Author Topic: furball island redux (Read 814 times)

lazs1 · « **Reply #30 on:** December 05, 2001, 05:24:00 PM »

deja.. my point is this.. You will admit that things have changed recently with the huge influx of newbies and the field capture/resupply thing? Ok, so.. what has also changed? Well...

The hand wringing "we have to do something about furballs" posts have gone up expotentially. Cries for bigger maps and more spread out fields and blinded radar and the ever boring allied vs axis etc.. I sorta feel like I'm fighting fire with fire here. I been having more fun lately not less. I think tougher cv's and 10% closer fields wouldn't hurt anyone and would help a lot of us.

remember.... The enemies of fun are sneaky and underhanded and ever vigilante and ruthless. We must be willing to swat them down before they get a handhold.
lazs

laz · « **Reply #31 on:** December 05, 2001, 07:05:00 PM »

If only we could all have our own arena the way we wanted it.

(this is intended for lazs) Sorry if it does not sound like i know what i am talking about... just parts of post, but if your sick of getting ganged by some alt monkey. then why not fly with a wingman? Maybe i am wayyyy off, but thats the way it came off to me

. Hope to see you all soon... waiting for my new pc.

Flame away

lazer

=357th=

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #32 on:** December 05, 2001, 07:14:00 PM »

Quote

I think tougher cv's and 10% closer fields wouldn't hurt anyone and would help a lot of us.

And others think that fields could be 10% farther away and not hurt anyone, rather help a lot of them.

You think what you want.. they think what they want.

If this is simply some kind of "I must counter their post with my own foot stomping" then I truly feel sorry for you lazs. When stomping your foot... its best not to shoot it first.

AKDejaVu

lazs1 · « **Reply #33 on:** December 06, 2001, 08:29:00 AM »

Actually I can make a case for fields being farther apart hurting getting to the fight and furballing but.... Having em 10% closer would not hurt any other style of flying.
lazs

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #34 on:** December 06, 2001, 08:52:00 AM »

You can make a case for anything lazs, that's not the point. Your 'case' will be based on assumptions and completely irrelevant... just as this 'case' is.

AKDejaVu

lazs1 · « **Reply #35 on:** December 06, 2001, 02:17:00 PM »

perhaps deja but.... you can't make a case for slightly closer fields hurting any other style. OTOH, my case for it helping furballers and casual players is solid.
lazs

AcId · « **Reply #36 on:** December 06, 2001, 02:20:00 PM »

YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!!

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #37 on:** December 06, 2001, 02:27:00 PM »

Quote

perhaps deja but.... you can't make a case for slightly closer fields hurting any other style.

Moving bases closer together can result in the likelyhood of one fight moving too close to another field resulting in ack diving or vultching. There needs to be seperation... too close can cause problems too.

See... anyone can make any claim as to how a change would affect the game. I don't need to back anything up just like you don't need to. They are called assumptions. They are worthless.

AKDejaVu

lazs1 · « **Reply #38 on:** December 07, 2001, 08:33:00 AM »

deja.. how would "ack diving" affect anyones style? You could still take off from a farther field and get alt and fight any way you liked. Those that were prone to furballs and "ack diving" would be at low alts, you would never see em anyhow. closer fields would promote fights between fields. It does now at the closer fields. Farther fields promote gangbanging and ack hugging.
lazs

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #39 on:** December 07, 2001, 08:48:00 AM »

Lazs, you still aren't getting it. You seem to only think one thing would be made better with zero risk to anyone else's preferences. That is simply short sighted and arrogant. If someone says something different, you counter with "no it wouldn't". Wow... great argument... but virtually everyone and their mother sees it as pointless.

End of story. Time to let this horse die in peace.

AKDejaVu

Rotorian · « **Reply #40 on:** December 07, 2001, 10:48:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKDejaVu:
Time to let this horse die in peace.
AKDejaVu

No way, I am having fun reading the love affair.

Over at brandx we used to have "Fightertown Night". We met in brandx's version of the DA and went at it......no rules. I believe Krusher tried to get it started here, but.......well, I really dont know why it didnt work here.

Seeker · « **Reply #41 on:** December 07, 2001, 11:13:00 AM »

Can we disable KS in there?......

lazs1 · « **Reply #42 on:** December 07, 2001, 12:25:00 PM »

Noooo deja... I am asking you to explain yourself. Your ongoing theme over the years has been "no changes" everything is fine the way it is.
Problem is... everytime something is changed you tout that change as the new omega of gameplay.

grow a pair and come up with a suggestion of your own. sheesh..pissy old woman.
lazs

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #43 on:** December 07, 2001, 12:42:00 PM »

Quote

Noooo deja... I am asking you to explain yourself. Your ongoing theme over the years has been "no changes" everything is fine the way it is.

My ongoing theme has not been "no changes". My ongoing theme has been to be against "I don't like that people are doing something I don't like to do so lets change it so they can't". As a rule, that hits every post you make.

AKDejaVu

lazs1 · « **Reply #44 on:** December 08, 2001, 09:40:00 AM »

I believe that my posts are about more choice not less. I do however, feel that gameplay is adversely affected when one or a couple of guys, using little or no skill, can affect dozens of players game. Improvements have been made IMO. I am glad that all your foot dragging was for naught.
lazs