| 1 |
[quote]Being a "good player" in a big game has different qualities that being a "good player" in a small game. You can be great at small games and have the ability to win battles, but lack the understanding of scale to improve your chances at winning big games.[/quote]
|
1 |
[quote]Being a "good player" in a big game has different qualities that being a "good player" in a small game. You can be great at small games and have the ability to win battles, but lack the understanding of scale to improve your chances at winning big games.[/quote]
|
| 2 |
I think this is incorrect. There are some large-teams-specific skills, but anybody who is a strong small teams player will be pretty good at large teams also. A large team made up *entirely* of small teams players might suffer a bit on certain maps, but a large team normally has no shortage of players willing to "scale" while a small teams specialist [s]suffers[/s] battles at the front.
|
2 |
I think this is incorrect. There are some large-teams-specific skills, but anybody who is a strong small teams player will be pretty good at large teams also. A large team made up *entirely* of small teams players might suffer a bit on certain maps, but a large team normally has no shortage of players willing to "scale" while a small teams specialist [s]suffers[/s] battles at the front.
|
| 3 |
\n
|
3 |
\n
|
| 4 |
On
the
other
hand,
I
have
seen
some
large
teams
players
play
very
poorly
in
small
teams,
though
this
is
by
no
means
true
of
all
large
teams
players.
|
4 |
On
the
other
hand,
I
have
seen
some
large
teams
players
play
very
poorly
in
small
teams.
This
is
by
no
means
true
of
all
large
teams
players,
but
a
few
are
unwilling
or
unable
to
adapt.
|
32-player TAW is good for Zerok