oh man, I missed most of the pyro bitching. Goddamn work.
I'll say that if you want to hang back and be a defensive pyro who blows back ubers who happen to show up in front of you, then good for you, that sounds really boring.
I'll be the guy who takes the side route to behind the enemy, kills the medics or cause them to pop their ubers far from any action, kill 2-3 other guys in the meanwhile, and survive the trip back to do it again.
oh man, I missed most of the pyro bitching. Goddamn work.
I'll say that if you want to hang back and be a defensive pyro who blows back ubers who happen to show up in front of you, then good for you, that sounds really boring.
I'll be the guy who takes the side route to behind the enemy, kills the medics or cause them to pop their ubers far from any action, kill 2-3 other guys in the meanwhile, and survive the trip back to do it again.
oh man, I missed most of the pyro bitching. Goddamn work.
I'll say that if you want to hang back and be a defensive pyro who blows back ubers who happen to show up in front of you, then good for you, that sounds really boring.
I'll be the guy who takes the side route to behind the enemy, kills the medics or cause them to pop their ubers far from any action, kill 2-3 other guys in the meanwhile, and survive the trip back to do it again.
hear hear!
I do that with the regular flamethrower all the time. Then I blow some guys for fun.
oh man, I missed most of the pyro bitching. Goddamn work.
I'll say that if you want to hang back and be a defensive pyro who blows back ubers who happen to show up in front of you, then good for you, that sounds really boring.
I'll be the guy who takes the side route to behind the enemy, kills the medics or cause them to pop their ubers far from any action, kill 2-3 other guys in the meanwhile, and survive the trip back to do it again.
So...how do people feel about the uber vs. krit ?
As a frequent medic I thought people would be more interested in getting krits but since I only had people wanting ubers I swapped back.
So...how do people feel about the uber vs. krit ?
As a frequent medic I thought people would be more interested in getting krits but since I only had people wanting ubers I swapped back.
I wish people could stack them. That's what I think.
So...how do people feel about the uber vs. krit ?
As a frequent medic I thought people would be more interested in getting krits but since I only had people wanting ubers I swapped back.
Kritz for defending opening gate rushes and ubers for attacking?
Are ubers on the defending team really so crucial to the overall victory?
Yeah, nothing I like more than waiting at the enemys gate with a medic on me, only to realize that Kritz is not going to save me from the 3 ubered pyros coming at me.
But still, I guess it has its uses, just uber comes in handy more often.
Also, was wondering if I could get an invite to the PA steam group? My registered name is FoolishChaos, but my 'nickname' (or whatever steam calls it), is currently Myatar.
And I thought of a better, not-6am-in-the-morning way of putting it.
I totally agree that I shouldn't stand much of a chance against a pyro once they reach me, and that was never my complaint.
But shouldn't I have a good chance, playing well, to kill them at range? This is my point, and what Asiina seems to agree with. I can do my utmost to kill a pyro at considerable range and still stand a decent chance of them getting to me before I can.
This seems to completely ignore the fact that you have a team who should be defending the rear (i.e: where you should be) with sentries, stickies, spychecks, etc. The pyro shouldn't be able to close in from a considerable range without getting blown to smithereens by your team, never mind possibly getting sniped along the way.
But this is dumb. You're effectively now saying that snipers should have to rely on a team being there to slow the pyro down because they're too hard to kill solo, at long range, with a sniper.
First you take it out context where it's inconvenient, now you add context where it's convenient.
And I thought of a better, not-6am-in-the-morning way of putting it.
I totally agree that I shouldn't stand much of a chance against a pyro once they reach me, and that was never my complaint.
But shouldn't I have a good chance, playing well, to kill them at range? This is my point, and what Asiina seems to agree with. I can do my utmost to kill a pyro at considerable range and still stand a decent chance of them getting to me before I can.
This seems to completely ignore the fact that you have a team who should be defending the rear (i.e: where you should be) with sentries, stickies, spychecks, etc. The pyro shouldn't be able to close in from a considerable range without getting blown to smithereens by your team, never mind possibly getting sniped along the way.
But this is dumb. You're effectively now saying that snipers should have to rely on a team being there to slow the pyro down because they're too hard to kill solo, at long range, with a sniper.
First you take it out context where it's inconvenient, now you add context where it's convenient.
You mean...relying on a team to shield your weaknesses?
And I thought of a better, not-6am-in-the-morning way of putting it.
I totally agree that I shouldn't stand much of a chance against a pyro once they reach me, and that was never my complaint.
But shouldn't I have a good chance, playing well, to kill them at range? This is my point, and what Asiina seems to agree with. I can do my utmost to kill a pyro at considerable range and still stand a decent chance of them getting to me before I can.
This seems to completely ignore the fact that you have a team who should be defending the rear (i.e: where you should be) with sentries, stickies, spychecks, etc. The pyro shouldn't be able to close in from a considerable range without getting blown to smithereens by your team, never mind possibly getting sniped along the way.
But this is dumb. You're effectively now saying that snipers should have to rely on a team being there to slow the pyro down because they're too hard to kill solo, at long range, with a sniper.
First you take it out context where it's inconvenient, now you add context where it's convenient.
You mean...relying on a team to shield your weaknesses?
And I thought of a better, not-6am-in-the-morning way of putting it.
I totally agree that I shouldn't stand much of a chance against a pyro once they reach me, and that was never my complaint.
But shouldn't I have a good chance, playing well, to kill them at range? This is my point, and what Asiina seems to agree with. I can do my utmost to kill a pyro at considerable range and still stand a decent chance of them getting to me before I can.
This seems to completely ignore the fact that you have a team who should be defending the rear (i.e: where you should be) with sentries, stickies, spychecks, etc. The pyro shouldn't be able to close in from a considerable range without getting blown to smithereens by your team, never mind possibly getting sniped along the way.
But this is dumb. You're effectively now saying that snipers should have to rely on a team being there to slow the pyro down because they're too hard to kill solo, at long range, with a sniper.
First you take it out context where it's inconvenient, now you add context where it's convenient.
You mean...relying on a team to shield your weaknesses?
This wouldn't be Team Fortress or anything
Whoa whoa whoa. That is absolutely not the point, and I'm sure you know it.
And even if it is, what part of "pyros can reliably kill snipers even when they start at range and that is a sniper weakness that your team has to cover" sounds right to you?
Posts
soldier one is well edited
soldier one is well edited
I'll say that if you want to hang back and be a defensive pyro who blows back ubers who happen to show up in front of you, then good for you, that sounds really boring.
I'll be the guy who takes the side route to behind the enemy, kills the medics or cause them to pop their ubers far from any action, kill 2-3 other guys in the meanwhile, and survive the trip back to do it again.
hear hear!
Zing!
Porn isn't going to download itself.
A couple pages late here on my part, but....
(spoilered for h-scroll)
Burna boys agree da back burna is proppa orky! Who needs ta push da 'umies away when yooz can burn 'em and bash 'em up close.
I do that with the regular flamethrower all the time. Then I blow some guys for fun.
I'm pretty sure this has never really happened.
Now...
As a frequent medic I thought people would be more interested in getting krits but since I only had people wanting ubers I swapped back.
Kritz for defending opening gate rushes and ubers for attacking?
Are ubers on the defending team really so crucial to the overall victory?
[IMG]http://www.alabasterslim.com/0/number 9.png[/IMG]
But still, I guess it has its uses, just uber comes in handy more often.
Also, was wondering if I could get an invite to the PA steam group? My registered name is FoolishChaos, but my 'nickname' (or whatever steam calls it), is currently Myatar.
But this is dumb. You're effectively now saying that snipers should have to rely on a team being there to slow the pyro down because they're too hard to kill solo, at long range, with a sniper.
First you take it out context where it's inconvenient, now you add context where it's convenient.
Or a soldier.
You mean...relying on a team to shield your weaknesses?
This wouldn't be Team Fortress or anything
it's less likely than you think
Whoa whoa whoa. That is absolutely not the point, and I'm sure you know it.
And even if it is, what part of "pyros can reliably kill snipers even when they start at range and that is a sniper weakness that your team has to cover" sounds right to you?
Minigun crits and crit stickies are insane.