Here's one from 05 with me and Kai. I'm actually surprised my roping looks decent, though I definitely wasn't as good with tiny tricks back then.

I remember one of my first elites which I played in a tourney, someone (I think it was Mojo from x2x) tricked me into giving him the win when we had a draw. I had no idea what was going on, so I just kind of let him have it. I guess it's just too tempting to take advantage of gullible noobs ;O.

Quote from: nino on May 16, 2011, 12:03 PM
what time are u avaliable at thusday mab?

Nothing that would be doable for most European timezones, only around 5 GMT or later, same for most nights.

Not doable for me as I stated, can only do Tuesday or Wednesday this week.

You might as well avoid trying to schedule me in, I never know my schedule very far in advance. I have this Tuesday and Wednesday off, but that's it.

I think the main problem with turn advantage in hysteria is that it evens the playing field for pretty much everyone, noobs and pros alike, in the same way that KTL ensures a 3-way roper stays even. There's almost no way that it won't get down to 1v1 or 2v1 if two decent players are playing; no amount of skill will allow you to get much of a lead. Hysteria's okay, but I'm not all that interested in it since most other schemes have a wider range of skill.

Yeah speed damage :0. In many cases to be susceptible to speed damage you have to hit a side wall first, but you're also in susceptibility mode when on rope. And then when you hit the ceiling the speed damage is applied, based only on your vertical velocity I think.

If you just try flinging yourself up into the ceiling with rope, it's hard to do more than 18 in speed damage alone, but I guess with the aid of the zook, you got enough speed to do around 27. Definitely out of the ordinary though :V.

Wow very nice KRD, seems like it's always the arch that controls the ending time. If you want to keep trying after the deadline, I'm game, since I see deadlines as mere obstacles to the neverending war that is RR.

Oh but rodent, why's my spike to nuke not done well? Seemed pretty normal to me, just my drive out was funky.

Quote from: DarkOne on April 15, 2011, 10:38 AM
I disagree with you right from the start, HHC. If you follow the christian philosophy, you'll find that the thing that matters is what happens after death. There are a lot of christians that believe the rapture will come in their lifetime. Not sure how you can see meaning in life and the things you do if you think the world is going to end soon anyway. Why do something about global? The world's going to end anyway. And if your afterlife is going to be eternal and filled with happiness, it just takes away the meaning of life. It's going to be such a short portion of your existence, why bother at all with it?

Life has meaning because it's finite. I think we can all mention things we take for granted in every day life, but that would've been incredible for other people. Clean drinking water is such a luxury, but we don't notice it because we get it any time we want at any place. In most parts of africa, they know how valuable clean drinking water is. There's your meaning of life for people that lived before us. They won't experience this anymore, but their efforts have led to an increased standard of life for us.
I sure hope my future family will have an even better standard of life after me, even though I personally can't complain about my standard of life.

Life isn't meaningless to atheists. Life is all that matters to atheists. And to say that "god is all-loving" when you see earthquakes and tsunamis and volcanos, flooding from rivers, forest fires, cancer in young people, hereditary diseases, famine, infectious diseases and religious violence (everybody's favourite at the moment) kill off so many people, including the very young, that's such an incredible insult to people to whom life is all that matters. I just don't understand how anyone can trivialise such disasters.

You are right about one thing though, Bart. We shouldn't rob them of their illusion (whether or not it's true, though I clearly don't think it is ), but then, they shouldn't rob us of our possibilities. I'm happy to live in a secular country myself, but to further our knowledge in medicine, physics, chemistry etcetera, a higher volume of research makes it go faster. And as much as we grumpy europeans would like to deny it, we need the US as much as they need us (or perhaps more). However, the religious right is putting shackles on research on stem cells and on decisions that should be between doctors and patients. I'm very happy to live in a country that gives people the choice of euthanasia for example, but the people that are stopping this from happening in other countries are the religious people. Gay rights are suppressed by religious people. Female rights are suppressed by religious people. Children's rights are suppressed by religious people.
And yes, most religious people are moderate and nice and reasonable and wear tidy jumpers and eat cheese like real people. But they have to accept that they are the powerbase for the nutters. (copyright Marcus Brigstocke on the last 2 sentences )
Religion is fine if you keep it to yourself. Currently, this is not the case.

Well said D1. I think we should "rob" people of their illusions whenever we're able to, but then again it's truly difficult to talk to people in real life about their religious beliefs, especially if they're close friends.

Quote from: HHC on April 15, 2011, 02:12 AM
I dunno, I say we cherish the games that make our lives enjoyable, even if we deep down know they hold no meaning and are just that, games.

So let's be nice and not crack down on other people's distractions.  

But HHC, to say that beliefs themselves are simply games is pure, unadulterated nihilism. If everything were a game, you would have to accept that there's no more reason to hold any one belief more than another. But then on the other hand, I'd suggest that if your viewpoint were true depending on what you mean by 'game', it wouldn't really change anything about the importance of a person's beliefs, if your idea of a game connotes subjective importance devoid of objective importance.

It's kind of a tired argument to say that because there's no universal recipe for determining the correct beliefs, we should abandon all hope of finding meaning in life. More importantly, it's kind of a misnomer to deem something a game when a person is neither intentionally treating something as a game, nor is capable of doing something outside the game.

Off topic I know, but I dislike it when people say crazy things.

I have tons of replays with old players, here's an old warmer with Moose! He was a very skilled warmer that I knew from back in the days of WWP, still great by today's standards. It's funny to watch myself rope 6+ years ago, I spent most of my time doing bouncy outlaws and kicks.

Definitely gotta spend some time thinking about this one, but I found it very fun, a must-try!

I did tell you guys I'd be first one way or another, right?

7 girders is a big improvement in pretty much every way, and I'd actually like to see how the scheme would work with fewer. Because with 7, you still never see a game where someone runs out, I don't think I've seen a single match where this has happened. And this is partly because people are forced to conserve their girders, but it would be nice to try say, 5 girders, because at that point you actually will see people breaking through their opponent's defenses.

And it would definitely make more games less likely to reach SD. The TUS scheme as it is suffers due to its crate probabilities, almost every Team17 I've played with it results in a tie due to lack of aqua sheep. If you wanted to keep these crate probabilities the same, lowering the number of girders would probably be the only way to even out games. Because people are definitely still having to rely on the (even scarcer than before) SD weaps, simply waiting it out on each side, and often tying.

I'm assuming the rationale for the TUS scheme's lower SD weap probability is to force players to fight each other head on, but it simply hasn't worked. The moment one team is at a noticeable disadvantage and faces defeat by regular weaps, they will take to one side as usual, and SD weaps will mostly determine the game, 7 girders is still just enough to defend. But unlike the FB scheme, games rarely come to a close this way, and there are tons of ties since often times no one has anything. Games that are 30-45 minutes long should rarely, rarely be ties, we should simply eliminate that possibility as much as possible.

Pretty much all the weaps collected in a T17 go unused since people are mostly trying to get SD weaps, and that strikes me as silly. If we tried 5 girders, I imagine people would actually have a reason to destroy girders and break through, knowing they can't be held off all game, and those excess weapons would get some use. I'd just prefer the FB scheme with 7 girders, or the newer one with fewer.

Ah man I love me some Zelda music D1 ;_;.

Now for something that will melt your troubles away.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-LKa1Y9_ok

Yeah but if there's no room above the worm's head, you're freely able to knock through that worm when you shouldn't be allowed to ;O. Probably something that would come up 1 in 1000 games, but I'm all about those rare situations. In fact since there's no rule against it, I guess it's something to keep in mind as a sort of trick :V.