The last time I played exile, the enemy team was winning and pushed us all the way back to our base(largely because I tried to pass our reg a mageslayer but his inventory was full so the game just deleted the mageslayer when he tried to grab it). They bought giants, it won the game for us because we just farmed at the choke for 20 minutes until we had the artifact and level advantage. By the end of the game, nearly everyone on my team was decked out with 2-3 artifacts in the 16-25
Vesuvius
I'd rather see a bunny with a pancake on its head as a DG.
[quote] I consider exploiting cheating/taking advantage of broken game mechanics.[/quote] How is getting 1000-1500 mana for as fast as you can click 4 times(technically achievable with two clicks and two hotkeys) not a broken game mechanic? Particularly when the game is designed for you to spend gold to achieve this effect(potions).
[quote] This is present for many things - the 15% health and mana flags are a good example.[/quote] It's alright with the flags because you aren't necessarily going to obtain them next to your health crystal(a teammate would have to when you're near your crystal) so for the bonus to take effect you'd need to retreat again(and probably lose the flag). The only reason it's needed for items is if you buy a health or mana artifact, you probably have to go back and heal. 
Damn that's a good one. That's definitely gamebreaking enough to consider it an exploit, especially if you can do it with health too.
The trouble with early priests is that they cost as much as a medium level item and have the benefit of essentially one combat potion per wave of priests that you support. This might be alright for the cost, but they're also feeding your opponents a ton of gold and XP for every wave they intercept or nuke with heaven's wrath. They're only really worth it as a transition to catas or giants. [quote] Heck, I've won and lost more than a few games where one team went *gian
If you can't drive erebus in 2v1 off with a rook and a sedna, all I can say is that you're both doing it wrong.
[quote who="AngryZealot" reply="6" id="2244455"]He probably just had low upload bandwidth. As soon as the game dropped to 4 people his connection could handle it.[/quote] Damnit, why'd you have to say something sensible before I got the chance to?
When his ping says AI.
8K gold. Takes up two of three activatible item slots. Doesn't work against archer rook or near an archer tower. Doesn't work reliably in the vicinity of a creep wave, more than one demigod, or standard towers. It's situational at best and for the amount of gold they spend on it, you could have an artifact instead.
[quote who="Cyrenic" reply="5" id="2240917"]Brad, Would it be possible to seperate disconnects and manual quits? My internet connetion isn't the best, and while I complete the majority of my games, my (legitimate) disconnects will probably add up. I'd rather people decide if they want to risk someone with a moderate connection instead of just assuming I'm a rage quitter. I don't leave games early, no matter how poorly they are going, and it would
[quote]When you agree with me, that Rage Quitting is a bad practice despite the absent of the moral argument, your argument is complete and we've come full circle as it is now on par with the general community consensus that Rage Quitting is a bad practice. [/quote] Correct. I've never tried to argue that ragequits are good for the community. The most I've argued(in another thread) is that they're a negligible problem for the community(I don't view it as a problem at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_sense The term has multiple definitions and all are plausible given the context in which it was initially used. [quote] Once we've agreed that Rage Quitting negatively impacts on the game experience of a group of people larger than the number of Rage Quitters, your argument is contradicting itself.[/quote] Not really. My argument is about it being morally neutral, not the effect it has on the community.&n
Is the concede option in?
[quote] You didn't answer the question - why are you avoiding it if you have no problem with it? [/quote] Umm having a preference to play games out IS answering the question. I would rather play against people than AIs, this is why I play the game online in the first place. It is a choice between an acceptable experience and a good experience. I'll take good over acceptable when I can, but it doesn't mean I have a problem with acceptable. [quote] Bing
Ack delete this one. Hit the back button on accident and thought I hadn't posted yet :/.
[quote who="Neil Banfield" reply="6" id="2237720"]If the person you are sending a message to is running demigod then a small popup will appear on the right hand side of their screen when they receive the message you sent. It will show a small version of your user icon and your name. If they click on that they will get the chat window to you opened up with your message in it. I believe the chat indicator will go away about 1 minute after it initially showed. I
[quote][quote] It is the only reason because it's your underlying justification for all your other arguments.[/quote] It's actually not, but you ignored the other reasons. A smart move if you're trying to avoid them.[/quote] If it's not the underlying reason state what actually is and I'll argue that point. [quote][quote]Common belief is the definition of common sense.[/quote] No, it isn't. If you were a slave owner
[quote]Your counter argument is "there is no morality." That's not a counter. If you think that ragequitting is somehow ok then you'd "better be fucking prepared" to say why. Ironically you instead tried to take the moral high ground.[/quote] My counter argument is that there is no absolute morality. Everyone has their own views on morality, you just can't reasonably apply your own to other people. Many people, including myself, simply do not see leaving
[quote who="bug" reply="2" id="2238109"]I think that was a yes/no/we don't know type of question.[/quote] "Should be" is usually a yes on the condition that nothing goes horribly wrong, like their servers getting firebombed by Jack Thompson.
[quote]A rebuttle comprising of insults is the lowest grade of counter argument that can be put forth.[/quote] Sort of like Vyper's post that I was responding to? I guess it only counts when the other side does it? I respond to insults with insults and to arguments with arguments. [quote] Your argument, which seems to be a mess of misunderstandings, is pointless.[/quote] Seems to be a mess of misunderstandings? If I'm not understanding something,
[quote who="Aroddo" reply="2" id="2236237"]what ? You believe in cat girls ??[/quote] According to my sources, girls and cats are equivalent so yes I believe in cat girls [e digicons]:meow:[/e] .
If it lasted 40 minutes couldn't have been that one sided(assuming the map is sane). Unless they decided to be mean and went for artifacts over giants(again assuming the map is sane).
[quote who="InfiniteVengeance" reply="14" id="2236504"] Common sense.[/quote] Common sense changes with time and is usually anything but sensible. How can it possibly be absolute? You're just extrapolating your own feelings to the majority and pretending that it's sensible because everyone agrees on it. The truly funny part is both assumptions are totally fallacious. [quote who="VyperXXX" reply="13" id="2236456"] Bullshit.
[quote]Blah blah blah, there are no absolutes! Yes there are. In this case, it's wrong to bail on your team. You might have a reason for it. Ok, but it's still WRONG to do so without getting the consent of the others you're damaging by your actions.[/quote] And those absolutes are what exactly(you've only listed one here)? And what qualifies them to be absolute? [quote] How nice for you. Doing whatever you want with no regard for oth