The Authoritative Minesweeper Guestbook

Feel free to chat, make suggestions, or tell your scores!

  First Page
  Prev Page
  Post
  Home
Next Page  
Last Page  
Viewing Page 21 of 36 (Total Entries: 3560)

Jul 17th 2003 at 12:24:53 PM
Name:  

XF

Best expert:  

69

Best intermediate:  

23 x7 -> 22

Best beginner:  

1

Comments:  

Finally I broke that 23...

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 17th 2003 at 09:15:38 AM
Name:  

lukasz malinowski

Comments:  

hi,
greetings from croatia . i haven`t posted here for long time, because i didn`t have an internet connection. so i played a lot recently, i had several sub50 times, but i did`t broke my records. have nice holidays guys, see you.

Email Email        
Jul 16th 2003 at 12:39:13 PM
Name:  

Jihad

Best expert:  

80

Best intermediate:  

20 or 23 dunno

Best beginner:  

2

Comments:  

omfg you guys are skilled )
check out HTTP://WWW.GETTOH.ORG

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 16th 2003 at 09:57:48 AM
Name:  

Elmar

Comments:  

Dennis, Jon uses 3 clicks and the 3bv is 3.

Jul 16th 2003 at 08:49:48 AM
Name:  

Martin Toft Madsen

Best expert:  

59

Best intermediate:  

15

Best beginner:  

1

Comments:  

Got home from my bike trip to Paris this morning. Until now I have a 77 on exp, and I don't think I can get near my last AR scores (59-15-2), so I will have to take the penalty this period.

Anyway, happy sweeping and happy summer

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 16th 2003 at 08:43:02 AM
Name:  

Stephan Bechtel

Comments:  

As I am the one who applied the 3BV method of counting clicks (not the one who invented the name), I can definitively confirm Alex's and Elmar's countings and explanations that Dennis' board is a wonderful 23 with 5 openings and 18 remaining clicks. As in every standard Windows minesweeper version, diagonal walls as the 1's in squares 3-3 and 4-4 are openings, when you click any empty square, those require - in an optimal way - only 1 click and therefore, 3BV counts only 1 click as well. Hopefully, anything is clear now

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 16th 2003 at 08:32:08 AM
Name:  

Dennis Lütken

Comments:  

Thanks Elmar! I just saw your post and I think I understand now. Unfortunately I'm not at my own computer right now so I can't even look at the picture I sent out to some people. If Alex was right, then it's only a 23 3bv and that's even more amazing! COOL!

Jul 16th 2003 at 08:27:00 AM
Name:  

Dennis Lütken

Best intermediate:  

62 --> 50 --> 40 --> 39 --> 33 --> 28x2 --> 25x2 --> 23 --> 21

Comments:  

This is as much of my int. history I can remember. I only started playing about half a year ago, so I think it's pretty nice to be at 21 already! I don't think I'll be able to go much lower for a while but I still enjoy playing!

Alex: I don't know if it's you or me who's counting the 3bv of a given board the right way. I didn't start doing that until about a month ago so I'm probably the one who's not doing it right. I didn't quite understand what you meant and why you only counted 5 openings. In the videos section I did discover something 'funny'... I must not be counting right because one of Jon Simonsen's 1's on beginner has a 3bv of 3 if you ask me but he only uses two clicks before the highscore sign pops up... Strange! I guess I don't know how to count the openings... Could somebody please try to explain???

XF: 7 23's... WOW, that's bad luck! As you can see, I only got one before getting a 21! I wish you all the best of luck and don't worry... if you've gotten 7 23's then I'm sure you'll sub 20 before you know it!

Email Email        
Jul 16th 2003 at 08:21:21 AM
Name:  

Elmar

Comments:  

Alex, you were right. Two diagonal numbers are not a wall for openings. A blank square opens all touching squares....

AR 58-18-X

Jul 16th 2003 at 07:33:27 AM
Name:  

Alex

Comments:  

I must be wrong. I only counted 5 openings. I have always counted an opening wall as being a solid wall. I have never counted 2 diagonal numbers as a wall. I hope you can understand what I mean. I have to review some of my record 3BVs then. They might be higher than I origanly thought!!

Jul 16th 2003 at 07:04:44 AM
Name:  

XF

Best expert:  

69

Best intermediate:  

23 x 5 -> 23 x 7

Best beginner:  

1

Comments:  

I'm wondering how many 23s will follow before I get something better...

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 16th 2003 at 06:49:27 AM
Name:  

Active Ranking

Comments:  

**** Deadline Friday @ 20:00 GMT/ 4pm EDT ****

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 16th 2003 at 04:58:05 AM
Name:  

Dennis Lütken

Best intermediate:  

21

Best beginner:  

2

Comments:  

I'm pretty sure it's a 24 3bv... I'll send you the board again... I've marked all of the squares you have to hit except for the six openings... I marked 18 and 18 plus 6 is 24... but I also counted it many times to make sure it was a 24 and not a 23 or a 25... I could be wrong but judge for yourself!

Email Email        
Jul 16th 2003 at 04:14:49 AM
Name:  

Alex

Comments:  

Dennis. I have checked the 3BV of your 24 intmediate board twice the old fashioned way. I am convinced it is a 23 3BV which is more amazing. Or am I wrong?

Jul 15th 2003 at 05:18:16 PM
Name:  

Gareth

Comments:  

Manu, I think James once got an intermediate board with a 3BV of 23 (Pretty sure it's on his website)

Email Email        
Jul 15th 2003 at 04:57:19 PM
Name:  

damien

Comments:  

hey dennis..can you send the pic over my way as well? thanks. i've had 5 people this week claim 38, 38, 39, 39, and 35 on expert...it's definitely entertaining, but it can be annoying. no one ever sent in sub-40 fakes until lasse broke 44. it's all your fault man.

Jul 15th 2003 at 01:25:23 PM
Name:  

Daniele

Comments:  

@Alex: I use Xp, too...
I uploaded my images. You can find them on my website

Website Website    
Jul 15th 2003 at 01:07:18 PM
Name:  

Manu

Comments:  

Dennis : Your 24 3BV board is the same that the one I got several month ago, and lost after 4 sec. i think it's a record, as i've never heard about a 23 3BV board or lower...

Email Email        
Jul 15th 2003 at 05:53:54 AM
Name:  

Alex

Comments:  

Daniele: My 1 was the biggest shock to me. Very lucky. Plus it was on xp so it doesn't really count
Dennis: 3BV of 24!! Thats amazing!! Could you please email the screenshot to me.

Email Email        
Jul 15th 2003 at 05:27:42 AM
Name:  

Daniele

Best expert:  

67

Best intermediate:  

20

Best beginner:  

2

Comments:  

@Elmar: Thank you, a long training was useful...
@Alex: My 67 was a surprise for me, too. I hope to improve it again, as i'll finish my exams tomorrow.
But i'm still looking for 1 on beginner...sigh...

Jul 14th 2003 at 07:19:10 PM
Name:  

Jarad

Best expert:  

59

Comments:  

57 elmar? damn you just messing, nothing for me here, I really havent been playing in a while, but if I do, elmar, I am coming for you!

Jul 14th 2003 at 04:55:15 PM
Name:  

David Barry

Comments:  

Aapo, I see what you mean. I'm not very busy for the next couple of weeks, so I may do some numerical work on the problem, just to see what I get.

Jul 14th 2003 at 01:45:59 PM
Name:  

XF

Best expert:  

70 -> 69

Best intermediate:  

23 x 5

Best beginner:  

1

Comments:  

After some months of "inactivity" i've started again to sweep and finally I got something out of it... Let's see...

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 14th 2003 at 01:11:35 PM
Name:  

Manu

Comments:  

Dennis, please send me your screenshot, thanks.

Email Email        
Jul 14th 2003 at 06:38:07 AM
Name:  

Dennis Lütken

Best expert:  

132

Best intermediate:  

21

Best beginner:  

2

Comments:  

Wow! I just screwed up worse than ever before! I was playing on intermediate and got a really nice board with a 3bv of only 24! That's the lowest 3bv I've ever seen on intermediate so I should have been able to get a really great time on it... However, when I was only missing one square, I couldn't find it and after a couple of seconds I tried the corner because it was impossible to tell if there was one up there! The timer said 19 seconds when I hit that mine so if I hadn't missed out on that one mine I probably could have gotten a 17 or an 18! Man, I blew it! I've got a screenshot of it of course if anyone wants to see this nice board!

Email Email        
Jul 14th 2003 at 06:16:01 AM
Name:  

Alex

Best expert:  

69

Best intermediate:  

19-->19x2

Best beginner:  

1

Comments:  

Dnaiele: Congratulatinons. We are now tied. But I think you are ahead due to your lower expert. I am away from my computer all summer so I won't get much of a chance to play. So You could be well ahead by the end of the summer.

P.S. My second 19 (3BV 42) was done on millenium windows, as apposed to my usual xp. I was very suprised cos the next best I have had on millenium was 24 with a 3BV of 35. Plus I have started playing around with density after reading all your messages. I have a lot of catching up to do. My best so far is a very average 27. But I haven't played it for too long. I worked my way up, in steps of 1 mine, from 11 to 27 in about 40 minutes. Played 28 for about 15 minutes, got bored and gave up.

Jul 14th 2003 at 03:45:28 AM
Name:  

Daniel Lynch

Comments:  

To the Czech Republic for a chess tournament. I won't be with you for at least a fortnight.

Happy Sweeping

Jul 13th 2003 at 06:55:37 AM
Name:  

Martin Toft Madsen

Comments:  

Hi everybody! I arrived in Paris some days ago and will be back sweeping again in some days I see there are a lot of new messages. Its graet to see And congratulations to all new recordbreakers

Email Email        
Jul 13th 2003 at 06:50:58 AM
Name:  

Georgi Kermekchiev

Best expert:  

64 ---> 61

Best intermediate:  

14

Best beginner:  

1

Comments:  

New expert record on 124 3bv board - I feeeeeel good http://www.geocities.com/joro100/videos/61.avi

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 13th 2003 at 06:20:26 AM
Name:  

Stephan

Comments:  

Tja, Oli, was soll ich sagen? I already expected you to beat my total. And you've done in fact the best German expert time ever. I would be interested in the video as well. Thanks for mailing it.

Email Email        
Jul 13th 2003 at 12:13:15 AM
Name:  

Aapo

Comments:  

Barry:g4 just can't be 1/2 because 2 next to it. It is more like 5/6.And about using mines left information: there is one basic rule in very high density board. More mines in some area is always more likely. If there would be a mine in g4 then there wuold be only 1 mine in 7 square area if not there would be 2 mines. I don't know how to count the possibilities but you have to consider this if you are ever going to complete high density board.

Jul 12th 2003 at 06:43:17 PM
Name:  

David Barry

Comments:  

Georgi, you're right about the d6 square. The g4 probability gets into what I was talking about in one of my posts - you would have to look at the number of mines required in those squares, and their probabilities, given the overall density. 1/2 is close enough I think, and certainly easier to calculate.

Jul 12th 2003 at 06:36:47 PM
Name:  

Jonas

Comments:  

Great site, thanks for making it! Keep up the good work! Creator of #1free minesweeper at http://www.numberonefree.com

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 12th 2003 at 02:29:13 PM
Name:  

Elmar

Comments:  

Damien, the format doesn't turn the way it should...

Jul 12th 2003 at 02:27:37 PM
Name:  

Elmar

Comments:  

Just got another sub-60. 58 - 3bv125 Luckily I had camtasia running, so I finally have a video of a sub60. It's on my site!Somehow display acceleration during capture works without any problems now. I have no idea why, but now I can once again watch TV while playing. I guess it's pretty good to have some distraction. I almost got another 58 earlier today, but I had missed two mines and ende up at 61. 3bv on that one was 163!! Georgi, I don't get it. Post-click possibility?? Shouldn't that be 1/1.

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 12th 2003 at 12:07:31 PM
Name:  

Georgi

Comments:  

When I proposed that a probability feature to be incorporated in Sorin's program I meant that after each opening click was made to be calculated probability of been succesful this last click, not to calculate all possible clicks at some moment. The idea was after completing the board to see what was the risk taken in order to complete the board. So the probabilities are postclick, not preclick ...

Email Email        
Jul 12th 2003 at 09:31:24 AM
Name:  

Elmar

Comments:  

... and actually you have to weigh each combination with its possibility (number of mines). But then you can't calculate each situation isolated from the rest of the board and it gets pretty complicated.

Jul 12th 2003 at 09:12:15 AM
Name:  

Elmar

Comments:  

probability that is... I should read my posts first.

Jul 12th 2003 at 09:09:20 AM
Name:  

Elmar

Comments:  

Georgi, I don't think that's exactly true. Imagine the possibilities are 2/3 and 5/6 (instead of 1/2,5/6).In that case you have 10 (2x5) favorable and 1 bad combination. So the propability would be 10/(10+1)=10/11 which is not equal to 5/6.You always have to consider all possible combinations and decide which are favorable.

Jul 12th 2003 at 08:33:23 AM
Name:  

Georgi

Comments:  

Right Aapo,Always better probability must be chosen when more than one way to be calculated ...

Jul 12th 2003 at 08:07:33 AM
Name:  

Elmar

Best expert:  

57

Best intermediate:  

14

Best beginner:  

1

Comments:  

Wow, congrats Oli. That's a new German record for expert and second place total. Makes it tough for me to keep up. I've been thinking 53-54 was possible for me, but 52...?Can you please send me the video?Congrats also to Daniele. Pretty impressive improvements lately!

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 12th 2003 at 06:08:20 AM
Name:  

Elmar

Comments:  

I'd say it's 5/6. There are 6 different combinations. 5 with the second mine on g3 and 1 with only one mine on g4.

Jul 12th 2003 at 06:06:16 AM
Name:  

Oli

Best expert:  

54 -> 52 137 3bv

Best intermediate:  

14

Best beginner:  

2

Comments:  

Hooray!! I somehow knew a record was coming so i started camtasia, 5 minutes later i was told to enter my name again

Email Email        
Jul 12th 2003 at 05:16:52 AM
Name:  

Aapo

Comments:  

What about g4? You can think that because it's near 4 square it is 1/2 or then you can think that it is near 2 square so it is 5/6 guess.

Jul 12th 2003 at 05:04:49 AM
Name:  

Georgi

Comments:  

David, at d6 the probability is not 1/3, but 2/3, so the final CP is 1/648 !

Jul 12th 2003 at 04:51:19 AM
Name:  

Aapo Käkränen

Comments:  

I mean g4 square.

Jul 12th 2003 at 04:50:36 AM
Name:  

Aapo

Comments:  

I was wondering how is to possible to combine all the information in the board when calculation propability. For example in my 37-mines-game is g5 square 1/2 guess or 5/6 guess? And is it also possible to use mines and squares left information same time when using numbers? How do you combine all this?

Jul 12th 2003 at 04:50:08 AM
Name:  

Georgi Kermekchiev

Comments:  

On recalculating Aaapo's board probability, Yes David you are right - I missed the first guessing (6/8 at d3) and miscalculated at g5 (1/3 instead of 2/3). So instead of the right probability (1 in 1296), I've got 1 in 486 ...

Email Email        
Jul 12th 2003 at 04:28:57 AM
Name:  

David Barry

Comments:  

There is a big difficulty in calculating an exact completion probability, even given an opening few clicks.In many situations where you have to guess, one possibility needs 2 mines to cover 4 squares and the other possibility needs 1 mine to cover the same 4 squares. It is more likely to be the latter, because the average mine density in an expert board is only about 1/5. However, to get this exact, you need to keep track of how many mines are left to flag and how many squares are left to be cleared. And then you need to know enough probability to know what the distribution of mine densities in 4-square regions is. And this last bit is too hard for me.

Jul 12th 2003 at 04:23:40 AM
Name:  

David Barry

Comments:  

That didn't format as planned....Hopefully it's still clear, though that smiley thing is supposed to say h 8.

Jul 12th 2003 at 04:22:27 AM
Name:  

David Barry

Comments:  

On the chances of completeing Aapo's board:Labelling the guessed squares as one would one a chessboard (letters for the x-coordinate, numbers for the y, starting in the lower-left):6/8 (d3)1/3 (a1)2/3 (g5)1/2 (g4)1/3 (d6)1/4 (h 1/9 (g2)Which gives a combined probability of 1/1296. Unless I've missed something...

Jul 12th 2003 at 01:13:44 AM
Name:  

GE Tenleav

Best expert:  

38

Best intermediate:  

9

Best beginner:  

1

Comments:  

I just got a 38 on expert! I have screen shots to prove it.

Email Email        
Jul 11th 2003 at 02:48:51 PM
Name:  

Elmar

Comments:  

true...

Jul 11th 2003 at 02:27:15 PM
Name:  

Sorin

Comments:  

Elmar, I think boards with low 3bv have more guessing situations. The low 3bv is given by high numbers and big openings. This usually leads to big clusters of mines.An algorithm to calculate the most efficient way of playing? I thought of that a long time ago, but i have no idea how to solve it efficiently. The algorithm could start from each opening and then take the optimal solution. But i say again, I don't really know how to do it.

Jul 11th 2003 at 12:46:47 PM
Name:  

Daniele

Best expert:  

71 --> 67!

Best intermediate:  

20

Best beginner:  

2

Comments:  

A fantastic 67 arrived on expert! Now the sum is 89...wow!

Jul 11th 2003 at 06:36:16 AM
Name:  

Elmar

Comments:  

The number of openings is probably a better indicator. You normally don't hit the openings before uncovering some numbers on the edges. So you could add 1 or 2 clicks per opening to the 3bv.

But even with this adjustment 3bv is still best for non-flaggers.

Getting the number of minimum clicks required with efficient playing is probably to complicated.

Jul 11th 2003 at 05:51:08 AM
Name:  

Elmar

Comments:  

Almost all guessing situations on expert are 50/50. I checked my videos of good games. It turned out that on most boards I had to guess once or twice max.

Still I don't think it's a very important meassure for the quality of the board. The only thing about guessing situations is that they irritate and interrupt your flow. If you realize fast enough that you have to guess it shouldn't really slow you down that much. Even 4 guessing situations in one game shouldn't cost too much time allthough the propability of finishing the board is reduced to 6.25%. And in my opinion boards with low 3bv usually have fewer guessing situations anyway.

Email Email        
Jul 11th 2003 at 05:30:00 AM
Name:  

Georgi Kermekchiev

Comments:  

Sorry for the flood, but another idea came ...

It will be more correct when/if we set an algorithm for calculating the completion probability (CP) to ignore the first 3 or 5 opening clicks ... otherwise the CP will depend very much on whether we get a good opening at the beginning or not, which is going to make CP indicator useless

Email Email        
Jul 11th 2003 at 05:14:18 AM
Name:  

Georgi Kermekchiev

Comments:  

Just an idea - It would be very interesting what is the probability of finishing a given board when playing the right way (I mean without unnecessary guessing). It is obvious that the probability will depend on the start position, going left or right when you have two or more equal probability guesses to be made, etc.

I am sure that such a feature could be incorporated in Sorin's counter ?!

The completion probability will be a multiplication of all guess probabilities. That for sure will give an answer why only small % of all games is finished. I personaly make some risky guesses even if not necessary, just because I am trying to minimize movements over the board and to gain speed. That's why i finish 5 or 10 times less games than the probability theory would say



We will probably have an answer why sometimes for games with same 3bv and almost same speed, we achieve quite different times. My point is that the 3bv is a good, but not sufficient indicator how good is a given board. Another good indicator will be Completion probability ?!



Any comments?

Marc, David, Charles, Sorin, anybody else ???

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 11th 2003 at 04:58:12 AM
Name:  

Georgi Kermekchiev

Comments:  

Right Marc - 1 in 486 !

Email Email        
Jul 11th 2003 at 01:25:37 AM
Name:  

Marc Schouten

Comments:  

I calculate a 1 in 486 chance, Georgi...

Either way... pretty good

Jul 11th 2003 at 12:42:56 AM
Name:  

Gareth

Best expert:  

76

Best intermediate:  

20

Best beginner:  

1

Comments:  

Never mind the 78 I got on a custom (16x30, 99 mines) board, I just got a 76. That means I've Finally gotten under 100 total.



Yay.

Email Email        
Jul 11th 2003 at 12:12:21 AM
Name:  

Georgi Kermekchiev

Comments:  

... in fact the chance of winning that game was 1 in 1944 - not bad

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 11th 2003 at 12:02:09 AM
Name:  

Georgi Kermekchiev

Comments:  

Congrats Aapo,

Amazing game, although lucky (6 guesses)

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 10th 2003 at 11:24:54 PM
Name:  

damien

Comments:  

i meant 7 flags, 91 on the counter

Jul 10th 2003 at 11:10:36 PM
Name:  

Robert Webb

Comments:  

I just released a new version of MineSweeper3D. There's an extra board available in the demo now, a 3D cross shape. See what you think.



http://home.connexus.net.au/~robandfi/Mines3D/



Rob.

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 10th 2003 at 04:11:33 PM
Name:  

damien

Comments:  

hey elmar...bravenet just changed settings for everything, so i just changed it to allow multiple posts. i will get the counter fixed when i get home from work.



thinking of fakes, i had a guy send me an expert board where he claimed to have discovered a rare mistake: a 5 touching only 4 mines. unfortunately, he forgot to edit the mine counter on the pic, so the counter read 91 mines but there were only 8 flags. really, really sad, but also funny.

Jul 10th 2003 at 03:19:54 PM
Name:  

Elmar

Comments:  

Damien, your new guestbook just told me that you limited the number of posts per user to one.

Jul 10th 2003 at 03:12:01 PM
Name:  

Aapo

Comments:  

Steffen: Just luck and couple of thousand of tries. Nothing weird.

Jul 10th 2003 at 03:02:27 PM
Name:  

Dan

Comments:  

Manu, consider it done.

Jul 10th 2003 at 02:48:20 PM
Name:  

Manu

Best expert:  

53

Best intermediate:  

12

Best beginner:  

1

Comments:  

Who can give me a software key that allows to use Camtasia for free, please? I had one but just reinstalled everything on my PC. Thanks.

Email Email        
Jul 10th 2003 at 02:10:13 PM
Name:  

Steffen

Comments:  

i didnt even think of you, billyboy...

Jul 10th 2003 at 02:09:29 PM
Name:  

Elmar

Comments:  

300sub-70s!!! 56sub-65s, 3sub-60s...

Just today i got: 61,66x3,67x2,68x3,69

I think I'm averaging at about 68 now. Still waiting for another sub60, but I'm sure it'll come soon.

Jul 10th 2003 at 12:54:11 PM
Name:  

Brian Cornell

Best expert:  

53

Best intermediate:  

12(14)

Best beginner:  

2

Comments:  

Just finished my 50th sub 60. I've been having a good last couple days including 54, 55 x 3, 56, and 14 intermediate. No luck breaking records though. Congratulations to all record breakers, especially those whose scores are real.

Jul 10th 2003 at 12:07:31 PM
Name:  

Elmar

Comments:  

Bill, if you wanted to claim all world records at once you shoud've checked the updated rankings on the addicts site first. Roli got a 9 on int some time ago and Steffen even got an 8!



AR: 61-XX-X

Jul 10th 2003 at 12:05:25 PM
Name:  

Owen

Comments:  

glad to be of service - you are most welcome! try sub 30 now

Jul 10th 2003 at 12:04:38 PM
Name:  

Aapo

Comments:  

I think that it's surely possible to complete beginner board with 49 mines. So far in my best game only four squares were uncovered. Purely luck though.

Jul 10th 2003 at 11:43:00 AM
Name:  

Bill Cheese

Comments:  

Well Steffen i will be sure to send you the first copy of any video record i can get and if you would like i can send you the pictures.



I have no problem with getting my record agian do to the fact that after i saw this web site and saw how horrible i was doing compared to the world i got obsessed with minesweeper and got everything that could possibly reduce my time. The sad thing is that with all my things to decrease my time. i have nothing to record it but crappy still photos. I hope that soon i will will get a working Camtasia.



Thanks to Damien Moore to showing me that it is possible to get 1 second in beginner.

Thanks to Owen Fox for showing me what time to be and then later Matt McGinely for beating Owens score and setting my goal higher.

Thanks to David Berry for setting my first high for expert and then hesitantly to Lasse Nyholm to have a better time then me when i finaly beat Davids and needed to still refine my game.

Jul 10th 2003 at 09:48:34 AM
Name:  

Steffen

Comments:  

Weird! Cheater ;.) *g

Jul 10th 2003 at 07:47:46 AM
Name:  

Aapo Käkränen

Best expert:  

84

Best intermediate:  

21

Best beginner:  

1

Comments:  

Wow, I just broke my density record. Now, this is perhaps the world record. 37 mines on 8x8 board. Watch the video.



http://www.angelfire.com/poetry/miinaharava/37B.avi

Jul 10th 2003 at 04:06:29 AM
Name:  

Georgi Kermekchiev

Comments:  

hey Bill,



You are the ONE

Jul 9th 2003 at 07:57:32 PM
Name:  

Bill Cheese

Best expert:  

39 sec

Best intermediate:  

9 sec

Best beginner:  

1 sec

Comments:  

Just be lucky that for now that i can't prove my records with videos but can prove them with pictures. i would have the video for you if i could download the camtasia software off the site. Well until then just keep doing your best at this game and will try to get another methode of video proof. until then you might as well try and tie or beat my records. GOOD LUCK MARK THOSE MINES

Jul 9th 2003 at 07:06:09 PM
Name:  

damien

Comments:  



global 2.0 has not been released via the creator's web site...he sent it to a few people to try, and then, when everyone begged him to offer it for free, he gave up working on it. so, dan and a few others have it, as well as myself, and you'll have to ask to have it mailed at the moment, although i guess i could eventually post it on the site.



Win 3.1: i have 3.1 and 98 links swapped, so download the '98' link. sorry for the mishap.

Jul 9th 2003 at 10:50:22 AM
Name:  

XF

Best expert:  

70

Best intermediate:  

23

Best beginner:  

1

Comments:  

I got listed in the Best 100 in the Active Ranknig site with the wrong name... The guy mantaining it took my website's name which has nothing to do with my name... I wrote him...

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 9th 2003 at 07:33:19 AM
Name:  

John Dickerson

Comments:  

MINESWEEPER ROCKS MY WORLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jul 9th 2003 at 02:10:51 AM
Name:  

Xiong

Comments:  

Hi, I'm here again, and I'm still looking for that win mine 3.1... anyone still got one plzzzzzzz email me one, thx
my email: zazaxiong@163.com

Email Email        
Jul 9th 2003 at 02:02:36 AM
Name:  

Dennis Lütken

Best expert:  

132

Best intermediate:  

23 --> 21

Best beginner:  

2

Comments:  

I've done it once again! - Beaten my intermediate record! I was just about to stop playing as I've got my sister and a friend coming over soon but I wanted to play just a few more games. I'm glad I did because I managed to set a new record of 21 seconds with a 3bv of only 36 but still quite an achievement for me! Will I be able to sub 20 ever I wonder? I guess it's just a matter of time!

Georgi Kermekchiev, I've got a question for you! You asked someone if he had tried global mines 2.0... You had this link in your post:
http://www.stefan-pettersson.nu/site/gmines/

... However, it seems that when you go to that site, Global Mines 2.0 hasn't been released yet...??? If it has been released, where can I get it? If not, does anyone then know when it will be released?

Thanks!

Email Email        
Jul 8th 2003 at 10:36:15 PM
Name:  

Robert Webb

Comments:  

Georgi Kermekchiev wrote:

> more efficient hook is to offer the 3 levels
> with full functionality and the rest to be
> received at registration. Thus many more people
> will start to compete with each other and the
> probability to sell the program is greater.

Not a bad idea, except that I have to process each submission manually to some extent. It's mostly automated: I receive submissions as email and open the attachment to include the new records. But I might still get 100s of these if anyone with the demo could submit (although an upper limit would be reached before too long I guess, where it would be harder and harder to submit better times).


Daniel Lynch wrote:

> Nice game Rob. Beat the 4.2 by a full 2 seconds
> on 10%. If you sign up, do you get listed with
> times done on the demo?

No sorry, the demo doesn't save the local times at all, so they are gone forever. Of course, if you did it once, you could probably do it again

I see "Marc Schouten" has already got that time down to 2.7 seconds anyway. I did only just release this game, so the current records are mostly just mine and a few other peoples. We'll probably be wiped off the board by people like Marc Schouten before long

> €15 is slightly steep for a "simple" (we
> appreciate how untrue that is) game but I think
> it could be worth it.

Pricing is a difficult one I'm happy to admit. I didn't think US$15 was too much. That's about the price of a music CD (here in Australia anyway).

I have noticed that most Minesweeper clones are either free or in the range $7-$10. I do imagine that this 3D version has considerably more work in it than most clones. I also don't want to price myself out of the potential market though.

So I'm interested in any comments people might have regarding pricing. I will leave it at $15 for at least a few months though to see how it goes.

Thanks,
Rob.

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 8th 2003 at 03:22:43 PM
Name:  

Daniel Lynch

Comments:  

Nice game Rob. Beat the 4.2 by a full 2 seconds on 10%. If you sign up, do you get listed with times done on the demo? €15 is slightly steep for a "simple" (we appreciate how untrue that is) game but I think it could be worth it.

Jul 8th 2003 at 01:37:19 PM
Name:  

Daniele

Comments:  

Just an update.... 88 sub90, and 13 sub80 (six 79!). Still waitin' for 100th sub90...

Jul 8th 2003 at 06:55:53 AM
Name:  

Marc Schouten

Comments:  

Steffen:
Well don't worry, I'm gonna do that too. Tonight, in fact . It was just an example.


Jul 8th 2003 at 06:40:26 AM
Name:  

Steffen

Comments:  

hi! haven´t been here for a long time.i hardly played the game, but seemingly didnt lose my speed to that extent i supposed it to be...
i like the idea of a master board. what does the congress think about it. does/did he exist? i also like your game robert -but wouldnt pay for it (sry*g)
@marc:go out and drink alot with your friends!

Jul 8th 2003 at 02:18:55 AM
Name:  

Marc Schouten

Comments:  

Georgi:
Good suggestion. Although, personally, I don't think $15 is that bad. In fact, I already registered. I realise some of you might not want to/be able to pay, but for me, it means staying home playing the game for one night, instead of going out drinking with my friends

Perhaps I've been conditioned by the fact that I've been playing a MMORPG (massively multiplayer online roleplaying game for those of you not familiar with online gaming lingo for the past two years, so paying for games online is not really an issue for me.

Jul 8th 2003 at 12:17:38 AM
Name:  

Georgi Kermekchiev

Comments:  

Robert,
Very nice, BUT not free ...
I do not think many of us will still be very excited after a couple of days if been limited to only local times. Much more efficient hook is to offer the 3 levels with full functionality and the rest to be received at registration. Thus many more people will start to compete with each other and the probability to sell the program is greater.
Well, don't take that seriously - just an idea...

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 7th 2003 at 10:53:47 PM
Name:  

Stephan

Comments:  

@Robert: That animation is simply not necessary...
Bad luck (for me) that one can't submit records in the demo version.

Jul 7th 2003 at 06:07:36 PM
Name:  

Robert Webb

Comments:  

About MineSweeper3D
http://home.connexus.net.au/~robandfi/Mines3D/

Marc Schouten wrote:

> Wow, Robert... Very, very excellent!

Thanks!


Elmar wrote:

> There are just to many edges on the lower levels,
> which is bad for orientation and overview.

All part of the challenge!

> And yes, the sound gets anoying.

Hopefully at least it's humourous for a while, then you can turn it off


Stephan Bechtel wrote:

> Hey Robert, really addictive game. In about 1 hour of
> playing, I got 3 new world records in subdivision 2
> (and tied the 12 0,0s). I'll send you an e-mail
> separately (maybe, I have a chance to enter your
> lists).

I'm afraid you can't submit records from the demo version. Submission files are encoded for security, as is the exe itself. If I accepted screenshots it would defeat the purpose of going to all the trouble of encrypting the submission files. Also, the process is automated for me (mostly).

> Of course, I don't like it that all local records are
> reset to Unsolved after closing the program.

Again, that's just in the demo version of course

> The only thing I don't really like is that animation
> after hitting a mine.

Yeah? You mean it could be improved, or it just gives you a fright?

Rob.

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 7th 2003 at 10:57:57 AM
Name:  

Dan

Comments:  

This morning I noticed my Windows XP clock was flying... 9 minutes too fast after one hour. I had just finished a game of expert in 63 seconds, but the 3BV was only 139. After discovering the fast windows clock I started another game to see if the minesweeper clock was running way too fast, and it was. With that timer speed I'd probably never sub60 again. I reset my computer and the clock is now running at normal speed. I have no idea what happened to it this morning. The motherboard's clock is good, so the problem is definitely with windows.

Email Email        
Jul 7th 2003 at 06:06:49 AM
Name:  

Stephan Bechtel

Comments:  

Hey Robert, really addictive game. In about 1 hour of playing, I got 3 new world records in subdivision 2 (and tied the 12 0,0s). I'll send you an e-mail separately (maybe, I have a chance to enter your lists). Of course, I don't like it that all local records are reset to Unsolved after closing the program. Luckily, I made screenshots of all my records

Nice to see that you implemented 3BV, that boards are able to be solved without flagging etc. The only thing I don't really like is that animation after hitting a mine.

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 7th 2003 at 05:19:48 AM
Name:  

Georgi Kermekchiev

Comments:  

Damien,
I'll start sending the ranking updates every 2 weeks

Elmar, have you tried Stefan Pettersson's Global Mines 2.0 - precise counter, submission feature - not only the final time, but also board layout, very good web interface and useful statistics like 3bv, etc. I think it is more likely that Global Mines is your version !

http://www.stefan-pettersson.nu/site/gmines/

Email Email         Website Website    
Jul 7th 2003 at 04:45:41 AM
Name:  

Elmar

Comments:  

Nice Robert. I beat the World Records on all demo levels, but can't submit scores either.
I think the higher subdivisions must be much better. There are just to many edges on the lower levels, which is bad for orientation and overview.
Also I think lesser levels would be better for competition.
And yes, the sound gets anoying.

But besides that, nice game. I especially like the submission feature with the updated rankings. Would be really nice to have that for 2D-Minesweeper.

AR: 62-XX-X



  First Page
  Prev Page
  Post
  Home
Next Page  
Last Page  
Viewing Page 21 of 36 (Total Entries: 3560)

powered by Powered by Bravenet bravenet.com