Jump to content

Best answer

A general reminder for all thread participants....

Insulting, inflammatory, off-topic and otherwise rule breaking content which does not contribute to the discussion will not be tolerated here.

Such comments can (and likely will) be met with warnings and possible posting time out if it persists. We get it's a hot topic. However, with that comes the responsibility of remaining respectful and constructive, regardless of your view on the matter.

>>> Take personal disputes of any type to private message, the forum is NOT the place for it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Light vehicles also have good anti tank capabilities and yet they get the scouting mechanic so I see no reason for that  being a argument against giving scout to SPAA in both game modes. 

7 minutes ago, croatiankiller said:

SPAA was rarely a game changer in ground RB because most of people spawn when they have nothing else.

Many spawn in to a SPAA late in the game because of that reason, but also because a SPAA has no reason to be in the match until there is a aircraft in the sky. If you spawn early there is the risk of losing your AA to tanks and then not having one for air defence later on. 

Some SPAA def has the same capabilities as other light vehicles and should be treated as such for both game modes. 

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, _Nobot said:

Light vehicles also have good anti tank capabilities and yet they get the scouting mechanic so I see no reason for that  being a argument against giving scout to SPAA in both game modes.


Because Light vehicles ARE scouts, so they scout.

SPAA are SPAA so they don't, they get AA abilities and some very good TD abilities (if everyone spams light vehicles/weak armoured mediums) so they can survive some engagements.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Deranger79 said:

Because Light vehicles ARE scouts, so they scout.

Are missile AA also scouts then since they also gain the scout ability?

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, _Nobot said:

Are missile AA also scouts then since they also gain the scout ability?


TT is a mess, not representative of the rest of this game really.

Never used them, but before that the only vehicles that get some Scouting outside of lights is a few TDs?  You can always ask Gaijin/mods why these ones are like that?  Or do you mean missile TDs?

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Deranger79 said:

Or do you mean missile TDs?

No:

FlakRakRad
FlaRakPz 1
Roland 1
Stormer HVM
Type 93
Lvrbv 701
ASRAD-R 

 

All of these gain the ability to scout since they can't engage heavier tanks, same as any light vehicle really. Having a scouting ability allows a vehicle to be part of the battle even when they have no chance in an engagement against certain enemies. 

One counterargument against giving SPAA scouting is that they might be to passive in the game by afking behind a hill. Gaijin however does not seem to have that worry since they have given all Missle SPAA the scouting ability.

 

We have to remember that this is a game, not reality. Some features are needed to make gameplay more fun for the player.

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, _Nobot said:

All of these gain the ability to scout since they can't engage heavier tanks, same as any light vehicle really. Having a scouting ability allows a vehicle to be part of the battle even when they have no chance in an engagement against certain enemies. 

One counterargument against giving SPAA scouting is that they might be to passive in the game by afking behind a hill. Gaijin however does not seem to have that worry since they have given all Missle SPAA the scouting ability.

 

We have to remember that this is a game, not reality. Some features are needed to make gameplay more fun for the player.


So they already have SPAA that can scout where needed.  Not sure why you want all to have this feature ( I sort of prefer that it is mainly limited to Lights)

Edited by Deranger79
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, _Nobot said:

To both allow them in TO and to incentivise people to spawn in them early on CA.


Not really needed, for TO they just become unneeded like Planes would be, and in a way it would be nice without the derpy vehicles.

For the tandem GFRB, sort of makes a mockery of vehicle classes.  Giving too much to all is not a great idea, in my view only of course.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, tranquillium said:

See, 4km is short range air defence. While I was talking about realism, you switch to game mechanics. You can’t discuss anything you don’t have the slightest clue of, but still you do.


I understand the issue just fine—and I also know it’s scope is limited.

 

Below very high BRs, 4km engagement ranges simply aren’t realistically occurring—the concerns around that are top tier issues more than anything else.

 

9 hours ago, tranquillium said:

Really? That’s the way you look back at this discussion? You are blinded by your ego.


Not at all...what I said was actually a very plain reading of what had happened.

 

9 hours ago, tranquillium said:

The only argument countering TO is a possible player-splitting, the rest is just brought up into the discussion to derail it and defend aircrafts abilities in RBGF. Despite the damage and flight models I do agree with  the most arguments, but they just don’t belong here. That’s the point.


Perceived needlessness of the mode is a legitimate stance for people to have and there is a great deal that supports that contention as well.

 

9 hours ago, tranquillium said:

Again, it’s totally uninteresting talking about aircrafts abilities and balancing them (that’s exactly what Sbmin did and said it in addition to TO)) in a thread that deals with a mode without any aircraft.


While I discourage off-topic chatter, aircraft performance talk is commonly necessary as reference material here.

 

9 hours ago, tranquillium said:

Like I said, reasonable discussion for you is only if it fits to your agenda. 


I have no agenda except to tell it like it is.
 

My willingness to do that is what has made my comments popular with many (though it has also upset a few too—they don’t want to hear it).

  • Confused 3
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

I understand the issue just fine—and I also know it’s scope is limited.

No you don’t. And your following sentences give proof to it.

 

10 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

Perceived needlessness of the mode is a legitimate stance for people to have and there is a great deal that supports that contention as well.

No need to repeat that. I know. Then just tell us your opinion and everything’s fine. No need to say it over and over again. But then don’t try to criticize other legitimate stances.

 

11 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

While I discourage off-topic chatter, aircraft performance talk is commonly necessary as reference material here.

So with that logic a vegetarian has to eat meat to accept he doesn’t want to eat it?

 

18 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

I have no agenda except to tell it like it is.

No, you aren’t objective, you can tell like you think it is according to your experience.

 

19 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

My willingness to do that is what has made my comments popular with many (though it has also upset a few too—they don’t want to hear it).

Saying what others want to read is easy. There are certainly many people that share your agenda. 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Matt_82 said:

Never trust a man who has to tell you how trustworthy he is. 

 

Pushing back against fake claims is just doing what’s right; there’s no bad reflection on me for setting the record straight and putting forward the truth.

 

As it stands, people trust what I have to say because my comments are backed by the citations—not any reliance on them being told.
 

28 minutes ago, tranquillium said:

So with that logic a vegetarian has to eat meat to accept he doesn’t want to eat it?


Contextual references are relevant to discussions.

  • Confused 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, _Nobot said:

Back to the topic then, should SPAA be allowed in TO or not? 

IMO high caliber SPAA vehicles should be in TO with the addition of the scouting ability. Having low caliber SPAA in TO would only lead to point soaking and have no benefit to the outcome of the matches. 

 

They'd be kind of pointless to take a lot of the time, but I'd also see no reason for gaijin to block most of them either, apart from the esxceptionally terrible AT ones like rolands. Afaik all the gun ones get an AT projectile in at least one belt which means they can at least do something in a pinch. Not to mention dual roles like ADATS.

 

But overall I think the concept of a TO mode would make it clear enough to players what to expect if they do bring an AA piece in and so gaijin could just leave it up to player choice and not take a hardline stance themselves. Besides, it's not like TO would necessarily put obstacles in the way for any potential SPAA-main playerbase. If anything its presence and competition with RBGF could lead to some actual thought being put into the overall implementation of SPAA on gaijins behalf as something other than a panic spawn when you got dicked on by air.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, milki30 said:

SPAA on gaijins behalf as something other than a panic spawn when you got dicked on by air.


Yeah...thinking of and using SPAAs that way is how and why enemy players defeat you/your team in the first place. 
 

Initial SPAA deployment offers a defensive advantage by having that line of defense in place; this is not be hard to appreciate and I would imagine you know this already.


————

 

Overall, defeatist thinking appears to be a primary hurdle for TO advocates.

 

While all sorts of people fall into that sort of mistaken belief, TO advocates have a more common setup than most—to them, they clam up and presume defeat the moment a plane appears; they think “it’s over!” 
 

That kind of defeatism is saddening and that fear factor’s effect must be a terrible burden for their teams. Defeatism causes far more loss than aircraft do.
 

As a tanker, I have to confess it is very sad that the tank victimhood myth  has been allowed to persist; it only hurts tankers and makes them less. When tankers defiantly decide to see their true potential, they do far better and are better for it.
 

For their sake, I hope the affected people have the strength to do what is right for themselves. :good:

  • Confused 4
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly don't understand why you guys keep responding to Warrior when he has been in this thread trolling since day one. 

1 hour ago, warrior412 said:

Overall, defeatist thinking appears to be a primary hurdle for TO advocates.

 

While all sorts of people fall into that sort of mistaken belief, TO advocates have a more common setup than most—to them, they clam up and presume defeat the moment a plane appears; they think “it’s over!” 
 

That kind of defeatism is saddening and that fear factor’s effect must be a terrible burden for their teams. Defeatism causes far more loss than aircraft do.
 

As a tanker, I have to confess it is very sad that the tank victimhood myth  has been allowed to persist; it only hurts tankers and makes them less. When tankers defiantly decide to see their true potential, they do far better and are better for it.
 

For their sake, I hope the affected people have the strength to do what is right for themselves. :good:

For some reason he treats people who want a TO mode like some inferior race when it's just players who wants the game they play to be more enjoyable. 

 

I honestly think this thread would be more constructive if he was not in this thread since he always seems to derail the topic. 

 

Edited by _Nobot
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, _Nobot said:

I honestly don't understand why you guys keep responding to Warrior when he has been in this thread trolling since day one.

Demagoguery has to be countered from time

to time to expose the true aims.
 

3 minutes ago, _Nobot said:

I honestly think this thread would be more constructive if he was not in this thread since he always seems to derail the topic. 

Totally true. Best example above. There was a discussion about the need of and ability of SPAA in a theoretically TO-mode. Let’s guess who derailed the discussion to his agenda driven propaganda? 

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, warrior412 said:

Overall, defeatist thinking appears to be a primary hurdle for TO advocates.

Oh look, I was defeated fair and square by a person who I killed in normal encounter a minute ago:

70618047_shot2021_02_1100_19_12.thumb.jp

Like the point of defeating a person is not to give them something You can't even counter in Your tank.

But yes, You sure know the game very well and understand the topic like You like to say :crazy:

1 hour ago, warrior412 said:

As a tanker, I have to confess it is very sad that the tank victimhood myth

"As a german players"

"As a tanker" 

And so on, and so on, no one cares about your "beauty" words 

 

Spaa is so good against planes that I have posted numerous screanshoots of me defeating them while flying a plane and explaining how planes have upper hand. But let's go back on topic as people are saying @warrior412 and stop spreading false claims about some kind of "victimhood" :good:

 

  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, _Nobot said:

I honestly don't understand why you guys keep responding to Warrior when he has been in this thread trolling since day one. 


Nope. What I’ve actually been doing is explaining how things are, how people could do better and how they might try to advance their interests (such as TO).

 

As it happens, about all people can see looking back on the thread’s early days is that I had (correctly) anticipated TO’s failure to gain traction back in 2018.


I am sorry that result upsets you, but successfully forecasting things isn’t trolling.

 

25 minutes ago, _Nobot said:

For some reason he treats people who want a TO mode like some inferior race when it's just players who wants the game they play to be more enjoyable. 

 

 

Lmao!

 

Because now saying people should not accept defeat as inevitable nor feel helpless about themselves really says those people are inferior. Encouragement is discouragement...up is down...up is down...all that about right?:016:
 

People can see what I’ve written and they see for themselves that I never wrote what you claim. Readers know your claim is phony.
 

The saddest part to me of all that is how plain and desperate the dishonesty there is: do you honestly think people cannot read and think for themselves and see my actual post immediately above? :facepalm:


Seriously guys...I know you’re upset that TO hasn’t gotten anywhere and that my estimate was correct but that’s not my fault...I helped you guys by bracing you with that early forecast, you ought to have heeded my advice to seek alternatives (perhaps even thanked me!).

 

40 minutes ago, _Nobot said:

I honestly think this thread would be more constructive if he was not in this thread since he always seems to derail the topic. 


Not really. (The TO advocacy group didn’t even know that it was necessary to propose changes by way of the development subforum before I mentioned it.)

 

Demanding that a guy like me who’s been one of the few to really push real ideas for advancing TO just goes to show how unwilling the TO crowd is to hearing anything beyond an echo chamber. That’s why a new, neutral thread is needed.

 

—————

 

38 minutes ago, tranquillium said:

Demagoguery has to be countered from time to time to expose the true aims.
 

Totally true. Best example above. There was a discussion about the need of and ability of SPAA in a theoretically TO-mode. Let’s guess who derailed the discussion to his agenda driven propaganda? 


Honesty is not demagoguery, realism about SPAA derailing nor is discussing the issues factually pushing an agenda or propaganda. This is yet more twisting and it’s rather disgusting—it’s why this thread is so mired...

 

As readers know, a few people in this thread are angry at me for:

-my willingness to look at the performance of aircraft in RB GFs factually rather than emotionally

-my skepticism that TO is a perfect idea that requires no thought or planning to succeed (I suspect there’s a bit more to it than this divinity that they suggest).
 

That’s about all there is to it. As a balance advocate and player, I will not give up on doing what is right, regardless of how unpopular it is with a few. I know I am speaking for many when I point out these realities and that to do so is rightful.

 

Overall, the cure to this thread's failure to serve TO is just a new, more neutral discussion with better prospects for TO This thread has accomplished nothing in three years because it is so heavily skewed pro-TO that bias has prevented serious discussion. With a more sensible approach, progress is much more likely.
 

It’s time that a new TO discussion be started—proceed with that and TO will be better for it.  :good:

  • Confused 3
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ULQ_LOVER said:

Oh look, I was defeated fair and square by a person who I killed in normal encounter a minute ago:

70618047_shot2021_02_1100_19_12.thumb.jp

Like the point of defeating a person is not to give them something You can't even counter in Your tank.


Suicide bombing is a losing move; that guy lost to you with that move—on SP alone you won (he paid 480+ SP to bellyflop while you had paid <150 SP to wipe out 6 guys and wound two others, earning all the while). That guy failed all around...that was not a win for him.
 

Also, let’s be real about this: air threats can be countered by GFs and their teams. Such attacks can be counteracted by SPAAs, fighters, tank mounted MGs, cover and even mere movement. The defeatist tank victimhood myth is a wickedly false tale and people pushing it should apologize to the people they’ve misled to death.

 

1 hour ago, ULQ_LOVER said:

But yes, You sure know the game very well and understand the topic like You like to say :crazy:


As a person with a great deal of experience in the game and with this subject, both of the bits you mentioned are true—but I have no interest in boasting, I prefer modesty. 


With research and time, anyone could have the same qualifications.

 

1 hour ago, ULQ_LOVER said:

"As a german players"

"As a tanker" 

And so on, and so on, no one cares about your "beauty" words 


I play tanks primarily and Germany is my single most played nation.


To say those things is just being honest about my background—what’s wrong with keeping it real?

 

1 hour ago, ULQ_LOVER said:

Spaa is so good against planes that I have posted numerous screanshoots of me defeating them while flying a plane and explaining how planes have upper hand.


Within a game anywhere resembling balanced, SPAAs can be expected to lose to aircraft some of the time—that’s what would mean they’re near their balanced point. No vehicles are supposed to win 100% of the time in a balanced game; if that was your expectation with SPAAs, it’s no wonder you are so confused by what really happens. (I never suggested anything like a 100% success rate either.)

 

As for the SPAAs you’ve faced, you’ve posted some of your citations...they’re not the stunners you portray them as. I still remember those two buffoons whose aim (charitably) “needed work” and who compounded their problems by grouping up, lowering their ability to get a crossfire going and increasing their vulnerability.


Poor SPAA usage =/= “SPAAs are bad—poor usage falls under L2P

 

————

 

Now with all that cleared up, as you said, back to the topic of TO.

 

Honestly if you guys were as enthusiastic about discussing all the aspects of TO as you are talking about me, TO’d probably be here right now and I wouldn’t have to be considering production of a biopic...

Edited by warrior412
  • Confused 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/02/2021 at 23:58, _Nobot said:

No:

FlakRakRad
FlaRakPz 1
Roland 1
Stormer HVM
Type 93
Lvrbv 701
ASRAD-R 

 

All of these gain the ability to scout since they can't engage heavier tanks, same as any light vehicle really. Having a scouting ability allows a vehicle to be part of the battle even when they have no chance in an engagement against certain enemies. 

One counterargument against giving SPAA scouting is that they might be to passive in the game by afking behind a hill. Gaijin however does not seem to have that worry since they have given all Missle SPAA the scouting ability.

 

We have to remember that this is a game, not reality. Some features are needed to make gameplay more fun for the player.

All SPAA should have ability to scout planes and helicopters

 

not just map but 3D

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

Suicide bombing is a losing move; that guy lost to you with that move—on SP alone you won (he paid 480+ SP to bellyflop while you had paid <150 SP to wipe out 6 guys and wound two others, earning all the while). That guy failed all around...that was not a win for him.
 

Also, let’s be real about this: air threats can be countered by GFs and their teams. Such attacks can be counteracted by SPAAs, fighters, tank mounted MGs, cover and even mere movement. The defeatist tank victimhood myth is a wickedly false tale and people pushing it should apologize to the people they’ve misled to death.

And You don't understand that frustrate people. They don't want to die to something that they can't do anything about.

And talking about the team when we are discussing player vs players situation is pathetic. I would like to see how You counter that plane when You have 2 more tanks in front of You that You are engaging and the MG mounted on your roof has limited movment :good:

15 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

As a person with a great deal of experience in the game and with this subject, both of the bits you mentioned are true—but I have no interest in boasting, I prefer modesty. 


With research and time, anyone could have the same qualifications.

And I have more experience than You and can really say that You don't understand of fail to understand basic things about the game. 

Same was when I was already explaining to You in other topic why gaijin is making some decisions and based on what before they announced why they were trying to do it :good:

16 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

I play tanks primarily and Germany is my single most played nation.


To say those things is just being honest about my background—what’s wrong with keeping it real?

Making it seem like it is inportant in the discussion while it really isn't. Trying to make Your point of wiev sound like fact isn't something that anyone want to hear :good:

17 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

Within a game anywhere resembling balanced, SPAAs can be expected to lose to aircraft some of the time—that’s what would mean they’re near their balanced point. No vehicles are supposed to win 100% of the time in a balanced game; if that was your expectation with SPAAs, it’s no wonder you are so confused by what really happens. (I never suggested anything like a 100% success rate either.)

 

As for the SPAAs you’ve faced, you’ve posted some of your citations...they’re not the stunners you portray them as. I still remember those two buffoons whose aim needed work and who compounded their problems by grouping up.


Poor SPAA usage =/= “SPAAs are bad—poor usage falls under L2P

Ok, so let's say that all planes that died to SPAA falls under L2P because the same logic can be implemented :good:

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, ULQ_LOVER said:

You don't understand that frustrate people. They don't want to die to something that they can't do anything about.


I understand perfectly what frustrates people—defeat. It’s understandable for them to feel that way...but defeat will inevitably still find them some of the time.

 

As for what they can do to avoid defeat by aircraft, I have laid out many of their options already:

 

42 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

Such attacks can be counteracted by SPAAs, fighters, tank mounted MGs, cover and even mere movement.


I have used all of these more than once; the last one is extremely successful, despite being nearly effortless.

 

24 minutes ago, ULQ_LOVER said:

And talking about the team when we are discussing player vs players situation is pathetic. I would like to see how You counter that plane when You have 2 more tanks in front of You that You are engaging and the MG mounted on your roof has limited movment :good:


WT is not a player versus player game, it is a team versus team game. As widely as team quality varies, the basic premise of teamwork is still critical to success in WT and that is something that players learn to understand if they wish to succeed.

 

As for 1v3 faceoffs...the key to doing well there is to not end up being the sole focus of three enemies at once. An airplane is the least of your worries there.

 

24 minutes ago, ULQ_LOVER said:

And I have more experience than You and can really say that You don't understand of fail to understand basic things about the game.


Not really. While I will concede that you have more experience with bush usage and ULQ manipulation (I have not used those things), the number of battles played is relatively similar between us.

 

24 minutes ago, ULQ_LOVER said:

Making it seem like it is inportant in the discussion while it really isn't.


Qualifications and characteristics are alright to include, especially when of direct relevance.

 

24 minutes ago, ULQ_LOVER said:

all planes that died to SPAA falls under L2P because the same logic can be implemented


Nope; you have obviously confused what I said but I am sure if you reread it, you’ll come to understand that what I had actually said is that some of SPAAs’ defeats owe to their users’ L2P issues and many others are from natural defeats.

 

As a general point: you cannot simply reverse things in matters like this and expect them to remain accurate—it isn’t. Realities just don’t work that way.

 

———

 

Now, onto TO, eh?

Edited by warrior412
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, warrior412 said:

I understand perfectly what frustrates people—defeat. It’s understandable for them to feel that way...but defeat will inevitably still find them some of the time.

 

As for what they can do to avoid defeat by aircraft, I have laid out many of their options already:

Defeat by something they can't do anything about :good:

Oh yes, I can make my tank into a plane/spaa all the time

1 minute ago, warrior412 said:

WT is not a player versus player game, it is a team versus team game. As widely as team quality varies, the basic premise of teamwork is still critical to success in WT and that is something that players learn to understand if they wish to succeed.

 

As for 1v3 faceoffs...the key to doing well there is to not end up being the sole focus of three enemies at once. An airplane is the least of your worries there.

Because making random battles into team ones where they have to work as a team is something that has a chance of success :crazy:

Oh yes, airplane is my least worrie, when I have already critted both tanks and was going to destroy them when someone that I have killed 1 minute ago just kamikaze into me :lol2:

3 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

Not really. While I will concede that you have more experience with bush usage and ULQ manipulation (I have not used those things), the number of battles played is relatively similar between us.

Oh I have more experiend doing what all players can do :lol2:. Try somewhere else with that ;).

And 4k battles and tournaments that are not counted is not "similar" 

3 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

Qualifications and characteristics are alright to include, especially when of direct relevance.

Personal belief and agenda is not relevant :good:

4 minutes ago, warrior412 said:

Nope; you have obviously confused what I said but I am sure if you reread it, you’ll come to understand that what I had actually said is that some of SPAAs’ defeats owe to their users’ L2P issues and many others are from natural defeats.

 

As a general point: you cannot simply reverse things in matters like this and expect them to remain accurate—it isn’t. Realities just don’t work that way.

I haven't confused a single word. Planes defeat to SPAA is L2P issue. 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, ULQ_LOVER said:

Defeat by something they can't do anything about :good:

Oh yes, I can make my tank into a plane/spaa all the time


:facepalm:

 

There is plenty that both an individual and his team can do.

 

This stubborn, persistent defeatist belief otherwise is saddening because it’s so needless...it kills many unnecessarily. :(

 

30 minutes ago, ULQ_LOVER said:

Because making random battles into team ones where they have to work as a team is something that has a chance of success :crazy:


Teams in random battles are still teams, for you, everyone on your side and everyone on the other side.

 

You’re not given anything different than anyone else.

 

30 minutes ago, ULQ_LOVER said:

Oh yes, airplane is my least worrie, when I have already critted both tanks and was going to destroy them when someone that I have killed 1 minute ago just kamikaze into me :lol2:


Your tank is 10 times more likely to be killed by another tank than it is by an aircraft.

 

So yes, aircraft are the lesser worry.

 

30 minutes ago, ULQ_LOVER said:

Oh I have more experiend doing what all players can do :lol2:. Try somewhere else with that ;)


Yeah..no.
 

Not all people can do that (some use ULQ because they have to, not to use it an advantage) nor is access to bush viable for all. Both of these (especially together) mean the conditions are not standard.

 

30 minutes ago, ULQ_LOVER said:

And 4k battles and tournaments that are not counted is not "similar" 


Tournaments are of no particular relevance to me or this topic (they’re more like custom battles than random battles) and ~4000 battles’ difference isn’t all that much when you’re talking about ~40,000 battles’ experience.

 

As experience goes, we’re comparable aside from the bit I noted before.

 

30 minutes ago, ULQ_LOVER said:

Personal belief and agenda is not relevant :good:


Eh...I’m afraid you’re just very confused. It is not a personal belief nor an agenda that I play tanks and German tanks more than other things; those are just facts.

 

You cannot keep twisting things around and writing things at random—reality doesn’t work that way.

 

30 minutes ago, ULQ_LOVER said:

I haven't confused a single word. Planes defeat to SPAA is L2P issue. 


Nope, that’s just false. Demises are not so simply explained as that, for the reasons I already explained.
 

Baseless derision with false absolutism like that is just another example of anti-aircraft bias showing itself. I did not say that of SPAAs, yet you say that of aircraft.

 

Reread what I said before and you will hopefully realize your mistake and understand the nuance.

 

———

 

Now, third try, let’s steer the topic back to TO. This thread isn’t about me or the biopic so many seem to want.

Edited by warrior412
  • Confused 3
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...