I don't understand you. Do you actually want people to submit times for categories that don't exist? How should I submit them. I'd be more than happy to submit runs if it was actually possible. How are you suggesting people set the bar exactly?

EDIT: Oh look, you added the categories. Wonderful.

I don't understand your point. A lot of categories with no runs in them? The categories don't even exist, how can people submit runs for those categories? Seems like backwards logic, we need the categories before times will get posted for them. I know a lot of people are interested in 1P and 2P categories.

My opinion on the subject is that we should have 3 main categories for running, and then sub-categories for the player counts in each category. The three categories I would like to see that I feel would be best suited for a game like this that involves high level of skill are:

Nightmare Any% - All skips and glitches allowed Nightmare Glitchless - No skips or glitches allowed Cataclysm 100% - All tomes and grimoires required. No skips or glitches allowed.

I like the NM categories because NM is a difficulty that is still somewhat threatening and players with higher skill, better movement and teamwork will be distinguished more than using any of the lower difficulties. And using Cata as a baseline difficulty is a bit too punishing for speedruns I think.

However, the great thing about Vermintide is the high skill curve that could make challenging 100% speedruns fun to complete and compete over. That is why I think we should have one 100% category, and I think that Cata is the only difficulty that merits this. Doing 100% runs is more of a show of skill, so doing it on NM doesn't really mean as much.

And for each category I would break it down by player count as follows:

1P True Solo (No Bots) 2P (Bots allowed) 3-4P (Bots allowed)

We could also include 1P w/ Bots and separate the 3 and 4 player categories, but I'm not certain if that is actually necessary. What do you guys think?

You thought I misunderstood, but I did not. You misinterpreted my statement. Although you do care about a "mod" being used, it ONLY matters if you can VISIBLY see that it is being used (on the stream screen only). This is why it is silly to make a distinction between visible and invisible mods, and it matters much more that we simply check for gameplay altering mods.

Anyone who is submitting runs for this game, is submitting them because they care about the game and they want to push the competition. No one cares about holding a title for an IL or campaign completion, we care about playing the game, completing it fast, and competing against others who share the same passion for the game.

I'm sorry if you feel that I insulted you, it wasn't my intention. I just wanted to call into question the integrity of the moderatorship here, and if the motivations behind decisions being made have the community's best interest in mind. It would seem to me that this is not the case, and I want to create some discourse to hopefully have these issues resolved.

I have no problems with a rule enforcing "no visible" mods, and I do understand why it could be necessary. I still think it's a drag that we have to do that, and I will carry on using mods invisibly (I will always say this openly and honestly as I do not use any mods that alter gameplay).

I do think we could use some player count categories, and I also think a 100% Cata category would be very interesting, but these discussions are best had in a different thread.

EDIT: Oh I forgot, the "w/Mods" category is so stupid, and there was no reason for adding it. Are you planning to remove it?

When I say "show" I mean that it shows in the video at some point that there is a "mod" active. This is the reason you have been denying our runs. I'm not saying that we have ever used a "mod" to affect any gameplay, we haven't done that ever. The problem is that you don't care about if the mod has affected any gameplay, you don't even care if a mod is active. The only thing you care about is if a mod is shown as being active at some point during the submitted video. If the mod doesn't show, you have no problem with the run.

What a farce. But I guess it's the easiest way to maintain your records. It's interesting, the correlation between you being a moderator for other game pages on speedrun.com and your "world records" for those games.

EDIT: And I also already provided a suggestion for a solution. ONLY DISALLOW RUNS THAT CAN BE PROVED TO BE COMPLETED WITH A MOD THAT AFFECTS GAMEPLAY.

You just rejected our other two runs that are 100% legit and show no sign of any mods in the video. Please explain why these were rejected, I would like them to be re-approved as they were, before they suddenly got rejected for no good reason.

EDIT: What the hell is the point of a "mods" category? That is basically the "cheater" category? Seems very useless and I doubt anyone will be interested in submitting times in that category.

EDIT2: I just removed the glitchless 2:50 run for Ramparts, because it does show the use of a mod, so it's invalid. But the Any% one looks all good, please re-approve the Any% run, or explain why it's not allowed.

Fair enough, and like I said, I do understand the reasoning behind the decision, but it's just too bad it has to be like that. Thanks for your time and input though.

Fair enough, but I still think it's a drag. If no one had typed in the chat during my game, the run would have been 100% valid. Also, I'm not worried about Glitched runs, Glitchless category is still a lot of fun.

You say to have the host be the one streaming, but this isn't in the rules, nor is it currently enforceable, nor should it be enforced unless there is a simple way to determine host without being in the Inn.

The only thing that we need to use from a "mod" is the ability to fail the mission (thus allowing you to restart more quickly). I imagine that I could strip down the existing mod, remove any chat messages and only use the fail functionality and it would be impossible to tell that it was being used.

It's really too bad we can't just proceed with openness and honesty and verify runs based on if they are actually using game altering mods. This rule does nothing to prevent cheating at all, it only prevents people who complete missions 100% legit while having a mod (that doesn't affect gameplay) from submitting times here. Tragic.

So my submission for Man the Ramparts was rejected on the basis that I was running a "modded" version of the game. I imagine this is because you can see the LupoMod message in the chat, which we use because it allows us to restart missions more frequently.

Now, I understand the logic behind disallowing runs like this, but does it really achieve what you want it to? The purpose is to disallow any mods that might alter the game, but this could be true on any of the 3 players who aren't the main video PoV.

There is no way to regulate what other players are using, so why are we basing the rulings solely on the player who is streaming?

I think that the only way a run should be disqualified is if it actively breaks any rules, or if it can be proved that a mod is active that is altering the game.

There is no good reason for our run to be disallowed. If we had a video of any of the other 3 players we could have submitted that and the run would count as being 100% legit.

Something with the system is wrong, and it needs to be fixed.

edit: In case it's not clear, the major problem here is the fact that a run can be considered illegal/illegitimate solely based on which player's PoV the video is from. That is, any player in the party can have any number of non-obtrusive/non-game-altering mods active, as long as their PoV isn't the one that is being streamed/recorded.

@Zefie: How do I load that script with Livesplit? It's my first time using custom auto-split scripts and I'm having a hard time finding the right information for it.