Double Binding

[sinewav]

The single/multi-bind argument is easily the stupidest debate in Armagetron. It's totally meaningless and proves nothing about the game or the players regardless of which side you are on.

[Tobe]

But single binds limit your ability to perform "stunts" that help you perform better under certain situations.

A single binder can do anything a double/triple/quad can do...trust me

come watch the 1v1 SB tournament and you'll be amazed.

In the case of a 0.1 CYCLE_DELAY maybe.....

[Word]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPMmC0UAnj0

[Phytotron]

ACK ack ack ack ACK ack ACK ACK ack ACK ack ack ack ACK ACK!!!

[Desolate]

In organized teambased play, I'd say multibinders always have a clear advantage, no matter what

Once again,

madmax, lack, pun, etc.

[Tobe]

Once again, in the case of 0.1 maybe....

[Phytotron]

Akira, boobert, myself, [several others who, unfortunately, don't play anymore]....

Most-timers like dlh/free kill, Dubya, dompij, [b3n?]....

"Stunts," as you call them, don't make the player or "teh skillz."

EDIT: Forgot to add: Even with low CYCLE_DELAY.

[Tobe]

Err dubya? I've never seen him single before . And maybe in fortress or sumo, singlebinders and multibinders have less of a difference in skill, but lets say in df or ctf, the gap is very apparent.

[Phytotron]

If anything, multibinders tend to overestimate themselves and assume singlebinders must be "noobs."

CTF and DF have apparently been standardised with absurdly low CYCLE_DELAY, and, in conjunction with that, are of course designed and predicated on certain stupid gameplay "rules" that one must follow to play "correctly." The gap you perceive is not in general skill; it's in the built-in requirements and advantages given to multibinders in those particular game types. That's what you're not getting. Allow myself and those mentioned (i.e., good players, not novices) to play normally in a "DF" server, without being kicked for "closing," and I guarantee you won't see any gap except the ones left by explosion radii when we core dump the multibinders.


And, in general, why only the consideration of rubbish "special game modes" (i.e., Fortress, Sumo, CTF, and DF) in your comments? All of those have game-type-dependent aspects of gameplay and supposed "skill." Have you ever played in a regular server?


When I play Dubya in Mud Puddle (another server with way-too-low CYCLE_DELAY, and yet in which I have a lot of success), he singles most of the time, only pulling out the doubles when he gets put in a particularly small box—i.e., leans on his crutches when in trouble. Hence the term "most-timer." I can't speak to what he does in other servers as I refuse to play that refuse.


Finally (maybe),

stuff about teh 1337 skillz uv pwning n00bz w/ superbindz corebumping!!!

He didn't ask about ability, judgement thereof, and doublebinding's role in that. I believe it has harmed the quality of the game, regardless of outcome. (Just because something is effective doesn't necessarily mean it's good.) But, again, this subject and argument is at least 6 years old (by this forum's history) and a well-worn one at that. So, yadda yadda...

The single/multi-bind argument is easily the stupidest debate in Armagetron. It's totally meaningless and proves nothing about the game or the players regardless of which side you are on.

I don't think it's any less meaningful than debates about rubber. In fact, there are parallels. Neither high rubber nor multibinding were originally intended, and, arguably, employing either one is an abuse. Employing both is downright obscene. Throw sub-0.1 CYCLE_DELAY in there, too.

[Tobe]

I guess I see what your getting at. I would put it in different words, but that was sort of my point for CTF and DF.

SN: If DF were played like any regular server, it would be basically a camp fest... Or maybe M/HR Also, its rules are not stupid. They are purposeful to the gametype. But there are many servers that almost entirely ignore the way DF is supposed to be.
SN2: Yes, I have played nearly every unique server or at least the settings of the original server.

[Mkay1]

Just because you don't like a game Mode does not mean it is therefore unworthy of existance, Phytotron. Even though I do not like ctf, df, or hr, they have provided fun to hundreds of players.

[INW]

Phytotron is so funny. Maybe he should try and actually play Tron...the kid probably couldn't stay alive for 10 seconds. This little kid cracks me up with his stubborn attitude towards new and improved game types.

He is the corn kernel of my shit; unimportant and smelly...yet takes up room in the toilet.

[sinewav]

Phytotron is so funny. Maybe he should try and actually play Tron...the kid probably couldn't stay alive for 10 seconds.

What's really funny is that I play my ass off in this game and I can't beat Phytotron. He plays. Very well. He's no kid either (if you couldn't tell by his perfectly eloquent writing).

[Monkey.D.Luffy]

Oh this thread remind me something did you read the news in september 2004?? That was only the beginning...http://forums3.armagetronad.net/downloa ... &mode=view

[Phytotron]

And what an eloquent, mature, thoughtful, civil, and entirely un-obscene and un-hypocritical post by INW. Worthy contribution. (Enough sarcasm?)

SN: If DF were played like any regular server, it would be basically a camp fest... Yes, I have played nearly every unique server or at least the settings of the original server.

Have you ever played Shrunkland, BiH (mine or the original), Swampland (the real thing, not Mud Puddle), Mud Puddle, Nexus9, AoT, goshdarn, -ish, etc? Even Yellow Submarine. Camp-fest? No. Trust me. Play me, even.

By the way, what does "SN" mean?

Just because you don't like a game Mode does not mean it is therefore unworthy of existance, Phytotron. Even though I do not like ctf, df, or hr, they have provided fun to hundreds of players.

My opposition isn't based primarily on whether I like or dislike a game mode. A person can like something while arguing it doesn't belong in a particular context.


Does your_mom play anymore? I know he switched to primarily fortress at one point....