Request Proper extra ball limits in all games.

[Jeff Strong]

Just give us a Tournament Mode for all the tables, that means no extra balls with a separate leaderboard. Sometimes I just want to have a quick game not a marathon session...

/thread

 

[Zaphod77]

The reason scores that high don't post to the leaderboards is because TPA usually loses track of a ball when you are going infinite.

Tables that do let yo guo infinite this happens a lot with.

THAT'S why the ability to go infinite should be removed from them by operator settings.

The following tables are realistically possible to go infinite on, for people without godly skills.

1) Funhouse. You can in fact build it up to four by collecting mirror and gangway every ball. This really needs a operator settings fix, in my opinion, as tuning the physics to fix would make the table unfun.
2) elvira and the party monsters. This could be fixed by making rejects on those ramps more dangerous. The ramps being loopable is true to real life. Rejects from the ramps always being savable is NOT. And i'm not sure it's possible to fix this by any other means but disabling extra balls completely. And operators WILL do this if the game is not making enough money.
3) bride of pinbot. Only reason it's considered less of a problem is the way the billion system works. Infiniting doesn't really give much advantage. ANd as you see, people can and do do this in real life.
4) black rose. get the whirlpool every ball. Once you figured out how to pull this off, games last a LOOOOOOONG time.

Games that are theoretically possible to infinite, but DO require godly skills to actually do it.

Cue Ball Wizard. it's very drainy, and you can MISS the horeshoe extra ball, and then you have to survive nineball without draining to get the wheel back.
Twilight Zone: yeah you can rack up the extra balls with patience, but you infinite it more by not draining.
Black Knight 2000: those loop extra balls get a LOT harder to collect. If you are godly enough to collect them every time, you don't need them in the first place. In other words the skill required to infinite the game with extra ball sis the same as the skill required to infinite without them (the ability to return the ball to the upper playfield every single time it drops down).
Space Shuttle; the max bonus extra ball is repeatable every ball. But just try it, with that bumper to right outlane vacuum. When this table was scripted on WHoF, there was a major bug in the script that let you relight the extra ball after collecting it by clearing the top 3 lanes again while the bonus was still maxed. THIS version was VERY infinitable. I was able to double roll it before i got bored.

Most recent games provide the ability to remove the ability to go infinite without disabling extra balls completely. When players are doing so, it costs the operator money, and they will change the settings to prevent it. If nobody (or maybe one player who's polite enough to stop after he gets the grand champion back) can actually do it, they will leave the ability in, as a carrot to entice people to play. they will go"hey i can get this every ball!" and try and fail.

 

[Zaphod77]

BTW, here are the guidelines i'd use for operator settings were I the TPA operator. They are simple and consistent to apply.

1) Replay awards extra ball always. UNLESS my testers can roll the game way too easilly. This is because you can get one replay per game, except for old games like f-14 tomcat, where you can rescore the replay after rolling the game. If my testers are rolling the game more than once, the physics are too easy. I would have to disable replay completely on f-14 tomcat most likely, as i've rolls most recreations of it i've played.
2) Specials that cannot be repeated should also award extra balls. Funhouse has a non repeatable special. It should award an extra ball (and does). Whirlwind has a repeatable special off the mega door score. It should award points instead (and does). Black Rose has a non repeatable special, i think. It should award extra ball. Instead, it awards NOTHING, and penalizes you by resetting the jackpot! I would have fixed this.
3) all one time extra balls, like the skyway tolls ones in whirlwind, should always get awarded, if possible. If you can collect it only once on default settings, it's ok to have in. If collecting all non repeatable extra balls, plus one, exceeds the stacked balls cap, that cap is too low, and should be raised. It sucks to deprive players of extra balls when it's not needed to prevent you from infiniting it.
4) extra balls that can be obtained every ball. that's the hard part. If possible, I would change the operator settings to make these unlimited extra balls dry up. UNLESS the game is a true add-a-ball (like many EMs), in which case this behavior is by design. This means when doing an EM game, use the add-a-ball version ALWAYS! because it's balanced around that. If I CAN cap it, i would set the cap for each one to three for a three ball game, or five for a five ball. If I cannot cap the repeatable extra ball itself (not an uncommon occurrence, unfortunately), well that's what the rest is about.

My guidelines are to keep people from infiniting TPA and crashing the tables. Here's i how I would do it.

If the game defaults to having a max extra balls per ball in play, and not a max per game, use that unchanged. This means the manufacturer already did it for me. The game cannot be played forever. I'm not gonna argue.

If the game has a max extra balls per game setting (a true one, not a max balls stacked setting) use that, and set it higher then all of the one time extra balls. I suggest the number of one time extra balls, plus three (or five for a five ball game). For whirlwind, this is six. (replay, tolls ramp X2). Oddly enough Williams did this already. Actually because score is a replay, it should have been five, but six is correct for us.

If the game actually has both settings turned on by default (a true max per game and per ball in play) disable the ball in play one, and use the per game one, as dealing with both caps sucks. It's preferable to use the total per game limit, because it's less confusing to players.

If the game doesn't have true max extra balls per game (it probably has max stacked balls instead), but does have max extra balls per ball in play, I would use that instead. Use the formula for max balls, per game, and divide by the number of balls, round up to get the max balls per ball in play setting. If my testers are running into the cap because of one time extra balls too often, then I would consider setting it no higher then the number of one time extra balls, plus 1. People may run into this cap early, but it's the best available option at this point...

If there is NO WAY to cap the extra balls per ball in play, OR the extra balls per game, then set the maximum stacked extra balls setting to 1, to make it as hard as possible to infinite by rules. (EatPM) Otherwise, leave the stacked extra balls setting equal to the number of unrepeatable extra balls, plus 1. If the default stack limit is LOWER then this amount, I would raise it. If my testers are still infiniting it after this, I would tweak the physics to make trying to infinite more dangerous. EatPM needs this done. I wold make it so rejects from the ramps drain 75% of the time. Problem solved.

 

[Shaneus]

I'm not sure why people are saying "don't limit the extra balls, I have a hard enough time getting them as it is!" when there's very little chance they'd hit that limit anyway. Doesn't make much sense.

I'd be for an EB limit if it's possible via the ROM setting, as the only ones who need to be concerned are those who are able to exploit the table for literally infinite EBs and work their way to the top of the ranking. It's not like the limit would be that small anyway, usually I think it's around the four ball mark? Reset the scores on the appropriate tables, limit the EBs then let people play within constraints of a system and work on how many points per ball they can get, rather than how many balls they can get per game.

 

[Zaphod77]

That's what I'm saying. have a reasonably high limit, but have there be one.

Whirlwind did this right. there's a hard limit of six. Three of them cannot be repeated ever, which allows you to collect three more form the super cellar. And yes, i've reached this extra ball limit on a real whirlwind on location. Were it not for the limit, I probably would have played many more hours.

A game can provide lots of ways to get extra balls, as long as they cannot be repeated. When there's a "you can get this every ball and it doesn't get any harder" situation, then something should be done about it. Only if the table is brutal enough that nobody can actually do it (which usually is not the case in TPA) should the infinite be left in.

 

[foxystyle]

The BoP 600k Pinbot value XB is easy to get over and over again.

 

[soundwave106]

The reason scores that high don't post to the leaderboards is because TPA usually loses track of a ball when you are going infinite.
Tables that do let yo guo infinite this happens a lot with.
THAT'S why the ability to go infinite should be removed from them by operator settings.

Too long of a game = game crashes due to TPA bug. Therefore, instead of fixing the bugs that cause the crashes, one should remove the extra balls.

Really.

I'm not opposed to separate harder settings (eg tournament modes with leaderboards) and/or EB limits being settable in pro mode, mind you... that is fine. Have some "expert modes" is good.

However:

A) It is my opinion that the default setting of the game should be the default setting as it was in the arcades, unless there is a really good reason for changing them.

B) I think that one *should* have games that are easier in TPA, and games that are harder. Anyone complaining about "infinite games" is quite a good player -- yes, this is true even of the easier tables. As pinball can be frustrating to many beginners, it is good to have a few tables to point them to that are easier to have longer games on. Therefore, I don't mind that Funhouse is not so difficult to rack extra balls on for an expert player. It's all the better for the beginner who would probably be frustrated by a few of the drain-o-matic tables.

If you get bored with a table and there is no pro mode, there are plenty of more difficult tables to choose. Play them instead! This even includes tables that potentially awards EBs per round. For instance, Firepower is "infinitely repeatable" in theory, I believe, but the EB is really tough to get, so I notice it isn't on your list. For that matter, this is true with Big Shot as well, as hitting a target bank + 8 ball + that weird EB target is not the easiest thing in the world.

Tables with pro modes, of course, can be made harder even if they are relatively easier and in lieu of a "tournament" setting this is a solution.

C) Sometimes the "fixes" to removing some extra balls may cause more problems than they resolve especially if they deviate from the ROM behavior.

The EB special in Black Rose was probably removed due to the whirlpool EB being relatively easy to get. However, as you said, it caused a bug on its own! So "be careful what you wish for".

 

[Zaphod77]

The "Max extra balls per ball in play" setting works fine in every game that has it. So do the max stacked extra balls, and the max per game settings.

I'm not saying to hack the code or anything. Just to change operator settings.

And a beginner will still not hit the limits after they are set. They will not tour the mirror on every ball. they might not even collect the steps extra ball at all, or get the gangway more than once.

Also while some are easier and some are harder in TPA, the same is true of real life. But many of us believe tables that are hard in real life should be hard in TPA, and ones that are easier in real life should be in TPA as well.

Some tables that are relatively easy in real life, and exist in TPA.

1) Black Rose. assuming this game works right it can be owned in the same manner it is in TPA.
2) Scared Stiff. As long as you avoid the death trap shots and the tv kickout cooperates, you can play a long time.
3) Elvira and the party monsters. Once you get your flippers on the ball, the game is yours.
4) Who Dunnit (well it will be in TPA). Fun table, but EASY EASY EASY.
5) Black Knight 2000. the game is really just as ownable in real life, exactly the same way you do it in TPA.
6) Tee'd Off. Dear gods. this game is very rollable, if you know how to abuse the system. It's actually a bit harder than real life i think, because the volcano likes to reject clean shots.


The following games are very hard in real life, but considerably less so in TPA.

1) Twilight Zone. The bumper to outlane power drains and a slot machine kickout that is often hard to handle cause this game to be a bit of a bastard. this game is the poster child for "really needs to have been made harder"
2) Bride of Pinbot. That center ramp is a deathtrap in real life, and much harder to loop, and the shuttle ramp is steep, needing a very clean shot up. Just TRY getting that backdoor billion with the glass on in real life.
3) Funhouse. Sure it's easy enough. until you miss one shot. Only the mirror extra ball is safe to go for, as the bunpers and the PEST targets can and will drain you. That said i'm not that bad at Funhouse in real life.

Games that i will be disappointed with if they aren't hard in TPA.

1) Bram stoker's Dracula. This game kicks you in the teeth hard. Combine the standups of death (avoidable) with the bumpers of doom (impossible to avoid), and we have a drain magnet.
2) Shadow. This game is considered highly exploitable in theory, but very difficult to do so in practice.

 

[soundwave106]

I'm not saying to hack the code or anything. Just to change operator settings.

Ah. So the real request is pro mode on games without it, in other words, which exposes the operator settings. Got it.

 

[pezpunk]

The problem is if I play Funhouse it's a 4 hour game. Worse, I can't pause and take a break to pee or whatever because the ipad will go to sleep and TPA will crash.

In any TPA tournament in which Funhouse appears, or on the leaderboard, the "game" simply becomes who has the greatest number of completely uninterrupted hours available to them to run the mirror over and over and over and over. Not fun and barely a competition of any kind of skill. My highest score was almost 400 million I believe and it took hours.

once you learn the bounces on this table, you CAN go on indefinitely, mostly limited by biological and social pressures rather than, you know, running out of balls. :/

i agree reed with Jeff Strong that a tournament mode is desperately needed, although the 15-minute time limit TPA has been putting on its tournament games is at least an ok band-aid to make tournaments somewhat playable.

 

[Sean DonCarlos]

And here's where a bit of kickout randomization would go a long way, both towards improving realism and cutting down on excessive game length.

 

[invitro]

And here's where a bit of kickout randomization would go a long way, both towards improving realism and cutting down on excessive game length.

Absolutely. I'll note though that I have very often played machines with kickouts nearly as predictable and railroaded as TPA's machines. (This is when I played in the 1990s through about 2002.) I think it is perfectly dandy and fine if some, maybe half, of the TPA tables have predictable or easily-catchable kickouts, since that reflects reality (or at least my reality). In particular, I recall that most/all real FHs I played had a very catchable kickout, many of the TAFs, and even a few TZs. I don't think all the TPA tables should be set up like PAPA tournament machines.

But it's a real shame that the supreme challenge of TZ is mostly missing from TPA.

Edit: After thinking about it... I think would enjoy having all the TPA tables set up like PAPA machines. Maybe more than the current situation. So I suppose never mind . As many many people have said, a separate "wizard" table configuration, with its own leaderboard, is the way to go. (I keep posting on, and am perhaps overly sensitive to this issue, because I am paranoid that farsight will make the tables significantly harder, while -not- resetting the leaderboards. I suppose I should try not to get paranoid until there's reason to be.)

 

[Sean DonCarlos]

Absolutely. I'll note though that I have very often played machines with kickouts nearly as predictable and railroaded as TPA's machines. (This is when I played in the 1990s through about 2002.) I think it is perfectly dandy and fine if some, maybe half, of the TPA tables have predictable or easily-catchable kickouts, since that reflects reality (or at least my reality). In particular, I recall that most/all real FHs I played had a very catchable kickout, many of the TAFs, and even a few TZs. I don't think all the TPA tables should be set up like PAPA tournament machines.

But it's a real shame that the supreme challenge of TZ is mostly missing from TPA.

I own a TZ with a reasonably predictable slot kickout. But 1 time out of 10 the ball will exit the kicker at a slightly different angle and/or a slightly different speed - not wildly different, but just enough to require different handling from the player. Even the most "well-behaved" real machines will sometimes do this, and it is what contributes to a lot of drains. But a TPA table never will.

That being said, TPA would need finer flipper control (live catching, tap bounces, and tap passes) to enable players to properly handle randomized kickouts, so maybe that's why kickout randomization has not been implemented.

 

[Zaphod77]

My experience is that many Funhouses i've played will send the ball into the slingshot if you try and use a simple hold trap.

But some of them DO let you pull off the easy trap, and those ones are much easier to do well on if you have the discipline to always trap that kickout instead of trying to whack it up the ramp on the fly. you trap the kickout, shoot the ramp, shoot hidden hallway from there, shoot rudy, which has very predictable results when done from the feed from the hidden hallway. If you are really paranoid and good at the trapdoor loop, just collect those over and over again instead of trying to relight the mirror, as they are good points.

Here's how i'd tune kickouts like that.

I'd have the percentage chance of the kickout scoop doing "something tricky" rise each time it kicks out, and drop every 30 or so switch closures. (this is to prevent people from just waiting for the kickout to settle) After doing a "tricky kickout" the odds would reset back to zero, and it would return to it's predictable self

So if you were trying to advance the clock by hitting the mirror over and over again it will become more and more erratic. But if you are instead doing ramp to superdog to hallway it will rise a bit slower.

If you are going ramp ramp piano over and over again, you will only be tripping 7 switches per loop, and the percentage chance of a tricky kickout will rise, and if you are looking to quick litz this way, you will almost certainly get a few curveballs. But if you actually play out the modes instead of trying to stack 5 at once, the slot machine will be generous. If you are good at the slot machine super slot will be tempting... but it will still be a real gamble...

 

[switch3flip]

Just give us 3 ball tournament mode highscore leaderboard.

 

[Espy]

Is it just me or is the kickout from the saucer in 1812 randomised? Every time I hit it, I have no idea what direction the ball will exit it.

 

[soundwave106]

That being said, TPA would need finer flipper control (live catching, tap bounces, and tap passes) to enable players to properly handle randomized kickouts, so maybe that's why kickout randomization has not been implemented.

Nothing is really "random" about a "random" pinball machine... physics is not random. Implementing a realistic "randomization" of say a kickout would require a lot of work, you would basically have to physically model solenoids etc. (Often when pinball kickouts are "random" they are not working at their best, to be honest.) I bet this type of modeling is truly beyond the capability of the low-end devices.

A few TPA tables do have a "random" algorithm on some kickouts, they end up very computerish in nature to me.

 

[Espy]

Nothing is really "random" about a "random" pinball machine... physics is not random. Implementing a realistic "randomization" of say a kickout would require a lot of work, you would basically have to physically model solenoids etc. (Often when pinball kickouts are "random" they are not working at their best, to be honest.) I bet this type of modeling is truly beyond the capability of the low-end devices.

A few TPA tables do have a "random" algorithm on some kickouts, they end up very computerish in nature to me.

It wouldn't be too hard to randomise the eject angle and speed by a few notches, but whether that would be patrticularly faithful as to how kickers work in real life would be another issue.

 

[Sean DonCarlos]

Nothing is really "random" about a "random" pinball machine... physics is not random.

Quantum physics would like to have a word with you...everything there is a probability.

Implementing a realistic "randomization" of say a kickout would require a lot of work, you would basically have to physically model solenoids etc. (Often when pinball kickouts are "random" they are not working at their best, to be honest.) I bet this type of modeling is truly beyond the capability of the low-end devices.

Not hard at all. I've even posted example code before that would implement it: http://digitalpinballfans.com/showt...sions-as-a-TZ-machine-owner?p=93715#post93715

 

[Alex Atkin UK]

In my opinion the defaults should ALWAYS match the defaults on the real table. I do agree that having a variation or two on the rule sets with their own leaderboards is a good idea though.

I kinda like the idea of being able to compete even BEFORE I know the individual table rules, having a mode without extra balls should help there.

That said, TPA is flawed for casual competition from the start as I need to be able to compare JUST to my friends list like you can on Zen Pinball.