again, why are the subforums not mod-only?

or why can we post in it? it's a fucking option to only allow mods to post in it

why


I just use a skin unlocker


every skin unlocked for free :^)

I got some weird hentai shit

Why aren't the subforums mod-only until halloween starts or soemthing?

how does bad rats sound

nice

Originally posted by Erick:

Originally posted by Kptn Howdy:

It says that you're obsessed with old-school shooters and can't accept that other kinds of shooters exist.

I highly enjoy other kinds of shooter. I, however, do not like Quake or Doom-like shooters.

It's a magical thing called opinion.

Press a button to jump high, not rocket jumping with some actual practice and team coordination.

Sure.

Yeah, your opinion is fact, sorry, forgot that.

Every game is shit and that's why they sell millions of copies.

Originally posted by Erick:

Originally posted by Kptn Howdy:

I'm not even sure what we're talking about anymore.

Why is everyone completely derailing the conversation.

What we're saying is that Overwatch is not competitive and not a good FPS game. It's another generic piece of crap you've seen in the past 6 years, only this time, with some flashy colors and waifus, other than that, you got something that anyone who truly wants a game with some actual player thought required, well, Overwatch is not that.

Hell, I've played PS2 and PS3 exclusive multiplayer games with much more skill required than Overwatch, what does that say?

It says that you're obsessed with old-school shooters and can't accept that other kinds of shooters exist.

I highly enjoy other kinds of shooter. I, however, do not like Quake or Doom-like shooters.

It's a magical thing called opinion.

Originally posted by Erick:

Originally posted by Kptn Howdy:

I'm not gonna pretend to say I know the maps from Doom 1 or 2 or try to tell people what modes they have though, aren't I?

Overwatch's "competitive" is an even more dumb down Quake competitive mode.

As in, even casual deathmatch in that game take more skill and true player interaction than any modern shooter these days.

Just saying.

Originally posted by Burnt Sienna:

Originally posted by Kptn Howdy:

what in the fuck are you talking about?

what i am saying is that in life somethimes things are cannot always be what they look like that is why we have things like the newtonuyon laws of physics for we to rely on. in the end overwatch competitive does not matter to the world

I'm not even sure what we're talking about anymore.

Why is everyone completely derailing the conversation.

Originally posted by Burnt Sienna:

Originally posted by Kptn Howdy:

I'm not gonna pretend to say I know the maps from Doom 1 or 2 or try to tell people what modes they have though, aren't I?

i don't pretend i have done mostly my research on the basis of scientific fact suck as that life is made up of cells

what in the fuck are you on about?

Originally posted by Reality:

You are supposed to lose more from losing than you win from winning (except on very new accounts) that is simply how these systems function. You would see the same on smogon, starcraft, dota, or chess. They don't use a strict elo system[en.wikipedia.org] but their variation of it stil applies this to any account that is considered to be stable. I think blizzard's wonky calibration is due to what happened in early starcraft 2. I do think it's arbitariness does help cut down alting...

So falling that many points due to those matches, even against a series of high rank opponets, is correct on the systems part.

Supports/Tanks versus damage. I think these are still misunderstood by developers, but for games that encourage team queues the importance of traditional objective/kill metrics is easier to implement. I think that weighting them is only great when solo queues are an active point of interest. After all med kit contention is a bit touchy to measure and destroys use of a blanket healing formula.

As for the matchmaking- In that case you are justified. The ladder system is extremely hostile to solo queues. Personally, I feel like you can mitigate the problems by joing a team yourself? I understand reluctance if you haven't done it before, but it doesn't really doesn't demand a much more difficult commitment than solo play.

In any case tournaments are a better competetive venue than ladders.. they encourage surprising opponet's instead of formulaic play, and usually downplay the importance of assuming oppnets strictly use meta rollouts. Of course ladders are nice in that they provide an immediate access to matches, but. as you say, it isn't really that competetive if not used "abusively" since communication is so important.

In a competitive scenario, you should still be going up if you have a 51% winrate.

Currently, you need an ~75% winrate to go up in ranks.