~Official International Strikers Ladder~

[Croswenthy]

We're not d-bags on this forum for the most part.

Also to update mine, we're 661 and 179. It's been a rough week, seems like everyone's disconnecting and/or the scrubs are getting a *lot* better. We're like 130 and 30 for the week. 488.

 

[SantaClaws]

my new score is 392

are you playing doubles? because that should be like a seperate ladder (way easier)

 

[Croswenthy]

I always play doubles. I've been saying that since day one. =P And saying it's way easier is kind of, well, wrong. It's harder to be good at, and way easier to be bad at. Any chump can take DK, lob and make 50% of his shots. It's difficult to defend, and a lot of people do it. That same team really doesn't work in doubles, since you can have 1 person pressuring the ball carrier, and another guarding the shooter.

 

[SantaClaws]

yea...well doubles are loads easier

I tried doubles once with a friend who'd never played before

went 86-0

 

[Croswenthy]

Score or record? Because I find that hard to believe given that in 86 games you're bound to face someone in the top 5 who will give you at least one loss.

And if it's score, our record is 66-0, we stole the ball and did Megastrikes. It wasn't fun, it really sucked and took 20 minutes.

My point is this, the gambit is wider than in singles. You wade through a lot of people that suck. But every once in a while you'll come up with a 2 player team that gives you a good run for your money. It's a lot easier to be mediocre in singles, it's hard to be good in doubles.

 

[SantaClaws]

nope we had a record of 86 wins and 0 loses

mediocre in singles won't give you that good of a score wheras being ok at doubles will

so if you play doubles all the time...

I really think it should be on a seperate ladder, it's just too different

 

[Croswenthy]

I agree, but let's throw down in doubles!

 

[SantaClaws]

my new score, 413

 

[SantaClaws]

my new score 449

 

[SantaClaws]

my new score 521