101,888 EXP in a single kill -- Can you top it?
By
Alannon,
Posted on: 2007-01-27 16:36 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
No, not really. In fact, I've seen it used and used it most often before the active need to defend my king became present, meaning well before things weren't going my way.
[ QUOTE ]
When you do, doesn't it give you a much better defense, especially when you manage to do it pretty early in the game?
[/ QUOTE ]
No. Its never a good idea to execute a castle too early in the game, giving the opponent the opportunity to concentrate on developing an attack on the castle's weak side. Its useful as a defensive move provided the game proceeds normally with the primary focus on the center of the board. But there are strong castling moves, and weak castling moves. Generally, neither are "ingenious." Ingenious implies non-obvious. A castle that turns into a non-sacrificing fork-check: that's ingenious (and your opponent is an idiot).
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
I thought my Geekenese was pretty good, but I can't make heads or tails out of this conversation. 
Then again, I never played chess. 
Can we talk about D&D instead? 
Guys, come on. You're being nerdier than normal. 
(I jest, I jest)
@Bengal Fist - Freedom - Authority SG
Bengal Fist (SS/EA) - Thirt3en (Time/Elec) - Aussi (Elec/Shield) - Potamoi (Water/Time) - Parkr (Staff/Ela)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When you do, doesn't it give you a much better defense, especially when you manage to do it pretty early in the game?
[/ QUOTE ]
No. Its never a good idea to execute a castle too early in the game, giving the opponent the opportunity to concentrate on developing an attack on the castle's weak side. Its useful as a defensive move provided the game proceeds normally with the primary focus on the center of the board. But there are strong castling moves, and weak castling moves. Generally, neither are "ingenious." Ingenious implies non-obvious. A castle that turns into a non-sacrificing fork-check: that's ingenious (and your opponent is an idiot).
[/ QUOTE ]
No, I'm not saying castling on, say, your seventh or eighth move is an excellent idea, nor is starting off with the intention of doing it as soon as possible, but when the game's being played in the center of the board, before you need to actively defend your king, castling early's a sound move. Ingenious? The move itself is pretty ingenious if only because of how unusual a move it is in itself.
Also, my ingenious (yes, that's right, ingenious!) plan to defend my king, Ultimus, by distracting you guys with semantics is paying off in spades. Suckers.
[ QUOTE ]
I thought my Geekenese was pretty good, but I can't make heads or tails out of this conversation.
Then again, I never played chess.
Can we talk about D&D instead?
[/ QUOTE ]
NEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRR- oh, wait, we were just jawing on about chess, weren't we?
Meh, still... nerd!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When you do, doesn't it give you a much better defense, especially when you manage to do it pretty early in the game?
[/ QUOTE ]
No. Its never a good idea to execute a castle too early in the game, giving the opponent the opportunity to concentrate on developing an attack on the castle's weak side. Its useful as a defensive move provided the game proceeds normally with the primary focus on the center of the board. But there are strong castling moves, and weak castling moves. Generally, neither are "ingenious." Ingenious implies non-obvious. A castle that turns into a non-sacrificing fork-check: that's ingenious (and your opponent is an idiot).
[/ QUOTE ]
No, I'm not saying castling on, say, your seventh or eighth move is an excellent idea, nor is starting off with the intention of doing it as soon as possible, but when the game's being played in the center of the board, before you need to actively defend your king, castling early's a sound move. Ingenious? The move itself is pretty ingenious if only because of how unusual a move it is in itself.
Also, my ingenious (yes, that's right, ingenious!) plan to defend my king, Ultimus, by distracting you guys with semantics is paying off in spades. Suckers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Please, call me Optimus.
By the way, this thread has 159 rates... I'm also not banned like someone said.
[ QUOTE ]
The move itself is pretty ingenious if only because of how unusual a move it is in itself.
[/ QUOTE ]
If castling is a novel move, en passant must seem like devil worship.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The move itself is pretty ingenious if only because of how unusual a move it is in itself.
[/ QUOTE ]
If castling is a novel move, en passant must seem like devil worship.
[/ QUOTE ]
Those pawns must die!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I thought my Geekenese was pretty good, but I can't make heads or tails out of this conversation.
Then again, I never played chess.
Can we talk about D&D instead?
[/ QUOTE ]
NEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRR- oh, wait, we were just jawing on about chess, weren't we?
Meh, still... nerd!
[/ QUOTE ]
White and nerdy and freakin proud of it!
I know how we can make this discussion even geekier! What on earth is the difference between a nerd, a geek, a dweeb and a dork? Many people have different opinions so let's hear everyone's.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When you do, doesn't it give you a much better defense, especially when you manage to do it pretty early in the game?
[/ QUOTE ]
No. Its never a good idea to execute a castle too early in the game, giving the opponent the opportunity to concentrate on developing an attack on the castle's weak side. Its useful as a defensive move provided the game proceeds normally with the primary focus on the center of the board. But there are strong castling moves, and weak castling moves. Generally, neither are "ingenious." Ingenious implies non-obvious. A castle that turns into a non-sacrificing fork-check: that's ingenious (and your opponent is an idiot).
[/ QUOTE ]
No, I'm not saying castling on, say, your seventh or eighth move is an excellent idea, nor is starting off with the intention of doing it as soon as possible, but when the game's being played in the center of the board, before you need to actively defend your king, castling early's a sound move. Ingenious? The move itself is pretty ingenious if only because of how unusual a move it is in itself.
Also, my ingenious (yes, that's right, ingenious!) plan to defend my king, Ultimus, by distracting you guys with semantics is paying off in spades. Suckers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Please, call me Optimus.
By the way, this thread has 159 rates... I'm also not banned like someone said.
[/ QUOTE ]
Someone care to explain what a rate is? Otherwise, 159 rates means nothing to me.
Castling would be "ingenious" if it were a maneuver you could perform with the normal moves of the pieces, and someone had just noticed that moving the king like this and then the rook like that provided amazing defense in tough situations. (Watch, I picked the wrong two pieces or something. I haven't played chess in years.) But castling is a special case in the rules. Using a special case in the rules isn't ingenious, nor is adding one. I'm sure I could add some useful rules special cases, like the "rearrange the board so you have checkmate" maneuver.
"I won using the Iron Yeti proviso. Ingenious!"
I team with the Repeat Offenders.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The move itself is pretty ingenious if only because of how unusual a move it is in itself.
[/ QUOTE ]
If castling is a novel move, en passant must seem like devil worship.
[/ QUOTE ]
Devil worship? Only if it's bait. Then you could entail "human sacrifice." And damned if that wouldn't make chess more interesting to a lot of people.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When you do, doesn't it give you a much better defense, especially when you manage to do it pretty early in the game?
[/ QUOTE ]
No. Its never a good idea to execute a castle too early in the game, giving the opponent the opportunity to concentrate on developing an attack on the castle's weak side. Its useful as a defensive move provided the game proceeds normally with the primary focus on the center of the board. But there are strong castling moves, and weak castling moves. Generally, neither are "ingenious." Ingenious implies non-obvious. A castle that turns into a non-sacrificing fork-check: that's ingenious (and your opponent is an idiot).
[/ QUOTE ]
No, I'm not saying castling on, say, your seventh or eighth move is an excellent idea, nor is starting off with the intention of doing it as soon as possible, but when the game's being played in the center of the board, before you need to actively defend your king, castling early's a sound move. Ingenious? The move itself is pretty ingenious if only because of how unusual a move it is in itself.
Also, my ingenious (yes, that's right, ingenious!) plan to defend my king, Ultimus, by distracting you guys with semantics is paying off in spades. Suckers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Please, call me Optimus.
By the way, this thread has 159 rates... I'm also not banned like someone said.
[/ QUOTE ]
Someone care to explain what a rate is? Otherwise, 159 rates means nothing to me.
[/ QUOTE ]
When I created the thread, the 1-star herd that follows me around came in and tagged this thread with one star rates. So I came in and 5 starred the thread like 110 times. After that people have just been randomly rating the thread. You can find it on the bottom.
[ QUOTE ]
Castling would be "ingenious" if it were a maneuver you could perform with the normal moves of the pieces, and someone had just noticed that moving the king like this and then the rook like that provided amazing defense in tough situations. (Watch, I picked the wrong two pieces or something. I haven't played chess in years.) But castling is a special case in the rules. Using a special case in the rules isn't ingenious, nor is adding one. I'm sure I could add some useful rules special cases, like the "rearrange the board so you have checkmate" maneuver.
"I won using the Iron Yeti proviso. Ingenious!"
[/ QUOTE ]
You can castle moving the pieces normally. It'd be a waste unless you absolutely couldn't do it normally, though. I'd trademark "Iron Yeti proviso" as so as you can if I were you!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When you do, doesn't it give you a much better defense, especially when you manage to do it pretty early in the game?
[/ QUOTE ]
No. Its never a good idea to execute a castle too early in the game, giving the opponent the opportunity to concentrate on developing an attack on the castle's weak side. Its useful as a defensive move provided the game proceeds normally with the primary focus on the center of the board. But there are strong castling moves, and weak castling moves. Generally, neither are "ingenious." Ingenious implies non-obvious. A castle that turns into a non-sacrificing fork-check: that's ingenious (and your opponent is an idiot).
[/ QUOTE ]
No, I'm not saying castling on, say, your seventh or eighth move is an excellent idea, nor is starting off with the intention of doing it as soon as possible, but when the game's being played in the center of the board, before you need to actively defend your king, castling early's a sound move. Ingenious? The move itself is pretty ingenious if only because of how unusual a move it is in itself.
Also, my ingenious (yes, that's right, ingenious!) plan to defend my king, Ultimus, by distracting you guys with semantics is paying off in spades. Suckers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Please, call me Optimus.
By the way, this thread has 159 rates... I'm also not banned like someone said.
[/ QUOTE ]
Someone care to explain what a rate is? Otherwise, 159 rates means nothing to me.
[/ QUOTE ]
When I created the thread, the 1-star herd that follows me around came in and tagged this thread with one star rates. So I came in and 5 starred the thread like 110 times. After that people have just been randomly rating the thread. You can find it on the bottom.
[/ QUOTE ]
Alright, cool... so does that actually give you anything, or is it just something to talk about?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When you do, doesn't it give you a much better defense, especially when you manage to do it pretty early in the game?
[/ QUOTE ]
No. Its never a good idea to execute a castle too early in the game, giving the opponent the opportunity to concentrate on developing an attack on the castle's weak side. Its useful as a defensive move provided the game proceeds normally with the primary focus on the center of the board. But there are strong castling moves, and weak castling moves. Generally, neither are "ingenious." Ingenious implies non-obvious. A castle that turns into a non-sacrificing fork-check: that's ingenious (and your opponent is an idiot).
[/ QUOTE ]
No, I'm not saying castling on, say, your seventh or eighth move is an excellent idea, nor is starting off with the intention of doing it as soon as possible, but when the game's being played in the center of the board, before you need to actively defend your king, castling early's a sound move. Ingenious? The move itself is pretty ingenious if only because of how unusual a move it is in itself.
Also, my ingenious (yes, that's right, ingenious!) plan to defend my king, Ultimus, by distracting you guys with semantics is paying off in spades. Suckers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Please, call me Optimus.
By the way, this thread has 159 rates... I'm also not banned like someone said.
[/ QUOTE ]
Someone care to explain what a rate is? Otherwise, 159 rates means nothing to me.
[/ QUOTE ]
When I created the thread, the 1-star herd that follows me around came in and tagged this thread with one star rates. So I came in and 5 starred the thread like 110 times. After that people have just been randomly rating the thread. You can find it on the bottom.
[/ QUOTE ]
Alright, cool... so does that actually give you anything, or is it just something to talk about?
[/ QUOTE ]
Not really, it is just odd to see a thread with so many rates.
Before you nerf shivan and nukes, you might want to
consider making them less reliable.
Like say making nukes affect everyone in their
range. As for shivan, maybe a rad explosion when they die
or their span runs out or even limiting their active time.
Soloist like myself rely on these to take out the EBs. Nerfing
them would hurt us and our gameplay style.
S.thug ((level 50 Invul/ss tank Pinnacle))
Wild Childs ((Level 50 Nin/SR Stalker. Virtue))
Quote="Not Racist. Not violent. Just choosing to no longer be silent."
[ QUOTE ]
Before you nerf shivan and nukes, you might want to
consider making them less reliable.
Like say making nukes affect everyone in their
range. As for shivan, maybe a rad explosion when they die
or their span runs out or even limiting their active time.
Soloist like myself rely on these to take out the EBs. Nerfing
them would hurt us and our gameplay style.
[/ QUOTE ]
Making them less reliable would be a nerf. Any reduction in the powers effectiveness or added drawbacks fits the commonly used definition of nerf.
Heroes
Dysmal
Lumynous
Sam Steele
Pluck
Wile
Slagheap
Pressure Wave
Rhiannon Bel
Verified
Stellaric
Syd Mallorn
Villains
Jotunheim Skald
Saer Maen
Jen Corbae
Illuminance
Venator Arawn
Taiga Dryad
Tarranos
So, Why did they change Trolls in the early D+D rules from 6+3 hit dice to 6+6?
old gamer geek
-Justice server-50's
RedSide Corrupter-6::Brute-3::Veat-3:: MM-1:: Dom-1
Blueside Tank-1:: Blaster-1::Scrapper-1
[ QUOTE ]
So, Why did they change Trolls in the early D+D rules from 6+3 hit dice to 6+6?
old gamer geek
[/ QUOTE ]
Because they gained more defense (via hit points) when they learned the ingenious move of castling. 
CGU:
Honor Harrison: 50 PB
CGS:
Capt. Arabella Blood: 50 Ice/Kin C
Maiden Might: 50 SS/INV B
Valentina Metis: 50 NW
Dark Falconayra: 45 EM/DA B
Imperiatrix: 45 Fire/Kin C
Fiona Flitterwing: 47 Ice/Kin C
Doc Electroshock: 43 SM/ELA B
So, presuming that Nukes and/or Shivans are going to be nerfed no matter what...
...what form should the nerfing take?
Story Arcs I created:
Every Rose: (#17702) Villainous vs Legacy Chain. Forget Arachnos, join the CoT!
Cosplay Madness!: (#3643) Neutral vs Custom Foes. Heroes at a pop culture convention!
Kiss Hello Goodbye: (#156389) Heroic vs Custom Foes. Film Noir/Hardboiled detective adventure!
[ QUOTE ]
So, presuming that Nukes and/or Shivans are going to be nerfed no matter what...
...what form should the nerfing take?
[/ QUOTE ]
Limit them to PVP zones
Shivans should be turned into mewling kittens who smother you to death by waiting till you fall asleep and then laying on your head.
[ QUOTE ]
When you do, doesn't it give you a much better defense, especially when you manage to do it pretty early in the game?
However simple it is, the maneuver's ingenious. Feel free to keep swinging at it, though.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's situational ... It's defensive. Used most often when things are NOT going your way.
I'm not saying it hasn't saved many a chess player's bacon, but I'm not thinking "ingenious" is the right word for it, UNLESS you bait someone into thinking they're romping you ... You Castle, and mate in two (not THAT kind of mate, prevs).
Which would be the overwhelming exception to the Castle is an Oh $hit move. If you gotta do it, you're likely going to lose.