The DWIronman League dies to: Mapgame

[an_mutt]

Hey folks, so I have a thing to ask.

 

A number of folks joined me for my stream of this Ironman a couple hours ago, but unfortunately my computer was freezing up like crazy and I finally decided to call it quits part-way through E1M9. After that, I decided to record a demo:

 

Complete in 1:01:21.

 

So what's the dealie, can I write off the fuck up and submit this instead?

[Suitepee]

I call for Alfonzo to throw out an_mutt's "demo", on account that it beats my time by a good hour!

 

Honestly an_mutt had awkward technical problems during his stream (I was there in anticipation of a turret related death!), so perhaps the demo should stand. However, I also ponder that an_mutt could have continued his run from the end of the stream via demo and then spliced them together to make one video?

 

I feel either way that this will set some sort of Ironman precedent based on Alfonzo's decision.....

[Tristan]

Regardless of what the rules say, I feel there would be more of a basis for rejecting runs dogged by technical bullshit if everyone were on level pegging, that is, playing blind. That way if someone takes a second attempt after their computer freezes/blows up/is abducted by aliens, they'd have the advantage of having already seen ahead. This isn't the case though (but that's not to say it couldn't be done for a special session in future!)

[an_mutt]

It is a tricky scenario at this point: I'm hoping that the special circumstances of me having streamed exactly what caused the problem in the first place, and the fact that the demo was recorded immediately afterwards, can allow for it to be counted.

 

I'd hope so, because it would literally mean me being third from top, as opposed to third from bottom.

[dobu gabu maru]

Yeah I don't see the point in punishing you because currently all demo submissions are entirely based on an honor system, so there could have been technical issues there that were scrapped and no one would know but the runner. That said, I think if someone makes it through half of the mapset with technical issues that have been there from the start, it could be seen as a bit of an unfair advantage even if you felt a restart was necessary.

[4shockblast]

On 4/23/2017 at 5:49 PM, Ancalagon said:

dead in map02

Someone needed to up this, so I died on map 1.

mapgame_Ironman_shock.zip

[Ancalagon]

Yey I am not last

[Alfonzo]

I can't wait for the feature-length demo where 4shockblast tries desperately to die and make it look like an accident but ends up surviving the mapset and wasting his valuable time. Worse yet - he wins the challenge! Oh, the humanity!

 

Godspeed, DWIronman League's resident clown car. (DNF)

 

7 hours ago, an_mutt said:

So what's the dealie, can I write off the fuck up and submit this instead?

The current rules stipulate that crashes and lock-ups terminate the run, but I hadn't considered just how complicated the issue of streams would be what with their broken-up vids and so on. It's a tricky question. No one would want to broadcast a botched run when you could just as well gain an unfair advantage in replaying the content off-screen, though...

 

As long as there's some sort of evidence of your computer going bonkers, you can restart. EDIT: Actually, this is a hard one to crack. Give me a bit to think about it; let me hold you in suspense!

Edited April 25, 2017 by Alfonzo : I am a clarification!

[A2Rob]

I lived; 1:27:52

 

 

 

 

[Walter confetti]

I died on e1m5, 30 minutes of gameplay.

Really cool episode, i'll finish it after i played at this ironman...

walt-ironman-mapgame.zip

 

demo was made with prboom 2.5.4, cl 9

[Scotty]

Yay

 

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/138207785

[TMD]

Died on e1m9
about 20 minutes of gameplay, seven minutes of burping afterwards.

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/138298550

 

[Roofi]

I will record my demo after tomorrow . I played this wad a long time ago. In my memories , turrets deal a lot of damage. In any case , I hope I will survive this time. :)

[Bashe]

I meant to hop on this earlier this month, but kept putting it off. Anyway, here's my demo. I actually survived! One SUPER close call though - I thought for sure I was a goner after that. The rest comparatively wasn't as bad. M1-M3 and part of M9 I had played previously, but the rest was blind.

 

mapgame_iron.zip - recorded with PrBoom-plus 2.5.1.4 at complevel 9, as per the rules.

[Suitepee]

So Alfonzo, the verdict on my Ironman rival an_mutt's demo?

[BigDickBzzrak]

Well, this was gay.

Infinitely tall pinky trapped me into an ambush from all sides, died on e1m5 (without secret level). Still way better than I expected, though...

It's a FDA btw.

 

My impressions so far: it's a cool set, but it feels VERY ripped off from UDoom. E1M1's finale, COME ON?

edit: also that turret sound creeped me out when I first heard it, heh.

dwiron_mapgame_bzzrak.zip

Edited April 28, 2017 by bzzrak

[Roofi]

Survived in 1:00:06 with the bonus level , That was stressful and all maps are complex , it was very easy to be lost.

 

http://www.mediafire.com/file/a41opkc384ochr2/Roofi_mapgame_10006.lmp

 

I remembered where was the secret exit , so I won precious time.

[Alfonzo]

@The Bandit There is no feasible way to explore the world of Doom PWADs in ironman without accepting that some people will have a more extensive knowledge of how the set plays than others. I mean, on most months my runs are the most compromised of anyone here! Unless it's a well-known set like BTSX that can be ticked off without inquiry, I have to investigate the levels to some extent ahead of time to make sure they're good for it.

 

It's all supposed to be accessible and easy-going. Talk about the nature of your run and your familiarity with the set when you make your submission to provide some context. That puts everything into perspective. 'I played this WAD 10 times this month before announcing to myself that the next one was going to be the one I'll submit' is a legitimate path to take. It's a bit... disappointing, sure, but it does have the effect of making a loser feel better about their blind attempt!

 

5 hours ago, Suitepee said:

So Alfonzo, the verdict on my Ironman rival an_mutt's demo?

I was going to going to tell you today, but you're so nervous I think I'll hold out for even longer!!

 

mutt's demo's will be used, after some thought. It's a hard one, but it presents as a good opportunity to rethink some of the rules in light of streaming runs versus recording demos, and the honor system that's assumed for both methods. My thinking on the matter is that it'd suck for some poor schmuck demo recorder to see a guy botch a run on stream only to get another go, because at present he himself wouldn't be able to try again should his OS crash or something similar. At the same time, though, no broadcaster is going to want to broadcast a shit run, as that just makes both him and his audience feel uncomfortable. The vagaries of Twitch and internet connections make it impossible for me to put the onus on the streamer for any technical difficulties that might arise during play...

 

If your attempt crashes - that is, your OS bombs or your connection drops out so that the stream is sufficiently compromised or w/e -  you're permitted another attempt in the form of a demo (and so on, if it crashes even further!). If, however, your stream is merely stuttering or you're having some technical difficulties that are making play difficult but not impossible, you should either continue or save the game and come back when it's fixed. Obviously, mutt should have done that, instead, but I'll let it through this time because the rules are still in flux, I guess. And because I want to make Britbowl interesting. And because I'm not a career asshole.

[NaZa]

Heh. I never watch anyone's demo or playthrough, I'm always starting blind. I'm just waiting for Hell Revealed to come around the corner and then I'll show my full "potential" ... :D

[Suitepee]

9 hours ago, Alfonzo said:

If your attempt crashes - that is, your OS bombs or your connection drops out so that the stream is sufficiently compromised or w/e -  you're permitted another attempt in the form of a demo (and so on, if it crashes even further!). If, however, your stream is merely stuttering or you're having some technical difficulties that are making play difficult but not impossible, you should either continue or save the game and come back when it's fixed. Obviously, mutt should have done that, instead, but I'll let it through this time because the rules are still in flux, I guess. And because I want to make Britbowl interesting. And because I'm not a career asshole.

Alrighty then, so you're going to allow an_mutt's demo to stand. I don't think an_mutt cheated in all honesty, as I was there when he attempted to stream his run several times despite technical difficulties, and a demo would be a reasonable way to provide evidence of a singular run without having to worry about Internet connection problems. (honesty withstanding) And I don't see an_mutt as being one of those unscrupulous cheating types. So yay, now the Britbowl stands at 2-2....

 

However, two points come to mind:

 

1) I still feel that an_mutt (and any future runners that encounter this problem) could still provide coherent video evidence of their attempt by saving at the last point of the technical difficulties during their livestream, and then resuming the offline demo from that save point.

 

I use a little tool called 'ffmpeg' that allows you to convert the .flv files from OBS recordings into the more easily editable .mp4 format. This would allow somebody to splice together multiple stream attempts into one file before the technical difficulties, and then the demo recording could then be added on at the end from the save point. While this would require a bit of work from the runner, it would at least quash any allegations of "they just recorded a demo that gave them the best time, and deleted any failed attempts".

 

2) What's stopping somebody who's having a bad livestream run from just "pulling the plug" on their Internet connection a few times, citing technical problems and then going for the offline demo recording route where they can submit their best time?

 

I don't take this too seriously (bar attempting to win the Britbowl, but there's nothing wrong with some friendly competition!) and I mainly enjoy playing through Doom wads in this style to see how long I can survive each month, especially when blind. But that doesn't mean others won't....and I feel that other moments like this will crop up in future Ironmans. An_mutt has done this competition a service by encouraging discussion over his run, and helping to establish another ground rule.

Edited April 29, 2017 by Suitepee

[dew]

1 hour ago, Suitepee said:

2) What's stopping somebody who's having a bad livestream run from just "pulling the plug" on their Internet connection a few times, citing technical problems and then going for the offline demo recording route where they can submit their best time?

Well, what's stopping them from not streaming in the first place and having the ability to "pull the plug" whenever they want, how many times they want, without even having to pull a plug? Overthinking rules for streamers when demos are allowed is a waste of time, heh.

[Alfonzo]

1 hour ago, Suitepee said:

I still feel that an_mutt (and any future runners that encounter this problem) could still provide coherent video evidence of their attempt by saving at the last point of the technical difficulties during their livestream, and then resuming the offline demo from that save point.

This is in effect what I was trying to say, yes. If you're having technical difficulties but are still broadcasting at a quality that can verify your run, you can establish a save game and continue by recording offline. Not a prboom demo, mind, since that would entail at minimum restarting from the same level; an OBS recording (or whatever recording software). Yeah, this would mean that an_mutt's run would be discounted. Since the rules were pretty inexact surrounding technical difficulties versus outright crashes, I'm just going to take it on the chin and shut the gate behind it.

 

Preserving the 'broken' bits before the carry-on in a more watchable format would be nice, but I wouldn't demand it of streamers or anything. If you can verify that it's the same save game then hey presto.

 

1 hour ago, Suitepee said:

2) What's stopping somebody who's having a bad livestream run from just "pulling the plug" on their Internet connection a few times, citing technical problems and then going for the offline demo recording route where they can submit their best time?

Nothing. dew and mutt are on the money.

 

If PCs conducted themselves with a sense of honor then I imagine I'd still 'DQ' a run if someone were stopped halfway through an attempt. Unfortunately, they're soulless machines and do not care if you're 4 hours into Helm's Deep with a 7 minute lead on Demon of the Well. Asking players to accept that their computer blew up on them despite hours of peace talk negotiations  - especially when ironman happens only once a month - is just too tight. I was wrong the first time!

 

Just say in the relevant post that your computer crashed and you had a second go. That's cool. If you think it was an irretrievable run then I will, too. There's just as much reason to believe that a demo was your first attempt.

[Suitepee]

1 hour ago, dew said:

Well, what's stopping them from not streaming in the first place and having the ability to "pull the plug" whenever they want, how many times they want, without even having to pull a plug? Overthinking rules for streamers when demos are allowed is a waste of time, heh.

Indeed, but this scenario probably wasn't thought about in any seriousness until it happened to an_mutt. Now that Alfonzo has made a decision, future runners won't have to worry about not being able to submit a run in case their Internet borks up mid-stream. I suspect this kind of decision-making will need to happen again and again as different cases pop up in the history of this fun competition. It will help to set some ground rules and allow more people to take part without fear of being DQ'd.

 

So long as Alfonzo makes a sensible decision each time (as he has done here), then there's no problems. But no harm in thinking up the possibilities ahead of time, to be prepared for what COULD happen. Overthinking though it is, it might one day count for something that other people will take seriously...

 

EDIT: (after reading Alfonzo's post) Anyways I won't drag this on further. The points have been well made, and I shall look forward to next month's Ironman where hopefully I will re-establish my Britbowl lead!

[Demon of the Well]

Here's me for the month, survived +1 in 55 minutes or so: Too many goddamned pinkies!

No real close calls here, and I mostly avoided getting lost, though I did scare myself a little getting hit by two simultaneous Baron spells right at the end of the game for big damage (wasn't as close as it felt like, though, still could've eaten another 1-2 and lived). As usual for me, I started off pretty fast and then slowed down more and more the farther I got, but still pretty satisfied with the time, given that pure speed's not really my strong suit to begin with.

 

Usual disclaimers: I've played Mapgame before. In fact, I think I first played it the very day it was released (or, rather, the very day it first appeared on /idgames), and maybe once more since then, although it's been quite a while now. I also caught the first few minutes of an_mutt's abortive Twitch stream, which was basically E1M1 + outage screens, and also the last couple of maps on Dobu's stream, the big takeaway there being knowing to ignore E1M7's exit fight. The really decisive factor here in a lot of the faster runs, I reckon, is almost certainly knowing you can use the secret exit to leave E1M3 in just a couple of minutes, and it's interesting to see how close a lot of the 'survived' runs are in time (other than Krypto's characteristically supernatural performance, of course!).

 

Good choice for an Ironman run given its short duration and relatively low difficulty (emphasizing speed), this, though if I can be a bit of a sourpuss here, playing this again has reminded me why I haven't touched this in forever. Not the hugest fan of KDitD-alikes to begin with, admittedly (Double Impact notwithstanding), but the big thing is that IMO most of the features which set Mapgame apart from similarly themed sets actually make the game feel worse, rather than better: making the chaingun weaker and less efficient/satisfying to use (and of course it is already largely seen as the most disproportionately weak weapon for its slot in the game) by taking away its hitscan ability, secrets which almost never contain anything but a  scant few potions and/or helmets, unpleasantly resilient turrets which either need to be completely ignored or corner-camped away, and far too many goddamned pinkies. Ah well, different strokes!

 

I look forward to dying in map01 of whatever eldritch horror of nodes and lumps Alfonzo summons from the yawning void beyond eternity with the promise of Doomworld's collective soul, just so we can finally see a death from Krypto next month.

[RjY]

Survived+1 in 1:16:37

E1M1  125/125  0  50/50  3/3  9:05+14   9:05
E1M2  126/127  1  54/54  3/3  7:04+15   16:09
E1M3  150/150  0  34/39  5/5  7:30+15   23:39
E1M9  229/229  0  73/73  5/5  13:24+08  37:03
E1M4  101/101  0  25/25  4/5  6:26+21   43:29
E1M5  177/177  0  19/19  3/3  11:25+16  54:54
E1M6  117/117  0  39/39  6/6  7:46+24   62:40
E1M7  157/158  1  2/2    3/3  9:29+24   72:09
E1M8  58/58    0  13/13  1/1  4:28+26   76:37

Only one recording attempt obviously as per rules, but not even remotely blind. I redid every map from a pistol start during last week in order to revise the wad (as one might do before an examination).

[Alfonzo]

At first I was upset seeing all these survived runs wash in before the end of the month and push me down the table. Now I realize that they're bridging the gulf between Australia and Canada. Damage control. Keep 'em coming.

[dew]

Blech. Never played the wad, my only preknowledge was "you should be careful at the beginning of m9" via osmosis in this thread, heh. I tried to maintain a solid pace, but then I got lost in m3 looking for the secret exit. And then I got REALLY lost in m9. And then I just couldn't get my game on, because the maps became rotten with excessive frontal pig spam and cockblocking turrets. The one that killed me by the end of m7 was classy though, caught me completely off guard and my quick rescue plan failed me.

 

I gotta say I'd probably like the wad much more if the turrets were used less prominently and more thoughtfully. I dunno if ravage messed around with hitboxes or something, but it feels like theirs is far too small. All those rockets I saved for the turrets? Wasted on autoaim not locking in, back to the pop-in, pop-out grind. The final room of m9 felt almost like a parody of 2002ado, why the hell so many pigs? And of course, I hate shotguns on pigs combat, so this was quite the purgatory for me. Berserks, people, berserks!

DWIronman_mapgame_dew-7137_m7d.zip

[ClonedPickle]

Local punk practices mapset before declaring Ironman run, does well: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/139220905

[RjY]

@dew not sure if you realised, or had you known, it would have changed your tactics, but, turrets are made of spiderdemons, so they have splash damage resistance. And yes they are thin (radius 16).

[dobu gabu maru]

23 hours ago, Demon of the Well said:

Good choice for an Ironman run given its short duration and relatively low difficulty (emphasizing speed), this[...]

Yeah I really enjoyed that we had an "easy" wad that plenty of people could survive without foreknowledge, making it so that running through the levels fast was central to getting a good spot on the leaderboard. I'm here to survive wads, not to play quickly, so I'm more happy with my placement this month than something like Legacy of Heroes, where I was also smack-dab in the middle of the leaderboards.