Board Admin
Status: Hidden
Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 1573
 |
 #10 Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 7:37 pm |
  |
Evidently I was not completely clear.... and this topic is getting more interesting than I had originally assumed it would be, so I will re-enter.
I am not talking about killing yourself in order to enter revenge mode and kill off other players. That is completely pointless in the sense that I was speaking of, which is not the "super revenge" as you call it, I am talking about the revenge mode in which you CANNOT re-enter battle. Therefore, you have been killed somehow, and enter at the sides to pick off players. As I said, the only point in doing this is to either 1) induce a draw game or 2) cause the player in battle with the least amount of points to win. The same goes for kamikazes. You are trying to induce a draw. Therefore, both methods have the same goal, and since the one I just described (revenge mode) was created by Hudson, then strategies aside, both methods are "legal." I do not even need to discuss this, I am merely bringing up an alternative example.
Notably, you are ignoring our points that this strategy is not game breaking, and that there are no Bomberman rules other than what the game's engine instates. I can only assume that this is so because you have no argument back and therefore try to defend your point by adding more fluff to your argument though it has already been penetrated. Instead, you should fight back instead of evading.
This would seem to be a matter of opinion (the topic, that is), but personally, I do not think that what is right and what is wrong is opinion, though I am positive that most of you here, with your views, would disagree. Anyway, I do not intend to drive this topic in another direction with this statement, I only intend to defend our position.
| It's a valid strategy that is not in any way game breaking, therefore it is fine. If I'm put in a situation in team games where victory is assured by taking an action I will generally take it. Games like this are no place for silly player made rules, whatever serves you the best at the highest ratio is the best choice. Why should I give the opponent a chance to win due to mistakes later in the game when I can seal the deal now. I play by the rules of the game, not the communities decisions of whats 'cheap' or 'skillful'. My win ratios have never been hurt by this policy. |
Good man! You just made my day. There is still sense in the world. |
|
Search Forum
Member List
Chat
Control Panel
Private Messages
Register
Log in
