Playing Open

Revision as of 09:28, 8 July 2010 by Word (talk | contribs) ((added various texts by Z-Man, root down and me))
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Today, there are lots of players who complain if you don't play open although it's not in the servers rules and the settings (the rubber) is set to a value which allows it. In my opinion everyone who thinks closing his bad can go to a norubber server. One of the main arguments that is used to underline the importance of playing open is that "all the pros do it", which is not true (according to a poll i started on Armagetron forums several months ago).

Playing "open" doesn't require a broader set of skills than playing "closed", ie. "closed" players NEED to know how to grind as tight as possible, open players don't. The skillset required for playing "closed" translates to "open", not the other way around. ("good open" players may be more skillful at mazing than "skilled closed" players, simply by virtue of the fact that "skilled closed" players don't need to make mazes, instead they force others to do so.) i would therefore draw the conclusion that "closed" playing requires more skill and is therefore the superior gametype. maybe that's fallacious, whatever. until open is an official gametype, "open" players can eat wall.

People who make up their own rules how a game is supposed to be played and try to force those rules on others have always been and will always be scrubs.

The whole point or arma was to cut people off so that they run into your wall and explode. Playing "open" is like buying yourself loss-insurance: If you kill some open player, you're just a closer. But if they kill you, you can't even win when you're trying to close them. low risk-high reward (in their heads).