Profile of drChengele

so do me a favor, and btfo.

Grammar nazi alert - I believe the term you are looking for is "gtfo" as "btfo" is not correct in this grammatic context. "Get btfo" would be correct.

But seriously, allow me to explain myself at least. A certain level of standard is expected from a forum badge, even a green one. Which is why I tend to notice when they behave haughty and superior to other players, as opposed to regular posters whose l2pposting just whooshes past my head. I've noticed the strategists' attitudes to new and experienced players before and have actually exchanged words with senior mods about this problem. I think the contents of the discussion would surprise you. Now obviously I am not going to post the details of private messages publicly, but they are available on PM if you do not believe me.

My point is, a few bad apples absolutely can spoil the bunch. How does the badge in and of itself have any worth if it's a crapshoot whether the guys having the badge will be helpful members of the community, or dismissive / constantly questioning people's skill when ever a potentially valid argument is put forward?

Perhaps it is my fault for expecting too much of a badge that indicates nothing more than that the user contributed to the guides section (which you are rightfully proud of). But when I see "strategist" I think "I should listen to this guy, he knows what he is talking about". If I have offended anyone who does useful work for the community, I will gladly personally apologize for my generalization. It was not my wish to derail the thread and I don't mind going to PM if you wish to take this discussion further.

Churchill, KVs, ISU didn´t receive any nerf. This is just a nerf to German vehicles. Not enough: Only the Allied tank destroyers received buffs.

It is almost as if the NUMBER of nerfs applied doesn't really matter, rather the effectiveness of the units on the field does. YOU NERFED KT, NOW NERF KV WAAAAAH is pure and simple whining, "if I can't have my toys then noone else can either (even though their toys were worn out and broke down a long time ago)".

Churchill didn't receive nerf? It got nerfed in October. HP 1600 to 1400, armour reduced from 280 to 200 (a 40% armour decrease!). Its cost was increased from 540/150 to 540/180. In that patch the KT was untouched (except getting reduced to 21 popcap from 26). Where were you back then to champion the equality of buffs and nerfs between armour of varied factions?

If you don´t see how a super slow, super expensive and easy to penetrate Elefant is a bad idea, we have nothing to discuss.

If you don't see how a super slow, super expensive and easy to penetrate from the sides after a successful flank Elefant, being left unsupported and allowed to be flanked by inferior Axis armour is a bad idea, we have nothing to discuss indeed.

If you are losing to the blob then play better. It's a low skill strat, but that doesn't mean the game should be dumbed down because you aren't skilled enough to deal with it yet. Work on your own skills before resorting to huge changes to the core mechanics of the game.

Strategists on this site continue to amaze me with their hostility towards players. The badge is beyond worthless, it's a shame.

I see nothing noobish against the idea. It would fit perfectly with the theme of the game. Such a mechanic has ALREADY BEEN INCLUDED BY RELIC in the form of incremental accuracy for MGs. There was also a similar mechanic included in the form of "negative zeal" to prevent pioneer spam in CoH1.

This idea to apply the same logic to all small arms accuracy (maybe not tank guns and the like) has been mentioned around here before and was given serious consideration. For good reason. Nobody complains about the incremental accuracy for MGs, and with good reason. Literally nobody would lose anything from implementation of this mechanic except the most egregious blobbers. Does that mean we should include it automatically? Not really, but calling people out for being noobs for suggesting it is simply bad. The argument boils down to "There is plenty of antiblob weapons in the game because blobbing should be punished, therefore no new antiblob measures should be included (because blobbing should be... punished... but only in the arbitrary amount of ways it is already being punished AND NOT A SINGLE ONE MORE)"

Or, maybe the argument is "you are a noob for wanting new antiblob measures, that is noobish, instead use the existing antiblob measures which I do and am therefore skilled"? So when you use measures already introduced into the game it's skill, but if Relic would add another antiblob measure then, oh, THAT is a completely different story, it is the complete opposite of skill and an anathema to everything this game is about.

Insulting other players over literally nothing, using faulty logic and non-arguments. Shame.

Would this really be possible to achieve without reprogramming the engine?

Thanks for the explanation!

Maybe the problem is more a doctrinal one since the Pershing is more like the heavier axis tanks and 1919s pack quite a bit of punch. But since I don't own that doctrine a can't really speak from experience. Anyways, I hope that all the blobbing will be addressed some time as I find it not very entertaining. Neither for the blobber nor for the receiving end.

Any time, just bear in mind that I play more team games than 1v1s, but I think the general principles apply.

Regarding blobbing, I am 100% with you. Spam should be a valid strategy (as opposed to blobbing) but when a single unit does everything well it is always cause for concern and typically leads to nobrain abuse (case in point : Volks and Bazooka rifles). Antiblob counters are sadly somewhat lackluster, locked behind commanders (USF, UKF) or late teching (Ost, Sov) etc.

If the Volks change sticks, as I sincerely hope it will, I for one would not be opposed to looking at the problem of Rifle blobs. Fair is fair.