Post #5801 · Posted at 2015-04-27 08:21:37pm 8.9 years ago
 playe | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 89 Posts | |
 | |
| Reg. 2014-04-23 | |
 | |
I think that might partially be excitement from finally hearing almost half the song now.
Also am I the only one half expecting the possible challenge chart for this song to have shock arrows? I know Konami's gotten better about them (I personally love shock arrow charts if they're done well), but I wouldn't be surprised if they threw a few in there just to throw someone off.
Also am I the only one half expecting the possible challenge chart for this song to have shock arrows? I know Konami's gotten better about them (I personally love shock arrow charts if they're done well), but I wouldn't be surprised if they threw a few in there just to throw someone off.
Post #5802 · Posted at 2015-04-27 08:24:06pm 8.9 years ago
| TBLKitten | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 549 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2014-01-29 | |
| "HAPPY☆SPENDY☆MONEY" | |
i understand that, but what the hell guys, you don't need to be doing all of this math stuff, slowing down the clips, etc to try and see if there's a gimmick.
if someone get's that far again (or further) then someone will see if a gimmick is there. it's crazy to me how heavily some of you guys are overthinking this.
needless to say though congrats dr.d, hope you get further in the song eventually
if someone get's that far again (or further) then someone will see if a gimmick is there. it's crazy to me how heavily some of you guys are overthinking this.
needless to say though congrats dr.d, hope you get further in the song eventually
Post #5803 · Posted at 2015-04-27 08:27:09pm 8.9 years ago
| Adamn | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 187 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2007-09-06 | |
Quote: TBLKitten
i understand that, but what the hell guys, you don't need to be doing all of this math stuff, slowing down the clips, etc to try and see if there's a gimmick.
if someone get's that far again (or further) then someone will see if a gimmick is there. it's crazy to me how heavily some of you guys are overthinking this.
needless to say though congrats dr.d, hope you get further in the song eventually
if someone get's that far again (or further) then someone will see if a gimmick is there. it's crazy to me how heavily some of you guys are overthinking this.
needless to say though congrats dr.d, hope you get further in the song eventually
I don't think there's anything wrong with analyzing it. People put effort into things they care about, including utilizing skills (math, screen caps) to solve problems (passing OTP). Maybe they're taking it too seriously for you, but that's the beauty of the internet - you can choose to not follow the thread for a while.
Post #5804 · Posted at 2015-04-27 08:27:47pm 8.9 years ago
| Arctic Wolves | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 2,586 Posts | |
 | |
| Reg. 2008-02-18 | |
The best way to help someone get farther in the song is to identify whether or not there is a speed change there. Otherwise it would take another player a lot of credits and even more failed attempts to get there. Confirming for Dr.D that there is a slowdown is useful information for next time.
If they want to go through the effort and analyze the clips, great. If that helps someone get farther, even better.
If they want to go through the effort and analyze the clips, great. If that helps someone get farther, even better.
Post #5805 · Posted at 2015-04-27 08:34:39pm 8.9 years ago
| Zowayix | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 1,144 Posts | |
| Not Set | |
| Reg. 2009-09-19 | |
Quote: TBLKitten
i understand that, but what the hell guys, you don't need to be doing all of this math stuff, slowing down the clips, etc to try and see if there's a gimmick.
if someone get's that far again (or further) then someone will see if a gimmick is there. it's crazy to me how heavily some of you guys are overthinking this.
The problem is that if someone gets that far again, if they don't know exactly how the gimmick behaves, they're likely to fail there again. Particularly because of the PFC requirements.if someone get's that far again (or further) then someone will see if a gimmick is there. it's crazy to me how heavily some of you guys are overthinking this.
And given that it takes at least a full hour of playing and 6 credits to earn the orbs necessary to attempt Over The "Period" once, anything that helps players avoid failing ought to be worth the effort.
At the beginning of this whole process, before we knew what was after the stop, the point of all the frame-by-frame analysis was to make an accurate simfile that could be used for practicing the opening, so that someone wouldn't go through 18 regular stages, 5 Extra Stages, and 1 Extra Stage on 3x Wave just to fail at the slowdowns or the first speedup again.
Post #5806 · Posted at 2015-04-27 09:41:17pm 8.9 years ago
| TBLKitten | |
|---|---|
|
Member |
| 549 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2014-01-29 | |
| "HAPPY☆SPENDY☆MONEY" | |
appreciated the constructive responses, thanks 
Post #5807 · Posted at 2015-04-27 10:41:09pm 8.9 years ago
| darkanine | |
|---|---|
 |
Member+ |
| 1,332 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2014-06-30 | |
| "bing bong" | |
Quote: darkanine
Here's an indirect proof of what Arcorann was trying to prove.
Here's a formula to calculate the song length if the BPM was 200 all the way through after the stop:
(10+(200/60)×n)/(22+1+n)=171/60 - let n mean length of song after stop.
This formula is derived from the formula for average BPM:
Total Beats/Total Song Length
OTP's total song length ≈ 22+1+n. 22 being the seconds before the stop, 1 second being the stop itself, and n being the unknown amount of seconds after it. -- These are approximations, but it won't affect the end result.
OTP's number of beats is 10+(200/60)n. 10 being the amount of beats before the stop, and 200/60 being the beats per second after stop.
171 is the average beats per minute, but we're dealing with seconds, so it is 171/60.
Algebra:
(10+(200/60)×n)/(22+1+n)=171/60.
(10+3.33...×n)/(23+n)=171/60
(10+3.33n)×60=171(23+n) ←Cross Multiply
600+200n=3933+171n
29n=3333
n≈115 seconds
Now figure out the total song length by adding 115 and 23 = 138
So I just proved what Arcorann was trying to prove. The song is either at least 2:18 seconds (possible but unlikely) or there is a speedup in the song.
So, from this slowdown, we can deduce that there is most likely a speedup faster than 200 BPM. The math above proved that if the BPM after the slowdown stayed at 200 BPM, in order for the average BPM to be 171, the song would have to be at least 2:18. But now we know that the BPM drops down to ~150, this means that the song would be much longer than 2:18 without being faster than 200 BPM. This is highly unlikely for a song to be that long, so we must assume that the song's BPM goes faster than 200 at one point or another. Basically, we're screwed.Here's a formula to calculate the song length if the BPM was 200 all the way through after the stop:
(10+(200/60)×n)/(22+1+n)=171/60 - let n mean length of song after stop.
This formula is derived from the formula for average BPM:
Total Beats/Total Song Length
OTP's total song length ≈ 22+1+n. 22 being the seconds before the stop, 1 second being the stop itself, and n being the unknown amount of seconds after it. -- These are approximations, but it won't affect the end result.
OTP's number of beats is 10+(200/60)n. 10 being the amount of beats before the stop, and 200/60 being the beats per second after stop.
171 is the average beats per minute, but we're dealing with seconds, so it is 171/60.
Algebra:
(10+(200/60)×n)/(22+1+n)=171/60.
(10+3.33...×n)/(23+n)=171/60
(10+3.33n)×60=171(23+n) ←Cross Multiply
600+200n=3933+171n
29n=3333
n≈115 seconds
Now figure out the total song length by adding 115 and 23 = 138
So I just proved what Arcorann was trying to prove. The song is either at least 2:18 seconds (possible but unlikely) or there is a speedup in the song.
Post #5808 · Posted at 2015-04-27 11:15:49pm 8.9 years ago
| dominatorstrangeman8 | |
|---|---|
 |
Member+ |
| 2,165 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2011-01-13 | |
| "Pls" | |
Why do I have this feeling that it slows down further before speeding up...
Post #5809 · Posted at 2015-04-27 11:24:49pm 8.9 years ago
| Zowayix | |
|---|---|
|
Member |
| 1,144 Posts | |
| Not Set | |
| Reg. 2009-09-19 | |
Why do I also have the feeling there's going to be another obnoxious gradual slowdown right at the end, a la Tsugaru/Absolute/Mei/etc.? D:
We'll find out one gimmick at a time I guess.
We'll find out one gimmick at a time I guess.
Post #5810 · Posted at 2015-04-27 11:28:15pm 8.9 years ago
Oh nvm, I just realized what you meant by that. @Zowayix
Yeah, and that's gonna be a big pain in the rear
I wonder if there's a way to find out if there are other gradual slowdowns
Yeah, and that's gonna be a big pain in the rear
I wonder if there's a way to find out if there are other gradual slowdowns
Post #5811 · Posted at 2015-04-28 12:09:35am 8.9 years ago
| Madotsuki98 | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 109 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2014-08-25 | |
 | |
| "Sleepy" | |
The beginning sounded so good, what happened to the song?
Post #5812 · Posted at 2015-04-28 12:40:46am 8.9 years ago
| Damox | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 119 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2014-09-21 | |
| "a.k.a. iNFECTiON" | |
Quote: darkanine
Quote: darkanine
Here's an indirect proof of what Arcorann was trying to prove.
Here's a formula to calculate the song length if the BPM was 200 all the way through after the stop:
(10+(200/60)×n)/(22+1+n)=171/60 - let n mean length of song after stop.
This formula is derived from the formula for average BPM:
Total Beats/Total Song Length
OTP's total song length ≈ 22+1+n. 22 being the seconds before the stop, 1 second being the stop itself, and n being the unknown amount of seconds after it. -- These are approximations, but it won't affect the end result.
OTP's number of beats is 10+(200/60)n. 10 being the amount of beats before the stop, and 200/60 being the beats per second after stop.
171 is the average beats per minute, but we're dealing with seconds, so it is 171/60.
Algebra:
(10+(200/60)×n)/(22+1+n)=171/60.
(10+3.33...×n)/(23+n)=171/60
(10+3.33n)×60=171(23+n) ←Cross Multiply
600+200n=3933+171n
29n=3333
n≈115 seconds
Now figure out the total song length by adding 115 and 23 = 138
So I just proved what Arcorann was trying to prove. The song is either at least 2:18 seconds (possible but unlikely) or there is a speedup in the song.
So, from this slowdown, we can deduce that there is most likely a speedup faster than 200 BPM. The math above proved that if the BPM after the slowdown stayed at 200 BPM, in order for the average BPM to be 171, the song would have to be at least 2:18. But now we know that the BPM drops down to ~150, this means that the song would be much longer than 2:18 without being faster than 200 BPM. This is highly unlikely for a song to be that long, so we must assume that the song's BPM goes faster than 200 at one point or another. Basically, we're screwed.Here's a formula to calculate the song length if the BPM was 200 all the way through after the stop:
(10+(200/60)×n)/(22+1+n)=171/60 - let n mean length of song after stop.
This formula is derived from the formula for average BPM:
Total Beats/Total Song Length
OTP's total song length ≈ 22+1+n. 22 being the seconds before the stop, 1 second being the stop itself, and n being the unknown amount of seconds after it. -- These are approximations, but it won't affect the end result.
OTP's number of beats is 10+(200/60)n. 10 being the amount of beats before the stop, and 200/60 being the beats per second after stop.
171 is the average beats per minute, but we're dealing with seconds, so it is 171/60.
Algebra:
(10+(200/60)×n)/(22+1+n)=171/60.
(10+3.33...×n)/(23+n)=171/60
(10+3.33n)×60=171(23+n) ←Cross Multiply
600+200n=3933+171n
29n=3333
n≈115 seconds
Now figure out the total song length by adding 115 and 23 = 138
So I just proved what Arcorann was trying to prove. The song is either at least 2:18 seconds (possible but unlikely) or there is a speedup in the song.
400 BPM CONFIRMED, we're screwed but we haven't seen the 400 BPM speedup yet. Patience will only be the key to success as of now.
Post #5813 · Posted at 2015-04-28 01:36:35am 8.9 years ago
| Zowayix | |
|---|---|
|
Member |
| 1,144 Posts | |
| Not Set | |
| Reg. 2009-09-19 | |
^No, all it confirms is that there's something at least a fair bit higher than 200. For all we know it could be 300 to match the 150bpm slowdown. or 600 like I blindly speculated earlier
Post #5814 · Posted at 2015-04-28 01:48:27am 8.9 years ago
| darkanine | |
|---|---|
|
Member+ |
| 1,332 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2014-06-30 | |
| "bing bong" | |
I'm predicting that it will go OVER the BPM of Max (period) so >600 BPM
Its just speculation tho :P
Its just speculation tho :P
Post #5815 · Posted at 2015-04-28 02:01:30am 8.9 years ago
| Pandemonium X | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 10,358 Posts | |
| | |
| Reg. 2007-04-06 | |
 | |
It sounds like TAG putting his spin on Fascination MAXX. I'm loving what I've heard so far.
Post #5816 · Posted at 2015-04-28 02:55:22am 8.9 years ago
Quote: darkanine
I'm predicting that it will go OVER the BPM of Max (period) so >600 BPM
Its just speculation tho
Oh god noIts just speculation tho
-----
Here's some more math.
Assumptions:
- We have no clue how long the 150bpm section lasts, so I will make the optimistic completely blind guess that it lasts only 4 measures (6.4 seconds)
- The song should last about 100 seconds.
We know that the average BPM, or Total Number of Beats/Total Length, equals 171 or so. Using 100/60 as the number of minutes the song lasts, that comes out to 285 beats.
Using the 4-measure guess from above, the first 78 beats of the song are known. That leaves 207 beats unknown.
It takes ~42 seconds for the known part to pass by, so that leaves 58 unknown seconds.
207 beats scrolling by in 58 seconds = 214 BPM.
Huh. That means that to meet the 171 average and still remain 100 seconds long, all the song has to do is slightly speed up to 214 BPM right after the unknown part and remain there. That's not very likely, but it means that if there's a fast part, it probably isn't a long section of the song. (Mark my words, it's going to be just long enough to screw up everyone who needs to PFC the song.)
Post #5817 · Posted at 2015-04-28 03:47:32am 8.9 years ago
| THEJMAXX | |
|---|---|
 |
Member |
| 23 Posts | |
 | |
| Reg. 2011-06-05 | |
Yeah liking a lot the song so far!
Keep going Dr. D! I've seen your progress since the first play of OTP.
Keep going Dr. D! I've seen your progress since the first play of OTP.
Post #5818 · Posted at 2015-04-28 04:05:21am 8.9 years ago
Thanks so much for the motivation everyone. I think it will be very hard to make further progress on the basic chart so I will probably put my next effort in making it the same distance in the difficult chart, I may even have a chance to make it further if I can time the slow down properly. As for the 400bpm that is probably coming... It doesn't matter if I prepare for it now or not, if I use a 1.5 speed option and by some miracle make it to that section, I'd probably fail at whatever trick they use to create it so I'd rather make it there with comfortable bpm then study that video like I've been doing. I think next time ill use 3.25 again since it will make the beginning slightly easier and I know I can read the 200 bpm part with it, not to mention it should help a little at the next slow down.
Post #5819 · Posted at 2015-04-28 12:38:22pm 8.9 years ago
| Quickman | |
|---|---|
 |
Member+ |
| 6,058 Posts | |
 | |
| Reg. 2013-08-17 | |
| "five minute white boy challenge" | |
I'm gonna guess on an 800BPM speed-up where only a few arrows need to be hit.
Post #5820 · Posted at 2015-04-28 02:04:16pm 8.9 years ago
Quote: darkanine
Quote: darkanine
Here's an indirect proof of what Arcorann was trying to prove.
Here's a formula to calculate the song length if the BPM was 200 all the way through after the stop:
(10+(200/60)×n)/(22+1+n)=171/60 - let n mean length of song after stop.
This formula is derived from the formula for average BPM:
Total Beats/Total Song Length
OTP's total song length ≈ 22+1+n. 22 being the seconds before the stop, 1 second being the stop itself, and n being the unknown amount of seconds after it. -- These are approximations, but it won't affect the end result.
OTP's number of beats is 10+(200/60)n. 10 being the amount of beats before the stop, and 200/60 being the beats per second after stop.
171 is the average beats per minute, but we're dealing with seconds, so it is 171/60.
Algebra:
(10+(200/60)×n)/(22+1+n)=171/60.
(10+3.33...×n)/(23+n)=171/60
(10+3.33n)×60=171(23+n) ←Cross Multiply
600+200n=3933+171n
29n=3333
n≈115 seconds
Now figure out the total song length by adding 115 and 23 = 138
So I just proved what Arcorann was trying to prove. The song is either at least 2:18 seconds (possible but unlikely) or there is a speedup in the song.
So, from this slowdown, we can deduce that there is most likely a speedup faster than 200 BPM. The math above proved that if the BPM after the slowdown stayed at 200 BPM, in order for the average BPM to be 171, the song would have to be at least 2:18. But now we know that the BPM drops down to ~150, this means that the song would be much longer than 2:18 without being faster than 200 BPM. This is highly unlikely for a song to be that long, so we must assume that the song's BPM goes faster than 200 at one point or another. Basically, we're screwed.Here's a formula to calculate the song length if the BPM was 200 all the way through after the stop:
(10+(200/60)×n)/(22+1+n)=171/60 - let n mean length of song after stop.
This formula is derived from the formula for average BPM:
Total Beats/Total Song Length
OTP's total song length ≈ 22+1+n. 22 being the seconds before the stop, 1 second being the stop itself, and n being the unknown amount of seconds after it. -- These are approximations, but it won't affect the end result.
OTP's number of beats is 10+(200/60)n. 10 being the amount of beats before the stop, and 200/60 being the beats per second after stop.
171 is the average beats per minute, but we're dealing with seconds, so it is 171/60.
Algebra:
(10+(200/60)×n)/(22+1+n)=171/60.
(10+3.33...×n)/(23+n)=171/60
(10+3.33n)×60=171(23+n) ←Cross Multiply
600+200n=3933+171n
29n=3333
n≈115 seconds
Now figure out the total song length by adding 115 and 23 = 138
So I just proved what Arcorann was trying to prove. The song is either at least 2:18 seconds (possible but unlikely) or there is a speedup in the song.
Never thought we could go that far. Math is serious business
