1 Like
Lol. Nothing like Call of Duty Warzone para-drops, directly ontop of the enemy.
haha. Look at you trying to dictate what’s worth talking about, and what’s not.
Ah yes. Deflecting the issue.
Ah yes… Killing a tanker, and he immediately spawns in a plane just to get revenge with HVAR Spam
Such high quality gameplay and immersion.
I never said they were invincible/immortal. I said they are being used to exploit matches.
Yes, but all of these things require time, effort, and/or skill. Traditionally… if a player wants to flank the enemy, and try to get to their rally points, then the player has to fight and/sneak their way behind enemy lines. Traditional flankers have a much higher probability of being detected, and encountering Anti-personnel mines and other defenses, compared to Call of Duty paratroopers who can be deployed anywhere they want.
Pay $60, and you can spawn behind the enemy!
And then you can accuse players of having “skill issues” for not camping behind their own objective, staring at the sky while waiting for paratroopers to randomly spawn throughout the match! Such genius strategy!
How many posts exist within this forum, from players who are crying about camping teammates? But by your logic… camping is REQUIRED. Because you gotta have people camping/guarding the rear, to protect the rest of the team from para-troopers who are spawning on the edge of the grey zone (near the opposite team’s spawn).
And also… by your logic… Players should be aware of EVERYTHING at all times (always aware and ready to shoot down paratroopers, and aircraft, and tanks, and infantry from all FOUR directions.
By your logic… we should have eyes in the backs of our heads, and on top.
I’m pretty sure the only players who are aware of EVERYBODY… are the cheaters/hackers.
LMFAO!!! This guy is criticizing me for building a rally point, and says I should be staring at the sky!
(My bad. My bad. I still haven’t adapted to this new Call of Duty style, game-mode)
You’re a dumb fuck. I literally just spawned, and was on my way to defend the objective. But first, I stopped to build a rally point so that my teammates could spawn closer, and not have to run 200m.
Are you familiar with engineers, and the importance of building rally points for your team?
Or are you a selfish player?
Nothing gets passed you!
You’re funny. Again, what happened to not wasting your time?
I get you’re trying really hard to be funny, but this isn’t working for you.
Not quite, Enlisted Messiah. Planes in their current form are far more effective at clearing points than paras ever will be because there’s no way to stop it in the moment. Either hope there’s an AA gun or fighter already, and if not, you’re screwed.
So if you are seriously going to argue that planes are less of a problem than paras, you have lost your mind or have never played Enlisted. They’ve literally been a pain in the ass since day one. But I’m not going to call them an exploit just because I don’t like them.
You brought up the tank thing. Still have no clue why.
Is this not deflecting the issue either? Remember what I said?
You don’t need a plane to revenge kill someone. It’s just the quickest way which is why everyone does it. And remember:
You didn’t say it, you’ve implied it. And if that’s true, then you’re admitting that it’s possible to counter them. And since you won’t listen to anyone with this exploit BS, here’s the official definition for a video game exploit:
So, according the actual definition of an exploit, paras cannot be an exploit because they are not a bug, and they are being used as intended. If the devs did not intend for them to drop on objectives, they would not have been given the option to.
They also cannot be P2W either, because that would mean they were added intentionally to give paying players an unfair advantage. Even if that were the case, they’re still not P2W because there are numerous free ways to clear an objective.
This also invalidates both the exploit and P2W argument because you’re admitting there’s other ways to flank and clear a point.
Yes, they do. But if a team is vigilant and capable enough to spot a player sneaking their way through brush, then they are more the capable of spotting a parachute drop. I don’t know what part of this you don’t get. The sky has literally no cover, no protection. You cannot argue that someone can just casually spot a player sneaking through bushes, but not a bunch of of parachuting soldiers in the sky.
Like dude… read what you write before you post it.
That’s subjective. You have no statistical evidence of that. I can’t speak for everyone, but flanking with a flametrooper is far more effective from what I’ve seen. Paras… not so much…
A large number of people have completed the event and have both free para squads by now. That is no longer an advantage held by paying players anymore.
That’s not what anyone said, and that’s not what situational awareness is. You need to be aware of all threats, wherever they may come from, to be a successful enlisted player. Most good players are already looking up to see if they’re about to be blown to pieces by attacker planes. It’s really not the hard to be aware of your surroundings.
Umm… no. Just no. I can’t think of you’re getting this from.
No. It’s simple. You see paras, you either intercept them or you risk losing your rallies. Defending is more than just camping on the stairs in the objective.
Yes, exactly. You had to do this even before paras were added. You’re trying to make this sound complicated when it really, truly isn’t. If you think it is, I really don’t know what else to tell you.
And then the point flew right over your head just like a squad of paras 
You didn’t read what I said. The point sails over your head once more.
If that’s what you want to call it, sure.
Woah, tough guy alert.
This has absolutely nothing to do with what you said. Like, not even a little bit.
Ok…?
I got all the time in the world, pal. Please, keep giving me more material 
It’s a good thing that words have multiple meanings, and/or broader definitions than your little excerpt. Particularly definition #2 and #3
Here are other definitions of the word *exploit:
*
Neither of those definitions can be smoothly applied to the situation you’re describing. They’re far too broad. Using paratrooper squads has nothing to do with “doing the right thing.” That’s why I used the video game definition specifically. Nice try, though.
Hopefully you will truly stop wasting your time and find a game you actually care about.
Just because the definition of the word, doesn’t fit your narrative… doesn’t mean it’s not true.
Particuarly:
#2 If you say that someone is exploiting a situation, you disapprove of them because they are using it to gain an advantage for themselves,
#3 If you exploit something, you use it well, and achieve something or gain an advantage from it.
So how does this apply to paratroopers?
Veteran players are exploiting the ability to spawn wherever they want on the map.
And if it’s a group of friends, they can all syncronize their deployment.
It’s pretty funny how triggered you get, whenever I call paratroopers an exploit.
Oh great, now I have to give you an English lesson? Feel free to give it up whenever you feel like. But first:
You can’t talk when you have rejected every single counterpoint, every one, from anyone, that doesn’t fit your narrative. You have refused to even consider you could potentially be at least partially wrong.
You could apply this to literally every game feature you don’t like. Every one. Planes, tanks, bombing runs, flamethrowers, WP, machine guns, everything. I could say that excessive use of flamethrowers is an exploit. I don’t, though, because that’s just factually wrong.
Lol. Read the example that was included in the definition you gave. When you use exploit in this context, you’re referring to getting full use out of something. Which doesn’t add up with anything you’ve said previously.
So all you’ve done is just muddy the water to the point it’s impossible to decipher what your issue with paratroopers is. Are you mad they’re using their squads to begin with?
If you have 2000+ completed matches as you claim, you’re a veteran player too. And I can only imagine you’re as toxic as you are in game as on the forum.
Hopefully I don’t ever get matched with you, because I clearly can’t trust you to pay attention .
You’re maliciously implying that groups of friends cannot be dangerously effective without paras. Very much not the case.
That’s cute. I didn’t lose a match and then cry on the forum for what, days now? If anything, I’m just surprised you’re still falling for this.
Nope. Just you, Forlorn, and the people with Brand new accounts (who are trying to tell me what to think).
You’re just mad that I’m not conforming to your viewpoint, and am simply holding my ground while engaging in this bottomless-pit-of-a-discussion with you. Soley for the purpose of allowing everybody else to read our debate, and decide who is the shill/troll, and who is being sincere.
You’re defending a premium product, and claiming that it cannot be used as an exploit during any given match.
(When the OP of this post, literally proves that a group of friends can all drop-in together. Thus… exploit the paratrooper mechanic)
(Paratroopers can also spawn on the rooftops of the objective, and safely capture from the highest-position in the building. But in your world. this is okay too.)
(You’ve implied that everybody should be aware of every single enemy player, at all times during a match)
(You’re also promoting rear-base camping, as a defense against 4th wall paratroopers)
(You’re saying that paratroopers can be easily countered, and any issue with them is entirely a skill issue)
(You’re saying that it’s completely fair for paratroopers to negate defenses/time required to spawn behind the enemy, because other squads can also flank and apply rear-attacking tactics*)
(You seem to be implying that paratroopers are perfect, in every single way. And anybody who has a problem with them, simply suck at the game and need to adapt to Call of Duty precision-paradrops)
Have I misunderstood you, so far?
But alas…
I’m aware you’re just trolling me, gaslighting me, deflecting actual issues within the game, and are otherwise trying to discredit everything I have to say.
Which is not an effective strategy, because anybody with a brain (who reads the thread), can see who’s being sincere, and who’s a shill.
All in all… shills and trolls are not good for business.
People who are genuine, can casually read through the posts/threads within the forum, and can easily identify who is sincere, and who isn’t.
You can say whatever you want, and it doesn’t bother me one-way-or-another…
Why?
Because I already understand your strategy and overall goal.
It’s just a matter of playing chess with you guys, and allowing everybody else to witness what CORE ISSUES that are driving the game in a negative direction. (One of these issues, being the trolls/toxic people within the forum/customer service area. Who attack anybody that shares genuine complaints/suggestions)
Anyways, I’m done talking to you. You can waste your time and say whatever the fuck you want, but I’m not going to read it. Nor am I going to reply.
I made my case, and now everybody else can read the thread/digest the information/decide for themselves.
I’m not trying to get you to conform. I’m just screwing with you now because you are extremely entertaining. You’re just hilariously toxic. And none of it is getting you anywhere.
Not quite. We are telling you the sky is blue. You’re getting upset, just yelling “No! The sky is green! You’re just a dumb f*ck!”
Same, bud. Except for the great comedic material you’re giving me.
You claim to be sincere, that you’re taking opposing views into account. Allow me to remind you what you said to the first counter argument on your original post:
Ah yes, very sincere. Definitely taking his viewpoint into account. My first response was met with equal hostility. Or this new thread about 3 tanks which I don’t care enough to read. All just anger. Anger at a video game that you claim to be dead, broken, and boring, and yet here you are on said games forum. Very cool.
No, after all this, the point has sailed right over your head like those paratroopers you despise so strongly. You see, I never said paras are crucial to the game. I said they provide more variety and more options for the attacking team. I said they do not do anything players can’t already do.
And again, them being able to cap on a roof is a problem. Them simply being up there is not. I explicitly said that already. According to the definitions you have given me, anything can be an exploit if used effectively.
Do you remember where I agreed with the OP that his concern was valid? I brought up the idea that this might become complicated for the game and offered another solution. Nonetheless, he identified a problem and gave a solution. You just whined.
No, I said you should pay attention to your surroundings and be on the lookout for threats. You made this sound far more complicated than it is because apparently that’s too much work for you. Boo hoo.
Quite literally not what I said.
No. I’ve identified several problems with paras and offered solutions. And whether or not they are easy to counter is entirely situational, I just said they can be countered. Just like anything else in the game.
Yes, I did. What your said here is true.
No, I absolutely did not. I don’t believe in perfection. You do need to adapt, though, now that paratroopers will be more common now that F2P players have them too.
Apparently.
If you want to look it that way. I’ve given you several real problems to think about and have actual tame discussions about. I don’t want to discredit you if I don’t have too. You’re just not seeing the bigger picture.
People can form their own conclusions. Neither of us can directly influence that decision. But your general hostility, toxicity, and complete inability to process dissent is not helping you at all. If that’s all you want to do, then you live a very tortured existence. It’s not gonna kill you to have some optimism.