wtb non retarded rounded down minute times

[Nika]

The only people who seem to be supporting the idea seem to be the people who never had a single post in the record section :^) but hey sure we can't judge it.

[roflmfao]

#fuckeurope

That's racist. #makeeuropegreatagain

Also, I am proud member of one alltime and one current meta record, and I still would like to see second based records. Especially if it makes people do Deep again :p

[Misty]

Anyway, what about old dungeon records?

In my opinion they should be kept alongside second-based times as long as they are able to compete. It's not fair to dismantle them or to remove them entirely without knowing what was achieved.

It's not that simple, though... if a video doesn't exist, you assume each level was x:00, but if there is a video, you add the seconds? So you're punishing people for having provided the video? That's not fair at all.

Throwing more salt, seems most people against the idea are euros #fuckeurope

Literally everyone in this thread except you is a Euro xD

[Flo]

you can start doing 9man deep, 5mins isnt too hard

stop saying that "second based records would increase competition" if people arent even going for the possible minute based records

[Cruz]

Anyway, what about old dungeon records?

In my opinion they should be kept alongside second-based times as long as they are able to compete. It's not fair to dismantle them or to remove them entirely without knowing what was achieved.

It's not that simple, though... if a video doesn't exist, you assume each level was x:00, but if there is a video, you add the seconds? So you're punishing people for having provided the video? That's not fair at all.

You're right, it would be unfair if submissions under the current rules are treated differently.
How about keeping all present minute based times on the table, video or not, and let the runners re-enter their runs under the new rules if they wish (without voiding the previous submission)?
I realise this is extra tricky for dungeons. But after all, if this change was to happen, old runs still retain their value as the first run to hit that minute threshold unless it's beaten with a lower /age.

[Jang]

It'd be possible to make such a change if you keep all time records, even if they're done after the change, minute based and only count the exact time on a new meta table.
I still fail to see how having somebody else, who neither has invested as much time as you nor done a better job than you, beat you by copying your tactic and getting a good spawn will increase the activity of an already dying comunity. The only ones benefiting off such a rule would be people with no creativity.
The most effective way of record hunting would change from developing the best tactics to waiting until somebody else provided them and then start pushing when they are not motivated anymore.
My view on this is that some guys who desperately want a record but aren't good enough, wanna change the rules to archieve something they otherwise couldn't. Thats why you're becomming a salty cunt when people are not cheering for your dumb idea. (Mainly directed at K A O S.)

[Ima Go Farm Now]

but you aren't a euro anymore misty #brexit

[Cruz]

It'd be possible to make such a change if you keep all time records, even if they're done after the change, minute based and only count the exact time on a new meta table

That could make for a good compromise, yes. It retains the old prestige of being first under the threshold while still making way for harder competition.

Also, please stop trying to derail the discussion with personal attacks..

[Misty]

That system doesn't seem to make sense, Jang... for example, If I did a Frostmaw's run with these times:
1:00, 2:00, 3:00, 2:00, 2:00, that's 10:00 altogether, and I'd get the current meta record.
If I then did a run with a different build that cost 59s on all levels except level 3, where I saved 1s... so 1:59, 2:59, 2:59, 2:59, 2:59, that would be 13:55, which is clearly almost 4 minutes slower than my 10:00 run, and thus would not qualify for current meta record. However, going by the minutes system, that's a 9 minute run, so it would get the all-time record.
So you'd have an all-time record that was done in current meta, but isn't the current meta record, and a current meta record that is MUCH faster than the all-time record, but is still considered too slow for that category. That's completely ridiculous.

[Jang]

Yes, but thats a very unrealistic case. The current meta guy may aswell go for 0:59, 1:59, 2:59, 1:59, 1:59 then.