BNT 2:1 TVL/30.09.07

81 replies [Last post]
rUnThEoN?!
Skullheadq3's picture
Offline
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts:
DE Germany
® BNT 2:1 TVL/30.09.07
*KINETIC* wrote:


You can even send naked women to the opponents' house and distract them, ok? Or you could camp or something Happy.

reminds me of players spraying animated gif players on walls in counter strike source Smug

hurrenson: "This idiot is apparently not familiar with a rail/sniper style."

Kefir
Impact's picture
Offline
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts:
® BNT 2:1 TVL/30.09.07

one reason is : all (no most popular clans) Get the nobs from bro and plus and thats = rail camp on resp etc

btw GG ...

end this topic

Look for my BFG at Space Station

{D*R*T} BODZ!
XbODz's picture
Offline
Joined: May 2005
Posts:
® BNT 2:1 TVL/30.09.07
*KINETIC* wrote:

if one clan says they can't manage to get 5 players playing, you must accept just 4. It's something you will have to live with.

lol 4 BNT on spec with decent ping in dm11 and they cannot manage to play 5v5?
Let's cut the crap out of here and be honest guys. Nobody really think that "that they can't manage". I haven't read ur rules but what's written here isn't serious. I understand completly tvl on that point.

I dont like camp too but i heard you guys tvl also had some nice camp session against en on dm5 isn't it ? Happy

anyway surprising result but it seems like bnt had some good recruitment lately

>P|_^<.keE|¯3R!!
Offline
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts:
® BNT 2:1 TVL/30.09.07

I dont see any rules about how many players must plays, Im not akcepted 4 vs 4, 4 ppl from BNT specs and cant plays ? this is funny? But this is Your rule Kinetic, I say STOP the time becouse Im not akcepted game 4vs4 on big map

this is rules - - the clan who chooses the map, chooses if it’s 3on3, 4on4 or 5on5. except one clan hasn’t got enough players for it

than U on CW change the rules and LIAR TVL - this is not akcepted

and now please stop bulshit

HYP3R
redkn33d's picture
Offline
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts:
® BNT 2:1 TVL/30.09.07

e5r is totally different from BRO...

e5r is:
-more fastest
-long camping accepted
-rail based
-spam
-high skill
-weapon switch high skill
-grenade & bfg jumps
-2 weapons minus

BRO is:
-slowly
-no long time camping
-no fast weapon switch
-multijumps (that sucks) - a horible invention
-also spawns
-mabe u need good movement...

*BNT* DIRTY OLD
Dirty Old's picture
Offline
Joined: May 2006
Posts:
® BNT 2:1 TVL/30.09.07

cw18209.txt

thx all for your comments, rly interesting.
@keep: i started a vote in events forum in private section of the league about how many ppl are standard on tie map. sry that i forgot to make a rule for that!

>P|_^<.keE|¯3R!!
Offline
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts:
® BNT 2:1 TVL/30.09.07
*BNT* DIRTY OLD wrote:

cw18209.txt

thx all for your comments, rly interesting.
@keep: i started a vote in events forum in private section of the league about how many ppl are standard on tie map. sry that i forgot to make a rule for that!

Now U sry ???? pffff

TVL win dm6 on cw with 5 ppl
TVL can be wins dm11 with 5 ppl

but we cant plays 5 vs 5 becuse REF changing rules

I dont see rule about this what say on CW Kinetic, than if 1 ref can change the rule on CW than TVL left from this league

THIS IS MY DECISION

odin [EN]
Offline
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts:
® BNT 2:1 TVL/30.09.07

someone wanne have a lolli? just accept the lost and dont take it that seriouse...the cry dont help and make u win... if u cry then the ppl take u less seriouse... so come down

>P|_^<.keE|¯3R!!
Offline
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts:
® BNT 2:1 TVL/30.09.07
odin [EN] wrote:

someone wanne have a lolli? just accept the lost and dont take it that seriouse...the cry dont help and make u win... if u cry then the ppl take u less seriouse... so come down

Im not cry

but fight with rule - without anarchy, answer me why Ref change the rule ?

*BNT* DIRTY OLD
Dirty Old's picture
Offline
Joined: May 2006
Posts:
® BNT 2:1 TVL/30.09.07

if we would have said we want 3on3 and u said u want 5on5, wouldn't we have chosen to play 4on4 then?
and what if just all bnt except those who played would have left?

we would have had other ways to get 4on4... although if the last example wouldn't be a nice one...