GR(Game Ranger) is god awful.

[Draco]

" please don't talk about grammar you illiterate fuck "


What part of the definition did I leave out that pertains to that sentence you wrote.

I tried not to respond, but making you look more stupid then you are is fun

[eeralf_]

many arguments are good and some similar to me

my main reason for play here is Relaxed and have Fun (with win of course its better) .,
also iam drink beer and will have funny chating, its also a part of the Games for me

and why not only a one set?, sry, when u love only one for e.g Mid, so its right to play only it

i love also Liga and TL games (Indy/Mod/Mid), but sry i cant real ralaxingon it, its to hard for me now
wait until u get age so u see it, its not a excuse, its true

Proost!!

[assys]

IMO when it comes to respect (setting wise):
1. All set player
2. Liga expert
3. SH and TL player (PRE/Mid/Indy/Mod)
4. Mod DM player
5. SH or TL player (Pre/Mid/Indy/Mod)
6. Mod Sh player
7. Middle player
8. Pre player
9. Mid sh f11 60 No R/S/B/D/G/F/Q/E/T/D/G/H/H/D
10. Fuckings grenwar players.

This is just plain wrong. I many times did already explain why and wonder why people don't think about things like that a little more.
A football player has to earn more respect than a climber.


Btw could me, Dave(witchking), krass, goldi and nevermind really rarely beat Texas Ranger in a mid sh 1on1 on aoc small map. He had some very unusual strategies that worked very good against rushing. So what i basically want to say is that all these mid sh "slut" rush strategies certainly don't work against everything. Also in mid sh aoc large map you better do not slutrush against good players.

[Icestorm2]

There's only like two settings worth playing on a regular basis anyways.

[Texas Ranger]

mid sh and mod tl, both aoc? ^

[Exodus]

Gameranger does have its upsides.

[_DavE_]

Bump - just read this lol. Once I learned how to boom/get early hero without using expansionism, I used the normal EE civ/start on wing towards the end of my aoc days and never had an issue taking out exp players. I wasn't that good when the likes of buttfreek and ice storm were in their primes.

The expert players in my day when I finally got good after Seizmic taught me were:
Calv
Ice storm
Elite
Signal
Dawn
Dusk
Reaux
Yankee
Answer
Pyro
Dante
General Jade

I'm not saying I won every game but I'd rarely lose on wing in mid 4v4s.

Ps Seizmic's cav exp without btd would destroy your regular EE civs. I went 74-0 1v1 using that civ against many of the players I just named.

Texas' playing style was unorthodox but effective, however I remember winning him 3-0 and then he refused to play me.

[Arntzen]

Bin my day

Approx when was this? What year?

Ps Seizmic's cav exp without btd would destroy your regular EE civs. I went 74-0 1v1 using that civ against many of the players I just named.

I don't know if you're talking team or 1vs1 here, but IMO the problem with CA EXP in 1vs1 is it's weakness to Sword EXP, where as regular CA owns that.

[_DavE_]

Off the top of my head, I was 16 when I learnt off Seizmic so 2006? So from 2006 to when the servers shut down in 2009 is when I played Aoc properly. What I enjoyed most was the mixture of units that wing players did.

To be perfectly honest, there wasnt that many players who played sword exp in a 1v1. The majority of players I played against was the regular sword civ or cavs exp.

I do remember Seizmic's cav civ vividly, in that period it was the 1v1 civ to use. Which is why when I came across to EE I played 1 gold tc cavs and tried to adapt that Aoc civ to EE.

Going off what you just said about regular cav civ owning swd exp... this cav exp civ would also destroy swd exp (in theory) because you can mass cavs much quicker with exp, than without.

[AEnima]

Bump - just read this lol. Once I learned how to boom/get early hero without using expansionism, I used the normal EE civ/start on wing towards the end of my aoc days and never had an issue taking out exp players. I wasn't that good when the likes of buttfreek and ice storm were in their primes.

The expert players in my day when I finally got good after Seizmic taught me were:
Calv
Ice storm
Elite
Signal
Dawn
Dusk
Reaux
Yankee
Answer
Pyro
Dante
General Jade

I'm not saying I won every game but I'd rarely lose on wing in mid 4v4s.

Ps Seizmic's cav exp without btd would destroy your regular EE civs. I went 74-0 1v1 using that civ against many of the players I just named.

Texas' playing style was unorthodox but effective, however I remember winning him 3-0 and then he refused to play me.

Just reading some of these names gave me a stiffy

[_DavE_]

I know man! What I'd do to go back to that part of my life! Lol.

[Arntzen]

Going off what you just said about regular cav civ owning swd exp... this cav exp civ would also destroy swd exp (in theory) because you can mass cavs much quicker with exp, than without.

Well, in retrospect "owning" is definitely an overstatement. What makes Mid AOC more interesting to me than EEC is that you in theory have 5 doable civs for 1vs1 (Sword, Sword EXP, CA, CA EXP, Knight EXP). Sword vs Sword EXP is very well balanced and I have an hard time seeing which is favorite. CA vs Sword as we saw this summer also isn't clear. Sword vs CA EXP imo definitely favors swords. Sword EXP vs CA slightly favors CA, and Sword EXP vs CA EXP slightly favors Sword EXP. The reason why regular CA is better vs Sword EXP is because regular CA can put much more pressure on early on (WC+Gold Mining). Whats absolutely clear in my mind in Mid AOC is that the last thing you want is Sword EXP to boom, because late game it's a clear favorite to beat all the other civilizations.

Of course everything I just said is my personal experience. I've seen and/or played most of the Mid AOC players. Including everyone on the list you made except Answer, Dante and General Jade, unless they made new names. But of course most of what I saw was at the end where people were either rusty or didn't put much effort into the game anymore.

PS. Never forget: Top 4 Mid EEC players would wipe the floor against top 4 Mid AOC players in both games.

[AEnima]

PS. Never forget: Top 4 Mid EEC players would wipe the floor against top 4 Mid AOC players in both games.

Even if this was true, which I would contest, part of what made AoC so much better than EEC for me was more than just the high skill level. There was so much personality, rivalry, and bromancing. It was almost like being a cast member on one of those dumb reality shows like Jersey Shore. Part of me wants to sit in a 4v4 lobby for an hour aimlessly waiting for someone to finally assign captains, realizing there was actually a video game to be played. I don't get that same vibe from EEC, which to me is a bit stale and boring. Most people I see on EEC take the game a little too seriously.

[herik]

PS. Never forget: Top 4 Mid EEC players would wipe the floor against top 4 Mid AOC players in both games.

Let's talk about currently...who the top eec players would be?
Because the last time I checked, you, dave, himmy, and I were all eec/aoc players.
Who is the ultimate eec only team?
Samuel, krass(recently went on holidays)...?

I would literally be thrilled to do a 4v4 eec players vs aoc players games... competition has always been a hype for me.

[_DavE_]

It's a difficult one to call, and something we'll never know.
I completely agree with Calv about the whole personality and rivalry vibe. Aoc was brilliant and the competition was awesome.
The best four players I saw and played with numerous times on Aoc would be Seizmic, Calv, Icestorm and possibly Dante or Pyro? That is a pretty beastly team. Some may say I should be in that team of four but I left myself out purposely.

Idk where the likes of Nafrayu or Zen would be, EE or Aoc?

Swords vs CA Exp, Imo definitely favours swords

This is the one I would disagree with 100%. Back in my time, I didn't lose Cav Exp vs Regular Swords, You'll be surprised by how much pressure you can put on, and how fast you can mass cavs with exp. You would start building a 3rd archery at 5 f11. Of course, this is going back years to my time.