View Single Post
Unread 8 Aug 2007, 18:51   #17
DarkHeart
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 383
DarkHeart is just really niceDarkHeart is just really niceDarkHeart is just really niceDarkHeart is just really niceDarkHeart is just really nice
Re: [Round 22] Terran success

There is little or no skill involved in running a terran planet Mzyxptkl. Build DE fleet. Build BS fleet. Go roid. Faking and the decision to be a distwhore or not is about as skillful as a Terran planet gets, but lets be honest you could train a monkey to make a fake attack

Your kind of getting the perspective I'm trying to represent Mzyxptkl (damn ur name is hard to type), but I am not claiming everybody could have done well despite choosing terran, I'm claiming everybody had the same potential to do well despite choosing terran. A subtle difference.

The rest of your post is actually contrary to what I'm saying Mzyxptkl. I agree with you and reiterate my shared belief that 4:3:7 has by all accounts required a vast amount of galaxy and alliance support.

But this is where the essence of my initial response to Ad is formed. It is not completely the fault of the stats that have failed terran players, and I have put 4:3:7 up on a pedestal merely as an undisputable shining example of where a terran could have got to this round despite of the stats.

And that is my alternative hypothesis, despite your claims I had not formed it, its right there in my initial couple of posts (feel free to re-read them I won't bog this down with quotes)

And jonny its these 'irrelevancies' that seem to have made the differenc e between success and failure :P

Furball, I can't profess any knowledge of round 13, thats one of the many rounds I missed, but surely a large proportion of the one ally all choosing the worst race explains why this is the.....'outlier' against Satyrs hypothesis

Last edited by DarkHeart; 8 Aug 2007 at 19:02.
DarkHeart is offline   Reply With Quote