|
Escrito por Tundy, 14.09.2014 at 21:23
stop putting words in my mouth, i never mentioned RP in this issue.
Escrito por Tundy, 14.09.2014 at 20:25
You know that high ranks teaching low ranks, proves that high ranks are more skilled/experienced?
Therefore low ranks are only "good" if they are trained, anybody can become a pro if he is trained,
Look at ex RP fags, do you seriously think they would be any good if wasn't for a fellow high rank training them?
PD: I wasn't ever trained, so I didn't become good until rank 8.
End of the discussion. I win you lose. GG
Escrito por Tundy, 14.09.2014 at 21:23
No thunder, you are wrong. (1)You are trying to relate training with RP players. There is no relation between those. However, for your single argument:
Escrito por Tundy, 14.09.2014 at 20:44
Low ranks are only good if they are trained by high ranks, therefore a non-trained low rank can't beat a high rank.
You are conditioning the premise. IF low rank doesnt get trained by highranks[/u][/b]. This happen today, but this was not the chase in Afterwind.
(2)What would happen IF theses high rank get trained? then you can concluide that your premise is invalid when a low rank get trained. Have you even hear of << The student beat the teacher>> ?
stop putting words in my mouth, i never mentioned RP(3) in this issue.
High ranks getting trained or not is not relevant to my argument, i will have to ask you to stop posting if you can't provide me with a relevant answer.
Clovis, do you see the word RP in my argument? nope.
again you are just jumping to conclusions without even understanding the context of the argument.
Your first mistake was to assume that I related trainning with RP players, your second mistake was to assume that my argument was about high ranks. and your third mistake was to assume that this argument is connected to my old post.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
Clovis, this is the original argument:
Escrito por Tundy, 12.09.2014 at 22:16
Actually, ranks use to matter, since before custom maps rank use to be the equivalent of experience and therefore skill.
Lies. Back in my time, rank 7 was able to beat rank 10 ( there was no UN or any custom map, just competitive envioment).
and the normal was 10's beat 7's, you act like luck or a bad high rank isnt possible, we see it all the time with crits, a player can get lucky, or just be better, but he is saying the majority of 10v7 back in the day would end in 10 winning, and actually he was probably referring to 8v5 or some shit as other than opi there arent many strictly RP rank 10s
Some fact's which can help you to understand why rank didn't matte much in Afterwind:
► General was free.
► Clan War where very stricty, but way better that they are now. There also was a very high amount of <<training clans>>
► The TB system charge also influenced on it.
► Also, 5k was the standart.
► Rank limit for 3vs3 was 6 (standart).
I dont see the point you are trying to make. some 101 on discussing, you have to actually refute your opponents points, cause you just shitted out facts that mean nothing because we are talking about the skill difference in high ranks to mid ranks before the rise of RP, high ranks beat low ranks in nearly every time they play
Clovis, you haven't replied to the main argument above. all you did was to post that low ranks are getting trained by high ranks. to which i replied:
"You know that high ranks teaching low ranks, proves that high ranks are more skilled/experienced?
Therefore low ranks are only "good" if they are trained, anybody can become a pro if he is trained"
Then i used RP players as a example that anybody can be pro if trained.
You did not understand, so i tried to simplify it and connect it with the main argument at the same time: "Low ranks are only good if they are trained by high ranks, therefore a non-trained low rank can't beat a high rank. " but apparently rather than answering to my claim, you tried to respond with more off-topic.
Consider this the last time i try to dive into your madness.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
Again clovis, you are evading the argument.
Do you agree that a low rank is only good if he gets trained?
Do you think a non-trained low rank can beat a high rank?
Btw, i beat you 2 times in a row in a custom map that i had never played before...
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
Black Shark
Conta apagada |
Say Clovis, are you by any chance simply debating in hope you'll manage to hind your mistake? I do it too sometimes. Stuff happens, and I can say only a mature person would not insult someone for making a human mistake every once and a while. If a person does insul- wait, did I insult you? Goddamnit...
But anyways, if you by any chance do know your mistake don't be afraid to admit it.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
oh clovis, youre still arguing all this, you know a r3 can enter a duel vs a r13, load all his troops into the r13s possible expansion areas and if he gets lucky, he can win. does this make the r3 better than the r13? ofc not. This is aw, anyone can beat anyone, while the basics are important, its the little things that distinguishes.the good players vs the great players.
when i first began dueling, i overcame tophats in a 5k duel while he was at his peak, it was nothing special, i sucker rushed him and held his cap. it was no great exibition of skill or level on his or my part. merely a bit of luck. Of all the UN and non competitive players ive encountered, none have impressed me with their technical skills. be it on world maps, their own scenarios or on europe if they decide to play there.
you say opi is a better player than you, well if you truly believe that after playing him 6 times then youve a lot more to learn on aw. ive seen him play, i saw nothing particularly interesting. and hes no match for you. im not entirely sure as to the circumstances with which he beat you, but i wouldve liked to have seen.
----
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
Clovis, you clearly realize you are wrong and you are just trying to confuse everyone so it makes you seem right, no low rank that isnt trained will win against a trained high rank in a series of games, of course there are shit rolls and lucky tbs but in the normal, or predictable situations, high ranks that are trained are better, so this bs claims about low ranks is completely false.
and the UN thing, UN died off, there arent strickly UN players anymore, just players who used to play it, take myself and joedtaxi, so trying to prove that UN players are somehow better at EU+? so confusing, but simple to see that you have run out of legitimate arguments and are just trying to shitface this until its locked
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
oh clovis, youre still arguing all this, you know a r3 can enter a duel vs a r13, load all his troops into the r13s possible expansion areas and if he gets lucky, he can win. does this make the r3 better than the r13? ofc not. This is aw, anyone can beat anyone, while the basics are important, its the little things that distinguishes.the good players vs the great players.
when i first began dueling, i overcame tophats in a 5k duel while he was at his peak, it was nothing special, i sucker rushed him and held his cap. it was no great exibition of skill or level on his or my part. merely a bit of luck. Of all the UN and non competitive players ive encountered, none have impressed me with their technical skills. be it on world maps, their own scenarios or on europe if they decide to play there.
you say opi is a better player than you, well if you truly believe that after playing him 6 times then youve a lot more to learn on aw. ive seen him play, i saw nothing particularly interesting
hi i am a UN player
hi me too, i used to love playing uns when they were popular believe it or not, every now and then youd have a un game with great battles. now they are never hosted and ive lost interest in playing long games. and i dont know why you felt the need to quote me and provide me with this informatiion lol
----
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
oh clovis, youre still arguing all this, you know a r3 can enter a duel vs a r13, load all his troops into the r13s possible expansion areas and if he gets lucky, he can win. does this make the r3 better than the r13? ofc not. This is aw, anyone can beat anyone, while the basics are important, its the little things that distinguishes.the good players vs the great players.
when i first began dueling, i overcame tophats in a 5k duel while he was at his peak, it was nothing special, i sucker rushed him and held his cap. it was no great exibition of skill or level on his or my part. merely a bit of luck. Of all the UN and non competitive players ive encountered, none have impressed me with their technical skills. be it on world maps, their own scenarios or on europe if they decide to play there.
you say opi is a better player than you, well if you truly believe that after playing him 6 times then youve a lot more to learn on aw. ive seen him play, i saw nothing particularly interesting
hi i am a UN player
hi me too, i used to love playing uns when they were popular believe it or not, every now and then youd have a un game with great battles. now they are never hosted and ive lost interest in playing long games. and i dont know why you felt the need to quote me and provide me with this informatiion lol
i was just trying to ask if ive impressed you sicne im scenario/custom map player
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
I am not replying against for repeat the same answer. All jared points are irrelevants. GG
but the point that untrained low ranks are the best players is relevant, the king of hypocracy has returned
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
oh clovis, youre still arguing all this, you know a r3 can enter a duel vs a r13, load all his troops into the r13s possible expansion areas and if he gets lucky, he can win. does this make the r3 better than the r13? ofc not. This is aw, anyone can beat anyone, while the basics are important, its the little things that distinguishes.the good players vs the great players.
when i first began dueling, i overcame tophats in a 5k duel while he was at his peak, it was nothing special, i sucker rushed him and held his cap. it was no great exibition of skill or level on his or my part. merely a bit of luck. Of all the UN and non competitive players ive encountered, none have impressed me with their technical skills. be it on world maps, their own scenarios or on europe if they decide to play there.
you say opi is a better player than you, well if you truly believe that after playing him 6 times then youve a lot more to learn on aw. ive seen him play, i saw nothing particularly interesting
hi i am a UN player
hi me too, i used to love playing uns when they were popular believe it or not, every now and then youd have a un game with great battles. now they are never hosted and ive lost interest in playing long games. and i dont know why you felt the need to quote me and provide me with this informatiion lol
i was just trying to ask if ive impressed you sicne im scenario/custom map player
youre also a competitive player... whether you define yourself as such or not.
----
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
oh clovis, youre still arguing all this, you know a r3 can enter a duel vs a r13, load all his troops into the r13s possible expansion areas and if he gets lucky, he can win. does this make the r3 better than the r13? ofc not. This is aw, anyone can beat anyone, while the basics are important, its the little things that distinguishes.the good players vs the great players.
when i first began dueling, i overcame tophats in a 5k duel while he was at his peak, it was nothing special, i sucker rushed him and held his cap. it was no great exibition of skill or level on his or my part. merely a bit of luck. Of all the UN and non competitive players ive encountered, none have impressed me with their technical skills. be it on world maps, their own scenarios or on europe if they decide to play there.
you say opi is a better player than you, well if you truly believe that after playing him 6 times then youve a lot more to learn on aw. ive seen him play, i saw nothing particularly interesting
hi i am a UN player
hi me too, i used to love playing uns when they were popular believe it or not, every now and then youd have a un game with great battles. now they are never hosted and ive lost interest in playing long games. and i dont know why you felt the need to quote me and provide me with this informatiion lol
i was just trying to ask if ive impressed you sicne im scenario/custom map player
youre also a competitive player... whether you define yourself as such or not.
its a gray area, i do enjoy competitive side, but i find the people way more irritating and full of themselves (not all but most) and it gets boring that way. But still fun to beat you 1v1
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
its a gray area, i do enjoy competitive side, but i find the people way more irritating and full of themselves (not all but most) and it gets boring that way. But still fun to beat you 1v1
people who are obnoxious and annoying are obnoxious and annoying regardless of what they play and they exist all over aw. ive met arrogant and rude scenario only players but i would never dream of labelling the whole subset or what they play as the problem
----
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
Everything die in life, 5k is drying and it got almost completery replaced by 10k. So, the Role Play will eventually die out.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
Escrito por Tundy, 15.09.2014 at 08:20
Do you agree that a low rank is only good if he gets trained?
There are some exeptions of low rank that learn on their own reading forums and asking clanmates without get trained by someone in particular. But for the bigger part this is a no.
Escrito por Tundy, 15.09.2014 at 08:20
Do you think a non-trained low rank can beat a high rank?
It depends if the high rank suck or is inactive. If you want to compare a low rank to someone like Laochra or you, then obvious you or lao will win. However, if you put the noob to play against someone more noob but higher rank, what you think would happen?
clovis, is a general accepted fact that in most cases a high rank will beat a low rank.
You have stated that training doesn't make a low rank good, since we don't need training to be good, a good low rank is somebody who has skill and knowledge (you don't develop knowledge without playing, and Rank is something that represents how many games you have played).
After that you claim that a normal low rank without training can beat a high rank if certain factors are meet. < this is a fallacy because you are basing your entire argument on exceptions: "The High rank could be noob, The High rank could be drunk. The high rank could have a hearth attack mid-game, etc." there is no such thing as an argument without exceptions.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
Black Shark
Conta apagada |
Well, they made a human mistake too because they think (I would have put ''know'' but I'm trying to be neutral) you are giving very bad arguments and even ignore some of them.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
-Irrelevant nonsense-
You keep debating and have yet to provide me with a valid response, each time you post it only hurts you.
Escrito por Tundy, 15.09.2014 at 21:09
and Rank is something that represents how many games you have played
high rank mean more games?  I cant do somenthing but take it as a joke XAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAXAHEHEHAHAHAHAHA 
Clovis, we are talking about a time when RP didn't existed, it looks like you don't know what to say.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
UN is to RP as Socialism is to Communism, an intermediate period.
----
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
Escrito por Tundy, 16.09.2014 at 08:28
Clovis, we are talking about a time when RP didn't existed, it looks like you don't know what to say.
Dont make me run in circles bro. Already gived you an answer to that. Read whole page 4 an 5 again and you will find all theses fact's which make possible a low rank to beat a high rank.
I answered: A lowrank without train cant beat a high rank with train.
I also answered: A low rank trained have equal chances to beat a high rank trained. I've provided enough facts for prove this is true.
Putting it in theses examples:
Low rank trained vs high rank trained = Equal chances.
Low rank trained vs high rank without train = Low rank win.
Low rank withou train vs high rank trained = High rank win.
Low rank without train vs high rank without train = Equal chances.
ok, you say rank DOES MATTE in old afterwind? nope it didnt.
You say high rank where the skillers? well in absolute numbers, they where not( there was more low rank trained that all the high ranks 10+) . In relative numbers , they where yes. Still there are some high ranks like zizou and killingforfun and El_General that are just.... OP in both Afterwind and AtWar...
that was sarcasm btw.
Clovis, you already stated that training doesn't matter, so this is irrelevant =D
But i am gonna be nice and let you keep going, because you can't come up with a better answer.
Low rank trained vs high rank trained = Equal chances. < wrong, high rank has more upgrades and knowledge.
Low rank trained vs high rank without train = Low rank win. < wrong, you are implying non-trained high ranks are bad, i am good and i was never trained.
Low rank withou train vs high rank trained = High rank win. < agree
Low rank without train vs high rank without train = Equal chances. <wrong high rank has more upgrades and knowledge.
Clovis, who trains the low ranks?  *cough* high ranks *cough*
Escrito por Tundy, 14.09.2014 at 20:25
You know that high ranks teaching low ranks, proves that high ranks are more skilled/experienced?
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
Escrito por Tundy, 16.09.2014 at 13:38
Clovis, you already stated that training doesn't matter, so this is irrelevant =D
But i am gonna be nice and let you keep going, because you can't come up with a better answer.
Low rank trained vs high rank trained = Equal chances. < wrong, high rank has more upgrades and knowledge.
Low rank trained vs high rank without train = Low rank win. < wrong, you are implying non-trained high ranks are bad, i am good and i was never trained.
Low rank withou train vs high rank trained = High rank win. < agree
Low rank without train vs high rank without train = Equal chances. <wrong high rank has more upgrades and knowledge.
Clovis, who trains the low ranks? *cough* high ranks *cough*
Dafuq dude I think I told you to read whole page 4 before post.
Run in circle alone if you want. I already provide the answer to this.Since you obvious have nothing new to add, I will just give you the link to the page 4 where I answered it. Next time you better read before post OK?
click here.
i already dismissed that as irrelevant, as it was off-topic and contradictory to your argument. i asked a legit question the first time i responded to your argument (which was around page 3, after that, page 4 and 5 are just you, posting shit in order to evade the question). i am not obligated to provide you with more statements if you don't even bother to answers the ones already provided.
so far, this is all that has been establish in the debate:
My argument is that ranks use to matter before custom maps. Your argument is that it didn't matter.
I have provided you with reasons that support my claim:
1.- Upgrades
2.- Knowledge
3.- Experience
You in the other hand, have provided us with nothing other than:
1.- low ranks use to get training (you later contradicted yourself and said training doesn't make a low rank good) (and is irrelevant because you are assuming high ranks don't get train)
2.- High rank could be hit by a meteor while he was dueling a low rank.
I already debunked both of your claims
1) who the fuck do you think invented training? just in case you did not know: High ranks!.
2) pointing out exceptions doesn't make something less valid, The best football team in the world could lose to a bunch of disabled kids if all the members of the best football team were paralyzed by a alien laser or god.
and finally not only i have debunked your claims but provided you with statements that destroy your argument:
A) even if a Low rank with skill "X" plays a High rank with skill "X" it doesn't make them equal: the high rank has more knowledge and experience + more upgrades. The high rank is most likely to win.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
Escrito por Tundy, 16.09.2014 at 21:28
trashtalking
Click on the link first....
EDIT: you too lazy. Here is the quote:
oh before the rise of RP? you mean before UN die right? This is before the merge:
► General was free.
► 3vs3 standart settings where rank 7
► Rank 8 and 9 where the best ranks, since they had the most sucefull games.
► Also there where many training clans around.
Even though the impact of custom maps on atWar competence is debatable, it mainly die because the charges on the CW system. Read here:
Here is the other quote:
From this, I replied with some fact's that help you to understand why rank didnt matte. With all the training clans teaching and caring for his lowranks every day, the difference between knowledge was very short: In those times, the rank 7-9 with fresh knowledge where the ones which actually do all the basic step. Again, I'l tell you some facts that help you prove why a rank 7 trained was as strong as a rank 10:
•) A very common one: Rank 7-9 get taugh to shut down game chat, sometimes clan chat too in a CW. Does high rank know this? YES. Does they do this? very often NO. Why they dont? because they think "nah" or " I dont lose concentration" or " he is a lowrank, I dont need to be this serious", while the rank 7-9 think " I am playing against someone strong, I need to focus".
•) Rank 7-9 know the importance of walls. They ( in Afterwind times) used to wall very much. The target they are going to attack next turn, they used to wall it too. Do high ranks know this? YES. do high ranks actually do this? well there are some players that still wall a lot, but in the biggest part, you will find even lack of walling. While theses rank 7-9 wall even places like Munich and Valencia, the high rank, in both old afterwind and even now in atWar, only wall capital or important cities like istanbul and hamburg.
•) Rank 7-9, or at least the ones I know, likes a secure slowroll to the death, while the rank 10 where the ones which actually got bored of play standard and started to reach another limits. Using another combination between country + strategies. They dont take the game serious when they are facing a lowrank, so they start to troll with country+strategy. Even in CW's with a competitive country+strategy pick, they never took a low rank serious.
•) Rank 7-9 where the ones which composed the mayority of 3vs3's. It is natural, as high ranks are usually in college, and they stop playing and dedicate less time to Afterwind until they eventually left the game. Some of them are still playing nowadays though. This was not the situation with the rank 7-9 which actually had plenity of time for play the game. If you start doing a research now, you will find that rank 7 to 9 are more actives that rank 10+ in overall.
This answer your first question: Theses are fact's which help to prove that rank was not a big deal. A rank 7 had the same possibilities to beat a rank 10, before the rise of custom maps. You say rank did matter before the merge, and I give you a lot of facts that prove that rank didn't matte.
What is the big difference?
You are high rank and know how to get a transport in sweden? A low rank also know it!
You know an awesome expancion for your favorite country? A low rank also know one for another country!
You know how does TB work? A low rank also know it!
You know all the basic expancions for all the countries? A low rank also know it!
You know how to do sea wall? A low rank also know it!
You know that is important to wall all your cities? A low rank also know it!
You know that paris have more income that london, and that hamburg is an important city? A low rank also know it!
Why you dont start talking us how was your atWar life in the past? Why you dont start giving us correct arguments? I am very sure you lived a reality like this, if you started your competitive life in this time.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
 Desu
Publicações: 898
De: Canada
 |
I think it's been long figured out that trying to have a discussion with Clovis is pretty pointless. He's almost universally wrong on every subject but he still manages to ignore your statement and continue arguing long after he's been proven wrong. I sometimes wonder why I read his posts still. It's a very deep and philosophical question.
Arguing is very enjoyable, I love it too, but I think you've proven yourself already Tunder3. Sometimes being proven wrong just isn't enough for some people.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
Escrito por Desu, 16.09.2014 at 22:21
I think it's been long figured out that trying to have a discussion with Clovis is pretty pointless. He's almost universally wrong on every subject but he still manages to ignore your statement and continue arguing long after he's been proven wrong. I sometimes wonder why I read his posts still. It's a very deep and philosophical question.
Arguing is very enjoyable, I love it too, but I think you've proven yourself already Tunder3. Sometimes being proven wrong just isn't enough for some people.
Clovis is a fallacy!
----
It's not the end.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
Escrito por Desu, 16.09.2014 at 22:21
I think it's been long figured out that trying to have a discussion with Clovis is pretty pointless. He's almost universally wrong on every subject but he still manages to ignore your statement and continue arguing long after he's been proven wrong. I sometimes wonder why I read his posts still. It's a very deep and philosophical question.
Arguing is very enjoyable, I love it too, but I think you've proven yourself already Tunder3. Sometimes being proven wrong just isn't enough for some people.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
► Say I am wrong.
► No proof.
Wanna discuss about how was Afterwind, Desu?
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
► Say I am wrong.
► No proof.
Wanna discuss about how was Afterwind, Desu?
When you learn English is when you can talk to Desu. Cause I'm quite sure hes one of the 100s who has no idea what you're saying 99% of the time.
----
It's not the end.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
Escrito por Mr_Own_U, 16.09.2014 at 23:46
When you learn English is when you can talk to Desu. Cause I'm quite sure hes one of the 100s who has no idea what you're saying 99% of the time.
Desu has stated somenthing without give any fact or opinion. I am not the type of guy that can accept arbitrary statements.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
Escrito por Mr_Own_U, 16.09.2014 at 23:46
When you learn English is when you can talk to Desu. Cause I'm quite sure hes one of the 100s who has no idea what you're saying 99% of the time.
Desu has stated somenthing without give any fact or opinion. I am not the type of guy that can accept arbitrary statements.
Sorry can't quite comprehend what you're saying.
----
It's not the end.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
Escrito por Mr_Own_U, 16.09.2014 at 23:51
Sorry can't quite comprehend what you're saying.
Are you in the side of thunder? Do you really think that rank matte?
It is not about english or not. Mr_Own_U, do you think that rank matte? Are you rankist? Stop hiding in the excuse of english, if you dont have answer for this then just say it: I dont have answer for this.
I don't side anyone... ranks do MATTE!!
I don't even know what this conversation is about enlighten me. And don't direct me to read the entire forum..
If it's about rankism.. Then I do believe in it. I don't want some narb rank 6 joining and picking Russia Central.. High ranks already know better to do something then that, even if they're not familiar with 3v3s.
----
It's not the end.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
|
Escrito por Mr_Own_U, 16.09.2014 at 23:58
Escrito por Mr_Own_U, 16.09.2014 at 23:51
Sorry can't quite comprehend what you're saying.
Are you in the side of thunder? Do you really think that rank matte?
It is not about english or not. Mr_Own_U, do you think that rank matte? Are you rankist? Stop hiding in the excuse of english, if you dont have answer for this then just say it: I dont have answer for this.
I don't side anyone... ranks do MATTE!!
I don't even know what this conversation is about enlighten me. And don't direct me to read the entire forum..
If it's about rankism.. Then I do believe in it. I don't want some narb rank 6 joining and picking Russia Central.. High ranks already know better to do something then that, even if they're not familiar with 3v3s.
We are talking about the past, where there was a lot of training coalitions. You was a lot likery to find a high rank bored picking a non standart pick ( probably exploring new expancions and ways for play) that a rank 7.
You joined in 2013, how was the situation in your times?
It's was very good
----
It's not the end.
Carregando...
Carregando...
|
