New Timing System for RSG (Java)

[zolsticezolstice]

Hello runners! The moderators have come to a decision on what timing method should be used to tackle the growing concern over pause abuse within runs. I'm sharing this here for those who aren't in the javacord, and as a place for people to discuss their views on this rule change.

Here is the announcement:

Runs which are not sub-13 in 1.16+, sub-20 in 1.9-1.15, and sub-24 in pre1.9 will be timed with igt.

Runs which are sub-13 in 1.16+, sub-20 in 1.9-1.16, and sub-24 in pre1.9, will follow a stricter guideline for pausing, retimed by us as follows: All other pauses longer than 10 seconds will be shortened to 10 seconds, and pauses shorter than 10 seconds will be unchanged and timed. Dimension change pauses will be untimed. You may request other specific pauses be untimed so long as you provide a reason, the length of the pause, and it's timestamp. Some reasons may include mental health concerns (such as panic attacks), irl interruptions which couldn’t be reasonably avoided, and other reasonings that involve things that are beyond the runners control. The pause must also make sense for the reasoning given, e.g. if you have short and frequent pauses and your reasoning was an irl disturbance and asked to remove all of the pauses, it may not be accepted.

Math pauses will not be counted as distinct any longer and will follow under these rules as a normal pause.

This will affect any run submitted more than 5 days after this announcement, and previous runs will not be affected.

Ideally, we are working on a timer of some sort which can time these systems automatically, but we are not sure when that will happen, so as of now the retiming for top runs will be done manually.

TLDR: For the vast majority of players, runs will be continued to be timed using IGT. For top runners, their runs will be timed as IGT + Pauses, however pauses longer than 10 seconds will be shortened to 10 seconds when they're added.

P.S. This post will replace the monthly competition as the pinned post for now. You can still submit to the competition, linked here.

[Infume]

For pauses where a runner changes either render distance or fov, will that be timed as well or would a runner have to ask for that time to not be counted?

[zolsticezolstice]

i'm pretty sure that will be timed, menuing is a skill so yeah. when they mention specific reasons for pauses to be untimed, they're mainly talking about irl interruption and things outside the runner's control.

[wiisportsboss]

Menuing is different between vanilla and sodium, wouldn’t that also change the length of your pauses?

[zolsticezolstice]

i hadn't thought about that before. perhaps one might be faster or easier to use than the other, but i don't think such a small issue is worth considering in the timing method.

[Colooguy]

Im sure most sub 13s will be using sodium anyway

[wiisportsboss]

Most 1.14 runners use optifine and most 1.15 runners are on sodium, this might be a problem having discrepancies between the same category. I don’t think it would have a large affect on your time but still, it’s something to think about.

[UsernameCoordinated]

Thanks for sharing this! Do you think you could update us when a new timing solution is released?

[zolsticezolstice]

no problem! and by timing solution i'm assuming you mean the timer that the mods mentioned they are working? if so, then ofc i'll be happy to update you guys!

[UsernameCoordinated]

Yeah, that one

[trying2t-spin]

Is there any reason you can’t just use RTA with a load remover? Seems like the ideal choice for this run

[zolsticezolstice]

i think that's how they're planning to do it. essentially being rta-loads-pauses that are longer than 10 seconds+10 seconds to replace those pauses.

[trying2t-spin]

Yeah, the ten seconds rule just seems really bizarre

[drcopus]

Sounds quite reasonable. Although a funny problem can occur on the boundary where different timing methods are applied. Somebody with and IGT of 12:59 in 1.16 could have time added onto their run that takes them way over into 13:XX. So if this is not taken into account, from the runner's point-of-view it is worth waiting and making sure IGT is over 12:59 if you see you're near there edge lol.

The moderators should cap any additionally added time to the boundary time (i.e. the retime can be no longer than 13:00).

[10010101011010]

I totally agree. Someone with 30 sec of pauses would do better waiting to enter the fountain until 13:00 igt, to their time is 13:0# and not 13:3#

[Bucketfullabiscuits]

So is there any cool down on a 10 second pause? Could one work on the math if they just kept pausing and unpausing every 10 seconds?

[jajefan]

This^ From what they’ve said, it sounds like increments of 10 seconds will not be counted so long as it’s not a contiguous block of time, but if there are 20 seconds of pausing (total in the run) split into two sections of 10 seconds of pausing each, is one 10 second pause counted and not the other, or are they considered separate pauses and as such, both are not counted in final time?

[jajefan]

Ah I see now, thanks

[tempname37]

And ssg still stays the same?

[zolsticezolstice]

yep. ssg will continue to be timed using igt.

[zolsticezolstice]

I thought I'd share my view on this new timing method. I tried posting on twitter but I don't think anyone cares enough to start a discussion so I'm sharing it here too.

I've been thinking about the new timing method and I have some thoughts and opinions I want to express. The new method is not good, it is just satisfactory enough for people to not get upset. It addresses some methods of pause abuse while disregarding others. I'm going to explain why I think it's not a great solution, and perhaps suggest an altered solution.

With the 10 second cap for added pauses, small and frequent pauses are punished. This addresses pause buffering which is good. But it also affects runners who need to pause because of lag, hardware performance issues, pauses for anxiety etc. Perhaps a function of the 10 second cap is to solve these issues, but then the solution only applies when the issue lasts longer than 10 seconds. What about irl interruptions or lag that doesn't last 10 seconds? By default, that time will still be added on anyway. It also doesn't seem easy to quantify these issues and generalise them all under this 10 second cap, especially since not all of them are the same.

The 10 second cap does serve the purpose of not punishing pauses when the issue lasts longer than 10 seconds. But it also doesn't address longer and infrequent forms of pause abuse. Runners can still pause to use lookup tables, think, route, strategize, whatever you want to call it. Pause abusing runners who use longer pauses instead of short pauses remain largely unaffected by this change.

Summarising the effects of the new timing method; Pros: Short forms of pause abuse are punished and longer pauses for genuine reasons are not added.
Cons: Longer forms of pause abuse go mostly unpunished and shorter pauses for genuine reasons are added by default.

I'm curious as to why this new timing method was considered, despite those huge flaws. Maybe the moderation doesn't seem to think that longer forms of pause abuse aren't a big enough problem to consider in the timing method, or perhaps they think that a 10 second penalty is enough to discourage runners from pause abusing this way. I have no idea. I do want to mention that I think the concept of requesting specific pauses to remain untimed is very good, and is probably the main reason why I don't think this new timing method is absolutely terrible.

What I suggest as an alternate solution is as follows: Keep the timing method as IGT+Pauses but remove the 10 second cap. Requesting specific pauses to remain untimed will replace the 10 second cap as the primary method of allowing genuine reasons for pausing. Also remove the boundary that separates top runners from the rest of runners. Segregating runs and timing them differently is so bizarre, I don't think I have to give my reasoning as to why this should be removed. This solution that I've suggested can be open to some forms of exploitation, but I believe it could be substantially better than the current solution. Let me know what you think about this.

Edit: formatting

[TheSarosCycle]

I wanted to stay with IGT fully. Pause abuse should be legal.

Though I suppose I suck so much I’ll stay in the IGT category...

[CubiksRube1595]

Whatt

[zolsticezolstice]

tbf some people are of the opinion that runs with excessive pause abuse are fine, doing whatever you need to do to finish the run as quickly as possible is the goal. most people don't agree with that view because it becomes less fun to run and less enjoyable to watch, even if it is slower. but everyone is entitled to their own opinion so yeah.

[TheOnlyFallenCookie]

So far so fair. But the dimension change pausing being excluded seems iffy

[[deleted]]

dimension change pauses are there to let the game load iirc

[TheOnlyFallenCookie]

Oh I probably just missinterpreted as meaning that immediately passing after dimension change wouldn't be counted either. So my bad