{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by Wes:
6/8/2021 2:13:06 PM
10
...did this man just say Behemoth is useless in PvP?
I mean, maybe its mindless "build" is. But the class has a crap ton of neutral game to offer.
The class just requires something now that it didn't before: thought.
If constant ability regen, resistance, overshields, and cover on demand are "useless" to you, you need help.
Maybe that's why you're asking for SBMM in a casual playlist?
English
-
Imagine calling pvp casual.
-
Imagine thinking a 6v6 game mode that is nothing but sheer chaos is competitive...
-
Anything that pits player against player is competitive, the only mode that would be "chaotic" is mayhen.
-
Edited by Wes: 6/8/2021 2:14:12 PMYou must be new to video games. If there is zero benefit to winning, it can't be considered competetive.
-
So because I dont call something casual that is in no way at all casual I dont know video games. The only people who call pvp casual are the ones who want no competitive play and an easy time.
-
No. If you call a mode that provides zero benefit or incentive to win "competitive," you must be new to games. Does winning in 6v6 give you additional or better loot? Nope. Does winning give you better rank up rewards? Nope. Does winning give you better rewards when you rank up? Nope. Does winning give you vanity items? Nope. Does winning give you a rank that can [i]only[/i] be achieved by winning matches? Nope. Sure doesn't. Explain to me how a mode where [i]winning doesn't matter[/i] is competetive? Just because a player's ego wants them to win doesn't mean winning matters.
-
You do get higher points for winning towards your rank so you dropped that ball. Rewards dont make a mode competitive, the fact your pitted against another player is what makes it competitive.
-
You get more points [i]to get the same end result[/i]. Nothing changes. You can win every single game or lose every single game and end up in the same place. [i]Winning has zero effect on the end result in 6v6 modes[/i]. Period. That is not a debate. That is a fact. And no. The game mode was not designed to have people fight and fight to win. If it were, [i]winning would mean something.[/i] And it doesn't. Not a single thing. What is happening here is you are [i]choosing[/i] to be competitive. [i]You[/i] have a desire to win [i]even though the game mode inherently does not value the win[/i] at all. The game mode was not designed to be an environment where people sweat for the win. It was not designed to be competitive. You are viewing it as competitive [i]by your own choice[/i]. There is a difference. There is a difference between choosing to be competitive and a game mode being designed as competitive. 6v6 is not competetive at all. Competive modes value the end result. 6v6 does not value the end result at all. And I can guarantee you if you valued the end result as much as the 6v6 did you would be a lot happier.
-
Imagine being so scrubby you think 6 player teams is "chaos"...
-
Compare it to 3v3 and tell me it isn't chaos. Having up to 12 supers on the field at once is anything but controlled. If there's no benefit to winning, it isn't competetive. Period.
