[sG] Visual Weapon Rules

«1

Comments

  • Please provide logic for allowing ZP/Crate weapons and items that provide advantages, but not items like the SPOP or armor.
  • This Draft was created to also attract some of the "Pubbers". We wanted to kind of introduce some sort of competitive yet fun style of game play to that aspect of the community. Also, we wanted to have our own separate rule set. We have been discussion alternating weekends and creating a B Rule set. B Rule set will have much more restricted in weapons. Set A would be the current rules.
  • sGDavid wrote: »
    This Draft was created to also attract some of the "Pubbers". We wanted to kind of introduce some sort of competitive yet fun style of game play to that aspect of the community. Also, we wanted to have our own separate rule set. We have been discussion alternating weekends and creating a B Rule set. B Rule set will have much more restricted in weapons. Set A would be the current rules.

    You still haven't provided logic that contains no contradictions/an actual consistent rule set.

    Joy.
  • There is not logical explanation to it. That is how we planned to create it and that is basically it. The developers don't care if the guns have advantages, they just add them for the players. That is simply what sG has done. We added the weapons to attract more players.
  • sGDavid wrote: »
    There is not logical explanation to it. That is how we planned to create it and that is basically it. The developers don't care if the guns have advantages, they just add them for the players. That is simply what sG has done. We added the weapons to attract more players.

    So then you aren't pretending to offer a competitive atmosphere? Good, I have no qualms with that.
  • Not pretending. Competitive doesn't just revolve around weapons. It also has to do with the game style or game play. 5vs5 Pug Scrims Gym style is basically what we do. I'm not exactly sure on were you are trying to go with this but "Pretending" to hold competitive drafts is not what we do. We hold competitive drafts with a different rule set. If you don't agree with our rule set, WOGL Runs some pretty good ones on Friday Nights at 9:00PM EST on their public ventrilo server.
  • sGDavid wrote: »
    Not pretending. Competitive doesn't just revolve around weapons. It also has to do with the game style or game play. 5vs5 Pug Scrims Gym style is basically what we do. I'm not exactly sure on were you are trying to go with this but "Pretending" to hold competitive drafts is not what we do. We hold competitive drafts with a different rule set. If you don't agree with our rule set, WOGL Runs some pretty good ones on Friday Nights at 9:00PM EST on their public ventrilo server.

    A truly competitive setting puts all players on as fair ground as possible. Going by this, you do not have a competitive setting.

    Whether or not I participate in your draft is irrelevant.
  • A bit bigger [I made it, didn't choose the rules]:

    66148173.png
  • Competitive - involving competition or competitiveness; "competitive games"; "to improve one's competitive position"

    Competitive doesn't revolve around the weapons. Some weapons may have an advantage but it's like saying Gurp is better then StopRagin so Gurp can't play. If you want to compare us to WOGL, they are more competitive. But saying we aren't a competitive draft is simply your opinion and if you are insisting it is a fact then you are wrong.
  • Thank you for the size configuration of the image.
  • sGDavid wrote: »

    Competitive doesn't revolve around the weapons. Some weapons may have an advantage but it's like saying Gurp is better then StopRagin so Gurp can't play.

    This is possibly the stupidest thing I have ever heard. You obviously do not grasp that competition is the process of playing against one another in order to determine who is the better player. Using this as an examplejust makes me sick.
    sGDavid wrote: »
    Competitive - involving competition or competitiveness; "competitive games"; "to improve one's competitive position"
    sGDavid wrote: »
    If you want to compare us to WOGL, they are more competitive. But saying we aren't a competitive draft is simply your opinion and if you are insisting it is a fact then you are wrong.

    I obviously forget that people vary in definitions, therefore I will be clear.

    You admit then, that your organization allows specific weapons an items that a) are blatantly unbalanced, and b) provide advantages to the paying user over the non-paying one, aka allowing factors other than the players' skill level to determine the winner?
  • You have your opinion. I have mine. If you don't like it, then ignore it. If you have a problem PM me. Your very critical on things that don't even concern you. Why they don't concern you? You don't even participate in our events or drafts.

    The reason why your post don't make sense to me is because your not here to suggest or even complain. You are simply just criticizing what we are doing. You could of asked me this question on a PM. This post was just a more designed visual rule set. Whether or not you like my opinions, doesn't really change anything. You could of even been like "Hey David, your rule set isn't fair because of .....".

    It's simply respecting another persons decision/opinion, even if you don't agree with them. If you would like to continue on with this conversation, then PM me. Other then that, please stop posting on this thread.
  • sGDavid wrote: »
    You have your opinion. I have mine. If you don't like it, then ignore it. If you have a problem PM me.

    No, this is relevant to the thread, and the possibility exists that someone else will get something out of the discussion.
    sGDavid wrote: »
    Your very critical on things that don't even concern you. Why they don't concern you? You don't even participate in our events or drafts.

    A) I'm critical on everything, whether or not it concerns me in your eyes. Which is does, for other reasons than the one stated immediately below A), you just need to extrapolate.

    B) I won your Friday draft.
    sGDavid wrote: »
    The reason why your post don't make sense to me is because your not here to suggest or even complain. You are simply just criticizing what we are doing.

    So? I don't understand your point.
    sGDavid wrote: »
    You could of asked me this question on a PM. This post was just a more designed visual rule set.

    I explained briefly at the top...
    sGDavid wrote: »
    Whether or not you like my opinions, doesn't really change anything. You could of even been like "Hey David, your rule set isn't fair because of .....".

    Nothing in this thread has to do with your opinion. Nothing. At all. If you can't understand that, then post that you are, so I can stop trying to talk to you.
    sGDavid wrote: »
    It's simply respecting another persons decision/opinion, even if you don't agree with them.

    You're stupid if you thin that I'm "disrespecting your decision." If you are stupid, then post that you are, so I can stop trying to talk to you.
    sGDavid wrote: »
    If you would like to continue on with this conversation, then PM me. Other then that, please stop posting on this thread.

    First quote.
  • Denxi wrote: »
    and the possibility exists that someone else will get something out of the discussion.


    I know I'm getting a mighty good read out of this dicussion DENZEEEE.
    <3
  • Your drafts aren't competitive, and that's a fact, not an opinion. Both times I have gone to your draft my team has run through the competition like a sharp knife running through explosive diarrhea by using OP guns to just smash everyone. There hasn't been a single team we've played that hasn't complained about the ruleset.

    If everyone thinks your rules blow, don't you think you should change them?
  • dagdemon wrote: »
    Your drafts aren't competitive, and that's a fact, not an opinion. Both times I have gone to your draft my team has run through the competition like a sharp knife running through explosive diarrhea by using OP guns to just smash everyone. There hasn't been a single team we've played that hasn't complained about the ruleset.

    If everyone thinks your rules blow, don't you think you should change them?

    I've heard complaints about the xm8. Nothing really about the rule set in whole. Like I said, they may not be as competitive as other organizations/leagues such as WOGL but they are still competitive. Maybe it is the time to change the rule set.
  • Another thing to say to the fake Saul and those of you who enjoy to troll. Suggesting is one thing. Complaining is another. In general, most people would prefer people to suggest. Complaining will become frustrating but that's part of anything somebody will take part in.
    Denxi is simply coming on here to criticize something that doesn't concern him. He brings up some good points and I would respect his opinions and suggestions if he gave them in a more respectable manner. I've seen him suggest on WOGL Forums and I've seen him make some really good suggestions to other parts of the community. I'm directing most of this towards Denxi because this discussion would of never come about if he didn't post.
    I like to see post that help. This helps but those of you that did have a problem with something, let me know. Just telling me now that other teams have been complaining doesn't help me until I do know. Now I do know which is why I have decided to go over the rule set with Saul.
  • This isn't close to a competitive draft.

    You're allowing Xm8 ( both variations ) Mp5 ( all variations ) but you don't allow the Type89 which does the same damage through the wall as both Mp5 and Xm8.

    Also you're allowing silenced guns which clearly give the owner an advantage. No zp guns should be allowed. You say your bringing "pubbers" to the process? Let them pub with their zp/bp guns.

    Competitive Scene shouldn't be everyone in the game.

    If you want to make it competitive at all, then you will change your rules. The weapon set can easily be changed. The best rule set to ever come out was CSN.

    All this is in my eyes and opinion.
  • fLowOUT wrote: »
    This isn't close to a competitive draft.

    You're allowing Xm8 ( both variations ) Mp5 ( all variations ) but you don't allow the Type89 which does the same damage through the wall as both Mp5 and Xm8.

    Also you're allowing silenced guns which clearly give the owner an advantage. No zp guns should be allowed. You say your bringing "pubbers" to the process? Let them pub with their zp/bp guns.

    Competitive Scene shouldn't be everyone in the game.

    If you want to make it competitive at all, then you will change your rules. The weapon set can easily be changed. The best rule set to ever come out was CSN.

    All this is in my eyes and opinion.

    Thanks. This helps.
  • Even through the stick you are getting in this thread. I believe Secular Gaming have made a good decision. Why create another Pug system similar to others we already have? Expanding to a larger audience is exactly what they should have done and are doing. Don't like the rule set? Play another a pug hosted by a different corporation.
  • Well you are correct, that is what we wanted to do but the demand of competitive players is pretty high. We wanted to attract some pubbers but to be honest, I see the same people I usually see participating. Plus, I know the XM8 has been taken advantage of in a lot of matches. I'm going to go ahead and edit the rules myself. I do feel that I need to change the rule set.
  • If you don't want to come to the drafts, that's fine. It's not like we need you to come on, as long as some people come, it's fine. We have 100s of players who come weekly, but only 12 teams weekly [60 players] and not having you could push some chances for others to shine.
  • Well I'm going to go strict on the rule set. I'll see how it works. Probably get Rex to edit the rules for me and get this thread closed since it is going to be the old visual rules.
  • Denxi wrote: »
    I obviously forget that people vary in definitions, therefore I will be clear.

    You admit then, that your organization allows specific weapons an items that a) are blatantly unbalanced, and b) provide advantages to the paying user over the non-paying one, aka allowing factors other than the players' skill level to determine the winner?

    I'm assuming by your dodge of this, that you're just too shamed to respond?
    sGDavid wrote: »
    Another thing to say to the fake Saul and those of you who enjoy to troll. Suggesting is one thing. Complaining is another. In general, most people would prefer people to suggest. Complaining will become frustrating but that's part of anything somebody will take part in.
    Denxi is simply coming on here to criticize something that doesn't concern him. He brings up some good points and I would respect his opinions and suggestions if he gave them in a more respectable manner. I've seen him suggest on WOGL Forums and I've seen him make some really good suggestions to other parts of the community. I'm directing most of this towards Denxi because this discussion would of never come about if he didn't post.
    I like to see post that help. This helps but those of you that did have a problem with something, let me know. Just telling me now that other teams have been complaining doesn't help me until I do know. Now I do know which is why I have decided to go over the rule set with Saul.

    You have done multiple ridiculously stupid things in the past, and have done nothing regardless of those to earn my respect. Flawed attempts are not results. Stop harping on how I "don't respect you" because in reality there are VERY FEW PEOPLE in this community who I actually respect (The number is under 15).

    Whether or not the conversation would or wouldn't have come up is not my problem. It DID come up, and you have yet to answer the discussion ENDING question with a true response. All I want is admission, something which, as stated above, you seem too shamed to give because of the reality. Why? I personally think it's because you ridiculously want to be part of this community due to some kind of exclusion in real life. Maybe you were bullied, I don't know specifics, but you constantly changing your personality and CONSTANTLY trying to get involved with something that has shown to not suit you pretty well suggests that.

    If you can't do it right, then get a consultant who can.
  • Hi denxi,

    But there would need to be some free or not free community for people, and that community would be able to have walls of text. But that community probably wouldn't have actually invented the wall of text. So basically, no one except God knows when or where or how the wall of text existed/was invented. Noobs probably invented, but probably not. Who knows. Walls of texts are usually filled with a lot of useless information and junk. Information and junk can be the same, but only if the information is junk or the junk is information. But who cares. The information/junk inside a wall of text are usually related to whatever the wall of text is located, but the best walls of text, which are actually the most irritating, most eye-bleeding ones, are completely random. Walls of text usually make the reader asplode or have their eyes bleed and fall out of their sockets. A number of people can stand it, but not read them. Actually some people can stand and read them. Those people do not have short attention spans. These are boring and patient people who have no life or have all the time in their hands, which are the same, but not really. The punishment of what making walls of text varies of the strictness of the community. But it doesn't really matter. Nobody cares. Walls of texts should be free of links, different font colors, strange characters, which are those other symbols used in society, and capital letters because it ruins the whole purpose of the infamy of walls of texts. It makes them look ****ing dumb and weird. Walls of texts are obviously free of huge spaces and outstanding things like capital letters. Of course, paragraphs should never be in a wall of text. Walls of text are known to create nausea, confusion, head explosion, and others. The others being something I can not think of either because I am lazy or if I do not feel like it or I can not actually think of anything. Like what the ****? That was a rhetorical question right there. What the ****? You are actually not requesting a satisfactory answer, you just say that because you try to be funny or you feel like it or if you are ****ed off. You must get a proper *****-slapping to stop making walls of text, but if you are weird then that doesn't apply to you. Walls of text are defeated by deleting them or splitting them into paragraphs. Or some other things that would work but will take hours to think of. People are considered a nuisance if they create walls of text. This might be the end. If you hope this is the end, I am not sure. But if I was not sure then I wouldn't be talking. I should know. Or should I? The best way to make a better and good wall of text is to copy and paste what you previously typed or write. Hey, that reminds me. Wall of text aren't always on the internet! They could be anywhere that is able to produce symbols. D'oh. A wall of text is something that is frowned upon in most, actually virtually all Internet societies, including forums, chat boards, and Uncyclopedia. You should not make walls of text because it can get you banned anywhere unless it is a place that encourages walls of text. I highly doubt any place does support something so irritating and annoying, but anything can exist, but not really because unless you are in heaven then that can happen. But no one actually knows that was just a hypothesis, a lame one that is. Actually not really lame. You can created a wall of text supporting site, but you would be hated if you do that, so do not. But you can if you like, but I discourage that. Now on to the actual information of walls of texts. The wall of text was invented when the Internet was invented, but actually it was slow at that time. So whenever it became fast. But there would need to be some free or not free community for people, and that community would be able to have walls of text. But that community probably wouldn't have actually invented the wall of text. So basically, no one except God knows when or where or how the wall of text existed/was invented. Noobs probably invented, but probably not. Who knows. Walls of texts are usually filled with a lot of useless information and junk. Information and junk can be the same, but only if the information is junk or the junk is information. But who cares. The information/junk inside a wall of text are usually related to whatever the wall of text is located, but the best walls of text, which are actually the most irritating, most eye-bleeding ones, are completely random. Walls of text usually make the reader asplode or have their eyes bleed and fall out of their sockets. A number of people can stand it, but not read them. Actually some people can stand and read them. Those people do not have short attention spans. These are boring and patient people who have no life or have all the time in their hands, which are the same, but not really. The punishment of what making walls of text varies of the strictness of the community. But it doesn't really matter. Nobody cares. Walls of texts should be free of links, different font colors, strange characters, which are those other symbols used in society, and capital letters because it ruins the whole purpose of the infamy of walls of texts. It makes them look ****ing dumb and weird and dumb. Walls of texts are obviously free of huge spaces and outstanding things like capital letters. Of course, paragraphs should never be in a wall of text. Walls of text are known to create nausea, confusion, head explosion, and others. The others being something I can not think of either because I am lazy or if I do not feel like it or I can not actually think of anything. Like what the ****? That was a rhetorical question right there. What the ****? You are actually not requesting a satisfactory answer, you just say that because you try to be funny or you feel like it or if you are ****ed off. Now I just copied and pasted part of this huge wall of text, which is actually not. Wait what? Nice right? Ba boom a rhetorical question right there. Is this the end for the sanity of your eyes? What the **** did you actually read up to here? Or did you skip to near the end and read this? Either way, you fail in life. Just kidding. Or was I? Oh well. Congratualtions, or not, actually not. Get a life right now. I found a cheap life on eBay, but cheap lives are rare. Well, good luck in finding one. Not! Okay go kill yourself, but I wasn't meaning that. So go sit in the corner in your house. I do not care which, just stay there and rot. If you are not in a place with a corner, then lucky you. Find one if you can. There is no other option because I said so. Now if you pity yourself for reading this like most do, then do something productive and useful to the environment. My goodness.So SAD SO SADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD!Walls of text often go on for how ever long a person is willing to read. Just about now, you should be getting fed up, or you have a "thing" and can't keep reading. go on, I understand. She's blond, isn't she. Thought so. Just, just, just leave, OK? make it easier on the both of us. OK this is me here. I am starting a new section of this article. I didn't read anything in this article above here, but nevermind, because I have something important to say, and you really have to read this. So just skip everything above and just come to this part and start reading and agreeing. The wall of text was invented by engineers using typewriters. Everything was in typewriter font (because it was made on typewriters - remember when I explained that in the previous sentence?) and the point was to use all of the paper, because paper was very expensive back then, it had just been invented I think. So anyway, the point was, no margins at the top or bottom or sides. If you left a quarter inch on the sides of the paper, that was very bad. And the guiding principle was "This was hard to write, so it should be hard to read". Because they were software engineers, not writing engineers. Is there even such a thing a writing engineers? Probably. But anyway, please go back to the top of this article and read it over again. You'll get the point after you read it for approx. 10 to 15 times.

    thank u for your time
  • iamPB wrote: »
    Hi denxi,

    stuff

    thank u for your time

    I was impressed until I realized it was a CnP. Apparently you are too lazy to even troll originally. Apparently you don't how to properly identify what a paragraph is either.
  • Denxi wrote: »
    I was impressed until I realized it was a CnP. Apparently you are too lazy to even troll originally. Apparently you don't how to properly identify what a paragraph is either.

    GET CUT FROM MINDPLAY PLEASE.

    we got a match next week, you can bottom for us again