I'm pretty sure the big difference between our scores is the spider walker. I think what you need to do is hit the mouth while it's open, but since that releases a bunch of smaller enemies, most of your shots will get blocked. It's just the weak point of the heads is super difficult to hit, and at the point of that recording I actually hadn't figured it out yet. I don't think the ripple laser is weaker, it's incredibly powerful when the shots all hit their target. just your weapon selection alone would give you more points there as you cannot destroy the boss as quickly due to your weapon being weaker. at the maui head boss your racked nearly 60k points where i got 35k. This is an example of inferior gameplay can score more points. I also tip my hat to you, as you're definitely a great Gradius II player, but I had to pound that fire button a million times to shoot (since the in-game rapid fire sucks ass) so it's one more thing I had on my plate when I played. I don't really care, but if you do play in future weeks, we do have a "no turbo" rule, so keep that in mind. You're using Turbo so your score is null and void (check the rules) The game already pushes the NES way harder than any other Gradius game on the platform (the Parodius port has less action going on, and slows down way more), so I could imagine they wouldn't dare trying to fit in any more bullets, or they'd go completely invisible.
You can take like 5 or so direct hits before losing it, which should probably leave you in perfect condition to immediately activate a new one if you do lose it. Most gimmicky or setpiece oriented challenges in Gradius games can be practiced quite easily though, and I think for almost all of them, the consistently hardest part are the seas of bullet spray when going through tight corridors, and it would be the same for this game if the shield wasn't so ridiculously overpowered. We both have shit to do in our real lives, why do you think I'm supposed to grind out wins every week to prove myself, but you don't? Being at the top of the leaderboard isn't good enough? Then why are we keeping score? But as it is, they are meaningless under the current setup. If the first post said, "to get in the playoffs you need to do X and/or Y," and then Y was like get at least two weekly wins, then that would make wins important. But for some reason this tourney doesn't. In pretty much any league of anything I've ever seen, they have clearly delineated at the start of the season what you need to do to get in the playoffs, or where the cutoff is. Why would anyone put in massive effort for that week after week? I put up my Gradius II score on Monday and I still got fourth. The way this season is set up you only get one more point for first than second. I get what you're saying, but the problem with your whole "you don't grind out wins" and thinking wins are worth more than points is that they are not. since then you said "its not worth the effort during the reg season to try and out grind you". ive only recently, within the last two seasons gotten good enough and seasoned enough, as far as not playing every single game for the first time (besides the 10-15 i had as a kid) to be able to casually play and finish near the top in any single week. and if you tried you would be burnt halfway through and give up because its too hard. i would be relentless if i had time for it. you do have the time and still dont have the marbles to grind. its an advantage for underdogs.Īnd that $100 offer is silly. someone who gets lucky with a game in there wheelhouse can absolutely upset a better player. it doesnt promote the best players winning. I dont know if you read what i said to richardhead but it is basicly the same as what you said. so imo, in that senerio, bert is the one getting into the tourney weaker. i actually won a reg season contest bert didnt. regardless if i only total, what i believe should be a min of 50 reg season points with a win. hell ya i should have a shot at upsetting him in the tourney. which admittedly i have no issaue with because i do think thats a strong enough showing.īut at the same time if, for example, i win two weeks in the reg season and bert doesnt. if your around the top 15 at the end and have semi regularly played and have podiumed a couple times you get in. What i was saying was thats how it seems the cut off for the tournament is decided. ive been in plenty of tournaments to know i would have to get a perfect trio of games tailored to fit my strengths in order to even have a chance at winning the crown.
0 kommentar(er)
