That's not true at all. If you get full in 6on6 it's 5on6 for a round, if you get full in 5on5 it's 4on5 for a round. Why would be it different? It's the exact same situation.
It's really not. It's way harder to play 4on5 than 5on6. It's also harder to play 1on2 than 2on3 right? It really makes the gameplay different. In 5on5 you take less risk to get full than in 6on6.
6on6 the gameplay is a bit more fun to play than 5on5, but 6on6 also had alot of spam in it and 5on5 there's less spam and more 'smg' shooting going on.
What you people who prefer 5on5 should understand is that ET is ET and not CS, COD or any other game which is played in 5on5. The maps meant to be played in 6on6 format and not other.
It's not harder! since 5on5 came the tactics changed and so the gameplay did, you take the EXACT SAME risk in 5on5 when you get one of your players full.
Whoever says 5on5 is better it's because he couldn't get predominated in 6on6. He was too stupid to understand the gameplay. And I am saying it without any offence, and not pointed at you.
Look what names came up to the so called high-skilled scene since 5on5, i have to laugh seriously.
"Look what names came up to the so called high-skilled scene since 5on5, i have to laugh seriously."
Players are getting better, get over it lol:D You should be happy that there are 'new' 'highskilled?' players coming. All the old players were also shit before they were this good. Anyway I like to play 6on6 more than 5on5. But to gather 6 players everytime is very hard, atleast with my team we only play 1 or 2 times a week I think? It's more fun to play 5on5 with the same players than to find a merc or two mercs everytime for 6on6.
:DDDD sorry but couldn't resist. Surprisingly half of the med skilled players who couldn't get the gameplay of 6on6 are now playing for good teams.
You can't do anything againts this idiot 5on5 rule, and I didn't say you still should play 6on6 because it's almost impossible now. But if we wouldn't have SHITHEADS as admins (e.g. krosan, tosspot etc) 6on6 would be just as easy to play as it was before.
And you wouldn't have problems to get 6 players together, not as shitheads say.
"now" doesn't mean they just joined the so called high-skilled scene.
it means they have been playing there since the format changed.
e: 2 years ago means 2009 and not 2007 btw :)
ur proving my point again :) i have to say ur a bad debater cause ur bringing up all sorts of unrelated stuff when u realise ur wrong. and im typing lol just so that u wont feel that bad, really.
well i agree in what u said, that's true, totally (about 1 full is important in each game style) ; maybe what he may thinks is that 6on6 is more organizeble (i mean about classes and positions), my point is that the difference between 5on5 and 6on6 is very short and i feel more confident with 6 players than 5 but i like both game style...in each way u have to play smart and use ur skill. About funniest and the rest who prefer 5on5 tbh i dont get why it's the same as 6on6 but with 1 player less, maybe it's more easier to spawnkill :D
U can get easier 5 then 6 players but i dont have any kind of prob, if i have only 5 players i play 5on5 if 6 i play 6on6 who cares about this shit. In the ET community there are a lot of teams recruitign or players asking the problem is the teams and players dont accept new players infact in the last 3 years always the same players played in higher league, nobody wants to skill newbie...that's why ET is diein.
if i may be right in the begin of the competitions and the ET business there was a lot of mixes gathers and stuff and players can learn more each other, now 2on2/3on3/5on5/6on6 low is forever low max low+/med cus an high will not play with a low.
6on6 the gameplay is a bit more fun to play than 5on5, but 6on6 also had alot of spam in it and 5on5 there's less spam and more 'smg' shooting going on.
It's not harder! since 5on5 came the tactics changed and so the gameplay did, you take the EXACT SAME risk in 5on5 when you get one of your players full.
Whoever says 5on5 is better it's because he couldn't get predominated in 6on6. He was too stupid to understand the gameplay. And I am saying it without any offence, and not pointed at you.
Look what names came up to the so called high-skilled scene since 5on5, i have to laugh seriously.
dont miss the breakfast nex time, its the most important meal of the day. could be the reason of you being angry.
Players are getting better, get over it lol:D You should be happy that there are 'new' 'highskilled?' players coming. All the old players were also shit before they were this good. Anyway I like to play 6on6 more than 5on5. But to gather 6 players everytime is very hard, atleast with my team we only play 1 or 2 times a week I think? It's more fun to play 5on5 with the same players than to find a merc or two mercs everytime for 6on6.
:DDDD sorry but couldn't resist. Surprisingly half of the med skilled players who couldn't get the gameplay of 6on6 are now playing for good teams.
You can't do anything againts this idiot 5on5 rule, and I didn't say you still should play 6on6 because it's almost impossible now. But if we wouldn't have SHITHEADS as admins (e.g. krosan, tosspot etc) 6on6 would be just as easy to play as it was before.
And you wouldn't have problems to get 6 players together, not as shitheads say.
it means they have been playing there since the format changed.
e: 2 years ago means 2009 and not 2007 btw :)
U can get easier 5 then 6 players but i dont have any kind of prob, if i have only 5 players i play 5on5 if 6 i play 6on6 who cares about this shit. In the ET community there are a lot of teams recruitign or players asking the problem is the teams and players dont accept new players infact in the last 3 years always the same players played in higher league, nobody wants to skill newbie...that's why ET is diein.
if i may be right in the begin of the competitions and the ET business there was a lot of mixes gathers and stuff and players can learn more each other, now 2on2/3on3/5on5/6on6 low is forever low max low+/med cus an high will not play with a low.