|
|
Post by Swami Chuckles on Nov 15, 2010 16:34:01 GMT -5
Okay, I'm hear to talk about my 1 on 1 show with Mayhem. Couple things I want to say right off the bat, Gia, fuck you for making that Ripper account LOL I will not apologize for what I said about Ripper or your fairy ass clan name. And as far as what Gia was tryin to say about my 1v1 with BM, BM said he wouldn't mind revealing the score so here it is, I was the first to 10 at 10-6 but BM took control after that and made it like 20-15 or something like that. That's the reason I said it was not reflective of either of out skills in the pod-cast, we both made a lot of bad mistakes and we were really just fuckin around, a lot of back and forth too. The reason I kept hiding it is because Onde didn't even believe it happened, and I thought that was very funny. Honestly the score doesn't matter to me, scores and stats can be deceptive, especially when you're just fuckin around. I was able to see how good BM was and I was pretty impressed. I only wish we could have a 1v1 on a console. Thank you all for listening btw. Here's the link for anybody who wants to listen: cnqreboot.info/podcast2.mp3 Oh and 1 more thing i want to say is FUCK YOU TIBERON. |
|
|
|
Post by straightcash5 on Nov 15, 2010 17:02:31 GMT -5
yea thats pretty close to what he told me the score was. 20-13 at the end though. he said you were pretty good, but that he thought you were much better in full servers then in 1v1. i wish i had the chance to play against you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Swami Chuckles on Nov 15, 2010 17:06:21 GMT -5
It's funny that I'm better in a full room on the PC because I was always better 1v1 on the xbox, hate living in the west haha.
|
|
|
|
Post by straightcash5 on Nov 15, 2010 19:32:07 GMT -5
lol.
but yo that podcast was hilarious, i was laughing through most of it. and i agree with what you said about different levels of skill certin mages have. it's definitely the easiest class to be decent with, but to be very good at it imo is harder then it is to be at warrior. there's just not as many warriors who dominate in 1v1 (with or without respawns) as consistently as the really good mages do. on both consoles it seems like there isn't as much of a gap between the top 5 warriors and the next 10 best after them. as in with mages the top 5 seem to be quite a bit ahead of the rest of the pack skill wise, especially in 1v1. you just don't see top 5 mages getting beat by anyone outside of them often, if at all. but the top warriors lost to players out of the top 5 much more often
thats why i always hated when someone would say 'oh you play mage, they take no skill to be good with'. well thats because of how easy it is to be a decent mage, there's a big difference in good and great.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mithrand!r on Nov 15, 2010 19:43:13 GMT -5
lol. but yo that podcast was hilarious, i was laughing through most of it. and i agree with what you said about different levels of skill certin mages have. it's definitely the easiest class to be decent with, but to be very good at it imo is harder then it is to be at warrior. there's just not as many warriors who dominate in 1v1 (with or without respawns) as consistently as the really good mages do. on both consoles it seems like there isn't as much of a gap between the top 5 warriors and the next 10 best after them. as in with mages the top 5 seem to be quite a bit ahead of the rest of the pack skill wise, especially in 1v1. you just don't see top 5 mages getting beat by anyone outside of them often, if at all. but the top warriors lost to players out of the top 5 much more often thats why i always hated when someone would say 'oh you play mage, they take no skill to be good with'. well thats because of how easy it is to be a decent mage, there's a big difference in good and great. Well i disagree with that part. If you talking about the top 5 on the awards i disagree at all since there are some players not on the top like grad, fleur, myself (here goes my modesty away lol) that can easily be compared with the top 5 if not better than some of them cof cof. - we all know about the popularity shit blablabla - If you talking about the top5 not on the list (but then i don't know who they are) i can´t, once more, say i completly agree since you never saw them fighting with each other or don´t know them all well. I would maybe talk about 8/10 not the 5 ;D Just my opinion... |
|
|
|
Post by BulgarianMenace on Nov 15, 2010 20:04:49 GMT -5
Fuck it though the difference in "skill" between top mages is negligible. The class is by far the easiest to "master."
Warriors have been pretty much figured out by now, but there's still a lot more there than with mages or archers (archers are simple to master, being consistent is what makes them hard). Scouts are the hardest class to play, but that's because of how limited their good options are. I'd say warriors are the deepest class in terms of optimal choice variability.
Even so, this is far from the deepest game in general. This is just deeper than your average shooter. If you're really looking for real variability you should be playing fighting games or strategy games (like starcraft).
|
|
|
|
Post by straightcash5 on Nov 15, 2010 22:16:41 GMT -5
and i'm not goin by the top 5 from the awards, i'm referring to whom i think is the top 5. your right about you, grad and fleur. i think your all top 6 mages, and are better or just as good as a few of the mages in front you on the awards. as for what i said it's mostly true, i've crushed everyone who is imo not a top 5 mage easily (some of them multiple times) actually every 1v1 mage duel that i ever did that wasn't against bm i won by a large margin, many of which were against alot of the top 10 best mages. the couple that i didn't, i never got to play (you and rizzen). so for me my statement is accurate. same for bm, he's beatin most of the top mages as well. if you, grad and rizzen had did more 1v1's you may have did pretty well against most of the top mages that were imo not as good as you 3. but my main point is that the very best mages (who did) do 1v1's, won convincingly against all but a couple guys.
|
|
|
|
Post by straightcash5 on Nov 15, 2010 22:27:28 GMT -5
as for warrior though, the best warriors didn't dominate nearly as much and actually had lost to warriors that were not considered top 5 by most people. with the exception of broly who never lost. and from what i've read, the xbox warriors have similar stats. same for there mages, they only lost to the very best, i believe swami said he only lost to mime, lstar, and uk henry, which are among the best on xbox. but from what i've read of there warriors, they lose to people that they are considered quite a bit better then.
maybe i'm wrong, i know both consoles had alot of good warriors, xbox had way more good warriors then mages, but thats not the case on ps3, we had a deep pool of both classes.
|
|
|
|
Post by King of the Pink Mushrooms on Nov 16, 2010 13:45:34 GMT -5
Just as a suggestion I suppose you could say that in mage 1v1's smaller levels of skill might have a bigger impact. For whatever reason. I guess this may be for exsample warriors may have to leave them selves more exposed to damage compared to a mage maybe which have a better defense with shield and heal maybe?
I don't do mage though so I would not really know lol just a suggestion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Swami Chuckles on Nov 16, 2010 18:57:31 GMT -5
I didn't mean to say that mage is the hardest class to master, I simply meant to say that people don't appreaciate the talent level of those top tier mages because shitty mages can put up a lot of kills. A talentless mage can get a lot of kills while a talentless warrior or scout can't do shit, people tend to group the great mages with the shitty ones. BM is probably right about warrior and scout being more difficult 1v1, and he's definately right about the scout being hardest in-game.
|
|
|
|
Post by straightcash5 on Nov 16, 2010 21:26:17 GMT -5
i agree with the scout being the hardest to master by far. but i wasn't talking about what a decent or great mage could do in full servers, warrior is obviously much more hard to rack up kills with in full servers. i was comparing the very best of the warriors/mages to those that were really good but not in the top 5 range, not to decent mages or warriors. all i'm tryin to say is that on both consoles the mages never lost to anyone besides the very best, the warriors that were considered the best lost to people who were just considered good. so with those facts i don't see how it's more hard to be a great 1v1 warrior then mage, being that there is more really good warriors then there is really good mages. the best mages were just more dominant then the best warriors were
|
|
|
|
Post by ClearNote on Nov 16, 2010 22:12:40 GMT -5
No one cares, Cash. >_>
|
|
|
|
Post by straightcash5 on Nov 16, 2010 22:43:45 GMT -5
shut up fool  |
|
|
|
Post by broncofan101 on Nov 17, 2010 2:37:48 GMT -5
shut up cash no one asked you
|
|
|
|
Post by BulgarianMenace on Nov 17, 2010 8:12:16 GMT -5
Well cash, the fact that there used to be few warriors who were way ahead of the pack only goes to show that warrior was difficult class to figure out, there were many more options and styles to choose from so it took a long time for the class tactics to be sorted out and no one knew everything so people with the right style matchups could beat anyone.
With mages it is much more cut and dry in terms of tactics. That's why I don't like mage 1v1s as much because they are sort of boring with the limited variety in strategies possible.
Although definitely now you can see the difference between the top two or three warriors and everyone else. They won't lost to numbers 5-10 I can tell you that.
|
|
