Moderator: Community Team
Who said sequential players are Alphas? A disgraceful thing if anyone did.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
Yeah, it's a mystery who said that.Fruitcake wrote:Who said sequential players are Alphas? A disgraceful thing if anyone did.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


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.White Moose wrote:Yeah, it's a mystery who said that.Fruitcake wrote:Who said sequential players are Alphas? A disgraceful thing if anyone did.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
I don't find it hypocritical at all.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!
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.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
That just about sums it up.Woodruff wrote: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.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
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.Fruitcake wrote:That just about sums it up.Woodruff wrote: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.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
Well saidpoo-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.Fruitcake wrote:That just about sums it up.Woodruff wrote: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.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
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.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).
Gengoldy wrote:Of all the games I've played, and there have been some poor sports and cursing players out there, you are by far the lowest and with the least class.

You use skills/treats/tactics when you eat an apple or a pear?alstergren wrote: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.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).

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.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..
