Grazza

The description brought Myscha's Odyssey to mind.

It's possible to reach the exit using a void glide in this map. You still need the blue and red keys though.

Sounds like phtga. Good point; it should have been a sticky, and it now is.

It depends what level you are playing at, but unless you're already somewhere around reasonable/good club level (140 ECF / 1800 FIDE / 1900 USCF*), then you don't need to know much specific opening theory at all. It's more important to understand opening principles and to be familiar with just a few very basic sequences. Any knowledge beyond that won't be much use yet in any case, as your opponents generally will deviate from it at an early stage. If there are a number of specific sequences in the book you're learning from (such as there are in my own "Chess Openings for Kids"), then you should be viewing these as sample lines embodying ideas, rather than something to be memorized. If you are already at or above reasonable club level, then the positive reason for examining specific opening sequences is that this is actually a very effective way to improve your game generally. A lot of important chess strategies spring from opening set-ups, and studying in them in a concrete setting is more immediately meaningful than doing so in isolation. This shouldn't be done as a memorization exercise. It should be more a matter of absorption: expose yourself to ideas and sequences and you learn more useful concepts, train your brain better in more transferable ways, and end up actually remembering more specific sequences too. I tend to liken it to the way you remember your way around your hometown; you do so by virtue of having travelled around it, not by memorizing a map. Once you have a reasonable understanding of chess strategy in general, it is much easier to play the opening in a more improvised way. * Note: ratings provided by online chess servers tend to be wildly unreliable; I'm talking about actual ratings from playing traditional competitive chess.

The basic premise is false. At practically every point in its history there have been some people claiming that chess needs to be altered due to "draw death" or "too much opening theory". This was particularly prevalent in the 1920s, believe it or not. But at each point players have turned out to be perfectly happy with the game as it stands. Modern chess is played in a more combative way than at most previous periods, and there has been a distinct move away from extremely deep opening theory, with players finding all sorts of interesting deviations at early move-numbers. The very richness of the game saves it from the problems that its accusers tout. Those "problems" themselves aren't an issue for many players either - many relish the scientific aspect. It's always possible to think up interesting-sounding variants, but that is all most of them tend to remain. Even small changes are liable to disrupt the delicate balance which is fundamental to the game's basic appeal. This may not be obvious to those who are familiar with the game at a novice level, but will become apparent as they gain more experience with chess. As for games dragging on too long, given that so many games are played nowadays with a time-limit of 3 or even 1 minute for all the moves, I'm not quite sure how to respond to this one... Cumbersome additional rules also jeopardize one of the game's key attractive features: the fact that even very young children (i.e. an average three-year-old) can learn the basic rules.

Much more than that. Try it to find out. During the couple of days I was there, there were times when the clouds above the volcano looked a little like an evil face.

Did you know that setting maxhealth to -1 in dehacked can lead to very odd effects, especially in Doom2.exe, when you pick up a health potion?

http://www.doomworld.com/tutorials/fx2.php

What discussion got "derailed" here? You expressed an "opinion" and made it clear that even though you posted it in a discussion context (this is a forum, not a personal blog), you regarded there as being nothing to discuss. It was a case of "this is mah opinion and aam entitled to it". Which is a rather pointless position to take in any context.

The first thing to understand is that most of the power of the BFG is in its invisible tracers, and not the fireball. You'll often see good players waste the fireball (e.g. pump it into a wall) in order to make good use of the tracers. Due to the way Doom's PRNG works, two full doses of tracers will always kill a cyberdemon (even if the fireball misses). Note that you could hit a cyber ten times with the fireball and fail to kill it if none of the tracers connect. So you need to understand how the tracers work. I'll assume you do; if not, read the BFG FAQ or a summary of it (such as this). But in brief: a little while after the fireball explodes, 40 tracers are emitted from the player's current location in the same "geographical" direction as the weapon was fired (not necessarily the direction you are currently facing). These tracers are hitscan attacks, and not splash damage or projectiles. The tracers spread out in a kind of cone of damage, with a degree of autoaiming - that's why they can take out a roomfull of smaller enemies. Obviously, versus a cyberdemon, you just want to hit a single target, so you need to be really close to it at the point the tracers are released. Players who are good at two-shotting a cyber will tend to carry out a little dance while the cyber is firing its batch of three rockets, dodging the rockets while moving into position for their attack. They'll fire so that just after the fireball explodes, they are close enough to the cyber and at correct angle so that almost all the tracers hit. A similar "dance" tends to be used when punching a cyber to death in Tyson runs, but obviously that takes many more "nibbles". You might want to practise simply dodging cyber missiles close-up to develop the relevant movement skills. Regarding the angle of attack (i.e. north, south, northwest, etc.), this isn't something you'll be able to think about much in the thick of most battles, but if you are able to plan out your attack in this manner (e.g. in a set-piece battle), then attacking from due south, north, east or west should be more effective than attacking from an angle, due to blockmap quirks. This is less of a factor with a cyber than with a spidermastermind though (where it makes a very large difference). (All this assumes vanilla behaviour. If you're playing in a port that doesn't emulate the original games accurately in these respects, then things may be very different.)

If he doesn't want it, can I have it?

Do you like getting a large breakfast for $3.33? Then you may indeed be Nevada.

Ah, nice - a 32-unit glide between a thing and a wall. That's essentially a standard glide (i.e. not flat-faced) so east->west vs west->east etc. shouldn't make an enormous difference. I don't recall too many glides between things, apart from my own on Osiris map06. (The standard wiggles on Doom2 map19 are a different matter, though that map also offers 32-unit glides between things.) I'd guess there are a fair few glides of this type that are waiting to be discovered. A Prb+ option to show things' bounding boxes in the automap might help track them down.

As a further example of a two-sector map that can lead to VPOs, but which wasn't specially constructed for that purpose, there is map05 of 2sectors. link: http://www.doomworld.com/vb/post/575137

New Mexico. One of the states that I haven't been to, though I have visited all the others that are the same colour.

You probably won't like Map10 of Equinox either. It makes Hunted seems quite mundane.

The naming isn't exactly clear, and you're not the first to be fooled by this. Edit: a bit more info about this here. I have the Boom v2.0 and Boombet0 exe files, but I don't recall anyone getting hold of the source from anywhere. You'd probably need to ask the original developers.

I believe the 2.01 source is here: http://www.doomworld.com/idgames/index.php?id=9464

Now that I've looked up what this term means, I'd have to say Battlezone.

Droidfish is awesome. Generally, http://www.appsapk.com is a good place to look. ISS Detector is cool.

I've just listened to this awesome track in Prb+ using both portmidi and fluidsynth, and hear the same oddity as you describe. Edit: also in Choc. I'm not 100% sure, but I think it is correct (i.e. no oddity) in Doom2.exe.

Indeed, that's how it was on the old forums, and it didn't add much. Here is an example.

dew: Are you confusing spechits and intercepts again? Spechits overflow emulation is the one you should definitely have turned on (no bad effects and it means it emulates the original game accurately), and intercepts is the one you should turn off unless you are investigating this phenomenon or have something very unusual in mind (i.e. exploiting the overflow to exit a map with a damage/exit sector). Otherwise nothing beneficial can come from having intercepts overflow turned on, as all it will do is trash an attempt without adding any useful compatibility otherwise. memfis's simple advice is good (although playeringame is largely irrelevant): turn emulation on in all other cases, and for general play or recording, turn all warnings off. I also recommend that once you have the settings set up the way you are happy with, you retain your cfg files, and whenever you upgrade to the latest glboom-plus.exe/prboom-plus.exe (using the current test version is recommended), you simply overwrite the old exe with the new one.

Looper: I agree with you completely, but some people have different views for coop, which is why I phrased it the way I did. BK: Yes, subject to what I posted above.

If it is at the end of a map, and any corpses are still moving (in any axis) at the time you exit, then you are definitely OK. If you die and respawn mid-map, then this definitely disqualifies it as a compet-n entry. For DSDA purposes (and for the DW Demos forum), this would make it a special category "Coop with deaths". So if you have an especially interesting idea that involves deaths, then don't abandon it completely; just view it as a different category, and not for compet-n.