I WIN GAMES
+ Show Spoiler +
Generally for the other team, but still!
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
RebirthOfLeGenD
USA5860 Posts
I WIN GAMES + Show Spoiler + Generally for the other team, but still! | ||
kingjames01
Canada1603 Posts
On November 23 2010 12:50 Qatol wrote: Show nested quote + On November 23 2010 10:56 flamewheel wrote: Hmm well we don't really want to restrict who can and can't no? That'd be elitist! But for this first one probably let hosts (all people currently signed up to analyze currently are hosts) do this one just so you can have a basis in future games. Then I'd say it should be [reasonably] open to anybody. Every player on the list has pretty much singlehandedly won at least one game as well. I realize I'm being a little elitist here, but I think it is worth it not to compromise. I would feel better with coaches who have consistently provided results. Well, I don't quite qualify then. =) | ||
![]()
flamewheel
FREEAGLELAND26780 Posts
On November 23 2010 11:54 kingjames01 wrote: Alright, that's a fair and nice way to tell me that you don't think I'm good enough yet... =) Also, I plan to be hosting a game just after the new year... I won't reveal any details or who has been helping me just yet, but I'll eventually need to pass it through the Mafia council to have a judgement about balance. Yah yah just send it to us for balance. On November 23 2010 12:50 Qatol wrote: Show nested quote + On November 23 2010 10:56 flamewheel wrote: Hmm well we don't really want to restrict who can and can't no? That'd be elitist! But for this first one probably let hosts (all people currently signed up to analyze currently are hosts) do this one just so you can have a basis in future games. Then I'd say it should be [reasonably] open to anybody. Every player on the list has pretty much singlehandedly won at least one game as well. I realize I'm being a little elitist here, but I think it is worth it not to compromise. I would feel better with coaches who have consistently provided results. I don't think I've singlehandedly won a game though? | ||
kingjames01
Canada1603 Posts
| ||
![]()
flamewheel
FREEAGLELAND26780 Posts
| ||
Incognito
United States2071 Posts
Flamewheel - Looking through a townie's eyes: How townies should use thread information Ver - Attention worthy points: What good players focus on and what they ignore Incognito - Important points and players: A look at who, how, and why people did or did not impact the game. | ||
Qatol
United States3165 Posts
On November 23 2010 13:07 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: QATOL DO I QUALIFY?!?!? I WIN GAMES + Show Spoiler + Generally for the other team, but still! Your performance in Mafia 5 will live on forever. ![]() | ||
Qatol
United States3165 Posts
On November 23 2010 14:26 flamewheel wrote: Show nested quote + On November 23 2010 11:54 kingjames01 wrote: Alright, that's a fair and nice way to tell me that you don't think I'm good enough yet... =) Also, I plan to be hosting a game just after the new year... I won't reveal any details or who has been helping me just yet, but I'll eventually need to pass it through the Mafia council to have a judgement about balance. Yah yah just send it to us for balance. Show nested quote + On November 23 2010 12:50 Qatol wrote: On November 23 2010 10:56 flamewheel wrote: Hmm well we don't really want to restrict who can and can't no? That'd be elitist! But for this first one probably let hosts (all people currently signed up to analyze currently are hosts) do this one just so you can have a basis in future games. Then I'd say it should be [reasonably] open to anybody. Every player on the list has pretty much singlehandedly won at least one game as well. I realize I'm being a little elitist here, but I think it is worth it not to compromise. I would feel better with coaches who have consistently provided results. I don't think I've singlehandedly won a game though? The VI game and from what I understand, you had a pretty major impact on a scum win from a pretty heavily town-favored setup in XXVIII. | ||
RebirthOfLeGenD
USA5860 Posts
Anyway I suppose its time that I write the day post SIGHH!!!! | ||
![]()
Ver
United States2186 Posts
On November 23 2010 13:48 kingjames01 wrote: Show nested quote + On November 23 2010 12:50 Qatol wrote: On November 23 2010 10:56 flamewheel wrote: Hmm well we don't really want to restrict who can and can't no? That'd be elitist! But for this first one probably let hosts (all people currently signed up to analyze currently are hosts) do this one just so you can have a basis in future games. Then I'd say it should be [reasonably] open to anybody. Every player on the list has pretty much singlehandedly won at least one game as well. I realize I'm being a little elitist here, but I think it is worth it not to compromise. I would feel better with coaches who have consistently provided results. Well, I don't quite qualify then. =) The only special thing about the "analysts" is that they'll be in the OP of the bootcamp thread. You (and anyone else) can chime in their thoughts in the actual thread. Hopefully we can have some nice discussions and see various POV's. | ||
kingjames01
Canada1603 Posts
On November 24 2010 14:22 Ver wrote: Show nested quote + On November 23 2010 13:48 kingjames01 wrote: On November 23 2010 12:50 Qatol wrote: On November 23 2010 10:56 flamewheel wrote: Hmm well we don't really want to restrict who can and can't no? That'd be elitist! But for this first one probably let hosts (all people currently signed up to analyze currently are hosts) do this one just so you can have a basis in future games. Then I'd say it should be [reasonably] open to anybody. Every player on the list has pretty much singlehandedly won at least one game as well. I realize I'm being a little elitist here, but I think it is worth it not to compromise. I would feel better with coaches who have consistently provided results. Well, I don't quite qualify then. =) The only special thing about the "analysts" is that they'll be in the OP of the bootcamp thread. You (and anyone else) can chime in their thoughts in the actual thread. Hopefully we can have some nice discussions and see various POV's. Do you really want non-players/non-analysts to post during the game? What format would you allow that will minimize the impact on the flow and not detract from the game itself? | ||
![]()
Ver
United States2186 Posts
On November 24 2010 16:12 kingjames01 wrote: Show nested quote + On November 24 2010 14:22 Ver wrote: On November 23 2010 13:48 kingjames01 wrote: On November 23 2010 12:50 Qatol wrote: On November 23 2010 10:56 flamewheel wrote: Hmm well we don't really want to restrict who can and can't no? That'd be elitist! But for this first one probably let hosts (all people currently signed up to analyze currently are hosts) do this one just so you can have a basis in future games. Then I'd say it should be [reasonably] open to anybody. Every player on the list has pretty much singlehandedly won at least one game as well. I realize I'm being a little elitist here, but I think it is worth it not to compromise. I would feel better with coaches who have consistently provided results. Well, I don't quite qualify then. =) The only special thing about the "analysts" is that they'll be in the OP of the bootcamp thread. You (and anyone else) can chime in their thoughts in the actual thread. Hopefully we can have some nice discussions and see various POV's. Do you really want non-players/non-analysts to post during the game? What format would you allow that will minimize the impact on the flow and not detract from the game itself? There is the normal game thread, and then there will be the bootcamp analysis thread posted after the game. It's a separate thread with a specific purpose because the normal end of game talk is usually just whining and ego boosting; useful posts get lost fast in that. So in the bootcamp thread the OP will have the "analysis" and then everyone, players and observers, can discuss the analysis/events of the game. | ||
![]()
flamewheel
FREEAGLELAND26780 Posts
| ||
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On November 24 2010 17:15 Ver wrote: Show nested quote + On November 24 2010 16:12 kingjames01 wrote: On November 24 2010 14:22 Ver wrote: On November 23 2010 13:48 kingjames01 wrote: On November 23 2010 12:50 Qatol wrote: On November 23 2010 10:56 flamewheel wrote: Hmm well we don't really want to restrict who can and can't no? That'd be elitist! But for this first one probably let hosts (all people currently signed up to analyze currently are hosts) do this one just so you can have a basis in future games. Then I'd say it should be [reasonably] open to anybody. Every player on the list has pretty much singlehandedly won at least one game as well. I realize I'm being a little elitist here, but I think it is worth it not to compromise. I would feel better with coaches who have consistently provided results. Well, I don't quite qualify then. =) The only special thing about the "analysts" is that they'll be in the OP of the bootcamp thread. You (and anyone else) can chime in their thoughts in the actual thread. Hopefully we can have some nice discussions and see various POV's. Do you really want non-players/non-analysts to post during the game? What format would you allow that will minimize the impact on the flow and not detract from the game itself? There is the normal game thread, and then there will be the bootcamp analysis thread posted after the game. It's a separate thread with a specific purpose because the normal end of game talk is usually just whining and ego boosting; useful posts get lost fast in that. So in the bootcamp thread the OP will have the "analysis" and then everyone, players and observers, can discuss the analysis/events of the game. If we still want to sit on the sidelines and analyze the game without being noted as an analyst can we do that? I don't think my analysis would really benefit the players or you all anyway, but like I said previously I want to almost play the game without actually playing, if that makes sense. | ||
DarthThienAn
United States2734 Posts
On November 24 2010 22:40 Amber[LighT] wrote: Show nested quote + On November 24 2010 17:15 Ver wrote: On November 24 2010 16:12 kingjames01 wrote: On November 24 2010 14:22 Ver wrote: On November 23 2010 13:48 kingjames01 wrote: On November 23 2010 12:50 Qatol wrote: On November 23 2010 10:56 flamewheel wrote: Hmm well we don't really want to restrict who can and can't no? That'd be elitist! But for this first one probably let hosts (all people currently signed up to analyze currently are hosts) do this one just so you can have a basis in future games. Then I'd say it should be [reasonably] open to anybody. Every player on the list has pretty much singlehandedly won at least one game as well. I realize I'm being a little elitist here, but I think it is worth it not to compromise. I would feel better with coaches who have consistently provided results. Well, I don't quite qualify then. =) The only special thing about the "analysts" is that they'll be in the OP of the bootcamp thread. You (and anyone else) can chime in their thoughts in the actual thread. Hopefully we can have some nice discussions and see various POV's. Do you really want non-players/non-analysts to post during the game? What format would you allow that will minimize the impact on the flow and not detract from the game itself? There is the normal game thread, and then there will be the bootcamp analysis thread posted after the game. It's a separate thread with a specific purpose because the normal end of game talk is usually just whining and ego boosting; useful posts get lost fast in that. So in the bootcamp thread the OP will have the "analysis" and then everyone, players and observers, can discuss the analysis/events of the game. If we still want to sit on the sidelines and analyze the game without being noted as an analyst can we do that? I don't think my analysis would really benefit the players or you all anyway, but like I said previously I want to almost play the game without actually playing, if that makes sense. Nobody's stopping you from doing that ^^. If you want to share your analysis after the game ends, no one's going to say "you're not allowed" to share your thoughts or anything. lol. | ||
![]()
Ver
United States2186 Posts
On November 24 2010 22:40 Amber[LighT] wrote: Show nested quote + On November 24 2010 17:15 Ver wrote: On November 24 2010 16:12 kingjames01 wrote: On November 24 2010 14:22 Ver wrote: On November 23 2010 13:48 kingjames01 wrote: On November 23 2010 12:50 Qatol wrote: On November 23 2010 10:56 flamewheel wrote: Hmm well we don't really want to restrict who can and can't no? That'd be elitist! But for this first one probably let hosts (all people currently signed up to analyze currently are hosts) do this one just so you can have a basis in future games. Then I'd say it should be [reasonably] open to anybody. Every player on the list has pretty much singlehandedly won at least one game as well. I realize I'm being a little elitist here, but I think it is worth it not to compromise. I would feel better with coaches who have consistently provided results. Well, I don't quite qualify then. =) The only special thing about the "analysts" is that they'll be in the OP of the bootcamp thread. You (and anyone else) can chime in their thoughts in the actual thread. Hopefully we can have some nice discussions and see various POV's. Do you really want non-players/non-analysts to post during the game? What format would you allow that will minimize the impact on the flow and not detract from the game itself? There is the normal game thread, and then there will be the bootcamp analysis thread posted after the game. It's a separate thread with a specific purpose because the normal end of game talk is usually just whining and ego boosting; useful posts get lost fast in that. So in the bootcamp thread the OP will have the "analysis" and then everyone, players and observers, can discuss the analysis/events of the game. If we still want to sit on the sidelines and analyze the game without being noted as an analyst can we do that? I don't think my analysis would really benefit the players or you all anyway, but like I said previously I want to almost play the game without actually playing, if that makes sense. Yeah that's half the point. There isn't good postgame discussion normally so the goal is that everyone will join in and there can be group emphasis on learning from games. Just post your thoughts anyways once its over even if you don't think it'll help anyone. It might stimulate some discussion or give people ideas. | ||
kingjames01
Canada1603 Posts
Okay, I look forward to the end of the game and learning what I can. | ||
RebirthOfLeGenD
USA5860 Posts
| ||
SiNiquity
United States734 Posts
On November 13 2010 09:03 SiNiquity wrote: Tentatively in ~ depends on when this thing actually starts (Thanksgiving & Christmas I won't be near any internet devices). | ||
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
I don't think I quite have the clout to be listed as an official analyst or anything, but I'll chime in with my thoughts. I need to work on my scumhunting for sure and my tendency to go for high risk/high reward plays runs pretty flagrantly against what a lot of people consider "good". | ||
| ||
WardiTV Invitational
February Group A
SHIN vs CreatorLIVE!
SHIN vs Clem
SHIN vs ByuN
SHIN vs Gerald
[ Submit Event ] |
![]() StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Sea Dota 2![]() Hyuk ![]() TY ![]() Shuttle ![]() Zeus ![]() actioN ![]() Nal_rA ![]() Pusan ![]() Killer ![]() Dewaltoss ![]() [ Show more ] League of Legends Counter-Strike Other Games Organizations Counter-Strike Other Games StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War
StarCraft 2 • Berry_CruncH165 StarCraft: Brood War• LUISG ![]() • AfreecaTV YouTube • intothetv ![]() • Kozan • IndyKCrew ![]() • LaughNgamezSOOP • Laughngamez YouTube • Migwel ![]() • sooper7s Dota 2 League of Legends |
OSC
Big Brain Bouts
Replay Cast
CranKy Ducklings
WardiTV Invitational
[BSL 2025] Weekly
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Invitational
Replay Cast
Clem vs Zoun
[ Show More ] Replay Cast
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
The PondCast
|
|