Hi there,

I'm starting to learn the SR of some tracks and I'm seriously questionning myself about the rules of the game.

Why are we forced to play with the default rules ? I mean the "12 shots an 2 minutes per hole" one.

I mean, I understand that these are the default rules of the game, but changing these does not change anything to the game right ?

It would permit to more people to access the game as some tricks are quite hard to setup. And way more important, in the actuel state of the SRC rules, it's quite impossible to do some races. One big mistake on ONE track means "reset". If it happens at the hole 17 ... well ... sorry but you just loose the race bro :D

What do you think about this ? Do you have any explainations for me ? :) Thanks <3

Hello Djodjino!

Thank you for your post, I am happy for every new runner! (Sorry for the late reply)

To be honest I didn't really question that part of the ruleset too much. For me resetting too much on one hole meant a reset for the whole run anyway, since it wasted too much time (not to mention taking 2 minutes on one hole).

Now that you brought my attention to it, I can definitly see how newer runners might struggle on difficult tricks, that involve precise shooting. I think Jaychalke (who set up the initial rules) wanted to ensure everyone runs with the exact same conditions. Personally I think this is super important in speedrunning.

That being said: Changing the rules would matter for the run: My theory: Increasing the stroke count (say to 99) would lead to more risky strats being used and constantly resetting the hole. Personally I don't think this is healthy for the game and not fun. ^ I would love to hear your opinion about this.

About impossible runs: Yes, some runs can be quite challenging (looking at you Jade Temple), but I don't think they are impossible. It sucks if you have to reset, because you failed a risky strat. But thats what risky strats do in all speedrun games. You can always go for the safe route and miss out on some time safes with the "all-in" skips. Hard tricks should be rewarded with a time safe.

Sorry for the wall of text, I just wanted to state my opinion as clear as possible. :)

TL;DR: For now I think it's best to leave stroke count at 12.

Cheers, Lofty

Hi Lofty,

Thanks for the answer.

Yep no problem, I don't want to come and change all the rules, I just wanted to talk about it to understand why they are in that actual state.

So, to answer you question : I don't think that setting the stroke count to 99 will lead to some reset fest with impossible tricks. For me there are two possibilities.

1. Yes, the runners will reset a lot and try harder tricks on their runs. So for a small amount of time, there will be a lot of reset fest runs. But the route is pretty optimised and the actual WR are pretty strong. So the runs with a lot of reset will not take the WR as they will loose too much time resetting again and again. UNTILL someone can do an awesome run with few resets with those crazy tricks. But with rules as hard as "12 stroke counter" nobody will attempt some new tricks.
2. The crazy strats are just too crazy and nobody will ever take the WR with a new routing, and so we don't really care if the time at the bottom of the grid includes reset fest. I mean, ALL the times are importants, but only the one at the top of the grid are importants for the new runners that want to take a look at the run and how it looks like.

And for the last point, I did not say that the run is impossible. I said that it's impossible to do somes races on the game at the moment. As a member of the Ultime Decathlon community, the race in speedruns are REALLY important to me. It's a wonderfull way to improve yourself and to learn some new strats. It's really usefull to keep the motivation and to keep learning. But in the actuel state. I would personally never attempt a race. It's too dangerous, you cannot attempt any risky strat. Well let's say one try per trick and then you have to backup on the normal strat that can be really long in comparison and so it ruins the race (I think to Jade Temple in this example :D). And even with the normal strat, you can still loose the map (like the trickshot with the big aim in jade temple).

Well that's it. I do understand why the rules are this way. I do understand that it's for the players to play on the exact same ruleset, but putting everyone with 99 is also the same ruleset and it will be better for newcommers to learn the game. It's important to be able to share your time in the leaderboard for some people to keep being motivate. :) And it's even more important on some small community like this one to avoid kicking out some new runners because of the rules.

But anyway, one more time, it was just to discuss this with you, let's keep it this way if the runners thinks it's better :)

Thanks for the answer mate ! :)

I'd 100% support no stroke limits requirements in the rules and no max time limits in the rules, I consider it a very obvious choice honestly.

"My theory: Increasing the stroke count (say to 99) would lead to more risky strats being used and constantly resetting the hole. Personally I don't think this is healthy for the game and not fun."

More risky strats is kind of a big part of speedrunning in general. There are loads of games where your run is dead if you miss pixel perfect tricks, that's essentially the nature of the beast of spedrunning. If you find a trick unfun you can just not include it in your runs, not every time you play do you have to go for world record... world records are always inconsistent inherently, the WR record holder for any given game doesn't consistently get that WR time when they sit down and play, as perfection is a matter of luck sometimes.

And allowing hard tricks encourages more research into new tricks in general, which is one of the big parts of speedrunning.

I consider it very not in the spirit of things to have a rule that's stated intention is to discourage trying out the "optimal" strategy for speed (hard tricks). There are multiple games where some strats are so tight, that 3 or less people in the WORLD have ever managed to do them outside of a TAS. They don't ban the strategy just because it's inconsistent. And they don't disqualify the runs because they had to retry their setup multiple times to get it right in game.

Speaking of unfun, hitting the 12 stroke limit after getting off rhythm is very unfun itself too. For a lot of shots, you can tell if you are gonna get it or not by your initial velocity and angle, you can basically reset after 1s if you know what it should look like. And not everyone is grinding for world record, most people who speedrun this game will never get world record, that's just the reality of speedrunning. For those people, breaking personal bests can be much more rewarding, and focusing on self improvement.

Also look at Golf It speedrunners in the middle of the pack: the difference in this game for Grassland between 1st and 10th is ~70 seconds. You can certainly be on pace with World Record, get off rhythm on a hole, and hit the 12 stroke limit, when if you were to land the shot on the 17th attempt (as an example), you'd have burned up a lot less than 70 seconds retrying it. So instead of going from WR pace to "throw your run away, haha, you hit 12 strokes, try again" you could at least land a run that still could theoretically be the new 7th place.

If you want the WR for Golf It, even with 12 stroke limits, you should take the highest risk + highest reward strategy. The 12 stroke limit doesn't stop you, it just honestly wastes your time. And the theoretical perfect run will always be under 12 strokes, so if that rule is set to 12, or 50, or 100, it won't change what the best run possible would be. It just makes it more forgiving for people still learning various tricks.

Djodjino also makes a great point about speedrun races, those are scenarios where requiring a hard reset just kills the fun.

"I think Jaychalke (who set up the initial rules) wanted to ensure everyone runs with the exact same conditions."

The "exact same conditions" has flaws, I think that's the wrong way to look at making a category. For example, mouse sensitivity is different for many but that doesn't give an advantage. So is resolution, computer hardware, FPS, operating system. I don't think the goal should be "exact same conditions", there would be a million categories then.

I think the goal should be "to make things fair". It's not fair to use macros for example ( a common rule in speedrunning ), or compare times from a run on easy difficulty to a run on a harder difficulty runs (another common category split ), but is it really unfair to let someone finish their run and submit it, even if they need 15 strokes to make a shot? They are already being punished on time, punishing them with a forced reset is really salt in the wounds at that point.

It's not the same, but I'd like you to imagine a scenario where runs with bad RNG (Golf It doesn't have that exact problem, but other games do) were banned from submission, because they should "reset for the whole run anyway, since it wasted too much time". And what happens if the run wasn't actually so bad that it wouldn't bump them up on the leader-boards a rank or two (instead of getting WR due to the time loss)?

I know this thread is old, but I really hope you can reconsider changing the rules again. Thank you if you read that huge wall of text, I know I rambled a little.

Just another thought, this could help simplify things with the "At least 106 out of 108 holes must be finished (You are allowed to overstroke or run out of time twice)" rule. "98%" (effectively) is a strange category, would it be a bonus if the category could just become a 100% category, if players didn't have to worry about skipping over holes because of stroke limit or time limit.

I know the rule is supposed to kill less runs, but even if you are a pro, and can do every course perfectly, first try, spamming the R key 12 times will likely be faster than at least 2 of the courses, so if you want world record, you might actually want to intentionally throw away 2 holes, right?

Thanks for your post! TL;DR in the end

After reading all the points again, I am mostly convinced your proposed rule change makes sense and should be implemented.

A ) Increasing Strokes for a Single Map ----------------------------------------

Riskier strats are risky, because 1) you waste time if you fail and have to start at the beginning of the hole and 2) you are potentially losing the whole run if you overstroke. Increasing the strokes would make risky strats less "risky", because you don't have to worry about 2).

But this isn't necessarily bad for the runners, imo! It's just something to keep in mind.

Having said this unlocking Strokes could lead to runners using R and F more liberally. However using R and F wastes time, so increasing Strokes would most likely NOT result in faster runs.

Overall I think unlocking Strokes (and Time Limit) should not be a problem

B ) Increasing Strokes for the "All Maps"-Category ----------------------------

I am still a bit hesitant to change this. Possible Rules?:

1. 12 Strokes and 106/108 (Current Rules) Hard difficulty. You cannot use risky strats, if you can't execute them reliably.

2. 12 Strokes and 108/108 needed (True 100%) Very hard and (probably?) unfun for most runners.

3. Unlocked Strokes and 106/108 needed Easy difficulty. It is still possible to use the RF-spam to finish a Hole quickly (it takes less then 5 seconds with 100 Strokes)

4. Unlocked Strokes and 108/108 needed (True 100%) Easy difficulty. The runs doesn't really get harder compared to 3), but it eliminates the RF-spam. The run is about you knowing when too use risky strats (risky strats are worse than the easy route, if you fail it too often). The difficulty in the run lays in executing strats reliably (so basically the same as in 1), but less punishing: beginner friendly?)

Either 1) or 4) seems to be the way to go. At the moment I lean towards 4), but I will think about it a bit more.

TL;DR ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I think your proposed rule change makes sense. I will think about it a bit more and then make a NEW POST to clarify the proposal (that way more people might read it and give feedback). If nobody objects within a few days, I will announce the new rules.

I appreciate the response, and I understand your concern on needing to consider the different possibilities before making a change right away. I'll keep an eye out for your future post when you make a final decision. Thanks!