Matt Ellis wrote on 02/15/08 at 05:06:19:Don't take this as if I am arguing with your views on Non-SC racing, as I am really not, I just want to express my opinion here.
In Hiding wrote on 02/15/08 at 02:20:18:Points to say again, and I feel like a broken record:
1) The point of this site is to document the times of a racing game. Not a jumping game.
2) The point of this site is to try to make the driving as natural as possible. I understand what Pierre is saying completely - if it wasn't for the fact that we got used to doing SC's this would feel alot more natural at times (BP+RMC2 for instance).
3) All of the people who are saying "real Sc's" should be banned but otherwise anything else goes forget that then that would open the door to t(r)icking which is definitely not what this site is about - real driving.
4) This site is trying to replicate the smk nbt site to keep a level of consistency. The main problem comes because people are getting clever with the shrooms. Take for example rdp3 - the bottom line is that I dont think the programmers wanted that SC, it was just a side effect that they would have to have by allowing players to shroom on TT when they included the snes/retro tracks.
5) I really feel like players are trying to find loopholes for the sake of it..
1) Understood
2) Understood, but it is hard for us to clearly define what natural is, considering we dont know what the programmers intended to be natural in the first place (RDP3 is a good example of this)
3) This wouldn't open the door to tricking if you were to say that any glitches, lap skips, and lakitu uses (for the aid of lapskips, etc.) are to be banned. This is actually what I believe should happen, but as I said before, it is very unlikely that it will happen.
4) Well, what do you expect people to do? If there is a way to get more out of your shroom, wouldn't you be tempted to try it out and see if it worked? I realize that the programmers adding shrooms to TT's made it alot harder for us to define what is natural and what is not, espescially on the retro tracks. Also, I disagree with RDP3, it is alot more natural than say, the way BP 3-lap is done.
5) I really feel that people are just trying to find a way to get better times within the written rules. Yeah, maybe there are some courses where that can be exploited a little, but all that means is that the rules for that specific track need to be improved.
In Hiding wrote on 02/15/08 at 02:20:18:There were a hundred different directions I could've taken this site from the start but my initial decision to get the site up and running again wasn't taken lightly, or on a whim, I looked at what style would encourage skillful play. Darkroy, Alvin, and the rest of you who want everything goes apart from sc should see how the last site died on its ass way before you lot started to play. The rules are here and I think we have done the best job we can with what we have. As I think Andreas said, we will not be able to keep everyone happy but to be honest we have a set framework here which is working for 100+ players and so if you dont like it.. you know what you can do.
I tried joining the old site and never got accepted, I must have tried joining at the time it died. Either way, I don't have any problems with the current set-up of the site, although I do believe that it can be improved so that the rules would be a tad less "exploitable".
Anyway, I've expressed my opinion, you can tell me what you're thoughts are on this in a reply if you want
3) Natural is down to both our interpretation of the game makers but also our interpretation of the game. "Our" (meaning initially mine) interpretation was to lay rules down to make the game as non-sc as possible. Initially, waaaaaay back, about two weeks before this site went live I was half deliberating saying that you couldn't use shrooms. Imagine how many "sc's" or grey areas would be removed if you took away the use of mushrooms? Anyway, the limit of natural for me is nbt+zzmt, anything more random than that would get banned (i.e ticking which involves straying off the track for the point of glitching).
4) I expect people to read the rules (There are so many people who have questioned sc'ing on this site who have not even bothered to read the rules through). I also expect people to consider that most of the anticipated routes have been thought of before, not all, but most. The amount of times people have gone "oooh new strat" but no, its not, its a toned down sc or a disguised sc with people getting around it using language to underpin the sc/rules.
5) If people want to drive faster times then do so, and there will be situations where new tech's/routes are found but there is a way to approach them. And some common sense should be implored - also see point above.
Here is one, there is a nbt site (sami's) and a non-nbt site, there is nothing stopping anyone out there making a site which conforms to the exact regulations that you determine, as it has been said before, theoretically, with all of the different diciplines there are you could potentially have 6 sites with different charts for sc, non sc, ticking, non-ticking sc and more..
I take on your point that maybe its because the courses aren't defined enough by the rules but Imho I think they're clear enough already..
Pages: 
