I might. You would deserve it. You were always a pretty solid freestyle player.
Printable View
I was a beast.
You're still missing the 100th player, so really its top 99 right now. :rolleyes:
You implied that he could compete with top old school players. He would have a very hard time. Likewise with Cekkino and Burnout. I like both of them, but they shouldn't be in this conversation. Honestly, you mentioning these players really devalues your argument.
They were just average players, if you think Burn or Cekk were better than avg in 2013, it actually devalues your argument and plays into my point that 2013 skill > 2008 skill.
Here is a nice ending to this silly arguement.
I kicked vish's ass too much, he always sucked, he didn't get good enough to consistently beat me until I came back after a 3 year retirement.
If I could beat a player consistently than that player isn't good considering if you look at my skills, I mean I'm just a mediocre player and always was.
If you have a different opinion in rank placement, than just like manon said make your own, I do agree though people did get better over the years but "creativity", being able to counterattack and improvise, like afo in most of our games, plays a huge part in skill.
I don't know why creativity keeps coming up. If you have most of your units up front with a cleric in the back, the creativity is gone. Poof.
In the last couple years, Rantzu was the probably the only player that had some creativity because he had a Furgon in his Turt. The rest of us were robots.
You do know what I meant by creativity right? I'm not talking about sets, I'm talking about moves. A player who does the same exact moves that he did to win previous games is a pathetic player, while or his opponent is just pathetic for losing multiple times either way you want to spin that. A player (like afo, or prof, even you) that can consistently win games reqardless of the set advantage and be able to creatively think of new/different strategies to counteract/pull a win out of your ass without luck is a great player.
I touched on it a little bit already, but I can try to rephrase it for you. Strategy is mainly formed based your opponents set.
When I bombed people with clericless sets, their scout placement was drastically different.
Another example, if you used an Anti and played against someone with a freeturt on opposite sides, there is no chance that that you will play defensive. You're going to rush hard and fast to smack the Stone Golem and kill cleric. Really not much creativity. imo.
I think both sides of the argument have truth in them. Of course the good 2013 players would beat the good 2008 players because the game has progressed since then. This is the case for alot of things, like if i went back to the 80's i would be a pro skater along with all of my friends because it has progressed so much. I also agree with spencer 555 when he says the skill in tao is capped at a certain point and if two good players are playing their best, it will come down to luck. (If sets are neutral)
I must be missing something, but isn't Chess even more simplified? King dies, game over. At least if a Cleric lives, you have 9 other units capable of winning.
And I get that with Chess there are tons of moves and strategies to try, but there are plenty of moves with Tactics (R.I.P. :( ) that can be done too. Luck also augments that as good players would try not to depend on it, even if we all complain about it.
Not a chess master by any means by the way. Played it, was decent. But never more than that.
No. You and your friends still would suck. The pros back then would take the new tricks that y'all are doing and be better at them than you are. Because they are more athletic than you are. That's why they're pros. You may have a better shot at being a pretty good skater than Vish would have at being a pretty good player if you all went back in time. This is due to the relative lack of popularity of skating back then and the relative lack of popularity to TAO later on.
I wish I would have played more after 2012-2013. When they added the known block % on the units it changed the game style.. everyone saw the %'s and weighed the risks. The game changed. The player changed. During 2004-2008 (because 2003 was the coolest before they changed from WLD so i won't include in the garbage) anyone could beat anyone on a given day based on their play and set-up vs set-up. There were several games I came back with just a knight, scout, and pyro to beat players still with 7 plus units. (true they would fall into the lower 100 for sure for allowing this to happen but it did happen.. often)
Players pre-seeing the RNG relied on "luck" (waits for that to start argument) and players after 2012 played the math of the game. If you took quality players like ozmaj, Smubeht, Quicks, and Bottle and gave them same game as the 2012+ plus played they would consistently win.
2006 or 07 rather. Legends went down in 09 and we had it for few years by then.
Too many thoughts un-organized by me, I'll try again..I type too fast for my own good.
I wish I had played more after 2012. I rarely did more than grey so anyone who started after I that.. I don't know their talents and couldn't really compare skill level.
When they added the %-RNG (looking at the flash files it was mid 2007) it changed the game. Players who had been around from the beginning had yet another thing to change or enhance their gameplay.
New players, that I never got to encounter really, after 2012 I cannot speak for their talents, but they did get to play a different game than the older folks. They played the math side of the game and "luck" was never something that had to play for.
Since the conversation was players in 2008 vs 2013 those were the numbers I was trying to discuss and compare and failed miserably...
So there's still a spot open. You all should nominate one player who you think deserves to be on this list. I'll take 5 of the nominees and make a poll for you all to vote on it.
Since the players that you nominate are probably players that I either overlooked or don't know much about, it would be helpful for you to state WHY you think that player should be included.
Thats my point dude im saying if we time traveled back right now, not if we grew up back then. Same with 2013 players if they time traveled back to 08 they would beat 08 players. Im saying the skill level for things evolves and gets better as time goes on. You completely misunderstood me. Also the tricks nowadays would take about a year to learn no matter how athletic you are because it's mostly muscle memory. Just like the 08 players, it would probably take them a couple months to catch up to (or surpass if they have more talent/skill) 2013 players IF they went back in time and played them. It doesnt mean that the 2013 players are better than them, they just have an unfair advantage of the game being out longer and using strategies that are new.
I nominate myself as a suprise underdog!
watch me get denied XD! hahaha I don't really deserve to be among the top 100, but then again I ccan easily compete with a couple of those in that list "coughcelticcough"
:jester:
@corpus- if the skill level evolved and player after 2012 were better than why can they not beat afo? Many on that list that played majority before 2010 could easily own players after 2012, just like Afo still did. I played a bit from 2012-now, not much but the few I have played and I did not see the same level of talent as I did before 2011. Not saying players after 2012 weren't good, but they were lacking somewhat. My info may be slightly inaccurate due to me not playing the game for 95% of the last few years, yet for the past several months I'd say I'v seen less talent except for a few players.
Zombie. he was like, the best turtler probably on Arma ever. I'd vote him.
Im talking mass majority vs mass majority. Not all 2013 players vs. one of the greatest of all time. Also top players from 2013 probably would split 50/50 with afo(because i believe the skill is capped). For example I would bet a 2013 RAHAN or Bonesplitter would beat an 08 afo. This doesn't mean they are better or even equal in skill, they just have advantage. This is just my speculation from playing this game my whole life.(an OPINION i could be wrong.)
@elimination
I didnt name any names, but this part I clearly said there were more players not just Afo that could play much better than the 2013-after players. I do understand what you're saying though about players getting better in later time periods than when they were years back, yet the mass of skilled players in the past were superior to those in the late years of Tao. I played alot more troublesome players in 06-10 rather than the players I have came back to play in recent time.
@Manon- in all seriousness unless you would put me on that list, I would nominate Cam-W He certainly deserves it,was a very solid freestyler.
I'd nominate HaLdAvId...
What I'm trying to say is that Blas' argument is invalid. You are trying to give merit to his argument. This is not about which meta-game is better. This is about who has more talent and skill. The old school players are ranked higher than the new players regardless of the meta-game, they are more skilled and talented. In other words, if they had the same time spent playing the newer meta-game that is supposedly superior, they would still be dominant... i.e. Bottle would still stomp Vish.
Agreed, im just saying i see where he's coming from :)
Blasph is so butthurt. You're ridiculous, get over yourself.
Surprised I was even included. :P
Anyways, tcbb and Bobcat are the same people, so that gives your list's accuracy some perspective. :D
I beat all the players in that list at least once... I was just too good.
Like I've said for years, this thread blows my mind. The work and thought that went into it. I fucking love it, and I'm glad it made it over. Manon you gotta understand that people are going to bitch no matter what. Ignore em. They could have made their own list by now.
This is a piece of TAO history here.
Relax kids, I made a joke. Though, it was entertaining to watch Veil smack AFO.
Kid, one day you're going to grow up and realize how much time you wasted here. You need to take a deep breathe and relax, don't take this that seriously.
Everyone could make a few adjustments here and there, but the list is fine. Pretty much what Butcher said.
Kid, you were only good during the middle ages of the game. The few tournaments you joined in the later years, you got the shit smacked out of you by average players.
You are a perfect example of a good 2008 player that was nothing more than an average player in 2013. You are living proof that my argument is valid.