Mod deletes report filed against themselves and other mods help him cover it up by spamming the mod actions. Great job guys. I can see how much integrity you guys have in your real life activity too.
but calling someone a b.tch is pretty offensive to the b.tch you're insulting because that's the point of calling the person a b.tch?
and the word ret.arded probably shouldn't be used offensively because people who actually have mental retardation are excluded enough as it is. So i guess ideally it wouldn't be offensive, and b!tch would be.
No need. Wait for A&d to be within limits. Then you can comp it. So what's the limit? Sds was allowed. So if a&d is same as sds then it will be allowed right? Kerry im asking you?
A&D is rly fun though and takes some skill as either alignment
it's sad it went so scumsided :(
deletedover 7 years
it all comes down to bad setups. bad setups should not be comped, good setups should be comped. point distribution is irrelevant. if the win percentages of a setup are imbalanced, one must understand the reason behind that imbalance and if its inherently unhealthy or not.
You're awfully hostile today, pranay. Sorry your precious A&D can't be comped.
If your premise is that a good player can choose to play hard setups for more points, then you are admitting that if Player A and B are good players that B has the inherent advantage. Why not play setups that are relatively balanced, as are the point distributions? I see no reason to allow setups that are too tilted to be allowed in comp.
deletedover 7 years
Your whole premise for allowing unbalanced setups is so a good player can use them to get an edge in points. So if Player A and B are good players and are capable of winning consistently as town on a scumsided setup, which has the advantage over the other?
Why not restrict comp to setups where both sides are relatively even and require a similar level of skill (and payout) to consistently win?
I remember a round where I chose to play easier setups to guarantee wins. I lost a trophy by few points even though we had the sam number of wins. Because the other guy played a few risky games and got more points. I wasn't whining about it. I knew that he deserved to be rewarded for the risk. If I wasn't too scared of the risky setup then may be I could have won. Or may be if I tried to play the risky setup and lost, I'd finish with a higher point gap.
