Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="soundwave106" data-source="post: 181983" data-attributes="member: 3746">I think the ranking would be lower if TPA players ranked it. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> I do think the 1960s and earlier EMs are a bit too harder to translate on the computer, and also represent too different of a time. I'm extrapolating from what I heard (never played a 60s EM), but from what I understand: They rely more on nudging, are usually *designed* with very short ball times (ala Central Park), are designed slower (TPA EMs / early SS tend to be very fast), and are usually straightforward with the only goal to get the replay.The only EM I've played in real life is Gottlieb's "Spirit of 76". It wasn't easy, but it wasn't designed to drain either -- you could get some long ball times on that. TPA could tweak that one and come up with a Big Shot style table easily IMHO, and I imagine other 1970s EM pins would be similar.</blockquote>

No members online now.

Total: 96 (members: 0, guests: 96)