My thought about the slide"bug"fixes.

[Freshmaker]

Thanks Mark. Much of what I've been wanting to say.

[Steve Camber]

Topic temporarily locked.

[Steve Camber]

Unlocked.

This could have overshadowed the post WC euphoria, hence the lock. Feel free to continue the discussion.

[Kostas O]

Thank you Steve.
I need to say one thing abour PBD.
I understand that if you don't use it it will feel like those who do have the advantage but this is not the case.
It certainly makes some things happen easier or possible but it also makes some others things impossible.
Nobody gets an advantage, they just play the way they are used to for 20 years.
I have said many times in the past that i would love to have the ability, and have urged Steve to bring it back (#0 man), to change from PBD to NOPBD and vice versa during a match. I am not that good but i can imagine that someone who is would use it for a different kind of attack each time.

I am sorry but you can never be free to choose with these "bug fixes". If one chooses "the autoslidebug" fixed one forces one's opponent to do so too (don't make me explain it) and if one chooses "the unintendedslidebug" fixed then one changes one's opponent gameplay.

[Steve Camber]

PBD is selectable during the game. Just hit 9.

I'm a natural NOPBD player, but I use PBD as I find it makes it easier to score goals.

I much prefer the game without the slidebugs in, and this will always be my choice.

[gdh82]

My thoughts on this thread were the same as Alkis. This subject has been discussed alot in the past. I was also surprised at the timing. I'm all for everyone having their say on an issue but two years late and coincidentally when a WC vote is taking place on the subject?

Please, don't accuse me of lobbying. I'm not lobbying.

The funny thing is, whether or not it's vote influencing/lobbying, like Rodolfo says, there's nothing wrong with it anyway.

As I've said, I want either the one extreme or the other; either we nuke 'em all, or we keep 'em all

I do get the 'all or nothing' mentality but wouldn't this be the most divisive option of all? Presumably the 'nothing' approach would involve removing all KO2CV's bug fixes that many of us have come to enjoy, whereas fixing all bugs would horrify the conservatives. Would there be anyone left to offend???

[Kostas O]

PBD is selectable during the game. Just hit 9.

Didn't notice that. Thanks mate!

I really hope to get a comment on whether the "freedom of choice" is a viable argument.

[gdh82]

I really hope to get a comment on whether the "freedom of choice" is a viable argument.

I am sorry but you can never be free to choose with these "bug fixes". If one chooses "the autoslidebug" fixed one forces one's opponent to do so too (don't make me explain it) and if one chooses "the unintendedslidebug" fixed then one changes one's opponent gameplay.

I agree it makes no sense to play mix-slide settings - has anyone ever advocated this anyway? I'm sure I've said this elsewhere but the APT menu is not designed to encourage this. APT choice allow two players to both play slide or slide free settings, and to easily make such a choice in a matter of seconds before each game. That is the choice, and in that sense, it is slide neutral.

Obviously where two players don't agree, you simply revert to the agreed tournament settings.

[Freshmaker]

My thoughts on this thread were the same as Alkis. This subject has been discussed alot in the past. I was also surprised at the timing. I'm all for everyone having their say on an issue but two years late and coincidentally when a WC vote is taking place on the subject?

Well. Timing's a bitch. From reasons of my own I wasn't able to follow the debate the last time it was running the forums, this time it simply came to me due to the vote taking place. I didn't wanna go into the vote-thread as I wasn't going to the WC.

Please, don't accuse me of lobbying. I'm not lobbying.

The funny thing is, whether or not it's vote influencing/lobbying, like Rodolfo says, there's nothing wrong with it anyway.

In my book lobbying is going behind peoples back to influence voters. If I'd done that here that would mean I'd be using the PM-system to send people pm's trying to convince them to vote with me. I didn't. I took it all in the open. No lobbying, no dirty tricks, just my say on the issue.

As I've said, I want either the one extreme or the other; either we nuke 'em all, or we keep 'em all

I do get the 'all or nothing' mentality but wouldn't this be the most divisive option of all? Presumably the 'nothing' approach would involve removing all KO2CV's bug fixes that many of us have come to enjoy, whereas fixing all bugs would horrify the conservatives. Would there be anyone left to offend???

Why would it horrify the "conservatives" more than what it already has? I guess I'm what you'd call a "conservative", but my point is simply that that would be a much more fair approach. The way it's done now is that you get to remove the bugs you don't like or can't control. As Gianni says, he can control the slidetrapbugfixwhatetever. You can't, so you wanna remove it. When did that get fair? I can't stop Gianni scoring goals on me, so I'd like to have his goalscoring ability removed. Many players around have played the game more than me and trained various situasions more than me, I don't like that, so I remove everything besides the KO-lob, cause I'm good at performing that.

It's just silly and unfair, and I stay by my conclusion; either keep 'em or kill 'em.

I've raised a proposal to have the "goalie running behind the line" bug removed, but it doesn't seem like people wanna remove it. Why not? Because you can master it? Well... I can' master to defend it, so to me it sucks. And besides, having your goalie running behind the line, TRHOUGH the net seems a lot more stupid than having your defenders slide due to a shoulder-tackle from an attacker.

[gdh82]

In my book lobbying is going behind peoples back to influence voters. If I'd done that here that would mean I'd be using the PM-system to send people pm's trying to convince them to vote with me. I didn't. I took it all in the open. No lobbying, no dirty tricks, just my say on the issue.

I understand now Jorn and get why you would object. We are using the word 'lobby' quite differently. I didn't think for a second that you were up to any 'slidegate' activites. I used the word in a neutral sense of potentially influencing, like promoting one side of an argument only at the time of a vote. No offence was intended.

Why would it horrify the "conservatives" more than what it already has?

I could be wrong but I simply meant that if someone objects to any single change, then they're gonna hate multiple changes. I can see how the all or nothing approach could be seen as fairer and more objective though, even if it would would upset more people overall, I think.

As Gianni says, he can control the slidetrapbugfixwhatetever. You can't, so you wanna remove it.

For me, it's not quite that simple. I might not be as good as Gianni and others but I can play with the unintended slide (or limited trapping functionality). The advantage of the trapfix imo is that it extends the possibilities of gameplay - you can trap the ball regardless of if your opponent is nearby or regardless of if he touched the ball last. This is why it's my preference to play this way. I still respect the preference of others of course.

I've raised a proposal to have the "goalie running behind the line" bug removed, but it doesn't seem like people wanna remove it. Why not?

I know where you're coming from on this goalie bug but a while ago I come to learn and accept that goals are a special case. I believe the KOA view is that once you 'fix' one type of goal, it's hard to justify not fixing others. You could even call this your 'keep 'em all' approach!

[Freshmaker]

As Gianni says, he can control the slidetrapbugfixwhatetever. You can't, so you wanna remove it.

For me, it's not quite that simple. I might not be as good as Gianni and others but I can play with the unintended slide (or limited trapping functionality). The advantage of the trapfix imo is that it extends the possibilities of gameplay - you can trap the ball regardless of if your opponent is nearby or regardless of if he touched the ball last. This is why it's my preference to play this way. I still respect the preference of others of course.

On the contrary, it is that simple. It is the exact reasons you use for using the "trapfix" that I understand as the reasons for why one should not use it. If the opponent is nearby he should be able to put pressure on you, making it harder for you to trap. Look at it as a ko2-version of a shouldertackle putting you out of balance. The only aspect I see as a proper "bug" here is that a slide occurs due to the other team being the one "in control of the ball" (a player of the other team was the last to touch the ball).

I've raised a proposal to have the "goalie running behind the line" bug removed, but it doesn't seem like people wanna remove it. Why not?

I know where you're coming from on this goalie bug but a while ago I come to learn and accept that goals are a special case. I believe the KOA view is that once you 'fix' one type of goal, it's hard to justify not fixing others. You could even call this your 'keep 'em all' approach!

Yes, my keep 'em all approach. If we remove the "shoulder-tackle-slide" wich I understand is not fully proven as a bug, then why the heck should we keep in this one? It's way more ridicoulus.

[Steve Camber]

If the opponent is nearby he should be able to put pressure on you

I believe this is the case whether the slide bug is there or not.

Look at it as a ko2-version of a shouldertackle putting you out of balance.

Barber is already very capable of falling flat on his face upon meeting Cox, so that is already well catered for.

If we remove the "shoulder-tackle-slide" wich I understand is not fully proven as a bug, then why the heck should we keep in this one? It's way more ridicoulus.

Removing the goalie-behind-the-goal-bug (as ridiculous as it is) would directly affect goals, whereas the trap slide bug does not. I expect you already knew that though!

[Freshmaker]

Look at it as a ko2-version of a shouldertackle putting you out of balance.

Barber is already very capable of falling flat on his face upon meeting Cox, so that is already well catered for.

Barber is very capable of doing most stuff, except keeping his balance while changing direction.
Anyhow, a shouldertackle should also be possible to do vs the defender...

If we remove the "shoulder-tackle-slide" wich I understand is not fully proven as a bug, then why the heck should we keep in this one? It's way more ridicoulus.

Removing the goalie-behind-the-goal-bug (as ridiculous as it is) would directly affect goals, whereas the trap slide bug does not. I expect you already knew that though!

I see where you're coming from here, but in my view this is just a matter of how you look at it. If you're able to make my defender fall over (slide), you'll gain a scoring chance. And if my defender is not able to put pressure on you, stopping you from trapping, you can easily trap, move - and score. Much the same.

My point is that if we should remove bugs, then let's at least remove the ones that are the most lame...


Edit: fixed quotes.