MNC 1v1 Chollo vs Bkitko73

who do you think won?

ill post the video in the morning

post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vbp6RVv0aQ8

And to think I voted for Chollo :cry:

I'm still waiting for the day where people realize 1v1s in a team game don't mean much of anything. I fail to understand why people take so much pride in their own individual skill in a game that practically screams, "Hey, buddy, teamwork is imperative and the focal point of this game's design!" Individuals who continue to act like ChRoN2cLe and co. simply continue to make the rest of us who just enjoy screwing around in shooters look bad, to put it bluntly. There are games in which individualism is completely prevalent, which should be populated by those who want to prove themselves and inflate their ego, but no, they're not. Team-based shooters seem to be filled to brim with the most egotistical catfish.

Bkitko73 is still annoying as always, by the way.

Actually private matches have mini 1v1's that make a team win or lose in a second.

Actually this 1v1 was one that Chollo should have never lossed

Individual skill is important because players with high individual skill and teamwork will beat players with low individual skill and high teamwork. MNC is more two phases than total teamwork tho bc many games are lost with perfect slaying power and teamwork but bad bot play. Great gunners and assaults can't do much to help bad tanks and assassins.

I'm not sure the motive of this post bc I remember your main class style of play very passive just shooting bots and not helping midmap or pushes without juice, then later posting proud pictures of 40-1 assault games which just screams selfish killwhoring, the anti team player

Bkitko is awful at mnc

Lol idk wtf yielding is even saying with that wall of useless text I'll just slap him 1v1 if he wants, chron is still bad and takes pride in being almost decent in mnc,a game in which he is the only one who takes it seriously. and over the 2 months I've been gone seems like I'm still hated for bringing light to the retardation of the "good players" and their lack of understanding of any game mechanics/ competitive gaming lol typical bads will bad.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RijqbJa5uTc

Get **** on Bkitko.

why dont you post the gunner game where it was your host and uhh some random flash character **** down your throat?

If we're doing requests, can you post the game where I get 30+ assists when I joined in late as a tank?

look at skills support.. sign him up coach! but it doesnt appear to be the right pic. it must have been in a different album of yours :lol:

It's funny because Gemecide has a better K/D than you

^Mad kid. BTW eat **** kolani kitkowski.

To be frank, the primary reason I stuck with tank is because I had adopted a playstyle that molded with my lack of communication, albeit not very well. The aforementioned 40-1 assault game was not to brag, because the oppositions team composition was rather laughable, and was posted solely to emphasize a point someone (don't remember who) made in the thread. I feel as though the frustration that inherently resides in having incompetent teammates really brought out the ego in some people, which carried over to other aspects of play/communication/general presentation as a person.

In response to the claims of being selfish on tank, however; I'll give it to you. I was always more interested in playing a slaying based class to begin with, plus that coincides with the previously noted conservative playstyle that was put into play to accommodate for... specific shortcomings (like terrible aim; I would lose lots of medium range fights because I can't work tank's DM game properly). In regards to my assault being overtly conservative in its nature, I disagree. You seemed to have given plenty of other players leeway in terms of the degree of moderate incompetence they can exert before being chastised or nagged for it, while practically using a "zero tolerance" rule when criticizing my actions as assault. I can understand a good bit of it in-game, but saying it was as miserable as it was (in terms of killing what an assault should be killing) in hindsight just doesn't make sense to me.

The motivation of that post was the minute irritation I have with the ego a sizable chunk of the shooter community has. If you're playing a game like MNC, you're setting yourself up to deal with incompetent teammates or a slew of enemies that collectively have more skill than your team. You can't complain about it; individualism is not entirely prevalent. Those who truly think they can "smack" any "nancy" they come across should be playing games in which you and only your own skill matters. You can't complain when you set yourself in that situation.

Dadale still comes up with the most eloquent and classy responses, I must say:

If i was playing SMNC i would agree that individual skill isn't as important as teamwork/communication however in MNC you can carry even with a **** team. You were not known for being a dominate slayer so i can see how you might not comprehend that.

I also agree with Chron that your play style in every class except support was conservative just like bkitko73 or Teapot. Playing for juice used to be good when you could buy it now its just laughable.

I know you can carry a crappy team... My point is that you have no reason to complain about teammates when you believe your individual skill is clearly better than that of each member of the opposing team because you're playing a team game. The ego in team games like this seems to outweigh that of 1v1 games in general, which makes no sense.

It's not rocket surgery, man. Rocket surgery is pretty hard.

hudson please ban everyone

My $0.02
1v1 skill does have to be a consideration in the selection of players.

Strong team play CAN make up for weak individual play, BUT weak team play is not always remedied by strong individual play. So, if you can only have one aspect, pick the person who is better on a team. So, you would think the good team players are the better players and that is true. But there is a third kind of player, the people who are good at both aspects of the game, the ones who can help their team excel while dominating on their own; they are the game changing players.

Here is the thing though - it is usually easier to teach people how to contribute on a team than to teach them how to play a class well. As long as they are willing to learn you will find more game changing players in the ones who already have the individual matchup skill than the ones who don't; all too often, people aren't willing to learn though. Maybe because early on, they might have to admit a deficieny in their skillset and that would just hurt the ego too much :|

But what do I know; I am just a random.