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 4 of 23 (Total Entries: 2239)

Aug 10th 2004 at 05:59:02 PM
Name:  

Bob Ab

Comments:  

Everyone goes for speed. I try to solve the largest custom board with the maximum number of bombs. Just managed 211 bombs and its only taken me 5 years.

Email Email    
Aug 10th 2004 at 05:06:28 PM
Name:  

Marko

Best expert:  

94 --> 91 --> 87

Best intermediate:  

22 --> 22*2

Best beginner:  

3

Comments:  

It's been a while... Ohw, Int 3bv/s up to 3.13 from 2.87

Email Email    
Aug 10th 2004 at 04:27:28 PM
Name:  

Dave Matson

Best intermediate:  

22 x 3 ---> 22 x 4

Comments:  

Another tie! This time a shameful performance on a 27 3BV board. Could have been a sub-20 fairly easily. Oh well.

@ James: Well, it looks like we're tied again for this period.....so far.....unless either of us have something up our sleeves.

   
Aug 10th 2004 at 11:39:25 AM
Name:  

Toli Cuturicu

Best expert:  

65

Best intermediate:  

25

Best beginner:  

4

Comments:  

The sum is 65 + 25 + 4 = 94, so I could be on the Top 100 list. What should I do to get there?

Email Email    
Aug 10th 2004 at 09:30:49 AM
Name:  

Tony Andersson

Best expert:  

122

Best intermediate:  

33

Best beginner:  

3

Comments:  

127 --> 122

   
Aug 10th 2004 at 05:27:35 AM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  


   
Aug 10th 2004 at 05:26:13 AM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  


   
Aug 10th 2004 at 05:24:54 AM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  


   
Aug 10th 2004 at 05:23:24 AM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  


   
Aug 10th 2004 at 05:20:51 AM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  


   
Aug 10th 2004 at 05:18:53 AM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  


   
Aug 10th 2004 at 04:04:34 AM
Name:  

Christoph Marx

Comments:  

Hi everybody!
Bad news. I just lost my last hope to find a sponsor for a minesweeper tournament.
So again we have no budget.
If there is anyone who would come to vienna without getting back the costs of the journey, to participate a minesweeper tournament, please send me a mail. the date would be the 18.9. If 10 sweepers promise me to show up I'll organize the tourny. Deadline is this Friday (the end of this AR period).
Up to now I'm sure about 4 players.

Happy sweeping
Christoph Marx

Email Email    
Aug 9th 2004 at 09:43:19 PM
Name:  

Todd

Comments:  


   
Aug 9th 2004 at 09:40:34 PM
Name:  

Chris

Comments:  

Some people need to get a life. I play the game to have fun and use my mind a little. However soaking my hands in hot water is taking it a little too far. But whatever floats your boat or as you guys would say whatever keeps your bomb from ticking.

   
Aug 9th 2004 at 08:59:59 PM
Name:  

Jason Tran

Best expert:  

67

Best intermediate:  

19

Best beginner:  

2

Comments:  

Hello guys and girls, just decided to join the community here. Ive got a question for Dion where abouts in Australia do you live? I live in Australia too (sydney)

Email Email    
Aug 9th 2004 at 05:28:42 PM
Name:  

James C.

Comments:  

Nice job Dave. Is it going to be close on this AR too? If you want to look on the bright side, breaking your record by one second is bound to lead to a lot less frustration than making a big jump and not being able to get close to it again for a loooong time. I'll give you a hint, though. You need to tie your int record to tie me again.

   
Aug 9th 2004 at 01:35:33 PM
Name:  

Dave Matson

Best expert:  

83 x 2 ---> 82.06

Best intermediate:  

22

Best beginner:  

3

Comments:  

OH MY GOD!!! I finally broke my record. Whoo-hoo! It's not much, but I still broke it!!!

   
Aug 9th 2004 at 11:32:53 AM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  


   
Aug 9th 2004 at 10:31:47 AM
Name:  

Lance

Comments:  

I am 100% convinced that the "spammer" is a member of this community. I'm not sure what he thinks he is going to accomplish by spamming - I for one still won't use the PhP message board and my opinions about who cheats and what it means to be a cheater have not changed either. All it does is frustrate other players and makes the person who is spamming look catty and childish. Slandering
and posing as other players seems like a waste of time when a person could be using that time to play the game and get new scores. Then they would really have something worthy of being posted in the guestbook. On that note, happy sweeping, all.

Lance

   
Aug 9th 2004 at 10:07:56 AM
Name:  

Brozek

Best expert:  

89

Best intermediate:  

30

Best beginner:  

8

Comments:  

BOOM-SHAKA-LAKA

   
Aug 9th 2004 at 07:02:14 AM
Name:  

Yoni Roll

Comments:  

um.... Dion, I'm pretty sure those messages in the name of Damien Moore wasn't really from him but the spammer.

   
Aug 8th 2004 at 08:36:55 PM
Name:  

Dion Tiu

Best expert:  

45

Comments:  

Heh Damien, i'ii take that as a compliment . I never understood how you achieved your 46 on a 170 3BV board and not go further. Surely you could get a 44 or less.

   
Aug 8th 2004 at 01:10:19 PM
Name:  

Gregoire Duffez, the real one....

Comments:  

@Gergely : you're such a bloody pain.

   
Aug 8th 2004 at 12:19:36 PM
Name:  

Gergely

Comments:  

Ok then, thanks Dan!
@Detrusor: before requesting for new entries for your clone ranking, what about updating with sent data??? For example, I sent you mine 3 or 4 times. (I can hardly count it).

   
Aug 8th 2004 at 08:29:04 AM
Name:  

Damien Moore

Comments:  

@Dion : I wanted to say :

b a s t a r d !!!


   
Aug 8th 2004 at 08:25:51 AM
Name:  

Damien Moore

Best expert:  

46

Best intermediate:  

11

Best beginner:  

1

Comments:  

@Dion : *******

   
Aug 8th 2004 at 03:00:18 AM
Name:  

Dion Tiu

Best expert:  

4.03 3BV/s

Comments:  

Looks like im playing fast too!
I knew i would break the 4.0 3BV/s barrier sooner or later. On a 219 3BV board, 55.37s

   
Aug 7th 2004 at 10:03:46 AM
Name:  

Rodrigo

Best beginner:  

3.84 3BV/s ---> 3.95 3BV/s

Comments:  

Wohoo!! Man, I'm so fast today!!

I'm slowly going to get 4 3BV/s playing NF on beginner, too!

   
Aug 7th 2004 at 04:58:11 AM
Name:  

Rodrigo

Best intermediate:  

2.89 3BV/s ----> 2.96 3BV/s

Comments:  

Wohooo!! I'm slowly going to 3 3BV/s playing NF!!

   
Aug 6th 2004 at 04:55:37 PM
Name:  

Xiaohu Zhang

Best expert:  

54 ---> 51!!! almost :(((((

Comments:  

Missed the last 50/50 click!!! Should have achieved 51 sec!!!!!! You can imagine how DISSAPOINTED I am!!!!

   
Aug 6th 2004 at 02:44:00 PM
Name:  

Lukasz

Best expert:  

44

Best intermediate:  

15

Best beginner:  

2

Comments:  

@Gregoire : you are an opportunist person. You must learn to respect the people. I won't never give my history and my email address. You are really disappointing...

   
Aug 6th 2004 at 02:33:08 PM
Name:  

Stephan

Comments:  

@Gergely: I didn't do anything except from replying to your post in this guestbook. It must have been Dan who did the update!

   
Aug 6th 2004 at 02:32:13 PM
Name:  

Yoni Roll

Comments:  

Err.. the guestbook have some problem showing "lower than" chars, I was saying (removed that char now..):
Anyway I don't know if Lasse even noticed it, if he auto-saves sub-50 games' videos he should have it somewhere.

   
Aug 6th 2004 at 02:26:53 PM
Name:  

Yoni Roll

Comments:  

I agree that generally low 3BV boards are harder reletivly to higher ones, but they are still easier\faster than the higher 3BV boards.
I guess the 3BV\difficulty graph is not linear, but it is monotonic.
and btw there was 88 3BV board once, that Detrusor found on the stats, and guess who got it.. Lasse
It was awfully slow for him though, finished in 47.57 seconds (that is 1.88 3BV\s)
I wonder if it was a very hard board for 88 3BV or just a bad game of Lasse really.
Anyway I don't know if Lasse even noticed it, if he auto-saves

   
Aug 6th 2004 at 02:18:48 PM
Name:  

Gregoire Duffez

Comments:  

@Lukasz : if you read the guestbook, i wanted to ask you if you were agree to send me your history.inf file to update your clone statistics on my site... If you are agree, don't forget either to zip it or to rename it into history.in
Thanks !

@all : (if he doesn't read...) Does anyone know lukasz's email address ?

Email Email     Website Website    
Aug 6th 2004 at 02:09:09 PM
Name:  

Damien Moore

Best expert:  

46

Best intermediate:  

11

Best beginner:  

1

Comments:  

Gergely : you bug somebody ; shut up.

   
Aug 6th 2004 at 11:29:18 AM
Name:  

Gergely

Best expert:  

61

Best intermediate:  

18

Comments:  

@Stephan: Thanks for the correction!

For the low-3bv discussion: I agree that these boards are often difficult to solve, because there are usually guessing situations in them. Btw I happened to solve a 110-3bv expert board yesterday (it took me 62 secs, not a good time - but my second best), and there were no guesses, while the 2 31-3bv int board I also solved contained many guesses which held me back from really good times (2*19).

   
Aug 6th 2004 at 11:08:43 AM
Name:  

Damien Moore

Comments:  

You are too bloody

   
Aug 6th 2004 at 11:06:31 AM
Name:  

Stephan

Comments:  

The original DB is indeed 3BV 30. Any clone board with 3BV 22 or 23 has a VERY low nad very unlikely 3BV.
And I agree with James that boards with relatively low 3BV are often more difficult to solve. It's quite logical, as the low 3BV often is a result of several mines grouped together in some areas of the board. So, you mostly have lots of high numbers (4, 5, 6) on low 3BV boards what itself openly ends in unknown patterns...

   
Aug 6th 2004 at 10:42:36 AM
Name:  

James C

Comments:  

My bad on the 29. Either way, it is not 23 for sure. Yes I am jc and j from earlier. I had my reasons, and laziness is only a small one or them. Maybe difficult is not the right word, and I am sure all of them don't apply, but a lot of the low 3bv boards are tricky. You are right about the infrequent occurrence, but maybe you misunderstood me. It's a simple matter really. When you stack a lot of mines in a small area, which is usually the case in intermediate and beginner, when 3bv goes down, there are usually tricky patterns or hidden mines or tough guesses in that small area. It may not affect expert much but you know well that the extra time it takes makes a big difference in int, and especially beginner. I have come across 3 different 2 3bv boards in the clone and I still don't have a 1 because they were all just a random space in a big cluster of mines. I don't know if it's the nature of the prng or not, but the clone has a very high occurrence of difficult to solve low 3bv boards, in my experience. The 23 board I saw had 2 very tricky areas in it. In fact I had one last night that was just about the same. I didn't save or study the board, so I can't say for sure, but... there were 7 or 8 single clicks around the board and a giant cluster in the middle. When I died trying to pick my way through it I just happened to notice the estim and the 3bv/s. It was 24.xx at 1.06 per/sec. That's pretty sad, really, in more ways than one.

   
Aug 6th 2004 at 07:32:35 AM
Name:  

Stephen (again)

Comments:  

< 110 are solved so infrequently - it's not because they are extremely difficult, it is simply the fact that they only show up every 3000 boards.

   
Aug 6th 2004 at 07:31:42 AM
Name:  

Stephen

Comments:  

Actually, to correct JC the dreamboard is 30 (try rebuilding it in Minesweeper clone, or check out Stephan Bechtel's 11 posted in 2002 or 2003 of the AR website, with the recorder showing. I wouldn't fully agree with JC, however on the fact that low 3bv boards are really difficult. I think part of the reason that low 3bv boards are beaten so infrequently is due to their lack of frequency showing up, rather than their difficulty in being solved. Which is of course similar to the reason that boards with 3bv

Email Email    
Aug 5th 2004 at 11:56:11 PM
Name:  

jc

Comments:  

DB is 29 3bv. I had a 23 on the clone once. It took me 3 or 4 tries to even solve it because of the stupid mickey mouse hidden mines. In fact most low 3bv boards i have found on the clone are ridiculously difficult.

   
Aug 5th 2004 at 08:15:21 PM
Name:  

Robert Webb

Comments:  

Been a while, so I thought I'd mention my 3D minesweeper game again. It's not like most 3D versions, which use blocks rather than tiles. Here it's like playing minesweeper on the surface of a 3D polyhedron.

It has all the nice things you'd expect from a minesweeper clone, plus 3BV, online world records, a built-in solver, and countdown bars which are really cool if you're trying to beat a record.

The program has proven to be very robust since its release, and the world records are coming in much slower now as they get much harder to beat. Anyone up to the challenge?

Free demo available, or US$10 for the full version. Here's the site (have a look for the screenshots at least!)

SITE: http://www.software3d.com/Mines3D

Comments & suggestions welcome.
Rob.

    Website Website    
Aug 5th 2004 at 06:03:51 PM
Name:  

Dave Matson

Comments:  

@ Stephen.....I think that the DB is 23 3BV, isn't it? Anyway, I'll put that video up on my website tomorrow. I'll post the URL then.

   
Aug 5th 2004 at 03:11:59 PM
Name:  

Martin Toft Madsen

Comments:  

Just writing a message to say that I'll be on a bike trip headed for Alpe d'Huez for the next 2 weeks, so you'll probably not hear much from me during that time

Email Email     Website Website    
Aug 5th 2004 at 12:23:35 PM
Name:  

Stephen

Comments:  

@Dave, that may very well be a new record. did you save the video of it? I think the lowest i have seen is 25 or so. If you have the vid, send it to my email, please.

Email Email    
Aug 5th 2004 at 10:26:28 AM
Name:  

Dave Matson

Comments:  

Correct me if I'm wrong......but I may have just found a new low 3BV record for int. I just got a board that had a 3BV of 22 on the clone today. Does anyone know of any boards that are lower than that???

Oh yeah, I screwed up the board after only 6 3BV.

   
Aug 5th 2004 at 09:57:55 AM
Name:  

Gustaf Forsman

Comments:  

I just made my 100th sub70 on the clone I also have 2 on Microsoft Minesweeper.
My first was a 69, 2004-02-21.
Happy sweeping

Email Email    
Aug 4th 2004 at 04:16:15 PM
Name:  

J

Best expert:  

78

Comments:  

@Rod: I never upgraded to the .92 when you released it. The first one I ever downloaded was the .90 and it was either that or the .91 I was using until 3 or 4 weeks ago. I shuffled and copied all the files around. I reset the history a few times because of the 44 and 30 second expert games that managed to save in the history. Btw, the 44 second video did save. It's pretty funny how it clears the last half of the board intsantly. Either way, after moving the files around it began to crash every time I beat a record, which was pretty often with a fresh history. I deleted all of the files and downloaded the .92 version from scratch. As far as I know, I have not had a major problem. I have seen a timer bug once or twice, but it hasn't affected a complete game. All the versions I have run have corrupted a video at one time or another. I got my first sub 90 on the clone two weeks ago and in the video, it somehow skips 10 3bv, so the timer never stops. The history file saved fine, but the video was a delete. Either way, my main question was if I could upgrade to the .93 and keep the same history files, and the answer appears to be yes.


On another note, I beat that 89 today with an 81 on a 120 board. It felt great to finally approach my best time again, and even better that I got a good video of it. It was a simple board, but that is even more encouraging to me because that's where I have been struggling. My current 105 total will be the best AR period I have had in over 2 months. I still have a week and a half to work on intermediate, too. Woo hoo!

   
Aug 4th 2004 at 01:47:06 PM
Name:  

/

Comments:  


   
Aug 4th 2004 at 01:15:31 PM
Name:  

Rodrigo

Comments:  

@J: Well, I didn't understand completely the point, but Yoni wrote everything. Fell free to send me your history file if you want me to convert it or to remove problematic games, ok? Another thing: you say you have a version that doesn't save videos, is it? If you think it is a bug, or something, please tell me, explain it better and I'll make everything possible to fix it.

@Detrusor: incredible times!! I'm feeling really motivated watching your progress! I remember when you had 20 on int, and I hope I'll get a 14 some day, too! Congrats!

   
Aug 4th 2004 at 12:02:17 PM
Name:  

Gergely

Comments:  

I sent my corrected profile to the activeranking address, because I knew no other. And sent now again, for second time.

Email Email    
Aug 4th 2004 at 10:17:52 AM
Name:  

J

Comments:  

Yeah I already upgraded to the .92 version. I think I had a corrupt file at one point because the version I was running wouldn't save any video. I realize that he can remove a corrupt file but I honestly don't want to go through the bother. Also, I played for a month NF in intermediate a while back and my periodic averages dropped from 36 to 30 so fast that the overall average couldn't keep up with it so I didn't mind resetting it. I did of course lose some times that would still be in my top 10 for intermediate, but oh well. Thanks for answering the main question about the .93 version history.

   
Aug 4th 2004 at 08:47:09 AM
Name:  

Yoni Roll

Comments:  

Stephan, a little late, but happy birthday!

J, you don't have to reset your whole history because of problematic times, Rodrigo can remove them manually.
Version 0.93 use the same history format as 0.92 so if you didn't update to 0.92 yet you'll have to send your history to him to convert it.

   
Aug 4th 2004 at 01:00:29 AM
Name:  

Daniele

Best expert:  

60

Best intermediate:  

16

Best beginner:  

2

Comments:  

I'm close to my friend Francesco on bestever ranking....I hope to overtake him soon...
The screenshot will be soon available on the screenshots page!

    Website Website    
Aug 3rd 2004 at 01:37:49 PM
Name:  

Gregoire Duffez

Comments:  

ok, send me the latest version of your history (zip it). I'll update when i'll receive it

Email Email    
Aug 3rd 2004 at 01:05:56 PM
Name:  

Stephan

Comments:  

@Gergely: to whom did you send your mail(s)? Both Dan and Lance did receive mails from me within the last days, so they should have got yours as well. Don't know, but if you send the mail to me, I could upload your second version of the profile (that's what is to be corrected, right?) tomorrow.

   
Aug 3rd 2004 at 11:01:54 AM
Name:  

Gergely

Comments:  

Ok, I'm not an important person, but I doubt I deserve so little attention either from Grégoire who hasn't updated my clone scores for 2 months and from the AR-guys who doesn't seem to care about my second letter. It's nice having the opportunity of appearing as the player of the period but it just means s.hit with this buggy file on the site - if you haven't received my second mail then just please take this file down from the site!!!

   
Aug 3rd 2004 at 09:53:42 AM
Name:  

Daniele

Best expert:  

64 --> 60!!!!!!

Comments:  

YESSSSS!!!!!!! I become the first Italian on expert, once again!

Here's the screenshot:
http://maresias.interfree.it/minesweeper/screenshots_page/Exp60.png

And here's the video:
http://maresias.interfree.it/altro/exp_60.mvf

    Website Website    
Aug 3rd 2004 at 09:08:12 AM
Name:  

Gregoire Duffez

Comments:  

What i want to say is on the following link

for my friend the stupid faker/spammer : pwn3d !

    Website Website    
Aug 3rd 2004 at 06:04:34 AM
Name:  

Georgi

Comments:  

Ryan,
Nice to see you back ...
Your last post was on 15th Oct'01
Most probably your next will be in Apr'07 - I doubt you'll find then some familiar players

BTW, the Emirates is nice place to live - I have a lot of friends there ..

Email Email    
Aug 3rd 2004 at 02:33:28 AM
Name:  

Ryan P. Gazder

Best expert:  

62

Best intermediate:  

19

Best beginner:  

3

Comments:  

Hi everyone, I'm posting here after ages! I've shifted from India and now work in a dynamic city in the Middle East called Dubai... those of you who like traveling will surely have been here sometime... just want to know if there are any active 'sweepers in this country! lemme know!

Email Email    
Aug 2nd 2004 at 10:58:31 PM
Name:  

Stephen

Comments:  

wow that guy is really annoying. I am on the verge of a new expert record. After 51 seconds on a 159 3bv board, i missed a 33/66 chance guess for a 55 second game. lately i have just been playing really well, and i don't think it will be too much longer before i improve on my 58. It is my birthday today (august 2) and it ends in 3 minutes and i will try to get a new record until maybe a few minutes past. anyways happy sweeping.

Email Email    
Aug 2nd 2004 at 10:32:07 AM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  


   
Aug 2nd 2004 at 10:30:04 AM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  


   
Aug 2nd 2004 at 10:28:22 AM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  


   
Aug 2nd 2004 at 10:26:41 AM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  

[Medidate]

   
Aug 2nd 2004 at 10:26:14 AM
Name:  

J

Comments:  

But the cycle/DB/UPK discussions are so fun.

I do have a serious question though. If I download the newest version of the clone, am I going to be able to keep my current history files without mailing them to Rod? I have avoided upgrading each version unless I have to for that reason. I am starting to build up some stats that I like and I want to keep them. I have already had to ditch them on several occasions. Two of which were because I got a 44 and a 30 in expert due to the clone timer/video bug that skewed my stats. Also the clone still has the problem of corrupting videos at the worst time. I finally broke 90 on the clone and I don't have anything to show for it but the history file. I do want the options of the latest version, though.

   
Aug 2nd 2004 at 09:52:43 AM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  


   
Aug 2nd 2004 at 09:51:34 AM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  


   
Aug 2nd 2004 at 09:50:34 AM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  


   
Aug 2nd 2004 at 09:49:38 AM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  


   
Aug 2nd 2004 at 09:48:40 AM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  


   
Aug 2nd 2004 at 03:06:25 AM
Name:  

Gergely

Comments:  

To Lance or anyone who has access to active-ranking update: please check your mailbox; I sent the corrected profile, so pls update it. Thanks

   
Aug 2nd 2004 at 12:50:44 AM
Name:  

Christoph Marx

Comments:  

@Tim: Yes. The random numbers are cycled, that's the reason for the board cycles.

to the cycling:
I don't have the board cycle, but it's very easy to find it. If you know which randomizer was used - and that's not so hard to find out - reprogram the board generation algorithm with the same randomizer -> you've just found the board cycle.
If you're not sure which randomizer was used, you can try some different ones. There are not so many standerd randomizer.

Email Email    
Aug 2nd 2004 at 12:07:25 AM
Name:  

Tim Weerts

Best expert:  

75

Best intermediate:  

19

Best beginner:  

4

Comments:  

I have a question about board cycling, but I don't want to start a whole debate about UPK or dreamboards. All I want to know is if you set a custom game to the same dimensions as a intermediate game (16x16 with 40 mines, will it follow the samae cycle as a normal intermediate board

Email Email    
Aug 1st 2004 at 10:26:21 PM
Name:  

Jae Youn Jeong

Best expert:  

129

Best intermediate:  

32

Best beginner:  

5

Comments:  

Hello... I'm Korean.
I don't write English.
sorry.. ^^

Email Email    
Aug 1st 2004 at 03:59:51 AM
Name:  

The best of the best

Best expert:  

34

Best intermediate:  

7

Best beginner:  

0,38

Comments:  

There are my records...

   
Aug 1st 2004 at 03:09:03 AM
Name:  

lachsack

Best expert:  

39

Best intermediate:  

9

Best beginner:  

0,46

Comments:  

can you beat my records?????? i don't think so...

   
Jul 31st 2004 at 04:10:53 PM
Name:  

Dennis LĂ¼tken

Best expert:  

61

Best intermediate:  

13

Best beginner:  

1

Comments:  

Wow, that whole cycling discussion is back for sure! I for one have had many board repeats but I don't think anybody knows the exact cycles. Jon Simonsen wrote an essay on board cycling too. This is his webpage: http://www.jontrans.0catch.com/ so you can read it if you want to... if it's still there... but I would think that it is!

Anyway, I just came here to tell you guys that I've now finished 100 int games on the clone at the computer at my parents' house. I used to play like sh*t at this computer but I've gotten pretty good at it. Here are the stats if anyone cares:

sub-20s: 17 (15x1, 17x4, 18x5, 19x7)
avg time: 22,95
avg 3bv/s: 2,56
best time: 15,87
best 3bv/s: 3,41

I got three of the 17s today so that's pretty nice. I think something's terribly wrong with the mouse I have at my own computer because I usually play a lot better on my computer but lately I've been playing terribly there! I'd better go buy a new mouse!

By the way, I'm going to go to Poland on Tuesday with my two brothers. We'll just be driving around the country and hopefully see a lot of interesting things. I'll be gone for about a week so I'll get a break from the Minesweeper playing. I don't really play that much anymore anyway so I don't think it'll affect my game very much.

Happy sweeping everyone... I hope you're all having and will have a GREAT summer!

Email Email    
Jul 31st 2004 at 05:15:57 AM
Name:  

Daniel

Comments:  

I know it's not strictly relevant to Minesweeper but I ask anyone interested to go to http://freebobby.org to sign a petition calling for Bobby Fischer's, Chess World Champion, release.

Thanks.

   
Jul 31st 2004 at 03:34:45 AM
Name:  

J

Comments:  

That is supposed to be 30%, not 305. In fact, now that they are starting to purge the intermediate scores from the record list, I would really like to see someone prove that they know the exact cycle.

   
Jul 31st 2004 at 03:31:18 AM
Name:  

J

Comments:  

Actually, do a search on google for minesweeper board cycles and there is a link... forget which one.... but it tells about the prng used in minesweeper. I don't remember all the specifics, nor do I completely understand it all, but here is the jist:

The seed for the prng is a time function. It grabs whatever millisecond the computer time is on, then generates a string of boards. In the Win98 and earlier games, the buffer takes 65 seconds and some change to completely fill. It uses every 55th millisecond as a seed until it cycles through all of them. What I don't know is whether this creats 65,xxx different boards, or 65,xxx different strings of boards, but I suspect that it is the first. Another thing it mentions is that a boot up in the first 20 seconds creates approximately 1/363 of the possible combinations. The infamous "dreamboard" is contained within this initial 20 second string. In the Win2000 and later versions, there are something like 20 times more combinations. The "dreamboard" is still there but now you have a lot worse chance of finding it. It would seem that the prng would grab a new millisecond as a seed each time, but it has been verified to some extent that certain boards do follow each other every time they come up, so the 65,xxx strings may be the case. People claim to know the exact cycle, but the won't reveal it. I personally believe the string theory and that the start of each string is pretty close to random. That's why certain boards have been documented to repeat themselves with anywhere from a week to a year between findings. I have been playing Win98 for about 305 of my games for 7 or 8 months now, and I found the same board in month 4 and 6. To me, all this information predicts only the fact that I will eventually see the same board again, but who really knows when?

   
Jul 31st 2004 at 12:18:20 AM
Name:  

Phlip

Comments:  

@Christoph: Yes, that's true. However rand() uses the returned value as the seed for the next, as do most psudorandom functions - so there would still only be max 32K boards for each size - just that a particular board would always follow a particular other board (yes I agree this could help with cheating)

Email Email     Website Website    
Jul 30th 2004 at 03:59:23 PM
Name:  

J

Comments:  

I can see how the real Gregoire must be frustrated by this, and I am not usually impressed by spammer trolls, but it is kinda funny.

   
Jul 30th 2004 at 03:43:23 PM
Name:  

Gregoire, Detrusor, not the stupid faker

Comments:  

shut up poor idiot...

   
Jul 30th 2004 at 03:19:02 PM
Name:  

Gregoire Duffez, the real one....

Comments:  

I promise that it's really me and not the other "Gregoire Duffez". The last message was not from me... Stop spamming please I am frustated

   
Jul 30th 2004 at 02:47:50 PM
Name:  

Gregoire, Detrusor, not the stupid faker

Comments:  

hmm i should have known that the **** spammer/faker would write some kind of message once i would have posted again...
Well done, spammer! You owned me for that... But of course it was really me that announced those pretty times.

Now that your funny sh.it turns to be not that funny, why don't you get brave and reveal who you are, spammer/faker ?

i think i'll have to make my messages on the announcements box of my own website... Just try to fake my name there, coward

    Website Website    
Jul 30th 2004 at 11:37:14 AM
Name:  

Gregoire Duffez, the real one....

Comments:  

Sorry but the last message wasn't from me...

   
Jul 30th 2004 at 09:16:58 AM
Name:  

JM Kim

Best expert:  

77

Best intermediate:  

17

Best beginner:  

2

Comments:  

hi damien
check your e-mail..
i can't send a mail to you bcuz your mail box is full...
^^
bye

Email Email     Website Website    
Jul 30th 2004 at 06:01:38 AM
Name:  

Martin Toft Madsen

Comments:  

New best int time on the clone:

14.47 sec - 43 3BV - 3.19 3BV/sec

It's still a 14 though

http://gymks.dk/lort/MTM-Int-14,47-3BV043-2004jul30-14.47.mvf

And while I remember it: Congrats Rodrigo

Now I guess I should go out in the great summer weather now it finally has arrived

Email Email     Website Website    
Jul 30th 2004 at 04:04:24 AM
Name:  

Elmar

Comments:  

Congratz Grégoire, but 15-62 is still -47...

   
Jul 30th 2004 at 02:32:49 AM
Name:  

Gregoire Duffez

Best expert:  

62x3

Best intermediate:  

15x2

Comments:  

This morning was a nice morning !! I had the sad idea to submit my times for the AR which were 18-67, and i decided to play a little, and i tied my 2 personal records !!! I made my 3rd 62 on a 150 board (62.18, record = 62.12), and 10 minutes later i had a 33 3BV board on which i managed to get a 15.93 !! (record = 15.81). I'm very happy to be able to submit 15-62 = 77, which is my best AR period ever made

Email Email     Website Website    
Jul 30th 2004 at 01:42:53 AM
Name:  

Christoph Marx

Comments:  

oups, Xcuse for the extra i

   
Jul 30th 2004 at 01:41:46 AM
Name:  

Christoph Marx

Comments:  

@Philip: That would be true if the MS-Version would reseed after every board. But it doesn't. So not the number of seeds but the cyclelength gives the limit for the number of boards. The seed can only determine where in the cycle you start - and as far as I know you are not garantied to start in the same cycle with every seed (but that depends on the used randomizer). Of course the rand() function is very week and I would never ever use it if my project tends to have problems with short cycles. Rodrigos clone reseeds after every board, that makes it difficult to cheat with the cycle but isn't the best idea for the number of boards. Nevertheless it's the best we have at the moment (and the randomizer he use is week enought to prevent too easy board).

Email Email    
Jul 29th 2004 at 03:00:36 PM
Name:  

hahaha

Comments:  


   
Jul 29th 2004 at 08:47:27 AM
Name:  

Sai

Best expert:  

101 ---> 86!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Best intermediate:  

24

Best beginner:  

4

Comments:  

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My first sub-100 and it's a whooping 15 seconds off my previous record! Happy sweeping everyone!

   
Jul 29th 2004 at 05:41:34 AM
Name:  

Phlip

Comments:  

Incidentally, the winmine 3.1 cheat is XYZZY Enter Shift (not shift enter).

I seem to remember you had to minimise it, then select the icon and type there (the enter would restore it, but it worked anyway) but I'm not sure if it was really necessary (I can't test it any more).

I also think it might of had to be right shift, but again I can't recall and can't test it.

Not that it really matters, I doubt anyone is still playing on Win3.1 anymore (and you can't minimise then select the icon on 95)

Email Email     Website Website    
Jul 29th 2004 at 05:36:54 AM
Name:  

Phlip

Comments:  

Just read your page on "randomness"
As you make a passing reference to, the random numbers are only pseudorandom.
The chances are that winmine uses the standard C rand() function as a source of randomness, this function uses a 15-bit number (technically 16-bit but it's a signed number and always positive, so the first bit is always 0) as the seed - so no matter how many boards are possible, only 32768 different boards will ever be generated. At absolute most.

If even just the top 100 played one game a day for a year then you'd be guaranteed to see some boards twice. And there's more people playing more often for longer.

And it's obvious that some boards would be faster to solve than others, because of large open spaces.

So not so surprising, really, when you think about it

Email Email     Website Website    


  First Page
  Prev Page
  Post
  Home
Next Page  
Last Page  
Viewing Page 4 of 23 (Total Entries: 2239)


powered by Powered by Bravenet bravenet.com