Competitive Multiplayer Choices That you don't Respect

[MrRaggaedeman]

I think I mentioned this somewhere else on the escapist but I really dislike the dorkmoon blade/sunlight blade in Dark Souls. Not because I think they`re overpowered but because this means that my opponent probably uses the falchion and is going to spam R1 or he`s using one of the rapiers and will only poke from behind this shield.

This usually leads to really boring fights because I tend to fight boring tactics with other boring tactics i.e. I`m going for backstabs or parries

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

eh, there are the people who play to win (not me), and the people who play with whatever they find fun (me)

i personally dislike alot of obviously broken/OP mechanics of lots of games, and i know plenty of people who every nanosecond of every game use those broken mechanics to their advantage, and it usually ends in people raging hard or no one really having "fun". more often then not the game creators didn't have enough time to see every single aspect of their game to know if or if not it was under/over powered and in what way, so it's understandable when weapons are used on certain maps in certain combos that the designers would've never realized to be so fucking broken, which is why i tend to not use them or if they aren't even fun in the first place (camping on top of a certain vantage point to use the weapon in a certain way that guarantees a kill) then i just don't do it.

but then again, this is why i hardly play multiplayer anymore, i dislike alot of the griefing and overly competitive nature of people online, so don't take my opinion as a majority.

granted, this is all based off of video games, in real life/shooting/war, anything goes for strategy, regardless of how cheap or unbeatable it is.

 

[Naeras]

I find it really difficult to take people seriously when they tell me that they're a "competitive player" of any fighting game that's come out since 2008 or so(with the exception of the newer Tekken games). Street Fighter IV and Marvel vs. Capcom 3 in particular have little to no competitive value since they reward the losing player with overpowered gimmick mechanics.

And yet there are top players that are consistently placing high at tournaments in these games, despite the fact that the people they beat get overpowered super-attacks handed to them.

I don't really like the mechanics behind ultras myself(especially how you combo into them compared to "regular" supers), but condemning SF4 because of them is like condemning CvS2 for having K-groove. Yeah, it's kind of dumb that you only get meter for taking damage, but it doesn't really matter. Fundamentals are still the most important thing in that game. Doing random ultras is still a massive risk.

X-factor is kind of bullshit, though, but that goes along with everything else in UMvC3.

 

[RJ 17]

Snip.

This one - as well as your first response to G-Force - are why UMvC3 suck...ever think of that? I find it funny how you're playing a game where you admit that balance was a laughable side-thought, where every character can easily be broken and exploited, and you're complaining about people breaking and exploiting the game. Does it suck when someone locks you into some BS 10K hit combo where you might as well just set your controller down and watch yourself lose the match? Yeah...but that's the name of the game:

Cheese.

You have to out cheese your opponent. If all the characters and teams can easily be exploited and broken, then the game never had anything to do with skill from the beginning. The entire thing just revolves around who can exploit the hardest. I used to be like you. I've never been exceptionally awesome at fighting games but damnit, I could hold my own against equally-skilled opponents. I used a team of Doom/Zero/TheDoggyWhoICanNeverSpellHisNameRight. It wasn't because of some super-cheese combo that I figured out, it was based off of team-building: zero for strong melee, doom for range, and doggy for quick striking. That worked just fine when I was building up my confidence in the arcade mode before going out to Multiplayer. And what happens when I go to multiplayer? SUPER-CHEESE-COMBO-LOL-L2P-YFS!!!!

So I quite playing that game because, just like Soul Calibur, it became quite obvious to me that online multiplayer wasn't based around fair play and skill. Like I said, it was based on exactly what YOU said: all the characters are broken, build the right team and it can be exploited to hell, kthxbi.

You know what I think is the best fighting game out there? Dead or Alive.

Yeah, I said it, and not because das bewbies.

DoA is ingenius in it's simplicity. It's got a very basic paper-rock-scissors fighting style: hit beats throw, throw beats counter, counter beats hit. That's all there is to it. Sounds simple, but it's very tricky to perfectly master and actually does require skill in reading your opponent and deciding what you should do next. If you become predictable in DoA, it doesn't matter what character you're using: you will be DESTROYED. Just ask the guy I beat 18 games in a row because he was playing as Hitomi and kept doing the same 5 punch combo over and over. That's all he did, nothing else. He beat me the first round because I couldn't figure out a way around it, but I adjusted and overcame and never got touched again. You'd think that after game 5 he would have though "Maybe I should try something else" but nope, he just stuck with the same five-punch combo and I kept smashing his face in.

Getting back to my point: MvC3 and UMvC3 are terrible fighting games that attract terrible players, you really shouldn't be surprised when everyone just uses cheap, exploitable teams when - by your own admission - that's what the entire game is designed around.

NOW! As for my own thing that really pisses me off: noobtubers. :3

 

[Nigh Invulnerable]

When it comes to video games and competitive play, I don't really think anything of people who choose to use the "low skill+high power" combos, as I really don't care about competition anyway. What does annoy me sometimes, is D&D or other similar games where a player decides to abuse rules and interpretations to create "broken" character builds. Sure, I'm the DM and can just invoke rule 0 (DM gets final say), but it's still frustrating when a player wants to take away the spotlight from others by powergaming. D&D and such games are more about cooperative storytelling than competing against the other players, so the "I must be the best!" mentality gets a bit tiresome. Plus, the DM can just kill some Munchkin character without a second thought, so why try to spoil the fun for others?

Sorry about the rant. I do get tired of competitive play of ANYTHING pretty quickly, unless it's just amongst friends who aren't taking it seriously anyway.

 

[Ftaghn To You Too]

Anyone who plays Mount and Blade: Warband online will see players running around with no armor or clothes and a two-handed weapon, jumping and spinning around for maximum speed. Those people are scum.

 

[Blade1130]

My biggest problem is when people use the same character/loadout/strategy every single time they play the game. Regardless of how effective it is, it just annoys me going through the exact same thing every time. Yes, I know you like playing Shiek, I know she's not particularly OP, and I don't want to fight her for the 14th time in a row! When the other 3 people playing go rando, you should too!

 

[Abomination]

Natural Selection 2 is a game with no kill or time limit, the match is over once the enemy command structure(s) has been taken out.

In a lot of servers you will spend a fair amount of team getting the teams balanced, convincing people to choose to play as the commander (they don't fight in FPS, they control construction like in an RTS) and eventually get the game started.

Then one team decides to suicide rush the enemy base to end the game within less than two minutes.

I don't mind the tactic itself, I just despise spending more time in the lobby than actually playing the damn game. I don't see how it is fun, especially considering it happens a lot on "rookie friendly" servers.

Nothing frustrates me more than that very thing. I've had to change my entire build order in pugs to accommodate for people being dicks to "win easy". Now I need to build an armory, observatory and second infantry portal which essentially means half my pug team builds shit when I only want one doing so while the rest secure resources.

There is ZERO benefit to an early win in Natural Selection 2 because it's a game played for fun, not rankings or experience. The fun is when you've got Fades chasing down jetpackers and Onos trying to ambush dual minigun exos and Gorges struggling to take out Arcs with flamethrowers trying to counter the toxic Lerk gas being thrown at the people welding the exos who are trying to help the jetpackers with their Fade problems... not 3 Skulks bite the infantry portal and insta-gib any marine that pops out 2 minutes into the game.

 

[schiz0phren1c]

personally when I was playing the original street fighter in arcades a looooooooong time ago(in a galaxy far away...) and it was like a pool table,you stay on as long as you're winning and the challenger pays,I used to fucking HATE people who spammed blanka's electric attack or e honda's hand job,or even chun li's kicks attacks,
I used to love playing as guile against m bison or something interesting where a bit of skill and reflexes could turn the game around,
in modern terms I pretty much quit playing blops 2 and sold the disc back to cockbluster because of all these jumpy little faggots that invest only in speed perks and hop around like spastics the whole match,they're worse than campers(to be fair I only got blops 2 cause my friend is mad into it,I'd never consider myself a cod type gamer).

 

[spartan231490]

I do multiplayer mostly in cod. I don't respect noob-tubers, quick scopers, or the OP weapon(there's always one). The more unusual ones I don't have respect for are running shotguns as your primary weapon, it requires no skill, and it's soooo easy to work around, it's just a bad choice. I also lose a lot of respect for tac-knifers(don't get me wrong, it's a fun way to play, but it doesn't require much skill either.

In card games I don't really disrespect any strategy. I've run everything from mill to beat-down to stall, and they all take skill. Don't get me wrong, if you run a mill deck against me I will desire your blood in the worst way, but that's different from not respecting you.

 

[bjj hero]

In COD I hate quick scoping. Its not skill, its exploiting the auto aim and the developers dont have the back bone to take it out because the community os so toxic.

In Bloodbowl online Ive stopped playing match making as randoms only seem to play farmed killer teams. I stick to league play where I know the coaches now.

In general I hate people who drop out when they start losing. I thought grown ups would be able to play games without having to always win. Its the sort of thing small children do. Dont think Ive played fighting games since SSFIV. In that I find firball spamming tedius. I dropped out when they started adding charecters and charging for it.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Personally, stuff like spawn camping in FPS games and ludicrously long juggle combos in the likes of MvC3 which is why I don't play those types of fighting games. Back when I used to play CoD stuff like the Ppsh in 2 and P90 in 4 for quite nooby in that they had high ammo/clip, good accuracy, high rate of fire and good damage. For what it was they had too much stats on 1 gun. I can't remember an even semi serious clan match where the latter wasn't banned for just being better overall than most weapons for most maps.

I have a screenshot somewhere of a random game of S&D I for most part single-handedly brought back from being 9-0 to the other team by just using the Ppsh as I got sick of the other team spraying and praying. It was a 3v3 on our clan's server with mostly clan members. That said I understand 1 game with no replay to prove is anecdotal evidence but that gun was OP and this is the only 1 I have left of a game with it.

Spoiler

Enough of the epeen stroking(after this next image) though random nades are the best.

Spoiler

 

[shootthebandit]

Battlefield 3

Me and my friends tend to play a lot on noshaar canals and 50% of the time the admin get all the choppers and pin us down on the carrier and spawn rape us. Its fairly easy to stop this happening if you have a good squad but once its already happened its unstoppable to the point where we find a new server.

Out squad usually consists of an engineer (with javelin), a recon (with soflam) and a support for ammo. Quite often we can javelin the fuck out the choppers but we almost always get kicked when we do

 

[G-Force]

Does the name ChrisG mean anything to you? MorriDoom is actually unbeatable, unless he lost the last EVO I didn't watch it yet, he wins every tournament ever because if you can play the team well it's near impossible to deal with.

ChrisG lost to Justin Wong using Storm at Evo this year which goes to prove that there is a way around every strategy

 

[Evil Smurf]

I don't like anything that prevents the opponent from even having the opportunity to react. I've seen combos in Magic: The Gatering, YuGiOh, PoxNora and various other competitive games that just completely lock out an opponent. While it may a strategy, I believe it's one that detracts from the game and entertainment it's supposed to provide. What was supposed to be a contest is one no longer, and you're effectively just running through a checklist.

Also I don't like people that bandwagon onto whatever they research to be the most powerful strategy or figure out what the top competitive players are doing and just mimic it. I've seen that aspect in DotA, LoL, HoN, Warhammer 40K tabletop, as well as Magic too.

It is so fun playing with a blue/red mill/spell deck though!

 

[Souplex]

My friend considering any level that is not Final Destination to not be worth playing as it doesn't take skill if it isn't there. Also him getting annoyed when I play Diddy Kong.

It was especially bad in melee. Brawl improved the balance a lot over melee with the notable exception of MetaKnight being very overpowered.
In Melee, every competitive match was Only Fox, Final Destination, No Items.

 

[Terminate421]

I don't like anything that prevents the opponent from even having the opportunity to react. I've seen combos in Magic: The Gatering, YuGiOh, PoxNora and various other competitive games that just completely lock out an opponent. While it may a strategy, I believe it's one that detracts from the game and entertainment it's supposed to provide. What was supposed to be a contest is one no longer, and you're effectively just running through a checklist.

Also I don't like people that bandwagon onto whatever they research to be the most powerful strategy or figure out what the top competitive players are doing and just mimic it. I've seen that aspect in DotA, LoL, HoN, Warhammer 40K tabletop, as well as Magic too.

Pokemon has yet to end up like this. I hope it stays this way.

Though there are tiers and such to "guide" people into making good teams. I usually catch them off Guard.

One Scolipede with Jolly Nature and a Swords Dance and Life orb on my side

One Latios, Landorus, and Ferrothorn later, he took my scolipede down.

I did a completely basic sweep set up and facerolled him. It's up to being unpredictable to change up the game.

The words you said....make absolutely no sense to me. Right when you started talking about Jolly Ranchers and Swords Pants I was completely bewildered.

These little factors can completely alter how you use a pokemon, I'll do my best in engrish:

Jolly Nature: Raises Speed by 10%, lowers Special attack by 10%
Swords Dance: Attack that raises my attack by two stages
Life Orb: increases power of attacks by x1.3, at the cost of 1/16 of my pokemon's health for each move used.

Summary: I buffed up my scolipede to make it hit REALLY HARD and REALLY FAST

Scolipede is fast on his own, but without the boosts to attack power, he's kinda lacking in power.

I plan on getting really into making a good team in Pokemon X and Y with EV/IV training (would do it in Black/White/2, however I just have no want to replay those games (I am so sick of that region, wasn't a huge fan of it to begin with).

Quick question about it, I love Glaceon/Lilligant. I will always put them on a team, regardless of whether or not they are shit (just because they are my favorite pokemon in the entire series). However, is it like any game where a good player will win with crappy characters over a average/medicore player does with OP or great characters?

Indeed it does.

Almost any pokemon can be used appropriately for combat regarding scenarios. The thing about my Scolipede situation is that the guy who I was going up against, was completely unprepared for it. In the chat, he was so...bewildered how I took out half of his team with a pokemon he did not even expect for anyone to use.

That is the beauty of competitive pokemon, players can win with skill so long as they think right on how to use the pokemon that they have made. If someone doesn't use their pokemon correctly, they will fail.

I like to use pokemon that I like to, otherwise, what is the point of playing the game? My main team consists of a Trick Room team made up of tanks, unexpectedly, I have a Xatu as my primary Trick Room deliverer, and a very good set up to make sure that he is successful. Because I thought this through, I have a much better chance of winning as opposed to the enemy who looked up a "guide" on how to make a good Tyranitar sweeper.

 

[Terminate421]

.I like the way you think

I usually use crossed tier teams and make absolutely certain that I am as unpredictable as possible. Not many people tend to know that a Dusknoir with Leftovers, Given high Defense and Special Defense, as well as Pain Split, Trick Room, Wil-o-wisp, and shadow punch, has more survivability than a duskclops with Eviolite.

I always play with favorites, sometimes, you just need to use pokemon you like rather than ones that are considered "good".

ALMOST ANY pokemon can be good when given the right scenario.

Here is a nice troll story I have:

When Pokemon Battle Revolution was out, I used to make people MAD, and I mean pissed due to one strategy I like to call the "Sleep then Fus Ro Dah them"

It uses Butterfree, Compound Eyes, Choice Scarf, and as much speed as possible along with a Chatot named Dovahkiin.

First turn:

Butterfree sleep powders the faster, most likely attacking target.
Chatot uses Nasty Plot

If Either one is knocked out, I replace her for Staraptor.

Second Turn:

Butterfree uses Sleep Powder OR Staraptor uses Brave Bird/Close Combat

Chatot uses Hyper Voice or Heat Wave, combined with life orb makes for a massive attack onto both sides, Hyper Voice is also boosted by STAB.

Chatot has a 90 base speed I believe, not many people know that Chatot has a DECENT amount of speed. So after they are down two pokemon in one go, and I have a very powerful cute little chatot, they are pretty much out of options.

 

[Raine_sage]

I don't like anything that prevents the opponent from even having the opportunity to react. I've seen combos in Magic: The Gatering, YuGiOh, PoxNora and various other competitive games that just completely lock out an opponent. While it may a strategy, I believe it's one that detracts from the game and entertainment it's supposed to provide. What was supposed to be a contest is one no longer, and you're effectively just running through a checklist.

Also I don't like people that bandwagon onto whatever they research to be the most powerful strategy or figure out what the top competitive players are doing and just mimic it. I've seen that aspect in DotA, LoL, HoN, Warhammer 40K tabletop, as well as Magic too.

Funny you should mention MtG. I literally just came out of the most rage inducing game I've played on the new Planeswalkers. 4 player FFA, 1 guy playing black pulls out a card that causes any creature that dies that isn't his, to become his. He then immediately plays a card that kills about 10 creatures amongst the other 3 players, then starts pulling out insta-kill spells that even my 19/19 Eldrazi can't survive, basically taking away nearly every creature on the field and giving them to him. Oh and the all become zombies and get counters on them, to make them more powerful.

Next time it's his turn, because he now has so many creatures, they're all zombies, and he already has another card out that gives him half as many more zombies, he's basically unstoppable.

Now, what's even more annoying is I actually have a counter for this situation, All is Dust, which destroys all coloured permanents. Unfortunately, despite being a card that nearly always turns up when I need it, neither of the ones in my deck are anywhere in sight, and nor does the other player who's using the same deck as me seem to have it either. Cue 2 players with nearly full life being killed in the same turn.

And yesterday I encounted one of the new lockdown deck stategies, due to the promo cards now being unlocked, one of which basically taps all your creatures, and somehow has endless flashback, meaning it can be cast every turn without fail so even the deck with the weakest creatures can proceed to constantly attack you until dead, whilst still having the mana left to mill your cards into your graveyard. Not that playing any creatures would help of course, since they all just get tapped immediately.

Sorry, that turned into more of a rant than I expected there...

Oh hey I know which card you're talking about. I have it in my deck. I also have Teysa envoy of ghosts, who has an effect that kills any monster that does direct damage to me and puts a 1/1 spirit token on my side of the field.
Throw in a couple cards that force attacks, and an extortion based deck, and the broken-ness is only mitigated by how bloody long it takes to set up (grave betrayal and teysa are both 7 cost cards and I have the worst luck drawing lands). If I can even pull both to begin with.

In fact I was on the opposite side in the scenario you just posted. Me and my partner were losing badly, other guys have all these overpowered creatures out, it's late in the game and we figure we're pretty much done. Then I pull grave betrayal and he pulled out a blue spell I can't remember the name of which pretty much wipes the field. I'd even ask if you were the same guy but my partner had no zombie card.

On topic, I can't stand games that come down to "how much money you spend determines how well you do". Not even just for online games, card games and the like too. When rares can go for upwards of 20 dollars sometimes tournaments can turn into a game of "who was willing to drop a couple hundred on their deck". I always wither a little inside when I hear someone bragging about the 40 dollar planeswalker they ordered on amazon.

 

[ecoho]

I think my example would have to be the StarCraft 2 Mothership. Especially in Heart of the Swarm.

Dude, you complain about UP Protoss units and and you don't mention the Carrier?

I mean seriously, even in troll games nobody uses it due to its awfulness.

I've used it in games and lemme tell you, just half a dozen of those can be quite the handful if you're not prepared. If you get to late game and you've gotten yourself to the point where you're full blown air-Toss, Carriers can be right bastards to deal with. Air Protoss with some Chargelots can be quite a force to be reckoned with. Though, I will make the argument that Carriers should at least have equal armor rating compared to the Battlecruiser and perhaps a similar build time. I would like to note, however, I do not play ladder and very rarely play against others on-line unless they're known friends.

With the Mothership, you can ONLY have one. And it's supposed to be the ultimate Protoss vessel. As it stands, it's the ultimate Protoss paperweight. And as I mentioned previously, at least the Carrier has some viability. The Mothership doesn't even have that.

sorry but the counter to toss air is Viking + mass marine. its so easy to counter if you scan and scout them as air play for toss takes at least 10 mins to set up right and by that time I have +1 marines and am breaking down their door.

OT: starcraft 1 on the other hand toss air= win. I mean 1 carrier pretty much wins in that game so you cannon up and just build the basterds till you have a nice fleet then stomp the other player when he finally break through your wall....trust me that's an experience I do not want again.