No one done it yet?
can't be that hard?
If i had furniture i'm sure i could do it =P
Printable View
No one done it yet?
can't be that hard?
If i had furniture i'm sure i could do it =P
lolol. It's actually quite hard. Still, I'd have expected someone to have done it.
i would but i can't log on habbo lol
atm
obv lolQuote:
Originally Posted by msb.
Neway, ste, coff up, i done it ;I
shup el. i taught u the methods u used to do it. lolololololol.
AND U STILL OWE ME A HC FROM THAT TC (the one that you won fair+square)
;)
oye, and ill come on habbo in a bit, watching Bleach atm.
coff- who discovered 3 bar stack, i cud hav easily done it wit my method, if it wasnt for my stroke of genius neither of us wud hav bin able to do it. ;IQuote:
Originally Posted by LoveToStack
ur method related in no way to the new method?! My way is: repeatable, always works, and reliable.
Your method relied on: luck. THE END. lol
And we couldn't do ANY of the stuff we can do with... 'your method'.
<:I
like i said, if i didnt discover my method you would have never looked into your method, REMEMBER, you brushed the hc stacking method off asif ther was nothing to be found. Trying to go after the AU method.
The stack your asking people to do could easily be done with my method, and in no way did the method rely on luck, i reli dont get how you can say it relied on luck, my method was exactly the same, the only thing i didnt know at the time and you informed me of, was that you didnt need to reload (which allowed it to be repeated), Your thinking of hc merging when it comes to luck. How can you say ur method was in no way related, when they both ride under the same principle, overide, use the same furni and acheive the same purpose, yes your method allowed for the process to be shorter and allowed for mutiple stacks, but thats as far as it goes wen it comes to how they differ.
FDEFgre gkjerg mergGRHGREherhjergj ejgrj jgwj gkeg jke jer gregr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PAH -givs up
k lol. I thought ur way was using the crappy sofa stack method. Which it was......
lol.
yes, which is exactly the same as your method but with reloading