Enough Said...

You could always use your ICE edit....

H

Yeah that would be a good stalemate edit.

Edit: Thank you, but I made a new edit that is doing very well as a building game with no unenforcable rules or server side scripts present.

No problem. Have fun. If you see any problems let me know.

this is a good argument for a smack forum right here. id like to hear how that tourney went from the people who played it- but if they mention anything adversarial its a no go.

tho if i recall correctly, wasnt GZ going to cby if it came down to points? thats not me smacking, i know i remember seeing that...

Ground Zero clearly won by having the over half the assets, less deaths, and more kills than any other corp. The only reason that we didn't take them out is because they gridded enough to keep evac scripts running until the end of the game. So any statements previous to the game are null and void considering that they refused to stand and fight. You can't kill what you can't catch. The bottom line is "Ground Zero was and is the CHAMPIONS of the ICE tourney."

Yes but they will call this smack to avoid being called out. As long as the discussion is kept civil then it just sounds like a good Open Discussion Topic.

There really is no topic. The topic has been resolved. The final factor being that "Ground Zero won ICE"

No.... answer the question that was ask and quit dodging the obvious.

to be honest i dont consider this a derail, and in the interest of proof i offer this explanation-
the topic is builder games. as i see it a builder game is one where the goal isnt to annihilate people but to build. the ice tourney edit was mentioned as a possibility- and since the guy who wrote it couldnt 'win' it(like i said i know it wasnt supposed to stalemate, and i know GZ was gonna cby) it would seem to fit the bill. when you consider that members of two of the three corps who played have suggested it as a builder edit?
now, you can take it however you want. 'stay on topic', whatever. but if we look in the draft thread we see-

and the question was asked why not use the ice tourney edit. how is that smack? wouldnt a simple answer like 'good idea' or 'i dont think so' have stopped a supposed thread derail?

Boog, to answer your question then.

It was stated that if there was no OBVIOUS winner, that GZ would cby.

1st, there was a clear and obvious leader who later became the winner by tourney rules as soon as 30 days (or less) into the tourney. This was when GZ had, and maintained 50% or above game assets. Therefor, there was a clear winner.

2nd. This was stated before I joined GZ. Being that I had no intent to CBY for any reason, I would have still been around to claim the a fore mentioned obvious win for our corp. The others CBY'ing would, at this point, be a mute point.

I hope that clarifies things.

There are more but we all know Big D so we can just leave it at that.

well, the 'real player' clause negated the 1st contract,(leaving out names by design as not to turn into smack) and I already explained the 2nd...laff. and again, twas before I joined the corp. so, I am not bound by any of it.

Both of those statements are null and void considering the type of play that was chosen in that tournament. I will say that both of the other two corps were very good at running evac scripts and avoiding us. This puts me in the mind of a fed safe player that sits in federation space with 99 fighters on his ship and says "You didn't win because you can't kill me." laff

well, while its nice to hear some of how the ice went down(thanx), this still doesnt answer whether or not that edit would be good for a builder. if one of three corps had a decided material advantage 30 days in and couldnt kill off the other two? seems to me that a couple tweaks (slow down the cits and whatnot) and it might make one.