KobRa_RR
Auto-translated
I'm not contradicting myself. Yes, you can lose a game due to a lack of control, just as you can lose for other reasons. Essentially, the arguments boil down to this. You're trying to remove the influence of randomness in determining the "strongest," while making the game bland and boring. All the most comfortable conditions are created for these "strongest" players, because if something goes wrong, they get very upset. Because if the strongest player loses, they blame the map layout, the lack of control, luck, and so on, but not because they played poorly or not well enough, or because the opponent was stronger (or perhaps luckier) in that particular situation. I repeat, we're talking exclusively about HL+U templates. And to say that only they are a true indicator of skill is just ridiculous. And if the strongest player loses on Jeb, M200, or Balance, then again, they just had bad luck.
I'm not saying that VT is bad, and Sod HD+ is good. I'm just saying that I'm once again amused by the arrogant opinions that only VT allows you to show real gameplay, and only there is the true class and skill of players revealed. I won't even mention the bugs, the stability of the version, etc.
Interesting games are also played on M200, I don't deny it, but only on a variable, large template is there time to correct the bias of the generator.
A player's skill is demonstrated/compared over a distance where the starting conditions are more or less equal. To say that this is the case on small maps, M200, and other similar things is to be very dishonest. The win rate of a player who plays HL well, mirror matches, and other "arrogant templates" will be incomparably lower, for example, on M200, simply because of the greater influence of the luck factor.
