Quote:
Originally Posted by Crono
Oh really? Then why was Arctic such an active and successful map in 2004-2005? In between bases 3 and 4 you usually had a few good sparrers in the middle, ready to fight anyone that came around. Base 5 was an easy one to get, but most of the time there were mines hiding about, and base 2 pretty much ended in atleast one conflict (as it's so close to the enemy's HQ).
Base 1 was a war zone, and I don't think I need to describe how it was. People used the base to it's full potential; they set up mines, some hid in the bunker (including medics waiting for the wave of enemies to go away), and other surrounded both the base and the base's roof.
They did all this because they WANTED those bases, and keeping base 1 almost always ensured victory.
|
Precisely.
These new goddamn headstrong kids charge people with gratuitously overpowered weapons (even moreso than the past, oddly enough) and except reasonable people to conform to their ideals of 'strategy'.
Strategy is not rushing at someone and attempting to display your 'mad skillz' by lobbing pipebombs or using a colourifle. Strategy is using the immediate environment, and your definition of 'base laming' is essentially highly effective area denial. Defense, contrary to popular belief - is not actually 'laming' either.
People still get angry at me for running into a bunker and stabbing the poor helpless sod who charged in attempting to get me as an easy kill. Then I get swathed in a furious torrent of rage by them that just makes me laugh.
Do you want to be
that guy? You know, the guy who sat down and cried in the middle of a game of bullrush because he got tipped when several people cornered him? Reassess yourselves and don't allow the perception of 'honor' jeopardise your gaming experience.