DCJ category
as allmost everybody else.
2 different categories.
@Flibo
Don't think that separating dcj with "normal" cj is like deviding in lj with 5 - 6 - 7 strafes adn so on....Not even close
Originally posted by FliboYep.
Also it's like having 5 strafe lj, 6 strafe lj, 7 strafe lj and so on..
laugh of the day
For me it's one categories becouse my cj stats=dcj stats
But i think for all will be right 2 diff categories.
Ah, even a 264 got accepted now, I guess this is the mods' reply..
Isn't DCJ the EDark Jump Category I?
As far i understood from NumB's interview ;)
DCJ = a part of Ej#1
Ej#1 = Multi countjump.
Nuclear, take 10 secs off to read what the hell I actually wrote in the first post and maybe you'll realise what this discussion is about. :)
If this was a vote.. 2 diff categories.
Only freaks do 265+ with regular countjump, pardon me for bumping this thread like this but I just want to say my opinion and agree with the majority here by saying, that I think they should be divided in to 2 different categories.
Just for diversity.
right. i think that 2 categories would be better.. (i jump a lot with normal cj xDDD my rec is 267) but i really don't care.. this is a Kreedz community, not longjumping community
word cookie!!
"this is a Kreedz community, not longjumping community"
god thats ignorant...
when u play kreedz, you jump from block to block while strafing...
when u lj, you jump from block to block while strafing = LJ IS A PART OF KZ.
im so sick of people not recognising that.
it should be split in 2. 'theoretically' 299 pre is possible on a normal cj, but the highest ive seen on one is 295-296 - therefore cj vs dcj is not an even playing field, and they should not be considered as the 'same technique' on the record list
this is also pretty evident due to the fact that theres like 3 normal cjs left on the rankings...maybe people dont bother trying cjs anymore cause they know their record will just get knocked out by a dcj - which is much easier to get higher pre and jump further.
for god sakes, its common sense to split them up.
lol, every1 was happy when that gay pre was invented, now every1 is crying cuz MCJ pwns ass.. there wouldn't be this problem if CJ/MCJ was performed on normal blocks
EDIT: nvm, don't want to enter the flamewar.
Btw, 1.. 2.. 3 more ducks, does it even makes any sense?
nobody is complaining about how much mcj pwns, just about how its not the same as cj, and eventually will knock all regular cjs out of the records list.
in a way, and yes, this is an abstract comparison, it would be like replacing the lj records with cj, after all the main advantage comes with the prestrafe as it does with mcj to cj.
yes, they are different techniques, but so too are cj and mcj --> lj to cj = 1 extra bop with a prestrafe advantage, cj to dcj = 1 extra bop again, with a prestrafe advantage
also dcj was recognised as 'a new technique' was it not?
therefore it should have its own place in the lj records as a NEW TECHNIQUE
i'll retract the statements of my last 2 posts if someone somewhere can send me a demo of a 299 pre cj to show that there is no advantage by multiple bops. but until then - they need to be 2 separate lists in the record section, because as i said before, its not fair at all.
Originally posted by kz[aHazard]
nobody is complaining about how much mcj pwns, just about how its not the same as cj, and eventually will knock all regular cjs out of the records list.
in a way, and yes, this is an abstract comparison, it would be like replacing the lj records with cj, after all the main advantage comes with the prestrafe as it does with mcj to cj.
yes, they are different techniques, but so too are cj and mcj --> lj to cj = 1 extra bop with a prestrafe advantage, cj to dcj = 1 extra bop again, with a prestrafe advantage
also dcj was recognised as 'a new technique' was it not?
therefore it should have its own place in the lj records as a NEW TECHNIQUE
i'll retract the statements of my last 2 posts if someone somewhere can send me a demo of a 299 pre cj to show that there is no advantage by multiple bops. but until then - they need to be 2 separate lists in the record section, because as i said before, its not fair at all.
Exactly!
CJ and MCJ should be separated, and DCJ would be classified as MCJ.
one part of CJ and other to DCJ
Please log in to post replies.