CC NLT 2008 - Round 4 [RESULTS PG 4]

He didn't "fail". He found out a way to make badly shapped elements :]=

[Coasterkidmwm]

He must model his rides off of yours.

What are you talking about? I hardly had any pumping. There were like maybe 3 points on the whole ride that had any sort of legitimate pumps. You can beef on the layout all you want, because I know it blows compared to most of the other entries, but how are you complaining about the shaping?

cjd, u did good
and people, dont tell someone that their ride resembles togo anything even if it does
i thought it resembled mystery mine

bout the only thing i didnt like about cjds ride is the long transition from helix to mcbrs and the non banked turn out of a mcbr but that could have been on purpose

[Coasterkidmwm]

Things with bad shaping:
~First drop
~twist and dive thing like Mystery Mine has
~Loop entrance
~Last inversion (the really slow one)

Things that pumped pretty bad:
~Apex of the lift hill
~First drop
~Loop (mainly the entrance and exit)
~Helix after the loop
~Entrance to the half loop part of the twist and dive
~Turn off the second MCBR
~Unintentional banking pumps in the last upward barrel roll thingy (those are a bitch to clear up, don't worry too much about them)
~Helix after said slow barrel roll
~Turn into the final brakes

Hardly had any pumping my ass

Ckid why is it necessary to rag on all of your opponents.
Just Stop.

Hardly had any pumping my ass
thats what she said?

[Coasterkidmwm]

Okay I won't rate rides anymore to try and help people.

No, you're taking it the wrong way, I'm just saying if he's going to disagree with your statements regarding pumping, than so be it, don't keep adding fuel to the fire and trying to make a fight on a forum. He obviously doesn't care.

Just as a general comment, a ride not pumping does not necessarily mean it has good shaping. In the context of NL, I'd say 95+ percent of rides that don't pump don't have real good, realistic shaping. Realistic doesn't mean it has to look exactly like a real element, but it does mean one should consider and impliment the designer's style into their coaster.

I'll just shut up out of fear for doing any more damage to my already-screwed reputation. I'll just admit that, aside from Intamin hypers, woodies, and sit-down B&Ms, I don't know a damned thing about what's "proper", and admit that I'm a lousy modern realistic designer, and was only good in a foregone era when everybody just built whatever the hell they wanted, and nobody cared about whether the real company would shape it like that or not. I give up. I'm going back to building demi-fantasy coasters and running contests. My work in this contest has just been depressing me more and more with every round.

Round 1, I had no idea what the hell I was doing, hated the result, hated myself for the lack of inspiration.
Round 2, I got great scores but disliked the coaster because it was unrealistically fast and severely unrefined.
Round 3, I thought I'd made a fantastic coaster, but then it got absolutely killed because of this argument about proper company-based shaping.
Round 4, just plain depressed me. I hated my coaster's layout, and the one part of the coaster that I actually thought I had done well on, people are now ripping to shreds.

So, yeah, I'm tired of arguing about my coasters, and I think I'm just going to take a break from building once this contest is over, and work on finishing the templates for the contest that I've been planning for the last 2 years instead. So is everyone freaking happy now? Or are you then going to start complaining about my contest ratings too?

Yes I'm pretty happy. Your contests are really good.

[Coasterkidmwm]

Originally posted by cjd

I'll just shut up out of fear for doing any more damage to my already-screwed reputation. I'll just admit that, aside from Intamin hypers, woodies, and sit-down B&Ms, I don't know a damned thing about what's "proper", and admit that I'm a lousy modern realistic designer, and was only good in a foregone era when everybody just built whatever the hell they wanted, and nobody cared about whether the real company would shape it like that or not. I give up. I'm going back to building demi-fantasy coasters and running contests. My work in this contest has just been depressing me more and more with every round.

Eh you were pretty off in the B&M sitdown area. Your intamins and wooden rides suffer in general because if you changed your wooden tracks to intamin tracks and changed the supports I doubt anyone could really tell what you were going after. If you uploaded your intamin ride designs as a GG woodie no one could tell the difference. That is a common problem among people so don't feel left out or anything. It's something you need to work on.

Originally posted by cjd
Round 1, I had no idea what the hell I was doing, hated the result, hated myself for the lack of inspiration.
Round 2, I got great scores but disliked the coaster because it was unrealistically fast and severely unrefined.
Round 3, I thought I'd made a fantastic coaster, but then it got absolutely killed because of this argument about proper company-based shaping.
Round 4, just plain depressed me. I hated my coaster's layout, and the one part of the coaster that I actually thought I had done well on, people are now ripping to shreds.

If you don't want people to point out problems then what is the point of wanting a rate? Writing in a track description that you did nothing wrong is an invitation from others for intense scrutiny

Originally posted by cjd
So, yeah, I'm tired of arguing about my coasters, and I think I'm just going to take a break from building once this contest is over, and work on finishing the templates for the contest that I've been planning for the last 2 years instead. So is everyone freaking happy now? Or are you then going to start complaining about my contest ratings too?

You constantly overhype your rides to hell and back again and then get frustrated when people point out that the ride didn't deliver close to what you promised. I honestly don't understand how you can come up with some of the layouts you come up with if you looked at pictures of the real thing. It appears as if you ignore everything written except for good things written and totally fail to improve on anything from coaster to coaster.

Moral of the story is don't act like a butthead and you won't be treated like a butthead.

1. Well, I do know how B&M sitdowns are shaped, I just chose to purposefully ignore it in round 3 for the sake of being original. Apparently I overdid it. And that's what's usually the motivator behind my "weird" layouts. I've historically been a lot more worried about how to make the coaster stand out and get people to take notice and declare them unique and original than about keeping them realistic.

2. I don't mind getting criticized, it's just that I'm constantly getting criticism that is so far off from what I thought was right and wrong about a coaster. It makes me feel like I totally suck at it now, and don't have a clue about what I'm doing anymore; like my entire last 5 years of coaster-building have been in vain.

3. I know I editorialize a lot in my ride descriptions, and I have been trying to stop doing that, starting with this year's contest coasters. I plan to keep doing so, and focusing on the backstory and ride statistics instead of the blow-by-blow editorialized essays that I used to do with every single coaster.

4. Yes, I'll admit that my advertising threads almost always had totally ridiculous claims in the past, and even as recent as spring of last year. I was just a designer that was really frustrated with never having won a single contest or having any coaster regarded as legendary, so I constantly thought up wild ideas that I thought would stand out, then hyped them to death to try and get everyone to take notice. Sorry for offending you back then.

I stick by my judgement. The best thing for me to do might be to just take some time off, and not do any more building until I'm over my need to try and impress people. All it's doing is depressing me, and turning me into somebody that I'm not. Good day. I'm off to go work on the template for my fall contest.

Geezus Krist, can we all grow up a little here?

Seriously, this site just isn't FUN any more. Wasn't that the point of NL and this site, anyway? To have FUN?

I hardly ever upload any tracks here because I get tired of all the bashing that goes on. For the record, I don't have access to tools, nor do I have access to tons of free time to shape and re-shape a track until it's pump-free and butter-smooth. And you know what? I don't care. If the ride is unique, entertaining, and interesting, then as far as I'm concerned, it's a GOOD RIDE.

I usually enjoy cjd's rides, even the ones that knock me out of a contest round (wink). They fit the above criteria: unique, entertaining, interesting. Perhaps there's a pump or jerk in a few places, perhaps it doesn't look like a [insert design firm here] coaster. Perhaps it's a tad unrealistic. WHO FREAKIN CARES? Was it FUN? That's all I want to know.

I understand that some people want to recreate a certain style or even make a replica of an existing coaster. If so, then I can understand getting picky about how a loop is shaped or whether or not the supports look real.
If a track comes from someone's imagination, however, then WHO THE HELL ARE YOU to tell that designer that his loops are shaped wrong, his hills aren't smooth enough, or his supports look funny? Get a freaking LIFE.

[Coasterkidmwm]

Originally posted by minicoopertx
If a track comes from someone's imagination, however, then WHO THE HELL ARE YOU

I'm Matt and thanks for asking. What's your name?

Originally posted by minicoopertx
to tell that designer that his loops are shaped wrong, his hills aren't smooth enough, or his supports look funny? Get a freaking LIFE.

If you're presented with a Big Mac and receive a Tendercrisp chicken sandwich you're going to be pissed off. A Tendercrisp isn't a Big Mac, and a wooden ride with 6 G's and a vertical drop isn't a Gravity Group ride. My entire point is that if you want to make something non-conforming and fun go for it, it's just don't advertise it as just the opposite. If something isn't labeled something then it doesn't get marked down for bad shaping and the like unless it has 5 lateral G's or something.

Calm down dude lol

It's not just cjd specifically, it's not just this contest... it's the site in general.

There would be a lot more tracks posted if it weren't for the rating mafia ready to pounce on every little "mistake".

I wish there was an option to disallow ratings or comments when a track gets posted. Some of us just build for fun and don't really care what rating it gets.

Just upload it on any random site then I guess. But that would be nice.

Originally posted by minicoopertx

Some of us just build for fun and don't really care what rating it gets.

Then why are we having this conversation? If you don't worry about the rating then don't keep pressing on about people rating tracks that were built with love and happy and fun.

I think he was just trying to get at why he wants an option to have his track rated/commented on. I think that would be a good idea for newbies that are learning No-Limits, along with those that build for fun.

Originally posted by Lewis13

I think he was just trying to get at why he wants an option to have his track rated/commented on. I think that would be a good idea for newbies that are learning No-Limits, along with those that build for fun.

Exactly. Like I said earlier, I hardly ever post tracks here because of the ratings system and the comments that go with it. I don't post tracks hoping for high ratings, but that doesn't mean that I want to see it get bashed, either.


The main point of my initial post, however, was that all this angst over ratings and such have made a fun site into a cesspool of ranting over what someone else thinks about someone's tracks. It's all very childish, and just a tiny step above the sixty-five pages of diatribe about whether or not a contest coaster gets DQd on a technicality.

I guess I just prefer the old days when folks were less critical and if they downloaded a coaster they didn't like, they simply deleted it and moved on.

[hyyyper]

The winner of this round are:
Kevin Brennan, Coasterkidwmw, unfortunate_smiley and Jakizle

The Ratings:

Kevin Brennan - Tremor

Tech - Track over the whole was reasonably smooth. Noticeable jerks just after the mcbr and after the barrel roll.
Lateral G's were way to high in the barrel roll, yet the vertical G's were kinda low for a EuroFighter.
Supports were very good.
Adren - Train speed was very high, and some nice close calls spiced it up more. Capacity, 1020 rph, was very good.
Orig - While the style is certainly EuroFighter, there was not much personal touch to it. But I must say I really liked the steep airtime hill.
7 - 8 - 6
7

---

Austin - NOS

Tech - Track wasn't all that smooth. Some transitions were quick, even for a EuroFighter. Also, the elements didn't really flowed neatly into
each other. It felt like you wanted to make element with a lead-in and lead-out, and then put another element right after that, instead of matching
and inter wining the leads. G's are in control, but vertical G's were a tad low, compared to real EuroFighters.
Adren - Speed was good, couldve been faster. To bad the sensation was lost because the track itself didn't have much interaction or close-calls,
only the helix on the pillar was kind of an adrenaline-booster. Capacity, 910 rph, was well done.
Orig - I like the reverse-flying-snake-dive (or however you call it), but I think it belongs on an Intamin rather than a EuroFighter. The layout was
very spread out, I'm sure it couldve been more compact. And what's with that prelift? If it would've been on a spinner I'd understand, but on a
EuroFighter it just doesn't fit.
6.5 - 6.5 - 5
6

---

coreyml - Flipperdy Doo Da

Tech - Track was jerky in most transitions, especially the top-radius on many drops were really too small. Supports are below average.
G-forces are in check expect for one lateral spike. And the vertical G's on the drop were good, to bad they were weak throughout the
rest of the ride.
Adren - The train speed was really slow, it took a real while to get around the track. The lack of good head-chopper and track interaction
didn't help either. Capacity, 950 rph, was well done.
Orig - I must say I liked the curving drop and wide loop very much. On the other hand, what were the vertical turn and weird zero-G-roll doing
there? Also, your ride covered a lot of ground.
3.5 - 4.5 - 4
4

---

Coasterkidwmw - Natural Male Enhancement

Tech - Track was very smooth. Support work was well above average. E-stop failed, the train didn't make it into the dive loop. G-forces were
in check, though they were quite low in the helix, and if there's anything with EuroFighter helices, it's that they're force-full. The was
also a lateral spike in the first barrel roll.
Adren - Speed was well maintained, and the compact track provided good interaction and close calls. Capacity, 830 rph, was average.
Orig - Track was a true EuroFighter. The helix was nicely inclined, and the double barrel roll was really fun. The ride was for a large
part compact.
7 - 7 - 5.5
6.5

---

unfortunate_smiley - Gir's Taco Tumble

Tech - Track is very smooth. Supports are very good. G-forces are very good, strong positives all over the place and the laterals in control.
Adren - The speed was amazing, and the close calls with the rest of the track and supports made it seem even faster.
Capacity, 950 rph, was very good.
Orig - The drop was very nice, something I actually see Gerstlauer putting in one of their rides. However, I think the drop would've been
way more spectacular if it spinned 270 or even 360 degrees, now it spins 180 while it couldve been that much more.
The prelift barrel roll was a little out of place, but the rest of the ride was certainly a EuroFighter.
The layout was very compact, very good job on that.
9 - 8.5 - 6
7.8

---

cjd - Rock Bottom

Tech - Track smoothness itself was ok, but the radii and some stretches are way to low for a EuroFighter, also the drop
down from the 2nd MCBR was not banked at all. Supports were just below average, mainly because of the lift hill tower and
supports on the dive loop. Lateral G's were high in some occasions, vertical G's were alright.
Adren - The speed was good throughout the ride, only the first MCBR-straight was way too long, but the rest of the ride was taken
fast. The up-side-down moment in the dive loop was really good, and the fly trough the lift tower was nice. Capacity, 860 rph, was average.
Orig - The ride was really big and covered a lot of ground. The only things that kicked up your originality were the support tower flythrough and
the hangtime in the dive loop.
5 - 7 - 5
5.7

---

Jakizle - Rush

Tech - Track is very smooth. Support are above average. Vertical G-forces were good in the first half, but after the cork-roll, they were quite
low. Laterals were well under control.
Adren - Speed was really good at the beginning, especially in the low-to-ground parts, but unfortunately the pace went down after the mcbr. Apart
from the low-to-ground section, there was very little to enhance the sensation of speed. Capacity was very low, only 630 rph.
Orig - I liked how you didn't put the loop right in front of the drop and the cork-roll was nice executed. Yet the right was very spread across the
template and there wasn't a barrel- or zero-G-roll to be found.
7.5 - 4 - 4.5
5.3

---

alton_ - Bodge Job

Well, I must say I liked the idea of the over-vertical airtime hill, but I would be a real captain obvious if I said the track sucked.
I do not think the actual ratings for tech, adren and orig would get above 2.

---

Originally posted by hyyyper

coreyml - Flipperdy Doo Da

Tech - Track was jerky in most transitions, especially the top-radius on many drops were really too small. Supports are below average.
G-forces are in check expect for one lateral spike. And the vertical G's on the drop were good, to bad they were weak throughout the
rest of the ride.
Adren - The train speed was really slow, it took a real while to get around the track. The lack of good head-chopper and track interaction
didn't help either. Capacity, 950 rph, was well done.
Orig - I must say I liked the curving drop and wide loop very much. On the other hand, what were the vertical turn and weird zero-G-roll doing
there? Also, your ride covered a lot of ground.
3.5 - 4.5 - 4
4

---

vert turn - mystery mine
slow roll - i found fun - another way for hang time

[hyyyper]

^lol [:D], that turn from mystery mine is way different, that's more like a turn, yours looks like a tophat. Also, i know the slow roll is for hangtime, but the banking is way off.

idk what you mean about the turn being way different
and
might i ask about what you mean the banking being way off

other than that
its been fun
thx hyyyper for hosting
and
i look fwd to fun tracks about 18 days from now