Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Thyphs

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thyphs


    People are still getting hung up on her damage....i cant remember a game all season 3 that ive played that i was looking for that non momentus damage and ive only got 5 hits a handfull of times to make the 3 dmg and double dodge usable. I cant help but saying again....in a world with A&G being almost impossible to counter effectively, Vitriol is fine. Shes been doing what she has been doing for 3 seasons now without much change, cant help but feel its driven from the killing teams not enjoying a football game.
  2. Thyphs


    Really...in a meta where we still have A&G goal scoring bullcrap we pick on Vitriol..... Yes shes good, yes shes arguably the best non captain striker alongside Flint. But for the reasons many have said above, she isnt without weakness. She has been nerfed already by taking her damage down a notch which is fine....now instead of making her a beat down monster she kinda has to play ball. That scares people....shes working as intended....from season 1.
  3. Thyphs


    Must say I agree that crucible looks fun....but for tournament play she doesnt do anything that others cant do. If her def was always higher then maybe....but the resources and investment required to make her work isnt optimal. Dont even think ill purchase her at this stage
  4. Thyphs


    I think in the current goal scoring meta Compound is almost number 1 choice...he is arguably to best keeper in the game....certainly one of the best backline players around. Ofc its personal choice....but hes always in my team
  5. Thyphs


    Sorry...no harm meant
  6. Thyphs


    Its been spoiled on FB.....ill remove it of its going to cause an issue....
  7. Thyphs


    Deleted on Request
  8. Thyphs

    What makes a good team composition?

    The great thing about this game is you can actually build a team around what models look good and be semi competative....the balance is really good. I started by picking a good looking team (Alchs) then learning what they all do, and how they interact with eachother. After that, then thats when you learn what other teams do and how to play against that The variables for teams are so many that you cant pick an overall best all of the time. What i think makes a good team is the ability to score, and not have weakneses that can be easily exploited.
  9. Thyphs

    My 9.

    Midas, Smoke , Naja , Harry , Vet Kat , compound, vitriol , mercury , Calculus Midas team - Midas, Naja , Harry , Vitriol , Compound , Vet Kat Smoke team - Smoke , Naja , Vitriol , Vet Kat, Calculus , mercury
  10. Right, im understanding now the different systems but im still struggling how you could base any system on rankings to determine placement. I kinda get that people who play 5 games against people in the top 100 have a harder time say against someone who played someone ranked 1000 and slowly moved up but....how does it deal with people who dont have rankings?? Who have never played a tournament. Does that system give more reward to someone who beats way higher opponents. For example....when i first started playing and entered my first tournament about 11 months ago i didnt have a ranking...but my first two games i beat people ranked in the top 50 then lost my next three due to inexperience....by the ranking points i got a mid table finish....but because i beat people way higher than me should i not get a bonus?? Again to me some of the stuff being said seems to be trying to make a difference to players of similar skill who got slightly different runs into a 4-1 for determining placement But how does it deal with something outside the norm like people who are low rankings - only playing 1 or 2 tournaments but can actually be very good players. Sorry im not trying to cause more heated debate im genuinely trying to see all points now and understand....because i saw VPD as a fair system because it was fixed...granted 1 bad game can plumit you down the rankings, but its a system everyone can understand. Personally i never thought skill of opponents should ever be factored in because its situational to who has played alot more tournament guildball vs people who havent.......but maybe my thinking is wrong.
  11. I got a prize like that at the UK championship by being the first round victim to the overall winner (though i gave him a very good game i thought) Got myself a ltd ed mist....i was so happy to lose in this way and gave him a man hug!! Its nice touches like that , that really make the community spirit grow
  12. Oh i completely agree, ive seen my ranking fall because of a bad result in one round. Im not saying you guys are flat out wrong or if i did then i apologise...what im saying is its an issue that effects very few players to the degree.....if were talking about rankings for the black orifice, my question would have to be this....would a fundemental change benefit everyone in a 64 or 128 man tournament?? Or would it just benefit a few who had one bad round? Personally ive never given it much thought, so im more than happy with the rules as laid out....then again im only ranked in the top 80 and not in the top 15 or so where i guess those points make all the difference
  13. To be honest Jamie said it perfectly above...i apologise if it came across as passive agressive...but I understood the vocal few were/are the top tier players...i cant even dream to be that level yet , however it does have a touch of an element of selfishness really that what you perceve to be broken is quite acceptable to the vast majority of the player base. If there was a genuine brokenness about it then it would be looked at, but for the life of me....i just cant see it.
  14. A gaming friend at the club uses 6 inch plastic strip clips... similar to what you can use on paper booklets ...if you type into google plastic booklet strips it should come up....two of them and it holds the board perfectly
  15. Is this strictly an American problem, caused due to the need for qualifiers ? Because frankly ive tried and failed to keep up with the crazy amount of maths going into working out the perfect way to predict the future and throw games, have your tournament placing be judged on who you play and then still come in top 3 because you either scored a goal or took out a player. I played quite a few tournaments last year in the UK...and this issue has never been mentioned, or was so minor that it didnt seem to get the momentum that its getting now. This is a game of football/soccer/rugby (ball game) As with most games of football in a league format (which a tournament is in essence) things are often decided by goals for, minus goals against...this isnt an entirely new concept. Ive never seen any of the leagues of soccer/football delve into mathmatical equations that half the world doesnt understand to try to fix an issue that has been around for so long. At the crux is this......there is a well established system in place, that may or may not be perfect for a select few people...however when you entered into gaming you accepted that these are the rules of tournaments. Just because it doesnt suit doesnt mean its justifiably unfair to everyone. All this talk of ...well 12-2 doesnt reflect how close the.game was....guess what, it doesnt matter one bit, the score is the score. Trying to suggest that systems should be changed to reflect how people played is utter bull. If my football team play well and get beat 3-0 you have to accept the score. Perhaps its time that the vocal few try to not impose their "perfect solution" onto (im going to take a wild asaumption here) a much larger majority who feel that the current system is perfectly fine once you understand and follow the laid out rules.