MapSearch-engine and a demo :)

By ernstaugust·
Hi guys,

mypTx, our IRC-Scripter made a MapSearch-engine especially for our channel.
just write !locate mapname in our chan, and you get the direct link to the download-page of this map.

and 4knuk made a new record on kz_bye_erarock, congrats :)

kz_bye_erarock in 4:20 by 4knuk (4:21 drake)

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.

4knuk
14/07/2005 21:09:00

n1 demo 4knuk :)

ernstaugust
14/07/2005 22:32:00

lol

T3dbundy
17/07/2005 00:01:00

sag ich mal auch n1 sonst stehste alleine da :P

T3dbundy
17/07/2005 00:01:00

obwohl drake könnte locker rec machen wieder -.-

4knuk
17/07/2005 18:45:00

ja ich ja auch ich könnte schon paar secs schneller sein weil ich hab ein kleines mistake und einmal hab ich kurz gestucked :P

elITe^
08/12/2006 04:32:00

gj crack :>

(M.E.O.)St. Jimmy
08/12/2006 06:47:00

"[url= " is that a link ? :P

AverageFreak
08/12/2006 07:29:00

word :) and whats my comment doing here? It sucks,yes? :E

pHs^
08/12/2006 08:18:00

GJ

UBacb
08/12/2006 12:51:00

where reference? I want to get and look :\

faker mapper
08/12/2006 13:02:00

Fixed the Download link. Sorry guys, it was a bit too late :D

Annihila7or
08/12/2006 13:42:00

The doublepal made my movie expirience so bad that i cant rate it, but the jumps really owned, if it had'nt been doublepal then i would give it 9/10... 7/10

iv4n
08/12/2006 13:52:00

but the idea and the whole layout of movie was new so.. ++

NoCom3n7
04/01/2007 07:43:00

gj scooter and nice production Insen :)

faker mapper
07/03/2009 01:31:00

See http://xtreme-jumps.eu/comment.php?comment.news.1002 (thopa's comment) as explanation of what was changed and why it was changed.

Dacca
07/03/2009 01:33:00

It's a good change :)

thopa
07/03/2009 01:37:00

[link=http://xtreme-jumps.eu/news.php?extend.1000]Or this explanation.[/link] Ofcourse I'm a yes-voter...

omilo
07/03/2009 01:37:00

Make sure you understand what this change does before you vote.

Spaniolu
07/03/2009 01:37:00

Nope its not. So much work for nothing. We will see the same demo or almost the same. Let CS be like it is: with bugs!!

spr1n mapper
07/03/2009 01:47:00

good change in some way and bad sametime, but there is other way to avoid "timerbugs" I thnk there should still be 1 second margin to get a record, to avoid lame 0.2-0.1 second iproovements for example my kz_man_eznasa was beaten by 1.1xxx seconds and its deserves to be listed. kz_man_alienbase is beaten by 0.2 seconds and looks total joke to me. ppl who made wr's before this rule had no oportunity (idea) to compare their demos by miliseconds so they didnt bother improving those "xx.0xxx" demos and now jumpers get advantage over previous ones. that my thoughts about it

billz
07/03/2009 01:54:00

omilo, write what you are thinkin please. I need to hear some opinions to make up my own.

s1gh
07/03/2009 02:12:00

Okay you guys, I'm pretty sure you know what I think about this in general, BUT this vote is about completely the WRONG thing. This is not what the poll should be about. This system of having a timer that has its main base as the in-game timer and a "secondary" timer as the FPS death timer is just bad. You either completely stick with the in-game timer, or you completely stick with the FPS death timer. Look at StormZz's bhopwarehouse demo. Originally, over a year ago now probably, he got a 22 sec demo with an actual time of 22.6 seconds real time which was removed because of a stupid fireworks plugin. Well, he continued to record it and got 22 seconds again, but this time with 23.01 in FPS death, so obviously slower, but it was still "22 seconds". Now, with this new system, even if he could get 22 seconds with 22.1 in FPS death, he still can't have the record, because the first priority is the in-game timer. It's like trying to ride a horse that's sitting on a camel. It just... doesn't work, because one of them is unnecessary. Make this vote either sticking completely with the FPS death timer, or sticking completely with the in-game timer, then I'll consider voting for what I think is right.

Supa
07/03/2009 02:22:00

The fact that someone can beat one of my demos by .05 seconds and have the wr does piss me off :( ... it should be that they would have to beat it by MORE then a second. That's my opinion.

faker mapper
07/03/2009 02:23:00

Good post s1gh, I shoulv have been more exact about that point. Actually "No, go back to the old one." means that only the Ingame timer matters - except for a real timerbug (60+ minutes uptime and a timeshift bigger than 3 seconds). Imo there could be rare exceptions (like the zhady vs mgD @ kz_kzfr_rabbithighway thing from the previous news with a difference of 3 seconds...), but other than that I'd rather see the old system (23,01 = 22 if the timer says so). P.S: If you have a better phrase for the poll question and options -> let me know.

s1gh
07/03/2009 03:09:00

The better phrasing would be: Would you like to have demos based on the FPS death timer or the in-game timer? The FPS death timer is 100% accurate, and the in-game timer is.. well, whatever you wanna argue for it.

PepoMerca
07/03/2009 03:13:00

yes, its perfect like this, if u were faster than wr even for 0.00001 its a wr...

fundi #world
07/03/2009 03:28:00

stand for the positive sign because it should be exciting and more chances for people to beat wrs - including those wrs prefered to be nearly perfect demo. :D

Supa
07/03/2009 04:19:00

Gamster is you HAD a wr and it got beat by 0.00001 I doubt you'd be happy.

abxx49
07/03/2009 04:21:00

Think about any other type of racing. Olympic sprinting, car racing. The milliseconds count. I'm aware this is a video game, but if it's about getting the fastest time, milliseconds are necessary. Yeah, we may see demos that seem identical, but a world record time is on that is faster (by however much) that the previous world record. Eventually we are going to come to a point where the milliseconds are crucial. And to the people who say it is the same demo....well I'd rather have a fresh demo of the same time rather than no demos at all. My two cents.

Supa
07/03/2009 05:11:00

well you have no demos... so your opinion is obviously reflected because of that. For example, Np_0 beat jay by .1 seconds. We might as well just do all demos by miliseconds then if we're going to get this precise... otherwise it just isn't worth it.

dEMolite mapper
07/03/2009 05:57:00

and also kreedzing was ment to have fun and thats why miliseconds should be removed.. so my vote goes to No aswell.

Ovidiu Dumitru
07/03/2009 08:55:00

Supa, perfect post : "The fact that someone can beat one of my demos by .05 seconds and have the wr does piss me off ... it should be that they would have to beat it by MORE then a second. That's my opinion." No. Don't you realise that with this new "rule" it's like saying "It's official now. XJ community it's now "geeking-jumps.eu" or smt like that... Like someone said above, this will ruin the kz feeling... thopa, perhaps I should make an interview with you, but until then, I want to ask you something "are you happy with the current situation in XJ community regarding demo recording ? You've been here for ages and you know the history of demo recording. Do you think this is the normal course for demo recording ? I'm always saying that wanting to reach the perfection is a good thing, but don't you think this is a bit to much ? Is this the way you want for demo recording ?"

cC|Nikolaa
07/03/2009 09:30:00

No. I agree with faker's post and Supa's also. Beating a WR like that just sucks. What timer shows = real time. It's been like that since the start of KZ and +1 to dEMolite here. KZ was meant to be fun and those miliseconds would result pure geeking.

zam
07/03/2009 11:01:00

cycloP perfekt post there, i think this new demo recording sucks, that you can beat a record with .05, i takes away the hole kz felling and its kidna bad imo. Vote: NO

ndR Tournament #2
07/03/2009 11:08:00

Come on dudes please take a step back so as to get a broader view of things... We reached a point where most of the short maps and almost unbeatable only with the Kreedz timer. This time is like 5 or 6 years old, Kreedz couldn't imagine the kz community would grow up as much as it is nowadays, less than seconds was totally [b]useless[/b] before. I think we need this rule, or we need a new timer. Long maps will still get pwnd by several seconds and short maps will now be able to get pwnd, isn't that great? More maps to record, more world records, what's the matter? The same run? Let me laugh about that, most of the the WR beaten nowadays (except the very long maps) just look like the same, [b]the only difference comes from the jumper's style[/b], and that's the same for short maps. I think people are whining because this rule allows jumpers to pwn unbeatable maps before, I've been a recorder too, and I know what means "recording a short map", harder to beat so you'll be quiet for a long time before it gets beaten. It's only a new step belonging to the evolution this community needs, because it really has stagnated too much in my opinion...

Ovidiu Dumitru
07/03/2009 11:25:00

Yes, this community needs a new timer, a perfect one. But until then... let's leave it this way, the old way. s1gh it's right. The better question would be : "Would you like to have demos based on the FPS death timer or the in-game timer?" This is something else....

akkord mapper
07/03/2009 11:31:00

And even if the new timer would be done and put in the upcoming new maps .. the old maps would stay unfair and the question about this rule would come again up .. even this rule wont get accepted, so it will in the future for sure .. because these situations will pop-up ALOT

beuhnoix
07/03/2009 11:48:00

totaly agree with faker.. :/ but if you change the rules, plz change de record page.. (more precise)

Fliborecord holder Tournament #2
07/03/2009 11:50:00

I will just paste my comment from the newspost: "Dujes, it's not 1 millisecond. The 1 second barrier is still there. I read all the comments and I see most of the people don't even know what it means. Let's take cg_wildwesthop for an example. The ingame timer said 2:47, but it was 2:48 in fps-death, so it was REALLY 2:48. kunqui's demo showed 2:47, but his time in fps-death was 2:47. It's still pretty much the same system... It's just less lame because timerbugs are eliminated... " I was most surprised by faker's post... 0.1 sec improvements have always existed. Let's take my kz_cho_mountaintree 4:57 for an example. I press the timer JUST when it changed from 56 to 57. Let's imagine someone beats it with a lucky 4:56 demo where the 56 stays kinda long there, for 0,9 seconds let's say. Isn't that a 0,1 second improvement? However, fully fps-death based timer system would be the best, but thopa told be that XJ needs some recoding for that, so it's not possible at the moment. So this is a perfect solution to eliminate timerbugs and make the game a bit funnier. Of course I understand that it's lame for StormZz that his bhopwarehouse got beaten like that, but XJ needs to move on - the ingame timer isn't just accurate enough. It's not supposed to be "play for fun", some people like geeking the hell out of themselves and gain appreciation, otherwise there wouldn't even be kz records. It's just sad to see how many people don't understand this new rule and because of that vote NO. In my opinion there shouldn't even be a poll, it doesn't make any sense to go back to the old system which was unfair. abxx49's post is great. This is the direction we have to take. In my opinion even the slightest improvement to any demo should be the wr. Why not take the fastest run? Should the slower run be wr? WELL NO? Some people say that every demo would be beaten with 0.001 seconds then. Not really... At first there would be lots of 0,xx second improvements, but they'll stop eventually, and decimals don't even matter in longer maps. They're boring to watch? Then don't watch them? It's just lame - The person who first makes 00:05 in rpz_downfall[boxes] will have it for an eternity... It has to change. Sorry for the hard-readable text... Same as faker, I don't even want to read it again.

remake
07/03/2009 12:14:00

i feel sad for guys who lost their demos by milliseconds, si [b]NO[/b].

remake
07/03/2009 12:14:00

so*

Stefkicha
07/03/2009 12:25:00

Imagine you are trying to beat cg_cupiators (44.2139). And you get 00.43 ingame timer. Did you get the wr? You just have to check fps death every time you do such a run. It's not like you get 00.42 ingame timer. Then you immediately know you have beaten brian's demo and don't have to waste time checking fps death. Now let's take a look at the 0000 records. According to the old system, if you find a big sc on an AXN map and you get 0001 second try, you woudn't submit it because the whole comunity will see that sc and someone could get 0000 with it and have the wr. So you wiould try to get 0000 and then submit it. But now the system has changed. And if you get 0000 ingame but 1.0012 in fps death it's like you have to do the map again. But now there are four 0000 records. If the real time in one of them is 1.0012 then it is beatable. But when that demo was recorded this new rule didn't exist. And the guy who recorded the demo couldn't know it's nessecary to have less than 1.0 seconds real time. So it would be Very unfair to the holder of the 0000 record if someone would beat it like that.

remake
07/03/2009 12:39:00

i have to correct myself, no by milliseconds, but why the fuck there's kreedz timecounter? to see how fast did you finished the map or to get a WRONG preview of your time? + XJ better should start building a new timer, or use sadpuppy's, cause if kreedz timecounter shows wrong time, then it's pointless to add such a timer in a map.

Slapapa
07/03/2009 12:40:00

I think you need to spend like kz recording mod or something. That mod works like that: then you pushing the timer in the cs corner time is running with 0:01 secs or something for example zhady finished kz_nolve in 4:42.41 or something :D P.S my english bad !

chrizZo
07/03/2009 12:42:00

Okay, I didn't even know about this rule change, since I haven't read it into the 'demo release'. This is my point. You made this rule change, without a newspost, I didn't know about it. Okay, this is not final, but if the community votes for 'yes' in this votes the records from this release will stay. If I was StormZz, I would feel punked now. I don't know if you are saying now, that it was my fault, since I haven't read the extended news in a demo release. A rule change means a newspost for me, sorry, but thats what I'm thinking. I personally like this new rule, but you should have made it more clear, seriously. And now there is no way back, if the people vote yes, the records of z0ck3r and StormZz are history. If the people will vote no, we will stay with our old and outdated system. I guess in the future we need acurate times with ms, maybe we could use it nowadays as well. I would have nothing against it to be honest.

Fliborecord holder Tournament #2
07/03/2009 13:50:00

[quote]i have to correct myself, no by milliseconds, but why the fuck there's kreedz timecounter? to see how fast did you finished the map or to get a WRONG preview of your time? + XJ better should start building a new timer, or use sadpuppy's, cause if kreedz timecounter shows wrong time, then it's pointless to add such a timer in a map. [/quote] When Kreedz made his timer he didn't know it was inaccurate.. I'm not sure if it's even possible to build a better timer which is 100% accurate like demolyser. Like MakeMeHappy said, a plugin would be cool. Then you'd know immediately. However, if the plugin is inaccurate, you can still check it from demolyser, but the plugin time will give you enough information if you beat it or not.

trb
07/03/2009 13:57:00

voted no. either only demolyser/fps death time counts on all demos. or then only kztime counts. but only fps death time counts on demos where kztimer was same is somehow, weird. for example. the picture brian on fairy_island. it has 12.0052, hels has 11.8867 With the new system it would look this way: 1) brian upload his demo with 11 seconds (ingame timer) 2) it will get accepted, cause no one other has 11 second on kz timer on this moment, but theoretically the time is wrong on kz timer. 3) hel upload his demo with 11 seconds (ingame timer) 4) it will get accepted, cause brians exactelly time is more than 11, hel's is exactelly in 11seconds range. Means: brians got replaced, because his exactelly time don't equal with kztimer, and now, there is a demo (hel) with exactelly time equals to kz timer. Means in other words: "We first accept Demos with theoretically wrong times, and when someone got same kztimer time but with right real times, it will get replaced" And this sounds really bad "first accept wrong ones". Old system was, only kz timer matters (if there is no real timerbug). Sure, u can say then here too, "we accept theoretically often wrong times" because many demos the ingame time don't equal to real time, but it is consistently. [b]so imo. either: only real time count (consistently) [/b](logically all actual demos will be changed to real time too)[b] or: only kztimer counts (consistently)[/b] and surely not: first kztimer, but replace when someone make same kztimer time but with right real time (first accept a demo with this time, which would be somehow incorrect cause it once will get replaces with "correct" ones.) (for myself, i would say only kztimer, but if there should get a change it could get "only real time" too because there would be also consistently, but it would be sucky to record, after each "stop" u have to load it first in demolyser to check if u got a record or not :D) [b]voted: No, go back to the old one.[/b]

McL Banned Comment Banned
07/03/2009 13:58:00

supa is right if someone beat ur wr with 0.00124s or something like that

Mehz
07/03/2009 14:08:00

Stupid...

Dogos^
07/03/2009 14:29:00

i voted no. i think this rule is too much.. come on 0.5 seconds or so and you beat a demo ? this isnt fair for people who had the demos cause when they recorded them they didnt know about this and maybe they could improve their times by 0.5 sec for example.. and now those demos will be ruined by some guy who now knows about this.. also the fact that every time you finish your demo you have to check if you did the wr or not.. that really sucks for the recorders.. well i have some more reasons but i dont want to write anymore :P i hope that this rule wont be accepted it sucks imo

qewi
07/03/2009 14:30:00

I don't really like this change, but it's really something that must happen. So I voted yes. It's not that much of a deal anyway.

Tafatt
07/03/2009 14:55:00

It's a good change. This is more fair to the recorders who actually are faster than the previous record without having to hope to be lucky with the inaccurate ingame timer.

soul v2.0 mapper
07/03/2009 15:20:00

What's the problem? If the climber is faster than the record then why shouldn't it be a new record? When the timerbug rule was announced everyone was for it because it would make the timer more accurate so why do people suddenly not want to make the timer more accurate? And it isn't lame for a player with a record. If someone beat my sandblock for example in 5:37 with a faster time I wouldn't be annoyed because I've been beaten fair and square (well yeah I would be slightly annoyed that I've lost the rec but :P). This rule would give more people more opportunities to record, thus increasing the activity on XJ. I mean c'mon, XJ is virtually on the brink of extinction (no new maps, long time delay between some demo releases), so this rule would allow for more demo releases, and everyone likes demo releases, right?

akkord mapper
07/03/2009 16:02:00

Checking demo after making isn't really a point it takes maximum 10seconds to get off the cs go into your csfolder find demo and check it ..

thopa
07/03/2009 16:19:00

soul|ftw: "...When the timerbug rule was announced everyone was for it because it would make the timer more accurate so why do people suddenly not want to make the timer more accurate?" Exactly, and that confuses me too. A timerbug rule were applied and people were told to restart their server after 60 minutes, although the timerbug can occur after any random period of time. An uptime less than 10 minutes can produce a timerbug, and how have we've been preventing these timerbugs? Yes - with fps death or demolyser. So we have been using the same tool to prevent timerbugs all the time - it's nothing new really. Read the news post where heL^_x's demo on kzno_xtremeblock were denied. People dislike timerbugs, and this new "rule" completely removes all known timerbugs, which leaves the most correct demos listed as WR. No more timerbugs, but No-voters seems to want them to exist. I can't understand that part. I'm also sad to read that I still see comments about people still not understanding this change. It's not about beating demos with 1/10, 1/100 or 1/1000 of a second. Kreedz timer won't be replaced by fps death or demolyser, it's not what the subject is about. It's just used as an extra tool to prevent timerbugged demos. Timerbugs have always been disliked, except for some few people that seem to love them - [b]because it fools them to be quicker than they really are[/b]. I just want to say that I do understand the No-side, and that you want to stick with the ingame timer - and nothing else; but it's just to grandpa-style. [b]TROUbl3m4k3R: "..we accept theoretically often wrong times"[/b] - Yes, but none of the accepted demos have been slower than the previous WR, except perhaps a very small amount if I've missed them.

remake
07/03/2009 17:58:00

I agree with you, Flibo. But still.. I just don't like this change, it's just lame when you made a demo in a past and NOW it will be beated by milliseconds, because admins accepted that demo WITH timerbug.

m0ver
07/03/2009 18:03:00

Is it possible to make AMX plugin based counter that is as precise as FPS death? So when you press stop button you get "real" time also. plus this plugin should detect real pressing of the start button not fake as today's plugins do (i,e. they don't detect starting through wall, you can start plugin timer but not the KZ timer).

StormZz
07/03/2009 18:40:00

As someone mentioned already, let the demo holders decide, they have a lot more experience and knowledge. XJ can either use only the fps-death timer or the ingame timer. And if the fps-death timer is used, make it milliseconds for 1min maps atleast. Clintmo_bhopwarehouse is now unbeatable because akkord beat my 23.01 sec time. I didn't even have the chance to improve my demo before with a better time, and now he gets the rec because he beat my .01 timerbug ?(is that even a timerbug?)

s1gh
07/03/2009 18:49:00

I voted yes, but not to this shitty half kz timer half fps death system. I voted yes just because I hope that VERY soon times will be based SOLELY on FPS Death. This means the ingame timer is worth jack shit to me, its only purpose is to give me some indication whether or not I beat the time, and how close I was to beating it. This also means that I want everything to be beatable with milliseconds, and that I want those milliseconds to be displayed on the website with the demo releases and on the demo page (extra coding, I know). Otherwise consider my vote a no.

Supa
07/03/2009 19:27:00

I agree with chrizzo... This rule wasn't really made that clear... and now all those demos this release are unbeatable practically. I say you give them your demos back.. and make a new timer that's accurate or publicly announce we are going forward then this... then make a date where it would be official.

Supa
07/03/2009 19:27:00

and let us know how fast you can actually beat a demo. are we doing .01 .001 .0001???

kunqui
08/03/2009 01:45:00

I agree with SuPa, Is bad if someone beat your demo with a difference of 0,3sec, personnally i wll be so mad if 1 or more of my demos were beated with this rule. I can support if that person what beated my demo, did 1 or more second, NOT 0,003. Well are just opinion. i put my vote in only demos with 1 or more secs of realtime

s1gh
08/03/2009 01:51:00

That's just stupid kunqui. Read what flibo wrote: "0.1 sec improvements have always existed. Let's take my kz_cho_mountaintree 4:57 for an example. I press the timer JUST when it changed from 56 to 57. Let's imagine someone beats it with a lucky 4:56 demo where the 56 stays kinda long there, for 0,9 seconds let's say. Isn't that a 0,1 second improvement?"

SilverNinja mapper
08/03/2009 03:16:00

brian: 12.0052 hel: 11.8867 so HeL can beat brian's fairyisland record by [b]0.12[/b] seconds and get WR, but if brian wants to get the WR back, he has to beat HeL's time by [b]0.89[/b] seconds? This is an incredibly stupid rule. All records should be able to beaten by 0.01 seconds.

omilo
08/03/2009 04:58:00

Some of you keep talking about a more accurate ingame timer. There already exists a accurate timer without timerbugs. And it's used in a lot of maps. For example the a2 maps and kzls maps. You guys just need to learn how to use it.....

trb
08/03/2009 12:26:00

thopa, the problem is, that I (maybe we) don't know the right definition of timerbug. In the news where the thing was "announced" with the timerbug, the possibility that a timerbug occurs was defined this way: "A timerbug occurs with a probability of 90% if the server is running longer than 60 minutes: The timer will show a better time than you actually achieved. (about 5-15 seconds better). The probablity that a timerbug will occur if your server is running for less than 60 minutes is 0,0%." So, actually i saw it as 2 ways. 1. the kztimer isnt accurate, 1.000000000second in real life isn't 1.0000000 second in kztimer. Don't matter if a server runs more or less than 60minutes, its very often that the time in fps death don't equal to the time in kztimer. (but still with a consistently) 2. the timerbug: if server is running over 60 minutes, there could be a timerbug with it less inaccurate and not even consistently. maybe this definition is wrong, but since in the news is standing that when server is running less than 60minutes, no timerbug can come, then this inaccurance in realtimee - kztimer with suchdemos might be not the "real timerbug" and just the consistently inacurance from kz timer. Also, when every time in fps death which don't equal to kztimer, i still don't understand following one: [b]People dislike timerbugs, and this new "rule" completely removes all known timerbugs, which leaves the most correct demos listed as WR. No more timerbugs, but No-voters seems to want them to exist. I can't understand that part.[/b] Why should this remove the timerbug completely? example: i would make a record, for example: kz_sandblock_ez 04:00 (just an example lol). kz timer shows 04:00, fps death time say 241.x seconds (04:01). it would get accepted and listed as 04:00, right? BUT if later, someone else do 04:00 too, but with 240.x seconds, it would replace my 04:00 cause the new one has the right real time (and also no timerbug). But, wasn't the first demo then with such a timerbug? my 0400 with 0401 in fps death? That's why i also said, either, stick on old rule, or if there have to be a change, then JUST accept demos were real time equals to kztimer (wouldn't that remove the timerbug completely?), which also means, that every demo which actually is in record list, and kztimer don't equal to real time in fps death, should get removed. (Or do i understand something in new rule explanation completely wrong?)

s1gh
08/03/2009 14:25:00

Wait, you honestly want them to accept demos where the real time is the same as the in-game timer, troublemaker? Seriously? So if I spend 2 months recording kz_sandblock because I hate soul|ftw, and I get 5:30 in-game because he sucks, but my fps death time says 5:31, it shouldn't get accepted? I would stop recording.

Ratmen
08/03/2009 15:33:00

no

Acelamb
08/03/2009 19:07:00

This change simply complicated things. The in-game timer should be what counts, but if this rule is to stay, then it should start showing about two more digits of the time. My conclusion is: Yes, if you want to complicate things a hell of a lot more then it already is. No, because this is a CS 1.6 game and then we follow the CS 1.6 timer.

Th1eF
08/03/2009 20:44:00

new way ftw

Supa
08/03/2009 20:54:00

delete the old timer ftw.

m0ver
08/03/2009 22:33:00

Supa is right, replace timers in all maps with new timer that has milisecs. Maybe then those maps will be properly archived :/

kASJAk
08/03/2009 23:27:00

NO, OLD TIME FTW FFS :<

trb
09/03/2009 00:10:00

s1gh, no, i don't want that, mostly i want to hold old system. but this what i called as other solution is just the the thing, if there rly have to be a change to make it more accurate. then, imo, it should be "accurate on all demos" and not only "just accurate, when someone make a same ingametimer time like the actual record" which is, imo, very stupid.

s1gh
09/03/2009 00:39:00

That's great, it's just not what you said before.

cheche
09/03/2009 09:03:00

I'm obviously with s1gh here, as I've said many times before - why use the ingame timer when we know it's not accurate? Of course KZ is still "just" for fun, but the competition since the "good old days" has increased so much, that having an accurate is absolutely necessary. "Who cares if you are 0,9 seconds faster than the old record?" faker how can you say that? Who cares if someone beats clintmo_bhopwarehouse with 0.9 seconds? You [b]should[/b] of anyone, be aware of how much that is in such a small map. One bhop skip is approximatly 0.2/3 sec's , just to give an idea. You go try add two more skips to a clintmo_bhop-map and then when if you did it - we shouldn't care? Of course we should - you just made new WR.. Gotta punch in now 08:00, will write later

trb
09/03/2009 10:26:00

s1gh, it is that what i said before? [quote] That's why i [b]also[/b] said, either, stick on old rule, or [b]if there have to be a change, then[/b] JUST accept demos were real time equals to kztimer (wouldn't that remove the timerbug completely?), which also means, that every demo which actually is in record list, and kztimer don't equal to real time in fps death, should get removed. [/quote] combined with my first comment, u see that I would like to stick with old, [b]but if....[/b] :) well anyway... my 2nd post was just refered to the "unclear" things in timerbug which i don't understand @ the comment from thopa 11 posts above my 2nd post.

cheche
09/03/2009 13:02:00

@StormZz"As someone mentioned already, let the demo holders decide, they have a lot more experience and knowledge. XJ can either use only the fps-death timer or the ingame timer. And if the fps-death timer is used, make it milliseconds for 1min maps atleast. Clintmo_bhopwarehouse is now unbeatable because akkord beat my 23.01 sec time. I didn't even have the chance to improve my demo before with a better time, and now he gets the rec because he beat my .01 timerbug ?(is that even a timerbug?)" That is why you should be able to beat it back by 0.1 sec, imo. It's you having the change to improve your previous record - it's about having the fastests demo as WR. And akkord's demo was faster and it therefore deservs to be the WR - now if someone beats that by 0.1 then they deserv the WR, as that would then be the fastests demo. Fastests demo = WR, it's as simple as that, imo.

cheche
09/03/2009 13:03:00

"It's [b]not[/b] about you having the change to improve your previous record." Sorry for dp

Nilsen
09/03/2009 14:19:00

Oh man SUPA stop crying. I would be very angy if I actually was faster than the current record holder(like mgd vs. zhady on +1337, though I think flibo took it now) but didn't get the record.

chrizZo
09/03/2009 16:51:00

The first step you have to do it that you have to make the mappers use the new timer from the a2 team. This means that there won't be any new timerbugs on new maps. Then change all world-records to example: 03:45.6 and run this system. Would be optimal in my opinion!

Marshell
24/09/2010 13:04:00

fix the dl link please :)?