|
|
Post by HangryBird on May 2, 2021 4:06:38 GMT
By that logic, List occasionally hits as hard as Guderian. Every unit can crit anyway. As per my last response, the reason I bought King is mostly due to personal reasons. He literally created the fleet carrier doctrine that was integral to the US winning the naval war in the Pacific. There is no "logic", and per my original post I am not defending my purchase of them as an efficient way to play the game. What I am saying is that if you want to buy a commander, them buy him. The game gives you medals over time and many ways to earn them, and if it brings you enjoyment to see the face of a person that means something to you over a unit instead of the meta pick, then do it. You don't *have* to play the most optimal way, it is just what most people on this forum do. Why are you so keen on attacking my position? What gives you the impression that I am attacking you for the sake of attacking you? If I was intent on doing so, why didn't I use strong language like "useless". I never criticized you for buying King since yes, you explained you bought him for personal reasons. I am just saying that King's output is not at all close to Nimitz's. |
|
|
|
Post by Józef Poniatowski on May 2, 2021 4:38:55 GMT
What gives you the impression that I am attacking you for the sake of attacking you? If I was intent on doing so, why didn't I use strong language like "useless". I never criticized you for buying King since yes, you explained you bought him for personal reasons. I am just saying that King's output is not at all close to Nimitz's. It took you 3 responses before you achknowledged my original position, "strong language" or not. I never said you attacked me personally, but it does seem you are attacking my opinion. I will get literal with your statement "every unit can crit". Perhaps I am mistaken, but the point your are alluding to is that my opinion is wrong because every unit can do a lot of damage with a crit. Your communicated intent is to devalue my opinion that King was worth my medals through that "logical" argument (to be clear, I agree it is logical, but that is your word not mine). You are allowed to have your opinion, but I don't remember asking for your critique of mine. |
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on May 2, 2021 4:49:33 GMT
What gives you the impression that I am attacking you for the sake of attacking you? If I was intent on doing so, why didn't I use strong language like "useless". I never criticized you for buying King since yes, you explained you bought him for personal reasons. I am just saying that King's output is not at all close to Nimitz's. It took you 3 responses before you achknowledged my original position, "strong language" or not. I never said you attacked me personally, but it does seem you are attacking my opinion. I will get literal with your statement "every unit can crit". Perhaps I am mistaken, but the point your are alluding to is that my opinion is wrong because every unit can do a lot of damage with a crit. Your communicated intent is to devalue my opinion that King was worth my medals through that "logical" argument (to be clear, I agree it is logical, but that is your word not mine). You are allowed to have your opinion, but I don't remember asking for your critique of mine. Did I ever criticize you for buying a general for personal reasons? No. I did not say anything about it, but that doesn't automatically mean I am against it. I only expressed disagreement with you comparing a gen's crit with another gen's regular hit; that's why I said "every unit can crit". Following your line of reasoning, I don't know how you came to the conclusion that I wanted to "devalue your opinion that King was worth your medals". Because of your personal reasons, your opinion can't be devalued unless I wanted to maliciously attack you for it. To further elaborate, if I was intent on doing so, why didn't I attack you on buying Voronov and Novikov. It wouldn't make sense for me to single out King. In short, I am not devaluing your opinion that generals can be bought for personal reasons that go against what is considered to be optimal. I just don't think it's a fair comparison to compare a gen's crit with another gen's regular hit. Hopefully this clarifies things; that is all. |
|
|
|
Post by andrei on May 2, 2021 5:32:07 GMT
Józef Poniatowski , lol You posted in the thread about low tier gens saying that some of them are "useful". They are same useful as non-general units. Means they can't change the tide of any mission/challenge/conquest. There are couple of exceptions of course but generally that's it. They are just crap. Don't say they are useful otherwise there always be people ready to come up with argument against Your opinion.
Moderated by: Saltin A couple sentences were removed as unnecessarily harsh.
|
|
|
|
Post by Saltin on May 2, 2021 6:30:22 GMT
Ok i had to slightly edit a post and move and remove a couple others to hopefully keep the peace. It's good to see pationate debates but please let's not get tempers flaring and out of control. As a reminder: 1)Everyone has the right to post about whatever topics they want to talk about. As long as they dont break the forum or proboards ToS they are free to post as they will. They can post their opinions on game matters no matter how true or false it maybe. 2)Everyone has the right to challenge or contradict others and lay counter claims and or attempt to disprove others. This is what we do in forums, this is normal and expected. We just need to do it in a civil and non-hostile way. That is all, happy chatting  |
|
Grigory Kulik
Captain
"What the hell do we need rocket artillery for? The main thing is the horse-drawn gun."
Posts: 53
|
Post by Grigory Kulik on May 2, 2021 6:32:47 GMT
Lowest tier generals were never very good (there are a few exceptions) but with the new update they are useless. Highest tier generals now add +60% HP to their units. Low tier generals can't do that.
|
|
