if, according to you, someone who has been in the top50 consistently for the past 3 years or so is not good enough to determine if this map plays well or not (which is laughable at it's own). how can you even have the nerves to think that you do?Purple wrote:
It's not a FC, and he himself knows he's not a top player as I described (yet), if he chooses to feel offended, then really that's not my doing. I do admit I find it surprising to see someone play a map that is way harder to read than this 900+ times and see him complain about pattern readability here. I do want to know the list of people who played this map on behalf of the QAT because I can almost guarantee that the players I mentioned in my previous post wouldn't have had a problem with readability on this map.rachel wrote:
are you actually legitimately flaming a top 50 player for not being considered a "top player" when you're barely in the bottom half of the top 10k yourself
dude almost has a fucking airman fc, is that not good enough for you?Even if the AR setting's intent purpose was to accommodate players and improve map readability (I don't agree with that), it's still a matter of preference, some people like AR10 and others prefer lower, and in this one case OP might have chosen something that is not popular among the majority of players and I think the QAT should always respect that decision as long as it's not extreme, like AR8 or something.Broccoly wrote:
Can you explain how it is objectively worse? Because you think so?
Less challenging? AR should not be used to challenge players; it should be used accordingly to the patterns and to guide players to clearly read what they are hitting.