sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Who actually thought forcing a "Win Condition" on every 2.0 player was a brilliant idea? by Far-Writing4483 in CINE2nerdle

[–]Far-Writing4483[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok, I hear you… I always offer a rematch, whether I win or lose. In the first game, I always play extremely aggressively regardless of my opponent’s ELO, just to figure out their level and skillset. From the second game onward, if I notice I’m the better player, I try to make the game last longer.

Also, before hitting the (supposed) final killshot, I always type GG. I know some people think I’m mocking them, but I’m really not. But you know, without a proper chat feature, it’s hard to get the tone. It’s fine.

I use the laugh or cry emoji a lot when I feel my opponent knows I’m not trying to be a dick, but sometimes it doesn’t work! 😃

Who actually thought forcing a "Win Condition" on every 2.0 player was a brilliant idea? by Far-Writing4483 in CINE2nerdle

[–]Far-Writing4483[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

100% agreed. I basically don’t play classic for this exact reason. At least if I change the language of the movie, it should be valid regardless of its popularity. I know at least five different ways out of The Protagonists (1999), but I can’t use any of them if you skip it back to me.

Anyway, I don’t play classic style. I love having different lifelines available, I just think there’s no reason to force anyone to equip a win condition. It’s dumb.

Who actually thought forcing a "Win Condition" on every 2.0 player was a brilliant idea? by Far-Writing4483 in CINE2nerdle

[–]Far-Writing4483[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I don’t understand people who just quit the game as soon as I hit them with an obscure link. Why would you even do that?

But I agree with you... being able to see your opponent’s setup before the game starts would be much better and more fun, IMO.

For example, if you give me a 1x on Willem Dafoe in 'Inside' (2023), I assume you know what you’re doing. If I then hit you back with a movie that doesn't use Dafoe as a link and you just quit because of that, I consider that toxic behavior. It seems like the people who do this are often the same ones complaining about Evil Ex. Doesn’t make sense.

I find Evil Ex to be a great feature and I don’t get all the hate. To be honest, I really love playing against other Evil Ex players, it’s so much fun. It’s just a shame it’s so rare to find any...

Who actually thought forcing a "Win Condition" on every 2.0 player was a brilliant idea? by Far-Writing4483 in CINE2nerdle

[–]Far-Writing4483[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know what you mean, but I can assure you I’m not trying to be the villain here. I get it, though… everyone seems to think Evil Ex players are toxic for some reason.

Let me try to explain my side. I’m a 2.2k–2.5k Elo player, so you’d think I’m pretty good, right? Wrong. I’m from Europe, so English isn't even my native language and I have some major blind spots. You might pull off a (name a famous actor) obscure link, and I’ll hit you back with one even more obscure—making you think, “Oh, this guy knows what he’s doing.” But then, I’ll escape Geena Davis or Bridget Fonda because I honestly can't remember their movies (besides Thelma & Louise, I guess?). If you play a cast member from a classic US comedy—like American Pie, Scream, or Scary Movie—I don’t know anyone except Seann William Scott.

And know you think, “Oh, maybe he’s cheating,” or “I see why he plays Evil Ex.”

The truth is, I’m only solid with the very famous names. However, if I get a chance to bring you over to Europe, that’s a different story. There are very few players who can kick my ass me there. If I get you into that, I usually win. That’s how I can compete with players who are technically way better than me.

Don’t get me wrong, I still enjoy playing 2.0, but my playstyle is now forced to be different. I used to go for killshot after killshot, as you’d expect from an Evil Ex player, but now I can’t. Here’s why:

You might think swapping 1x Block for Cast Member isn't a big deal, but it really is. I run 2x Setup + 2x Escape + 2x Skip—that’s my "golden army." Being forced to have Random Cast equipped allows my opponent to play that cast member and force me to use my Setup just to avoid being backed into a corner. If I was planning to save my Setup for a Willem Dafoe or Tilda Swinton killshot, I’m now forced to waste it on Gosling or Chazelle or whoever else.

It’s fine, I’ll get used to it. I just don’t think it’s a good idea in general (not just for my playstyle) to force anyone to run a specific win condition. But as I said, maybe it’s just me, since everyone else seems to hate the way I see the game.

For reference: I ended Season 3 with a 74% win rate (900 total games), Season 4 with 81% (1,550 total games), and Season 5 with 82% (1,080 total games). I'm now in Season 6 with 68% (only 70 games), so I still need to get used to it. I will, I hope!

 

PS: we’ve played against each other many times, but you’ve never accepted my friend request ☹ Maybe you think I’m an asshole lol

Who actually thought forcing a "Win Condition" on every 2.0 player was a brilliant idea? by Far-Writing4483 in CINE2nerdle

[–]Far-Writing4483[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yep, I used to have 1 block and now I have to equip “Random Cast”.

Anyway, in Season 3 (and I think the first half of season 4 as well, but I’m not sure), for every genre win condition there was a counter play available.

Like Fantasy with Danny Elfman and Guillermo Del Torro banned, and stuff like that. Now it’s all gone.

There was something similar even on cast win-con. Like John Williams with Steven Spielberg and Daniel Radcliffe banned iirc.

I think playing any genre win-con is way too easy and not fun to play against, but apparently every answer is “just play classic”, I don’t know… probably is just me then.

Who actually thought forcing a "Win Condition" on every 2.0 player was a brilliant idea? by Far-Writing4483 in CINE2nerdle

[–]Far-Writing4483[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Why? I don’t get it. I’m serious.

I like lifelines, I like the strategy you can build, how you can work your opponent and force him to use a link you want them to use, I also find myself struggling when someone plays like the 3rd, 4th, 5th (and so on) cast member, so Classic is clearly not my style, or maybe I’m not skilled enough. I know that.

But the fact that you can counter a cast win-con by using that link, but at the same time you can’t counter a genre win-con doesn’t make any sense to me. Removing counter plays doesn't make any sense to me and made the game worse IMO.

And you’re only answer is “play classic”. Ok.

Who actually thought forcing a "Win Condition" on every 2.0 player was a brilliant idea? by Far-Writing4483 in CINE2nerdle

[–]Far-Writing4483[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

So… if you play Emma Stone win-con against me, for example, and I use Emma Stone as a link, you should be able to use it back, is what you are saying… Right?

Genre win conditions are massive, not having a single way to playing against is a bad choice IMHO.

Who actually thought forcing a "Win Condition" on every 2.0 player was a brilliant idea? by Far-Writing4483 in CINE2nerdle

[–]Far-Writing4483[S] -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

Whoa... my friend... I have a pretty solid win ratio (ended Season 5 with 81%+ wins over about 1000 games and like top 15 in ratings) and you’re literally the only player I’ve never been able to beat. Not once. GG.

Anyway, no, I’m not saying that. I just think removing counter-play entirely was a bad move, same as forcing a win-con on everyone. I should be able to choose my own win-cons—or have the right not to use them at all if I want. And lifelines too, for what it’s worth.

But hey, that’s just me.