exist, than that method would be the required routing for a 'max' demo, because there's demonstratively a way to get to those monsters AND kill them. My rule would only apply in a case where once entering the Type 11 sector, you cannot leave that sector, and any monsters available up to that point in the run are dead. (E1M8 Doom, PL11, for example :D)

[purist]

dew said:

Your rules suggest that the person who kills the most monsters in the exit rooms of e1m8, pl11 or p211 gets the record no matter the time. This goes against 20 years of speedrunning, because those monsters are canonically ignored

Well... my rules suggest the person who kills the most monsters in the exit rooms of e1m8, pl11 or p211 in the fastest time gets the record... but the point of my list was to provide rules that can be globally applied without the need for subjective exceptions and sub-exceptions - not to defer to awkward examples where the map (good or important as it may otherwise be) is by design not suitable for max runs.

That said, don't take me too seriously. I'm not a speedrunner and these sort of things should be decided by those with most at stake. I wasn't being deliberately disrespectful to speedrunning history - it just triggers some OCD thing in me when rules needed to be rewritten on the fly because the fundemantals aren't exhaustive enough!