The Ultimate Site of Worms Armageddon
All About TUS => TUS Discussion => Topic started by: Chicken23 on March 05, 2010, 01:21 AM
-
There are two rules in the bng rules which are wrong in my experience and opinion of bng.
First of all darksiding is stated as not being able to shot your enemy. This is incorrect. It does not matter if you can not hit the worm. That is your fault for not having the skill to hit them or tactics to dig. It only takes a couple of turns to zook a hide or explode some grenades on impact. Also saying that you can not hit your enemy is very subjective. People's skills vary and some players only know 3sec nades and they won't be able to curl against the wind a low strength wind zook which could hit a darksiding position.
Darksiding is when the player in the hide does not have any possible shots with grenade or zook. If someone has cover and roof over their head but they can lg bounce a 5sec grenade to the otherside of the map then its not darksiding. They can also most likely use zooks to hit aswell..
It would be nice if you could clear up this rule please as it has come up in a clanner today vs RoH. It also came up in a bng tourney at WO which i won. Crazy will remember this because Dead-tag tried to claim i was darksiding when i was in a pit of 3 shots deep and just using the bank on the rule.
The second rule is the distance teleporting. 1/3 of the map is far to big to call a close teleport. The close teleport rule was defined as the distance of 2 notches of a 4sec grenade. That distance which is similar to the length of a grider was considered a close teleport. 1/3 of map is about the distance of 5-6 taps of 4sec range and far too big. This has also been a reoccuring problem in some league matches ive played recently where someone has teleported into the middle of the map at start of game and claimed i couldnt not get that close to them after the hides on the far side of the map were destroyed. Normally this rule isnt a problem when the map is distance. But not many wormers know how to make a good bng map these days.
Id like the close teleport rule to be define by the length of 1 grider because i think that is the distane a full power 4sec grenade falls after 1 or 2 movements. We used these two rules in AL anyway and they were writen by a more experienced players like anubis, mablak and myself. No offensive but i know the tus rules were written quickly by Ray to speed the launch of the site. Because tus is now over a year old, alot of people have taken these rules to be correct when there are some errors in them..
-
At XTC i rmbr the rule for tele was half a screen in 1024 res`?? Thats a nice distance i would say..
-
At XTC i rmbr the rule for tele was half a screen in 1024 res`?? Thats a nice distance i would say..
Not everyone plays at 1024 though.
Simple measurement that you can do with girder would be the best.
-
I agree with Chicken23. There should some change in this rules. I have many disputes about darksiding etc. It would be nice to fix it. :)
Yea, length of the grider is perfect !
-
I somehow miss the logic in your point chicken. Why should it be against the rules when you put yourself in a position from which you cant shoot your opponent?
When i remember the bng rules from cbc-wwp right then darksiding was even considered when you put yourself in a position in which your opponent cannot reach you with a DIRECT shot. No bounces or anything. And that is how it should be played imo. Darksiding is preventing your opponent from shooting you and nothing else.
-
I somehow miss the logic in your point chicken. Why should it be against the rules when you put yourself in a position from which you cant shoot your opponent?
Because when you are in a position that you cant shoot your opponent that is darksiding, that is just wasting turns and dragging the game out. You have no possible means of attacking which you should be doing every turn.
When i remember the bng rules from cbc-wwp right then darksiding was even considered when you put yourself in a position in which your opponent cannot reach you with a DIRECT shot. No bounces or anything. And that is how it should be played imo. Darksiding is preventing your opponent from shooting you and nothing else.
I also played in cbc and did many bng clanners back then and would take hides like i did in that clanner vs RoH with no complaints. This is darksiding but not illegal darksiding, it is using the land to protect yourself, it can be considered lame but it is a good tactic to force your opponent to do harder shots on you. It allows you to take safety from lame bouncy attacks or notching, a player repeating 3sec nades over and over. Its smart because your making exploiting the lack of skill your opponent has by taking a hide they have difficulty hitting. Therefore aslong as you can still attack your opponent from this hide it is not against the rules but smart play to try and win the game.
-
Well I like your idea. But if I can add my own.. :p
I've been playing this scheme for a long time now, I used to love it but then everyone started to use the "notch" technique and just repeat and I really stopped to like it.
Why does people don't like this scheme ?
1) "it's tooooo long" => my idea: Change the worms health to 150 or 100
2) "People are cheap and keep repeating" => my idea: forbid someone to hit two times in a row with the same kind of shoot (A same kind of shoot is a shoot using a nade with the same amount of second.. If you're good enough changing the amount of second of a nade and still hit is often easy and if it's not possible just tele and then you'll avoid repeating).
3)"I got f@#!ed always because I use all my tele" => my idea: use unlimited tele, I don't understand why there's limited tele.
I'd like to see what thinks regular bnger :)
-
I somehow miss the logic in your point chicken. Why should it be against the rules when you put yourself in a position from which you cant shoot your opponent?
Because when you are in a position that you cant shoot your opponent that is darksiding, that is just wasting turns and dragging the game out. You have no possible means of attacking which you should be doing every turn.
Thats not the reason why it is forbidden, it is forbidden because you prevent your opponent from shooting you, while you still have the opportunity to shoot him. I see you dont really understand why darksiding is not allowed. When you put yourself in a position where you cant hit but you cannot be hit too then thats not against the rules, its simply stupid.
When i remember the bng rules from cbc-wwp right then darksiding was even considered when you put yourself in a position in which your opponent cannot reach you with a DIRECT shot. No bounces or anything. And that is how it should be played imo. Darksiding is preventing your opponent from shooting you and nothing else.
I also played in cbc and did many bng clanners back then and would take hides like i did in that clanner vs RoH with no complaints. This is darksiding but not illegal darksiding, it is using the land to protect yourself, it can be considered lame but it is a good tactic to force your opponent to do harder shots on you. It allows you to take safety from lame bouncy attacks or notching, a player repeating 3sec nades over and over. Its smart because your making exploiting the lack of skill your opponent has by taking a hide they have difficulty hitting. Therefore aslong as you can still attack your opponent from this hide it is not against the rules but smart play to try and win the game.
We never complained, although i found your hide there absolutely darksiding "worth". I was only able to hit you there by luck. The only reason why Wormiverse asked you if that isn't darksiding is that you claimed me of not being able to hit properly without bouncing. Then i ask you how would i have been supposed to hit you without a lucky bouncing nade? Same with Sogeking, i could not hit him from my angle without bouncing off behind him. Your hide was another thing though, nearly impossible to hit, as i said it was only luck.
-
Zipperfou point 1 and 3 of your post are quite contrary as unlimited teles will make the game longer i guess. @ point 2: thats already forbidden :).
-
Zipperfou point 1 and 3 of your post are quite contrary as unlimited teles will make the game longer i guess. @ point 2: thats already forbidden :).
Oof nice rule there ! :)
Well, yes I agree that unlimited tele can make the game longer (since you waste a turn to tele) ^^.
I guess it's just that I don't like to loose because I used all my tele ^^
-
Yeah, you got a point there :).
-
delete bng from classic league pls
-
Thats not the reason why it is forbidden, it is forbidden because you prevent your opponent from shooting you, while you still have the opportunity to shoot him. I see you dont really understand why darksiding is not allowed.
You are so wrong. I don't consider you to be an experienced bnger or that it was your prefered scheme on worms after the clanner we played. Nevertheless that does not make your opinion invalid. People have used the definition of darksiding when you cant shoot your opponent for years in all leagues expect tus. I think your wrong on the cbc rules because i used to play there too when i was in LoR and had no complaints against me when i took a hide like that.
It is a rule that was written incorrectly and not changed that has caused the community to think it is correct. If you ask any oldschooler who has experience in bng they will tell you my hide was no illegal. fade, hhc, skippa, dubc, komodo, dibz, dark, mil2,unique,franz,wiz they all know that my hide was fine. Obviously i can't say you are wrong because we are all oldschool and have no problems with hides like that because its naive. I have to explain why you are incorrect.
First of all my hide promoted skill in the bng. It took a harder shot for me to attack you. I had to use an lg bounce. This is not easy. Then i had to use lg zooks aswell. This is no easy. Therefore this hide improved my game and the quality of our match.
Secondly it required you to raise your game. You no longer could throw bouncy grenades. You had to time your grenade to explode on inpact to hit me. You needed knowledge of low powered zook to curl a zook against the wind to hit me. Your saying it was luck that you did hit me. You still hit and it took skill. My hide forced you to try harder shots.
These two points have just increased the standard of skill of the bng match and stopped the game from being repeating shot, or 3sec nades.
Thirdly the hide like you rightly said protected me from you and still allowed me to attack you. It is not stupid to take a hide that protects me from your shots when you are playing cheaply and do all those things that fada posted that upset him with morden day bng.
I took a hide where it was hard for you to hit. It was not impossible. That is tactical. Its stupid to have a rule that does not allow me to take a protective hide against players who only use a few different types of shots. Its stupid to have a rule that promotes cheapness and does not allowed you to protect yourself from notchers, repearters, bounciers.
It is stupid to have a rule that lowers the quality and ranges of shots in a bng match.
It is stupid to have a rule that is defined by stating a player can not attack you when that is a measurement of skill and their are many possible shots to a good bnger and fewer possible shots to someone who has only learnt the basis bng shots.
Also once a worm is darksided and can still attack you. It does not take much to destory their hide.
When you put yourself in a position where you cant hit but you cannot be hit too then thats not against the rules, its simply stupid.
I agree. Its stupid when i cant hit you from a hide. But i could hit you. You could not hit me easly and thats the point. It should only be against the rules when someone darksides and THEY hit you. It doesnt matter if YOU cant hit me. Thats your fault the other players fault for not being good enough. Like i said above, a good bnger can hit a harder hide. A less experienced bnger cant, why have a rule that protects less skilled bngers and helps promotes poorer shots?
-
Where are we coming to when people construe the rules so that they fit them the best ::). Also you ll have to explain me how i was supposed to hit you directly with a curled zook against the wind. Not possible from my position. Anyway would be interesting to see what a league mod thinks about that hide because this wont lead anywhere. Not to re-judge this game, simply as an external opinion from some1 who wasnt directly involved.
-
if i had won from that hide would you complain?
the angle that you threw the 3sec at to hit me was low, that kind of angle with the right blue wind would hit me. The more powerful the wind the lower the angle was needed, the less powerful wind, the more you could aim up.
thats kind of my point too. it was possible to hit me so it wasnt breaking the rules. But the rules are very subjective because players won't beleive they can hit when they can, they just dont know all the shots and its gonna cause problems. Hence wanting the rule to be redefined.
-
Well i see your definition and my definition of darksiding lie worlds apart... how many shots i must have tried to get a clean direct shot on you with a zook, neglecting that i would also have to wait for the perfect wind of course. There was a tiny tiny tiny little gap through which i must have shot to hit you directly. Anyway, all said from my side, i d rather have some1 external have a look on this.
-
Darksiding has always been based on intentionally moving to a location where you can't hit your opponent. I think at some point it's been phrased 'when you can't hit your opponent and your opponent can't hit you', but the second part of that statement doesn't need to be included really, since there's no harm or annoyance to the other player if they can still hit you.
And that's the main purpose of the darksiding rule, to prevent an annoying tactic that delays the game. The rule has never been phrased exclusively in terms of your opponent being unable to hit you, because it might very well be their fault that they can't hit you. If they chose a hide with almost no angles available to them, and you move out of their reach, why should that be considered darksiding? If there is even one major problem with a rule, such as this example, it should be changed.
Alternatively, the only situation that would be a problem for Chicken's version of the rule is finding some cove on the side of the map, making a girder to hit your opponent, and being entirely unhittable without your opponent teleporting too close, but your map choice should prevent this kind of thing, as it does with those Team17-type maps. The rules are simply not very complete, and that's the only reason they're phrased as they are.
Nonetheless we're still planning on getting rid of the darksiding rule for FoW and just getting rid of girders / adding infinite teles, disallowing someone from going to a virtually unreachable spot and banking off a girder, and also allowing someone to get in prime position to take advantage of a darksiding opponent with no loss of teles to them, to name a couple reasons. Also removing the need for two rather convoluted rules about girder usage and darksiding.
-
Why on earth would some1 choose intentionally a hide where he can't attack from? Excuse me but that makes no sense at all to me unless he wants to, as u posted, annoy his opponenty but you gain nothing from hiding in a spot you cant shoot from. Can't win a game by skipping your turns. And talking about annoyance, isn't it annoying when your opponent hides in a place where you are not able to shoot him or its v hard to attack?
Edit: Ok, i just watched the replay again, completely impossible to hit directly with a zook shot at the time you moved there, even for wormi who was nearer...
-
Nonetheless we're still planning on getting rid of the darksiding rule for FoW and just getting rid of girders / adding infinite teles, disallowing someone from going to a virtually unreachable spot and banking off a girder, and also allowing someone to get in prime position to take advantage of a darksiding opponent with no loss of teles to them, to name a couple reasons. Also removing the need for two rather convoluted rules about girder usage and darksiding.
Mablak, you got to be joking? Is FoW still under construction?
PS: Would love to give a comment but I`m still struggling @ watching replays.
-
You would intentionally hide in a spot where you couldn't attack from initially, so that you could attack after some tunneling; it would have to be something that gives you an advantage after one or more turns. Like on the side of a map, basically. And once again you shouldn't choose maps where incredible darksiding is even possible, that's really the only solution. The one you guys played on was fine, and Chicken was thoroughly hittable in his hide in any case.
And yeah crazy, certainly slow but still going.
-
Mablak has really hit the nail on the head defining Darksiding.
I agree. Its stupid when i cant hit you from a hide. But i could hit you. You could not hit me easly and thats the point.
This is called using your noggin.
the rules are very subjective because players won't beleive they can hit when they can, they just dont know all the shots and its gonna cause problems.
Precisely, lack of skill/experience/vision leads to this.
Where are we coming to when people construe the rules so that they fit them the best
Both of your arguments could be interpreted in this manner. The written set of rules support your argument, this however does not represent how BnG has been played for the many many years WA has been around, and certainly not how I played it against the many skilled players of the time.
isn't it annoying when your opponent hides in a place where you are not able to shoot him or its v hard to attack?
These are the moments where you raise your game to hit your opponent.
i just watched the replay again, completely impossible to hit directly with a zook shot at the time you moved there, even for wormi who was nearer...
To re-iterate what Chicken said, someone without full knowledge of the shots they can play would come to this conclusion. I would not. In no way was Chicken unhittable or Darksiding in his position on the edge of the map. You proved this by hitting him.
I have to challenge another poor rule that's written into the BnG scheme on this site.
5 second Grenades are not allowed. 5 Second Grenades are only permitted in combination with Low Gravity and/or Maximum Bounce. The penalty for a 5 second Grenade is a Grenade or Bazooka to and from yourself in an attempt to cause the same damage you previously inflicted.
This kind of guff is bred by lack of ability. The true skill in BnG is the ability to explode a grenade on impact. Having it roll around in your opponent's face for a second or so is lame (though sometimes unavoidable, where were those half second fuse timers?) and an unnecessary overuse of fuse time. There are occasions when you might get a bounce off a lip after it passes over your opponent but this is usually intended.
There should be absolutely no restriction on the settings of the grenade as it's up to the player to decide what is required during that turn to make the grenade explode on impact of the opponent. These kind of rules dumb down BnG and I have never been a fan of this.
I wouldn't like to see Griders disappear in favour of infinite Teleports, I used to love the frustration of getting my Grider blown apart after setting it up for a bounce, and the elation of doing the same to my opponent.
-
i just watched the replay again, completely impossible to hit directly with a zook shot at the time you moved there, even for wormi who was nearer...
To re-iterate what Chicken said, someone without full knowledge of the shots they can play would come to this conclusion. I would not. In no way was Chicken unhittable or Darksiding in his position on the edge of the map. You proved this by hitting him.
If you want to comment my posts you should at least take your time to read them properly... For the other stuff well... we didn't complain about him being darksiding, Chicken brought this thread up. My team mate asked ckc in game if that wasn't a darkside move after i have being accused of not being able to shoot properly by ckc, just wanted to make that clear as well. All in all i would say that was a lame hide and then they rly dont have to complain about lame bouncing shots when i cant hit them directly. Just wanted to make that clear too. Last word from me, this discussion kinda bores me.
-
The topic isn't about you, it's about the rules of BnG in the league this community provides. Chicken is attempting to get them changed and used his game with you as an example of why this is required.
I have taken the time read this entire thread properly prior to posting. Your choices of shots were limited, however, you weren't entirely unable to hit Chicken. You also had the choice of hitting his team mate, moving yourself, destroying more of your hide so you had a wider angle of shots to play, the list goes on.
Nobody is forcing you to post here.
-
Nobody is forcing you to post either, your not even personally involved :P. I am though as he took our clanner as an example like you said. The whole thing came up only because darksiding became a topic due to this game.
-
i d rather have some1 external have a look on this.
I'm external.
your not even personally involved :P
I would disagree, BnG was a big part of my life for many years and I feel the need to preserve what was good about it, and not let it be watered down and restricted with unnecessary and incorrect rules.
-
So will the rule be tweaked? I think mine, mablak and reso's arguments were stronger than chakkman. What is needed a poll?
-
Yes they will be, No need for poll.
I believe your hide wasn't darkside and chakkman proved it by hitting you there. A hide can be so hard and need a bit of 'luck' to hit, but that doesn't make it a darkside.
-
@ point 2: thats already forbidden :).
Didn't find that anywhere, can you give me a link?
P.S. lol crash
-
The thing was discussed here: https://www.tus-wa.com/forums/schemes-13/new-rules-for-bng/
Not sure now if they actually changed the rules now that way but i think so. No1 cares in league games though, just like no1 cares about darksiding as this thread shows :P.
-
People don't care about the scheme itself, not it's rules. I don't play the scheme since these cheap-playing people appeared in the leagues. I hate this scheme ever since.
-
Darksiding only exists in your mind.
-
imo,that wasnt darksideXD,and the link u mentioned is the topic that i started and not a single rule has been added to this scheme so far.
in a lame game infinite teles would be cool but in a pro 1 it will suck.just my opinion.
i agree with crash to move bng out of classic league but not to free league,think it should be a bng league to avoid being lame,too bad a2b didnt work out but ill try to start a bng league here if MI helps me.
-
bng should always be in classic league. It would be like taking chopping out one of my legs in my list of skills that makes me a good 'allrounder'
its just league style bng which results to 'cheap'
i like fada's suggestion, could use more rules to focus on more style. Really u have 3 different types of bng. normall. style and no rules.
-
There are at least 2 league schemes which require some bng skills, so it wouldn't harm you that much. :) Anyway since i started playing leagues there had been problems with the bng scheme... always some1 complaining about cheap shots, or people hiding in impossible spots and so on... for me this scheme isn't league suitable. See playing bng with style is like playing a roper game like a warmer, it might look good but in the end you lose unless you have godlike skills. And thats what you ll have to understand. That people are keen on winning and not keen on the best looking shot award.
-
Bng has worked as a scheme in league for 10 years now though Chakkman, there is absolutely no reason it shouldn`t work as a league scheme in TUS! If there are so many complaints, it`s because of an attitude problem among the players. There is nothing wrong with the scheme, but moreover the players who plays the scheme. If you take out bng from the classic league, you might aswell fire off a zook at the Team17 server, it would give the same affect, to put it in an awkward way.
-
But you would agree with me that there have been a lot more complaints and discussions about changing the rules on the bng scheme than on any other scheme wouldn't you? Also i never played any other league scheme in which people are so quick on calling you a lamer, cheaper, darksider or w/e (mostly due to bad losing spirit, that's true...). Still there's always that kinda weird style vs. lame thing in every bng you play, maybe because one player is simply more skilled than the other or 1 player is more keen on winning at any costs and that causes trouble.
-
maybe playing it on big map, make it no rule and anorched would help.. I dont' know ^^
-
its only chakkman who seems to detest this scheme. One guy that never cared for the scheme arguing to get it removed from league and about rules he does not fully understand against a select few bngers isnt going to get the scheme removed from tus.
How many leagues complaints have been based on bng rules? Not many. And how many have been hard to solve. Its always clear to see when a cow occur. This topic was created to highlight issues with tus's rule set. It was not a complaint. I was using the game as an argument. BnG does cause agruments between the players when peoples view of whats lame and cheap is challanaged but not many games actually go to complaints for a cow because people still follow the rules and dont use sitters.
Roper has similar issues with hiding on top of the map when you have a lead to get easier crates. Its not agaisnt rules its a style of play. Just because we disagree on different styles of play, doesnt mean the scheme should be removed! Also if someone is laming you, the infinite teleports and the 'correct' bng rules are there to protect a bnger from cheap shots by using darksiding tactics to make a player use a harder shot.
BnG should never be removed from classic. It is a unique scheme and very enjoyable at times.
-
Hey, don't touch bng!! lol
-
a2b is back up and running, 1st time we had a2b it was private/invite only
Now it's public but still invite, but anyone interested can apply:
a2b is addicted 2 bng - b2b clans BnG league
If you want an invite send me an email:
pudgiebudgie99@hotmail.com
Thanks, remember - you've got to be in it, to win it :)
-
Why on earth would some1 choose intentionally a hide where he can't attack from?
Well can you explain to me why people do it then?
-
Never seen some1 doing it, so i can't tell. Makes exactly zero sense to me. But well i'm quite a new player with my 4 years of experience or so, so wth do i know. :)
You know i still think it makes much more sense to forbid to move into a position from which you can attack your opponent but he cannot attack you rather than to forbid moving into a position from which you can't attack/can't be attacked. No harm done by that, don't you think? Still i was proved wrong by some old school fashioned guys who rely on a non-sense rule created before World War II, so no point in discussing with guys that are immune towards logic.
-
There is really no explaining this, you will never understand unless you get into BnG properly...
-
Well, don't get me wrong i used to enjoy BnG's but that was before i realized that this is a easy-to-be-complaint scheme. If every1 would accept that this game should be played "for the win" in the league just like any other scheme it would make things much easier. Now we have the situation that certain people expect you to play it just like a rope warmer and that's why things are getting complicated. <- referring to this thread in general
-
Well, don't get me wrong i used to enjoy BnG's but that was before i realized that this is a easy-to-be-complaint scheme. If every1 would accept that this game should be played "for the win" in the league just like any other scheme it would make things much easier. Now we have the situation that certain people expect you to play it just like a rope warmer and that's why things are getting complicated. <- referring to this thread in general
Yeah but mate, it's not that, BnG is one of the only schemes where you can win by playing cheap and skill, the only thing that seperates lame/cheap shots is the rules.
I have been playing by the rules recently and I am cool with it.
All I ask is for people to understand why playing cheap and darksiding etc pisses people off.
-
BnG is one of the only schemes where you can win by playing cheap and skill, the only thing that seperates lame/cheap shots is the rules.
Actually, it's the players, you shouldn't need rules to play fair and well.
-
There are two rules in the bng rules which are wrong in my experience and opinion of bng.
First of all darksiding is stated as not being able to shot your enemy. This is incorrect.
...
Darksiding is when the player in the hide does not have any possible shots with grenade or zook.
I think this is just a misunderstanding, cause the rule says exactly the same what you are saying Chicken:
"- Darksiding is not allowed. A darkside is considered a place where you can't hit OR be hit with a nade."
If it would be more clearer it can be changed to:
"- Darksiding is not allowed. A darkside is considered a place where it's impossible for you to hit OR be hit with a nade."
You know i still think it makes much more sense to forbid to move into a position from which you can attack your opponent but he cannot attack you...
I think there's no place on a map where U can attack with a nade and cannot be attacked at the same time..
It's simple as that, I guess everyone would agree about this one, no?
Id like the close teleport rule to be define by the length of 1 grider because i think that is the distane a full power 4sec grenade falls after 1 or 2 movements.
1 length of a girder? Huuuh.. This looks too close for me, it's not even "mini-bng" it's like "micro-bng" lol
Like this?: (see attach)
btw, shouldn't this topic be in "Schemes" page instead of "TUS Discussion" ?
(lol, there are like 4 or 5 topics with BnG rules running at the same time, maybe we could make a board just for BnG rules XD :P )
"The most complexly things are usually the most simple things".. Always were, always will..
-
Considering darksiding as not being able to hit or be hit with a nade is a completely new aspect actually Ramone. Chicken23 and others argued like it was darksiding when you can't hit your opponent/he can't hit you with a nade or zook. To me your rule makes much more sense than the nade or zook thing, as the scheme is called "BnG" and not "Bazooka" or something. :)
I also still wait for the explanation why it should be senseful to get your worm into a hide from which you can't attack, nobody could explain that so far... people rather trust in rules that seem to be written into stone, while in the leagues i have played i have never come along the "darksiding is considered moving in a place where you can't hit or be hit by nade/zook".
-
BnG is one of the only schemes where you can win by playing cheap and skill, the only thing that seperates lame/cheap shots is the rules.
Actually, it's the players, you shouldn't need rules to play fair and well.
Actually unfortunately it's the rules, if the rules are specificly written to prevent repeat shots or hiding under cover repetitivly zooking, or throwing nothing but 3s nades and cheap 4s nades that are practically straight shots, then it wouldn't happen.
Yes, you SHOULD'NT need rules to play fair and well, but unfortunately most gamers are desperate people who would do anything to try and win a game, and I don't care what anyone says because it's true about practically every game on the planet, I play another 3 games actively online and it's all the same.
-
I also still wait for the explanation why it should be senseful to get your worm into a hide from which you can't attack, nobody could explain that so far... people rather trust in rules that seem to be written into stone, while in the leagues i have played i have never come along the "darksiding is considered moving in a place where you can't hit or be hit by nade/zook".
There is no sense moving to a place where you can't attack, unless you intend to turn it into a hidey hole from which you can attack. There would have to be an agreement on a reasonable amount of turns to achieve this whereby it's possible for the opponent to hit you.
-
You mean a hole like Chicken23 picked as hide in that game? ;)
-
I could attack. I was bouncing lg 5's and hitting you. I did the damage. The point about the darkside rule was that you were arguing because you could not hit me easly. You were saying i was breaking the rules. I was not because i could attack you from my hide.
My argument is that is does not matter if you can hit me or not. It matters if i can't hit you. If i can't hit you then its illegal regardless of how hard it is for you to hit me. It may be considered lame or cheap but its within the rules when you teleport to a hide which you can attack from even if its harder for you to attack me. Why should i stay in a pit and let someone repeat me with bouncy 4 sec lame nades?
-
I could attack. I was bouncing lg 5's and hitting you. I did the damage. The point about the darkside rule was that you were arguing because you could not hit me easly. You were saying i was breaking the rules. I was not because i could attack you from my hide.
My argument is that is does not matter if you can hit me or not. It matters if i can't hit you. If i can't hit you then its illegal regardless of how hard it is for you to hit me. It may be considered lame or cheap but its within the rules when you teleport to a hide which you can attack from even if its harder for you to attack me. Why should i stay in a pit and let someone repeat me with bouncy 4 sec lame nades?
chakk, sorry, but he's got you there, there is NOTHING you can say that can defy this...
No offense.
-
That doesn't convince me one bit as when you take a look at ANY other scheme, rules are made to prevent players from getting theirselves into positions where their opponent can't attack them. E.g. the disallowed glitch on t17 where you port yourself on top of the map, the anti-blocking rule on roper, anti permanent block rule in shopper and so on.
I give you an example: You get yourself into a position from which you can bounce shoot a nade and you are able to hit your opponent, but hes not able to hit you, so he shoots the terrain for 5 or 6 turns to make it possible to hit you. Isn't that extremely lame? Wasn't the case with you Chicken, as i hit you (altho with big luck). Just an example of how a game could look like according to your rule.
-
Yes I agree, what you are saying Chicken done, in my opinion is lame, but if you were throwing repeat 3s nades and rolling 4s nades, then I think what he done is right and pretty fair.
And this isn't about other schemes it's about BnG.
-
Yes I agree, what you are saying Chicken done, in my opinion is lame, but if you were throwing repeat 3s nades and rolling 4s nades, then I think what he done is right and pretty fair.
Please don't turn this around man... they were 1st to accuse us of throwing lame rolling nades, we just asked if what Chicken did wasn't darksiding after they complained about our nade shots. If our shots were lame or not also is in the eye of the beholder, see for yourself if their hides didn't enforce roll shots. Seriously we were playing just like in any other league game and no1 complained about it.
-
I am not turning anything round I am stating the facts that are being told in front of me, at the end of the day you were both playing like noobs so deal with it lol.
-
The point of the thread is about the darksiding rule. Currently its not very clear on tus because you thought my hide was illegal when it wasn't.