<3

toxic > cooller!!

maybe in struggle, but not in q3 :)

Actually both in 1v1 and tdm this year :).

yes its pretty much well accepted that toxic is a much better dueler than cooller..

Not overall, but I do believe that in official games, toxic has beat cooller more than he got beaten.

probably, but still it isnt totally correct to say 'toxic > cooller'
i mean toxic is omfg unbelievable, but no one can dethrone cooller 1v1 as of forever

im not saying overall =), just that when they played vs each other so far tox > cooller

1300 kb, lovely

worth every byte

mhmm

Hahaha nice smiley.

wtf is up with that gif? :)

maybe you forgot who won eswc

He beat him.

dont even get in on this cooller won the event and thats what its about.

I was never talking about the entire event, I was talking about cooller vs toxic only.

now he just has to study everyone else

Is coincidence the right word to use here?

Does not compute:)

fluke or accident maybe?

i'm sure everybody understands what he means though.

HAPPENSTANCE!

he seems preety calm for a rail+shaft whore :)

why shouldn't he be?

Aim = reflexes = hysteria? :D

with great reflexes, you know you don't have to be on guard all the time since you know you can handle whatever that happens :p

OR, you can ALSO be on guard and crush the guy who thought he could relax :>

aim is not about reflexes

I disagree wholeheartedly but care not to elaborate :) Feel free to come up with theories of what aim really is but I'm quite sure I got it pretty much down. Sure it's not all reflexes but a huge part.

'word', hahah. well then you like most of everyone are taking things at face value too much.

aim is a far more complex issue than i will care to get into as i'm tired of giving people advice and then having it thrown back in my face sometimes, besides that it has layers and layers of depth and understanding to get into. Aim equating to reflexes is a shallow and sometimes arrogant view that will get you nowhere in actually being good at fps/aim.

but i will tell you this. All humans have basically the same speed in their reflexes, in fact there were studies shown and i forgot where and when but basically everyone recorded an average response time of .011 of a second or something. Doesn't really matter, you can quote and cite other 'scientific' studies all you want but it only distracts from the point in situations such as these because they gloss over real-world circumstances. To me this idea that everyone generally reacts at the same speed was already apparent in the first place.

If someone's reflex reaction is 'slower' it would have to be in the smallest unnoticeable fraction of a second that it wouldn't really make any real-world difference. Take this other fact in: this is talking strictly human capabilities of response time only, because ones reaction to any specific event is influenced by dozens of other things like FOCUS, AWARENESS, etc. I'm not talking about someone not reacting to an incident on the freeway in time because his mind was elsewhere, I'm talking about a persons sole recorded speed to react to something upon being aware of it, which are his reflex/response times.

So since everyone's response time is relatively the same, then wouldn't everyone be railing the same? Again, what difference is .009 from .013 gonna make in quake, or anything really? There is no possible real world difference that can be made by that. If someone was mentally challenged and their response time was .100, then that would be a different story. But someone is not going to lose an lg fight because their response time is .004 of a second slower for christs sakes-- a span of time that doesn't even allow one lightning cell to be expended. There are far more important elements to playing that come before that. Now take what you want from that.


Second, I lg 29% out of hundreds of shots per 1v1 game at 66 ping on shitty US osp servers against players of all sorts of movement, so i think my philosophy behind it is working.

I don't know what "taking things at face value too much" means but if it means what I think it means then it's you who did when trying to analyze an unserious comment containing 3 words and a smiley. I did use the "=" sign but why aren't you also asking how I can think that being good at aiming has anything with being hysterical to do? ;)

Take this other fact in: this is talking strictly human capabilities of response time only, because ones reaction to any specific event is influenced by dozens of other things like FOCUS, AWARENESS, etc. I'm not talking about someone not reacting to an incident on the freeway in time because his mind was elsewhere, I'm talking about a persons sole recorded speed to react to something upon being aware of it, which are his reflex/response times.

Yes, that's exactly what was the point in it all, toxic has very nice reactions while railing and shafting around and is most definately very focused and aware while playing, look at the picture and realise the jokes please...

Like I said I'm quite sure I got most of how aiming works down (agree on most of that unneccessarily long post of yours aswell) but I wasn't going into detail or even talk about it more than the joke which I didn't start in a thread under a fun image of toxic.

"Take this other fact in: this is talking strictly human capabilities of response time only, because ones reaction to any specific event is influenced by dozens of other things like FOCUS, AWARENESS, etc. I'm not talking about someone not reacting to an incident on the freeway in time because his mind was elsewhere, I'm talking about a persons sole recorded speed to react to something upon being aware of it, which are his reflex/response times.

Yes, that's exactly what was the point in it all, toxic has very nice reactions while railing and shafting around and is most definately very focused and aware while playing, look at the picture and realise the jokes please..."

you misinterpreted what i said. I don't care about the picture or even what you originally said about it. I'm talking about reflexes and its importance in who aims better, which is nearly non-existant.

Well we're just misinterpreting around then, glad you took the last one calmly though :) I don't want to argue or act like a moron even to people over the net.

i commented 'taking things at face value' because simply equating that aim=reflexes is just that, looking the issue at face value.

Aim is about eye-hand coordination. Being able to track your target well. Good reflexes makes you able to start doing that sooner than bad reflexes ;)

Word, now reply to the right person :D

Huh, wtf. That comment wasn't there when I wrote ;) I replied to Cloud. This is weird ;)

Yes you did. He wanted you to reply to him. It's not that complicated. :)

The reply was originally attatched to comment #12, which was wrong of course.

I'd say its about prediction more than hand-eye coordination nowadays. Its not that hard for pro's at least to hit spot you want to hit. The hard part is which spot do you aim for?

Just wait till they see my Q4 aim... haha.... haha..... ahUIAHIAHAHAHAAAHA!