Forum Discussion

Seasoned Adventurer

2 months ago

Slowly becoming pay to win

Title says it all. Some of the new premade builds coming out are just too good. Jean Spectre Sniper anyone? What a joke. They are slowly making this a pay to win in WOC but are doing it very sneak...

feedback

KidShowtime1867

Hero

2 months ago

TTZ_Dipsy wrote:
"i don't personally have an issue so your argument is invalid".

I did not say this. You use of a Strawman argument. is not cool my dude.

TTZ_Dipsy wrote:
These builds are literally better than what we can create; Still being able to technically compete against them holds no weight

Anyone who is confident with their in-game skills doesn't give a single hoot about these premade builds. I could not care less if someone uses them. You couldn't pay me to care if an entire team is equipped with them. In fact, like I said - seeing players equipped with these builds just tells me they have gaps in their game and are using these builds as a way to try and get bailed out. These builds have their deficiencies too and aren't perfect.

When players believe premade builds are overpowered, that perception can become self-reinforcing. Every lost puck battle, bounce, or goal against gets filtered through that assumption, and the build becomes the default explanation regardless of what actually caused the play to break down. I suspect online echo chambers will be rife with angst.

Those of us with good stick skills will continue to be unphased by premade builds.

rsandersr47

Seasoned Ace

2 months ago

"Anyone who is confident with their in-game skills doesn't give a single hoot about these premade builds."

hasty generalization fallacy..

Based on what data? How many people? Who was polled? I believe my skills are above average. I typically win far more than I lose. I had a 90% win rate in WoC a couple years ago, not as active now because of life.. i have an issue with these builds, others that I know do too.. I think I'm confident in my skills. They're confident in theirs. The "skill issue" argument is always the only leg you stand on, and it doesn't make sense when you use a universal "all" when it isn't "all" this is general logic.

"You couldn't pay me to care if an entire team is equipped with them."

Why would someone pay you to do that? Did someone suggest that? Strawman? Not cool my dude.

"seeing players equipped with these builds just tells me they have gaps in their game and are using these builds as a way to try and get bailed out. These builds have their deficiencies too and aren't perfect. "

You get all that from someone's bought build huh... sounds like another generalization..

"When players believe premade builds are overpowered, that perception can become self-reinforcing. Every lost puck battle, bounce, or goal against gets filtered through that assumption, and the build becomes the default explanation regardless of what actually caused the play to break down. I suspect online echo chambers will be rife with angst."

True.. more reason to not have them.. but also they just ARE better.. you can argue "how much" but they are better.

"Those of us with good stick skills will continue to be unphased by premade builds."

Back to skill issue and universal wording again, imagine that.. you are of course aware this is ALSO a stawman.. right? It's using the strawman to attack rather than change or distort.. The person using the fallacy attacks Claim Y (the straw man ie. Stick skills) rather than claim X (the topic of this being P2W) of which I think I made a fairly good argument for.

Let's stay on topic please. 🙏