Castlevania II: Simon's Quest - November 1st, 2008

2008-11-01 04:21:36 pm

My feelings on The Demon Rush

Game Page: http://speeddemosarchive.com/Castlevania2.html

Thomas L. Mallory, Jr's single-segment run

Quote:

I've watched the video.
The route changes from the existing speedrun show that this runner has a stronger understanding of the routes available, and a good idea of when to collect and use hearts.
As it's around 7 minutes faster, it's obviously a great improvement.
There are still spots that could be done better - a few very minor route changes here and there would save random seconds. Also when the Start dialog box opens up there's sometimes a feeling of "uncertainty," and considering that the subweapon changes should be consistent from run to run, the button presses to move the cursors around should be scripted and done without thinking on it so much. I think better use of the subweapons towards the end of the run, like the Sacred Flame and the Golden Knife, would have cut down on some seconds spent whipping, while still having enough hearts to kill Dracula. This run could have been in the 40:XX's with a little more practice and more attempts to get better luck, but as an improvement on the existing speedrun it's fantastic.

PASS

Quote:

this runs quality was a big step up from the previous one, as the route planning was much more efficient, there weren't any random platforming errors that resulted in death, and the luck was pretty good. It can probably be improved further, but its still pretty damn good

Quote:

This is an excellent route with a mediocre execution.

My first impression after only two castles was not polished enough.
There were too many blunders on a whole along with other issues.

In the first two minutes the runner sets precedence with death abuse and then doesn’t ever use this to his full advantage. He actually skillfully avoids damage. Huh I was expecting him to OWN this. Recoiling off enemies and using the rest of his lives to propel him through.

I understand that there are tight spots with buying required items, but this should be treated secondary to speed. He should be killing only the enemies that don’t slow him down. It’s a lot like metriod in that respect getting the right “drops” you need in time.

I would ask the runner:
How many seconds do you heart farm in Veros Woods?
Have you calculated which enemy you level up on?
Which enemies can you get hit by?
Which enemies can you avoid?
Is it faster to die rather than wait for the pause while you level up?
Are there any jumps/floors that you can boost off enemies? (I noticed you did once on accident)
Are there any walls/ floors you can death abuse through?
Don’t sell yourself short! If you know the answer to ALL these questions your going to see another 5 minutes drop off your time.

It’s too bad considering this is such a large time improvement compared to the current run.
I would just use this as incentive to get sub 40 minutes. Wink

My decision is: REJECTED

Quote:

OK here we go.

Overall, video/audio quality seems to be ok (now that I've fixed my computer)

Gameplay is overall good. There's a few mistakes, but for a run of this length they're acceptable (mistakes are less than 30 seconds at most... probably far less than that)

A couple of minor glitches seen that I hadn't seen before (walking halfway through blocks in one stretch), but given the wonderful NES code that should be ok; based on the TAS I think it's ok.

Overall, this should be accepted.

One verifier requested me not to post his comments. He said that this run annihilates the old run.

Decision: Accept

Reason: This run beats the old run by nearly seven minutes. Even though verifiers admitted there were some mistakes, most of them agreed that this was a good run that should be posted. Yes, there was a verifier who rejected the run, but he was outvoted.

Thread title:

Game Page: http://speeddemosarchive.com/Castlevania2.html

Thomas L. Mallory, Jr's single-segment run

[quote]I've watched the video.
The route changes from the existing speedrun show that this runner has a stronger understanding of the routes available, and a good idea of when to collect and use hearts.
As it's around 7 minutes faster, it's obviously a great improvement.
There are still spots that could be done better - a few very minor route changes here and there would save random seconds. Also when the Start dialog box opens up there's sometimes a feeling of "uncertainty," and considering that the subweapon changes should be consistent from run to run, the button presses to move the cursors around should be scripted and done without thinking on it so much. I think better use of the subweapons towards the end of the run, like the Sacred Flame and the Golden Knife, would have cut down on some seconds spent whipping, while still having enough hearts to kill Dracula. This run could have been in the 40:XX's with a little more practice and more attempts to get better luck, but as an improvement on the existing speedrun it's fantastic.

PASS[/quote]

[quote]this runs quality was a big step up from the previous one, as the route planning was much more efficient, there weren't any random platforming errors that resulted in death, and the luck was pretty good. It can probably be improved further, but its still pretty damn good[/quote]

[quote]This is an excellent route with a mediocre execution.

My first impression after only two castles was not polished enough.
There were too many blunders on a whole along with other issues.

In the first two minutes the runner sets precedence with death abuse and then doesn’t ever use this to his full advantage. He actually skillfully avoids damage. Huh I was expecting him to OWN this. Recoiling off enemies and using the rest of his lives to propel him through.

I understand that there are tight spots with buying required items, but this should be treated secondary to speed. He should be killing only the enemies that don’t slow him down. It’s a lot like metriod in that respect getting the right “drops” you need in time.

I would ask the runner:
How many seconds do you heart farm in Veros Woods?
Have you calculated which enemy you level up on?
Which enemies can you get hit by?
Which enemies can you avoid?
Is it faster to die rather than wait for the pause while you level up?
Are there any jumps/floors that you can boost off enemies? (I noticed you did once on accident)
Are there any walls/ floors you can death abuse through?
Don’t sell yourself short! If you know the answer to ALL these questions your going to see another 5 minutes drop off your time.

It’s too bad considering this is such a large time improvement compared to the current run.
I would just use this as incentive to get sub 40 minutes.  Wink

My decision is: REJECTED [/quote]

[quote]OK here we go.

Overall, video/audio quality seems to be ok (now that I've fixed my computer)

Gameplay is overall good.  There's a few mistakes, but for a run of this length they're acceptable (mistakes are less than 30 seconds at most... probably far less than that)

A couple of minor glitches seen that I hadn't seen before (walking halfway through blocks in one stretch), but given the wonderful NES code that should be ok; based on the TAS I think it's ok.

Overall, this should be accepted.[/quote]

One verifier requested me not to post his comments. He said that this run annihilates the old run.

[b]Decision[/b]: Accept

[b]Reason[/b]: This run beats the old run by nearly seven minutes. Even though verifiers admitted there were some mistakes, most of them agreed that this was a good run that should be posted. Yes, there was a verifier who rejected the run, but he was outvoted.

Vugmer

2008-11-01 11:28:35 pm

Cigar Man

How can someone reject a run that is seven minutes faster than the current run?

gia

2008-11-02 01:20:08 am

I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

probably he wants the runner to rerecord before he forgets about it

AquaTiger

2008-11-02 03:51:40 am

Never give up!

Quote from vgmrsepitome:

How can someone reject a run that is seven minutes faster than the current run?

In this case, I don't know. But overall? What if that seven minutes is only a third of the improvement that's well-known to be possible?

mikwuyma

2008-11-02 10:11:54 am

My feelings on The Demon Rush

I haven't watched this run, nor have I played the game for over 15 minutes, but maybe the run Thomas obsoleted was really bad (sorry Kareshi), and this verifier thought the run replacing it was merely decent.

mikwuyma

2008-11-02 10:17:02 am

My feelings on The Demon Rush

Okay, the verifier's response below.

-I am bummed this run was accepted. I probably should have been more specific and my critisism may have had more weight

It took me four days to respond to mikwuyma, I watched this game FOUR times in its entirety, I did not make my decision lightly.

Quote
I would ask the runner:
How many seconds do you heart farm in Veros Woods?
Have you calculated which enemy you level up on?
Which enemies can you get hit by?
Which enemies can you avoid?
Is it faster to die rather than wait for the pause while you level up?
Are there any jumps/floors that you can boost off enemies? (I noticed you did once on accident)
Are there any walls/ floors you can death abuse through?
Don’t sell yourself short! If you know the answer to ALL these questions your going to see another 5 minutes drop off your time.

First off, I mean no offense to the runner, but the reason why I asked those questions was because I know he does not know the answers. (Although didn't know why at the time). It was clear by his tentativeness throughout the game that he wasn't prepared as much as he should be.

1:47 It is the same time to go down the stairs than it is to go left fall then back right.
1:54 This is interesting, considering the entire first night is taken heart farming, this is a uninhibited time section, but yet it is one of the only times in the game he avoids enemies.
4:42 He goes out of his way to kill the the second skeleton not knowing if it will leave a heart.
5:24 He arrives too fast to the second town after heart farming and has to wait EIGHT SECONDS for daylight.
11:28 First blunder missing castle jump loses +9 seconds
14:48 Second blunder misjumping the platform at start of second castle +6 sec
16:45 Subscreen twice really?
22:25 Takes hit from Reaper. Has to backup during fight, ends up further away from dagger.
27:28 Forgets there's no false floor an tries to holywater it HA
29:19 Doesnt perform glitch jump as cleanly as can be done.
31:29 Forgets to go get oak stake
31:53 Forgets to fall down instead takes the stairs +5 sec
32:40 Forgets equip golden dagger early, so is unable hit mask in time has to leave room and com back in to start battle over. +8 sec
32:53 Still doesnt kill mask optimally. +2 sec
35:38 Misses whip jump twice.
38:12 This is his best castle. Although Id hope so it is less than two minutes, there is still some goofyness, fake walking upstairs, jumping past alter, missing hidden jump.
Ends before Dracula with 126 Hearts

These were the major issues. Quite a few early on hence my distaste after only the begining of the second castle.

There at least Ten times in the run where he is hit unitentionally. Plus the times he goes out of his way for hearts. Also the runner doesnt realize that while waiting for enemies at tho top of stais he can be about 3 pixels above the stairs without being hit. Which means he waits too long. Really the list goes on but....

After I had responded to mikwuyma, I checked the Old Castlevania II thread and found JPatricks run he posted on YouTube in 39:58. Yes this is the Identical route but 2 minutes slower.

This brings a lot of things into perspective, why I feel the runner wasn't either knowlegable or couldnt answer those questions. Because he didnt do the leg work himself. He saw this route and emulated it. (poorly) Why wouldn't we accept it's 6 minutes faster?

I hope this answers why I REJECTED the run. Wink

BTW: JPatrics Run is the SHIT its nearly FLAWLESS.
http://speeddemosarchive.com/forum/index.php/topic,3546.0.html

me: I did not know about JPatrick's run

Okay, the verifier's response below.

-I am bummed this run was accepted. I probably should have been more specific and my critisism may have had more weight

It took me four days to respond to mikwuyma, I watched this game FOUR times in its entirety, I did not make my decision lightly.

Quote
I would ask the runner:
How many seconds do you heart farm in Veros Woods?
Have you calculated which enemy you level up on?
Which enemies can you get hit by?
Which enemies can you avoid?
Is it faster to die rather than wait for the pause while you level up?
Are there any jumps/floors that you can boost off enemies? (I noticed you did once on accident)
Are there any walls/ floors you can death abuse through?
Don’t sell yourself short! If you know the answer to ALL these questions your going to see another 5 minutes drop off your time.

First off, I mean no offense to the runner, but the reason why I asked those questions was because I know he does not know the answers. (Although didn't know why at the time). It was clear by his tentativeness throughout the game that he wasn't prepared as much as he should be.

1:47 It is the same time to go down the stairs than it is to go left fall then back right.
1:54 This is interesting, considering the entire first night is taken heart farming, this is a uninhibited time section, but yet it is one of the only times in the game he avoids enemies.
4:42 He goes out of his way to kill the the second skeleton not knowing if it will leave a heart.
5:24 He arrives too fast to the second town after heart farming and has to wait EIGHT SECONDS for daylight.
11:28 First blunder missing castle jump loses +9 seconds
14:48 Second blunder misjumping the platform at start of second castle +6 sec
16:45 Subscreen twice really?
22:25 Takes hit from Reaper. Has to backup during fight, ends up further away from dagger.
27:28 Forgets there's no false floor an tries to holywater it HA
29:19 Doesnt perform glitch jump as cleanly as can be done.
31:29 Forgets to go get oak stake
31:53 Forgets to fall down instead takes the stairs +5 sec
32:40 Forgets equip golden dagger early, so is unable hit mask in time has to leave room and com back in to start battle over. +8 sec
32:53 Still doesnt kill mask optimally. +2 sec
35:38 Misses whip jump twice.
38:12 This is his best castle. Although Id hope so it is less than two minutes, there is still some goofyness, fake walking upstairs, jumping past alter, missing hidden jump.
Ends before Dracula with 126 Hearts

These were the major issues. Quite a few early on hence my distaste after only the begining of the second castle.

There at least Ten times in the run where he is hit unitentionally. Plus the times he goes out of his way for hearts. Also the runner doesnt realize that while waiting for enemies at tho top of stais he can be about 3 pixels above the stairs without being hit. Which means he waits too long. Really the list goes on but....

After I had responded to mikwuyma, I checked the Old Castlevania II thread and found JPatricks run he posted on YouTube in 39:58. Yes this is the Identical route but 2 minutes slower.

This brings a lot of things into perspective, why I feel the runner wasn't either knowlegable or couldnt answer those questions. Because he didnt do the leg work himself. He saw this route and emulated it. (poorly) Why wouldn't we accept it's 6 minutes faster?

I hope this answers why I REJECTED the run.  Wink

BTW: JPatrics Run is the SHIT its nearly FLAWLESS.
http://speeddemosarchive.com/forum/index.php/topic,3546.0.html

me: I did not know about JPatrick's run

Emptyeye

2008-11-02 12:15:05 pm

Talk to the Hand

Quote from mikwuyma:

I haven't watched this run, nor have I played the game for over 15 minutes, but maybe the run Thomas obsoleted was really bad (sorry Kareshi), and this verifier thought the run replacing it was merely decent.

For what it's worth, I think Kareshi actually agrees at this point that it's really bad.

kareshi

2008-11-02 08:27:58 pm

Quote from Emptyeye:

Quote from mikwuyma:

I haven't watched this run, nor have I played the game for over 15 minutes, but maybe the run Thomas obsoleted was really bad (sorry Kareshi), and this verifier thought the run replacing it was merely decent.

For what it's worth, I think Kareshi actually agrees at this point that it's really bad.

I agree that Kareshi agrees.
Maybe a 41 minute run will encourage more competition?
Maybe not. Maybe I'll take up the sub-40 goal next year, but I may just keep playing SGnG or Genesis GnG instead. Who knows.

connect4

2008-11-03 07:58:44 am

Insert text here later

Even if this run is of low quality, it's still 7 minutes faster than the old one.

And if it's of such low quality, the verifier will easily be able to make his own run faster using the same route (or for that matter, JPatrick might submit the run here).

It might not be the fastest time available, but it's the fastest time that's been submitted. After all, if it had to be the fastest time available, the Link to the Past videos would not be on this site either.

Siyko

2008-11-03 08:11:14 am

I used to be athiest until I realized I was God.

Quote from connect4:

And if it's of such low quality, the verifier will easily be able to make his own run faster using the same route

I hate this method of thinking. I don't need to be good at something to point out that someone else could be better.

Even if its true, since the verifier seems to have a strong knowledge of the game, it's a ridiculous retort to make.

mikwuyma

2008-11-03 08:51:14 am

My feelings on The Demon Rush

Quote from Siyko:

Quote from connect4:

And if it's of such low quality, the verifier will easily be able to make his own run faster using the same route

I hate this method of thinking. I don't need to be good at something to point out that someone else could be better.

Even if its true, since the verifier seems to have a strong knowledge of the game, it's a ridiculous retort to make.

Have to agree with Siyko here. Also, what you said about the verifier making his own run isn't true, because making a good run usually takes a lot of time.

connect4

2008-11-03 09:26:14 am

Insert text here later

Quote from Siyko:

Quote from connect4:

And if it's of such low quality, the verifier will easily be able to make his own run faster using the same route

I hate this method of thinking. I don't need to be good at something to point out that someone else could be better.

Even if its true, since the verifier seems to have a strong knowledge of the game, it's a ridiculous retort to make.

I apologize for saying it that way. I'm simply looking at it from a relative viewpoint; compared to anything else that has been submitted here, this run is better (at least route wise; the gameplay may not be up to as high standard). Yes, the run might not be as good, and yes I understand that SDA has certain standards of quality for their runs, but it's a 7 minute improvement, and SDA should have up the best runs for each category. Rejecting a "poor quality but 7 minute improvement" run would only be acceptable, in my mind, if the old record was also removed. Sure, this can be improved apparently, but then in that case let a new runner use this run as an impetus to do their own work (or for JPatrick to submit his run).

I guess I just have slightly different standards than SDA. Although I want a run to "look professional", my primary issue is time; if the game is 7 minutes faster (on a sub-hour game), then even with some mistakes it should be good enough to obsolete the run; it just serves the purpose of showing a future player what they need to do to break the record. Again, I just view the site more as a world record site than a high-quality play site. Although they typically go hand-in-hand, I'd personally take the "faster time but sloppier" over the "slower but cleaner". But again, that's just my opinion.

As for the "verifier making his own run", in retrospect I shouldn't have said that, and I apologize for that comment. Speedrunning is a lot of work, and making these runs do take a lot of time.

[quote="Siyko"]
[quote="connect4"]
And if it's of such low quality, the verifier will easily be able to make his own run faster using the same route
[/quote]

I hate this method of thinking. I don't need to be good at something to point out that someone else could be better.

Even if its true, since the verifier seems to have a strong knowledge of the game, it's a ridiculous retort to make. 
[/quote]

I apologize for saying it that way.  I'm simply looking at it from a relative viewpoint; compared to anything else that has been submitted here, this run is better (at least route wise; the gameplay may not be up to as high standard).  Yes, the run might not be as good, and yes I understand that SDA has certain standards of quality for their runs, but it's a 7 minute improvement, and SDA should have up the best runs for each category.  Rejecting a "poor quality but 7 minute improvement" run would only be acceptable, in my mind, if the old record was also removed.  Sure, this can be improved apparently, but then in that case let a new runner use this run as an impetus to do their own work (or for JPatrick to submit his run).

I guess I just have slightly different standards than SDA.  Although I want a run to "look professional", my primary issue is time; if the game is 7 minutes faster (on a sub-hour game), then even with some mistakes it should be good enough to obsolete the run; it just serves the purpose of showing a future player what they need to do to break the record.  Again, I just view the site more as a world record site than a high-quality play site.  Although they typically go hand-in-hand, I'd personally take the "faster time but sloppier" over the "slower but cleaner".  But again, that's just my opinion.

As for the "verifier making his own run", in retrospect I shouldn't have said that, and I apologize for that comment.  Speedrunning is a lot of work, and making these runs do take a lot of time.

kareshi

2008-11-03 02:17:51 pm

I'd like to point out that the 48:45 run that's on the site now has incredibly sloppy playing in addition to an inferior route and should be removed anyway.

stanski

2008-11-06 12:09:07 pm

wise fwom yo gwave

Well i am not familiar enough with the game to know how much this could have been improved, but I saw it as a huge improvement to a run that honestly looked really bad on the site (it was the first run one of my friends watched and he said it was awful and this site was terrible).

kareshi

2008-11-06 04:09:06 pm

So here's why I submitted it in the first place: I didn't know about twingalaxies at the time, and figured this is where all the videogame world records go. So I thought it would be neat to have a CV2 world record, and I really didn't care how good or bad it looked as long as it was faster than the one that was on the site at the time (and yes, I actually DID obsolete another run with it!)

But soon after I realized the true nature of SDA and made Ghosts 'N Goblins as a way of apologizing. That and two other speedruns later, I feel like a stronger addition to SDA and I really am proud of my listed runs now.

Thomas

2008-11-16 06:06:39 pm

I figure it's probably safe to defend myself now since it's likely that no one is reading this thread anymore Smiley

I will apologize in advance for the length - I am a wordy person.

First - I am not going to knock kareshi; I'm sure he feels he's had plenty of criticism already. I am glad that he did his run, and frankly, it was up because no one else submitted a run to take its place, so therefore it was the best run on the site for that game at the time. Regardless of how good or bad anyone felt it was, it was there, and there was a pretty big window of opportunity for anyone who wanted to improve it to do so.

Seriously, I'm not going to disagree much with anyone about my run. I admit that there is plenty of room for improvement. If speeddemosarchive.com's policy is to only post perfect or near perfect runs (or supplant currently existing runs with perfect or near perfect runs), then I will agree that my run is not nearly perfect and therefore does not belong on the site. It is possible that the archive's standards have changed from the time that kareshi posted his run. It is possible that a run should not be posted and take the place of another run, even if it is a six-to-seven minute improvement, because of flaws.

As far as the list of questions proposed by the rejecting verifier, I do have the answers to those questions. I will be honest and say that some of them might not be very good answers.

I don't heart farm in Veros based on time, but based on how many enemies I kill. I go back and forth along the strip between 21 and 23 times - it varied because it was determined by how many times I had to kill the two headed beasts I was death-abusing in the beginning of the game. The more times I had to kill them to get my 50 hearts, the less time I had to farm hearts in the evening. As long as I made it to the town before daybreak with the correct number of hearts to purchase the chain whip that the mission was accomplished. After the first level up, the hearts don't contribute to progressing to level two, so there is only the financial necessity.

I do not calculate the enemy that I level up on, nor could I. Experience earned is based on heart pickups, which are random. I know that the areas that I always level up are in Veros Woods, in Bodley Mansion, and between Braham's Mansion and Dora Bridge.

As far as which enemies to be hit by/avoid and boosting off enemies, a lot of enemies in the game move in a random fashion - you can't count on them being in the same place every time you play through. Some of the ones that follow a set pattern are the non-bone-throwing skeletons, so I admit that I might be able to cut my time by running on an emulator and figuring which of those I could use to my advantage.

Concerning avoiding enemies, which I take to mean which ones do you not "need" to kill, it's tough to determine this. If an enemy is one or two seconds out of my way to kill and is a fairly easy (one or two hit) kill, then I am probably going to take those seconds to kill it. I would rather do that than get to an area where a weapon or item must be bought and spend even more time outside killing more difficult enemies in order to earn hearts I could have gotten easier at a lower time expense.

Regarding whether it is faster to die rather than wait for the pause while leveling up, I am not clear on the question, but I am assuming that it refers to the time that I wait to make sure I am safe from an enemy before dispatching it when I am close to leveling. The player loses all experience gained since the last level up if a continue is used. I wanted to do the run without using a continue. This made me extra careful when I got close to leveling. I could have leveled up and then dunked myself in the river afterward to start with a fresh three lives each time, but that was not my choice.

I am not aware of any walls or floors that one can death abuse through.

I will admit that when I did the run I was not as prepared as I should have been. In my write-up, I realized and noted all (or nearly all) of the mistakes that I made. I was fully aware of the imperfections of the run and I made them available for all to see before verifying. I'm not sure if the write-ups are distributed to the verifiers with the runs, but it was there.

Finally, in response to the comments about JPatrick's run... I can take all of the other verifier's comments with a grain of salt, as I appreciate the constructive feedback regardless of the fact that I already knew my flaws. However, I resent the fact that someone would suggest that I am not "knowledgeable," that I did not "do the legwork myself," and that I "saw this route and emulated it (poorly)." You will notice in my writeup that everything I "emulated" from JPatricks run, I gave credit to him for. I will admit I watched the run. I will admit that I did learn some tricks from it. I will admit that I did not perform some of those tricks flawlessly. But, regardless of whether anyone takes my word for it or not, I did not swipe the route from JPatrick; if I had I would have admitted it. I had discovered the route before watching the youtube/google video. I am insulted by these uninformed accusations.

-T

I figure it's probably safe to defend myself now since it's likely that no one is reading this thread anymore :)  I will apologize in advance for the length - I am a wordy person.

First - I am not going to knock kareshi; I'm sure he feels he's had plenty of criticism already.  I am glad that he did his run, and frankly, it was up because no one else submitted a run to take its place, so therefore it was the best run on the site for that game at the time.  Regardless of how good or bad anyone felt it was, it was there, and there was a pretty big window of opportunity for anyone who wanted to improve it to do so.

Seriously, I'm not going to disagree much with anyone about my run.  I admit that there is plenty of room for improvement.  If speeddemosarchive.com's policy is to only post perfect or near perfect runs (or supplant currently existing runs with perfect or near perfect runs), then I will agree that my run is not nearly perfect and therefore does not belong on the site.  It is possible that the archive's standards have changed from the time that kareshi posted his run.  It is possible that a run should not be posted and take the place of another run, even if it is a six-to-seven minute improvement, because of flaws.

As far as the list of questions proposed by the rejecting verifier, I do have the answers to those questions.  I will be honest and say that some of them might not be very good answers.

I don't heart farm in Veros based on time, but based on how many enemies I kill.  I go back and forth along the strip between 21 and 23 times - it varied because it was determined by how many times I had to kill the two headed beasts I was death-abusing in the beginning of the game.  The more times I had to kill them to get my 50 hearts, the less time I had to farm hearts in the evening.  As long as I made it to the town before daybreak with the correct number of hearts to purchase the chain whip that the mission was accomplished.  After the first level up, the hearts don't contribute to progressing to level two, so there is only the financial necessity.

I do not calculate the enemy that I level up on, nor could I.  Experience earned is based on heart pickups, which are random.  I know that the areas that I always level up are in Veros Woods, in Bodley Mansion, and between Braham's Mansion and Dora Bridge.

As far as which enemies to be hit by/avoid and boosting off enemies, a lot of enemies in the game move in a random fashion - you can't count on them being in the same place every time you play through.  Some of the ones that follow a set pattern are the non-bone-throwing skeletons, so I admit that I might be able to cut my time by running on an emulator and figuring which of those I could use to my advantage.

Concerning avoiding enemies, which I take to mean which ones do you not "need" to kill, it's tough to determine this.  If an enemy is one or two seconds out of my way to kill and is a fairly easy (one or two hit) kill, then I am probably going to take those seconds to kill it.  I would rather do that than get to an area where a weapon or item must be bought and spend even more time outside killing more difficult enemies in order to earn hearts I could have gotten easier at a lower time expense.

Regarding whether it is faster to die rather than wait for the pause while leveling up, I am not clear on the question, but I am assuming that it refers to the time that I wait to make sure I am safe from an enemy before dispatching it when I am close to leveling.  The player loses all experience gained since the last level up if a continue is used.  I wanted to do the run without using a continue.  This made me extra careful when I got close to leveling.  I could have leveled up and then dunked myself in the river afterward to start with a fresh three lives each time, but that was not my choice.

I am not aware of any walls or floors that one can death abuse through.

I will admit that when I did the run I was not as prepared as I should have been.  In my write-up, I realized and noted all (or nearly all) of the mistakes that I made.  I was fully aware of the imperfections of the run and I made them available for all to see before verifying.  I'm not sure if the write-ups are distributed to the verifiers with the runs, but it was there.

Finally, in response to the comments about JPatrick's run... I can take all of the other verifier's comments with a grain of salt, as I appreciate the constructive feedback regardless of the fact that I already knew my flaws.  However, I resent the fact that someone would suggest that I am not "knowledgeable," that I did not "do the legwork myself," and that I "saw this route and emulated it (poorly)."  You will notice in my writeup that everything I "emulated" from JPatricks run, I gave credit to him for.  I will admit I watched the run.  I will admit that I did learn some tricks from it.  I will admit that I did not perform some of those tricks flawlessly.  But, regardless of whether anyone takes my word for it or not, I did not swipe the route from JPatrick; if I had I would have admitted it.  I had discovered the route before watching the youtube/google video.  I am insulted by these uninformed accusations.

-T