Spring RTS Engine

Spawn_Retard wrote:dude, one minute you want who's playing by playing by name, and then you dont give a fuck who plays.

You seem to be confused. All I want is for someone to tell me who is playing for CoX so it can put in the list and then those people cant go playing for other clans in the league.
Whats the fuss about? I didnt know noruas and trib were CoX (:p) you just told me now.

@pintle
Im against dgunning and living but it hasnt been a problem in any team games that I have played. I hardly ever morph and dont suffer from that. Feel free to make me eat my words by dgunning your way to victory, but until then..
And yeah there is much more drama than decent games atm but there werent any decent games before this anyway really so there is no harm in still trying to make this happen

Gota wrote:Guess why BA 1v1 games have RULES that say you cant transport your commander into enemy base within 10 minutes of game start?
Because Competitive BA players learned it the hard way.

Was it really like that? I thought that the rule was just copied from TA

I wonder if TMO returned and had a "clan match" with CoX, got d gun'd, we lived, and if he'd be like "ok yeah that's legit carry on". Or 1/2 of CoW for that matter

are leather weightlifting gloves with the fingers cut out suitable for pro XTA?

JohannesH wrote:

Gota wrote:Guess why BA 1v1 games have RULES that say you cant transport your commander into enemy base within 10 minutes of game start?
Because Competitive BA players learned it the hard way.

Was it really like that? I thought that the rule was just copied from TA

It was immidielty understood that this would be horrible cheese.
and despite what some xta players might say I think its very possible in xta..

Gota wrote:

JohannesH wrote:

Gota wrote:Guess why BA 1v1 games have RULES that say you cant transport your commander into enemy base within 10 minutes of game start?
Because Competitive BA players learned it the hard way.

Was it really like that? I thought that the rule was just copied from TA

It was immidielty understood that this would be horrible cheese.
and despite what some xta players might say I think its very possible in xta..

It's totally possible to kill a com with your com + 1 unit, even if that unit is a con. Provided you abide by com dgun= forfeit (standard in any *A 1v1 which include dguns by default), you either have to com drop so late that they will have aa/you will be rushed, or do it so early that it is incredibly hard to secure the kill before your own com pops.

90% of the time, even if the lab gets dgunned/self d'd, a decent land player receiving comdrop start will either have the combat units out to secure the faster com kill, or enough cons out to kill the airlab and out-recover the air dropper.

There is plenty of skill and risk in the start, and I don't see how it is less legit than other all-in strategies.

The BA rule always seemed like QQing bullshit to me, and literally no different than a "10 mins no rush" or "no noox" game.

I agree with both pintle and teutooni. In principle any competitive game should be comends, and there shouldn't be a need to write rules such as start 1000m/e out, it should be common knowledge.

babbles wrote:I wonder if TMO returned and had a "clan match" with CoX

no word about me?
btw, lets discuss proper 1v1/clan-rules here and then reset the ladderboard in a new thread. every game replay should be uploaded

In principle any competitive game should be comends

atm, thats a little stupid because dgunning other com = you win because your commander explodes half a second later. If that could be detected to maybe make the game a draw then?

knorke wrote:

In principle any competitive game should be comends

atm, thats a little stupid because dgunning other com = you win because your commander explodes half a second later. If that could be detected to maybe make the game a draw then?

i smell a gadget here :)

Have 1v1 clanmatches, bo3 or bo5, different player of the same clan for each map.

Or some games of the match could also be teamgames

knorke wrote:

In principle any competitive game should be comends

atm, thats a little stupid because dgunning other com = you win because your commander explodes half a second later. If that could be detected to maybe make the game a draw then?

As pintle said, dgunning another commander is forfeit, whereas lasering him dead ┬┤is okay. I agree to this principle, but in practise I have seen that commander continues also works fine. It's a bit more barbaric, but as long as both teams agree it also works.

Jools wrote:

knorke wrote:

In principle any competitive game should be comends

atm, thats a little stupid because dgunning other com = you win because your commander explodes half a second later. If that could be detected to maybe make the game a draw then?

As pintle said, dgunning another commander is forfeit, whereas lasering him dead ┬┤is okay. I agree to this principle, but in practise I have seen that commander continues also works fine. It's a bit more barbaric, but as long as both teams agree it also works.

If you play competitive game with com contintues, expect my com exloding over you eco/lab/com ~3 minutes into the game. Every game.

That's because you don't expect _mines_

Anyway, I would love to play commander ends, if we can agree to such rule.

pintle wrote:If you play competitive game with com contintues, expect my com exloding over you eco/lab/com ~3 minutes into the game. Every game.

OH SHIT ONE MISSLE TOWER GG, LOL


competetive gaming = anything you can possibly get away with between the agreed tourney rules and game engine is game. if the rules favour combombing then bomb away.

also, if somebodys playstyle was hugely focused around the use of commanders I wouldnt have a second thought sacrificing mine to remove his from the game in continues

BA has the right idea with tourney rules because otherwise unfun bullshit and comboms is the most efficent way to play.

edit:
just had a fairly random flashback of a RoX vs CoW 4v4 on greencomet where I accidently self-d my commander 3 minutes in and pintle raged the fuck out, good times

1v0ry_k1ng wrote:also, if somebodys playstyle was hugely focused around the use of commanders I wouldnt have a second thought sacrificing mine to remove his from the game in continues

I hate people like you.

I have to admit, the more you wrestle with each other here, the more I want to play XTA.

Incidentally, both a mine and an MT would facilitate the whole "my com explodes on yours" (and i get to keep my lab) thing, and for either of those to work in the context of the 1v1 cb I am envisaging, you would have to start con/ML --> mt/heavy mine (in the perfect spot) either way, massively exposing yourself to X Y and Z actual valid rush builds, let alone maek atlas-> point at nme start pos.

The very worst outcome in a continues com drop 1v1 is that you are forced to land (outside mt range) and dgun their lab. Them com blocking your dgun means sweet bugger all, as it yields the same result: they lose lab+com, you lose com, keep lab, win game.


tl;dr= com continues 1v1 needs either lame rules, or to not happen.