Login

russian armor

JPIV Cautious movement - Phaseshifting

20 Nov 2015, 07:12 AM
#21
avatar of CombatWombat

Posts: 98

What's so wrong in calling out players who are proven to be wrong? But saying L2P when it's an honest to god bug/balance issue is not a dick move?

To say L2P is not a thing that should be said lightly, as it is demeaning and dismissive to other players, so it is only really merited if the player is not applying his skills properly or has no detailed knowledge of the game. The player who says L2P should have lots of experience applying the remedy he / she is suggesting, otherwise it is just harmful and misleading - why would they say such a thing if they had no practical experience?

If something is in fact not a skill related issue, then the player, by saying "L2P", is committing actual harm to the community by obscuring actual issues, shifting burden away from the actual cause of the issue to the skill of the player.

Every time someone said attack ground and L2P in a JPIV thread, they actively contributed to keeping this bug from being detected. Imagine if everyone said "There is no Vickers range bug, it gets better range in buildings, L2P".

You might say these people had no reason to suspect that JPIV cloak behaves any different from other cloaked units. But if so, this means they didn't actually encounter the scenario where the JPIV did the cloak / decloak dance and they didn't actually destroy a single JPIV through attack ground.

If they didn't encounter that scenario, what gives them the right to say L2P?

If you have the temerity to insult other players' skill, you better damn well know what you are talking about. And if you do and are still proven wrong, you deserve to eat crow.


Well spoken drChengele!

The 'L2P' is an extremely condescending statement that serves little purpose beyond insulting other players and there is already more than enough of that going around in the game.
20 Nov 2015, 07:16 AM
#22
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470

stuff


there is a difference between calling someone out, calling someone out and being rude about it, and going back and digging up stuff just to be an asshole. the last one is a lot of effort spent on being a faggot and leads to flaming.
20 Nov 2015, 07:28 AM
#23
avatar of Just easy

Posts: 110

Achtachter was more rude and insulting, and what he said was stupid. aus magic's reply here is obv fine, not sure how you can argue otherwise.
20 Nov 2015, 07:34 AM
#24
avatar of Nuclear Arbitor
Patrion 28

Posts: 2470

Achtachter was more rude and insulting, and what he said was stupid. aus magic's reply here is obv fine, not sure how you can argue otherwise.


it's obviously not fine, he's flaming.
20 Nov 2015, 07:34 AM
#25
avatar of Dullahan

Posts: 1384



The 'L2P' is an extremely condescending statement that serves little purpose beyond insulting other players and there is already more than enough of that going around in the game.


No, people just choose to take it that way.

Originally L2P was an attitude revolving about analyzing your play with friends and figuring out how you could improve. And as a way to offer suggestions for said improvement, new ideas and get players in a creative mindset to come up with new strategies rather than being a slave to the metagame.

There's a huge fuckton of players in this game who blame the game rather than analyze their own play. L2P is a reminder that they need to try things rather than bitch and moan.

But people take it as a personal insult or whatever nowadays. It offends their precious ego. Every single player should "L2P". The best attitude to have in any game is "How could I have done this better? What could I do better in the future? What might have helped me beat this strategy?" rather than "WAAH RERIC ALLIES OP AXIS OP FUCK OFF FANBOIS" that seems prevalent in this forum.

20 Nov 2015, 08:57 AM
#26
avatar of CombatWombat

Posts: 98



No, people just choose to take it that way.

Originally L2P was an attitude revolving about analyzing your play with friends and figuring out how you could improve. And as a way to offer suggestions for said improvement, new ideas and get players in a creative mindset to come up with new strategies rather than being a slave to the metagame.

There's a huge fuckton of players in this game who blame the game rather than analyze their own play. L2P is a reminder that they need to try things rather than bitch and moan.

But people take it as a personal insult or whatever nowadays. It offends their precious ego. Every single player should "L2P". The best attitude to have in any game is "How could I have done this better? What could I do better in the future? What might have helped me beat this strategy?" rather than "WAAH RERIC ALLIES OP AXIS OP FUCK OFF FANBOIS" that seems prevalent in this forum.



The 'L2P' might have started out that way, but unfortunately to many folks ended up using it in such a dismissive and non-helpful manner that it devolved into an insult.
Saying 'L2P' is basically making the assumption that the player that you directing the comment to has a smaller working knowledge of game than you, when the opposite might be true.

Or at least that how I perceive the phrase these days but I am of course not everyone so projecting my perception to the whole player base might be completely wrong.

The problem is COH2 is a complicated game and a great deal of its mechanics are hidden or not obvious, meaning folks might be mistaken about what they know and should always be critical of what they claim.

Tell though me though, would you not be insulted or annoyed if someone simply stated 'L2P' or 'Smoke and flank' when you have a genuine concern you will like to discuss or learn more about?

I totally agree that there are plenty of shouty people who are quick to complain about XYZ without considering all options available, but tossing 'L2P' at such folks just adds fuel to the flame war fire. Hard stats and concise tests are best way to deal with those people and we shouldn't let them degrade our interaction with those who have legitimate concerns.

As far as my 2 cents on the matter go, if people want to use L2P without appearing condescending, then they should back the statement up with stats, field tests or helpful suggestions rather than just being outright dismissive and viewing members as whiney noobs.


20 Nov 2015, 09:21 AM
#27
avatar of Shanka

Posts: 323

"Just attack ground"






F*** those guys now :snfPeter:
20 Nov 2015, 10:06 AM
#28
avatar of Dullahan

Posts: 1384



Hard stats and concise tests are best way to deal with those people and we shouldn't let them degrade our interaction with those who have legitimate concerns.




People just nitpick anything you respond with. I've written a thousand wall of texts on forums like this arguing with all sorts of people in similar situations. I've done hours of labs, collected dozens upon dozens of replays, experimented with hundreds of "that isn't viable strategies."

It's a waste of time. They'll say the stats aren't reflective of the actual game, they'll nitpick any labs or replays you post and otherwise maintain a rigidly closed mind. Everyone's favourite fucking phrase is "not viable" and it just shows their ignorance as to how these games actually work. Anytime someone brings up "micro tax" or claims something won't be done because it's "too much micro" I don't know how else to respond but telling them that they suck, because they have a really shitty attitude about getting better at the game. Incidentally, there's a ton of micro tricks and strategies commonly used in Dawn of War 2 that people used to say those same things to me on the forums back in the day, so not only am I irritated at seeing those responses again but I also know that they are wrong and that people WILL get good enough to do that shit.

Maybe I've just burned out on this shit over the years, I dunno. I feel like a grumpy old man. Everytime I watch any tournament casts I see players who don't use half their abilities or units, make awful teching decisions (Or don't make any and just play with call ins) and float resources out the ass. (And that's before we talk about micro and map awareness, but I give people a break on that since there's a lot to deal with in this game.) Pretty shitty under-developed metagame for a two year old game, if you ask me.



20 Nov 2015, 11:56 AM
#29
avatar of CombatWombat

Posts: 98




People just nitpick anything you respond with. I've written a thousand wall of texts on forums like this arguing with all sorts of people in similar situations. I've done hours of labs, collected dozens upon dozens of replays, experimented with hundreds of "that isn't viable strategies."

It's a waste of time. They'll say the stats aren't reflective of the actual game, they'll nitpick any labs or replays you post and otherwise maintain a rigidly closed mind. Everyone's favourite fucking phrase is "not viable" and it just shows their ignorance as to how these games actually work. Anytime someone brings up "micro tax" or claims something won't be done because it's "too much micro" I don't know how else to respond but telling them that they suck, because they have a really shitty attitude about getting better at the game. Incidentally, there's a ton of micro tricks and strategies commonly used in Dawn of War 2 that people used to say those same things to me on the forums back in the day, so not only am I irritated at seeing those responses again but I also know that they are wrong and that people WILL get good enough to do that shit.

Maybe I've just burned out on this shit over the years, I dunno. I feel like a grumpy old man. Everytime I watch any tournament casts I see players who don't use half their abilities or units, make awful teching decisions (Or don't make any and just play with call ins) and float resources out the ass. (And that's before we talk about micro and map awareness, but I give people a break on that since there's a lot to deal with in this game.) Pretty shitty under-developed metagame for a two year old game, if you ask me.





I feel your pain in that regard. Its enormously frustrating when people ignore empirical evidence and straight up disregard it using generic statements.

But what else can one do to keep the conversation constructive without joining the poo flinging club?


20 Nov 2015, 12:16 PM
#30
avatar of Antemurale
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 951

I suggest removing the ability and giving it Target Weak Point instead. Makes it a StuG III G with better armor and a better gun.
20 Nov 2015, 14:06 PM
#31
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1

Nurf that mean (future T4) Jagdpz 4, is killing my T34s !! :*( :*( And it can even scratch my churchills!!!
20 Nov 2015, 14:07 PM
#32
avatar of Von Kluge
Patrion 14

Posts: 3548 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Nov 2015, 14:06 PMJohnnyB
Nurf that mean (future T4) Jagdpz 4, is killing my T34s !! :*( :*( And it can even scratch my churchills!!!

Have you been drinking again?
20 Nov 2015, 14:10 PM
#33
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1


Have you been drinking again?


Jagermeister. You like it? :rolleyes:
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

454 users are online: 1 member and 453 guests
Musafir
9 posts in the last 24h
37 posts in the last week
152 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45058
Welcome our newest member, podcasts
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM