Reward players who do not lose so many soldiers

[DNAmodsNP]

@TUSUPOLISI69

How the game functions / meta has been now explained to you clearly as it in writing can be explained.

I know all too well how the game functions and the meta, and did not need anyone to explain it to me as if they thought they knew something I did not already know. The reason I made this suggestion is partly because of the issues associated with those functions and meta

That is how suggestions work, you make a suggestion because it is something that isn’t in the game and that could be in the game and would help the game.

I understand you like it the way it is, and you are afraid of a suggestion that would encourage players to improve.

But your fear is not a legitimate counter argument to anything, it’s just an invalid opinion based on what you prefer.

A suggestion to lift the game standard cannot be undone by your fear of that

You want stats, yet you do not need stats. Anyone who has as much experience in this game as I have knows what I am talking about. And if you are arguing with me on those points it’s because you are either willingly ignorant or really don’t know or just want to stimulate this culture of dumb in the game.

And then you want to pretend like that is the best thing for the game and the players, when it is the exact opposite, and the reason for this suggestion.

[TUSUPOLISI69]

@DNAmodsNP

Anyone who has as much experience in this game as I have knows what I am talking about.

Judging by your absolutely retarded suggestion & contradictory arguments id say your “experience” is measured in few hours.

But sure you can provide your stats here.

@DNAmodsNP

And then you want to pretend like that is the best thing for the game and the players

Quite ironic that just few posts above you blamed us for “insufferable elitist complex”
While pretty much saying that we’re all so dumb that we dont even know what we want or need but you can tell what we need & want.

[YUI_Kutarinカニ野郎]

Wow this is a very compelling point, now I would love to support your cause, but I need to see your stats first so I may verify the information you’ve given above.

[DNAmodsNP]

@TUSUPOLISI69

id say your “experience” is measured in few hours

Don’t have to provide any stats of my experience, because I have hundreds of hours and battles under my belt across multiple campaigns. I would not have made a suggestion based on a few hours of gameplay. I play long hours and sessions over long period of time.

@TUSUPOLISI69

While pretty much saying that we’re all so dumb that we dont even know what we want or need but you can tell what we need & want.

What you want and need has nothing to do with this suggestion, the suggestion is something that would benefit players in the game to raise the standard of gameplay, and to slightly shift some dumb players thinking so they can try to improve, and have another reason to try to improve.

All you want is for them to run at your bullets and die.

I am actually saying, take more care with your game lives, so you don’t feed the other team so much.

What are you so afraid of with the suggestion? It adds another layer of challenge for players to try and improve and to increase their effective battletime.

Nobody that is dying 20 times for only 20 kills is being effective on a losing team, no matter how much you want to twist it. Already showed you the stats, they finish below even the campers on the losing teams, and when they win, it’s because of the others that carried them.

[PinoyRicochet]

@DNAmodsNP

Making your own irrelevant points and stories as if I said it, does not constitute what I am saying.

Well, let’s be real here. These scenarios I have mentioned only came from the conclusion based on my assumption is that you suck at the game. Until you share your stats, I can only build off on what you and others have said while trying to bind them with mine. Maybe then I will change my stories.

And no these are not irrelevant points as they have been tested countless times and the community acknowledges them. Again, your TTK is HIGHER because the amount of enemies you need to clear from the point and using a sniper at a distance to do this is practically impossible unless you have a semi-auto/select-fire sniper and this is all on the assumption that your team got wiped out trying to hold/take the zone. Even then it’s better to be around the objective to sneak in that bonus of “Kill on the Objective” points.

[DNAmodsNP]

@PinoyRicochet

Well, let’s be real here. These scenarios I have mentioned only came from the conclusion based on my assumption is that you suck at the game. Until you share your stats, I can only build off on what you and others have said while trying to bind them with mine. Maybe then I will change my stories.

Well it hardly matters, you can make up whatever stories you want, doesn’t mean any of them are true, accurate or relevant. Anybody can make up whatever nonsense they want, even if you have the stats to back up yours.

At the end of the day, I am not the best player who scores 200 kills per match, but I am also not the player who only gets 20 kills and loses 20 squads.

My performance in the game is probably below the top tier, and slightly above the average. But again, that has absolutely zero bearing on the merits of the suggestion.

The suggestion speaks for itself.

Who makes the suggestion makes no difference.

Anybody could have made the suggestion and if they had explained it the way I have, regardless of their stats, I’d still support it.

Because it just makes sense. And it’s needed in the game.

Let’s be real, if you are just making up nonsense stories and running with that instead of what is being said, you aren’t being real, and you know it.

[TUSUPOLISI69]

@DNAmodsNP

Don’t have to provide any stats of my experience, because I have hundreds of hours and battles under my belt across multiple campaigns. I would not have made a suggestion based on a few hours of gameplay. I play long hours and sessions over long period of time.

Ah then its fine. I dont really post my stats either as ive played this game since 1997.

@DNAmodsNP

What you want and need has nothing to do with this suggestion, the suggestion is something that would benefit player(s)

At this point im quite sure there would be atleast one (1) other player agreeing with you with this suggestion if this was helping playerS.
I just really cant see a single one agreeing with you here, so im quite sure you aint in position of speaking of behalf of playerS.

@DNAmodsNP

I am actually saying, take more care with your game lives, so you don’t feed the other team so much.

What are you so afraid of with the suggestion? It adds another layer of challenge for players to try and improve and to increase their effective battletime.

Dumb, superiority complex and now we’re afraid as well.
You sure know how to get support for your suggestions.

@DNAmodsNP

Nobody that is dying 20 times for only 20 kills is being effective on a losing team, no matter how much you want to twist it. Already showed you the stats, they finish below even the campers on the losing teams, and when they win, it’s because of the others that carried them.

Well hes 20 times more valuable than the sniper with 40 kills & 0 cap / engi points.
If anything we should promote those who selflessly zergrushed to point. Since you want to punish ppl so much, maybe we should give the exp those useless snipers / tacticoolians get from the game and grant them to those zergrushers.

@DNAmodsNP

Who makes the suggestion makes no difference.

Thats true, even if Einstein resurrected from death and made this suggestion it still would be absolutely retarded.
But atleast Einstein would have other credentials.

[DNAmodsNP]

@PinoyRicochet

And no these are not irrelevant points as they have been tested countless times and the community acknowledges them. Again, your TTK is HIGHER because the amount of enemies you need to clear from the point and using a sniper at a distance to do this is practically impossible unless you have a semi-auto/select-fire sniper and this is all on the assumption that your team got wiped out trying to hold/take the zone. Even then it’s better to be around the objective to sneak in that bonus of “Kill on the Objective” points.

I don’t know why you presume that a sniper weapon is the only tool of a camper

Campers use tanks, they use MGs, they use mortars, they use artillery, they use SMGs and even grenades.

But let’s go with the sniper since you bring it up. Let’s say that a match is deadlocked, and the final objective needs to be capped and the team pushing is out of lives. Now there is one squad left and they are the zerg rush guy with 20 kills and 20 squads lost to his name. And for arguments sake, let’s say the other teams crack sniper is the only guy left.

Are you willing to tell me that your clueless zerg rusher has a chance?

Because I might not play sniper squads, but I have one sniper in my squads, and sometimes, when he is the only guy left, I can kill multiple squads with just him. And when I can get more ammo, I can get many more kills.

So yes, he may not be capable of stopping an entire team the way tanks do.

But he can decimate squads just as well as any rifle man sharpshooter.

And why should he not be rewarded for his dedication to his style?

People in this discussion act as if snipers need to be removed from the game and are a detriment.

Yet, there are so many times, when a sniper is the only guy for a specific problem and situation, such as an opposing deadly shooter or gun emplacement

[TUSUPOLISI69]

@DNAmodsNP

Yet, there are so many times, when a sniper is the only guy for a specific problem and situation, such as an opposing deadly shooter or gun emplacement

Yeah, cant even count how many attack games ive lost and had the pleasure of spectating the last sniper being useless as fk for 30seconds.

[DNAmodsNP]

@TUSUPOLISI69

But atleast Einstein would have other credentials

I think even Einstein would know that manpower is eventually limited in warfare and therefore has to be put to good effect.

In cases like the defenders when it is not limited, then you can understand why they don’t care about those lives. But that is another issue with the game. The defenders should also have a limit of manpower, even if slightly higher. But unlimited makes them play too crazy also

[DNAmodsNP]

@TUSUPOLISI69

Yeah, cant even count how many attack games ive lost and had the pleasure of spectating the last sniper being useless as fk for 30seconds.

Yeh the dead guys were so useful, that you lost

I’ve seen the last guy be different people, not always the sniper, sometimes it’s the guy at the top flying his plane or in his cozy tank with his 200 kills

[TUSUPOLISI69]

@DNAmodsNP

I think even Einstein would know that manpower is eventually limited in warfare and therefore has to be put to good effect.

If I recall USSR did quite well with zergrush.

@DNAmodsNP

Yeh the dead guys were so useful, that you lost

Well they very least tried to win. While the sniper did nothing.

@DNAmodsNP

I’ve seen the last guy be different people, not always the sniper, sometimes it’s the guy at the top flying his plane or in his cozy tank with his 200 kills

Good for you.

[Kamad0_Tanjir0]

Show stats, pathetic creature

Also why i need to camp to be better bruh. Sweat lords are based, snipers are cringe

[Kamad0_Tanjir0]

@TUSUPOLISI69

If I recall USSR did quite well with zergrush.

all sides besides axis that loose actually did quite well

[秋YUI绘_Beaver食過炸蛋]

Agreed, camping is for scrubs, go in go hard and bully

[Kamad0_Tanjir0]

THATS BASED

[PinoyRicochet]

@DNAmodsNP

I don’t know why you presume that a sniper weapon is the only tool of a camper

Never have I mentioned the word “camper” until now. Huh, and you were the one who was claiming I was making up nonsense stories. But let’s put that aside and I will explain why I held off using the word.

“Camping” can be defined as the usual “sitting in the back and playing for kills” or some shit. But it can also mean playing AGGRESSIVELY on the point or within it’s vicinity. Whether you are the attacker or defender, you want that point to be your team’s and not the enemy’s and do whatever necessary to hold it. Sure you can use any other tools to fight on the point as long as you are PLAYING it. That includes using MGs, taking a defensive position by a window and shooting out from it, providing close tank support, popping smoke and rushing, etc. Again, you want the point to be persistently yours.

Obviously, players will die a lot in this process, which is the main reason - that has been pointed out previously several times - why this suggestion isn’t welcomed; it encourages the “usual” definition of camping and the first rush at the start of the match may determine how the game goes. If not everyone contributes on the point then the game drags on longer till its taken or you lose. Even if you share your stats or not, you should think about how your games have gone and how you won or lost them.

The reason why I keep bringing up snipers is because those players are the usual suspects that are not effectively contributing, with greyzoning tanks arguablycoming behind in 2nd place. These players just try to pick off anyone, even if they’re on the point or not. At least greyzoning tanks can be easily countered after annoying players with a bomb or a brave soul who travelled that far deep to blow it up.

[秋YUI绘_Beaver食過炸蛋]

Absolutely based and redpilled

[DNAmodsNP]

@TUSUPOLISI69

If I recall USSR did quite well with zergrush.

Zerg rush has its place, but there are various things that have to also be in place to make it effective

I am speaking of when those things are not in place. Germany messed up bigtime in that campaign, so as much as it was credit to soviets, it was a disaster on Germans side with many mistakes made. Never underestimate an opponent, or a foreign land/weather or a foreign people.

I am speaking of those times when swathes of men run at bullets and get cut down and they just die and achieve nothing. Unless absorbing bullets was the goal, then goal achieved.

You are only talking about the times when it works, which is usually due to the factors you will ignore for the convenience of your argument.

For example in Vietnam the vietnamese fighting the americans had no choice but to charge at the enemy in certain situations, because their enemy had total air superiority and control and superior artillery. So their only chance was to get in close quarters so that the Americans would not drop bombs and shells on their own men (despite that happening on occasions). So they laid ambushes (camping) very effectively, and then moved on before artillery could hit them. Though this was not always the case. They too made mistakes and ran at bullets in the wrong places and times.

Mel Gibsons movie of landing zone style warfare on helicopter was a great example of when zerg rushing fails, based on real events. However the movie doesn’t cover the other battlegroup that got completely wiped out by the vietnamese zerg rush there in a different landing zone. All of the americans were killed there on that zerg rush, because the numbers were just too great. But that is a number superiority effect. Which is not always a guarantee for victory either.

But again, different conditions and factors decide which zerg rush wins, and which zerg rush fails.

And my suggestion makes you think more carefully about when to engage it.

Whereas you seem to think it must always be employed by these other players, when that is not always the case and when it is, you have to be aware of what the situation you are rushing into, because if you just run carelessly and don’t clear, you will be cut down.

For example you run in and a tank has the spot on lock, he is going to murder your entire squad and anyone else in the vicinity. Because you did not consider that problem.

And now, if you keep going in there and getting obliterated by the same tank in the same spot and you keep doing it again and again, you are not going to get a different result until you acknowledge that the tank is a problem that has to be dealt with first before running into that same spot again.

[Kamad0_Tanjir0]

Not 3 planes

(((git gud))) bro

Also, why only one squad of flames? Isn’t better to be one squad of Brownings and two flames?