eGO's Finest (Allied Rifleman)

[Sumac]

Situations vary. Everyone on that list is going to have strengths and weaknesses on certain maps, against certain players, with certain team dynamics ect. I agree the way to judge this would not be off K ratios or most things on a stats page. If you could factor in the other teams fear of these players than maybe

And in Blue's defense, "camping" or "defensive style play" while being a valid tactic can also skew the K and other meaningless stats in favor of that person. But, a few players like that on a team can be incredibly useful. I know I can't sit outside field with an MG the entire match, but if someone didn't we would be in greater trouble. If however the entire team is doing this, a good player (as everyone on that list is) moves up and helps get the team going again.

I guess what I am trying to say is while I would never want myself as a teammate with that weapon (honestly props to anyone that can use a rifle), I can see situations where I would prefer Crusader over Bill, and Bill over Crusader in others. It "just depends" on too many variables. It's like saying, who is the best Rugby player of all time? Impossible to truly answer.

 

[Crusader]

Your absolutely right Sumac, you can't judge a player by his stats. So many different variables that can decide a persons effectiveness on a team.

 

[YoSpankDawg]

well urs is upside down, who cares...

Touche...

Can we vote for Pedro?

Did you not see the "Other" option? haha

Well I know you weren't calling anybody out, I was merely asking if I couldn't do a little of both. Never underestimate the value of a good spawn camping. (Strand only)



But back on to the skill topic of this thread. I have to say Bill is one of the most talented Rifleman I've ever played with, but most everybody on that list is a skilled marksman.

Ok, well spawn camping is something completely different than just plain camping, haha.

They way I have always seen it, is that if you're in enemy territory and camping, that's alright, because it is part of the overall "push". For example, I see nothing wrong with the Axis camping in the Allied sniper house or vice-versa, so long as they are covering that second flag. The reason why this is different in my mind is because when they cover that 2, they're literally just making sure that the guys pushing first will win the round ALSO they are covering those of us who are just about to make a break up the street. Therefore, if you're "camping" in enemy territory, you're actually a part of the push still (note that they did have to make their way there to begin with...).

Anyways, back to this debate, that is a great point that people who are just plain great marksmen will obviously get high credit with any weapon they are proficient at. I am a K98 guy, but I can rock people with the M1 carbine. That is why, again, this debate needs to factor in the finer things like who has great rifle nade placement (that's a huge one, since that's essentially half of a rifleman's firepower) and who goes out there and captures flags, etc. Here is a small breakdown of some of those numbers (I know, more stats, right? lol):

Crusader: 3.9 caps an hour, 1.0 blocks an hour, 0.4 bombs planted an hour. 276-134 W/L. 21.9% fired nades hit (477 kills). 84.6% thrown nades hit (1532 kills).

Bill: I some reason cannot find on Steam at all right now (???)

Sabion: 1.5 c/h. 0.4 b/h. 0.1 bp/h. 69-102 W/L. 21.6% fired hit (97 kills). 61.9% thrown hit (151 kills).

Ravage: 1.2 c/h. 0.0 b/h. 1.3 bp/h. 47-56 W/L. 22.9% fired hit (75 kills). 60% thrown hit (5 kills).

Bad Brain: 3.0 c/h. 0.1 b/h. 0.3 bp/h. 0.2 bd/h. 124-120 W/L. 39% fired hit (159 kills). 47.6% thrown hit (57 kills).

(IO) SA: 19.2 c/h. 1.1 b/h. 0.4 bp/h. 0.9 bd/h. 174-50 W/L. 17.4% fired hit (95 kills). 55.5% thrown hit (228 kills).

ronpaul: 14.0 c/h. 0.9 b/h. 0.2 bp/h. 0.1 bd/h. 139-77 W/L. 20.2% fired hit (105 kills). 52.2% thrown hit (250 kills).

Old Monkei: 5.1 c/h. 0.3 b/h. 69-37 W/L. 74.2% fired hit (111 kills).

Shrike Drop: 7.9 c/h. 5.3 b/h. 0.9 bp/h. 1.1 bd/h. 108-10 W/L. 71.6% fired hit (242 kills). 71.9% thrown hit (61 kills).

Duality: 7.6 c/h. 0.1 b/h. 3.4 bp/h. 45-19 W/L. 20.7% fired hit (52 kills). 135.3% thrown hit (294 kills).


Looking at some of those numbers, it would be hard not to argue that, along with Bill and Crusader, the top 5 needs to be rounded out with Shrike Drop (great winning percentage, lots of blocks, amazingly-high nade hit %), Duality (caps a lot and excellent rifle nade primer), and (IO) SA (flag cap king, great win and nade hit percentages)??? If you've played Duality or (IO) SA, you know they are great, and I can assure you that when Shrike Drop is on and at the top of his game, he's a great rifleman. In fact, if he were around more often, he'd be giving Bill and Crusader a run for their money in this debate for the simple fact that he is good with the M1, and amazing with his nades, only people don't see it.

Situations vary. Everyone on that list is going to have strengths and weaknesses on certain maps, against certain players, with certain team dynamics ect. I agree the way to judge this would not be off K ratios or most things on a stats page. If you could factor in the other teams fear of these players than maybe

I guess what I am trying to say is while I would never want myself as a teammate with that weapon (honestly props to anyone that can use a rifle), I can see situations where I would prefer Crusader over Bill, and Bill over Crusader in others. It "just depends" on too many variables. It's like saying, who is the best Rugby player of all time? Impossible to truly answer.

Very true. But at the same time, if you had to just pick one, or even list the top five you'd start a team with, there'd have to be a thought process, reasoning, and ultimately, a selection, behind that. This is like narrowing it down to the best goalkeeper in soccer (because would you really, honestly, choose an Allied Rifleman with your "top pick" if you were picking a DoD team??).

 

[Sumac]

Very true. But at the same time, if you had to just pick one, or even list the top five you'd start a team with, there'd have to be a thought process, reasoning, and ultimately, a selection, behind that. This is like narrowing it down to the best goalkeeper in soccer (because would you really, honestly, choose an Allied Rifleman with your "top pick" if you were picking a DoD team??).

I disagree. You don't pick the 5 top players in a class and make the best DoD team. There is so much wrong with that logic, it's about who plays well with who, who is good at the map you would be playing, who is clutch under pressure. I just think the question is far to complicated to ever come up with "The A team". At the end of the day it's all speculation, and that is the main problem. You MUST make numerous assumptions.

I agree with your SIMPLISTIC premise of "Top Pick" and starting somewhere, but many people would pick a different team. If I play with Crusader, Blue, Ravage or Brain far more than I play with Bill, and I know I can count on them to watch my back, why would I not pick them? If Bill is better at making X shot on Y map with Z players and windage A, what does that matter to me if I am more familiar with someone like Crusader's play style and work well with him? I am not advocating for anyone, simply saying the question is a bit more complicated than, "Who shoots better?"

 

[Skippy]

To me, it looks like YSD's intent for his poll for "eGO's Finest Allied Rifleman" was based primarily on skill with wielding the M1 (and not other intangibles like team leadership, map/situational awareness, etc.), since the factors he considered were --

1) K,
2) Dom:Rev, and
3) accuracy

The problem is, he generically asked "Who is better?", but didn't list the specific factors that we should consider when voting. This left the poll wide open for various qualitative interpretations, which resulted in the predictable extrapolated debate on rushing/camping etc.

Just my 2 cents YSD, but unless the selection/voting criteria are more expansively defined in the future, I anticipate similar problems with the subsequent polls for other weapon/class categories.

Personally, I'd be much more interested in a poll that evaluated players who give their team the best chance to win a map objective. Sure, it sucks getting repeatedly dominated by the best rifleman in the world during a session, but (to me at least) it sucks more when my team loses a round. I know there are players who play primarily for the frags, but at the end of the day, that's the main goal of the game right? A team win via captured flags or blown up objectives.

I know a few ringers who go around with their rifles/snipers and dominate half of the opposing team all by themselves, but their teams don't necessarily end up winning. On the flipside, I also know several players who aren't the most deadly nor do they rack up crazy (or even positive) K ratios, but they give their teams a much, much, higher chance of winning, typically due to their knowledge of the map, communication with their team, and understanding of map/respawn time dynamics etc. during the course of a battle. Put me on their team any day.

 

[YoSpankDawg]

I disagree. You don't pick the 5 top players in a class and make the best DoD team. There is so much wrong with that logic, it's about who plays well with who, who is good at the map you would be playing, who is clutch under pressure. I just think the question is far to complicated to ever come up with "The A team". At the end of the day it's all speculation, and that is the main problem. You MUST make numerous assumptions.

I agree with your SIMPLISTIC premise of "Top Pick" and starting somewhere, but many people would pick a different team. If I play with Crusader, Blue, Ravage or Brain far more than I play with Bill, and I know I can count on them to watch my back, why would I not pick them? If Bill is better at making X shot on Y map with Z players and windage A, what does that matter to me if I am more familiar with someone like Crusader's play style and work well with him? I am not advocating for anyone, simply saying the question is a bit more complicated than, "Who shoots better?"

I agree. However...this isn't about any of that. It is, quite simply, "who is the best rifleman" (actually, who are the best five I guess is what I ended up with). I know that there are sooooo many ways to measure that, but when all is said and done, somebody (by whatever complicated formula we might concoct) is, in fact, better. There's no such thing as a tie. True, it might be an unmeasurable difference, but still...

To me, it looks like YSD's intent for his poll for "eGO's Finest Allied Rifleman" was based primarily on skill with wielding the M1 (and not other intangibles like team leadership, map/situational awareness, etc.), since the factors he considered were --

1) K,
2) Dom:Rev, and
3) accuracy

The problem is, he generically asked "Who is better?", but didn't list the specific factors that we should consider when voting. This left the poll wide open for various qualitative interpretations, which resulted in the predictable extrapolated debate on rushing/camping etc.

Just my 2 cents YSD, but unless the selection/voting criteria are more expansively defined in the future, I anticipate similar problems with the subsequent polls for other weapon/class categories.

Personally, I'd be much more interested in a poll that evaluated players who give their team the best chance to win a map objective. Sure, it sucks getting repeatedly dominated by the best rifleman in the world during a session, but (to me at least) it sucks more when my team loses a round. I know there are players who play primarily for the frags, but at the end of the day, that's the main goal of the game right? A team win via captured flags or blown up objectives.

I know a few ringers who go around with their rifles/snipers and dominate half of the opposing team all by themselves, but their teams don't necessarily end up winning. On the flipside, I also know several players who aren't the most deadly nor do they rack up crazy (or even positive) K ratios, but they give their teams a much, much, higher chance of winning, typically due to their knowledge of the map, communication with their team, and understanding of map/respawn time dynamics etc. during the course of a battle. Put me on their team any day.

Not at all, Skippy. It was simply "who is the best Allied Rifleman" and I left it at that. Those numbers were just there because not everybody plays with everybody else, so it was just a kinda comparison amongst them via things people generally look at most. I have never played WITH any of these people, so I have no idea what their leadership, awareness, etc. is, not to mention the fact that the role of the rifleman is generally blurred, since they are pretty generic.

In later threads, I will be focusing on some different things with different classes--especially the more defined ones.

I agree very much with all of the "team makeup" responses--look at everything I have ever said...I like to work together, I like certain players above others for their gameplay style or teamwork, etc. On the flip side, I just threw up those numbers because some people have a "if you kill the enemy more than they kill you, you will inevitably win" mentality.

 

[Skippy]

Not at all, Skippy. It was simply "who is the best Allied Rifleman" and I left it at that. Those numbers were just there because not everybody plays with everybody else, so it was just a kinda comparison amongst them via things people generally look at most.

Understood now, but I still agree with Sumac that it's impossible to get a valid and useful consensus on something overly general like "who is the best Allied Rifleman", because it's just simply to broad of a statement. Yes, you'll get people voting and you'll end up with a player with the most votes, but what did those votes really mean, since in all likelihood each voter had a different interpretation of 'best'.

 

[Blue Stealth]

To me, it looks like YSD's intent for his poll for "eGO's Finest Allied Rifleman" was based primarily on skill with wielding the M1 (and not other intangibles like team leadership, map/situational awareness, etc.), since the factors he considered were --

1) K,
2) Dom:Rev, and
3) accuracy

The problem is, he generically asked "Who is better?", but didn't list the specific factors that we should consider when voting. This left the poll wide open for various qualitative interpretations, which resulted in the predictable extrapolated debate on rushing/camping etc.

Just my 2 cents YSD, but unless the selection/voting criteria are more expansively defined in the future, I anticipate similar problems with the subsequent polls for other weapon/class categories.

Personally, I'd be much more interested in a poll that evaluated players who give their team the best chance to win a map objective. Sure, it sucks getting repeatedly dominated by the best rifleman in the world during a session, but (to me at least) it sucks more when my team loses a round. I know there are players who play primarily for the frags, but at the end of the day, that's the main goal of the game right? A team win via captured flags or blown up objectives.

I know a few ringers who go around with their rifles/snipers and dominate half of the opposing team all by themselves, but their teams don't necessarily end up winning. On the flipside, I also know several players who aren't the most deadly nor do they rack up crazy (or even positive) K ratios, but they give their teams a much, much, higher chance of winning, typically due to their knowledge of the map, communication with their team, and understanding of map/respawn time dynamics etc. during the course of a battle. Put me on their team any day.

just make 2 categories

1 category based on pure facts, numbers, etc.
and another category based on how important they are to their team

-Blue

 

[Sabion]

Well, we can all argue about who's better and have that argument go on for ages, but that's not what the important question is. The important question is...Why am I on this list and who are the 4 people who voted for me? <3 for people who did, hahaha

 

[Skippy]

Well, we can all argue about who's better and have that argument go on for ages, but that's not what the important question is. The important question is...Why am I on this list and who are the 4 people who voted for me? <3 for people who did, hahaha

lol...I didn't vote for you (I'm sorry, my cafe buddy), but you'd definitely be near the top of my list if we were talking about defense coordination/awareness and last-man/flag stands.

 

[YoSpankDawg]

Understood now, but I still agree with Sumac that it's impossible to get a valid and useful consensus on something overly general like "who is the best Allied Rifleman", because it's just simply to broad of a statement. Yes, you'll get people voting and you'll end up with a player with the most votes, but what did those votes really mean, since in all likelihood each voter had a different interpretation of 'best'.

Lol, that's always going to be the case--same as in...say....fantasy football. haha

just make 2 categories

1 category based on pure facts, numbers, etc.
and another category based on how important they are to their team

-Blue

Uhhh...I don't think that the "pure numbers" people should be different than the "most important for team" people--it's just a matter of finding the right numbers. Some of the things we all need to factor in we don't have the numbers for. There is no stat for "going on a suicide mission to distract an MG or sniper so that a teammate can pop out and shoot them, thus clearing the way for the rest of the team", but I can guarantee you it helps and that I'd always been at or near the top of that list. There is no "suicide via picking up the nade sitting at everybody's feet, thus saving four lives" stat either. etc.etc.

Again, the numbers were just to supplement things and also, really, a way for me to put together a good pool of guys to choose from for us to debate about. Most of us only play one map, myself included, so if I were to just go solely off of "the players I have seen" then there would be a lot of justifiably ticked off people missing. lol Bill is the one I have played against the most, I know he rocks, therefore he got my vote. Just that simple. I expect the same bias from nearly everybody else.

Again, the one true way to solve this is to schedule some sort of measurable competition OR for us all to play with and against all of these players on all maps with all situations present and accounted for.

...

Well, we can all argue about who's better and have that argument go on for ages, but that's not what the important question is. The important question is...Why am I on this list and who are the 4 people who voted for me? <3 for people who did, hahaha

Haha, again, you ended up on there because I got demoralized trying to find people who even use the M1 and kinda got lazy with it. I did a much better job with the Allied Assault (just posted here), pouring over the hlxstats pages, thinking about who I have seen rock with the Thompson, and seriously analyzing over 50 guys before coming up with my Top 5. However, as always, people are going to be forgotten or missed. It happens. Oh well. That's why it's open for debate and not just a "These are the Top 5. I have spoken. Done."

Also...by the way...I have no idea what four crazy fools have voted for you, but it kinda makes me think I didn't make such crappy picks as I think I did lol (cause somewhere out there, some people think you're the best!).

 

[Genji]

uhm, I'm sure someone is bound to have mentioned this before, but I'm a bit lazy to read all 5 pages of this silly thread:

Stats, especially GameME(formerly HLStatsx) stats, should be not be the deciding factor as to whether or not one player is better than another.

I'm not sure if the thread maker also accounted for kills per minute as well, which if you check the top 10 points-attainers, at least when I checked about a month ago, then you'll see all but one(eGO's IO) with less than 1 kill per minute. I'll say it again with some emphasis, less than 1 kill per minute.

On a side note, I voted for Bill because I know he played in CAL and from what my friends say, he was pretty decent, so until I get rocked by Crusader, Bill Clinton has my vote. BTW: just noticed the xhair Bill uses =)





*Blue Stealth is my hero*

 

[(IO) SA]

Stats, personal feelings, map awareness, experience, play strategy. All these are factors and all of them matter.

In the end, this post is all about a poll "Who is eGO's finest Allied Rifleman?". It is a poll for a reason, YSD wanted to know what/how others thought about the people typically at the top of each weapon class. The debates over stats and strategies are great (and predictable) but it really is just a poll and obviously subject to personal opinion. IMO, it's just nice and fun that YSD is creating these polls (ffs people, nothing else is happening in these forums ).

I guess my main point is simple: vote for who you think is "best" with whatever rationale you think is correct and feel free to comment about how or why. YSD is putting quite an exorbitant amount of effort putting these stats together (regardless of how much he downplays it and says that he enjoys it) so enjoy the polls for what they are worth!

A couple other comments: in the debate about the alternates that YSD stated "should also be included": Shrike's stats are quite great I agree, but I've never played with him so I can't really speak to how he plays the game. Heck, I've never even heard of him or seen him on the forums? Impressive resume' though, no doubt.
And just 1 constructive criticism: maybe you shouldn't include a video of a player in like the "original" poll post. That can be quite swaying, and while is no doubt evidence that a person deserves a vote, is a bit unfair if a person or two has a video and others do not. Absolutely put them in the following comments that add to the debate, just don't know if it belongs in that original presentation of the choices. <3

 

[Bad Brain]

uhm, I'm sure someone is bound to have mentioned this before, but I'm a bit lazy to read all 5 pages of this silly thread:

Stats, especially GameME(formerly HLStatsx) stats, should be not be the deciding factor as to whether or not one player is better than another.

I'm not sure if the thread maker also accounted for kills per minute as well, which if you check the top 10 points-attainers, at least when I checked about a month ago, then you'll see all but one(eGO's IO) with less than 1 kill per minute. I'll say it again with some emphasis, less than 1 kill per minute.

On a side note, I voted for Bill because I know he played in CAL and from what my friends say, he was pretty decent, so until I get rocked by Crusader, Bill Clinton has my vote. BTW: just noticed the xhair Bill uses =)





*Blue Stealth is my hero*

you really should of read the thread, the players mentioned arnt the top stat earners, and several times in the thread we've stated why we shouldnt base how good people are on stats.

these players go on reputation, not 14000 points

 

[(IO) SA]

uhm, I'm sure someone is bound to have mentioned this before, but I'm a bit lazy to read all 5 pages of this silly thread:

Stats, especially GameME(formerly HLStatsx) stats, should be not be the deciding factor as to whether or not one player is better than another.

I'm not sure if the thread maker also accounted for kills per minute as well, which if you check the top 10 points-attainers, at least when I checked about a month ago, then you'll see all but one(eGO's IO) with less than 1 kill per minute. I'll say it again with some emphasis, less than 1 kill per minute.

On a side note, I voted for Bill because I know he played in CAL and from what my friends say, he was pretty decent, so until I get rocked by Crusader, Bill Clinton has my vote. BTW: just noticed the xhair Bill uses =)



*Blue Stealth is my hero*

I don't think at any point anyone indicated in this thread that someone was better because they were ranked higher in HLStats? Actually, many of the stats/arguments are presented because YSD didn't think HLStats did an adequate job of ranking eGO's best at each specific class.



Side note: I do take pride in that fact that you pointed out . And who doesn't think that Blue is a hero?

 

[Skipper Finny]

Just by seeing that video, I'd have to say Bill Clinton has my vote.

 

[Skippy]

I don't think at any point anyone indicated in this thread that someone was better because they were ranked higher in HLStats? Actually, many of the stats/arguments are presented because YSD didn't think HLStats did an adequate job of ranking eGO's best at each specific class.



Side note: I do take pride in that fact that you pointed out . And who doesn't think that Blue is a hero?

I don't. When he's on the other team.

 

[Blue Stealth]

I don't. When he's on the other team.

antihero? luls

 

[YoSpankDawg]

uhm, I'm sure someone is bound to have mentioned this before, but I'm a bit lazy to read all 5 pages of this silly thread:

Stats, especially GameME(formerly HLStatsx) stats, should be not be the deciding factor as to whether or not one player is better than another.

I'm not sure if the thread maker also accounted for kills per minute as well, which if you check the top 10 points-attainers, at least when I checked about a month ago, then you'll see all but one(eGO's IO) with less than 1 kill per minute. I'll say it again with some emphasis, less than 1 kill per minute.

On a side note, I voted for Bill because I know he played in CAL and from what my friends say, he was pretty decent, so until I get rocked by Crusader, Bill Clinton has my vote. BTW: just noticed the xhair Bill uses =)

*Blue Stealth is my hero*

Lol, commenting and arguing with me when you're too lazy to even read the thread to see what stance I might have to begin with? Only somebody whose hero is Blue Stealth would dare such a thing.

Listen, I don't know how many times I have to write down that I just put the stats up there so people can see them for those people who they have never seen play. This will be the last. I do find it funny, however, that you say we shouldn't go off of stats...and then tell us about the stats we need to take into effect. lol

Stats, personal feelings, map awareness, experience, play strategy. All these are factors and all of them matter.

In the end, this post is all about a poll "Who is eGO's finest Allied Rifleman?". It is a poll for a reason, YSD wanted to know what/how others thought about the people typically at the top of each weapon class. The debates over stats and strategies are great (and predictable) but it really is just a poll and obviously subject to personal opinion. IMO, it's just nice and fun that YSD is creating these polls (ffs people, nothing else is happening in these forums ).

I guess my main point is simple: vote for who you think is "best" with whatever rationale you think is correct and feel free to comment about how or why. YSD is putting quite an exorbitant amount of effort putting these stats together (regardless of how much he downplays it and says that he enjoys it) so enjoy the polls for what they are worth!

A couple other comments: in the debate about the alternates that YSD stated "should also be included": Shrike's stats are quite great I agree, but I've never played with him so I can't really speak to how he plays the game. Heck, I've never even heard of him or seen him on the forums? Impressive resume' though, no doubt.
And just 1 constructive criticism: maybe you shouldn't include a video of a player in like the "original" poll post. That can be quite swaying, and while is no doubt evidence that a person deserves a vote, is a bit unfair if a person or two has a video and others do not. Absolutely put them in the following comments that add to the debate, just don't know if it belongs in that original presentation of the choices. <3

I have played against and with Shrike and, again, he is really good. I just didn't have the heart to throw him up here since he's been MIA for so long (and I haven't faced him on my new computer yet, which has changed some of my feelings about people's abilities).

The video is in there because Kirk had it available for me to see and I thought it was pertinent. I tried looking for videos of other players (in both threads) to include as well, because it really does help when you can see them play, but I couldn't find any.

With that being said, if anybody has videos of these players, or other players you are arguing are better, PLEASE let us see them because they help your argument better than anything you will say. Plus, we just like to see them. lol I just ask that they are related to the class in question (so save those Bad Brain STG videos for later, lol).

you really should of read the thread, the players mentioned arnt the top stat earners, and several times in the thread we've stated why we shouldnt base how good people are on stats.

these players go on reputation, not 14000 points

True story...and some of the greatest you couldn't find on the stats no matter how hard you try, because they are just plain inactive right now, haha.

I don't think at any point anyone indicated in this thread that someone was better because they were ranked higher in HLStats? Actually, many of the stats/arguments are presented because YSD didn't think HLStats did an adequate job of ranking eGO's best at each specific class.

Side note: I do take pride in that fact that you pointed out . And who doesn't think that Blue is a hero?

No they do not. Neither do K, cph, W/L, or anything else I might have thrown out there. Seeing people become legend status, however, does.

Meaning: say some player pops up and some guy mentions that he had a 2.0 K and a 20 cph average. Really, for most of us...who cares? We keep playing. However, when I am playing (and I'm a pretty fearless player) and the very first time I saw ronpaul get online, and I see all of these great players falling back and setting up a defensive perimeter, you'd best believe I paid attention and knew something was going down. Yes, it's true that there are a lot of people who are great with a K98, but then there is that fine line where I see time and time again in which Ides and myself run from bridge to first (stopping by second on the way--and this is obviously Kalt I mean) without stopping and half of the people stop to oppose us, while--by now--half just run and hide. You'd best believe it happens.

 

[YoSpankDawg]

So I want some closure on this thing...what did we decide?

1) Bill Clinton
2) Crusader
3) Shrike Drop
4) Duality
5) ???

1-2 are pretty much set in stone, maybe flip-floppable in some eyes. 3 is pretty solid--if you've played him. It's 4-5 I am not so sure about (but Duality is good)...