|
Post by mrgametheory on Aug 28, 2007 17:44:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Jun 21, 2007 3:20:30 GMT -5
MrGameTheory ..A..Kazache DarkwoodDub Rupman TheVindicator andreas23 ahandac yumpak
Edited by CS, to reflect actual ladder players.
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Jun 4, 2007 21:02:33 GMT -5
Before these eyes all of your jutsu are worthless....
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on May 7, 2007 2:46:24 GMT -5
rofl, cs and mookie, get a room ..A.. does not merge with other clans, other clans merge with ..A.. With no rokkitlauncher Ray can say goodbye to the possibility of any points for event 1 All your bases are belong to GameTheory
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on May 7, 2007 4:47:05 GMT -5
..A..
MrGameTheory (captain) Marak Rupman kazache CanKaban Darkwooddub wanggon MigUgra scoticus matlowe gab1so sausageface Extinct
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Jan 10, 2007 15:30:40 GMT -5
And who beat you guys on July 10th You may go into detail....
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Jan 8, 2007 16:22:18 GMT -5
Great Job Ray, You guys deffinitly have an All Star Squad...
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Jan 14, 2007 2:52:34 GMT -5
SPM were you aware that Alex lost a second city? If you can go back and take points away from ..A.. you sure as hell can go back and give them to ..A.. . I had no idea that alex lost a second city and I hope you didnt either because disqualification with this new information i just found out is compltly unacceptable, especially when you consider that MDRs captain agreed that we deserve the points fair and square and it was MDR who set these settings in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Jan 8, 2007 23:09:45 GMT -5
Incidents liek this happen but 1-2 times a month and not 45 times a day. its not complicated to just add these rules in. The most that should of happened on this decision is ..A.. should of recieved their points and a rule regarding continueing games with poor settings be made........ Thats it..... Anytihng beyond shows a lack of judging knowledge on any person making a decision on this matter especialyl considering CCC is over....
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Jan 8, 2007 23:04:43 GMT -5
I am just finding out about this mess now, and I am sorry that I was unable to find out about this earlier....
Due to the fact that there isnt a current rule stating that a game must be scrapped if in the middle of the game settings are found to be in error, the game should continue and until the end of the time set or if both teams agree to a scrap or a TD agrees to a scrap. Due to the fact that Both Teams didn't agree to a scrap and the TD of the event agreed to continue ..A.. should not be disqualified for this event and they deserve to win this round. After the TD ruled on the decision all players continued to play until the end and ..A.. won. Case closed. All players knew there was a mistake in settings and agreed to play. Maybe wanggon wouldnt have died at all if ..A.. didnt lose those workers... Who knows such things, the fact of the matter is you cant speak in If and you must speak in what happened. Lets say settings were clicked and Wanggon would have been removed after he died. Who is to say that ..A.. would be unable to take another city of the MDR player that lost 1 already to regain the win over the game. Due to the fact that both teams agreed to play on ..A.. felt compelled to defend for the rest of the game and not pursue a second city......
What I am saying in short. Is that ..A.. deserve to move to the next round. For a TD to rule on a decision after CCC has ended and change the score is unacceptable. How dare the other team talk about sportsmanship when they said on turn 15 that this is the last chance to scrap the game and after this there is no scraps. MDR captain even said that the decision should stand because he agrees that once a game starts and all players accept settings the game stands.
For mookie to say that players will play different era or something on purpose is very very ridiculous and I am surprised that statement even came out of his mind. This is a mistake and there is a difference between mistakes and Intentions and if it needs to be spelled out in the rules than do so. It may seem complex to some people, but adding a few lines of text into the rules for CCC will take less than 45 seconds................. So don't try to bring that slippery Slope into my house......
----------------------
A rule should be made for future CCC on accepting settings. ..A.. Deserves the points it received. If anything, SPM should of ruled that both teams need to replay the game with the correct settings. If ..A.. Wins than they get the 5 points, if ..A.. loses than they get 0 and MDR gets 2 points. If this is not accepted by both teams than both teams receive 0 points for the event. Both teams showed poor sportsmanship this game and its not right to point the unsporting finger at ..A.. .For the Head TD to disqualify a clan in an event after CCC is over is ridiculous and the appeal process should of ended at the end of CCC.
Personally, I do accept some of the TDs to use wrath on the ..A.. clan because I am a member and they may disagree on previous decisions which have ruled in my favor, but to take points away from ..A.. after CCC is already over is an insult and if ..A.. would of won CCC by 1-5 points and he pulled this decision in this manner I would be so furious that I would probably do something so bad that I wont even announce it here because ..A.. didn't win and Its not right to take it to a certain level when speaking in hypothetics.
SPM appeal your own decision and offer both clans a chance to redo the event with proper settings. Thats the right decision.
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Jan 4, 2007 15:23:20 GMT -5
Listen I have an idea.. There are now 12 events, there used to be far less correct? Yet the maximum amount of players allowed on a clan roster for CCC is still 20. Clans are growing in size and we are going to be seeing clan rosters in the 30s in the near future. I think its time to raise the maximum amount of players eligible to participate in CCC to 25-30. I see no reason why it has to be 20, especially when it should be allowed for each event to be played by a different player in the clan making the maximum that should register at least 27 players due to there being 27 different slots. Plus subs are needed which should allow for an extra 3. Most people can't sit and waste their entire weekend playing a video game and most people wont know in advance if there schedule will be open all day to play a video game. By only having 20 allowed it hurts the players who are good, but arnt willing to sacrifice their personal life for a video game. Of course clans like Ray and Mud don't mind the low rosters because they are clans filled with people with no social lives and they can afford to play 5 events spanning 30 hours of their weekend. "Kidding Kidding (Was a joke " Why is there a cap on the amount of players allowed to play in ccc? I understand a minimum, but there should not be a maximum. I understand CCC is supposed to be a serious lol, but some clans, especially ..A.., don't have set people playing each event do to time problems and it really hurts when a few players from teh clan are logged on willing to play in an event when no other player is and the clan doesn't even participate in the event because their is a 20 max clan roster for CCC Listen, we are just here to have fun and hopefully raising the maximum elidgable players able to play in CCC wont be to much of a big deal. thanks....
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Nov 20, 2006 12:43:06 GMT -5
CCC has always sucked ass and is rediculous. You are pretty much forced to play with newbies that lag and on settings which have major inbalances. Thats why I started Cash games, To Save Us alllllllllllll.
I AM A HERO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
;D
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Nov 16, 2006 18:44:01 GMT -5
Ohh tommy, those tears are pennies from heaven = The fact that you wont play because someone dissed you/ called you a cheat is hilarious.... You can Sign me up for this Newb Fest................ MrGameTheory
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Jul 14, 2006 0:41:18 GMT -5
Gunznroses will also be playing with ..A.. for CCC
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Jun 1, 2006 23:56:26 GMT -5
..A..
GameTheory GodComplex Notagoodname marak Kazaa Smuckey Rupman and a few more
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Jan 25, 2006 21:31:28 GMT -5
(reached rank 1 on the ladder that has chosen to play me a 1v1 has lost) Fried refused to acknowledge the Ladder Formal Challenge I sent him, and It was refreshed for a good month, and I was well within the 10 ranks to be allowed to send the challenge, so to answer your question, Fried doesn't count because we never played a 1v1
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Jan 25, 2006 15:21:24 GMT -5
As I recall Tommy I have beaten you every single time we have had a fair 1v1 game, or do you not have a good memory? Only reason why I lost to you on CCC is because Lord dragon got booted from the game and there was no body on your side of the map to balance you out while I was being attacked by my Southern enemy and to Top it off I wasn't allowed to pick the same leader as you. Rank means absolutely nothing in this game, people have high rank because they play the game more than others and are online when A Higher Ranked person is on. I have been to Rank 3 before and Was over it. Every single person who has reached rank 1 on the ladder that has chosen to play me a 1v1 has lost, including you, so I suggest you slow your role a little. And in regard to the Losses of CCC, I already reported that I will report the losses after the Admins have made their decision on the matter in regards to sidhe. Tommy no offense but your a rank hor who only play the same 5 people. How about this, you actually beat me in a 1v1 game, Epic 1v1 or Standard ladder 1v1 and I wont spam the board anymore with insightful information. Ill even offer to play you a standard Epic game with 6 other people, but I am allowed to pick who I want and your not allowed to have an initial leader advantage over me.
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Jan 25, 2006 12:16:59 GMT -5
Listen people, You need to understand this game a little more before you make comments on it. Let me break it down for you. Currently players on Ladder have subliminally left an impression on themselves on how to play this game. They believe that certain settings in this game should be in every ladder match. Gandhi is the product of a static environment, just as in any game there will ultimately be a better player/character/leader in a specific static environment, change is what affects the game and I highly suggest people doing it. Every Ladder Game I play I see the Same 5 Maps and the same climate. Instead of playing every single game on temperate, which every single game is played on, why don't you use one of the other climate choices. Certain characters are dependent on certain permanent resources, horse, iron/copper, etc. Gandhi is the only character that is dependent on a non-renewable resource (For his slight short term advantage). Playing every game on temperate is like playing every single game with horses or iron inside your capital. You guys put this on yourselves. Instead of going and just changing this entire game, why don't you people understand it and the people that play it a little more. Promote diversity in settings and don't change an already balanced game in the grand scheme of things because a group of people who play this game online in a ladder league have imposed certain settings restrictions on themselves. The climate changes were created for a reason people and not just created to give temperate a group of Friends to hang out with when you are not playing the game. People think that different climates are not fun, but In reality, if you people actually shut up for a second and thought about what I am saying you will find the solution to all your problems with specific leaders.
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Jan 24, 2006 20:09:12 GMT -5
I will not be playing in a tournament where 1 player is allowed to pick a character and another isnt. I wrote an essay on this under the Cheating/Problems/Solutions thread and I suggest you read that part. Have fun in your tournament, which might I add isnt really a tournament because tournaments prove skill and with this rule it isnt a direct show of skill and ultimatly a waste of time that proves nothing in the end. Your not supposed to give the advantage to the best players, its an illogical rule. Enjoy your game and when you guys understand how to create fair and balanced tournaments I will join. And Tommy, you said the player wins the game, not the Leader, than why dont you enter the tournament without Qin or Ghandi.........
Enjoy your game people.
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Jan 23, 2006 3:46:23 GMT -5
LOL, Just Because you take a picture from the game, it doesn't mean anything, I called you a lier and this is what you produce in your defense. I am sorry, When I saw this I had the fattest smile on my face and was actually about to laugh. But seriously, You took a picture of the game at around the middle Mark of the attack against me. Think about what you are actually trying to, or supposed to prove to this board if you did actually want to exonerate yourself as not having had anything to do with me being attacked. You would have to pretty much prove that TommyNt Was sending Troops over before you said anything, which he was not doing In any of these pics, You cant just take a picture of the game from the point after I lost 800 Points and say, well this is proof. If you see it shows Tommy inside my base and my cities have already been lost, this is all this picture is proving. You are full of nuts and with every post you make in reply you are just looking more ridiculous. The fact of the matter is the situation is over and however the Admins want to rule on it is up to them, I am pissed that I wasted 10 Hours of my Saturday to a game which was ruined by some guy cheating. I want to be able to come to a tournament and not have to worry about if the guys playing in it know the rules and will actually follow them. In regards to Tommy attacking me, I am pretty confident at that point in the game I wasn't going to KILL Tommy, but If I took your lands I would have easily been able to defend it with Infantry let alone Tanks I would have gotten in 15 Turns after I had my men in the ship, I completely lowered my tec when Tommy entered my borders because I had to go to full military production and it inevitably stopped me from being able to Defend period, Even if Tommy Was able to take over only Half of my Lands, I would have had your lands to give support to my cities and would of taken it back and Tommy would of had to use too much military for comfort and would have eventually backed off. You are still a lier in my book, and just so you know, I didn't end up getting last place in the end of the game, I had so many damn military troops I was able to boat over to your lands and completely Wipe you out in 16 Turns on AI, if you had anything remotely established in your cities the AI would of easily defended let alone not die so easily and quickly.
|
|