SCs other than the vq

How about this. Ban VQ's for another month and have Norfleet play Ermor with just a different pretender. You don't change any of your strategies or try anything new, and if he suddenly loses a disproportionate amount of his games, then you can say with every validity that it's the VQ that is the determining factor.

Originally posted by archaeolept:
lol more insults. I guess that stands in for actual experience.

Maybe if you could site another player who has done it every time and won every time, I would have a better time seeing your point of view. But since it is the same person every time and I haven't heard "I play exactly like Norfleet and I win every game I play" I think there is something missing as far as your experience.

[archaeolept]

the combined strat is broken. r'lyeh works very well even though it doesn't have access to the VQ (the GK instead) because it is so nicely defensible and capable of getting the clam strat up and running.

however, that was before the paralysis bug was fixed, so I'm not sure norfleet would want to play them now.

And norfleet certainly can win w/ other pretenders. he knows a lot of tricks and a lot about the game - ie. he would be very good even if he did not use these abuses.

As such, that he would still win doesn't logically imply that the VQ isn't broken...

Maybe if you could site another player who has done it every time and won every time, I would have a better time seeing your point of view. But since it is the same person every time and I haven't heard "I play exactly like Norfleet and I win every game I play" I think there is something missing as far as your experience.

please. name me a good player who has managed to deal w/ his strat and does not think it is broken. just one.

[ May 04, 2004, 22:44: Message edited by: archaeolept ]

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by archaeolept:
the combined strat is broken. r'lyeh works very well even though it doesn't have access to the VQ (the GK instead) because it is so nicely defensible and capable of getting the clam strat up and running.

however, that was before the paralysis bug was fixed, so I'm not sure norfleet would want to play them now.

Are you challenging me? I'll still play them.

Originally posted by archaeolept:
And norfleet certainly can win w/ other pretenders. he knows a lot of tricks and a lot about the game - ie. he would be very good even if he did not use these abuses.

Ignoring the loaded term of "abuses", which cannot be proven, I've won games where I have not had the option of, or deliberately chose not to use, a VQ.

Admittedly, I *DO* have a certain stylistic preference that the VQ fits well into, but it is because of the fit that I choose it, not the other way around, and it is not the only shoe that fits: My preferences were that way well before Dom2 existed. However, if shoe fits, wear it.

[ May 04, 2004, 22:48: Message edited by: Norfleet ]

[archaeolept]

Are you challenging me? I'll still play them.

lol

like I said, you'ld still do well, and be a ***** to beat.

However, if we Banned clams and only allowed you castles in half your territories...

Originally posted by archaeolept:


And norfleet certainly can win w/ other pretenders. he knows a lot of tricks and a lot about the game - ie. he would be very good even if he did not use these abuses.

Oh, so he is a good player and has won with other pretenders? I thought he only used the same thing every time, that was your point I believe.

As such, that he would still win doesn't logically imply that the VQ isn't broken...

Nice CYA there. No it does not mean they are not broken, but it puts the bias on the skill of the player and not the use of the VQ. All it says is that a good player can win consistantly without using only one design. If he were to do so, I think you'd see alot less of an uproar about it and it wouldn't be so pronounced for those who play him time and time again facing the exact same strategy/pretender.

I believe it's been said before and I'll say it again, as if people suddenly forget. The VQ might need to be adjusted in cost/nations, if only to limit the popularity not the potency of the VQ. Anything a VQ can do, any other pretender with the exception of the physically weak ones, can as well. So if they can do the exact same thing under the same circumstances, why is the VQ singled out? Because it's easier?

please. name me a good player who has managed to deal w/ his strat and does not think it is broken. just one.

Graeme. He may personally feel that it should be adjusted, but broken? He'll have to answer that for himself. Earlier in this thread he mentioned he almost won with Vanheim except for the bad luck of his AF casting Shockwave. If he was previously unable to handle it and is now progressing to the point he could, it means to me he is strategizing his way to beat Norfleet's finely honed strategy.

[ May 04, 2004, 22:54: Message edited by: Zen ]

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by Zen:
So if they can do the exact same thing under the same circumstances, why is the VQ singled out? Because it's easier?

Because it's noticeable, available, and all the rage right now. If anything, the controversy is fuelling the popularity, to the point where people will pick a VQ even when playing a strategy that is otherwise inappropriate for the VQ. If the furor died out, and it will eventually, it would become a lot less popular...or be supplanted with some new "all the rage" option.

Frankly, the fact that many chassis are unattractive is a far bigger problem than the VQ: If the VQ were eliminated, everyone would simply pick the next closest cousin: the GK, which is in some ways better, especially if you aren't willing to sacrifice as much in the way of national scales. The real problem is that so many other options are overpriced, defective, or otherwise uncompetitive. (See: Moloch's Imps).