EE PatronJun 5th 2021, 13:54:18
Originally posted by Kill4Free:
Originally posted by DerrickICN:
Yeah haha. If you run 10 CDs on a spied out dude your country will be worthless for like 4 days haha.
I see it happening the way sov says it and the way I said it and not any other way. It's a bit speculative because certainly people will adapt. I think in this case tho, the good players will adapt to being unkillable which like sov said. It's part of war. I think it would lower outcomes and quality and usefulness of the entire tag. The further we are from two or three countries with a high spy total getting killed by an OP chem rush deciding wars totally in a day and the whole rest of the set being a grind, the more fun our meta is. When I see this, I instantly see less kills. Less kills hurts our meta, especially when coupling that with diminishing the usefulness of restarts.
Maybe bring back lemming efficacy?
I see it happening the way sov says it and the way I said it and not any other way. It's a bit speculative because certainly people will adapt. I think in this case tho, the good players will adapt to being unkillable which like sov said. It's part of war. I think it would lower outcomes and quality and usefulness of the entire tag. The further we are from two or three countries with a high spy total getting killed by an OP chem rush deciding wars totally in a day and the whole rest of the set being a grind, the more fun our meta is. When I see this, I instantly see less kills. Less kills hurts our meta, especially when coupling that with diminishing the usefulness of restarts.
Maybe bring back lemming efficacy?
Well I believe I only have 1 death over the last year in 1a. Good players are already pretty much unkillable, and I don't do the drop land to max my SPAL either. I go for the extra income a larger country provides, and use that to make up my CD losses. And who cares about the Meta, if the rules change, the Meta has to change. Your guy's opinion is "This hurts how we currently do things", my opinion is "Figure out a way to do things better/different". I provided solutions (Aka, bring more land to the table now that spies arent as crippling). And the response is "This hurts kills, which hurts Meta". Screw Meta. I have come up with several strategies already that can take great advantage of this change, which would increase kills, just because you can't see it, doesnt mean it doesnt exist.
Adapt, overcome succeed!
Or
Complain how this is inconvenient to the way you currently do things.
If you're gonna come at my opinion, dont be so overzealous. This will absolutely not increase kills. That defies all logic.
Further, I've suggested many changes to this game, some of which have been adopted and considered. To say I'm resistant to change isnt the case. I'm resistant to less kills, for sure. And I have my reasons for it. But its not because of any of the reasons you said. Even said some of the things are speculative and that I'd be more into this idea if they fixed expenses in addition. Theres more parts to it than just hesitation to all change. That's why we're having the discussion.