karma
A better forum warrior
Posts: 118
|
Post by karma on Aug 24, 2012 15:39:19 GMT 2
Great work Grin
Now bring back MWC scoring! :E
|
|
|
|
Post by giantkillergeneral on Aug 24, 2012 15:45:25 GMT 2
I understood Myrk's original point just fine.
ok so to stop contesting from any ghols on ctf desert, you can take like around 15 thrall and put them in a circle formation. problem solved. i guess they never could think of that back then. or was it really just that contesting points wasn't as important as you say?
I recall getting 2 points for a contest on ctf maximum, and that was it. once you got the contest, that was your 2 points. regardless though, putting 20% including archers on flag defense almost guarantees your loss in the BC fight and the game if the other side isn't equally as stupid, so that is no excuse.
i certainly don't remember people calculating how many unit points you had defending the flag and then using that to calculate how many contest points u got from there. how would they create a concrete rule of what qualifies as "flag defense" and what is just units that are somewhat near the flag but not quite flag defense? just by judging it? by some certain distance from the flag that they measure on their screen? does this sound outlandish yet? clearly that all sounds very made up. your memory is horrible.
also the example match you linked to doesn't demonstrate anything about contesting. it only shows a high ctf scoring, but nothing to do with contest points. the 18-0 points aesir got was from straight up steamrolling gtm on that game, ending with 54%-0%. there was no contesting done. let me say that again, it only shows a high ctf scoring, but nothing to do with contest points. the 18-0 points aesir got was from straight up steamrolling gtm on that game, ending with 54%-0%. gtm also made no attempt to even contest their flag, even though they could have easily sent a heron to go rack up those massive contest points you talk about. i thought you were trying to say that contest points made the ctf games really close even if you won, but 18-0 on that game is really showing the complete opposite. you would think with ctf games being so valuable point-wise that that would be even more incentive for teams to not be retarded with 20% defenses.
hilarious film by the way, everyone arching with clumped line archer formations moving back and forth. really hilariously horrible play. they did get light flag defense though, so I guess the ctf contest scoring must not have been like you say.
but how do you guys explain the clumped archer line formations fighting back and forth? and what about the less than max herons for both sides? did they not read my article about how you always max herons? lol.
i wasnt around for mwc06, you can argue it wasn't exactly 06, but definitely around that time, the peak of pmnet. if i recall tcox upset BME or something that year, so that probably contributed to the finals blowout.
oh and cave, that's a hilarious crock of shit.
|
|
|
|
Post by honkey on Aug 24, 2012 17:43:27 GMT 2
Why you pickin on gtm gkg?
|
|
|
|
Post by flatline on Aug 24, 2012 17:45:37 GMT 2
I understood Myrk's original point just fine. ok so to stop contesting from any ghols on ctf desert, you can take like around 15 thrall and put them in a circle formation. problem solved. i guess they never could think of that back then. or was it really just that contesting points wasn't as important as you say? I recall getting 2 points for a contest on ctf maximum, and that was it. once you got the contest, that was your 2 points. regardless though, putting 20% including archers on flag defense almost guarantees your loss in the BC fight and the game if the other side isn't equally as stupid, so that is no excuse. Ok the rules page doesnt work on mw2k site but get to that later. www.mythgaming.net/mwc2001/rules.phpThe mwc2k1 rules page has ctf scoring and it is like 4 points or 6 points for a contest and it is clearly either 4 or 6 dependent on what % you contest with with regards to like I said about attacker/defender point values. This was still shitty but the mwc2k contest points were even worse. So your memory is bad not mine. LOLNo not made up at all. And yes the judging of the units classified as defending the flag was a little fuzzy and i think left up to the match scorer or the tos. But it was basically generalized as units in the closish vicinity of the flag on defense. Bit fuzzy but thats how it was. You are sounding silly randomly insulting my memory when my memory is fine about the ctf scoring back then and you have no idea what you are talking about or dont remember it. LOLOk firstly myrk wasnt posting the link to the match to demonstrate how shitty ctf contesting points were. He was posting that link to show how shitty CTF scoring was overall. ie that a single ctf blowout win was basically worth 2-3 good wins on other gametypes. Secondly. www.mythgaming.net/mwc2000/results/winn/2/2W08/1.shtmlThat's a link to 9c-poop acts of cruelty ctf game in mwc2k. If you read the review on that page of the game it clearly states that poop get a 14 point contest on 9c's flag using just their single FG. It also states that 9c actually takes poops flag and win the game and get 18 points for doing that. So 9c captured poops flag and got 18 points for the win. Poop contested 9cs flag with a single FG and got 14 points for it. Ridiculous and not made up at all. www.mythgaming.net/mwc2000/results/winn/2/2W08/1.shtmlYou can see on the same match patch the score for ctf was 18-14. Watch the film of the ctf game and you will see poop got 14 points for a simple pussy fg contest and 9c got 18 for taking poops flag. If 9c didnt let poop contest their flag at all this game would have been scored 18-0 which was huge points in this 3 game series and almost impossible to overcome in the remaining 2 games. Im sure the play and trades in this game are horrible so feel free to giggle but its just to show you that my memory on the ctf contest scoring (and myrks etc) is completely correct and that not letting other team contest was important for ctf games considering this game was scored like 18-14. I havent watched films from 2000 for ages but im sure some of it was hilarious. Some of the trades probably pretty funky too. But there were also what you call retarded trades in mwcs many years later also. Example : BME (or UA) getting a zero fg trade on acts of cruelty terries vs HOA in a bottom bracket elimination match in the final deciding game. I'm not making this up either and that was in like mwc2005 LOL. and that was the mighty chohan and btt doing the same shit years later that was so retarded in 2000 or whatever. So much for 2005 or 2006 or whatever being so much better. Finals blowout in 2006 was probably more indicative that 2006 was definitely not the high point of myth care and skill. I think thundercox upset bme and bia too or something but whatever i have no idea why youd trhink 2006 was some high point of anything in myth. LOLI sorta remember that several of cacra dummied for greek gods in mwc2k1 and vice versa so thats not made up either! |
|
|
|
Post by flatline on Aug 24, 2012 17:59:37 GMT 2
also wwo since you wanted to point out that I used to be roster filler, let me just add that I placed 8th in mwc2k1 with Cacra. What did you place at that year? If you follow the same argument as myrk, flatline, and others that tournaments back then were way more competitive, how could roster filler such as myself place 8th out of the 80+ teams in mwc2k1? I actually wasn't even really a roster filler. I played most if not all of the games and had a prominent role on the team, helping to cap and strat at times even way back then. Myself and the rest of Cacra were most certainly 2-3 ballers by today's standards though, and with much shittier internet connections, there is no doubt about that. I just wonder how we placed 8th being as mediocre as we were in what is often considered by those that cling to the past as the most competitive mwc of all time. A similar quality team of 2-3 ballers from this mwc would have a placement not too different. HRMMMMM. The reason they placed 8th : dummy accounts. Myself, Limp and probably many others dummied regularly for Cacra during mwc2k1. In fact they benched their real players so dummies could play. I think I played as 'Blade'. Tee Hee. |
|
|
|
Post by giantkillergeneral on Aug 24, 2012 18:14:40 GMT 2
Ok so you talk on and on about how that was how they scored ctf in mwc2k but you don't have any actual proof. gotcha. Oh wait, I just found the ctf scoring rule on the page you provided: Scoring: 2/6/10/14/18 for contest with <50%/50%/75%/100%+/win says right on here: www.mythgaming.net/mwc2000/results/winn/2/2W08/1.shtmlso again, my point stands. yes that was retarded scoring, but 15 thrall circle formation and that's it. still doesn't really justify that stupidity. anyway, about the made-up contest points calculation using the number of unit points defending the flag, I guess your memory really was horrible after all. makes me wonder what else you are making up, hrmm... and it was amusing how you pitched that story as if it was just a matter-of-fact. you can find examples of terrible strats everywhere (look at bullz vs NC mwc11 finals). the idiocy with both the strats and skill is much more prevalent back then. and the thing with it back then was that BOTH teams would do it. these days the one that does the stupid shit is the one that gets blown out. what about the clumped archers moving back and forth flat? you seemed to completely ignore that. that was the signature arching of the day. hrmmmm??? |
|
|
|
Post by flatline on Aug 24, 2012 18:45:52 GMT 2
Ok so you talk on and on about how that was how they scored ctf in mwc2k but you don't have any actual proof. gotcha. Oh wait, I just found the ctf scoring rule on the page you provided: Scoring: 2/6/10/14/18 for contest with <50%/50%/75%/100%+/win says right on here: www.mythgaming.net/mwc2000/results/winn/2/2W08/1.shtmlso again, my point stands. yes that was retarded scoring, but 15 thrall circle formation and that's it. still doesn't really justify that stupidity. Well uh everything i said about the scoring which you basically said was made up or didnt exist or whatever was correct. You would get 14 points if you contested the enemy flag with 100% or more of the point value of the units defending the flag Maybe your 15 thrall thing *might* stop 6 ghols or something from contesting a flag and geting a cheap 6 points or not. A better question is how much stuff do you need to put on your flag on acts of cruelty ctf to stop a fg getting an easy 14 point contest when you will only get 18 pts if you actually take their flag. I guess you could shadow the fg and stop or etc etc or whatever but on map like that especially it just showed you had to think a little different if it was a ctf game. err umm what  You just sort of proved above yourself that my memory was correct with the ctf contest scoring. You losing me here. I dunno why are teams doing idiotic strats as recent as 2011 mwc finals if mything is of such a higher quality these days than back then  a paradox I guess. Hmm i dont know i'd have to watch the old films again I guess but it was probably the fashionable thing to do at the time like say for instance saying "mirin" or "butthurt" right now. I'm sure i'd probably laugh myself at some of the stuff in old films. But shit i laugh at similar stuff in games nowadays like say losing 12 souls to a single mort shot at crucial moment in a game and shit. Theres just as much horrible play today as at any time in any myth tourney in any year really! |
|
|
|
Post by giantkillergeneral on Aug 24, 2012 18:54:02 GMT 2
LOLNo not made up at all. And yes the judging of the units classified as defending the flag was a little fuzzy and i think left up to the match scorer or the tos. But it was basically generalized as units in the closish vicinity of the flag on defense. Bit fuzzy but thats how it was. You are sounding silly randomly insulting my memory when my memory is fine about the ctf scoring back then and you have no idea what you are talking about or dont remember it. those % in the ctf scoring rules are % of your total army, not % guarding the flag, or % multiplied by the unit points guarding the flag. what the hell are you talking about man? holy shit... and the contest points are a 1 time thing, they don't stack. how deep are you going to dig into this delusion of yours? |
|
|
|
Post by flatline on Aug 24, 2012 19:17:23 GMT 2
LOLNo not made up at all. And yes the judging of the units classified as defending the flag was a little fuzzy and i think left up to the match scorer or the tos. But it was basically generalized as units in the closish vicinity of the flag on defense. Bit fuzzy but thats how it was. You are sounding silly randomly insulting my memory when my memory is fine about the ctf scoring back then and you have no idea what you are talking about or dont remember it. those % in the ctf scoring rules are % of your total army, not % guarding the flag, or % multiplied by the unit points guarding the flag. what the hell are you talking about man? holy shit... and the contest points are a 1 time thing, they don't stack. how deep are you going to dig into this delusion of yours? Seriously lol why would u think the % is the % of your total army to contest the enemy flag...................... Makes even less sense than the contest rules already made. Please grim or anybody that remembers the rules would verify i am correct. Or better yet WATCH the ctf film from that page of 9c-poop ctf and you'll SEE that poop gets a single contest with their fg on 9c's flag and get 14 points for that single fg contest. In what universe that you live is a single FG 100%+ of poop's total army to get them 14 points for that contest according to the ctf scoring rules as you understand them to be. Please just watch the film you would see that I am 100% correct. I know whos digging deep into a delusion here  And i never at any time said contests stacked. They didn't. I dont know where u got that from at all. |
|
|
|
Post by giantkillergeneral on Aug 24, 2012 19:31:13 GMT 2
dude what in the *cruiser*.
you contest a flag. scorer's watch the film and press f7 at the point of the contest to get the team's % left at that time, and you now get at least that many points for that game no matter what else happens in it.
it actually isn't actually clear which team's % it takes, either your teams or their teams.
better make those LOL's bigger bro.
|
|
|
|
Post by giantkillergeneral on Aug 24, 2012 19:50:10 GMT 2
were you are suggesting the % is based on how many units points you contested with divided by how many unit points they had guarding the flag? LOL.
Btw i just watched the film, and its exactly as I say. PoOp contests your flag when you have like 78%, so they got 14 points for a 75% contest.
so it looks like they go by the team whose flag got contested's army %, which makes more sense.
gg, gf, no re.
|
|
|
|
Post by tirri on Aug 24, 2012 21:23:59 GMT 2
not that i dont enjoy gkg making himself look mentally retarded page after page but here are the actual rules from the rules page:
Capture the Flag
All MWC2k Capture the Flag games will be scored as follows:
Each team receives one bonus award from the following list (the largest award for which the team qualifies):
0 points if the enemy flag is never contested.
2 points if the enemy flag is contested by any unit.
6 points if the enemy flag is contested by a force at least 50% as strong as the flag's defenders.
10 points if the enemy flag is contested by a force at least 75% as strong as the flag's defenders.
14 points if the enemy flag is contested by a force stronger that the flag's defenders.
14 points if the enemy flag is captured but then lost again, or if flags are swapped.
18 points for a win, where one team owns both flags (or eliminates the enemy team).
The maximum score possible in Capture the Flag is 18.
The determination of relative strength of attackers and defenders for purposes of the bonus awards made in Capture the Flag and Balls on Parade games will be based on unit trading point value. The flag's defenders include all units that contribute to the flag's defense by: 1) being within contesting range of the flag; 2) engaging in melee combat with the assault force during its attack; or 3) attacking the assault force with ranged attacks or being attacked by the assault force's ranged attacks. An assault force includes all units that engage the flag's defenders, with melee combat or ranged attacks.
All such determinations are made during the period of time that the flag is contested. Forces that are destroyed before the flag is contested, or after the flag is no longer contested, are not included in the strength determination.
For example, a force of 12 warriors and 4 heron guards (point value: 36) attacks a flag defended by 15 thrall, 2 dwarves, and 4 archers (point value: 39). If the flag is contested by any of the attacking units at any time, the attacker qualifies for the bonus of 8 points for contesting with a force at least 75% as strong as the defending force. Note that the entire force need not get into contesting range, as long as they are all contributing to the assault. However, if some of the attacking force was ordered to attack and delay a group of 16 thrall moving to reinforce the flag while the battle continued, the thrall would be included in the defenders, reducing the bonus to 5 points since 36 is only 65% of 55.
In the case of any dispute, the final determination of bonus awards in games of Capture the Flag will be made by the Triumvirate.
|
|
|
|
Post by adrenaline on Aug 24, 2012 21:29:56 GMT 2
those rules would actually be pretty decent in a CTF-only tourney.
|
|
karma
A better forum warrior
Posts: 118
|
Post by karma on Aug 24, 2012 21:30:43 GMT 2
l
o
l
|
|
|
|
Post by giantkillergeneral on Aug 24, 2012 21:35:59 GMT 2
link it
really can't believe a rule that retarded.
|
|
a paradox I guess.
