|
Post by succat on Nov 13, 2008 23:59:55 GMT -5
haha ... scarfs, ponchos. heck, anything woulda helped.... I mean we're not in Siberia here.. or are we
|
|
|
Post by Dubber on Nov 14, 2008 12:18:08 GMT -5
Really? ;D Funny how that didn't translate into a win.. He should have been able to predict what Bio and Vermont were gonna do ( or not gonna do, according to you ) and come up with some sorta weather-defense-system Dude, you speak Russian, so English can't be all *that* hard for you I meant he could call who would throw what (and usually at whom) with high accuracy (at least, until Bio & VT didn't disrupt you & xade enroute to resists and storms) - overarching strategy guessing for a whole battle (beyond "they're trying to win") is a bit much to expect, even from ExDeath
|
|
|
Post by BioLogIn on Nov 14, 2008 12:49:13 GMT -5
succat you speak Russian? Dubber What you say basically is "ExDeath predicted that Bio\Vermont would disrupt succat\xade, so we decided to do our business meanwhile". Very unfortunate for your wonderful predictions, guys, but are we really guilty? ExDeath could have pulled a charm on t22 (to help to four of us) instead of ogre (which would have worked for YOU only if WE had prevented storms). We misjudged danger from double resist\storm on t21, yes, but that was like the ONLY time we didn't disrupt resist guys. So please stop blaming only our team.
|
|
|
Post by xade on Nov 14, 2008 20:05:50 GMT -5
Hey Cat, when are we going to get blamed? We threw the ...ed storms!! ps - is Ex back on the forums yet? h would have gone off!
|
|
|
Post by succat on Nov 14, 2008 21:13:58 GMT -5
Really? ;D Funny how that didn't translate into a win.. He should have been able to predict what Bio and Vermont were gonna do ( or not gonna do, according to you ) and come up with some sorta weather-defense-system Dude, you speak Russian, so English can't be all *that* hard for you I meant he could call who would throw what (and usually at whom) with high accuracy (at least, until Bio & VT didn't disrupt you & xade enroute to resists and storms) - overarching strategy guessing for a whole battle (beyond "they're trying to win") is a bit much to expect, even from ExDeath I speak Russian? Really? That's news to me. You don't like my English cuz I'm basically just makin' what you said look like a contradiction, and ya' don't like that too much. But it is what it is. And yeah, blamin' another team is sooo lame. Xade, you're absolutely right! We deserve the blame, not Bio and Vermont
|
|
|
Post by ExDeath on Nov 15, 2008 11:50:39 GMT -5
I'm going off the top of my head here, because I don't have the game in front of me. I actually did charm xade one turn to keep them both disrupted so that the FoD could go off unhindered. It's obvious that I wanted to let you FoD, because if you FoD me or Dubber you end up losing due to being 2v3 at a severe health deficit. I think it's stupid that you claim my predictions were bad; I was just predicting what you should do to try to win the game. I wouldn't really expect anything else from either of you. Vermont admitted that it was an oversight. Surely paralyzing Bio on the turn before his FoD was not a good move, because there wasn't even any disruption possible on that turn, but there was an ice storm possible from Succat.
It's a mistake, a big mistake, but I'm not angry about it or anything. 3-way games of all kinds are inherently flawed anyway, because there comes a point where the losing team can choose to throw the middle team under the bus and get 2nd place, or hold out and pray something ridiculous happens, which leaves it up to the middle team to decide whether they want to take 2nd place or not. They can never gang up on the winning team, because that would benefit the middle team, who would then be leading. It's all simple game theory, but basically: 3 teams is always less fair than any other number of teams. I knew that when I signed up. Certainly no hard feelings or anything like that.
|
|
|
Post by xade on Nov 15, 2008 19:00:20 GMT -5
what's that - Old Master of the whining finger?
|
|
|
Post by ExDeath on Nov 15, 2008 20:17:59 GMT -5
I'm not whining about the loss itself, I just dont like the implication that we gave the game away as much as the other team did, when we were in no position to stop the storms and they let 2 of them through for absolutely no reason. Admit your mistake and then forget about it.
To give you an example of how the format is flawed though, how the game should've unfolded is that succat or xade gets FoD'd, leaving the other one alive at 12 (I think?) health, and the rest of us alive at lower health. At this point, the lone living person from succat/xade's team probably can't win the game without some major mistakes, but he does get to decide who wins. Whoever he chooses to attack will likely lose, leaving the third side to mop up. Since the top and middle teams must constantly struggle with each other, it gives a lot of power to the bottom team who is uninvolved and immune. We benefited from this, being the bottom team and being immune from FoD. If it were 2v2v2v2 we would've been wiped out earlier.
|
|
|
Post by xade on Nov 15, 2008 20:42:32 GMT -5
couple of things - firstly - don't bite! I was obviously stirring you. secondly - that's not necessarily how it will play out. If Succat were to die, it would be in my best interests to a) keep myself from receiving damage. b) use the little sway that I'll be putting out there to keep the initiative of both teams even. It's a bad move for me to flat out attack a team as the 5th wheel. Further to that, when another team loses a member - that doesn't make the team with two players an instant winner - that makes the enemy of my enemy, my friend. at least until a 1v1v1 senario comes up. the biggest difference in this scenario is that we wiped out multiple players at once - thus removing the 5th wheel syndrome.
|
|
|
Post by ExDeath on Nov 15, 2008 20:47:53 GMT -5
Well, you're right, it's not an instant win, and I'm not saying it's impossible for you to come back. But there's a push-pull dynamic inherent in the format where you can't allow it to come down to a 2v1, and the middle team can't afford to gang up on you and enter a disadvantageous 2v2. So the winning team needs to defend itself from the middle team, and the middle team needs to try to whittle down the winning team to the point where killing you off will give them an advantage. Meanwhile, you can sit there and twiddle your thumbs, or choose to kill someone off, but either way you do have control over the game.
The biggest mistake you could make is to keep the teams perfectly even, because at that point they could decide to kill you off and play out the rest of the game as a 2v2. But I do see your point, passive play is best.
|
|
|
Post by xade on Nov 15, 2008 21:51:38 GMT -5
Yeah, but generally killing the 5th wheel, when the teams are balanced, will throw some initiative towards the other team... It's a tricky thing though 2v2v2's - I quite enjoy the dynamics that they do create.
|
|
|
Post by Dubber on Nov 17, 2008 9:29:23 GMT -5
So, okay, how about another 2v2v2? Same teams? Or are ExD & I just whiny losers that no one dares play?
|
|
|
Post by BioLogIn on Nov 17, 2008 9:44:59 GMT -5
I'm in.
|
|
|
Post by vermont on Nov 17, 2008 10:36:50 GMT -5
I'm in.
|
|
|
Post by xade on Nov 17, 2008 17:27:35 GMT -5
nah, I think I might have to retire was champion...
nah, who am I kidding... I'm in!
|
|