Viewing Page 18 of 23 (Total Entries: 2239) |
![]() |
|
Mar 31st 2004 at 07:18:16 AM |
|
Name: |
Dave Matson |
Comments: |
@ all: Has anyone ordered any Minesweeper stuff from the (I think it is the) cafepress website? I just ordered the dreamboard shirt and the mousepad. I saw the shirt, and just had to buy it...very cool shirt! I'll probably get a lot of weird looks wearing it, but that's okay. Also, I've been on the photos section on the yahoo group two or three times in the last year to see photos of other sweepers. Every time I checked, there were no new photos. I just realized yesterday that there were two other pages of photos. I really need to pay more attention to some things I guess! ![]() Happy sweeping all! |
![]() |
|
Mar 31st 2004 at 07:13:40 AM |
|
Name: |
Dave Matson |
Best expert: |
83 |
Best intermediate: |
25 |
Best beginner: |
3 |
Comments: |
@ Shubbard: Don't worry, as long as you keep playing, your times WILL drop! When I first came to this site, I had not even finished an expert game, and I think my intermediate time was 61. (Not that my times are amazing now, but...) That was about a year ago. Just keep playing, and you'll be ahead of me in no time! ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 31st 2004 at 06:00:59 AM |
|
Name: |
shubbard |
Best expert: |
136 |
Best intermediate: |
40 |
Best beginner: |
7 |
Comments: |
Hi Guys this is just a quick post to say keep up the good work! you guys on the 'world record' board are phenomenal! i started playing Minesweeper in 97 while at college...i keep coming back to it every now and then though. i feel really happy when i even complete the expert but since i've been looking round this site (which i have only found today!) i suddenly feel very inadequate!! ![]() now i know there is a site on Minesweeper i shall try - but no doubt fail! - to improve my scores! i will hopefully be reporting back some success, though, for some reason, i doubt it! take it easy boys and girls |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 31st 2004 at 04:38:59 AM |
|
Name: |
Roli |
Comments: |
Hi Guys, First of all thanks to every1 who congratulated to my birthday. Secondly, respect to Stephan and Martin for their NF-51s. Today I tied my 59-record on Curtis' Clone. I bought me a new mouse again and I'm in better shape than ever. But I'm afraid now that you won't count the records on his clone, if I get to make a new one. It's a very secure clone I think and I'd be glad if you analyzed his clone a bit more and think about if records could be accepted. I got my 59-vid, if anyone wants to see. If clone is accepted, my AR is 17-59 until now. Thx in advance... ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 31st 2004 at 04:36:38 AM |
|
Name: |
Dion |
Best expert: |
3.90 3BV/s |
Comments: |
How coincidental ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 31st 2004 at 02:06:10 AM |
|
Name: |
Dion |
Best expert: |
3.69 3BV/s |
Best intermediate: |
4.16 3BV/s |
Comments: |
Beginner i have no idea.. I'm usually on the pace of 3.8 for expert if im playing extremely well, just havent finished a game yet. |
![]() |
|
Mar 31st 2004 at 01:50:28 AM |
|
Name: |
Ben Mann |
Comments: |
If anyone is interested, I posted a short article on my website on procedurally solving minesweeper (ie, when programming an auto-solver) in n dimensions. The URL is http://i2d.com.au/members/~benmann/solvingminesweeper.html. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 31st 2004 at 01:38:58 AM |
|
Name: |
Stevan |
Comments: |
Teague, what da post it is ![]() Drink more and you 'll probably get better times ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 31st 2004 at 12:09:44 AM |
|
Name: |
Gergely |
Best expert: |
2,68 |
Best intermediate: |
3,13 |
Best beginner: |
3,54 |
Comments: |
These were on the clone, but if I'm right, I had a beginner of about 3,90 on some earlier version. ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 11:25:00 PM |
|
Name: |
teague |
Best expert: |
248 |
Best intermediate: |
90 |
Best beginner: |
9 |
Comments: |
yeah, i'm drunk as ****. i've kill a pint of wild turkey 101 and the last beer i had in the fridge. i'm just bored so i looked up **** on minesweeper since that's what i usually do on my computer. i may have some pretty ****ty times on minesweeper, but i don't really care right now. i see people don't usually flag, but i can't help it. i was just wondering if there was anything to reduce my time, because from what i've seen 248 on expert isn't that great. holler at me if you can think of anything i should do to help me get some kick ass scores on expert (i don't really care about intermediate and beginner). i just found out about the holding the left and right down mouse buttons down and wondered if that really helped any. it did lower my score about ten seconds, but i'd like to get lower times. holler at me if you think you can help me. just put at subject about minesweeper and i might actually read the e-mail, because i delete a bunch of crap from people i don't know. whatever. holler at ya, teague |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 11:06:15 PM |
|
Name: |
Lance |
Best expert: |
2.72 clone (pretty small sample) |
Best intermediate: |
3.43 clone |
Best beginner: |
4.73 clone |
Comments: |
I think my numbers for career are probably closer to 2.90 expert, 3.7 intermediate, and maybe accurate for beginner. My total on the clone is 10.88 3bv/s. Happy sweeping! Lance |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 10:48:01 PM |
|
Name: |
Georgi |
Best expert: |
2.87 |
Best intermediate: |
3.30 |
Best beginner: |
4.36 |
Comments: |
I can check my Clone 3bv/sec. only ... |
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 08:10:59 PM |
|
Name: |
Stephen |
Comments: |
New decision: i hate minesweeper. i hate this game. i can't beat my frickin record. this game is teh stupidest game ever invented. it is the biggest waste of time ever. Frick. I'll get 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, and nothing more, unless it's a 3bv of like 250. any average 3bv i'll get about 70. or less or just a little more. not a lot less. not a lot more. like what the frick? |
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 05:39:11 PM |
|
Name: |
Lloyd |
Best expert: |
2.28 |
Best intermediate: |
2.98 |
Best beginner: |
3.67 |
Comments: |
Total = 8.93 I've stopped playing beginner since I got my 1.81 sec time, and mostly have played intermediate since I got the clone. Still trying to break that 3.0 3BV/s on int... |
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 02:47:53 PM |
|
Name: |
Stephen Arnason |
Best expert: |
2.71 |
Best intermediate: |
3.51 |
Best beginner: |
4.50 |
Comments: |
I haven't been a sweeper for long enough to know whether or not the following has been suggested, but i think that the 3bv/s added totals are extremely interesting, as statistics. Is there any chance it could ever be added to the active ranking in some way, or perhaps best ever (or has it already been discussed and rejected?) |
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 02:29:57 PM |
|
Name: |
Dave Morgan |
Best expert: |
2.63 3bv/s |
Best intermediate: |
3.48 3bv/s |
Best beginner: |
4.49 3bv/s |
Comments: |
Almost broke my expert record today - 57 seconds gone, est 61.14, one 50:50 and then one simple uncleared area not far away (with no guesses), but I got the 50:50 wrong - could have been 60 or even 59 seconds I think I did get a 67 today and was very lucky in that game though, but my record is still 64 ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 02:12:24 PM |
|
Name: |
Active Ranking |
Comments: |
Make that 4pm EDT, not EST. |
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 02:11:23 PM |
|
Name: |
Active Ranking |
Comments: |
For players living in the USA, the deadline will now be at 4pm EST because of the start of daylight savings time. |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 01:58:41 PM |
|
Name: |
Katy LaVallee |
Best expert: |
2.92 3bv/s |
Best intermediate: |
3.50 3bv/s |
Best beginner: |
3.65 3bv/s |
Comments: |
for a total of 10.07 since i started using the clone a few weeks ago. i don't play on beginner much anymore since it's not accepted for AR. oh, i got my second 14 ever on int this week ![]() ![]() i'm going to start putting vids up on my free space from my isp soon. i'll post when i do. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 01:36:31 PM |
|
Name: |
Martin Toft Madsen |
Comments: |
Seems like I play well on the clone. I just broke the 3 3BV/sec barrier: 67.68 sec - 201 3BV - 3.01 3BV/sec ![]() Btw, my best int ratio is (if I remember correct) 3.86 3BV/sec. I don't know about beg ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 12:31:46 PM |
|
Name: |
Roman |
Comments: |
4,78(beg)+4,40(int)+3,31(exp)=12,49 |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 12:19:54 PM |
|
Name: |
Grégoire Duffez (Detrusor) |
Comments: |
(on the clone) 4.08 + 2.79 + 2.66 = 9.53 |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 11:28:00 AM |
|
Name: |
Dennis Lütken |
Best expert: |
2.65 |
Best intermediate: |
3.45 |
Best beginner: |
4.41 --> 4.58 |
Comments: |
It was on an 11 3bv board which I finish in 3.40 seconds! My 3bv per sec total is now 10.68!!! ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 11:13:42 AM |
|
Name: |
Strider |
Comments: |
Hi I'm making a new MineSweeper game called MineField. Would be nice to get some suggestions and bug reports: http://forums.thegaminguniverse.com/showthread.php?t=12516 |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 08:48:00 AM |
|
Name: |
Martin Toft Madsen |
Comments: |
@James: There's a "Play video..." option somewhere (I think it's in the options menu). You should also be able to play the video by making a doubble click on the video file ![]() @Dave: If you write your scores in this guestbook, I'm pretty sure that Georgi sees it and put you on the list ![]() @Stephan: I don't play as much as I used to either. It was only my 4th or 5th finished exp game in March, so it came as a surprise to me that I got such a good score. I also have some hours without any finished exp games, but I will try to at least play enough to keep my current shape, and then let's see if there comes a vacation without to much to do other than sweeping and maybe then there will be a chance to improve ![]() Hope you also stick to the game for a while so we can get at least a little competition going on ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 06:39:12 AM |
|
Name: |
James Custer |
Comments: |
Okay, I got the clone. How do I get the video to play after I save it? |
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 06:07:31 AM |
|
Name: |
Dave Matson |
Comments: |
Once someone get a sub-100 sum, how do they get on the Best Ever list? |
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 02:19:46 AM |
|
Name: |
Stevan |
Comments: |
Martin great vid!!! ![]() Rodrigo, when I play video I cant see precision time (e.g. 50.xx instead of 51 that Martin did) ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 30th 2004 at 12:44:38 AM |
|
Name: |
Dion |
Best expert: |
47 (x2) |
Comments: |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 10:36:27 PM |
|
Name: |
Lloyd |
Comments: |
@ Rodrigo: I am aware that it is possible to solve boards in less clicks than their respective 3BV values, which would result in efficiencies greater than 100%. My proposal is to merely use the 3BV as a reverence point, knowing that 100% does not mean a "perfect" clicked game. It is not uncommon for efficienies to have similar bases leading to values above 100% (the concept of efficiency in heat pumps comes to mind, where you are supposed to get efficiencies above 100% to have an effective heat pump). In short, it is a relative idea I was thinking about, in which the method of calculating the efficiency is arbitrary. The importance (to me) would be that one could use this relative stat to help improve ones game. Again, it's just an idea I thought would be nice. |
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 04:38:09 PM |
|
Name: |
Christoph Marx |
Comments: |
I just had the time to read the statements on the cycles. Well, the size of the boards has nearly nothing to do with the length of the cycles. The cycles are created by the cycle of the random-number-generator. This cycles has usally a length that is a power of 2. Out of this reason it is the number of random events (to create one board) that determines the length of the cycle. So the reason, why the expert-cycle is so long is, that 2 is not a divisor of 99(=3*3*11). The beginner and intermediate boards needs 2*5 and 2*2*2*5 mines. The size of the boards determine only the number of the used bits of the random number. Expert uses 9 bits per mine, Intermediate 8 and Beginner 6. So big parts of the random numbers are wasted. That could additionally enshort the cycles. But I'm really tired of taking about cycles! There are random-number-generators that work without any cycles! Just use it for programming. And if you can't find one, than add the system time to your random number, that kills the cycles to. (I hope that this is the last statment on cycles for a long time.) By the way: As I promised I will post something about my tournament-project on Wednesday. happy sweeping Christoph |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 04:24:22 PM |
|
Name: |
Elmar |
Comments: |
@Rodrigo: Conerning the lag... I'm also a WinXP user. I don't notice any lag at all when I play as usual. However there is a little lag when you keep hitting one square and F2 alternatively wating for an opening. Maybe those people who keep complaining play like that. Just an idea, I hope it helps.... ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 01:37:12 PM |
|
Name: |
Stephan |
Comments: |
@Martin: tell that to my mouse... In fact, I'm no longer playing really competitively. Today, I tried to make some time as contra on your 51, but I couldn't finish any expert game within about 1 hour. And my mouse has moments of no-reaction, a thing that makes me mad... So, as you'll be listed in front of me anyway due to your lower expert time despite of same total, I hereby give up (officially, I don't speak about my "internal" anger ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 01:28:41 PM |
|
Name: |
Martin Toft Madsen |
Comments: |
Thanks for the congrats ![]() It looks like Rodrigo's clone is widely accepted ![]() I've made a Camtasia video of the clone video for those who might want it: www.gymks.dk/lort/mtm51.avi Stephan, we have the same total now, and this can only mean one thing: The race to NF sub50 has begun ![]() ![]() ![]() Happy sweeping! |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 12:10:54 PM |
|
Name: |
Rodrigo |
Comments: |
Stephen, I will try to see if I get the lag in WinXP. Really, I use Win98. Detrusor, now I see you have a point there. I will try to include it, ok? ![]() And here is my wallpaper for celebrating my first sub-25: http://www.geocities.com/minesweeperclone/24secondswallpaper.jpg It's simple, but fits perfectly in the desktop, isn't it? Looks nice when you turn on the monitor! It's just like if someone was "turning the lights on" when it appears slowly. See and you'll understand. I suggest everyone to make one like this with your personal records. ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 11:35:01 AM |
|
Name: |
Stephan |
Comments: |
@Martin: congratulations even if you'll be in front of me now in exp list, best ever totals, best ever NFers etc.! The video looks nice, indeed. |
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 09:57:47 AM |
|
Name: |
Stephen Arnason |
Comments: |
@ Rodrigo: I, too, have that problem of clicking F2 immediately, and i like to be able to view the stats afterwards, without them clearing upon pressing F2. Thanks |
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 09:44:15 AM |
|
Name: |
Grégoire Duffez (Detrusor) |
Comments: |
i forgot... I'm using Blender, a free 3D/animation software |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 09:40:35 AM |
|
Name: |
Grégoire Duffez (Detrusor) |
Comments: |
Rodrigo > the reason why i want to keep the stats displayed is quite stupid... It's just an habit i have with old Minesweeper + Sorin's counter. When i lose a game, as i have the finger on F2, i automatically hit F2 without thinking... Some stupid reflex, and when I want to look up at the stats, they've disappeared ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 09:02:37 AM |
|
Name: |
Emily Propst |
Comments: |
I love the comment on hand cramps. Are you also some sort of hand doctor? ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 08:52:57 AM |
|
Name: |
James Custer |
Best expert: |
102 --> 92 2 days ago |
Best intermediate: |
26 ----> 21 yesterday |
Best beginner: |
2 (windows 2000) |
Comments: |
Finally, I beat my friends times. I found this site 5 months ago and I have dropped 56 seconds off total time. How do I keep getting better? Where can I get the clones that everyone is talking about? |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 08:26:52 AM |
|
Name: |
Rodrigo |
Comments: |
@ Elmar: just overwrite the file history.inf from the previous version. The clone will recognize it automatically. @ Martin: really impressive video!! Congratulations!! @ Detrusor: in fact, I intend to include all of the suggestions you gave. I would like only to know a reason to let the stats displayed until you start another game. This seems to be useless for me, but there must exist a reason for that. I will try also do make the personalization on the board, but most probably not with an image, or the video file format will be very big to store an image. And besides, if I do it, I will change the file format AGAIN, what is not desireable. @ Lloyd: I have already thought about doing such an efficiency counter, but the problem is that it is possible to solve a board with less clicks than the 3BV value, if you flag mines. In this case, the efficiency would be greater than 100%, what is not logical. The best would be to create an algorithm that could indicate the ideal way of solving a given board, what would include the flagging style. I have already tried to create it once, but I stopped. @ Detrusor again: incredible coincidence! Yesterday, I made a "comemorative" wallpaper for my first sub-25!! I am not at home now, but when I get there, I will also post the file here. You seemed to use 3D Studio to make your wallpaper, didn't you? |
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 08:18:04 AM |
|
Name: |
Stephen |
Comments: |
@ Rodrigo: well i believe i may have found the problem with your clone's delay: it only occurs in Windows XP. I downloaded the 0.85 beta version just five minutes ago to this computer running windows 98 and it works absolutely perfectly (of course i don't have a very good mouse so i can't get under 30 in intermediate). Any way you can fix it for XP? |
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 05:26:41 AM |
|
Name: |
Georgi |
Comments: |
Nice one Gregoire... would look even better if the label goes around the planet in a Saturn-rings manner ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 05:15:37 AM |
|
Name: |
Grégoire Duffez (Detrusor) |
Comments: |
I made a wallpaper about my site and the minesweeper... Here it is http://www.planete-demineur.com/images/wallpaper.jpg Tell me what you tink about it ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 04:15:28 AM |
|
Name: |
Georgi |
Comments: |
Dave, "perfect circle" is 8 surrounded by mines |
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 04:07:39 AM |
|
Name: |
Dave Matson |
Comments: |
@ Elmar: What's a perfect circle? |
![]() |
|
Mar 29th 2004 at 03:52:27 AM |
|
Name: |
Elmar |
Comments: |
Congratz Martin, great video. I'd say it's the best NF video I've ever seen. Hardly any mistakes and only 40 clicks more than necessary (30 if you consider 1 extra click per opening). I usually need more than twice as many clicks as necessary. Yesterday I got another 59 on the clone, 3bv 166. I used 274 in total, 195 of those were doubleclicks. And that's already pretty efficient for me. ![]() I also finished my first perfect circle yesterday in 67 secs. ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 10:36:23 PM |
|
Name: |
Dion |
Comments: |
Congrats and very nice vid Martin. I've always enjoyed watching NF style ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 10:25:16 PM |
|
Name: |
Dennis Lütken |
Comments: |
HEY! I'm in the top 50 EVER now! Woohooooooo!!! ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 10:12:20 PM |
|
Name: |
Dennis Lütken |
Best expert: |
61 |
Best intermediate: |
13 |
Best beginner: |
1 |
Comments: |
@Martin: Congrats on your 51!!! That is REALLY good! ![]() ![]() @Rodrigo: the stats you've included look very nice! I can't wait to test out the clone some more! My total number of finished games has already passed 2000... although most of those are beginner games, of course! ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 09:51:05 PM |
|
Name: |
Ryan |
Best expert: |
131 |
Best intermediate: |
39 |
Best beginner: |
3 |
Comments: |
Thank you so much for the great inspiration. After seeing the posted scores, tonight I dropped 24 seconds off my combined scores. Unfortunately, I am still at 173. But I'm working on it. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 09:05:14 PM |
|
Name: |
Lloyd |
Best expert: |
72 (73 on clone) |
Best intermediate: |
19 (22 on clone) |
Best beginner: |
1 |
Comments: |
This is my first time posting on any kind of forum, and I've only been playing for a little over a year. I also thought it would be cool to post my scores, and leave a little idea for a possible improvement on the minesweeper clone of Rodrigo's that I've been using for about 2 weeks now. Plus, it would be an idea that everyone could look at to see if they might like it. So, to Rodrigo: I think it would be kind of cool to see some kind of efficiency score for completed games, which I think many of the less experienced sweepers (like myself) could use to see how they are improving, even if they can't get their times down significantly. I would think efficiency should be a comparison of the 3BV rating of a board, compared to the total clicks used to solve the board, or [3BV / TOTAL CLICKS (l + r + d)]. Since all of these values are posted in the 3BV stats window upon completion of a board, it seems like it would be fairly simple to include in the same stats window. Moreover, it would be interesting to keep track of efficiency ratings in the history, much like your new method of 3BV/s evolution and such. Thanks for an awsome clone of a great game! piman |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 06:05:14 PM |
|
Name: |
Dave Matson |
Comments: |
@ Martin: I think that we accepted it, didn't we. We voted 85% in favour of it, and nothing much has been said since. |
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 03:20:48 PM |
|
Name: |
grzegorz |
Best expert: |
55 |
Best intermediate: |
15 |
Comments: |
thanks Dan ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 03:12:29 PM |
|
Name: |
Martin Toft Madsen |
Best expert: |
55 -> 51 (I assume!) |
Comments: |
![]() ![]() ![]() I just played some on Rodrigo's new version, 0.85, to try it out. I have only played on his clone one or two times before, so I'm not comfortable with it yet. After a little while I made a 51.31 sec on a 141 3BV board, but since I haven't played this clone very much, I don't feel secure about it, but I hope you guys have tested it for bugs, so this is not some fake record ![]() I have the screenshot and video of course: www.gymks.dk/lort/mtm51.png www.gymks.dk/lort/mtm51.mvf I really hope that it's accepted (and that it's accepted because it's just as good as the original MS). Has it been clarified whether it actually IS accepted, or was it just something that people silently vouched for? |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 01:59:55 PM |
|
Name: |
Mat T |
Best expert: |
83 |
Best intermediate: |
24 |
Best beginner: |
2 |
Comments: |
i have a problem emailing Mr. Moore because i dont have the proper mail client installed or something like that i was wondering what your email was |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 01:29:19 PM |
|
Name: |
Mat T |
Best expert: |
83 |
Best intermediate: |
24 |
Best beginner: |
2 today!!!!! down from 3 |
Comments: |
im glad to hear that you will be updating the site its nice i love it word Mat T |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 01:21:28 PM |
|
Name: |
Grégoire Duffez (Detrusor) |
Comments: |
Rodrigo > Good, excellent, I love these stats !!! But let's go with other suggestions : 1. as Elmar said : you should add an 'import history' option 2. i persist to think it'd be better if you put all history in a beautiful windows box instead of actual display. Make 3 categories for each level, and all your tables under each category 3. add curves to display stats evolution (time, 3BV/sec evolution) 4. include non-flagging stats in the history 5. let the stats displayed until you start another game and not until you hit F2 6. video player : add a progression bar + it must be possible to replay the same video without reopen the file 7. personnalize the video, with your name, date (or something, image.... )ON THE BOARD (with transparency) 8. open the new video in the current player if already opened, instead of opening a new one 9. automatically record video if the time enter the top10 of current level, and associate the video (link) with the records in top10 of each level (and also screenshot ?) => this is only if you make a stat window... the video&screenshot linked to each time would be very pleasant ! 10. i'm not fully satisfied with the actual auto recording feature... For myself, i want to record all sub85 (finished) boards, and all >2.30 3BV/sec AND >70% completed boards... BUT i don't want to name both games with the same type of name, nor in the same directory... I don't know how you could correct that ; maybe including the 'naming & saving' option in EACH condition should be a solution... 11. I don't know if i'm alone to think that, but i prefered the versions where the counter was included in the board, and not a little windows.. Maybe you could let the user chosing how he prefers to have the counter : included or not ? Just tell me if you plan to include these options in next version ![]() Keep on good work Rodrigo, we all thank you !! |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 12:41:34 PM |
|
Name: |
Gergely Nagy |
Comments: |
well, Rodrigo's clone joked me a bit ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 12:40:47 PM |
|
Name: |
Dan |
Comments: |
Grzegorz, I just fixed the AR page. This week I wrote a program that updates the ranking automatically and it must have a bug that I wasn't able to weed out. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 09:36:21 AM |
|
Name: |
Elmar |
Comments: |
Is there a way to import history files of earlier versions? |
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 09:27:49 AM |
|
Name: |
Rodrigo |
Comments: |
Well, after a good comemoration for my first sub-25, I released today a new version of the clone, the 0.85 beta. ![]() It has three new tables for each level in the History window. One shows the time evolution, the other shows the 3BV/s evolution, and the last (the most interesting, I think) shows the daily evolution. Quite nice! Please take a look and tell me what you think! Thanks. |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 08:39:33 AM |
|
Name: |
Roman |
Comments: |
@ Grzegorz Górny: Apparently your name should be written instead "first" Jon ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 08:33:00 AM |
|
Name: |
Grzegorz Górny |
Best expert: |
55 |
Best intermediate: |
15 |
Best beginner: |
2 |
Comments: |
One little question. Why my name is not on AR 6th period list? I sent my scores [56,18] to active_ranking@hotmail.com on thursday night. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 08:27:37 AM |
|
Name: |
Stephen |
Comments: |
@ Martin Toft Madsen: Sorin's video recorder sketched hard on this one. First of all, it says there are 28 mines. In the video itself, you can see me clicking in the top left at blank squares for a while, and it changed my high score for intermediate (as i achieved my 16 on Rodrigo's clone, and my best time on intermediate was 18 thus far). however i was mistaken about the 3bv: i counted the 3bv manually, and it only takes into account those 28 mines. I'm really not quite sure what the Recorder thought it was doing. All of the other games in this txt file were fine, but this one sketched. It was still a low 3bv, but somewhere about 28 or 29 most likely. Sorry! |
![]() |
|
Mar 28th 2004 at 04:42:54 AM |
|
Name: |
Elmar |
Comments: |
@Dan: How come Jon is both 6th and 16th this AR? ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 27th 2004 at 06:41:15 PM |
|
Name: |
Dan |
Comments: |
Active Ranking has been updated. |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 27th 2004 at 05:26:15 PM |
|
Name: |
Martin Toft Madsen |
Comments: |
Congratulations to all recordbreakers ![]() Stephen, could you mail me the screenshot if you have one? ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 27th 2004 at 04:26:02 PM |
|
Name: |
Dave Matson |
Comments: |
By the way, congratulations Rodrigo and all who have broken their records recently!!! ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 27th 2004 at 04:25:26 PM |
|
Name: |
Dave Matson |
Best expert: |
83 |
Best intermediate: |
25 |
Best beginner: |
3 |
Comments: |
@ Rodrigo: Looks like I've got some work do to to catch up to you now! I just got a 26.10. Look out! ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 27th 2004 at 03:02:57 PM |
|
Name: |
Stephen |
Comments: |
Congrats Dennis! that's unbelievable. I was just playing intermediate and came across the lowest 3bv board i have ever encountered: a board witha 3bv of 20! I finished it in 16 seconds, but unfortunately it seems to be a bit confused, as i was using Sorin's recorder to record it, and you can't see 12 of the mines. believe me, they were there, because the 16 is on the intermediate. Sorin's counter may be sketchy with extremely low 3bv boards? |
![]() |
|
Mar 27th 2004 at 02:47:46 PM |
|
Name: |
Daniel |
Comments: |
Congrats to Rodrigo, Katy and Dennis. Please send on any videos you have to me if you get the chance. ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 27th 2004 at 01:58:36 PM |
|
Name: |
Rodrigo |
Best intermediate: |
25 (x4) ===> 24 |
Comments: |
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!! Wow!! I decided not to program very much today, and to spend just a little bit more than the usual just trying to beat my intermediate record!! And after getting 4 sub-30's, with the last three separated by 15 minutes each, I could not stop!!! Six minutes later, there was it!! 24,34!!! I may look like a fool with such a score. But for me, it's impressive!! You can't imagine how proud I am for looking at my History file and reading: "Sub-25: 0001" ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 27th 2004 at 01:58:20 PM |
|
Name: |
Dennis Lütken |
Best expert: |
61 |
Best intermediate: |
13 |
Best beginner: |
1 |
Comments: |
I'm' at my brother's computer now, so I would like to use this oportunity to write in the guestbook! ![]() @Stephan: Thanks for letting people know about my new record! ![]() ![]() Katy: I was hoping you would recognise my name and I did realise that you might not recognise it and just delete it! Thanks for sending me the video! I'll take a look at it some time later when I get home (if I'm able to download files... ![]() ![]() ![]() Georgi, I don't know if you need proof but if you do then I'll send you the video whenever I am able to. Actually I might be able to send it tomorrow so if anyone else is interested let me know! ![]() I wasn't even sure people were getting my e-mails but since both Stephan and Katy have received an e-mail from me I guess that the e-mail I sent to the AR got there too! I would hate it if my 14-65 couldn't be submitted! My next AR is already looking really good... 16-61! NICE! ![]() ![]() By the way, I think it's amazing that I've reached 61 so fast! My sub-70 history looks like this so far: 68, 69, 68, 65, 65, 61! Cool! ![]() Good luck everyone and happy sweeping! ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 27th 2004 at 12:39:29 PM |
|
Name: |
Katy LaVallee |
Comments: |
that's hilarious! i almost trashed the email he sent me asking for my video because it had no body. lucky i recognized his name. oh, it's hilarious that my best time was better, and then i beat it by one second, and he asked me for the video, and then he beat his best time by four seconds, so now he's ahead of me. ![]() i have to work harder now! ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 27th 2004 at 12:09:32 PM |
|
Name: |
Stephan |
Best expert: |
still 52 for me, but 65 ---> 61 for Dennis Lütken !!! |
Comments: |
Dennis Lütken has problems with his internet and so, he was only able to write some post in the guestbook of my personal website. But as he broke his record, I think his post might be of the community's interest! Dennis wrote: "[...] Anyway, my internet is totally ****ed up so I can't do much online. I can read the guestbook but I can't post, I can read e-mails but can't send any... Actually I can send out e-mails but I am unable to write anything except in the 'subject' and I can't attach files either! I have just broken my expert record and gone from 65 to 61,66!!! ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 27th 2004 at 02:37:03 AM |
|
Name: |
Katy LaVallee |
Best expert: |
63 ---> 62 |
Comments: |
yay! i beat my best score ![]() i'm kinda sad though, because now that i'm using rodrigo's program, i can see how lucky i was. the board had a 3bv of 123 and my 3bv/s was only 1.99. very disappointing. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 27th 2004 at 01:27:18 AM |
|
Name: |
Manu |
Comments: |
Not only analysing data with only 3 points isn't "reliable", but there is also something else : with only 3 dots, you'll ALWAYS find a quadratic equation that will perfectly fit... y = ax² + bx + c has 3 parameters to determine ! It is ( in my opinion ) just like we said : I found a staight line fitting 2 given points ! |
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 05:35:25 PM |
|
Name: |
Dave Morgan |
Comments: |
Sorry if I'm over posting, but... I plotted number of squares against approxnumber of boards (using 300,000 for expert), and whilst analysing data with only 3 points isn't reliable, a quadratic equation gives an almost perfect fit (for those who know about such things, r^2 = 0.9999999 according to the graph program I'm using (r^1 = 1 indicates a perfect fit)), and an exponential function gave a reasonable fit too (both y = a * exp(b * x) and y = a * b ^ x give r^2 = 0.963591 apparently). As I increase the number of expert boards exponential regression lines become a less good fit, but the a quadratic stays as a good fit (r^2 = 0.9999999 or 1, presumably due to rounding errors in the program) So mathematically there's no reason why the number of the number of boards shouldn't follow the pattern it does, but its 1.30 am so I can't be bothered to think about whether there's a reason why it should be this way (a quadratic relationship, or maybe even a higher order polynomial) |
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 05:20:08 PM |
|
Name: |
David Barry |
Comments: |
Ack. Sorry about the first paragraph Rodrigo, didn't read your post properly. ![]() Anyway, the 1 3BV beginner boards are not relevant to whether 3BV should be restricted on intermediate and expert. |
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 05:14:54 PM |
|
Name: |
David Barry |
Comments: |
Rodrigo, there are several one-click beginner boards in the MS version. Minesweeper doesn't always like boards being solved in one second (it doesn't always stop the timer when it happens), but they definitely exist. I don't know enough about PRNG's to comment knowledgeably, but I find it odd that we have something like: beginner, 64 squares, ~8000 boards (from memory) intermediate - 256 squares, ~23000 boards expert - 480 squares, >300 000 boards. I don't like the argument that the cycles are bigger on expert because there are more squares. There aren't THAT many more squares, but the number of boards is much larger. |
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 04:28:55 PM |
|
Name: |
Rodrigo |
Comments: |
That's an interesting question... from a programmer's point of view, I can't see any reason for expert boards not to be cycled. Or even to be repeated. Why would beginner and intermediate be cycled and not expert? No appearent reason for that. I always suspected (and only suspected, without proof) that expert level is also cycled, and that the reason for its cycle not to be discovered may be two: 1) it is obviously a bigger board, and the number of expert boards may be bigger than beginner and intermediate, what makes difficult to remember a given board if it appears twice; 2) People usually finish less expert boards per day than in any other level. And also, it takes more time to be finished. In other words, the "search" for known expert boards runs "slower" than in other levels. And about the 3BV on MS version, I don't believe that it restricts 3BV, but I do believe that there is something in it that prevents boards from being finished in 1 second. That's why there are no known 1-3BV boards on beginner. As there was no knowledge about 3BV when it was created, I think that if a board is solved in one single click, then the program chooses another board, just like my program does, with the difference that the clone chooses another board everytime a first click is made, and not only when it is finished. This explanation is coherent: by doing it, the programmer forgot to check the case of solving the board in one second with the 1st click over a mine and its replacement. That's why the game doesn't finish when it happens. Wow!! Minesweeper is so interesting!!!! ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 03:58:27 PM |
|
Name: |
Grégoire Duffez (Detrusor) |
Comments: |
Stevan > I don't know if i'm right, but i wonder one thing : maybe you can tell that the minimum 3BV in MS original version is around 20, "because of cycling boards". You can know the 3BVs of the whole intermadiate existing boards in MS version, so you can easily extract the lowest 3BV. But you can't know at the expert, because you don't know the cycle ; i thought that noone discovered 2 strictly identical expert boards : the cycle isn't known. So if you don't know the expert boards cycle, you can't know the minimum 3BV. Is your "~100" the most little 3BV ever met in the expert ? That does not mean that less is impossible to obtain... |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 03:58:04 PM |
|
Name: |
Stevan |
Comments: |
I didnt understand u Dave, but because of cycling MS version has limited number of boards, with minimum and maximum 3bv off course ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 03:40:35 PM |
|
Name: |
Dave Morgan |
Comments: |
Question is, how can the microsoft version restrict the 3bv value, when when it was made the concept didn't exist, and as far as microsoft is concerened it still doesn't exist |
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 02:03:19 PM |
|
Name: |
Stevan |
Comments: |
Original MS version also has restricted 3bv (because of board cycling), its about ~2, ~20, ~100 respectively. 3bv 1 for beginner is only if your click is on mine and then mine is set somewhere else ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 11:20:02 AM |
|
Name: |
Dave Morgan |
Comments: |
I don't know how many of you are familiar with this http://www.forbes.com/newswire/2004/03/18/rtr1303881.html and the similar thing that happened in the US but, I think we should sue microsoft - clearly including their free version of minesweeper in with every version of windows is stopping people's clones of the game being widely used ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 07:55:36 AM |
|
Name: |
Dave again |
Comments: |
I didn't mean accept Rodrigo's times, I meant accepting times from Rodrigo's clone. ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 07:54:43 AM |
|
Name: |
Dave Matson |
Comments: |
@ Rodrigo: As your official agent, I believe that I am entitled to 10% of the profits. ![]() ![]() @ Everyone: I like Hopsing's idea. Maybe we should only accept Rodrigo's times. I can see one problem with that though. I think it was Dave Morgan that said that he can't get it to work on his system because he uses Linux or Unix. This is a problem that Rodrigo would probably be able to fix, though. If it is something that we have to do in order to standardize times, maybe it is something to look into. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 07:51:20 AM |
|
Name: |
Marc Schouten |
Comments: |
Why don't we set a single fixed 3BV for all boards? I'm sure some creative programmer can find a way to achieve this. ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 07:39:54 AM |
|
Name: |
Rodrigo |
Comments: |
Dave, I must admit that I LOVED your idea!! ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 06:18:06 AM |
|
Name: |
Hopsing |
Comments: |
Hi all I don't see the problem why we should not only accept scores on Rodrigos Clone. Every Windows User can play Minesweeper. If an user likes the game then he will find this website. Now, we tell him to use the Clone to have his records accepted. I doubt that anybody will appear and claim: Oh, I just found this page and would like to send in my world records achieved on the original Minesweeper and we have to say: No, these records don't count. And if it happens, it's no real problem either. We don't close any door. So what is the matter. I agree with the people who say we need restrictions on the boards because otherwise it is pure luck. To mention the extremest example: an expert board with 1 3BV And some lucker (like me) gets it and can call himself the best player in the world. CU Hopsing |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 05:20:02 AM |
|
Name: |
Dave Matson |
Comments: |
I think that we SHOULD try to convince Microsoft to replace the original winmine with Rodrigo's clone. It is clearly a far superior game! ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 04:48:21 AM |
|
Name: |
David Barry |
Comments: |
I voted Yes in the poll to a lower limit on 3BV, but I only think it necessary for intermediate (for the moment, at least). |
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 12:23:12 AM |
|
Name: |
Gergely |
Comments: |
ps: Or we should persuade Microsoft to substitute the game in the windows to the clone ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 26th 2004 at 12:19:16 AM |
|
Name: |
Gergely |
Comments: |
OK, so you say that we should throw out the old game completely, because it's just like a lottery? I think that only accepting the clone as official - or do not accept it, because of the many desired differences between the original and this one - would close the doors of the community and present a "sect", because noone will advertise it throughout the net possibly and spreading of the game will halt. So until it becomes well-known worldwide, I think this option is unnecessary. I will play only the original version, because I like gambling, too ![]() |
![]() |
|
Mar 25th 2004 at 07:04:09 PM |
|
Name: |
Dave Matson |
Comments: |
I agree with Detrusor. Yes, the chance of getting a board with a very low 3BV is very small, but the chance of me winning the million dollar lottery is also very small. That doesn't mean that I can't win the lottery though. If one person does happen to get an extremely lucky board and manage to get an expert time in the 20's because of it, that will make many experienced players lose interest in the game. It'll become more about who can get the luckiest board, and will become less about actual skill. Now I know that there are many people out there that say that it is unnecessary to put a limit on the 3BV, but is there any harm on putting a limit? Will it effect your everyday sweeping? No, it will only allow you to receive fair boards. It is kind of like checking to make sure that you locked the front door before going to bed. It does you no harm to go check the door, but it ensures that no one breaks into your home. Enough ranting, back to sweeping! |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 25th 2004 at 03:14:32 PM |
|
Name: |
Detrusor |
Comments: |
Gergely > you say it's not necessary... But let's think about one thing. If one day one guy find a 3BV board about 70, and makes a wonderful 31 sec on it (2.33 3BV/sec), the interest of the game would be ruined forever... RUINED FOREVER !! You'll tell me that the probability of such a game is quite 0, but it's possible ! I know it was possible in the original version, and i think it's a bug that must be corrected... Now let's imagine the worst : a 20 (or less) 3BV board at the expert : new record -> 10 sec...How could you imagine having motivation for your next games ? Saying that its probability is too little DOES NOT PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING !!!! I don't understand how people can say "NO" to the poll... Completely ununderstandable ! (i don't know if this word exsist ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Mar 25th 2004 at 01:51:06 PM |
|
Name: |
Gergely Nagy |
Best expert: |
64 |
Best intermediate: |
22 |
Comments: |
Jon: I don't know if there's any limit in the original game, but the 3bv limit seems unnecessary to me. But, as for the "mouses": I'm fed up with my new A4 optical mouse - though I made my best intermediate with it. It resonates while I sweep.I had a great int. table with 20,18 est. at 17 sec, when this sheety mouse moved the pointer to a mine while I clicked. ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
Viewing Page 18 of 23 (Total Entries: 2239) |