Storms from decrewed emplacements

[JimQwilleran]

This is so cute <3!

[Devilfish]

This is so cute <3!

This is the moment when people often say: "I am not sure if I should laugh or cry"

[MarKr]

Hi seha...I know you sometimes post here, so yes I remember you.

I know that you and Tiger are friends so I can understand you defending him, though I don't understand much why you bring this up again after I wrote this:

I am sorry but it was simply too similar to what Tiger kept telling us in PMs...

and this:

yes, I was being sarcastic, becasue I suspected Tiger had at least something tiny to do with this. Sorry, my bad.

and also this:

So one more time - I was wrong and I am sorry for thinking that you told Paso to come here and support your case.

Anyway...

well, can you take a look at this please? (follow quotes from Devilfish and Sukin)

Yes, I can of course.

seems incredibly similar too, don't you think?

Yes, these two are very similar but the reason is simple...let me explain you: The first quote by Devilfish was:

That's clearly a bullshit. Jumping out of decrewed emplacement, are you kidding me? What does it have to do with CQB in ANY way?!

after that Tiger posted and few minutes later Sukin wrote

I agree, jumping out of emplacements is pure BS, there is nothing to do with CQB or sabotage squads.

It is obvious that Sukin read Devilfish's comment and instead of writing something like "@Devilfish +1" he simply decided to use a full sentence and probably by that he pointed out that he agrees with "jumping out of emplacements being nonsensical" and also that he can see no correlation between that and Gliders and CQB - we can presume that Sukin did not wish to comment on the rest of Devil's post - specifically this part:

Let's wait for Mark, but I'd bet my pants that this is no way intentional....

Tiger, if you think blitz doc it's too weak or needs some tweaks, start a topic and present your reasons and proposed solutions.....and not this.....trying to fool people that some nasty glitches are intended because CQB can spawn without vision....damn.

So Sukin's post was reaction to Devil's post.
On the other hand Paso "summarized" in his oppinion pretty much everything Tiger has said throughout the entire topic using very similar choice of words and in addition he did so after pretty much everything had been said, so his post was not an obvious reaction to Tiger's posts as there was missing the link of his post coming in short succession after Tiger's. I hope I explained to you the difference clearly enough and you can see that the situations were not exactely the same.

If I failed to explain the difference clearly enough, ask Tiger because he understands what I meant:

But I can understand how you felt suspicion about it.. as it really seemed like if I have actually whispered him... Pretty much it definitely seems to be the case.

so perhaps he will be able to explain it to you better.

so if i say now .... " i agree, jumping out of emplacements is a feature and not a bug. is balanced, and not unfair " does this mean tiger whispered me to say so?

Of course it does not mean Tiger whispered to you to say so...It only means that you are trying to use sarcasm and irony to make it look like my reasoning is flawed and illogical, while actually failing miserably at doing so because, just as I explained above, your arguments are based on missunderstood flow of the posts in this topic.

Hoho... Nailed it, nice one! Maybe Sukin and Devil have whispered each other too.. #MarKr's plot logic!

#dontArgueWithoutSolidArguments

[Krieger Blitzer]

#dontArgueWithoutSolidArguments

#StopBias.

[kwok]

Stop Bias? Granted, I agree that ANY popping out of buildings no matter what squad is a bit bullshitty but i've accept it as part of the game and work to keep that in mind while I play. But to call out devs for being bias??? Sorry for derailing the topic, but come on... How can I NOT respond to this?

Let's talk about recent pretty major Axis updates:
-Let's talk about Reg5 already had objectively the best mid-range gun, close to 2nd best short range gun, high tier maybe top 5 long range gun with already elite armor and highest HP among all infantry. Recent patches gave them airborne armor which boosts their gap-closing potential to use their short range guns PLUS gebirgs bonuses on cover further improving their survivability. Originally they were the highest damage dealers with the trade off of just using simple skill that so many BK players claim to have (simply flanking or oh no even more tactically cumbersome: diverting fire), but instead devs pandered to the blind-bum-rushers which is basically how KCH was played back then with even more effective guns and tougher armor and stacked defensive bonuses to make gap-closing a simple right click. BUT GOD FORBID IF SAS CAN RUN AROUND WITH ALLEGED INVINCIBILITY AND THE SAME DPS AS ANY OTHER CLOSE RANGE ALLIED INF.
-Let's talk about hodgekiss getting accuracy bonuses to a doctrine that focuses on tank hunting, not bunker busting, inf fighting, emplacement smashing. Why does TH even need arty? Why do half the axis doctrines even need arty? But god forbid if arty doc can make more than 2 howitzers. (For the record, I am an opponent to RAF getting the 95mm cromwell. Give everyone arty or give the specialized docs arty for both axis/allies).
-Let's talk about Def Doc getting the ability to offensively throw easily the most OP grenade (close tie with incendiaries) as a defensive doctrine plus every other buff def doc already gets that NO ONE EVEN USES but literally carries games when used. Instead it's just complaints and further buffing of def doc.
-Let's talk about the 88 range buff so the RE which is supposedly made for emplacement and bunker cracking has only 1 counter that relies on RNG to decrew. You'd think with all the ordnance and tough skin that RE should have it should act as a counter to taking on emplacements with the trade off of loss in mobility. But nah, let's just make RE just really really good at sitting still like a big fat arty target. If it wasn't for the churchill boosts which received a shitstorm initially because people didn't know how to kill tanks except to put an obvious pak out in the middle then RE would barely have any offensive capabilities whatsoever.

Axis received its fair share of tuning down, price ups, and in this case bug fixes. But, that's the trade off to being a consistently well-balanced faction with less reliance on teamplay. As much as I can agree/disagree with what you propose, and quite recently more so agreeing than disagreeing, acting so sour on-forum and off-forum, two faces that only some people have the misfortune of seeing, is just too much.
Honestly, why would the devs even be biased? They literally can't be faction biased because they don't even play the game. Some people don't like that fact, but to me it's a strong symbol of objectivity because it's so easy to coerce a favorite playstyle as a dev which they literally don't/can't do as non-players.

[Wolf]

Storms coming out of decrewed emplacements, or any other unit doing the same = BUG.
CQBs coming in fog of war = FEATURE.

We are going to fix BUG, we currently do not intend to remove FEATURE.