Bring back classic sumo

[Amaso]

Sumo is dead ggs
No turning back
Rekt

[Durf]

The ranked sumo (ultimate) 1v1 server I had did pretty well.
Unfortunately the host retired from tron and there isn't a spot for it to be hosted afaik.
If anyone wants to host it, we can have ranks for sumo 1v1 again.

[Agent007]

yeah sure we could rank the whole seven people who still play sumo regularly

[asdasd]

lol, right..

[Amaso]

Pickup killed it way back. Want new players to come? Drop those ******* settings and think of a new noob friendly game type. Something like Fast Track or Yellow Sub will never die.

[Titanoboa]

No ranking. Like the backwards Osama is saying, we need to be less competitive in casual play. ^^

And at the same time, more competitive.
I'll explain briefly... In sumo, it's taboo to kill your opponents using your rubber, which makes the rounds boring and if (God forbid) a newbie wins a round, he'll be scolded for doing it wrong. In fortress, as soon as there's a lone defender, it is common procedure to let (help, even) the defender set up so that the attackers (no matter how many) are free to practice cutting. This is, of course, without any regard to the dead players who are now forced to spectate this misery.

And, when you play like that, there's no wonder you all are longing for a sacred competitive play paradise somewhere else.



As for me, I'll keep closing your tunnels in sumo and ganking your zone in fortress

[Durf]

The server script I had didn't force people to play ranked matches - but rather made it available for those who wanted that competitive edge.
There were ranks for all time, year, month, week, and for the day, so even a competitive player that wasn't the top player, could still be the top for the day or week.

<deleted a rant about "rules" in game types - "rules" that aren't written - and the concept of "rules" and how they ruin a game type>

I agree with closing in Sumo - if they didn't want you to close, they would have at least made "rules" clearly written somewhere saying (let alone forcing players to play open through cfg settings).

I disagree with violating public Fortress etiquette - I understand the effects of unbalanced teams under 4 players:
1 / 2 = 50% (50%)
2 / 3 = 66.66% (33.33%)
3 / 4 = 75% (25%)
4 / 5 = 80% (20%)
As you can see, even an imbalance of 1 player has a greater effect on the entire team when the total player count is less than 4.
The "rules" of public Fort make sense in this case - but they are not enforced; that is the responsibility of each server (owner).
This is precisely why I made a script that forces players to abide by a chosen etiquette while either team has less than 4 players.
If a server owner cared enough about the "rules" of public Fortress, they would do something about it (the least of which being imposing written rules - and moderating the server); but clearly not many of them care if the players follow the etiquette or not...

I think you can be a "good sport" and allow people to set up their defense in Fortress.
I don't think refraining from using rubber in Sumo is being a "good sport".
If anything that is allowing people to have it easy and not improve (it's not a rubber war, but if you put yourself in a tunnel, it's your own fault).


P.S - for those who want something new and competitive, I will be working on a new tournament soon (I know I've been saying that xD but this time, I meant it!)

[Jet]

@durf Do you try to make your posts as long and unreadable as possible or does that come naturally?

[Durf]

@durf Do you try to make your posts as long and unreadable as possible or does that come naturally?

If you think my post is too long to read, then you aren't all that qualified to use these forums.

You must have read already read nearly double the length of my post just to get to my post - so why does an unexpected (to you) amount of content in a single post cause such a problem? How is it even a problem?

I'm discussing at least 3 different relevant topics.
Or did you expect my post to be like these:

lol, right..

Sumo is dead ggs
No turning back
Rekt

Perhaps my post went a little more in depth than you would have liked, but that's your problem. You are not obligated to read my posts, you are not obligated to respond to them; you make the choice to do so.
You (and everyone) done complaining about post length? Or shall I write up an essay on why those who complain about post length are making a meaningless argument anyway?
If you have such a problem then keep it to yourself - I'm not breaking any rules by writing long posts, but you are by harassing me about it.

<edit>
Out of all the posts I made you could have complained about, you chose a relatively short one.

[Jet]

you need a 50 word count per post. Any mods willing to institute this?

[Durf]

This isn't twitter.
Even if it was, it'd be 140.

[kyle]

you need a 50 word count per post. Any mods willing to institute this?

This isn't twitter.
Even if it was, it'd be 140.

50 word count Twitters 140 is character count, big difference

[Durf]

Woops! You're right it is xD

Even so, don't you think 50 is a little ridiculous? I mean, consider all the long posts made by people. Tutorials, answered questions. 50 letter, even word limit is far too little to be of use to these forums.
And what, would this be just for me? Why would I be the only one being limited and treated unfairly? What rule am I breaking?

<edit: I failed to edit so many times xD>

[Titanoboa]

I disagree with violating public Fortress etiquette - I understand the effects of unbalanced teams under 4 players

I buy that. As long as you're doing the "winners attack" business, it's fair to let them set up. But I see it regularly even when there's a full game going (5v5 or more) and there's a lone defender on one side: "Set up so we can attack"... Meanwhile, a majority of the players are forced to spectate this hypnotizing lullaby of lightcycles. Fortunately, that trend appears to be diminishing.

[Phytotron]

This is an excellent candidate for an official server.

Totally disagree, for reasons I gave in that other thread. Thought you agreed. Servers with special, unintuitive game modes, especially those with unwritten and arbitrary gameplay rules, are exactly what shouldn't be included as "official" servers.

If you want to include/introduce zones in official servers, then do it in the old-school way with win zones or some such—something peripheral to the actual gameplay. I don't think game modes totally centered around zones are good as introductory servers.