TETRISCONCEPT : Great Tournament !

Thread in 'Discussion' started by Amnesia, 3 Aug 2008.

  1. Edo

    Edo a.k.a. FSY

    It's not always favorable to initial rotate, and in these circumstances, a floor-kick is needed.
  2. tepples

    tepples Lockjaw developer

    So I guess one might need to mod Heboris to add a floor kick limit for SRS. But would we need 1, or 2, or something else? I suck at 20G, so I'll have to ask someone else to run an experiment. Open Lockjaw 0.45 and put in these settings:
    • speed curve: Death
    • rot: SRS
    • floor kicks: 1
    • lockdown: Step reset
    Then try the same with rot: Arika and see whether it's significantly easier or harder.
  3. jujube

    jujube Unregistered

    we still have other issues that will make it harder for SRS players to play with step reset:
    http://zeta.hypersector.com/Tools/Tetri ... j7eBH0cP5c

    a move like this, which causes the piece to step down, is not going to reset the lock delay with step reset + SRS because of the basic rotation of the S piece. this might not seem like a big deal, because the player in this example has gotten the piece to where it's supposed to be, but if the player tries to lock manually he's likely to lock the next piece as well by mistake because the lock delay for the S piece has nearly expired. this is an example of the awkwardness that SRS players will have to deal with. step reset is logical and consistent, but only ARS players will be able to take advantage of that consistency. the SRS player will have to memorize a bunch of situations where the lock delay should reset but doesn't.
  4. ARS players have that problem with the I piece. It's just something you get used to.
  5. tepples

    tepples Lockjaw developer

    I could give an analogous example for ARS:
    |     |  |     |  |     |  |     |
    |     | => |  J  | => | J    | => |     |
    |     |  |  J  |  | J    |  |J    |
    |     |  | JJ  |  |JJ    |  |JJJ   |
    `----------'  `----------'  `----------'  `----------'
            IRS R, 20G   DAS left    Rotate R
                             No step,
                             no reset
    Notice that the "center" of the piece has moved down, yet the lock delay hasn't reset. A player using SRS without infinity would just know that the lock delay doesn't reset in the S situation you showed
  6. Zaphod77

    Zaphod77 Resident Misinformer

    But that is EXACTLY why step reset works with ARS!

    Because the bottom of the piece stays touching the ground when rotating, except for the I piece, where that would be counterintuitive. It is known that rotation which don't allow the piece to drop lower do not reset lock delay.

    It is possible to fix SRS for step reset, as I said, but i have no idea how to program that into heboris.
  7. Edo

    Edo a.k.a. FSY

    Why should that move reset the lock delay? The tetromino's bounding box hasn't moved down, so there shouldn't be a step reset. According to your own logic, this move shouldn't reset the lock delay, yet it does. Both moves are logical and shouldn't require any memorization; it's just a matter of the player knowing the basic rotation of whatever system they're using, and visualizing the behavior of the bounding boxes.

    It can also be proven that over the course of a "theoretically typical" game, SRS receives the exact same number of step resets as ARS, but just in different situations (in fact, this is true for all bounding box rotation systems); neither rotation system is disadvantaged by using step reset.
  8. jujube

    jujube Unregistered

    ok, but that's only 1 piece that doesn't always reset lock delay when it drops. the problem exists with 6 pieces when using SRS.

    but the thing about ARS is that the player doesn't need to be concerned with where the center of the piece is. they only have to consider the lowest point of the piece, with the exception of the I. moreover i don't think players in general consciously think about where the rotation box is at all times. it's too confusing, and unimportant if you know how the pieces kick once they've landed. when i look at the example you gave i can see the logic in the failure of lock delay step reset because the piece really isn't dropping visually, regardless of what's happening internally.

    AFAIK i'm the only player signed up for 20G with SRS in this tournament. blink mentioned he wanted to but i don't know if he will. as the only confirmed SRS 20G player i'm willing to conform to a lock delay system i'm not so familiar with, but not if it's broken or different for me. this is why i suggested:

    a) separate contest for SRS 20G
    b) everyone uses entry delay
    c) add a shirase 500 move reset contest open to everybody
  9. jujube

    jujube Unregistered

    i don't care about the f*****g bounding box and i don't think ARS players do either in most situations.

    if you guys want to do that next year i'll start training now. no offense to you edo, because i appreciate your thought on the subject, as well as everybody else's, but i can't be expected to memorize a bunch of exceptions. if a piece drops and the lock delay resets, or if it doesn't drop and the ld doesn't reset, i think i can get used to that a lot more quickly because it makes sense.
  10. Zaphod77

    Zaphod77 Resident Misinformer

    SRS is significantly disadvantaged by step reset, because it interferes with many of it's intended maneuvers, such as using floorkicks to move a piece over an obstruction. If these floorkicks don't reset lock delay, pieces can and wil get stuck on the blocks you are trying to get it over.
  11. jujube

    jujube Unregistered

    i can't wait to hear the L2stack remarks coming from the ARS players [​IMG]

    this is a useful tool that you have with SRS, and it's very good in 20G when you want to open up a hole underneath. you can put the piece where you want instead of a less desirable spot. i'd like to hear what other SRS players say, but i don't really want this advantage. the situation where you have to do something like that is usually the result of a mistake, and IMO there should be a penalty for that mistake. i believe SRS is perfectly playable without the need for excessive rotation or time-consuming placements if the player stacks correctly.
  12. jujube

    jujube Unregistered

    you know, i'm tired of getting upset about this so i'll just compete in contest #1. nobody needs to modify heboris to better suit one player who's choosing a different rotation system. the ARS players should have step reset and shouldn't have to play something unfamiliar to them, and i don't really feel like bringing a spork to a fork fight. maybe someday in the future we can get a few SRS 20G players to compete in a tournament and there can be a separate division for them.
  13. tepples

    tepples Lockjaw developer

    In Ti Classic (Ti-ARS, step reset, 1 floor kick), the first floor kick already resets lock delay.
  14. Muf


    Wait, what? You're actually admitting that SRS promotes bad stacking by providing a mechanism to climb over obstacles (a luxury that ARS simply doesn't have), yet you're saying that removing that mechanism disadvantages players using SRS? [​IMG] I'm going with jujube; lrn2stack. If anything, this evens out the advantage.
  15. Edo

    Edo a.k.a. FSY

    Regardless of rotation system, all floor-kicks reset lock delay. This has nothing to do with step reset. And like everyone else is saying, if SRS can move pieces over obstacles which ARS can't, then removing this ability is merely making things fair.

    On a side note, you say that the floor-kick behavior is intentional. Personally, I have my doubts. I must emphasize that this is just my personal opinion, but I have a strong suspicion that the basic rotation of SRS was designed without any consideration for very high gravity and lock delay. The basic rotation of SRS has the pieces rotating about a fixed point; you can see these rotation centers if you look at the wiki article. From a programming point of view, this is quite an elegant and easy way of doing things, because it means that the operation of rotating the pieces can be performed in a number of different ways (for example, matrix transformations) without the need to have tables for each of the 4 rotation states. For low gravity (i.e. not much greater than 1G) and instant lock behavior, (which is where western tetris started out), this way of doing things presents no negative repercussions. However, when high gravity and lock delay are introduced - the purposes of which are to restrict placement options and force players to think faster - problems arise. Once the pieces land on the stack flat side down, it becomes impossible to rotate them because doing so will cause a collision with the stack. A 1-cell vertical floor-kick is added out of necessity, simply to make the basic rotation work. But as a consequence, it's also now possible to move pieces over small obstacles, destroying the point of high gravity and lock delay. To me this doesn't seem like an intentional design decision. The addition of more extreme kicks (including 2-cell vertical floor-kicks) only serve to further break high gravity. With proper stacking, players shouldn't need to kick over obstacles at all; if you watch jujube's 50 tetris run, he exploits floor-kicks to climb over obstacles a grand total of... one time (at 2:32). If good players don't need and don't even want the extreme kicks, the only reason they're there is as a consequence of the original design of the basic rotation.

    Please don't say that jujube! I'm only trying to make this 100% fair because I thought that was what both parties wanted. Seeing as this is supposed to be a casual thing, there's no reason (if everyone's happy with it) for you not to play at a slight advantage/disadvantage. You can either play with step reset as previously suggested, and accept that you'll be at a disadvantage because of less intuitive rotations not resetting lock delay; or play with move reset limited to 3 rotations and say, 8 movements, and accept that you'll be at an advantage due to the more forgiving nature of move reset. A contest doesn't have to be fair for it to be fun. Or, as a more extreme solution, you could try one of these alternative rotation systems:

    ZRS: http://www.sendspace.com/file/39g95o
    ZRS is essentially SRS, but more streamlined for step reset 20G. The kick tables are identical, but because the basic rotation has been altered to make step reset more intuitive, a few of the moves that worked previously will no longer work. You'll still have the use of a lot of the more elegant placements, like this one, and to be honest, judging from the way you play, you might not even notice the difference between this and regular SRS. Preset 1 has a move limit of 4 to prevent abuse of the extreme floor-kicks. Preset 2 has no limit, to allow you to experiment more freely and test which kicks are different. (Although, like I said earlier, you might not even notice the difference).

    HRS: http://www.sendspace.com/file/cw2ssa
    HRS is more akin to ARS, and follows Arika's 1 right, 1 left wall-kick rule. The spawn orientation, and the 2 vertical states are exactly the same as SRS though, so it should feel quite familiar. This should also work perfectly under step reset 20G.
  16. jujube

    jujube Unregistered

    thanks edo [​IMG] i'll give those rotation systems a try tonight. did you design them yourself? i've never heard of them before.
  17. Zaphod77

    Zaphod77 Resident Misinformer

    If step reset removes the mobility of srs (by not letting floorkicks reset lock delay), it also removes one of the main reasons for playing with it.

    For those who have access to Tetris: New Century, try playing it with classic rotation (infinity off). You will see what i'm talking about pretty quickly once the gravity gets up there. The game refuses to let you exploit the reset system. [​IMG]

    Henk has made it perfectly clear that he wants to allow players to fix their mistakes, and that that is the reason for infinity. It was designed to give the player as many tools as possible with which to keep playing. Therefore, I must conclude that the extreme floorkicks were made to be used.

    Yes, you have a point that if you "learn2stack" you don't ned to kick over obstacles. But if you are'nt goign to take advantage of srs mobility to, say, set up t-spins, why are you using SRS in the first place?

    And TI-ARS only allows ONE floorkick per piece, because they reset lock delay. and then only to the two pieces that need them. (T-I)
  18. Am I misunderstanding you guys? Because a floorkick by itself does not reset lock delay in TGM3. Step reset is the only mechanism that will reset it.
  19. Because for 0G it clearly has the potential to be faster, and most people who pick SRS can't be bothered coping with the tetlag for 20G modes so just continue to use SRS.

    ARS was used for arcade games, where the idea is that it's hard and you die reasonably quickly. SRS is a lot easier. To neutralise the ways SRS is easier is the best option, because otherwise all the TGM players are going to be severely handicapped, either because they're using ARS or because they're using SRS with severe tetlag.
  20. HRS is very good. It's very easy to learn. I thought you weren't supposed to be able to floorkick, though. (Also, the rotations are inverse).

Share This Page