Free Allegiance Forums

Well, this was a good game. It was a freaking hard fought battle to the end.

Weedman is an exceptional commander and I feel honored for having participated in an EVEN game.

People can blame XT for the stack but you can also blame us for even games.

/blink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":o" border="0" alt="blink.gif" /> Yup /wub.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":iluv:" border="0" alt="wub.gif" /> XT /ninja.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":ninja:" border="0" alt="ninja.gif" />

http://asgs.alleg.net/asgsnet/recentgames.aspx?gameid=12819

There's such a THING as a even game?

With all the shouts of "omg stack" you begin to doubt their existence.

I wish all games were similarly balanced...

but it'd make Noir cry to see people on BOTH sides having fun

--TE

Alright. I have to say that I am my favorite commander to fly for. Next goes Virulence, Weedman, Aarm, Shiz, DrStrangelove... on and on. People NOT on that list are going to be commanding a lot and using the *antistack* button to force me onto thier team so I can *MUTINY* them. I will only play *antistack button* games if there is a *Vote to mutiny* option.

If I am being forced to fly for someone, they should be forced to play better.

Even comms = Even game.

Two good experienced comms is preferable.

The problem is when a good commander won't give up the command seat even though no-one of similar quality will face him.

Two average commanders against each other is far, far better than one good comm vs. one weak comm.

You are not forced to fly for anybody whether they use the button or not.
You can choose to fly for either commander as you wish.

The only difference is, just like you can't join Aarm when he is up a player when Imbalance=1, you can't join Aarm if he's stacked and EnforceBalance=on.

If the "balance" button makes it past the senate, that's all that will change.

--TE

Ozricosis wrote:QUOTE (Ozricosis @ Jul 24 2006, 09:50 PM) Alright. I have to say that I am my favorite commander to fly for. [...]
If I am being forced to fly for someone, they should be forced to play better.

Wow, you are pretty full of yourself.

That was a terrific game. Huge props to both commanders for facing off against each other. If we had more commanders willing to go against equally skilled comms like this more often, we'd have a gigantic player base and we could make a huge dent in the stacking mentality.

If I am full of myself than so be it. Screw me to the wall if I am against bad commanders being rewarded for sucking.

I think that what all of you on the senate (who actually have a vote that is not a majority but rather a dictatorship) decide that this is a good thing... you will be happier than HELL to see all the pilots who podded you remove themselves from the game.

I will not be told who to fly for ever. Period. never.

Arrogance or not, you cannot MAKE ME fly for you because of a button you have clicked.

Force me to do anything and I am gone.

lol.

If you feel misrepresented by the senate, ask your senator to represent your opinion more appropriately. So far it was a simple no. Well, that might be your true opinion, but it is a bad argument.

If you think, I joined the senate to remove all the "good" pilots from the game, you are wrong. I expect to be podded, I am a goddamn htt/bomber/scout/nan/sf/sb pilot, not an int whore. Allegiance does not revolve around dogfighting only.

Balancing wil be optional, there are plenty of servers, where you can command a game with the option turn off, when the game owner decides to enable it. ELO will only count for balanced games, so there is a trade off (but "ELO is broken" anyway).
By the way, I have a list of commanders I will not fly for. I am not too fond of the prospect of flying for them again, the stacked games are worse though.