That makes your argument worse.
If one's experience in the scenarios, or with the items, being debated is non-existent or minimal, how can one comment on what would improve them?
That you are a top tier player that aggressively defends SCBs provides addition evidence of the problem.
I aggressively oppose shortsighted and/or misinformed fixes for potentially nonexistent problems.
In quite a few of them devs pandered to the top and lost much of their player base.
The game doesn't pander to me. I do well at what I do because I am adaptable. The game is not exactly what I would wish it to be, but I play the game that is, not the game I hope for.
I didn't ask for SCBs. I opposed them quite vocally. I didn't ask for explosives to be nerfed. I opposed that quite vocally too. Why? Because I thought the disruption caused by these changes were not going to be worth whatever problems these changes were supposed to fix. I still feel that way, and that is exactly why I am against further nerfing or other radical changes to SCBs. They are well integrated at this point, and the fallout from messing with them would not make
anyone happy.
Stagnation is the heat death of all games and you openly defend it.
I openly defend the status quo because I have yet to see a suggestion that wouldn't introduce more problems than they would solve.
That's not stagnation. Those who insist on playing a version of the game that no longer exists, never existed, or does not yet exist, rather than modifying their own behavior in light of what currently is are the one's being stagnant. Many of these people don't seem to have even given the current game a chance...it's disturbingly similar to all those complaining about Open, who have never played in Open, or who gave up on it because of one experience that did not go according to script.
Fixing what isn't broken, forcing people to relearn fundamentals, and arbitrarily changing the rules is not good for a game either.
Think of something that would solve our problem without ruining your game style and I'd be all ears.
My game style is not static. It lies wherever effectiveness and my personal taste of the moment intersect. I decide what I want to do, then I figure out how to make it work with the game I have.
To be clear our problem is an average pvp fight is very very long and boring because of SCBs.
I'm not convinced this is your problem. I'm convinced that a vocal minority have this perception, but perception and reality are often not remotely the same thing.
I doubt the premise that removal of SCBs would appreciably shorten combats. I doubt the premise that removal of SCBs would result in a form of combat any significant portion of the player base would consider to be more exciting.
You find the average PvP fight to be long and boring, but I do not believe SCBs are the cause as much as a scapegoat.
If your solution involves a non-average level of player skill it's not a solution.
If the average player lacks the ability to experiment and learn, no solution will ever be forthcoming for them.
If you want some respect for your opinions on game design, please make some constructive suggestions.
Suggesting solutions to something that I believe has had problems falsely attributed to it would be hypocritical.
