Blitz, the FINAL thread

[safariguy5]

Meth is a helluva drug, innit Bung-o.

2 minutes later, the cauldron explodes.

[jefjef]

i didn't mean to start a fight between you two.

You didn't start anything. ljex loves to hate on me and defend his tactics. I don't know why - It's all CC legal and on the up and up. Must be a guilt thing.

i brought it up because every game i play against jefjef is no spoils. he makes me think about every move, or non-move. it hurts. i think playing a Conquerer should hurt, even if you win.

Well thank you. I know I have had rough games vs you too. And you are 100% correct. Games against conquerors should be painful, bloody and nasty brothel alley brawls that hurt and leave marks. I know my few games vs Blitz have never been a stroll thru the tulips.

btw, i usually have a sword but i have been playing a lot of assassin of late and i guess they see that big sword coming.

I know you do. I was just giving ya a hard time.

CONGARTS ljex on achieving conqueror*. A rank I am certain to never achieve.

[jefjef]

THREAD UPDATE:

Soon after the last of my quads oasis games start and finish im going to play a bunch of 1 vs 1 games and let my rank slide as low as it can while i still try to win every game. Im guessing if i play really simple maps 1 vs 1 and a bunch of assdoodles i can get down to 1500 or so.

Now for the challenge lets see if you accept. We would both do this and then see who can get higher playing only sequential games against "good opponents" only. What do you say? we would have to put a limit on the number of games or the amount of time till we declared a winner.

How we make it interesting...loser wears a sig and avatar chosen by the winner for 3 months (1 month is kinda short after my challenge with aog though i guess that would be fine with me too)

How about we DON'T play a bunch of 1v1 and drop our points.

How about you just retire from your farming games and play PUBLIC Sequential - auto - whatever other settings you like, although I play 90%+ chained - no spoil - fog (And switching from Oasis quads to the other farming maps like Jamaica etc.. don't count) I'm talking public 2v2 dubs + trips + a few quads with MANY different partners and a wide variety of maps like I do. Made by your team and open for whoever like most of mine are. None of that 24/allstar game selections of joining team games made by lone wolf - no rank - inexperienced players.

See where ya end up after a few months. I'm already where I am playing what I play.

Have a nice day and good luck!

[owenshooter]

Isn't it ironic that Blitz the Conqueror will be tarnished with the asterix - the asterix that he invented? - the joshy jesus

according to the rules in the top 5 thread, he should remove himself... remains to be seen...-the black jehova

[ljex]

Isn't it ironic that Blitz the Conqueror will be tarnished with the asterix - the asterix that he invented? - the joshy jesus

according to the rules in the top 5 thread, he should remove himself... remains to be seen...-the black jehova

he cant remove himself yet as he is on a ban...

[ljex]

THREAD UPDATE:

Soon after the last of my quads oasis games start and finish im going to play a bunch of 1 vs 1 games and let my rank slide as low as it can while i still try to win every game. Im guessing if i play really simple maps 1 vs 1 and a bunch of assdoodles i can get down to 1500 or so.

Now for the challenge lets see if you accept. We would both do this and then see who can get higher playing only sequential games against "good opponents" only. What do you say? we would have to put a limit on the number of games or the amount of time till we declared a winner.

How we make it interesting...loser wears a sig and avatar chosen by the winner for 3 months (1 month is kinda short after my challenge with aog though i guess that would be fine with me too)

How about we DON'T play a bunch of 1v1 and drop our points.

How about you just retire from your farming games and play PUBLIC Sequential - auto - whatever other settings you like, although I play 90%+ chained - no spoil - fog (And switching from Oasis quads to the other farming maps like Jamaica etc.. don't count) I'm talking public 2v2 dubs + trips + a few quads with MANY different partners and a wide variety of maps like I do. Made by your team and open for whoever like most of mine are. None of that 24/allstar game selections of joining team games made by lone wolf - no rank - inexperienced players.

See where ya end up after a few months. I'm already where I am playing what I play.

Have a nice day and good luck!

If i were to do that it would take me months to drop to colonel even if i did suck and only win 40% of my games as i would have to drop 1500 points. Hence the idea of playing 1 vs 1 so that my score tanks to prove i can gain the points from those team games...ill do it with or without you. Also trips and quads are way more fun so i wont be playing mostly dubs with a trips and a few quads i will be playing mostly quads trips and a few dubs...but its essentially the same. Also i host my own games or join tournaments so you dont have to worry about me only joining games with bad players. And a wide variety of partners means little to the skill of a player...but i will be doing that anyway because simply put there are a lot of people i enjoy playing with.

Thanks for sharing the "private" message...

[Dukasaur]

Just going to throw out the idea that anyone who reaches conq is a capable player on most settings, if you were to take away their preferred settings its not like they'd piss themselves and be a cook a week later. Different strokes for different folks. And the online pissing contest at 3 in the morning isn't going to accomplish anything either

It has accomplished a lot! It has made me laugh. I was having a very bad day and now my day is better. A more lofty goal than to make my day better does not exist. Honestly, the term "LOL" is grossly overused and rarely true, but in this case I really have been quite literally LOLling while enjoying this delghtful prose!

[jefjef]

And a wide variety of partners means little to the skill of a player

Really? Not everyone knows maps or settings or communicates well and it complicates games especially when they are learning team play strategies + map strategies etc... It directly affects the outcome of games.

Any one can win with the same ole repeat team that has grown and melded and learned each others move and what to do. But yes ole wise one, it takes skill to jump in and win with team playing noobs and map noobs.

It's playing only with the same ole crusty old veterans or well trained map sheep that requires little skill.

[ljex]

And a wide variety of partners means little to the skill of a player

Really? Not everyone knows maps or settings or communicates well and it complicates games especially when they are learning team play strategies + map strategies etc... It directly affects the outcome of games.

Any one can win with the same ole repeat team that has grown and melded and learned each others move and what to do. But yes ole wise one, it takes skill to jump in and win with team playing noobs and map noobs.

It's playing only with the same ole crusty old veterans or well trained map sheep that requires little skill.

Lol well not anyone can win with the same old team...and it takes little skill to jump in with noobs on a noob map unless they listen to chat. Otherwise it is just luck or they aren't really noobs. Because i doubt you were able to follow the simple logic...if your partners are noobs and map noobs but dont bother to chat and talk about moves you will need to be lucky to win. One person making the perfect move every time while others are making bad moves will not get you a win without luck.

[jefjef]

And a wide variety of partners means little to the skill of a player

Really? Not everyone knows maps or settings or communicates well and it complicates games especially when they are learning team play strategies + map strategies etc... It directly affects the outcome of games.

Any one can win with the same ole repeat team that has grown and melded and learned each others move and what to do. But yes ole wise one, it takes skill to jump in and win with team playing noobs and map noobs.

It's playing only with the same ole crusty old veterans or well trained map sheep that requires little skill.

Lol well not anyone can win with the same old team...and it takes little skill to jump in with noobs on a noob map unless they listen to chat. Otherwise it is just luck or they aren't really noobs. Because i doubt you were able to follow the simple logic...if your partners are noobs and map noobs but dont bother to chat and talk about moves you will need to be lucky to win. One person making the perfect move every time while others are making bad moves will not get you a win without luck.

Well duh. btw. Games can not be won without luck. No one has ever won at risk rolling only ones but many a game has been lost cuz of dumb attacks. Not knowing the map. Not reading the drop. Not understanding team play concept. Not following/changing plans. Forgetting to look at chat. Not forting/troop hogging. Basic team play stuff.

It's a challenge and takes some skill to teach and overcome some mistakes etc... And of course a lot of luck or opponents mistakes.

Oooh. And if ya don't like me sharing your pm's don't send me any.

[Funkyterrance]

Hmm, now that this has calmed down a little I would just like to offer my highly esteemed opinion. My instincts tell me that aon is truthful when he says that he is a man's man in rl, which I can respect but I can't really know for sure on the interwebs so it's a bit of a moot point.
I don't remember anyone ever seriously saying that blitzaholic was anything less than an above average player, only that he was hypocrite/cheater. I am sure that he could beat me on most maps but it has been pretty well established that skill alone means basically jack shit past a certain point range.
I shudder to think what would happen if someone like Fruitcake were to become conqueror. He's too sterling of character for anyone to find any legitimate fodder to aim at him so we would all have to start making fun of his avatar or scouring old posts to find grammatical errors that he may have made (good luck with that one btw). I am not brown nosing here nor am I condoning the "kicking while down" mentality. I am just saying that this seems to be the reputation side of cc justice, like it or not.
If it's any consolation aon, I would rather have you at my back than blitz in a fight. But then again I also don't see how his skillz at CC count for a hill of beans in a man's mans world.

Just for the record, my e-peenor resembles a turtle's head after a thunderclap.

[ljex]

And a wide variety of partners means little to the skill of a player

Really? Not everyone knows maps or settings or communicates well and it complicates games especially when they are learning team play strategies + map strategies etc... It directly affects the outcome of games.

Any one can win with the same ole repeat team that has grown and melded and learned each others move and what to do. But yes ole wise one, it takes skill to jump in and win with team playing noobs and map noobs.

It's playing only with the same ole crusty old veterans or well trained map sheep that requires little skill.

Lol well not anyone can win with the same old team...and it takes little skill to jump in with noobs on a noob map unless they listen to chat. Otherwise it is just luck or they aren't really noobs. Because i doubt you were able to follow the simple logic...if your partners are noobs and map noobs but dont bother to chat and talk about moves you will need to be lucky to win. One person making the perfect move every time while others are making bad moves will not get you a win without luck.

Well duh. btw. Games can not be won without luck. No one has ever won at risk rolling only ones but many a game has been lost cuz of dumb attacks. Not knowing the map. Not reading the drop. Not understanding team play concept. Not following/changing plans. Forgetting to look at chat. Not forting/troop hogging. Basic team play stuff.

It's a challenge and takes some skill to teach and overcome some mistakes etc... And of course a lot of luck or opponents mistakes.

Oooh. And if ya don't like me sharing your pm's don't send me any.

working through bad teammates does not show skill...how does it show skill more than playing with good players? Good players make mistakes too and beyond that if you are skilled mistakes should not be made so you should not have to work through them.

[jefjef]

And a wide variety of partners means little to the skill of a player

Really? Not everyone knows maps or settings or communicates well and it complicates games especially when they are learning team play strategies + map strategies etc... It directly affects the outcome of games.

Any one can win with the same ole repeat team that has grown and melded and learned each others move and what to do. But yes ole wise one, it takes skill to jump in and win with team playing noobs and map noobs.

It's playing only with the same ole crusty old veterans or well trained map sheep that requires little skill.

Lol well not anyone can win with the same old team...and it takes little skill to jump in with noobs on a noob map unless they listen to chat. Otherwise it is just luck or they aren't really noobs. Because i doubt you were able to follow the simple logic...if your partners are noobs and map noobs but dont bother to chat and talk about moves you will need to be lucky to win. One person making the perfect move every time while others are making bad moves will not get you a win without luck.

Well duh. btw. Games can not be won without luck. No one has ever won at risk rolling only ones but many a game has been lost cuz of dumb attacks. Not knowing the map. Not reading the drop. Not understanding team play concept. Not following/changing plans. Forgetting to look at chat. Not forting/troop hogging. Basic team play stuff.

It's a challenge and takes some skill to teach and overcome some mistakes etc... And of course a lot of luck or opponents mistakes.

Oooh. And if ya don't like me sharing your pm's don't send me any.

working through bad teammates does not show skill...how does it show skill more than playing with good players? Good players make mistakes too and beyond that if you are skilled mistakes should not be made so you should not have to work through them.

I guess reading comprehension is not one of your skills.

Have fun ljex. Good luck on all you do.

[Mr Changsha]

And a wide variety of partners means little to the skill of a player

Really? Not everyone knows maps or settings or communicates well and it complicates games especially when they are learning team play strategies + map strategies etc... It directly affects the outcome of games.

Any one can win with the same ole repeat team that has grown and melded and learned each others move and what to do. But yes ole wise one, it takes skill to jump in and win with team playing noobs and map noobs.

It's playing only with the same ole crusty old veterans or well trained map sheep that requires little skill.

Lol well not anyone can win with the same old team...and it takes little skill to jump in with noobs on a noob map unless they listen to chat. Otherwise it is just luck or they aren't really noobs. Because i doubt you were able to follow the simple logic...if your partners are noobs and map noobs but dont bother to chat and talk about moves you will need to be lucky to win. One person making the perfect move every time while others are making bad moves will not get you a win without luck.

Well duh. btw. Games can not be won without luck. No one has ever won at risk rolling only ones but many a game has been lost cuz of dumb attacks. Not knowing the map. Not understanding team play concept. Not following/changing plans. Forgetting to look at chat. Not forting/troop hogging. Basic team play stuff.

It's a challenge and takes some skill to teach and overcome some mistakes etc... And of course a lot of luck or opponents mistakes.

Oooh. And if ya don't like me sharing your pm's don't send me any.

Well this is a bit more interesting...

I think the most skill is shown in either leading a trips or quads team entirely (the dictatorship model) or playing in a well-honed outfit that is able to compliment each other's moves without apparently much communication at all...though it is my personal opinion that the dictator has the edge in terms of liklihood of winning, if not necessarily skill, due to a better chance of total coherency.

However, while I do lead teams as an effective dictator I have never really been part of a 'we are so attuned we can play silently' kind of team. I base my judgement on the dicator having the edge in terms of results purely on playing against such teams.

So, if you are either setting your own moves OR setting moves for the entire team in high level sequential trips and quads then you are obviously a very solid player.

But you two are having a very odd argument (and have been having it for a while). You are both obviously very solid players, one of you is much higher ranked, but as it has been explained about a billion times by now on this forum, the difference between 2,500 and 3,500 is basically game selection, effort, stamina etc etc...rather than pure skill.

The old maxim that 'if you can hold your own on the first page playing equivalent opposition you are a very good player' still holds true. The rest is all fluff.

[jefjef]

Well this is a bit more interesting...

I think the most skill is shown in either leading a trips or quads team entirely (the dictatorship model) or playing in a well-honed outfit that is able to compliment each other's moves without apparently much communication at all...though it is my personal opinion that the dictator has the edge in terms of liklihood of winning, if not necessarily skill, due to a better chance of total coherency.

However, while I do lead teams as an effective dictator I have never really been part of a 'we are so attuned we can play silently' kind of team. I base my judgement on the dicator having the edge in terms of results purely on playing against such teams.

So, if you are either setting your own moves OR setting moves for the entire team in high level sequential trips and quads then you are obviously a very solid player.

But you two are having a very odd argument (and have been having it for a while). You are both obviously very solid players, one of you is much higher ranked, but as it has been explained about a billion times by now on this forum, the difference between 2,500 and 3,500 is basically game selection, effort, stamina etc etc...rather than pure skill.

The old maxim that 'if you can hold your own on the first page playing equivalent opposition you are a very good player' still holds true. The rest is all fluff.

Well I have game dictator tendencies in most of my games. Unfortunately not every move gets choreographed in time. But I also have a few stray partners that we really don't chat at all cept for the occasional fuch off or other crack. tdans and my games are like that and tend to flow very smoothly. We play very much alike.

But anyway good post MC. And yes ljex is a good player. I just like to fluff on him every now and then. I think he likes it too.

[Mr Changsha]

MC is not an acceptable name for me Jef Jef. Not acceptable at all. Mr C please, if you want to shorten it.

And yes ljex is a good player. I just like to fluff on him every now and then. I think he likes it too.

That is of course an entirely proper motivation.

[safariguy5]

And a wide variety of partners means little to the skill of a player

Really? Not everyone knows maps or settings or communicates well and it complicates games especially when they are learning team play strategies + map strategies etc... It directly affects the outcome of games.

Any one can win with the same ole repeat team that has grown and melded and learned each others move and what to do. But yes ole wise one, it takes skill to jump in and win with team playing noobs and map noobs.

It's playing only with the same ole crusty old veterans or well trained map sheep that requires little skill.

Lol well not anyone can win with the same old team...and it takes little skill to jump in with noobs on a noob map unless they listen to chat. Otherwise it is just luck or they aren't really noobs. Because i doubt you were able to follow the simple logic...if your partners are noobs and map noobs but dont bother to chat and talk about moves you will need to be lucky to win. One person making the perfect move every time while others are making bad moves will not get you a win without luck.

Well duh. btw. Games can not be won without luck. No one has ever won at risk rolling only ones but many a game has been lost cuz of dumb attacks. Not knowing the map. Not understanding team play concept. Not following/changing plans. Forgetting to look at chat. Not forting/troop hogging. Basic team play stuff.

It's a challenge and takes some skill to teach and overcome some mistakes etc... And of course a lot of luck or opponents mistakes.

Oooh. And if ya don't like me sharing your pm's don't send me any.

Well this is a bit more interesting...

I think the most skill is shown in either leading a trips or quads team entirely (the dictatorship model) or playing in a well-honed outfit that is able to compliment each other's moves without apparently much communication at all...though it is my personal opinion that the dictator has the edge in terms of liklihood of winning, if not necessarily skill, due to a better chance of total coherency.

However, while I do lead teams as an effective dictator I have never really been part of a 'we are so attuned we can play silently' kind of team. I base my judgement on the dicator having the edge in terms of results purely on playing against such teams.

So, if you are either setting your own moves OR setting moves for the entire team in high level sequential trips and quads then you are obviously a very solid player.

But you two are having a very odd argument (and have been having it for a while). You are both obviously very solid players, one of you is much higher ranked, but as it has been explained about a billion times by now on this forum, the difference between 2,500 and 3,500 is basically game selection, effort, stamina etc etc...rather than pure skill.

The old maxim that 'if you can hold your own on the first page playing equivalent opposition you are a very good player' still holds true. The rest is all fluff.

My best teammates tend to play in the more autonomous style. Certainly it doesn't mean that it's complete chat silence, there will be some general region specific discussion and some notes about where forts are headed. But there isn't usually an overarching dictator unless he's the only one with experience on a certain map and has to coach the other players.

[Mr Changsha]

I demand obedience (unless I am playing with Fruitcake in which case I do my best to gain something of a even-footing with regards to strategy tactics etc etc...this btw is not the easiest thing to achieve!!!) based on the fact that I am leading the team, it is probably assumed I am leading the team and I want every move to be by my design on that basis.

However the life of a dictator is a tough one. One must keep winning, always, otherwise one's comrades would have every right to begin questioning orders.

And then I would have to shoot them.

[jefjef]

CC dictators. Gotta luv em/us.

[Funkyterrance]

Does that suit come with the piss stain or does that cost extra?

[jefjef]

Does that suit come with the piss stain or does that cost extra?

That comes from after extensively planning the winning move/strategy and thoroughly dispatching the orders only to have troops in the field ignore/fail to read/decide a useless tert is more fun to attack/rush thru their move/not show up or having the attack ground up in the gears of war. When that happens all a dictator can really do is sit in his/her bunker and wet them-self.

[King_Herpes]

MC is not an acceptable name for me Jef Jef. Not acceptable at all. Mr C please, if you want to shorten it.

It's emcee MC in the place to be, and I gots what it takes to rock the mic right!!

[Mr Changsha]

You could introduce me to a woman so hot she would make my testicles twirl, but if she ever uttered the truly frightening words ''I like to, you know, write some rhymes...rap a little'', I would be out of there so fast one would have to assume I was either a homosexual, suffering from changsha stomach, or just fucking hated rap.

It is even worse than when someone picks up a guitar at a party and declares ''Oh yeah...I write my own songs.''

Watching a mainland Chinese rap (for I have been unfortunate enough to witness such an appalling scene) is akin to seeing your grandmother have her muff waxed by a man who isn't your grandfather, while your parents get busy on your bed....while your best mate is around for a sleepover and has just revealed that he thinks he might be gay.

It is that embarrassing.

[King_Herpes]

One must keep winning, always

[rabbiton]

Well this is a bit more interesting...

I think the most skill is shown in either leading a trips or quads team entirely (the dictatorship model) or playing in a well-honed outfit that is able to compliment each other's moves without apparently much communication at all...though it is my personal opinion that the dictator has the edge in terms of liklihood of winning, if not necessarily skill, due to a better chance of total coherency.

However, while I do lead teams as an effective dictator I have never really been part of a 'we are so attuned we can play silently' kind of team. I base my judgement on the dicator having the edge in terms of results purely on playing against such teams.

So, if you are either setting your own moves OR setting moves for the entire team in high level sequential trips and quads then you are obviously a very solid player.

But you two are having a very odd argument (and have been having it for a while). You are both obviously very solid players, one of you is much higher ranked, but as it has been explained about a billion times by now on this forum, the difference between 2,500 and 3,500 is basically game selection, effort, stamina etc etc...rather than pure skill.

The old maxim that 'if you can hold your own on the first page playing equivalent opposition you are a very good player' still holds true. The rest is all fluff.

well look, it's that great gameplay philosopher MC Changsha ("no Math please, we're Chinese") !!

i must say though it's kind of sad to see that in the team game there are only two equally moronic and pointless archetypes available for success.

i wonder what army of nobs would think about all this. surely just standing out front of your team beating your chest should be a viable alternative?