Mod Reminder

[KCJammer]

KC,

If the two versions become combined into one huge collection of green conditions ...

Will it really be that huge?

Let's have a look ...

(Where are the "Will The Plane Take Off ? " boys when I need them ???) :lol:

Let's see ... guess I'll have to figure this one out on my own ...

If we had 27 different combinations within the standard version ...

N/S/S
N/M/S
N/F/S
N/S/M
N/M/M
N/F/M
N/S/F
N/M/F
N/F/F
B/S/S
B/M/S
B/F/S
B/S/M
B/M/M
B/F/M
B/S/F
B/M/F
B/F/F
W/S/S
W/M/S
W/F/S
W/S/M
W/M/M
W/F/M
W/S/F
W/M/F
W/F/F

that's 3 cubed to get the 27 ....

and then add in another set of 27 for the v1.06 possibilities ...

I'm guessing here .....

so then it's 6 cubed for a total of 216?

OK Dennis ... you're right ... if my math is correct, that is indeed a huge number of combinations.

But is that such a terrible thing?

I'm just gonna have to add a few more pages to my collection of ... errrr .... uhhhh .... charts.

[RR_Desperado]

Is David Cass going to go through every course that he intends to use any 1.06 settings in and play every hole to see if the course is "mod Friendly"? Is every player who sets up an event in the arcade going to do it? Are the other tours prepared to accept this new version in their tours?Is every APCD designer going to rework his course to make it mod friendly or do we just throw away a few hundred perfectly good courses ? For those that say"We just won`t use the mod conditions on those courses", I ask you "Who is going to decide what courses? Who will make sure the arcade isn`t full of unplayable events?
Most of the other proposed changes make sense and won`t affect the games playability but this mod can of worms is an aboration.
You speak of people who resist change. Well resistance is warranted. What about those who think the word new automatically means better?
I`m sorry but the only one to benefit from this change to our game would be EA Sports!!

[gibby]

Seem to me there's a simple answer, 3 types of tour events
normal 1.05 events and its own tour
mod 1.06 events and its own tour
mixed events using both and its own tour
just chose which you will play and that's it

[KCJammer]

Seem to me there's a simple answer, 3 types of tour events
normal 1.05 events and its own tour
mod 1.06 events and its own tour
mixed events using both and its own tour
just chose which you will play and that's it

Hey, who knows, you could be right. We still have people who play Links 2001 exclusively.
We could always have a separate group playing just Links 2003.
And a third group of individuals playing Links 2007.

[terrell]

i floated this a long time ago, but it never got any traction. i've always felt it would be a lot easier for everyone if certain sites catered to particular tastes. have one site use legacy courses and v1.05. another use mod v1.06. another exclusively apcd courses. now, particularly since mark doesn't have corporate big bucks behind him, it doesn't seem reasonable to try to be everything to everyone.

the reasoning behind this is i've always been a distributed processing person. centralized processing reduces overall costs in hardware and labor, but distributed processing provides greater node satisfaction/efficiency.

[gibby]

Seem to me there's a simple answer, 3 types of tour events
normal 1.05 events and its own tour
mod 1.06 events and its own tour
mixed events using both and its own tour
just chose which you will play and that's it

If these options are going to be in the new upgrade, then where not losing anything.

[Chip_Jett]

For me MOD is a welcome change. It's a new challenge to the game and more realistic IMO. If the whole tour went to 1.06 it wouldn't matter to me. But im a glass is half full type person not half empty.

[LH13241]

Is David Cass going to go through every course that he intends to use any 1.06 settings in and play every hole to see if the course is "mod Friendly"?

Already done

Is every player who sets up an event in the arcade going to do it?

If those people want players to participate, then yes

Are the other tours prepared to accept this new version in their tours?

They should, in won't affect the way they play now

Is every APCD designer going to rework his course to make it mod friendly or do we just throw away a few hundred perfectly good courses ?

Why throw away courses, we will still be able to play them, remember, you will still have the choice to play 1.5

For those that say"We just won`t use the mod conditions on those courses", I ask you "Who is going to decide what courses?

Again, there is a list of MOD friendly courses, and the person who set's it up will decide

Who will make sure the arcade isn`t full of unplayable events?

Some people will try, but no one will join

Most of the other proposed changes make sense and won`t affect the games playability but this mod can of worms is an aboration.

All changes will make sense, and if you would be less negative about the MOD, you'd see that the game was improved

You speak of people who resist change. Well resistance is warranted. What about those who think the word new automatically means better?

Some changes are shove down our throats, such as government and we can't do anything about it, but it is part of life. These changes will not be shoved down your throat, you will still be able to play the game the way you play it. And if by any chance you do accept to change to the MOD, or accept any changes, then only you will be able to appreciate all the hard work that went into it.

I`m sorry but the only one to benefit from this change to our game would be EA Sports!!

I've tried to explain the best I could, that if you want to stick to the existing game, you will be able to and as for people setting up games that don't make sense, well we can't change those people like we can't seem to make you understand that the MOD is a good thing
So if you really think that the only one to benefit from this change to our game would be EA Sports!! than please quit Links and join them

LH

[sinewiz]

I think part of the problem is that many of those that have played 1.05 for many years (myself included) switch to the faster settings on 1.06 and because of the extreme differences immediately disregard it. I have played a tremendous amount of IRLG as well as a lot of rounds at every speed in both 1.05 and 1.06 and its of my opinion that S/M and M/S with 1.06 are the most realistic ball physics of all.

There has been so much talk of 1.06 rendering many 2001 courses as unplayable which quite frankly is a lot of hooey. I have played almost every top 2001 course with the speeds that I have mentioned above and have yet to have too much of a problem with the exception of the occasional pin placement on an exaggeratedly hilly green with the hole at it's crown. (I still continue to play 2001 courses all the time, but not at speeds higher than what I just suggested.

I am one of the biggest proponents of 1.06 (up to a point). I look for the most realistic play I can get regardless of what I shoot. Unfortunately many of those that are slamming the mod are doing so only because they fear their scores escalating and not because they view 1.05 as more realistic. I think you will find that the majority of people who don't want things to change are also huge supporters of TW because quite frankly they aren't looking for a simulator, which is what Links is supposed to be.

I said that I was a proponent of 1.06 up to a point. As much as I believe S/M and M/S are the perfect settings I also believe that M/M is perfect for Links style courses and U.S. Open type challenges. The speeds above that in my opinion are a little over the top and I don't play them.

My point being that the transition should not really be that difficult as long as a little common sense prevails when setting up tournaments. Everyone has their own agendas but I challenge anyone that can be objective, that golf’s in real life on a regular basis, and has played (all) the game speeds, to tell me that I'm very far off in my assessment.

Oh yea, just my opinion.

[LH13241]

Sinewiz, I agree with you up to the point about the speeds

You are right about courses build before 2005, the best speed for those courses playing MOD is S/M M/S. But most courses after 2005 can be played at M/F F/M. For example, Augusta 2006 is playable at F/F and so is Chuck's Pebble Beach. But you are right about F/F, it is usually used for majors.

I just finished playing Nautilus Bay at M/M, M/F F/M and F/F. It was very playable at all those speeds, you just had to make sure you landed at the right spot....

For those who want to compare 1.5 with MOD green speeds, here's an idea


MOD 1.5
S/S 20 feet 20 feet
S/F 20 feet 14 feet
F/S 20 feet 15 feet
M/M 20 feet 11 feet
M/F 20 feet 8 feet
F/M 20 feet 9 feet
F/F 20 feet 6 feet

LH

[terrell]

MOD 1.5
S/S 20 feet 20 feet
S/F 20 feet 14 feet
F/S 20 feet 15 feet
M/M 20 feet 11 feet
M/F 20 feet 8 feet
F/M 20 feet 9 feet
F/F 20 feet 6 feet

LH

thanks, lh. i'm continually batting the ball back and forth across the greens in v1.06, often further away than when i started (then i play a v1.05 tournament, and i can't get one to the cup). but i'll attempt to commit your chart to mammary. i might be able to shave a stroke or two.

[sinewiz]

Yes LH13241 I'm aware that many mod supporters believe in speeds slightly higher than what I believe, but as mentioned it's only my opinion. I've just always felt that speeds higher than my suggestion have a tendency to roll out a little bit unrealistically. I should have also mentioned that I think F/S is also fair. But I don't like using the Augusta scenario as an example because that's a condition that is set up to challenge the best players in the world on the biggest stage once a year, and quite frankly if the average golfer went out and played under those conditions he would shoot 200.

Remember there is also a difference between being playable, and being the most realistic. I still feel S/M and M/S are the most realistic.

Oh Yea, just my opinion

[Harpo]

It used to be nice to check a one page tourney list and see who's leading what. Now with so many tourneys and going to be more it seems that you have to spend a half hour just to check them all out to see who's leading. I can see already that the players are getting spread thin in most all of them. Who wants to win or place hight in a tourney with a weak field. (not degrading anyone here). I only play in 1 maybe two a week and have to search pages to find some of the players that I used to play against. What am I trying to say here? I don't really know but I'm waiting to see how things look come the first of the year.

[Larry_Warrilow]

not only the ms legacy courses, but even the newer specifically designed to be 1.06 friendly courses have many hole locations that are very unfriendly to 1.06 f/f. that's because if you designed greens where all pin locations were friendly to superfast surfaces you would have very flat uninteresting greens. this a problem that concerns many real world architects.

augusta national has a ton of contour in their 30's style greens, but it has only three or four usable pin positions per hole for very fast green speeds. that's why 1.06 events need an individual pin location choice option.

in the real world, on a superfast green surface, you must have less than 2.5" of downhill grade from 10' above the hole, which corresponds to the real world architect's practical rule of thumb: can a skilled player leave a putt short of the hole? if not, then the location is useless for a superfast green.

my guess is that we're not going to get some frankenstein mutant mixture of 1.05 and 1.06 anytime soon. the 1.06ers would scream miscegination, and the mass of average 1.05ers would just be confused. change will come, but the time is not right just now. when they have a good many of the remaining 45 ms legacy courses that do not yet have a credible update [six of them do, but only two so far from apcd-courses], then we can start talking about some mandatory new game play parameters [sound sort of like a new version?] for everybody. lw

__________

[Crissy]

Nothing what so ever should be added to the game of Links. I don’t want to see even a new colored golf ball added to the game when it is loaded. The core of the game was designed and released by the companys that own or owned it at the time and should not be altered for any reason unless they decide to do it.

How would the designers of APCD courses like it if people decided to unlock there courses and mess around removing bunkers and shorting holes and such ? If a person gives a ten cent Microsoft course to a friend, many people never stop crying and whining for days, but messing with the core of the game is ok ? ( How quickly we turn, when it serves are own agenda )

The mod is a third party novelty at best and thats all, it should not be added on a mandatory basis just to play here or anywhere for that matter in my opinion. Someone has to speak up against the sort of criminal activity.

Crissy