Double-Blind for life.
Quote:
Double blind is imo preferable to the swapping in and out counters each match that used to go on.
|
Originally Posted by perilX
Double-Blind for life.
|
Shenanigans
LotD - JaL - POWT/SMD - SoCo - AJs
Quote:
yeah ok, cause enforcing set times for starting a match is hard when you have a disability.
|
Originally Posted by Mirage_Mage
Double blind is imo preferable to the swapping in and out counters each match that used to go on.
|
Quote:
Enforcing match start times has absolutely nothing to do with counter picking.
|
Originally Posted by iLostCountBarrier
yeah ok, cause enforcing set times for starting a match is hard when you have a disability.
|
Quote:
An idea that would result in 60% of the already tiny PvP community refusing to play sounds pretty terrible to me.
|
Originally Posted by Supermax
LOL nice, personal attacks are the way to go I guess. Face it, you don't know anything about me. I PvP'd on test long before I ever heard of you. Not that it matters - just don't make baseless assumptions.
Also, you having the opinion that something is a terrible idea doesn't actually make it one. It's your opinion. In the end, it really doesn't matter because it's clearly not going to happen. |
Quote:
the argument that is always made about the double-blind line-up submission bs always centers around not having to delay the start-times of matches because people are switching back and forth.|
Originally Posted by Silit
Enforcing match start times has absolutely nothing to do with counter picking.
|
counter-picking is not a bad thing.
unless you're too stupid to counter-pick.
It has nothing to do with delaying start times, at all. Even if the start time is completely in stone it doesn't prevent counter picking. Understanding lineups and countering is one thing. But counter picking is retarded because of one simple fact: One of two teams will always get the last picks.
I'm not a huge fan of lineup submission either, but I fail to see the problem with it, as long as someone is there to take lineups. I honestly don't care all that much either way, but I lean toward liking double blind submission, since it completely prevents post-entrance counter picking - which by the way takes no skill whatsoever, and requires little (if any) knowledge of game dynamics. "They have stalkers, bring a fort!" What an ingenious tactical move!
Quote:
I agree, I prefer the tactical "Im willing to bet they are bringing stalkers, Toady get your fort"
|
Originally Posted by Silit
It has nothing to do with delaying start times, at all. Even if the start time is completely in stone it doesn't prevent counter picking. Understanding lineups and countering is one thing. But counter picking is retarded because of one simple fact: One of two teams will always get the last picks.
I'm not a huge fan of lineup submission either, but I fail to see the problem with it, as long as someone is there to take lineups. I honestly don't care all that much either way, but I lean toward liking double blind submission, since it completely prevents post-entrance counter picking - which by the way takes no skill whatsoever, and requires little (if any) knowledge of game dynamics. "They have stalkers, bring a fort!" What an ingenious tactical move! |
Basically no one can ever play a stalker again if counter-picking is in place. Using two stalkers as a means of offense allows for a lot of diversity in lineups, the CIGAL backroom team proved that. If we could counter, we would have a kin and fort in that match.
Counter-picking is an absolutely stupid idea to purposely allow to happen.
Quote:
less kins more oranges
|
Originally Posted by perilX
Basically no one can ever play a stalker again if counter-picking is in place. Using two stalkers as a means of offense allows for a lot of diversity in lineups, the CIGAL backroom team proved that. If we could counter, we would have a kin and fort in that match.
Counter-picking is an absolutely stupid idea to purposely allow to happen. |
Quote:
wrong. way way way wrong. do i need to go into the many many many examples of counter-picking resulting from knowing obscure facts about game mechanics that are not widespread knowledge? i've done this about 10 times already and i don't feel like doing it again.|
Originally Posted by Silit
It has nothing to do with delaying start times, at all. Even if the start time is completely in stone it doesn't prevent counter picking. Understanding lineups and countering is one thing. But counter picking is retarded because of one simple fact: One of two teams will always get the last picks.
I'm not a huge fan of lineup submission either, but I fail to see the problem with it, as long as someone is there to take lineups. I honestly don't care all that much either way, but I lean toward liking double blind submission, since it completely prevents post-entrance counter picking - which by the way takes no skill whatsoever, and requires little (if any) knowledge of game dynamics. "They have stalkers, bring a fort!" What an ingenious tactical move! |
back during the i12 days, OS, Renegades and UJL would have people dual-boxing in pocket d until the last minute to either throw off the opposing team or to be ready for any eventualities. having a line-up that is not set in stone and allowed for discussion amongst the team with something other than conjecture was 10 times as fun as sumbiting a "better safe than sorry" line-up full of psi/ems with 2 emps; or playing the dick card and rolling out 6 lolmelee-ers.
i assume this ladder isn't gonna have the retardo fiteclubber "no more than two stalkers" rule; so i'll tell you this, blind line-ups are the only reason retarded ideas like that made it to the league... so it really comes down to these three options; do you want 6-8 stalkers to be auto-win; do you want to allow teams to actually get their **** together and counter-pick accordingly in situations where such un-fun line-ups are brought in or do you want to go retardo-fiteclubber and legislate line-ups again...
Quote:
Way wrong.|
Originally Posted by perilX
Basically no one can ever play a stalker again if counter-picking is in place. Using two stalkers as a means of offense allows for a lot of diversity in lineups, the CIGAL backroom team proved that. If we could counter, we would have a kin and fort in that match.
|
We had teams with 3 forts and 2 mms that actually knew how use their pets in the villain ladder. Stalkers were still used and definitely got the job done.
Quote:
Was the repel that was the issue, not the TP. That and Silit.
|
Originally Posted by Daknah
less kins more oranges
|
I don't think it really matters as long as teams aren't allowed to choose maps to benefit their blind team makeups, I really don't care though.
Quote:
There might have been a few other reasons tossed in there as well.
|
Originally Posted by perilX
Was the repel that was the issue, not the TP. That and Silit.
|
@Ethical Inquiry
Quote:
Nah, it was completely my fault. I got plain unlucky at one point when they accidentally wormholed me right as an orange dropped, but other than that it was on me.|
Originally Posted by Pareto
There might have been a few other reasons tossed in there as well.
|
I made up for it though by making an entire team quit, though, and getting us an extra win in doing so.
Quote:
I'm pretty sure those stalkers were top notch, unlike the stalkers of this issue. People like Banzai and Zero and Vert and Modoom could actually get AS's in those matches, stalkers today just trow sharks.
|
Originally Posted by iLostCountBarrier
Way wrong.
We had teams with 3 forts and 2 mms that actually knew how use their pets in the villain ladder. Stalkers were still used and definitely got the job done. |
@Ethical Inquiry
Quote:
Alright you win this round. I will get my revenge!
|
Originally Posted by Silit
Nah, it was completely my fault. I got plain unlucky at one point when they accidentally wormholed me right as an orange dropped, but other than that it was on me.
I made up for it though by making an entire team quit, though, and getting us an extra win in doing so. |
@Ethical Inquiry
And if this happens on test you might also want to make a rule against name gimmick teams, like barcodes, etc. unless everyone doesn't mind.
I can see the benefit to both ways of doing it. I don't like sitting around and waiting while team A switches to toon X causing team B to switch to toon Y and back and forth until it's 10 minutes after start time and we 'have' to press go, but I also don't like playing the same damn lineup all day either.
"His Imperial Majesty's Minister of Restraints and Leather" -LHF
Two naughty acronym teams / Ascension / Convenient / Artic and the Chillz / Fap / Other teams I can't remember (sorry.. mind is goin')
Quote:
Modoom was/is awful at everything. Don't speak anymore.
|
Originally Posted by Pareto
I'm pretty sure those stalkers were top notch, unlike the stalkers of this issue. People like Banzai and Zero and Vert and Modoom could actually get AS's in those matches, stalkers today just trow sharks.
|
Quote:
I was simply saying that he was able to get AS's. Today's stalkers can't even do that for the most part.
|
Originally Posted by slickadelaphante
Modoom was/is awful at everything. Don't speak anymore.
|
@Ethical Inquiry
Doesn't sound like its a problem anymore considering the renegades are still trying to figure out if they're bringing tanks or brutes.
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/6685529/3-hot-and-vex-3