View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
DigitalCyber Trick Member
Joined: 22 Jul 2004
|
0. Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2005 2:24 pm Post subject: Timing Window |
|
|
OK, I remember seeing something like this on here before, but I cant find it. It would be awesome if someone could give me the codes to make the SM timing window be identical (or very, very close) to the timing window in DR Extreme Arcade. If someone could walk me through the process and tell me where exactly I enter the code, it would be awesome |
|
Back to top |
|
|
AFIpunk572 Trick Member
Joined: 26 Jan 2005
|
1. Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2005 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
theres a thread all about this called " The stepmania timimng that windows configures" or sumthing like that. The timings are on the first page |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PedanticOmbudsman Trick Member
Joined: 07 Jan 2005 Location: Fayetteville, AR |
2. Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is the thread:
http://www.ddrfreak.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=95076
However, I don't think this information in the first post is entirely correct:
Quote: | JudgeWindowScale=1.000000
JudgeWindowSecondsAttack=0.135000
JudgeWindowSecondsBoo=0.191666
JudgeWindowSecondsGood=0.158333
JudgeWindowSecondsGreat=0.108333
JudgeWindowSecondsMarvelous=0.016666
JudgeWindowSecondsMine=0.108333
JudgeWindowSecondsOK=0.250000
JudgeWindowSecondsPerfect=0.033333 |
I'm sure the Marvelous and Perfect values are correct, by I'm doubtful about the rest. I prefer the values from this post later in the thread:
kmoyGTI wrote: | Aren't the timing windows for the 8th Mix Arcade:
Marvelous window = 1/60 of a second
Perfect window = 2/60 of a second
Great window = 4/60 of a second
Good window = 5/60 of a second
Boo window = 8/60 of a second
So wouldn't it make sense for the timing windows to be:
JudgeWindowScale=1.000000
JudgeWindowBooSeconds=0.133333
JudgeWindowGoodSeconds=0.083333
JudgeWindowGreatSeconds=0.066667
JudgeWindowMarvelousSeconds=0.016667
JudgeWindowOKSeconds=0.250000
JudgeWindowPerfectSeconds=0.033333 |
And I'll take this opportunity to whore the little chart I made that compares the arcade timings to the various Stepmania timing settings.
"Theory 1" is the first one I quoted in this post, "Theory 2" is the second one I quoted in this post (which I think is more accurate). _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
yagsimit69 Trick Member
Joined: 05 Jan 2004 Location: rochester |
3. Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
PedanticOmbudsman wrote: | This is the thread:
http://www.ddrfreak.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=95076
However, I don't think this information in the first post is entirely correct:
Quote: | JudgeWindowScale=1.000000
JudgeWindowSecondsAttack=0.135000
JudgeWindowSecondsBoo=0.191666
JudgeWindowSecondsGood=0.158333
JudgeWindowSecondsGreat=0.108333
JudgeWindowSecondsMarvelous=0.016666
JudgeWindowSecondsMine=0.108333
JudgeWindowSecondsOK=0.250000
JudgeWindowSecondsPerfect=0.033333 |
I'm sure the Marvelous and Perfect values are correct, by I'm doubtful about the rest. I prefer the values from this post later in the thread:
kmoyGTI wrote: | Aren't the timing windows for the 8th Mix Arcade:
Marvelous window = 1/60 of a second
Perfect window = 2/60 of a second
Great window = 4/60 of a second
Good window = 5/60 of a second
Boo window = 8/60 of a second
So wouldn't it make sense for the timing windows to be:
JudgeWindowScale=1.000000
JudgeWindowBooSeconds=0.133333
JudgeWindowGoodSeconds=0.083333
JudgeWindowGreatSeconds=0.066667
JudgeWindowMarvelousSeconds=0.016667
JudgeWindowOKSeconds=0.250000
JudgeWindowPerfectSeconds=0.033333 |
|
the times for marv's and greats are incorrect for the decimal values, their what one would get from a calculater but not the exact values. although its so small it wouldn't make a difference, they should be:
JudgeWindowGreatSeconds=0.066666
JudgeWindowMarvelousSeconds=0.016666 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PedanticOmbudsman Trick Member
Joined: 07 Jan 2005 Location: Fayetteville, AR |
4. Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 7:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Incorrect. Actually, they're repeating decimals, meaning you'd have an infinite string of 6's, (1/60 = 0.01666666666..... continued forever) if you could actually represent them that way. But in reality, infinitely long numbers are often inconvenient to work with, and you have to round them off somewhere.
As you may remember from school, when you round a number at a particular decimal place, you have to look at the digit after the digit you want to be your final one. If the digit after the one you want to be the final one is 5 or above, you increment the final number by one. Otherwise you don't.
For example, if you needed to round the following numbers off to one decimal place:
0.12 would become 0.1 when rounded to one decimal place
0.15 would become 0.2 when rounded to one decimal place
0.19 would become 0.2 when rounded to one decimal place
0.43 would become 0.4 when rounded to one decimal place
0.47 would become 0.5 when rounded to one decimal place
0.33 would become 0.3 when rounded to one decimal place
0.66 would become 0.7 when rounded to one decimal place
0.99 would become 1.0 when rounded to one decimal place
You could tack on extra digits to these and none of them would change... 0.1000001, 0.133333, and 0.1399999999 would call become 0.1 if rounded to one decimal place, because they're all closer to 0.1 than to 0.2. 0.15000001, 0.159999999, and 0.193284793284 would all become 0.2 if rounded to one decimal place, because they're all closer to 0.2 than to 0.1.
Now let's look let at our repeating decimal from before:
0.016666666666.....
If you cut it at 3 decimal places, it'll become 0.017
If you cut it at 4 decimal places, it'll become 0.0167
If you cut it at 5 decimal places, it'll become 0.01667
If you cut it at 10 decimal places, it'll become 0.0166666667
No matter how far along you cut it, the final digit you include will always be rounded up to 7 because the digit you cut out after it will always have been a 6. In other words, it'll always be closer to 0.16...7 than to 0.16...6 when you cut it off.
Now let's consider the specific case of Stepmania. Let's assume that Stepmania's timing window can handle six decimal places. In order to decide how to round off a repeating decimal into six decimal places, we need to look at the 7th decimal place also:
0.0166666
Now, we could represent this in 6 decimal places in one of two ways: 0.016666 or 0.016667. It doesn't take a mathematic genius to tell you that 0.0166666 is closer to 0.016667 than it is to 0.016666. So the correct way to round our repeating decimal into six decimal places is 0.016667, not 0.016666.
But as you said it's not a big enough difference to actually make any difference at all... in fact, the difference would probably get rounded down to nothing somewhere else along the line. So the difference is purely academic. But I'm somewhat pedantic about these things. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|