chackpop
David Campbell
25%
Posts: 1,543
|
Post by chackpop on May 6, 2009 14:49:17 GMT -5
In the SASUKE 22 preview of the new obstacles, the Circle Hammer looked to be a first stage Metal Spin, jump off the platform, grab the rope, land. Instead, people just reached out for the rope and slid down. Did the competitors find a loophole in the obstacle?
|
|
Lennon
Levi Meeuwenberg
Posts: 793
|
Post by Lennon on May 6, 2009 15:08:04 GMT -5
I wouldn't consider it as a loop hole, just a new way to get around an obstacle. Same way if you were to go down the slider jump and instead of immediately jumping off, stop and swing back and forth giving you momentum.
It's just what the developers did not have in mind when they created the obstacle. So who knows, maybe they will change it a little next time.
|
|
|
|
Post by obakemono on May 6, 2009 15:11:10 GMT -5
I don't think 'reaching out for the rope' can be considered a loophole. More like common sense.
I think that alternative Slider Jump tactic would be 90% likely to go badly wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by jfeathe on May 6, 2009 20:22:04 GMT -5
It's hard to tell. If they would have placed the rope intentionally close or far away, it would have been more obvious.
However, I do think they actually planned for people to jump. They put it closer so it wouldn't be that hard.
|
|
|
|
Post by davidcampbell on May 6, 2009 23:44:11 GMT -5
I don't think it was a malfunction. The testers were doing it this way too. This is not the metal spin, it's supposed to be an east time waster, it is the 2nd obstacle after all.
|
|
|
|
Post by RiderLeangle on May 6, 2009 23:47:18 GMT -5
I think the long runup space is just to throw people off so they try to get people to waste time.
|
|
joemello
Komiya Rie
#1 Unlimited curmudgeon
Posts: 515
|
Post by joemello on May 7, 2009 0:32:50 GMT -5
That word. I don't think it means what you think it means. The difficult part definitely looked like it was supposed to be the landing, not the take-off. If they wanted to make things more interesting for next time, they can either shorten the rope or allow the ring to swing freely (i.e. no scaffold to stop its progress) |
|
|
|
Post by RiderLeangle on May 7, 2009 2:17:22 GMT -5
That word. I don't think it means what you think it means. The difficult part definitely looked like it was supposed to be the landing, not the take-off. If they wanted to make things more interesting for next time, they can either shorten the rope or allow the ring to swing freely (i.e. no scaffold to stop its progress) Physics problem there. How Can you get a ring that goes all around the circle and keep the circle held up? |
|
|
|
Post by gazzawhite on May 7, 2009 16:43:22 GMT -5
That word. I don't think it means what you think it means. The difficult part definitely looked like it was supposed to be the landing, not the take-off. If they wanted to make things more interesting for next time, they can either shorten the rope or allow the ring to swing freely (i.e. no scaffold to stop its progress) Physics problem there. How Can you get a ring that goes all around the circle and keep the circle held up? M.C. Escher would be able to do it. Oh wait a sec, he only made drawings. Bummer. You could have a spiral though. Or instead of a stopper at the end, just have nothing, so if you miss it on the first go, you'll probably fall off the end. I'd think that would be a little unfair though, the waste of time should be enough punishment. |
|
|
|
Post by davidcampbell on May 8, 2009 3:13:21 GMT -5
Shortening the rope would make it harder. I hope they don't read this!
|
|
|
|
Post by VxJasonxV on May 8, 2009 10:06:36 GMT -5
Personally I didn't like the flow of the Circle Hammer. It was very wonky and just didn't feel like it felt in.
Now, the Slider Jump was a beautiful addition. The Circle Hammer tends to stick out like a sore thumb. I can't entirely explain it, I just wouldn't mind seeing it gone never to return in 23.
|
|
|
|
Post by obakemono on May 8, 2009 11:28:34 GMT -5
I agree with that entirely. It was just cumbersome. It encouraged non-fluid motion, as trying to do it quickly was just very dangerous. I imagine it'll be a one shot obstacle, though, and will be the only change to the first stage for 23.
|
|
|
|
Post by RiderLeangle on May 8, 2009 12:21:17 GMT -5
The Pole Maze encouraged fluid motion in 19? That's news to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by jfeathe on May 8, 2009 12:53:53 GMT -5
That word. I don't think it means what you think it means. The difficult part definitely looked like it was supposed to be the landing, not the take-off. If they wanted to make things more interesting for next time, they can either shorten the rope or allow the ring to swing freely (i.e. no scaffold to stop its progress) Physics problem there. How Can you get a ring that goes all around the circle and keep the circle held up? They could make it a downwards spiral that was only connected at the start. That way, if the competitors missed the landing they would go around and drop off into the water. |
|
|
|
Post by jfeathe on May 8, 2009 12:55:07 GMT -5
Physics problem there. How Can you get a ring that goes all around the circle and keep the circle held up? M.C. Escher would be able to do it. Oh wait a sec, he only made drawings. Bummer. You could have a spiral though. Or instead of a stopper at the end, just have nothing, so if you miss it on the first go, you'll probably fall off the end. I'd think that would be a little unfair though, the waste of time should be enough punishment. I really should read he enire thread before making my post.  |
|
joemello
Komiya Rie
#1 Unlimited curmudgeon
Posts: 515
|
Post by joemello on May 13, 2009 2:23:06 GMT -5
If you separated the wheel from the main scaffold and only attached the two via reinforced poles at the obstacle's starting point, you'd have basically what I explained without the issue of physics.
The point was that you were physically stopped from going around past the landing area. Take that out of the equation, and you have an obstacle that's at worst a bigger time sink and at best a challenge.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oti on May 13, 2009 11:25:50 GMT -5
I don't know if that would be better. I would just make the obstacle even more of a time waster.
Anyway, no, it wasn't a "malfunction". If they wanted people to jump for it, it would have been farther away, it would have had a shorter rope or both.
|
|
|
|
Post by Badalight on May 14, 2009 13:53:59 GMT -5
If you separated the wheel from the main scaffold and only attached the two via reinforced poles at the obstacle's starting point, you'd have basically what I explained without the issue of physics. The point was that you were physically stopped from going around past the landing area. Take that out of the equation, and you have an obstacle that's at worst a bigger time sink and at best a challenge. Draw a picture in MS paint, I'm confused as to how that would actually work. |
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on May 14, 2009 20:53:19 GMT -5
If I'm understanding it correctly, joemello was suggesting having just under 360 degrees of movement, as this ugly example shows. Don't ask why the Circle Hammer is floating in midair. I just got tired of adding details to the pic.  Now, I'd be concerned that this design (the circular track in particular)would bend or break over the course of the tournament because the larger circle would have a lot of torque to overcome with the weight of competitors who haven't landed at the far end yet. |
|
