Best of the best TOURNAMENT:

 [ViCiouS]H00dluM


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 29 June 2007
Posts:910
Posted 7 August 2012 - 9:01 pm
im 1700 in rm.. i micro the **** out of those berries in gwarz
連結 | 回應 | 引用
 RIP_TreasoN_


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 4 May 2009
Posts:2974
Posted 7 August 2012 - 9:31 pm
did you REALLY just try and imply Eot are afraid to play vs YOU and your horrendous clan in games?

think ive seen it all now.

Can you read? Keane said it and he's lc, besides that I'm not going to bother arguing how 'horrendous' we are because we we last played 4v4 clan games we came out on top... 3-1. lol.

But I don't rly like the fact you said 'YOU', are you implying any eot are superior to me in anything apart from euro? rofl, i beaten every single one of u ****es.
連結 | 回應 | 引用
 [Eot_]Marvel__


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 17 February 2012
Posts:6455
Posted 7 August 2012 - 9:54 pm
zanchys ego is rearing it's ugly head again ;cry
連結 | 回應 | 引用
 [ViCiouS]Skreemo


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 19 September 2010
Posts:5395
Posted 7 August 2012 - 10:39 pm
How CS works skill-wise and brain function-wise. Or maybe I'm a genius and no one knows it :O

CS 1v1 - No variety in strategy in 90% of maps ANYMORE. It's programmed micro and programmed game-play in this age (everything has been discovered basically), who can do what actions faster and more effectively and efficiently since every map is known inside out. Amount of practice and player speed dictates who wins. Nothing more, nothing less.

CS 2v2 - Strategy has now started to develop and is now important in evenly skilled match-ups. You can double players, play the meat-shield, combine heroes, share resources or cover for ally, play the defensive/offensive player, double a single player, etc. Basically, even if you beat the opponent on your side/half playing like a 1v1 style, your ally could be getting beaten much worse putting your team at a disadvantage.

CS 3v3 - Much more strategy, less programmed micro and more thoughtful micro. You must work with allies to get most effective results. You must also think wisely about how to make the most out of a situation, or recover a situation and much more @.@

CS 4v4 - Ultimate strategy, ultimate variety in game settings (side vs side, alternate, side + alternate, surrounded player :( ). Most skilful and strategic gaming in CS. Ultimate variety in team-work.



That is why a lot of us oldschoolers have generally mocked you Zanchy. Your programmed micro is brilliant to be honest (don't get me wrong, 1v1 skills are still a crucial element in TG to an extent). You're only just now starting to gain an understanding of strategy and skill from a team-play sense in most maps I'm guessing, because you had very little when you were in LC/Eot_. This is also why I consider Charlie and my ViCiouS chums to be some of the most brilliant players CS has seen. I've seen great players like Hun, Damian, Andreas, yourself, Geen, Zola and others excel in 1v1 when they practice enough to reach nearly unbeatable levels, but then lose in TG to mediocre players who are slower and have poorer micro (at some point of their playing career - not trolling or baiting btw, honest thoughts), especially when they pair up with players they are unfamiliar with.

For me 1v1 is all about how much your practice your micro and speed and the amount of maps you practice this in. I can win tons of games in certain maps in a row vs great players (40+) if I practice religiously for a set time period, like any other good player can. You're solely responsible for everything that happens in the game these days, players very rarely surprise you with something you haven't seen before. If you happen to lose, it's 90% of the time because of your mistakes, which unfortunately isn't an excuse. So while I agree that's it's a great asset to be good in 1v1, it's a lot easier to become better and lose the skill as well, in comparison to TG. I'd stay away from 1v1s because I don't practice them enough most of the time, people take too much out of them, or if you beat them they **** and cry for rematches over and over if you're not on good terms.

As for team game, your have 1-3 other allies and 1-3 other enemies to think about. You can't treat a 4v4 like a 1v1, otherwise you'll get beaten by good teams. You can try and manipulate matches to work like this for you [7th were particularly good at this], but good teams will prevent this from happening. Some strategies can counter others and vice-versa. You have to react and adjust. You can't just go full mid and expect to win, you have to use positioning and team-work!!!

This is why no one can touch TyranT in RM, Kkab is an absolute genius who educates Viper, Jordan and Daut in strategy, whereas their individual ability executes the strategy. This is why I'm biased with my team-mates, they know team-work inside out (except Dave teaming Mike in Khans 11111).

Some will disagree, but that's what my experience has taught me. I've beaten so many of the greats over many maps in 1v1, but those wins don't feel anywhere near as valuable as beating a strong clan in a 4v4. Nothing infuriates you more than losing a 4v4 clan game either 11.

/rant

PS EUROPE MOST DEMANDING TG IN CS. 8)
連結 | 回應 | 引用
 RIP_TreasoN_


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 4 May 2009
Posts:2974
Posted 7 August 2012 - 11:58 pm
I don't particularly think 4v4/tg takes more strategy / skill than 1v1 in any sense i think it's more sync, let me explain with examples,

in 1v1
smosh - I play ultra mexi aggressive, I'm at a 1/1000 regroup rate and I send so fast, especially as red that I can afford to click way over the over side of statue to stop enemy from getting to mid = GG.
gwarz - I play ultra aggressive, I will do what I must to kill enemy's sub ASAP, ofc if I decide that I cannot do it safely anymore, I will play the 'common' defense + snipe game... but generally people can't handle that either, I have very quick reflexes and am good at sniping, I remember a certain Tom raging hard about that blaming lag when there was no lag - hence why I could snipe ;P
vet - I play aggressive again but not in mid, I always try to spawn my enemy inside his gates, so basically he can't get out, there are all kinds of gate tricks you can do... and get a massive lead, which I know from CBA infantry skills....... then when I got a v good advantage I'll take mid and keep archers there.
cba - any civ, I will attack the second i have full pop, i will do my micro'in when i see enemy, whether thats repatrol, stances, both, stop or flanking, depending on what they do, then if i need to reteat ill gb and attack again right away... people cant handle it.

in tg bloods, smosh my example, 4v4 smosh tourny one round, sides... pockets 40/0, sides 20/20, i was a pocket, went 40/0 other pocket went 40/0, but one side went 0/40 full hill.. that's gg, not in sync... i will do a lot worse then what I would have done..... ally ****ed me over - out of sync playing i call it... can you really call that stratagy?

it's basically same story for all bloods, and cba... take 2v2 cba same.. you'd think because i know all civs in 1v1 id be v good, well i am alot of the time... but when i say 14 i go right that second, if ally stays behind for a bit.. im gg'd 1v2, if they gb too early im gg'd, if they feed too much by not gb'ing im gg'd.... alot of it relies on your ally.... and really i need to find an ally with similar style to me, vezir is one, efkan was, fujative was.. but all never play now

anywho, new topic
連結 | 回應 | 引用
 [Eot_]Marvel__


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 17 February 2012
Posts:6455
Edited 8 August 2012 - 12:06 am by [Eot_]Marvel__
self praise is no praise faggots

you could make valuable posts if you lifted your ego for 5 minutes and didnt feel the need to talk about how good you are every muther****in' sentance zanchy
連結 | 回應 | 引用
 [Eot_]Polaris_


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 1 January 2010
Posts:6493
Posted 8 August 2012 - 12:13 am
Can you read? Keane said it and he's lc, besides that I'm not going to bother arguing how 'horrendous' we are because we we last played 4v4 clan games we came out on top... 3-1. lol.

But I don't rly like the fact you said 'YOU', are you implying any eot are superior to me in anything apart from euro? rofl, i beaten every single one of u ****es.
-facepalm- you are just so stupid.

連結 | 回應 | 引用
 RIP_TreasoN_


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 4 May 2009
Posts:2974
Posted 8 August 2012 - 12:24 am
-facepalm- you are just so stupid.

baboon
連結 | 回應 | 引用
 RIP_TreasoN_


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 4 May 2009
Posts:2974
Posted 8 August 2012 - 12:25 am
self praise is no praise faggots

you could make valuable posts if you lifted your ego for 5 minutes and didnt feel the need to talk about how good you are every muther****in' sentance zanchy

i wasn't talkng about how good i was, i was giving an example of my gameplay and how if players aren't in sync in tg we will lose but that dsn't mean me or them are bad at it,
連結 | 回應 | 引用
 [Eot_]Marvel__


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 17 February 2012
Posts:6455
Posted 8 August 2012 - 12:27 am
Re read ur post..every sentance starts with u talking about how good u think u are lol
連結 | 回應 | 引用
 [ViCiouS]Skreemo


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 19 September 2010
Posts:5395
Posted 8 August 2012 - 12:39 am
Quote:
in 1v1
smosh - I play ultra mexi aggressive, I'm at a 1/1000 regroup rate and I send so fast, especially as red that I can afford to click way over the over side of statue to stop enemy from getting to mid = GG.
That's a reaction, not new strategy. I've been doing that for years. Even Chingon was doing this ^.^ If you have that option, you'll take it. If not, you'll stick to your side and play solid.
Quote:
gwarz - I play ultra aggressive, I will do what I must to kill enemy's sub ASAP, ofc if I decide that I cannot do it safely anymore, I will play the 'common' defense + snipe game... but generally people can't handle that either, I have very quick reflexes and am good at sniping, I remember a certain Tom raging hard about that blaming lag when there was no lag - hence why I could snipe ;P

Gwarz is part of that 10% I didn't highlight for 1v1. For me it's a map where aggressive or defensive play can be rewarded. It was a map I really loved playing when I was active in 1v1, as you could choose to sit-back at gates like Hun style, be super-aggressive with hero like you claim to do, or totally rush middle like old Uni style. You can also branch out the strategy after you up into going full hero sniping and luring, gate sniping, kill/resource pooling or a balanced approach.
Quote:
vet - I play aggressive again but not in mid, I always try to spawn my enemy inside his gates, so basically he can't get out, there are all kinds of gate tricks you can do... and get a massive lead, which I know from CBA infantry skills....... then when I got a v good advantage I'll take mid and keep archers there.

Again, old news. This style of play was huge on Zone. It's all a matter of programmed micro.
Quote:
cba - any civ, I will attack the second i have full pop, i will do my micro'in when i see enemy, whether thats repatrol, stances, both, stop or flanking, depending on what they do, then if i need to reteat ill gb and attack again right away... people cant handle it.

Again, programmed micro. You know how to treat each situation beforehand. There isn't anything new or out of your control to potentially make you lose.
Quote:
in tg bloods, smosh my example, 4v4 smosh tourny one round, sides... pockets 40/0, sides 20/20, i was a pocket, went 40/0 other pocket went 40/0, but one side went 0/40 full hill.. that's gg, not in sync... i will do a lot worse then what I would have done..... ally ****ed me over - out of sync playing i call it... can you really call that stratagy?

It is a strategy for a basic map which your team failed to adhere to. New elements to the game, communication and understanding. The one thing I noticed in the 4v4 Smosh tournament was the lack of understanding in how to play it effectively in a team sense. Someone as inactive in bloods like me should be having a hard time every match. The only time I was beat was when I epic failed as flank and sent 30 men in a frenzied state and missed mid with first 10 as well, which hurt my pocket. Every other game I killed my flank, because people don't know how play 4v4 Smosh very well. This highlights how important it is to perform in a team game as well. If it was 1v1, I can salvage a bad start through using hills effectively (Ghosty is brilliant at this) much of the time unless it was complete failure.
Quote:
it's basically same story for all bloods, and cba... take 2v2 cba same.. you'd think because i know all civs in 1v1 id be v good, well i am alot of the time... but when i say 14 i go right that second, if ally stays behind for a bit.. im gg'd 1v2, if they gb too early im gg'd, if they feed too much by not gb'ing im gg'd.... alot of it relies on your ally.... and really i need to find an ally with similar style to me, vezir is one, efkan was, fujative was.. but all never play now

Now here you're being purely arrogant without realising it. You're a team so you're both gg'd. The way you discuss shows that your psychology is based around a 1v1 sense, hence why you're much weaker in TG. Players with a similar style help greatly, sure. But that's taking a short-cut. Do you not consider it great skill to make a team of misfits perform as underdogs and upset the big teams?

For me, TG requires more, I have always found it more difficult than 1v1. I have also found it far more enjoyable. I'm not saying 1v1 isn't as hard, I'm saying it isn't as strategic and dynamic, and I've played both styles for 8 long years @.@ But I've been lucky enough to enjoy years of CS gaming where the clans were more balanced and more competitive.
連結 | 回應 | 引用
 [Eot_]ForgiveMe_


Group: Most Valuable Player
Join Date: 21 December 2007
Posts:1476
Posted 8 August 2012 - 2:39 am
Best Quote of this topic
Coming from an Eot'er so apparently they're not all ****ed (Sry Charlie, you used to be the non ****ed Eot'er but in this topic alone already you proved you reduced yourself to their level)

Still not quite at your level of forum failing ^^. The memes thread was trying way to hard IMO.
連結 | 回應 | 引用
 RIP_TreasoN_


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 4 May 2009
Posts:2974
Posted 8 August 2012 - 2:58 am
That's a reaction, not new strategy. I've been doing that for years. Even Chingon was doing this ^.^ If you have that option, you'll take it. If not, you'll stick to your side and play solid.



Gwarz is part of that 10% I didn't highlight for 1v1. For me it's a map where aggressive or defensive play can be rewarded. It was a map I really loved playing when I was active in 1v1, as you could choose to sit-back at gates like Hun style, be super-aggressive with hero like you claim to do, or totally rush middle like old Uni style. You can also branch out the strategy after you up into going full hero sniping and luring, gate sniping, kill/resource pooling or a balanced approach.



Again, old news. This style of play was huge on Zone. It's all a matter of programmed micro.



Again, programmed micro. You know how to treat each situation beforehand. There isn't anything new or out of your control to potentially make you lose.



It is a strategy for a basic map which your team failed to adhere to. New elements to the game, communication and understanding. The one thing I noticed in the 4v4 Smosh tournament was the lack of understanding in how to play it effectively in a team sense. Someone as inactive in bloods like me should be having a hard time every match. The only time I was beat was when I epic failed as flank and sent 30 men in a frenzied state and missed mid with first 10 as well, which hurt my pocket. Every other game I killed my flank, because people don't know how play 4v4 Smosh very well. This highlights how important it is to perform in a team game as well. If it was 1v1, I can salvage a bad start through using hills effectively (Ghosty is brilliant at this) much of the time unless it was complete failure.



Now here you're being purely arrogant without realising it. You're a team so you're both gg'd. The way you discuss shows that your psychology is based around a 1v1 sense, hence why you're much weaker in TG. Players with a similar style help greatly, sure. But that's taking a short-cut. Do you not consider it great skill to make a team of misfits perform as underdogs and upset the big teams?

For me, TG requires more, I have always found it more difficult than 1v1. I have also found it far more enjoyable. I'm not saying 1v1 isn't as hard, I'm saying it isn't as strategic and dynamic, and I've played both styles for 8 long years @.@ But I've been lucky enough to enjoy years of CS gaming where the clans were more balanced and more competitive.

Well I'm not meaning to be arrogant but my point is true, it's either I change the way I play in maps to suit my allies in TG's , or I find ally's that play similar style to me, I am fed up of barry saying tg requires so much more skill than 1v1 bla :P now ur not gonna start, because it's just the same, less pressure probably but.. more about if your allies listen which is a mega problem with modern voobly I find.
連結 | 回應 | 引用
 [ViCiouS]Skreemo


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 19 September 2010
Posts:5395
Posted 8 August 2012 - 3:19 am
I guess to sum it up is TG requires the broader range of skills, whereas 1v1 requires you to excel further at a certain set of skills.
連結 | 回應 | 引用
 Nick


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 13 March 2008
Posts:168
Posted 8 August 2012 - 10:28 am
zanchy, if you were at my level eco wise in europe, I would still beat you.


連結 | 回應 | 引用
123456789101112131415161718[19]20
Displaying 271 - 285 out of 299 posts
轉至討論版面:
2 User(s) are reading this topic (in the past 30 minutes)
0 members, 2 guests

Most active threads in past week: