DK Submission Rules

[corey.chambers]

I just realized that when I originally created the list I only drew up from a certain point from TG. But then I later set the minimum at 200,000 points. So I went back and did a quick audit and realized that I stopped much higher than that on TG. So to my surprise and I am sure yours, that I would be adding about 46 scores to the High Score List that range from 200K to 340K.

So I propose to move the minimum to 300,000 points. This would only effect John McNeil. But I know he has gotten over 200K twice so I am hopeful that he can get 300K if he really tried. Does anyone object to this proposal?

[JNugent]

Although I have submitted a few 200k scores over the spring and summer (and enjoyed submitting them) I think a 300k minimum is reasonable.  I realize it's easy for me to say that now, but I still think it's a good idea Corey.

[corey.chambers]

Apparently I move too fast for this forum and am way to impatient. I decided to place the following minimum limits:

No-Hammer 80,000
High Score 300,000
Level 1-1    9,000
Start      100,000

This would not directly effect the only two people that presently fall below these limits. There were a couple on the no hammer list but they were so low I can't imagine that any of them could not beat it in a day or two. I mean if Jason Brittain can get over 80,000 points then I am sure these can as well. (Joking Jason! lol )

John McNeil falls below 300K with a high of 266K. I have faith in him. I will leave it up to motivate him to get off the bottom and into the 300K range! Though his TG score is higher than his WCR #2 score so I am actually updating it.

Jeremy Young is below 9,000 on 1-1, but if I remember he was just submitting something. I will leave it there to taunt him with the prospect of being eternally last. There ought to get him up and into the 9,000 point category.

[corey.chambers]

Thanks Jason. Even with the adjustment I am still adding about 11 scores. Someone had suggested that I raise the minimum to 300K at one time because I was updating these PB's so often. I wanted to leave it to encourage newer players to get on the list, but I am sure that trying to get at least 300K to get on the list should be good motivation enough.

[Justin]

hello, i just joined after picking up a DK cocktail with 2x TKG3-07 4-boardsets but I see the TKG3 PCBs aren't accepted for submissions. I want to know, can the rules be revised to accept a TKG3 using (US Set 1)?
I may get back to playing this winter, my previous best score is 335900 set about 3 years ago on TG MAME.

I did a little testing on the boardsets by removing the EPROMs and comparing the checksum data on each on the with the files from "dkong" (US Set 1) and the files from "dkongo" (US Set 2).

This showed roms on one TKG3 boardset to have the same checksums as the roms in (US Set 1).
The title is displayed as "(c) 1981 Nintendo of America Inc."
The barrels killed the player regularly when at the top of the ladder.
It's indeed a TKG3 with (US Set 1).

The the second TKG3 boardset had three roms that didn't match (US Set 1) but instead matched three files in (US Set 2).
This version displayed "(c) Nintendo 1981"
The barrel cheat was enabled.
This is a TKG3 (US Set 2) as the checksums match.

I came across a small exception to the rule of a "(c) 1981 Nintendo of America Inc" title screen having no ladder cheat.
Exchanging a certain EPROM from (US set 2) to the (US Set 1) board enabled the ladder cheat AND the "(c) 1981 Nintendo of America Inc" title screen. It would work also with the TKG4, just the EPROM would need to be socketed in a different location.
 
What are the thoughts on this? and what are the thoughts on allowing (or disallowing) the TKG3 boardset with (US Set 1) for submissions?

Thanks

[ChrisP]

It was my understanding that all TKG-3-7s shipped with the "Set 1" code and should be okay. (The TKG-3-7s were released concurrently with the TKG-4s for the uprights, but they continued to use the 4-board sets for cocktails and cabarets because they had to for size reasons).

It's the TKG-3-6s and lower that all have the old code.

However, this is troubling, because you're saying that you have a TKG-3-7 with the older code... so that's interesting.

As far as I know, nobody has ever been aware (up until your post) that one could swap in a "ladder cheat" ROM chip and still get the NOA title screen. Of course, now that you mention it, it would seem that this could indeed be done seamlessly, since the code would maintain integrity.

That's even more troubling!

Ultimately Corey will have to weigh in on this.

My opinion: the ladder cheat is a total non-issue. A player using it habitually enough to actually derive any significant degree of advantage from it would be extremely easy to spot.

Is it possible that they could "slip one in" over the course of a game as an emergency evasive maneuver and make it look like they "luckily" survived a 75% chance of dying? Sure.

Would slipping just one in suggest that they were not otherwise thoroughly capable of getting whatever score they got? No.

Could they slip in more than one over the course of any given run without arousing major suspicion? No.

While I'm not running this list, if I were, I'd be taking a more lax approach for scores below 700,000, accepting any score, from any version of the DK arcade software, with minimal evidence and minimal verification, since I can't imagine why anyone would bother faking a score less than that, or how it would negatively impact anyone if they did.

In other words, if you're not planning on putting up a kill screen or a million any time soon, I'd be in favor of accepting your scores. The only way to ever be sure about ANY of this is live play anyway...

[corey.chambers]

Essentially, since US Set 1 is accepted overall, any US Set 1 should be fine whether it is emulated and processed by a TKG-4 or TKG-3. It is my understanding from Jeff or someone else, I don't remember, that the same processor is used.

The information about mix-matching the US Set 1 and US Set 2 is disconcerting. What file would it be? I want to try this out with the mame files, record an inp with it and then playback in us set 1 only. I suspect that if this was done I could catch any problems with it. Arcade is another matter. We had discussed at one time that if someone modified the roms on Arcade that it would be horrendous. But how would we know. Mame is much better in this regard.

I always want to see any new submissions by new players with Cabs that we have not seen so obviously if you put up a good score just show us what you have after the game. People like seeing this stuff anyways, love seeing cabs, etc.

I was waiting for the first submission of this type so I could think it through but I think that Chris did a good job in his pcb and rom thread which is attached to the high score list. You will want to read through that too if you have not.

Essentially, if you have the US Set 1 roms, I don't think that it matters whether it is TKG-4 or TKG-3 since the same processor is used, etc. I may want to specify on the high score list though, such as the following platforms: TKG-4, TKG-3, JAMMA, MAME. The platform section helps to make distinctions so that people see that scores are not completely comparable.

Chris has proposed that we set some kind of limit on the list that would dictate what kind of verification would be required. For example, if someone got say 500,000 or higher, or as Chris suggested, 700,000 or higher, then we would enforce a higher level of verification, and be a little more laxed on scores that fall below this limit. We should keep this in mind but for now my inclination is to keep everything except a more explicit explanation of the use of US Set 1 in various pcbs. Essentially this proposal would not have too much of an effect since most streamed arcade scores are accepted and the only time I have required anyone to show their machine was if it was a new member of the forum, and they are posting their first score. If for some reason someone got a new cab or new board that is an established member, I have not required it, but it is recommended. I did this when I got my second cab, I show everything the night I got it.

I already accept US Set 1 played on a JAMMA pcb, then why not accept it on a TKG-3 as long as it is US Set 1. This will need to be differentiated on the platform though.

Any other thoughts on the possibility of people mix-matching roms on the Arcade? Of what files I would need to swap in the mame files to get US Set 2 effects in US Set 1 without losing anything else, just adding how the barrel stage functions? I am almost certain that the verification process will find these out.

[corey.chambers]

All the more reason to get that inp and wlf files. Otherwise watching the game play on the barrel boards can be tedious. Even though the questions still remain about the advantages or disadvantages of this, I think that the main concern is that we have a standard and that we follow it, that only US Set 1, non-modified, is acceptable.

[ChrisP]

Chris has proposed that we set some kind of limit on the list that would dictate what kind of verification would be required. For example, if someone got say 500,000 or higher, or as Chris suggested, 700,000 or higher, then we would enforce a higher level of verification, and be a little more laxed on scores that fall below this limit.

Well, it wasn't so much of a "proposal" as it was "this is what I would do if it were my list."

You are running a tighter ship though, which is cool, and I am not suggesting you change it. I only suggest it because it would probably be a lot less labor for you to just go on an honor system for scores below 700K.

Don't mistake what I said for "pressure", in any case.

[corey.chambers]

Thanks for the clarification, Chris. I understand what you are saying now. It is an interesting idea but yeah, tighter for sure.

[up2ng]

Wow, so annoying -- I had written a whole nice post in this thread yesterday and it's nowhere to be found.  Absolutely bizzare.  Oh well, I'll try to recreate it now but it definitely won't be as good . . .

I just realized that when I originally created the list I only drew up from a certain point from TG. But then I later set the minimum at 200,000 points. So I went back and did a quick audit and realized that I stopped much higher than that on TG. So to my surprise and I am sure yours, that I would be adding about 46 scores to the High Score List that range from 200K to 340K.

So I propose to move the minimum to 300,000 points. This would only effect John McNeil. But I know he has gotten over 200K twice so I am hopeful that he can get 300K if he really tried. Does anyone object to this proposal?

I'm not sure how I didn't see this when it was first posted so I apologize for the delayed response.

I would encourage you to keep the minimum at 200,000 points and go ahead and add the 46 TG scores to the list.  I think that the accuracy, completeness and community inclusion by doing so will far outweigh the minor inconvenience that the keepers of this list will have in dealing with a few more score submissions.  I understand that the popularity of this game and these forums have been exploding lately and there is probably more work involved in maintaining this list than anticipated, but I think you need to ask yourselves again what you hope to accomplish with this list and whether or not that is really served by bumping the minimum score up to 300,000.

I should remind the highly skilled active members here who can boast high scores of 700k+ that scoring 200,000 points on this game is a significant accomplishment and is NOT a trivial thing to do.  I would bet that a large bulk of casual but NOT novice players likely have as their personal best a score between 200,000 and 300,000 points.  I feel like if these folks want to become more active members of the community and wish to share their accomplishments with us, we should welcome that and recognize their efforts.

In fact, if this were my project (and I'm glad it's not -- I understand how much work is involved in maintaining these lists), I would probably drop the minimum score to 100,000 points (and possibly to 0).  I know that back when I was playing this game casually in isolation topping 100,000 points was very significant and it required some sustained effort in order to do it.  This would include even more people and also allow the list to be more accurate and complete as well, giving a better picture for how all of the verifyable personal best scores stack up against each other which I think has more value to the community.

Anyways, I definitely appreciate the efforts of those of you who have taken it upon yourselves to compile a high score list for this community.  But, regardless of what your final decision is, I hope that you will at least take some time and think about the motivations behind raising the minimum score and whether or not that lines up with what is trying to be accomplished by maintaining this list in the first place.

[corey.chambers]

Great post, Dean! Hmm, how about I propose this... I could take both Dean's and Chris' idea and say that scores at and below 299,900 points will not require that same level of verification. Just an idea, though, it will be much more work which is why I had proposed for people to help verify scores... but even then I had suggested further that I keep the spreadsheets (excel) that I use to compile these lists on Dropbox so that a could other people could also edit the list there. I would of course use that list and modify the original post. So far no takers on that level. What does anyone else have to say about this matter? Any ideas? Thoughts? Concerns?

[marinomitch13]

I agree with Dean's idea. Though I realize this will require a lot more work, I think it'd be very beneficial for the community. I don't think we should lax on the rules, rather, we should put more emphasis on recruiting verifiers. If we can't get enough verifiers and the process is slow, I think that's just the breaks, but people will learn to live with it. I'll be hopefully getting a new computer within the next 6 months, so I can pledge to help out verify as much as I can once that day comes (my slow comp, as well as it being a Mac and not easy to mess around with INPs -which is what is holding me back). Even though the idea of lax verifying for the low scores is tempting, I think purity is important enough that we don't want to give any incentive to people to get into the habit of lying about their scores such that, once they become familiar enough with the software and the qualifying hurdles, they try to pull a fast one with a larger score.

[Justin]

ok thanks good to know TKG3 will be accepted. .

One of the TKG3-07's has stickers indicating it came from a place called 'Brady Distributing'. It's possible they swapped in the (US Set 2) roms from another board. The pic below shows examples of rom labels from each boardset.
The top pic is "Set 2" the bottom is "Set 1".
http://imgur.com/a/Rcas4 
When I have a recording setup I'll make videos showing the table, it's hardware and gameplay.

Corey, here's the info on which chips were swapped and the results.
http://pastebin.com/6i1RKWik

I tried the swap in MAME like you suggested, this is what came up:
1.Adding the rom 5H from "dkongo" to "dkong" didn't play correctly.
The screen was messed up and there was no ladder cheat like on TKG3 hardware.

2.Exchanging all the roms possible from "dkong" to "dkongo", with the exception of rom 5H, showed that the game could be played with the NOA title and the ladder cheat. Exactly like when played on the TKG3 hardware with the same swap.

It looks like I was wrong for suggesting that a TKG3 and a TKG4 would play the same. I'm curious to know what might happen on actual TKG4 hardware. If someone with a TKG4 is interested I'd mail (free of charge) a copy EPROM 5H as long you post the results.

Also here's the checksum comparison.
A GQ-4X programmer was used to compare all the data.
http://pastebin.com/2w6NxMQ8

Off topic but here's a couple interesting things that came up:
ASCII Jumpman?
http://i.imgur.com/kktWJPj.png

The hidden message on EPROM 5K (5A). Looks like it changed when Set 1 was created.
US Set 2:
http://imgur.com/GzilSkI

US Set 1:
http://i.imgur.com/Pz1kAbv.png

[Justin]

i guess nobody wants a rom from a complete stranger inside their machine... : )
if i come across a TGK4 sometime i'll make a new thread with the results.

my apologies if my request + other info was off topic from submission rules. wasn't my intention to hijack the thread, just a rookie here getting a little carried away.

one more question on the rules, how are they concerning bootleg PCBs? the one pictured below has the same roms and CPU's as original DKjr, just no Nintendo markings. can this be used for submissions or no?
http://imgur.com/a/2FQx1