Sweepbox.INW wrote:7 seeds in a row for mym.
4 ladles in a row the finals have been mym v. sp.
Oh yeah, gz sp.
Moderator: Light
Sweepbox.INW wrote:7 seeds in a row for mym.
4 ladles in a row the finals have been mym v. sp.
+1vogue wrote:We rarely used sweepbox this ladle
yeah, so much anger in gonzaps commentvogue wrote:stay mad though.
Reigning champion of: Sir-spam-a-lot 2011apparition wrote:You being able to kill so many players that quickly and efficiently is evidence that the community skill level must be dropping... Sad
It certainly didn't look like an endorsement.wap wrote:yeah, so much anger in gonzaps commentvogue wrote:stay mad though.
Right, this is exactly the point. Sweep-boxing is a simple, now common tactic. If a team refuses to use it, or doesn't take the time to disrupt it, that's their call and they must accept the outcome. There seems to be this weird stigma around sweep-boxes, like holing is Ok for some reason, but sweep-boxes go too far. I don't get it. I mean, if you want to keep playing Fortress from 2008, go right ahead. Meanwhile the rest of us will be looking forward to the innovations of 2012.Desolate wrote:We won the match you didn't use a sweepbox, not like it was the only reason you won, but I guess if we had started doing it later it might have changed things.
Exactly.vogue wrote:Complaining about sweepbox is soooo 2010. :b
Them attacking us off the grind, much like we did to them last ladle, forced us to split early. Our split made it hard to set up the sweepbox. I think we used it once or twice?Lackadaisical wrote:Out of curiosity: why didn't mym do a sweepbox against sp?