I'm... sorry, everyone.

Yes, I understand. It's fine, I still had fun with this :)

Honestly... as @Swskrei has already said, there's no point in creating an entirely new speedrunning page.

Once a "super-moderator" comes back, more people can become mods, and it'll be fine :)

Well, Level 2 could much more easily be improved with the "Drahnoel Climb" in the ending, which would save much more time.

Level 4 is decently probable; @MichaelChan managed to do it in his run and it's not difficult with a bit of practice.

You must wait on the platform on Level 7, since the cycles would be all messed up if you didn't. There's no point in doing what @MichaelChan did in his run.

The "spike death" on Level 8 technically lost time to the TAS. However, it's extremely difficult to get this in a fullgame% run, especially when your vision is obscured by the fading wipe menu. There are many easier ways to improve this run.

As for Level 9, it's cycles again. There's no point in attempting for maximum efficiency; even the TAS cannot make the cycle without waiting. The only way to save time on that level is the ending. The goal there is to jump through the crushers with as little waiting as possible, and that's exactly what @DapperScratcher did.

True, we should wait until this becomes a bigger topic. Do you know any ways to contact them other than speedrun.com?

Ah, that is quite unfortunate. @sushisrx wanted to give his modship to @swskrei... I suppose when he or @Chiken_11 comes back, we can ask them to add more mods who are more active.

Agreed. Honestly, I always thought it was unfair if someone has a worse computer or a worse mouse, they have an inherent disadvantage. Load times aren't a measure of skill.

@Luis_sm, maybe we should have some sort of community vote, or at the very least, some sort of vote between the mods to decide if we should put the new timing system into place. You say you "don't know if everyone would agree." Well, this is an easy solution to that.

Well, @DapperScratcher's run has perfect load times, so there's nothing to worry about there. I'm not sure if she used an autoclicker, we can ask her later, I suppose.

And... livesplits really isn't the worry here, since neither run is timed using that. The mods use vidtimer.com to make sure there's no discrepancy between the timers. The only problem is that there still seems an issue with the timing, somehow :(

Well, with the splits alone, @DapperScratcher's time is certainly faster; there's no question about that.

Hmm... interesting. Not sure exactly what that means, but it's certainly something to keep in mind.

So... if you've been keeping up with Appel speedrunning, you'll certainly have seen @DapperScratcher's 3'51"533"' run. It's an insane run that rivals even @MichaelChan's in skill!

However, after a bit of digging, a few people, myself included, have realized that the timing is a bit off with it, at least compared to @MichaelChan's run.

First, I'll give what any good argument requires - hard facts. Let's take a look at the splits of the two runs, not counting load times.

@MichaelChan - 18.9 + 27.2 + 13.8 + 25.3 + 15.4 + 31.7 + 36.6 + 35.4 + 15.4 = 219.7 seconds.

@DapperScratcher - 18.9 + 27.5 + 13.8 + 25.3 + 15.5 + 31.4 + 36.9 + 34.9 + 15.3 = 219.5 seconds.

Notice something off here? On the leaderboards, @DapperScratcher's run is an entire 1.366 seconds slower than @MichaelChan's run, even though her splits are clearly 0.2 seconds faster.

If her time was only slightly slower than @MichaelChan's, this could be attributed to slight lag, and I wouldn't push the issue any further. However, this is a way too much for me to just let it slide.

Honestly, I'm not here to point fingers at anyone. @MichaelChan's cheating scandal was already resolved long ago, and I'm not looking to open up that rabbit hole again. All I know is that @DapperScratcher deserves**** to be at the top of the leaderboard.

Therefore, I propose a new timing system. One that will remove the disadvantages of lag and make sure that every run is timed fairly, based on their splits and nothing else.

Instead of timing the runs with vidtimer.com or any other website, we could simply add up each speedrunner's splits as well as their load times. Courtesy of @MichaelChan's own video,* we know that each load time is 1.62 seconds. If we multiply that by eight to get 12.96 seconds, and add that to the splits of the two top speedrunners...

@MichaelChan - 219.7 + 12.96 = 232.66 seconds.

@DapperScratcher - 219.5 + 12.96 = 232.46 seconds.

Now, let's convert that to minutes using simple math.

@MichaelChan - 3'52"66"'

@DapperScratcher - 3'52"46"'

So, there you have it. Yes, this means everyone's runs will be slowed down. However, keep in mind everyone means everyone, so everything will still remain equal between the speedrunners, while being much more fair, especially to speedruners like @Swskrei, who has a huge disadvantage because of lag.**

Mods, tell me what you think! If you don't have the time to retime everything, I'd be happy to.

*@MichaelChan's video, if anyone was wondering:

**Speaking of, @Swskrei, could you put up your run using something other than clipchamp? It seems the link for it has expired.

Yo, amazing run! I know you've probably heard this a bunch of times already, but it's insane. Other than Level 2 (and maybe Level 4) this is basically the best run a human can be expected to achieve. The grind paid off :)

Oh, and also, I agree that this run definitely should be faster, considering @MichaelChan's time. If we add up the splits, @DapperScratcher should actually be slightly ahead, but somehow she's over a second behind. With @Swskrei's run we could attribute the timeloss to lag, but this run seems to have little to none, so it can't be that. Something suspicious is definitely going on here. Whether it's @DapperScratcher's run or @MichaelChan's, I can't be sure. I do have my own private suspicions, though...

I mean.... technically, there's no perfect rule to differentiate humans from TASes. However, TASes generally have different movement from a human. Plus, if the run is too insane, like if you managed to tie the Level 5 TAS or get extremely close to it, then it would probably be rejected, since it's far beyond human capabilities. Like @Swskrei said, there's nothing to worry about. You already have a good reputation in the Appel community, and we all trust you :)

Honestly, it's really unfair to reject runs because they're too good. When you put enough hours into a level, you'll start looking like a TAS, whether you like it or not. So... don't worry about it being rejected. As long as your movement isn't too weird, you'll be fine :)

I see no reason not to do allow this. It's still the same game, just with different controls, which I honestly think should be a feature of the game in the first place.

Great idea! With how impressive it is, I'm sure @MichaelChan would much prefer his run to still be valid. Speedrunning and clearing Key to Success are basically two entirely different levels, and it's much fairer to everyone if we kept them in separate categories.

Thanks! It certainly has been a long while since we've been tied... now that I've quit, though, I'm sure you'll catch up quickly!

I'm so glad this is will finally get verified! I've wanted it on the leaderboards for so long, and it's great to see you get what you deserve.

Wow... you could have destroyed my time with a better blue platform cycle during the ending! Quite impressive an impressive run.

Well, that was surprisingly easy! Thanks for agreeing without any argument :)

I'm so glad that you agree! Hopefully @MichaelChan will as well.

@Swskrei and I have extensively discussed the matter of @Krackerz's AAL15 run, and have concluded that his run was falsely rejected. We are both experienced TAS makers, and this run looks nothing like one. We know that he could have made it look more "human," but if we use that logic, then every run could be TASed. Your only evidence is as follows:

I'm not sure if you made a TAS before, but that's not how it works. A TAS doesn't have to wait to perform a spike edge; they can keep going like what @MichaelChan says is normal for a human. If @Krackerz really is this TASer that @MichaelChan says he is, then wouldn't he not stop during a spike edge to throw off suspicion?

Additionally, this piece of evidence isn't true at all. The only times that @Krackerz stops for a spike edge is the first one, (which @MichaelChan himself and I do as well) and the third, which @Swskrei, @MichaelChan, and I do the same. That pixel perfect would be much harder if you held left the entire time. His other spike edges are done "normally."

@Krackerz only slightly stops; he still has momentum. Again, other people have done similar things and @MichaelChan has still verified their runs. For example, in @DapperScratcher's AAL14 run, she basically does the same thing, but with even less momentum and more pausing. Everyone plays a bit different; just because other people's spike edges aren't the same as your spike edges doesn't mean the run is invalid.

There's really no good reason to doubt @Krackerz's run more than anyone else's. It's not like he just randomly got this without any prior runs; he had a less optimized time before he got his 19.7 run. He's clearly a great player who has gotten a bunch of incredibly optimized times. It's simply not fair to reject this run when there's no clear evidence of it being a TAS. It may look like a TAS to @MichaelChan, but honestly, when one puts such a large amount of time into a level, they start to look like one themselves.

So, @MichaelChan, please reconsider your decision. You know how it feels to pour hours into a run, only for it to be rejected, even though you didn't cheat. The same thing happened with some of your runs. Unless @MichaelChan can provide better arguments than the ones listed above, @Krackerz's run deserves to be up on the leaderboards.