Vet?

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[sheffer]

i do enjoy killing vet, it gives me small satisfaction but hunting down vet for no reason and killing vet that is retreating is something i shun and just think is deskusting.

its makes a game personal like cause and effect in the chain: "U conscious kill my vet3? Payback!" I hunt units of vethunters without mercy, but for other players i usually trying to move back my killers to allow an enemy to retreat. Because this mod is about vet for 40+%.

[Artekas]

You shun people and consider them disgusting for playing a videogame in a certain way? That's pretty fuckin' sad, to be honest.

And this is exactly what I mean by the behaviour about vet being completely retarded.

[TheIcelandicManiac]

You shun people and consider them disgusting for playing a videogame in a certain way? That's pretty fuckin' sad, to be honest.

And this is exactly what I mean by the behaviour about vet being completely retarded.

okey i must admit is that i brake my own rule from time to time but hunting down vet that is fleeing from the battle feild without giving it a chance is just is something that i shun opon but if its a tank that is being repeared in the middle of back parts of the battlefeild is something that i would not consider a vet hunt when killed.

[11on2d6]

Some people dont seem to understand why people chase stuff, its not just because its vet. Its also to vet the unit that is doing the chasing, hence unless they have another mission, my Ac's would always chase...its for me, not for you.

[Artekas]

Somebody here please tell me why in a game where the overall objective is winning I should withhold from doing things well within the boundaries of the game (ie not hacking/exploiting) that might help me win? My goal isn't to be super nice to be my opponent and make him feel good. It's to have fun trying to win. Vetting up is a nice thing on the side that helps my chances of winning, but not something I focus on.

How is somebody winning against me any different than me hunting the vet of people who play for vet? In both cases the other party comes out less than thrilled. I'll consider never vethunting the people who play just for vet if they concede every game to me.

[Masacree]

Is winning an end in itself? Or is the point of the game to have fun? I personally agree with the latter, and I think I'd rather have all players involved enjoy the game, rather than "win". In fact, it makes me kind of sick that some one suggested vet hunting to break enemy "morale" as if EIR is some sort of war. Well, little known fact, but EIR is still just a game that we play for fun, and though I personally do enjoy the competitive aspect (and the playing to win attitude) of the mod, losing the fun aspect in the process literally kills the whole point. Winning is just a means to an end, and though I do vet hunt quite often, I don't do so for the sake of hurting other players.

[Smokaz]

I like breaking masacrees morale, hopefully i will have it bended an spended before the game even starts

[Masacree]

I like breaking masacrees morale, hopefully i will have it bended an spended before the game even starts

Nah brah, pretty sure my pre-game bombardment of Nietzsche is what nearly won us the game.

(Sure as hell wasn't my teamates)

[Artekas]

There are two different ways people enjoy this game. One way is by trying to win. The other way is by vetting up units. If you win against me, you may very well have ruined my fun (although mind you losing can still be fun, in some situations). If I vethunt against you, I may very well have ruined your fun. Yay, doublestandards?

In addition, all competitive videogames are some sort of war. You are fighting each other with the most common goal being to win. Making the opponent frustrated enhances your chances of completing the goal.

If you don't like this, go play co-op games, or just singleplayer games. The entire premise of competitive gaming means that sometimes, one party just isn't going to have tons of fun.

[sheffer]

There are two different ways people enjoy this game. One way is by trying to win. The other way is by vetting up units.

Third way is a game itself with all aspects of mod: vet, doc persistency, tactical playstile and win. Every part of it is important for me

[Masacree]

WHAT?

Let's take this piece by piece.

There are two different ways people enjoy this game. One way is by trying to win.

K gg no re, in the first line I've won. Even you admit that you have fun, not by winning, not by achieving victory, but by trying to win, by striving for victory. So its completely reasonable to expect both teams to enjoy the game. Just the same as even the loser in a brilliant chess game can appreciate the beauty of the winning combination.

The other way is by vetting up units. If you win against me, you may very well have ruined my fun (although mind you losing can still be fun, in some situations). If I vethunt against you, I may very well have ruined your fun. Yay, doublestandards?

I don't think anyone solely derives pleasure from vetting up their units. Regardless, there's no double standard; if I don't strive for victory as well, then your achievement of victory is meaningless and so you won't enjoy it either. My point is that I won't beat you for the sake of ruining your fun, but for the sake of actualizing my own fun.

In addition, all competitive videogames are some sort of war. You are fighting each other with the most common goal being to win. Making the opponent frustrated enhances your chances of completing the goal.

First of all, competitive video games are definitely not a war, they're a competition, a struggle. (certamen)

But, frustrated your enemies for the sake of victory costs the END GOAL of the activity (if only to your opponent). I mean, if your sadistic, and the only way you derive pleasure is from pissing off other people, then I suppose you may have a point. Winning isn't an end in itself, though I suppose competition might be. (Aristotle's virtue ethics?)

In fact, frustrating your opponent's probably destroys any hope of good competition in a game. I'd imagine winning is significantly less fun if you know that you are only winning because your opponent is pissed off and making stupid mistakes.  

On a larger scale (playing to win on a community level) though, its probably to your advantage to not be an asshole just so better players will be willing to play with you and so when you win, your opponents don't drophack ect. Also, I guarantee you'll have more fun/more friends in the community if you're not an asshole.  

If you don't like this, go play co-op games, or just singleplayer games. The entire premise of competitive gaming means that sometimes, one party just isn't going to have tons of fun.

Assholes like you are pretty much the reason I don't really play competitive multiplayer games very often anymore.

[tank130]

I kill vet because it is the biggest threat of it's kind on the field. I also kill vet to ensure I don't have to fight against it next battle.

[BigDick]

probably the best moment in eir i had while being with aloha in vent/ts and screaming hunthunthunt kill kill kill to coordinate focus fire onto vet units or chasing and hunting down retreating vet of vetwhores
It give me a huge adrenalin kick if i see much vet of a player ingame that is waiting to be killed.

I remember a game on tantevile against some vetwhores (i think it was sourdiesel and tym and an other guy) where i chased overdrive ACs over the whole map hunting down tons of retreating vet3 AT gun crews, airbornes and british infantry...goood times i must say

also it was always quite fun to vethunt pak88 (he loved vet hunting too but had much vet himself and he surrendered always after loosing some vet tanks - "yummi yummi vet3 shermans")

Actually its not fun to play in a team with vetwhores sitting half the game around a casualty clearing station or a triage but its so much fun to play against them
Vet can be very powerful if one does not care about loosing it but to play vet whore players with full vet armies works perfectly to suicide stuff just to kill some of the vet....that make them retreat stuff  very early and playing extreme defensively or surrendering/ragequitting

keep on killing the vet!!!!

[Mysthalin]

If I fight someone, chances are that I will fight him again in the future.

If I fight him again in the future, it makes sence for me to prepare for it by weakening him prior to the future engagement.

The only way (currently) to weaken an opponent before a future match is to kill his veterancy in the current match.

Ergo, it makes sence for me to kill his veterancy in the current match.

Not to mention that killing veterancy and winning a game are not mutually exclusive, and - in all actuality, go hand-in-hand in most cases.