[Armag] diarouga wrote:Haha I expected this kind of answer from you or from garja
What's happening here is that you guys can't deny the truth ( even though as garja said, the choices made have some legitimity) so you go personal.
I don't really see what truth you're talking about. For a guy saying "there's no objectivity", talking about "truth" seems kind of weird anyway.
And I have good reasons to go personal. It's always the same people who lag/use glitches/use macros/get transparent ui with market trades/etc. You can call it a coincidence, I call it people who aren't legit. Always trying to download some external help or to abuse bugs... It's just not the kind of people you want in your lobby.
[Armag] diarouga wrote:By the way, I don't have issues playing without glitches, I don't use alt d, fast shooting, and I use building rotator because the EP added it to the game, so I don't know where that comes from
Still, I don't use these because there's an agreement amoung players not to use it, and I know that my opponents won't use it, but I argue against the ESOC decisions to ban building rotator or fast shooting from the game (which is paradoxical since they added the building rotator).
You might not use glitches (though I'm sure you did use alt d a lot in the past, and you said before on these forums that you use the explorer crackshot glitch), but you still advocate their use, which is just as bad.
Build rotator got nothing to do with this discussion, it's irrelevant compared to alt d or crackshot glitch.
[Armag] diarouga wrote:I can be right, I can be wrong, there's no objectivity, just opinions but what's funny is that instead of saying « we decided after discussions to ban these abuses from the game» you make it look like as if there was only one reasonable opinion, your, and you call the others «dumb» or «cheesy».
Of course there is objectivity sometimes. Or are you gonna tell me that banning moesbar hacks is subjective, for example?
The crackshot bug is objectively game breaking. As explained tons of times, it conflicts with the explorer ROF. The ROF is a
stat, the explo's ROF is supposed to be 3, and not less. This is like using a bug to get 100 attack instead of 15, for example. No matter how much apm it takes, it is not acceptable.
And same goes for alt d, as said hundreds of times: there is a reason why you're supposed to either pay 100g or wait till explo has 100 hp + you have a unit nearby. It's just the way the explorer was designed. Alt d just objectively kills the way the explorer is supposed to work. No one cares if your opponent gets extra xp in the process. It just destroys a game mechanic.
Now please, tell me how that was not objective. It's not a matter of opinions here.
[Armag] diarouga wrote:That's the strategy dictators use against their opponents actually, they impose their ideas, and call the people who disagree terrorists to quiet them.
No one is imposing anything lol. You're can stop posting on ESOC if you're not happy. You can even use these glitches on RE. And people can think what they want about you.
[Armag] diarouga wrote:Dyddy, Tit, kynesie and me, even if you don't like us, are people who also play the game, so I don't know what's your point.
Finally, I'm indeed trying to be controversial because I want to show that there's a lack of objectivity in these decisions (though it's not going to change anything). Still, I think that I have the right to have an opinion on the matter without getting considered as a dumbass, a cheater, or even worse: a cheesy guy.
You play the game, and also you play around the game.
Again, I don't see what's subjective about the decisions. I could understand if you said that about the rotator mod, since they added it into EP. But regarding alt d and crackshot glitch, just no.
And again, you have the right to have whatever opinion, and people have the right to consider you what they want. By being controversial, you should expect some people to dislike you anyway, since it's the point of being controversial.