nomadic;dr

FUFUFUFUFUFUFUUFUFU

:V

i saw it and instantly thought "ha, sif i read nomadic articles."

then you stole my post. :(

Harsh.

I read it for you, it was crap.

Nomadick is a cunt

Seems he also has very poor grammar.

Or broadly speaking, hes not that bright. Poor grammar, average quake skills, jealous, the list goes on.

lol, esr comments ftw* the same 10-20 people posting Nomadick!

The guy is my hero.

figures

shut up, dicklover.

don't knock it till you try it BITCH!!!

hahaha

next time, i shall effectively use PUNS!
HAHA, PUNS!

He should stick to ca also.

sounds like a good reference to have when writing about quake community.

yeah, his credibility (if there ever was any) is completely destroyed.

oh, you were being sarcastic. :(

You guys do realize it wasn't Nomadic's decision regarding that match. He was one of 4 in that decision. It wasn't personal. It was a job. He didn't run the tournament, he was designated as the community voice. Like what Syncerror is to QL in a sense. No one likes making such calls. Especially if only 1 can get the blame for it. Online tourneys ftw.

are you trying to tell me that it was some kind of hard decision for him to ban walter without any evidence?

also: if you read up in that particular thread, there is an admin explaining exactly what happened in the process.
and since i trust everyone else more than nomadick on that matter, i'd say it was his own decision.

Yeah, it's not like he's been on a witch hunt for walter for well over a year or two is it?

It may not have been just his decision but he was clearly an important factor in it happening and it happening so quickly and without an unanimous decision.

Streetrunner, read #15. From what I followed in the thread where other admins posted their explanations, it seems that it actually was nomadic's decision.

I understand that, but there is more than what would be released publicly. I won't get into exactly why or what, but from what I know is that it isn't as it seems. Doesn't matter as it is past, but when companies make decisions, and then their market overturns it, sometimes it is crafty to point fingers within themselves if it serves it's purpose. Always take that into consideration on anything related to company type decisions that go bad. I mean look at the media on any subject: they always do this same technique.

I do know that alot of top players watched that match and provided feedback before any decision was made.

Point being, Nomadic does support the community and really has never been an ass online or off to most of you guys. And if he wasn't told to make a decision or help make a decision on an online tournament, this harshness probably wouldn't exist.

Assume Nomadic totally made that decision and hates Walter and KGB: you guys have all hated people before and made mistakes you probably would change at this point right? We are all humans ya know.

I won't get into exactly why or what, but from what I know is that it isn't as it seems.

Well, you certainly convinced me!

Point being, Nomadic does support the community and really has never been an ass online or off to most of you guys. And if he wasn't told to make a decision or help make a decision on an online tournament, this harshness probably wouldn't exist.

Assume Nomadic totally made that decision and hates Walter and KGB: you guys have all hated people before and made mistakes you probably would change at this point right? We are all humans ya know.

This sounds pretty weak to me. Especially coming from the guy who wants to build "the next big quake thing".

1.) he was a total cunt in every way on the walter+kgb matter.
2.) that's bullshit. it was bullshit to make him part of the admin-team in the first place.
considering the fact, that he was a "spokesman" for razer on the matter, it's even more bullshit.

lol? i think ull find not many of us have made idiot decisions involving prize money thats worth what 1000+ $?

dont try to defend him based on some mysterious behind the scenes knowledge that ur not willing to reveal. and dont act like this is some secret thingy. its an online q3 tournament. theres nothing that needs to be confidential about it.

it was made clear that nomadic initiated the whole process of accusing them of hacking by approaching every other admin and some of the other players. if ur not going to call syn an outright liar then u should just stfu.

back to topic. dont really get why this is majored.

I think this is worthy of being major, four fairly interesting articles.

I think Mojo could do a better job of formatting it though, it's a bit messy at the moment (Most news post on ESR are horrible if you ask me).

If you actually go re-read the post you're referencing, you'll see that the admin you're talking about (syn) voted against DFM. He goes on to say that the vote wasn't unanimous, however.

and if you could actually read you would have read this line:
"For the record I voted "no" based on the fact that I did not see 100% proof of any sort of hack"

Even if he wasn't the only one, he was the one who started it.

"He didn't run the tournament, he was designated as the community voice"

You lost me with that line because obviously the decision was not what the community had in mind.

by his company: meaning, he was public and the rest were private. And note this as well: some admins might have changed their vote after deciding the other way around. Just to look good. These happen, not saying it did though.

I do not care one way or the other, but are you saying it did or did not happen?

problem is,
he shows no class when he is on here. 90% of the stuff ive seen nomadic post is "winz cheated at eswc" or something related to that eswc. the rest is generally anti-waltor rhetoric.
you play the way you live? you post the way you think.

"problem is,
he shows no class when he is on here."

lol? compared to the rest of ESR nomadic is a class act.

Have any of you guys ever actually met him? I'm guessing not.

Have any of you guys met any of you guys?

I love clan arena! Yay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

show cock bro

I will show you my cock...

i don't want to see your std infested clit, lady.

so you don't want to see mine? too bad :(

show

nub

go way

what the fuck is nomanDICK doing for the quakecommunity???

DQs!!!!!!

I'm a very experienced chess player, I've played it about 3-4 years competitively and got to the Polish national under-18 semi-finals, haven't played them about two years now, tho; also, I'm one of the better Polish Quake Live players (in the most recent biggest on-line QL competition in Poland seeded fourth, also note that the Polish Quake Live scene is one of the toughest ones). And to be perfectly honest, I have no idea how can chess improve an average player's Quake game.

If you learn about chess on a high level then yeah, you tend to develop a certain thought discipline. In high level chess one of the things you learn is how to influence the way you think to count variations more efficiently. And that kind of work really helps in Quake, yeah. One of the more interesting things of what I've particularly learned is the way how to watch and analyse demos, especially my own ones (which I don't usually do anyway due to laziness). And a lot of other things I will not list here.

But, on an average level? I don't really think it would help that much.

What I think would help a lot is staying fit. It works pretty simple, it helps you to stay 100% focused for the whole game. Staying fit is also essential at tournaments, but that's a whole other story.

Also, if you're a loser in life, you will be a loser in game. I think it was Mikhail Botvinnik who said that "you play the way you live."

oh, but one more thing: never give up. That's probably the best advice you can get ;)

Good point regarding upper level chess. The reason I suggested it was purely from a setup point of view. Most players I play in Quake Live don't setup any moves ahead of where they are and I find that alot in higher Quake level of play. It helped me though and the comparison to it was always present to me. So, planned possibility and setup is the purpose of that suggestion.

a plus for the interesting article anyway ;)

Totally agree with you about high level players setting up moves. I used to watch cooler play in Q4 and just marvelled at his aim and positioning, but then in one phrantic game I noticed him set a trap at the RA and realised just how good he actually was/is and how far behind I am.

The trap involved laying grenades near the lower RL exit and then rushing fast through the HB corridor to kill his opponent in the back. It impressed me because it distracted the enemy with the grenades while pinning them in with no-where to run as the grenades were still blowing up at their only exit...

I know it's quite simple written down but the ease at which he pulled it off impressed the hell out of me. :)

I've had a similar argument with many players. I insist that chess strategies are very helpful. They were insisting that some form of martial arts would be more comparable.
The chess strategy plays in by guiding your opponents move, and attempting to corner them with an advantage of some sort. If you don't have the advantage, don't corner them.

edit : martial arts might make more sense in a CA match. Duel? Not so much.

I wouldn't really be that literal in comparing martial arts, chess, and Quake. Those are such different things, after all. They start working marvellous things, but on a much more profound mental level, and only when you get to know them very, very well.

well, I suppose chess might help your strategic intuition.

There is hardly any time for real thinking comparable to chess. (except maybe 5 minute time limit chess...)

Yeah, you don't really conciously think about stuff in a Quake match, it's nearly all intuition based on previous experience.

maybe that's what separates the absolute best from the best?

I mean, if I think real hard in game I hold my own vs some very good players, but then I just lose concentration and get fucked over a third of the way in. :<

well, that is pretty much what I meant with "five minute limit". There you don't have the time to really think about your next move in depth. But you go with a mixture of intuition (based on experience) and some thinking. But you still need to be concentrated, so you don't overlook the immediate threats.

have you seen the movie 'Fresh'?
Samuel L Jackson tells his son, that he beat numerous grandmasters in timelimit chess, 'cause they all fail, when under pressure.

:)

good thing I didn't see it then...
There is hardly any grandmaster who can't play well under pressure, time or position.

It's just that everybody plays better when they take more time. I even beat some Chinese players because they underestimated me and only used 5 of their 60 minutes :P

Well, I think about it in another way.

In high-level chess, there are players who sometimes assume the situation wrong, thus making wrong calls on who have the advantage. There are players that tend to chose wrong strategical concepts when they are in an abnormal closed/open game. There are players who don't know some opening variations that they should know. But, there no high-level chess players who cannot count hundreds of variations when playing a game.

It's similar in Quake. You've got world-class players who sometimes have problems with timing. There are players who tend to be too afraid or overaggressive when fighting for the items. There are players lacking good movement in tough situations. But, there are no high-level Quake players who cannot aim well.

In every sport there are basic skills which are essential and that ordinary people with no insight tend to see and overvalue, as well as skills that you develop when you master the game.

Intuition is basically thinking, without conciously thinking. You just know what to do because you've unconciously filtered all the relevant information from the irrelevant and then processed it to make a decision.

You only have a certain amount of attention that you can apply to any task at a time (try listening to a group of people tell you something different at once). Concious thinking is rather slow and demanding on attention.

Your intuition is all based on previous experience (just another reason why practice is so important) which allows it to filter out the right information and process it faster with more accurate decisions.

Like you said, in high level chess there are no players who can't count hundreds of variations. In non-timed chess you have as long as you want to consider all the possibilities and make your move. In timed chess you only have a limited time and you can't possibly conciously go through every possible variation in play as you just don't have the time, but you don't need to because your intuition always filters out all the irrelevant stuff and lets you focus on the best solutions and the more experience you have the more accurate and faster you do it.

In Quake it allows you to put more attention into things like aim, movement and clock timing.

I do though... hmmm ;)

I guess that's why you're number one.

Mikhail Botvinnik

you play the way you live

I've been saying that for YEARS. If you dedicate all of your playing time to camping base in CTF(oh, sorry, you guys call it defense), camp corners, and rail platforms, then it's probably what you are in real life: anal worm that is scared to come out and face the real challenge.

"you" is purely hypothetical

"you play the way you live."
Science and all other bs propaganda use to talk abt concepts like evolving genes, winner =surviver, etc. Rubbish. Living beings adapt to environment as result of combination of physical forces who governs the matter, but there is no conscience in here.
There is no such thing as loser and winner, excepting the relative inept human desire to give a meaning to his existence, to form some standards, and call some winners, other losers. How you call a guy a loser, by counting his stats, by analysing whether he has a family, crappy expensive cars and inny-tiny-ten children and three wives, all ex-porn stars who look-a-like my daughter? The loser/winner stuff is based on population, which proves be just some mathematical function, pushing things into statistics. In a 10 people community, your chances to be a winner, depending the standard, goes from 1 to 9. If your community accepts one guys as a failure, your chances are 90%. If community consider anything than first place a failure, your chances go down to 10%. All based on your relatives, mate. Winning and losing is relative concept. If there would be a world with just two of us there, me and you, your idea of loser or winner would need me, in order to give u an auto-evaluation and thus make a succes afirmation u worth your existence. Human pride...Which is masturbation.
There is no prove loser in life equals loser in games, and there are so many variables. If you play quake2 3 times a year at all, and the time you play you go against pro players, you lose 50-0 anyway. Every person has the capacity to improve, to the extend of beating better natural players.It depends on time spend on training (frequency+intensity) and the ability to force human cells into unbalanced forms, which goes exactly against the theory wo says the winner is the better specimen. Because those who find difficult to learn anything are in fact the guys with best natural capacity, because they have the best capacity to keep their system unchanged.
"A soap bubble is round...because it is the most energy-efficient configuration". -K-Pax
In Universe there are planets where life dissapeared graduatelly, going through unevolved creatures, depending on natural environment.

You play the way you are, sounds more appropriate (the way you play reveals your character/style/whatever, but this has nothing to do with relative concepts invented by man, like winning and losing).
And there is the other definition of an expert -expert is the guy who made all possible mistakes on the very matter. Only problem, in life you are not allowed to make too many mistakes, because limited time -based on this formula and using human standards, once again, we could say winners are in fact the guys who did not make enough mistakes, so winners are in fact the big amateurs of life.
Winning or losing games has nothing to do with the world "outside the box". From nature's point of view, we could be dead or alive, this century our genes are stronger, next it will be weaker, depending the environment situations, so it doesn't even matter, winning/losing concept exist in human mind only.
Mikhail Botvinnik was a second rate philosopher who never really understood what's going on. Typical example of an idiot who become somebody by doing same thing over and over again, and who at the end tried to reduce all things to what he won, not able to understand these winnings signed up by so called wise conclusions, represent his limits, nothing more.

Mac and Linux users would love to be supportive of the game, shame they can't play it lol. SyncError I'm talking to you!

Mojo looking for big juicy plusses!

Though I've always loved CA type gameplay...I can't agree that it is just as skillful as 1v1/tdm. Just for the simple fact that 1v1/tdm includes every aspect of CA and much more. You have to have great positioning, aim, etc...as well as map control, prediction of the enemy, etc...I think CTF throws in a whole other skill-set on top of this, and has the highest skill cap in terms of game modes of Quake...gotta say that ctf is fucking BAD in QL tho :(

Good on you for recognizing the true skill of CTF. [+]

QL has alot of potenial for CTF, the reduced rail damage was always going to be a bonus for attackers (and spectators) of CTF. All we need is more maps, good maps. So far the only good maps are ctf5 and Ironworks (which for an ID map, is quite fucking good).

Or, just fucking give us WCP.

Yea agreed, the nerf of hitscan weapons definitely makes ctf more interesting...but like you said the maps are very bad...I've never been a big fan of ctf2 or ctf5, so ironworks is the only one I can tolerate to play. Also, I've always despised pub ctf servers, scrims/pickups the only way I enjoy it

doubler destroys that effect on maps where its available but on the other hand you got scout ...

so what i want to say is

runes fucking suck :P

Yeha I recently played a clan match on a rune map and it was rather terrible.

Runes slow the game down alot, because if you spawn without one near by you are inclined to go back and pick one up because you will be at a great disadvantage otherwise.

Oh and mines, don't need to really say anything about them.

CTF throws an interesting dynamic in but reduces the overall skill cap and limits some elements greatly.

hello, my name is donkz

and I play CA only because

TDM crowd sucks skillwise
CTF has NO good maps
Duel ... has never been my thing, plus it's only dm6 now

Other than that it's a worthless mod, and all of you RA3ers should be ashamed of yourselves for playing this brainless gametype for life.

TDM is pointless to play with 10 sec wep respawns...that's why no one good plays it

well it doesnt help either that some moron is always team killing or suiciding making it impossible to win

lack of locking or at least 4 player team limit doesn't help either. God, I could probably add this feature in 10 second flat. WTF?

12

and the average CA skill is high? lol

it's not that tdm crowd sucks skillwise but more that a mod where mg is used 90% of the time sucks gameplay wise.

hmmm well I don't really agree on some of the things...
But overall it's good to read, pretty direct and has some good hints etc. (for the first 3 articles anyway I'm not interrested in the last one Oo)
overall pretty decent ;)

haahahahaaaaaaaaha

Streetrunner, I would be interested if you wrote that DIET guide. I could be wrong, but havenīt you prepared some article in Progam3r like Maximalizing Mental Performance or such? Would be nice if you did something like that, since it doesn't have to be gaming related :)

me too as hes probably a fat yank

Dird, you are right. Feel better now?

very, fatty

fuck clan arena

I played ra3 from 2001 to 2006 and I really loved the game. I can however say that it suffer major flaws.

Ra3 / CA is fun. The infights are pure adrenaline. And it can be damn spectacular. In EU it was played with armor damage off, and one of the things I liked was to rocket jump me right in the middle of the battle, and being surrounded by a 3 second chaotic "infight", usually decided by one or two backwarder that decided not to show up, either in your team or in the opponent's.

But this is actually the problem. The gameplay does not force you to play the cool way. This creates ridiculous situations where the community has "unwritten rules". In central Europe, not meeting at upper in a public server was usually a good and quick way to get kicked out the server. But then you had competition.... and there you had those endless ra3map2 matches with people spamming 40 grenades per round or whatever. I can remember a super flame war in a clan base ra3 div 2 match we did in 2004, because in map11 we were not playing the conventional way and did some camping/backwarding that allowed us to win the better close combat opponents.

A game must be designed so that the optimal way to play it is also coolest. Unwritten rules are bullshit, and if the way to win makes the game boring, then the game sucks.

Said this, the way to do ra3/Ca is to constrain the gameply with the right type of maps, which imho are of this kind: one big open space. More open than the usual q3 maps, to allow virtually 10 people to have the same close combat fight, but not big in extension, otherwise you allow camping/backwarding. That's the environment that makes you adrenaline addicted. That's what Ra3/CA is about. You want tactics? Go play TDM, Duel or CTF which are way better than any ever possible attempt with the flawed CA rules.

"But this is actually the problem. The gameplay does not force you to play the cool way."

agreed completely. ra3 sucks as a competitive mod, but it can be a lot of fun when played with reasonable people. (or raging nerds)

if you play strictly to win you won't have much fun, since you'll be bw railing 90% of the time. it's very hard to match with fw tactics unless you're a skill class above your opponents.

"Said this, the way to do ra3/Ca is to constrain the gameply with the right type of maps, which imho are of this kind: one big open space.More open than the usual q3 maps, to allow virtually 10 people to have the same close combat fight, but not big in extension, otherwise you allow camping/backwarding"

haven't seen such a map yet, because the very requirement to have 10 players on an open map, but at the same time not be rail dominant is conflicting.

the only decent map where you can counter bw rail tactics (but also only to an extent) is thunder 2on2.

imo the only worth way to play RA/CA as they are is the kamikaze/berserk one, anything else would turn boring and lame
it's designed to be a huge mindless fun battle, or a rage factory

But this is actually the problem. The gameplay does not force you to play the cool way.

seconded, thats why i usually dont play ca