Conquer Club

If! you want my bod-y, and! you think I'm sex-y, come on sequential players let me know!

White Moose wrote:Freestyle is one play style, Sequential is another. Both requires diffrent tactics. Sequential players aren't "Alphas". Both are equal.

Kinds sums it up

Who said sequential players are Alphas? A disgraceful thing if anyone did.

Fruitcake wrote:

White Moose wrote:Freestyle is one play style, Sequential is another. Both requires diffrent tactics. Sequential players aren't "Alphas". Both are equal.

Kinds sums it up

Who said sequential players are Alphas? A disgraceful thing if anyone did.

Yeah, it's a mystery who said that.

This is an interesting thread.. Who amongst these top players would fall under the guideline of a farmer..

White Moose wrote:

Fruitcake wrote:

White Moose wrote:Freestyle is one play style, Sequential is another. Both requires diffrent tactics. Sequential players aren't "Alphas". Both are equal.

Kinds sums it up

Who said sequential players are Alphas? A disgraceful thing if anyone did.

Yeah, it's a mystery who said that.

I said the freestyle players are second class citizens, I avoided saying Sequential players were alphas....did you read the post?...can you read?...are you able to sort out a statement from an inference?...or are you just stupid perhaps?...maybe you are in need of some nice soothing Synthetic Anti-Riot Speech Number Two (Low Strength)...who knows...you make your own mind up without thinking so maybe you need others to do it for you.

Scott-Land wrote:Fruitcake has made it quite clear on his stance against farmers ( in no way do I defend them either) but yet in the last months farm them [ cooks and low ranks] on his triples team. Hypocrisy at its best!

I don't find it hypocritical at all.

There are many players that do not want the scoring system to encourage farming the way that it does - they find it boring and a bit anti-climactic, and they'd rather have a system where the best peer player gets to the top - but they farm because until the scoring system is changed, it is the easiest way to get to the top.

Jeff Hardy wrote:but unlike in sequential, in freestyle almost every time the better player(s) win(s) so the luck factor is a lot smaller in freestyle which allows those players that are good at it to get to the top easier

An interesting statement...how is it that you come to believe that freestyle relies LESS on the luck factor than sequential games? It has always seemed to me to be the opposite, unless you consider "speed in clicking" to be an applicable skill, I suppose.

Woodruff wrote:

Jeff Hardy wrote:but unlike in sequential, in freestyle almost every time the better player(s) win(s) so the luck factor is a lot smaller in freestyle which allows those players that are good at it to get to the top easier

An interesting statement...how is it that you come to believe that freestyle relies LESS on the luck factor than sequential games? It has always seemed to me to be the opposite, unless you consider "speed in clicking" to be an applicable skill, I suppose.

That just about sums it up.

freestyle games are not nearly as much about speed as most seq players think
yes, it gives you an advantage but its not that big
the really quick players that completely rely on their speed and play games where speed gives them a bigger advantage (assassin07, towin12, awesome t-baby, adamk89,...) are all around major, speed alone cant really get you higher than that

a good double freestysle team can win 9 out of 10 against another good but not quite as good team, in seq that is nearly impossible against a team that knows what they are doing because dice will give them a couple of games

also in seq team games you only need 1 good player to win the game as people like prankcall prove, in freestyle every player needs to be good not just one


freestyle speed game where one good player wasnt enough: Game 4162509, Game 4162946

seq game where 1 good player is enough to beat a team of good players:Game 3993609

Fruitcake wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

Jeff Hardy wrote:but unlike in sequential, in freestyle almost every time the better player(s) win(s) so the luck factor is a lot smaller in freestyle which allows those players that are good at it to get to the top easier

An interesting statement...how is it that you come to believe that freestyle relies LESS on the luck factor than sequential games? It has always seemed to me to be the opposite, unless you consider "speed in clicking" to be an applicable skill, I suppose.

That just about sums it up.

Basically, there are more things happening in a freestyle game compared to a seq one. This enables good players to do more with the time that they have compared to bad players that will see things as they unfold, not before. Don't get me wrong, clicking fast is a big factor in speed freestyle. You need to be able to actually perform what you want to do. But the key is to play making split-second decisions and to be able to recognise your opponents tactics (which you have as long as you want to in seq) after a couple seconds. The better players play faster and harder, and a quick map rank of the top 8 player freestyler's compared with the top 8 player seq players would show the difference in win percentage- this shows that theres less of a luck factor in freestyle.

I guarantee if any top seq players jumped into a competitive freestyle game, they would be swamped with the speed and complexity of the play. I'm not saying that it would be impossible to get the hang of it and to excell at it. But really, it doesn't take that much skill to analyse a seq game when you have as long as you want to do it in (i even used to use a battle odds calculator to even out the odds on all my fronts).

poo-maker wrote:

Fruitcake wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

Jeff Hardy wrote:but unlike in sequential, in freestyle almost every time the better player(s) win(s) so the luck factor is a lot smaller in freestyle which allows those players that are good at it to get to the top easier

An interesting statement...how is it that you come to believe that freestyle relies LESS on the luck factor than sequential games? It has always seemed to me to be the opposite, unless you consider "speed in clicking" to be an applicable skill, I suppose.

That just about sums it up.

Basically, there are more things happening in a freestyle game compared to a seq one. This enables good players to do more with the time that they have compared to bad players that will see things as they unfold, not before. Don't get me wrong, clicking fast is a big factor in speed freestyle. You need to be able to actually perform what you want to do. But the key is to play making split-second decisions and to be able to recognise your opponents tactics (which you have as long as you want to in seq) after a couple seconds. The better players play faster and harder, and a quick map rank of the top 8 player freestyler's compared with the top 8 player seq players would show the difference in win percentage- this shows that theres less of a luck factor in freestyle.

I guarantee if any top seq players jumped into a competitive freestyle game, they would be swamped with the speed and complexity of the play. I'm not saying that it would be impossible to get the hang of it and to excell at it. But really, it doesn't take that much skill to analyse a seq game when you have as long as you want to do it in (i even used to use a battle odds calculator to even out the odds on all my fronts).

Well said

poo-maker wrote:Basically, there are more things happening in a freestyle game compared to a seq one. This enables good players to do more with the time that they have compared to bad players that will see things as they unfold, not before. Don't get me wrong, clicking fast is a big factor in speed freestyle. You need to be able to actually perform what you want to do. But the key is to play making split-second decisions and to be able to recognise your opponents tactics (which you have as long as you want to in seq) after a couple seconds. The better players play faster and harder, and a quick map rank of the top 8 player freestyler's compared with the top 8 player seq players would show the difference in win percentage- this shows that theres less of a luck factor in freestyle.

I guarantee if any top seq players jumped into a competitive freestyle game, they would be swamped with the speed and complexity of the play. I'm not saying that it would be impossible to get the hang of it and to excell at it. But really, it doesn't take that much skill to analyse a seq game when you have as long as you want to do it in (i even used to use a battle odds calculator to even out the odds on all my fronts).

I concur I guess. But with that said, starting a debate on whether seq. or freestyle is more challenging/demands more skill is useless. It's like the old debates on whether no cards, flat cards or esq. cards were the most challenging. Or whether dubs or 8 player standard games takes most skills. Each setting comes with their particular challenges. Comparing seq. and freestyle is like comparing apples and pears - not possible. Just different and they demand different skills/treats/tactics etc.

I'm not sure they are debating which requires more skill.I guess it's another contest of who's gun is bigger!!!

alstergren wrote:

poo-maker wrote:Basically, there are more things happening in a freestyle game compared to a seq one. This enables good players to do more with the time that they have compared to bad players that will see things as they unfold, not before. Don't get me wrong, clicking fast is a big factor in speed freestyle. You need to be able to actually perform what you want to do. But the key is to play making split-second decisions and to be able to recognise your opponents tactics (which you have as long as you want to in seq) after a couple seconds. The better players play faster and harder, and a quick map rank of the top 8 player freestyler's compared with the top 8 player seq players would show the difference in win percentage- this shows that theres less of a luck factor in freestyle.

I guarantee if any top seq players jumped into a competitive freestyle game, they would be swamped with the speed and complexity of the play. I'm not saying that it would be impossible to get the hang of it and to excell at it. But really, it doesn't take that much skill to analyse a seq game when you have as long as you want to do it in (i even used to use a battle odds calculator to even out the odds on all my fronts).

I concur I guess. But with that said, starting a debate on whether seq. or freestyle is more challenging/demands more skill is useless. It's like the old debates on whether no cards, flat cards or esq. cards were the most challenging. Or whether dubs or 8 player standard games takes most skills. Each setting comes with their particular challenges. Comparing seq. and freestyle is like comparing apples and pears - not possible. Just different and they demand different skills/treats/tactics etc.

You use skills/treats/tactics when you eat an apple or a pear?

I think that anyone that has not played 20-50 speed freestyle single games is not very qualified to speak on which they know very little.It's easy to side-line it..

Prankcall wrote:I think that anyone that has not played 20-50 speed freestyle single games is not very qualified to speak on which they know very little.It's easy to side-line it..

In all likelihood, you are 100% correct. I determined sometime back that I do not take enough caffeine in a day to effectively play freestyle and certainly not freestyle speed. I would probably have my ass handed to me...and certainly would by Scott, Prank, or Rabbit...or any of the guys and gals that play speed freestyle often.

Multiple scoreboards is the only way to determine the top players in a category. Lumping everyone together makes it difficult. Even then, I know plenty of folks that wear stripes as their rank often that are tough as nails players. Rank is but one indicator, which I know you already get. There's lots o' factors at play here.

Agreed....