White Water WIP

[Kinsey]

Them's some loverly lookin' ramps.

 

[PacDude]

This is a quick Photoshop test for what the GI lights could ultimately look like (pretty much cut, paste and adjust playfield to make it real). I plan to fit the decals and then cut them and the all the ramps out and put them on a blank copy table so I can more easily do the playfield drop-wall lights and then I can just cut, paste and drop it all back into place when the rest is done so there might not be a whole lot more preview pictures for awhile. I've also readjusted the ramps and top plastics and flipper colors to all match up with the overlays more precisely and adjusted the bottom right overlay so it aligns properly with the wire ramp (which also then centered properly over an existing post, so I think it's aligned correctly now).

 

[Shockman]

It does look good. When are you going to have it done? Are you using a bttf fix in the script, or are you using an older core.vbs?
Perhaps, if you are using the fix in the script, you should let the folks here know the code. I'm sure some of the newer people have no idea. Becides, it would be nice of you to share.

 

[PacDude]

Why would I need a ball through the flipper fix in the script??? (for a sec there I thought you were talking about back to the future). The newest VBS file works exactly the same with my tables as the old one did (despite shockman's ranting that I somehow brought the bug back). What I did was REMOVE THE BUG from the VBS core instead of having a bug patched to fix the bug--that is to say that the problem was CAUSED by the original VBS core and then patched to address the bug (with a value that some complained about looking too fast for a down-swing).

I removed all the fixed value code and so the flippers now use a speed that is the SAME as the upswing speed you specify. So, if you have a reasonable upswing speed (say greater than 0.1 or so), you won't get the BTTF problem because your downswing will be in the proper range automatically (it's the same as the upswing like most original tables get by default as well--remember only VPM tables got the massive BTTF complaints and that's because the VBS core created the problematic values (ok the default flipper value the "new" table uses isn't good, but then what is good about that default table?)

Most VPM tables use reasonable flipper values (and if they don't, they won't aim right anyway so you either change the values or you don't play the table) so most VPM tables will notice no real difference either way.

Seeing as my tables use 0.137 as the upswing value, they will behave IDENTICALLY to the previous cores (which forced a fixed 0.137 value for the downswing). 0.137 = 0.137 in both so no difference in behavior at all.

 

[Shockman]

But if people use the default settings, or want to use a slower speed the they are screwed. They will have ball through the flipper problems. My table Mr. & Mrs. PAC-MAN use a realistic flipper speed. That speed it however too slow for the downswing and it relies on the core.vbs to speed up the downswing to elimate ball through the flipper problems. I have my own core.vbs file, but not everyone or anyone, that I know of has it.

You broke my table, as far as I am concerned, and you had no right to do that. We all agreed back then that the fix for the problem was worth it. THAT"S WHY YOU EMAILED THEM YOURSELF AND SAID YOUR NUMBER WAS BETTER and that it should be put into the .VBS like I was saying before that. You broke many tables everyone that does not use a fast enough speed is going to get balls through the flippers.

Even if you were the one to come up with the fix, instead of bitching about the things that VP could not do like have the flipper problem fixed and transparent ramps and took out the fix because your tables did not need it then I would think it was wrong. To take out my fix that fixed it for every one is childish, and very wrong, evil and stupid, as well as disrespectful to the community. You had no right, it's as simple as that. There is nothing you can say short of 'it's back' to change that fact.

STFU about what caused the problem, that's just trying to draw attention away from the issue. It don't matter what caused the problem. Even if the team did not slow down the back swing we would still have the problem. Have you ever played a real pinball machine, one you could touch and smell? have you ever hit those buttons on the side of it while looking inside? Do you really think the upswing and down swing is driven the same? Look again. Some of us want realistic action as best as they can get, and some of us are just happy with something that works I guess, me, I had both imo. You had NO right.

 

[Kinsey]

He said his fucking table works. Start the debate about the core.vbs file somewhere more relevant than this thread. But no, typical Shockfuckingman behavior spamming someone's thread whom you don't like.

 

[Shockman]

I just asked if he would explain why HIS table worked, and he did. It's on topic. WTF does your post have to do with the fucking topic?

 

[Shockman]

fucking bitch

 

[LeeVanCleef]

Have you ever played a real pinball machine, one you could touch and smell?

I don't recall ever sniffing a pinball machine before. Or was Smellorama one of the extras that made Pinball 2000 so special. I do love the smell of pinball in the morning. It smells like victory.

 

[PacDude]

Shockman, you are full of shit. NO pinball table has a SLOW upswing speed and while your point that the downswing speed is different from the upswing speed has merit, the problem is the downswing speed is ALWAYS *SLOWER* than the upswing speed. Now you tell me how removing the core.vbs file could cause the BTTF problem on a table UNLESS that table is using such a slow upswing speed that the same downswing speed would cause a problem. And IF that were the case, then what you would have is a table with a SLOW upswing (hitting the ball) and a FAST downswing (to prevent the BTTF effect). But that is ASS BACKWARDS!!!! In REALITY (not Shockman World), you have a FAST upswing (caused by a powered solenoid) and a slower downswing (caused by spring action). So IF ANYTHING, you'd want a fast upswing and a SLOW downswing to look realistic!!! But that situation would ***CAUSE*** the BTTF problem to occur!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thus, you are full of shit because you CANNOT have a fast upswing and a slow downswing (that is realisitic) WITHOUT creating the BTTF problem in the current public VP (fixed in Ultrapin's VP BTW).

So WHAT GOOD is the core.vbs code then???? It FORCES a fixed high speed downswing that is unrealistic to prevent the BTTF problem, yet if you use a slower downswing, you then have something equally unrealistic (a slow upswing with a fast downswing??? That would look exactly like the REVERSE of the real world and look WORSE than using the SAME speed for both).

Thus, I say it's better to use the SAME value for both than to have something that REALLY looks weird (powered downswings and springy upswings). At least then they are equal (and to my eyes visually it's more of a power difference than a speed difference in movement).

So the ONLY way you're going to have a BTTF problem with the new VBS file is if your upswing is very slow (e.g. maybe less than 0.1). AND you can now use FASTER downswings (by using faster upswings) if you so choose. But i don't see why anyone would or should be using speed settings of less than 0.1. The flipper wouldn't aim very well at that speed in VP.

In reality, I don't think you're bitching about something wrong with the VBS file, but rather that you aren't getting credit in it. Now neither of is getting credit for it so SHUT UP already.

And for your information, I didn't email wpcmame to give him 'my' speed over your speed per se (what stopped you from e-mailing him eh???), but to GET A HOLD OF HIM (because he did not read the forums much and at the time was in control of the VBS files) and I wanted the VBS core problem 'fixed' one way or the other as it was CAUSING the problem.

He obviously put the downswing code in there to look more realistic (VP will not do it on its own), but forcing a high speed value there doesn't look more realistic and so I'm saying it's just as valid to REMOVE the downswing code as it is to force an unrealistically high value for it.

The ONLY case where the BTTF would still occur is where an author is using a pathetically slow upswing speed on their flippers (probably with HUGE flipper strengths to compensate) in which case they should probably fix their upswing speed/strength combo because having a fast downswing would look ridiculous there anyway and a matching slow one would cause the BTTF problem so why not just fix the upswing and have a matching downswing (that at least is never FASTER than the upswing whereby with the old 'fix' you could have just that, a faster downswing than the upwswing which would never occur in real life except if the solenoid is broke and barely working).

 

[PacDude]

You broke my table, as far as I am concerned, and you had no right to do that.

So you are using slow speed upswings on your table?

We all agreed back then that the fix for the problem was worth it.

And I'm saying removing the cause of the problem is just as valid as band-aiding the cause so it no longer causes it. Why not remove something that is defective and does not do what it was intended to do (which was to make the flipper move SLOWER on the downswing than the upswing) rather than force it to do something that is completely opposite to its intended effect (i.e. the fix was making it force the flipper to a fixed FAST rate, which could make it move faster than the upswing on a table using a slow upswing, which is exactly the OPPOSITE of what the code was there to do in the first place, which again was to make the flipper move SLOWER than the upspeed.

If you remove the code, you have a flipper that moves up and down at the SAME rate, which is preferable to a faster downswing. I used a rate that matched my upswing (so I'd neither get the BTTF effect or have a faster moving downswing) and removing the system produces the exact same effect, so there's no difference at all to me.

THAT"S WHY YOU EMAILED THEM YOURSELF AND SAID YOUR NUMBER WAS BETTER and that it should be put into the .VBS like I was saying before that.

That's simply not true. I never said my number was better and that's a blatant mis-quote or even a LIE, really. I did tell him it had to be corrected in the VBS file and using a number like 0.137 would fix it. I used that number because it's what I use and I didn't want the downswing to be FASTER than my upswing. Some people like PK argued that 0.137 was TOO SLOW and that a much faster number should be used, but that would look even more ridiculous if my 0.137 upswing was accompanied by a 0.500 downswing (whereby the flipper would move upward and then instantly downward and look visually WEIRD to say the very least).

But this way, that's not an issue because it will simply match your upswing. And the SAME is better than faster on the downswing.

AGAIN, the purpose of having a separate downswing was to have it LOOK more realistic by having a SLOWER downswing. By forcing a HIGH number in the VBS CORE, the true purpose of even having that code in the first place was DEFEATED. Thus, I say that code doesn't even need to be there anymore.

I did, however, keep the forced power downswing, but lowered the number to a power whereby it can't hit the ball with any force (as a spring loaded flipper isn't going to do much of anything to a ball beyond its rubber value).

You broke many tables everyone that does not use a fast enough speed is going to get balls through the flippers.

Give an example and then ALSO tell me how realistic it looks to have the flipper move up slow and move down fast. Why not tell those authors to use a more realistic upswing instead? Because it will look silly to have the downswing go faster than the upswing.

was wrong. To take out my fix that fixed it for every one is childish, and very wrong, evil and stupid, as well as

Oh, you mean sort of like your own behavior every day on these forums????

disrespectful to the community. You had no right, it's as simple as that. There is nothing you can say short of 'it's back' to change that fact.

I had every right. I'm the maintainer of the VBS files and I removed a bug that was there since inception and CAUSED the problem in many tables that would otherwise not ever have had the problem (i.e. ones with reasonable realistic flipper settings would STILL have had the BTTF problem with the original VBS Core, but no longer have it without that code). As for tables that have SLOW upswing values, it's not my job to fix individual tables that are using unrealistic values. Forcing a high downswing limits the author's choices and may make their flippers look silly as well. They should fix their upswing so the downswing doesn't look ridiculous with the old FIX and to prevent the BTTF with the new fix. Thus, EITHER WAY, those authors should STILL fix their tables! Becauwe EITHER WAY, it either LOOKS WRONG or BEHAVES WRONG or BOTH.

STFU about what caused the problem, that's just trying to draw attention away from the issue.

The real issue is you acting like psychopathic nutball. I want nothing to do with ANYTHING you have done with VP when you act like that and thus my decision to eliminate the bug rather than patch it.

It don't matter what caused the problem.

Sure it does. The purpose of that code was defeated when it was patched. Thus, it was no longer needed in the first place. I also had several authors tell me they didn't want an arbitrary fast value in there and I was defeating hte purpose of the code to make it LOOK realistic. I had to argue that you either had it look fast or balls would drop through. There's no difference now because again it either moves fast or the ball drops through.

Even if the team did not slow down the back swing we would still have the problem.

Only on tables using slow upswings. There is no reason to use a slow upswing. Real flippers move fast (they are kicked into place with a solenoid action).

Some of us want realistic action as best as they can get, and some of us are just happy with something that works I guess, me, I had both imo. You had NO right.

It doesn't LOOK right (and therefore unrealistic) to have a faster downswing than an upswing. If your table uses a slow upswing than it's already unrealistic. Forcing an even faster downswing will only make it look even more unrealistic.

The ONLY viable solution for BOTH situations is to use the SAME value for both. At least then it doesn't look FASTER (which looks odd) and it won't cause the BTTF with a proper upwsing speed either.

Most tables that feel right use flipper settings with speeds greater than 0.1. Those tables should play the same regardless. I'd expect any table using some odd flipper setting that has a speed less than 0.1 to aim weird anyway (or could be corrected with lower strengths and more speed).

Of course, if you had not acted like a complete nutjob, I wouldn't have bothered to change it in the first place. Actually, I thought about adding a new call whereby you could specify the speed and strength of the downswing right in the call itself, but you'd probably bitch about that too saying you invented it so I figured why bother.

 

[Kinsey]

I just asked if he would explain why HIS table worked, and he did. It's on topic. WTF does your post have to do with the fucking topic?

Actually, he did explain it, cuntslit. Then you demand it explained again because you want more conflict to occur.

How about leaving him the fuck alone and let him work on his table?

 

[Shockman]

WHAT THE FUCK DOES IT MATTER TO YOU WHAT SETTINGS PEOPLE USE FOR THEIR TABLES PacDude? I use a slower upswing because I FUCKING LIKE IT LIKE THAT. I would use a slower value for the downswing but the fucking ball would not stop when it hit the fucking flipper. Fuck man, you are something else. You never did play a REAL table, have you? When you ever do you will learn where you are wrong. You have no respect for the Pinball Community and if you did you would understand what is at stake here. If you ever did play a real one, or even if you opened your eyes when playing a VP table you would see finally that the game is played by hitting the ball by flipping the flipper UP, YES UP. the downswing is useful in special cases that I would not even try to explain to you, but the table is basically played by hitting a ball with the upswing of a flipper. The downswing most useful function is to get the flipper back into position to use again, to flipp fucking UP again. For all intents and purposes, the down swing is not important. NOW, listen and try to understand, People should be able to use any value in a VPM table that they want to for a flip. But people should not HAVE TO use your value, they should be able to use what works best and have the return fast enough to not meet up with a ball. They should be able to make it as slow as they want. .05 even without that happening.

You fucked us over and set this function of VPM back 5 years. There is no reason people should have to mod their tables and release again because they relied on the core.vbs file to get their table to work, and now it dont.

 

[Shockman]

I just asked if he would explain why HIS table worked, and he did. It's on topic. WTF does your post have to do with the fucking topic?

Actually, he did explain it, cuntslit. Then you demand it explained again because you want more conflict to occur.

How about leaving him the fuck alone and let him work on his table?

I FUCKING SAID HE EXPLAINED IT, DICKHEAD!

 

[Kinsey]

I just asked if he would explain why HIS table worked, and he did. It's on topic. WTF does your post have to do with the fucking topic?

Actually, he did explain it, cuntslit. Then you demand it explained again because you want more conflict to occur.

How about leaving him the fuck alone and let him work on his table?

I FUCKING SAID HE EXPLAINED IT, DICKHEAD!

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I'm not you. Did you kiss your sister with that mouth?

 

[Shockman]

Alright then, how about I be the dickhead, and you be the cuntslit then. Don't you understand that that is where that came from?

She was a step sister, and older than me, and she did not live with us for long, but no, I don't remember ever kissing her, but we did love each other, that much was clear.

She really did look much like you, much like my step father, who was the only father I ever knew, I was 1 1/2 when he met me and married my mother. He was 1/4 Indian (american)

If my posting is keeping him from his table, then that's his fault, sis.

 

[Shockman]

FUCK PacDude.

Who the fuck is going to be watching the God Damned flipper swing back when the fucking ball was just hit.

YES asshole, my table does use a slow enough upswing to cause problems as a downswing speed

SO FUCKING WHAT? I made it and you have played it and you have critiqued it and you did not even notice. You said it played good. You went to PAPA or something and played a real on and posted I could almost quote 'To Shockmans credit his and the real table played about the same'

What does it matter what a fast downswing looks like. you said about 4 times in that single post how bad a fast downswing looks like.

WELL WHAT THE FUCK DOES A BALL FALLING RIGHT THROUGH A FLIPPER LOOK LIKE TO YOU THEN?

If the default flipper speed was enough to not cause the problem then no one would give a fuck.

You are using my discovery to your advantage, and leaving new people to learn what the community could not learn in years OF FUCKING TRYING, PacDude! Or to live with something they should not have to.

Write a book, it is not going to change anything.

You are right about the fucking speeds, but who the fuck do you think you are talking to? I know that crap better than you do. I just unlike you think that the fucking fast flipper downswing looks not even close, not even BAD, compared to a ball and a flipper using up the very same space!

LOL at you 'Dude, you are a funny man!

 

[elton]

Wow, Shockman's learnt new skills ... font size, uppercase and use of colour!

 

[elton]

But it's the same record playing ... yawn.

 

[PacDude]

It's simple really. Either Shitman goes or I go. I won't put up with constant personal abuse here. It's against the rules even. These forums are pretty much Shitman's Shit Forums with him here and no topic is safe from being shit on by Shitman. He's a psychotic troll and should be dealt with like *ALL* other VP sites have dealt with him. Permanant Bans for life.

 

[kristian]

FUCK PacDude.
[...]
Who the fuck
[...]
fucking ball
[...]
SO FUCKING WHAT?
[...]
WELL WHAT THE FUCK
[...]
no one would give a fuck.
[...]
OF FUCKING TRYING
[...]
You are right about the fucking speeds,
[...]
who the fuck do you think you are talking to?
[...]
fucking fast flipper downswing

Omnipotent......impotent....close...I think maybe a ceegar is in order.....!

 

[highrise]

Hey guys

Nice to read in this thread that the Whitewater table is progressing well. I must be a soft touch, because I keep popping back. Some day I might pop back here to find you all playing nicely, but it hasn't happened yet. So I guess I'll leave again.

 

[Kinsey]

Well, it takes less than 48 hours for him to get a new ban. But, I can't say as I blame you. To be honest, I'm about ready to make the same ultimatum.

 

[bob]

I'm leaving! I'm leaving! I'm leaving!

Don't let the door hit ya in the ass....

 

[PacDude]

Well you might find it amusing, Bob, but I think it's way past being funny. You try to create a regular WIP thread and it gets hijacked and ruined by Shitman. Even Mr. Hanky is sick of of Shitman shitting on him!