Hmm, I personally think radar is too much of a (and I hate saying it) crutch for bad players in 1v1/2v2s. Especially a radar on which you can constantly see where your opponent is. You might as well put a waypoint over their head and call it a day. It completely ruins the awareness aspect of the game. One of the things I love doing most in 1v1 is moving in ways the other player didn't predict and it pays off in nearly every battle that commences. Getting the jump on people because of superior awareness and movement is so rewarding. With that gone 1v1s would be a lot less interesting for me.
As I've said previously a countless amount of times in the last two days, on a variety of different topics... just because your personal preference of gameplay is generally competitive, it does not mean that you are a more skilled player, nor does your playstyle mean you are more skilled. If a player wins by camping in a corner with a shotgun... they simply outsmarted you and maintained a lead. They won. That's all that matters. Whether or not radar is included or not... you should learn to adapt your playstyle and play to what the tournament specifies. The tournament shouldn't have to adapt to a certain set of gamer's playstyles to compensate for their skillset. That certainly does not prove a players skill in a game. Adapt your playstyle, or lose the game refusing. Simple. Also, radar itself simply creates a new set of tactics. With or without it, different gameplay styles are created. Complaining about having to adapt to play to a certain playstyle doesn't help your arguments saying playing a certain way requires more skill if you cannot play the reverse way flawlessly yourself.
It's like that old dude said... Survival of the fittest... adapt to your surroundings, or die like a mother ****er.[sup]*[/sup] *quotation may not be exact.
As far as I know, no one has implied the bolded. Personally, I have no problem adapting. I played in your most recent 2v2 Throwdown and did fairly well. I play with radar often, and do just fine. My point is and has been: I acknowledge the inclusion or exclusion of radar essentially creates different games. I am saying that no radar is (in my opinion, and in the opinion of many others) the better option. Furthermore, casuals (for the most part) will play despite which is used. Competitive-minded players will not. To appeal to the most people and to create the more competitive settings would be to not include radar. Additionally, as easy as it is for you to tell us to adapt, it is just as easy for us to turn around and tell you to adapt. Quite simply, the settings and maps chosen are essentially what the people who are running this want to play, not what the participants want to play. I'm not saying the majority may want to play without radar, but basically, you guys don't even bother to ask or consider it a respectable amount. Once again, I am going to have to tell you to provide some decent point. The only points you have brought to this thread is 1) Players run blindly around maps without radar and 2) Adapt. You have also completely ignored the fact that it is a No Radar vs. Enhanced Radar debate at this point.
But aPK, your from MLG. Its implied that you would imply that your better. Duh. Your a try-hard because your favor competitive settings. Every one that favors competitive settings is an elitist try-hard. Duh.
At the end of the day, regardless of what has or will go down in the thread, this. Have you ever heard of a tournament where you're able to persuade the organizers to make decisions on the conditions of said tourney? Staff has yet to make a decision on this or any topic relating to a tournament, and even if we did, we're not going to confer with participants on the matter. Trust me, if conversation were to start up, we're going to debate it to the utter and absolute death, on the grounds of what we as staff feel is best for a tourney. Not what the contestants are more comfortable with/what they feel is best for a tourney.
Well the point I'm making is, as you've more or less backed up. All other players would be happy to adapt their playstyle to compete in the tournament, except the few people complaining about something as minor as the radar. Whether the radar is or is not included, and to what degree it's detection level is apparent, should be irrelevant to any serious competitive gamer. A true competitive person would strive to compete and be the best at any given category, not a category they specified to their own refined skillset as that does not prove anything. The bolded statement was implied by most members more or less opposing the radar being included in the next tournament because if it isn't for your own personal preference... it's backed up by examples of your own personal preferences in your own competitive field of play and playstyle. Please view things like this from the outlook of the entire community, rather than your own personal taste in how gametypes are configured or played. For example, I'm expecting the same arguments from 100% bloom or no bloom to be included.
Don't enter if you don't like it. 3-4 people isn't going to break this tournament, sorry. MLG.... get raped. Ha, Quake Maps. get raped
No one here is saying they won't play. We'll play obviously because it's ****ing ForgeHub and well all love it here, but we just like to share our thoughts on the merit of certain settings.
I won't play. Its too much a hassle to bother with unless the settings are something I wouldn't mind going out of my way to play. Hulter brings up a good question. Is it 100% bloom? That'd be a bigger issue than the whole radar thing.
lol what BT said. Hulter, I'm trying to get a simple point across here... Asking for something to be removed because you and a few others prefer the game this way is trying to get something accomplished for yourself and as hard as it may be to see... it may not be in the best interests for the tournament. Do not be disappointed if radar IS included, and to a non-standard setting. Whether it is, or isn't is still yet to be decided (and that's even if the tournament exists yet... :|) Also, the exclusion of radar may cause you, individually, to judge the map harder and try to predict player movement yourself... but the inclusion of radar forces you, individually, to move unpredictably to conceal your approach to your enemies. The reason I said it's minor is because with or without radar, there are different tactical approaches skilled players must take. You have to actual work your arse off to flank an opponent with a radar... where as you could just get pot lucky and have them walk out with their back turned to you without a radar. The scenarios work both ways. Simply assigning your own personal skill curve and approach to it doesn't apply to all players. A good example of this was last night when we were playing with Bloom, on standard gametypes we'd been playing with the for the last year. (which you complained at for the entirety of the game, I might add!) I hadn't played Halo Reach (as in competitively) in what is typically 8 weeks or so (I might have had the odd game here or there, I can't remember). But as someone you'd consider a casual gamer, because I play for entertainment value, I consistently placed in the top 50% of the game, if not being the MVP of the game, playing on multiple different types of gametype settings. Your skill curve evidently doesn't apply to me, because my gameplay style adapted (albeit, only slightly) to support the different gametype settings much better than you did because on your skill curve, you're only actually higher up than me on a very refined skillset because of very precise gametype settings and maps. [sup]*based on the eight or so games we played last night[/sup]
...Also its a tournament. Part of the challenge is adapting to the rules of said tournament. If you don't like the rules or can't adapt to them and succeed then don't take part. Simple, simple, simple.
That is your choice to participate... And referring to the settings as bad is your opinion, which regardless of how much you like competitive play, does not weigh anymore than the next person to post in this thread, nor does it hold any extra influence. (much like my own, I'd like to add)
You may need your balls to drop in order to realize APK is only asking to chose no radar over radar. The discussion is about only one setting. However, it may very well be the most important setting to distinguish good and bad gameplay in 1v1. Without radar, the skill gap in predictability is wide and flanking is a strong possibility. With radar, there is no such thing as predictability and flanking is nearly impossible. No-radar widens the skill gap by ALOT, so it is a huge deal for this tournament. If players end up camping on the map, then it is the map and the weapon set that doesn't promote movement, not the lack of radar. - Agreed for sure, APK - And about enhanced radar. It is possibly better then motion-tracking, but here's a story or this suitable audience: -Fred, losing 0-14, finally decides power weapons are useful, and hopes to use one. "Hey, maybe I'll go into that room to get the grenade launcher." -approaches the room...then "Shoot! It looks like he just got it. I better get out of here." -runs away, knowing he got lucky because he would have gotten wrecked without the radar on. However, he backs into a dead end like a dumbass and the other player imminently earns his last kill