Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About tchkb

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. MAP12 UV-Max in 18:18 Route based on this old masochistic casual ZDoom piece I did 2.5 years ago, but with a bit more detailed routing, more practice and faster pace. Played it safe by not running past anything and therefore killing early stuff with weaker weapons, but it's probably not the fastest approach. I've had a lot of trouble finding good spots to distribute all 31 BFG shots this map gives you and ended up with a few excess ones by the final fight (which I ended up needing anyway because my brain shut down). b112-1818.zip
  2. tchkb

    New Scythe 2b Demos [-complevel 2]

    I tried some UV-Max-SoloNet runs. Here's the first 14 maps. I'll finish the remaining 10 (23-30 have no multiplayer-only monsters) once I'm done with a more important project I want to finish by the end of the year. Hopefully someone else will pick this category up, I'm certainly nowhere near as good as j4rio and other record holders on this WAD and it shows. Scythe 2 SoloNet tchkb 14 of 24.zip
  3. tchkb

    Eviternity demos [-complevel 11]

    MAP28 UV-Respawn in 2:26 MAP28 UV-Fast in 4:54 Table fillers. UV-Fast especially has a lot of room for improvement. ev28r226.zip ev28f454.zip
  4. tchkb

    Post your Doom video! [but don't quote video]

    Stardate 20x6 full run on HNTR difficulty. Part 2 linked in video description.
  5. tchkb

    Sunder - Map17 is here!

    Speaking of Descent, MAP01 track is a weird corrupted version of what the original MIDI is supposed to sound like.
  6. Guys, take another look at the first post's wording. That's a very obvious and low quality troll, probably from 4chan or some derivative garbage dump. Not worth 30+ replies.
  7. tchkb

    The DooMed Speed Demos Archive returns!

    I get grinding IL maxes for time, but why on earth would anyone risk a 5+ hour long WAD without advanced HUD?
  8. tchkb

    Demos for miscellaneous Ribbiks maps

    Stardate 20x6 MAP01-07 (D2ALL?) HNTR-Max in 1:36:40 1 attempt a day (minus MAP01 deaths) for 6 weeks eventually did the job. stalls2-13640.zip
  9. tchkb

    Sunder - Map17 is here!

    Someone better than me could do this without using up as many rockets as I did here. EDIT doing this is twice as slow as speedrun strat and definitely less safe. You could force this fight as I showed above by locking the tunnel behind player at some point, but then you'd also need to provide extra ammo (a couple extra medkits wouldn't hurt, either). As a point of reference, Killer5 used 340 cells and 10 rockets to finish the survivors off in his demo. You can beat Cyb+AV+Cacos without taking invul and instead take it afterwards and carry it over to the final fight, which makes a huge difference there. Fully agreed on your MAP09 remarks.
  10. tchkb

    The DooMed Speed Demos Archive returns!

    I've noticed that my Sunlust MAP15 demo lacks "Skill 2 Max" label under it, it's simply listed as Other with no comment, unlike every other demo I submitted for it. I checked the demo again, didn't miss any monsters or secrets.
  11. tchkb

    Eviternity demos [-complevel 11]

    No, I didn't know this path. On one hand backtracking takes some 30-40 seconds. On the other you save a bunch of time 2-shotting Cyber, get 3 extra BFG shots to spend in RK area itself and also don't have to wait for the pillar to BFG to lower. Might end up saving a little time overall. You could avoid this backtrack altogether by returning to earlier areas and doing Blue and potentially also Yellow key and using the path from purple chamber through Plasma Rifle and 3 cells to return to path to RK area. You'd still have to either make a backtrack from YK to top of lava river through RK area, navigate it upwards from Imp cliffs or take it before entering RK area and then go back upwards anyway, but it seems like a faster approach at first glance. Would need a complete overhaul of BFG use and cell pickups, though. Just a note to anyone wanting to run this in the future (myself included?) - I make a few not so easy to spot but still costly mistakes: - used one BFG shot less prior to YK grab than I should've (probably the annoying Mancubus around corner by the 3 pillars) - didn't rocket the Zombieman horde straight away - once they spread out rockets are a lot less effective - didn't pick rocket boxes near the above - didn't BFG the Mancubus with 4 Demons in lava sewers straight away, letting them spread out - order of stuff to do in guardhouse area was completely random overall, could probably be more optimal
  12. tchkb

    Eviternity demos [-complevel 11]

    MAP32 UV-Max in 42:50 Second try (minus a few early resets). Sub40 is definitely doable. Stream highlight ev32-4250.zip
  13. tchkb

    Speed of Doom demos (-complevel 9)

    MAP28 UV-Speed in 6:50 Quick and lazy table filler. Played the ending safe by backtracking to RS area to lure the monsters away from exit tower. sd28-650.zip
  14. tchkb

    Demos for miscellaneous Ribbiks maps

    I considered doing a MAP01-07 (D2ALL?) movie of Stardate 20x6 on HNTR and practiced individual levels, but while routing the full run I realized doing all 7 maps in one go would be way more difficult than I expected from playing each map individually. I'm not ready to waste another month or two grinding for a ~100 minute run no one will care about anyway, so I'll leave that for some other time and dump some IL demos I recorded (which no one will care about either, but it's another hour added to my DSDA stats, haha). stardate20x6 hntr tchkb.zip
  15. tchkb

    Does anyone actually play the easier difficulties?

    >95% of Plutonia (that infamous mapset a lot of novices "hate") either already is a ramshackle shooting gallery or can be trivially reduced to it if you know the maps and act accordingly. Same with almost all 90s maps and a very large portion of modern ones as well - almost anything that has neither slaughter nor puzzle gameplay and even quite a lot of Plutonia-level content. "Ramshackle shooting galleries" is simply the standard Doom gameplay - what everyone learns when they begin playing it and what a significant portion of players has trouble moving past unless you ease them into it with carefully tuned difficulty of nonstandard setpieces. And it's not like these RSGs are inherently easy - there's quite a large difference in play experience required between Doom 1 RSGs and Hell Revealed 2 RSGs (these are probably the hardest ones you can get away with before they turn into obnoxiously long one-dimensional patience tests). I do admit that the skill ceiling we're talking about here is an order of magnitude or two lower than that of modern high-level Doom gameplay, but like I said a few lines above - you have to introduce that gameplay gradually and in a way that is comprehensible for relatively new players, and like I said in first post - lack of sufficiently reduced difficulty in lower skill levels will alienate these players because to them it will be a trial and error where they can't even tell error from non-error apart because they'll be constantly dying even if they happen to do something close to what map designer intended for a particular section. Yes, a lot of these "alienated by UV" players will cheat, ITYTD or just not play it even with lower skill levels available, but what you appear to suggest ("can't appeal to everyone, then appeal only to one side") sounds absurd to me for reasons which should be logically obvious, and your argument's premise may not even be entirely correct. Lack of feedback on lower skill levels (not just when testing WIP stuff, but also well after releases) may come from several additional factors in addition to what you mentioned. Beating something on lower skill level is not exactly bragworthy. Many could also treat is as simply stepping stones before moving on to UV. Doomworld is also one specific community. Its playerbase is different from that of Zdoom forums, Reddit communities, Youtube/Twitch letsplayers, randoms who just grab stuff, play it and don't report back, etc. If you ask people elsewhere, chances are you may get a different statistical distribution of responses. Speaking of which - has anyone on even gathered any statistics on this topic? "Gutting" is a very relative concept. From a certain point of view anything that is at all changed from the "intended experience" of UV is "gutted" to one degree or another and certainly isn't the "intended experience" anymore. But is "non-intended experience" automatically bad? From another point of view "gutting" is what you get if you change too much. But what about changing too little? My personal opinion is that it's better to change too much than too little because it's better to have a subpar but unique product than one that does almost nothing while still being not intended/not bragworthy. Of course ideally you'd change the right amount of things in the right way to get the intended result with said intentions also being what the most players will want. There are a lot of different ways to gut, or whatever you consider it/however you want to call it, a level, and many of them can be combined together. You seem to be of opinion that heavy reduction of monster counts is a cheap, usually subpar and inherently invasive method of decreasing difficulty. But consider a simple math problem - lowering number of monsters from 1500 to 500 in a certain fight still leaves the number of monsters thrown at you higher than anything in Plutonia. Depending on what exactly is cut, different variants may have wildly different results in what is now allowed/required to do to beat the section and how difficult doing so is, but that's kind of the point of difficulty levels and it's up to mapper and testers to decide what's best - it could indeed be doing something different than cutting anything, or doing cutting plus something else. I've seen a lot of veteran players disagree with me on this matter, but we haven't had a proper analysis with empirical evidence on this issue yet, just generic statements from both sides.