GR(Game Ranger) is god awful.

[StatsZero]

I use BTD i think I use Kazter civs.. So Kaz, are there BTD in you're civs? LOL. tbh i don't even check them.. I just thrusted in Kaz they were good

[lightnessking.]

Read what Elite said here:
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=3922&start=30

I've already explained why Elite isn't someone to look to for advice on what works and what doesn't in regards to mid sh etc.

His whole opinion is "You can't mass enough cavs without BTD so it's suicide not to have BTD" I could go into detail about why he's wrong but I really can't be bothered, as I said before, I played against the best slut rushers of my time and won against them on a consistent basis with expan cavs, no btd. Elite was one of the people I'd consistently beat infact.

expand 2 rax start isn't slut rush. 3 rax non expand isn't a slut rush either. It's just a term in AOC. -.-

[Arntzen]

I use BTD i think I use Kazter civs.. So Kaz, are there BTD in you're civs? LOL. tbh i don't even check them.. I just thrusted in Kaz they were good

Yeah, tho if you have civ's with 4v4 versons also then that civ has popcap and no btd in it. (I'm thinking the MW civ-package)

[StatsZero]

Yupyup i got that ones. I got to make some of my own but i don't play enough to actually dig in it to find my most comfortable combo!

Kaz, i'll be home in about... 2 hours Want to fire up a game by then?

Knackebrod Kazter and Zero [Skill]

[Arntzen]

Sure

[seizmic]

Read what Elite said here:
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=3922&start=30

I've already explained why Elite isn't someone to look to for advice on what works and what doesn't in regards to mid sh etc.

His whole opinion is "You can't mass enough cavs without BTD so it's suicide not to have BTD" I could go into detail about why he's wrong but I really can't be bothered, as I said before, I played against the best slut rushers of my time and won against them on a consistent basis with expan cavs, no btd. Elite was one of the people I'd consistently beat infact.

expand 2 rax start isn't slut rush. 3 rax non expand isn't a slut rush either. It's just a term in AOC. -.-

Yes, because I'm sure people like Goldeneye, Krass, Assys, Lion and Zealot were your typical AOC slut rushers. Don't comment on things you know nothing about imo, you end up looking retarded.

Seiz the last time I played you sword vs. CA was like 4 years ago. The only way you can win without BTD that I can see is to keep them so distracted with your first few cav that you can get a decent mass before they blob your base. Also your color of choice is really fucking annoying to play against.

Imo, my colour of choice was never considered a problem for any of the actual experts that played back then and unless slut rushing has been radically revolutionized since I played (it hasn't, at all) then no, you can still easily win without BTD as long as your micro and base is up to par.

[Elite]

There's been some changes in how people play swords in the last few years. Also I never really considered lion to be a good mid player, I recall beating him pretty easily at a time when I wasn't even that good at mid. As for peace and zealot, well, double CA in 2v2 is considered a suicide strat at this point. I just don't see how you can win with no btd cavs vs swords in a head to head match up, the way that game plays out now the CA player's timeline in the first 8 f11 is a huge factor. Obviously if the game goes past 10 f11 and the exp. player is allowed to mass ranges, he will have a much better chance. But most sword v ca games I've seen recently don't play out that way.

And I think any good player would agree, black is very annoying to face in a 1v1 situation. But everyone knows its "your color" and not worth complaining about since you won't budge.

[Arntzen]

Ye, I saw he used same colour as Turkiye used before just to be gay. Same goes for light blue (not cyan) in ice age time. Since I havent played him , Seizmic, 1v1 yet I havent asked him to change.

[Icestorm2]

Never did find any particular color hard to spot on the minimap.

[Arntzen]

That is your opinion, I have my own.

[Icestorm2]

I know, wow! It's such an incredible world we live in now that we can all have different opinions and skin colors and genitals and sex preferences and live in perfect harmony with each other while we buy consumer products that we decorate ourselves with omg its so wonderful run on sentence

[seizmic]

There's been some changes in how people play swords in the last few years. Also I never really considered lion to be a good mid player, I recall beating him pretty easily at a time when I wasn't even that good at mid. As for peace and zealot, well, double CA in 2v2 is considered a suicide strat at this point. I just don't see how you can win with no btd cavs vs swords in a head to head match up, the way that game plays out now the CA player's timeline in the first 8 f11 is a huge factor. Obviously if the game goes past 10 f11 and the exp. player is allowed to mass ranges, he will have a much better chance. But most sword v ca games I've seen recently don't play out that way.

And I think any good player would agree, black is very annoying to face in a 1v1 situation. But everyone knows its "your color" and not worth complaining about since you won't budge.

Imo, if my colour never bothered the best players in 2006 why does it suddenly bother the best players in 2012? And no, the general slut rush strat hasn't changed at all, I've watched you play and I've watched others play, NOTHING has changed in regards to the sword rush, it's the same EEC civ, the same starting strat and the same two options when using such a civ: turtle and mass until 15f11 with a hero then rush in or rush first 12 swords @ enemy eco and then mass. Nothing has changed in this regard at all.

Also please refer to that basement thread where I explain why expan cavs without btd is more effective vs swords than any other cav civ. It's the most in depth explanation I'm willing to give at this point because I can't be bothered to explain something I've put to the test 100s of times before with consistent results etc.

EDIT: I'd say black would be more fucked up in a 2v2/3v3/4v4 than a 1v1, all things considered in the 1v1 you only have one opponent to focus on and you know his colour, so please, save that "annoying in a 1v1 situation" bullshit for someone with an IQ lower than 90.

[lightnessking.]

There's been some changes in how people play swords in the last few years. Also I never really considered lion to be a good mid player, I recall beating him pretty easily at a time when I wasn't even that good at mid. As for peace and zealot, well, double CA in 2v2 is considered a suicide strat at this point. I just don't see how you can win with no btd cavs vs swords in a head to head match up, the way that game plays out now the CA player's timeline in the first 8 f11 is a huge factor. Obviously if the game goes past 10 f11 and the exp. player is allowed to mass ranges, he will have a much better chance. But most sword v ca games I've seen recently don't play out that way.

And I think any good player would agree, black is very annoying to face in a 1v1 situation. But everyone knows its "your color" and not worth complaining about since you won't budge.

Imo, if my colour never bothered the best players in 2006 why does it suddenly bother the best players in 2012? And no, the general slut rush strat hasn't changed at all, I've watched you play and I've watched others play, NOTHING has changed in regards to the sword rush, it's the same EEC civ, the same starting strat and the same two options when using such a civ: turtle and mass until 15f11 with a hero then rush in or rush first 12 swords @ enemy eco and then mass. Nothing has changed in this regard at all.

Also please refer to that basement thread where I explain why expan cavs without btd is more effective vs swords than any other cav civ. It's the most in depth explanation I'm willing to give at this point because I can't be bothered to explain something I've put to the test 100s of times before with consistent results etc.

EDIT: I'd say black would be more fucked up in a 2v2/3v3/4v4 than a 1v1, all things considered in the 1v1 you only have one opponent to focus on and you know his colour, so please, save that "annoying in a 1v1 situation" bullshit for someone with an IQ lower than 90.

Derpalerpherpppp, EEC mid sh swords = >>>>NOT<< << a slut rush, it's a regular sword strat, and AOC whiners just judged it as slut.

[Icestorm2]

Don't be so hard on him, man. I'm sure he didn't intend to offend the rainbow brigade.

[Elite]

Black doesn't annoy me in a team game situation because first, no one uses it, second, there tends to be less eco raiding because people are more focused on booming and mixing for a long game.
That color could actually be very annoying in a team game when you had players like hobo who would combine it with pf swords and run around all game with multiple small groups of swords killing cits; it was quite possible to get half your entire cleaned out because you're fighting elsewhere on the map and get no flare, and of course you can't see him in your base on the minimap.

As for exp. cavs, I just don't see how you stop 35 swords at 8 f11 with no btd.