The Infantry Problem 2

[TerrorBite]

It's irrelevant whether it actually occurred (assuming it was on hard or rag)
The fact is that most of the time this is not the case at all without being a slasher. What's the point in cherry picking outliers?

[Winter]

I got top kills once when playing Cards Against Humanity in TS with some friends on my laptop while shielding on infantry. Now we just need to figure out if that is to be attributed to the fact I was on infantry or if it was the Cards Against Humanity....

Having one person do well on a certain class in a certain run does not mean that class is overpowered or balanced. When I attended events on Castleyard the archers were always the top few scores on the scoreboard and the infantry all ended up with under 30 kills. Using this logic, does that mean archers are overpowered and infantry is underpowered?

PS - I am aware the online game is actually Pretend You're Xyzzy, but Cards Against Humanity is a more recognized and cooler name

[Kaasovic]

It's irrelevant whether it actually occurred (assuming it was on hard or rag)

It actually is. To come to an agreement we need to take both stances in consideration. From cases like the top scoring legionnaire with melee only, we could learn what is needed to achieve such accomplishment. Even if external factors played a role it is still relevant as these factors will help in balancing the final outcome.

[Sir Baron]

You want Screens?
I will get you screens

[Winter]

You want Screens?
I will get you screens

I don't think they were asking for screenshots, no.  I think Kaasovic was saying he finds it hard to believe a Legionnaire achieved it with melee only and would like more details so that external factors could be evaluated and perhaps used to come up with fixes for other individuals that are not finding themselves as successful with the class.  TerrorBite said it is irrelevant whether it happened or not (therefore proof doesn't matter) and stated that regardless of its truth, cherrypicking a single example (or even a few) does not constitute a good argument. Kaasovic disagrees and says that if it is true, he wants to know what else could have contributed to this happening for the reasons outlined above.

Providing screenshots of a score will not answer any of those concerns.

[Sir Baron]

It could be said that it's the same for any other class
I have seen top gear MP least kills without being healer

If screens don't count I can't prove anything but no one else can so there is no point being here

---

And I have yet to hear why Infantry is under powered besides being able to be 2-3 hit by bots that 1 hit most else

[Winter]

It could be said that it's the same for any other class
I have seen top gear MP least kills without being healer

If screens don't count I can't prove anything but no one else can so there is no point being here

It can be said it is the same for any class, yes.  I'm glad you agree that a Legionnaire getting top kills in melee doesn't mean anything, as any class can obtain top kills using their weapons of choice.

Screenshots of a person getting a high score along with their class doesn't prove anything relating to balance, no.  There is plenty of points to being here, though.  For one, I am hoping some people will get some practice in actually addressing the points made by others and not just arguing past each other.  As far as the actual topic goes, maybe at some point there will be a reasonable conclusion reached on what is wrong with infantry, if anything, and how to fix it (whether or not this is a changing of the class or of outside factors such as maps or barricades).  If no conclusion is reached, at least some ideas will be thrown out that may later be adopted and people will be forced to actually think about their positions in order to provide evidence and reasoning for their beliefs instead of dogmatically shouting the same thing over and over.

I don't know why in argumentation there is such an emphasis on "proving" yourself right. If that is the mentality one approaches a situation with, it is much harder for them to accept the ideas of others and will often lead to subconscious logical fallacies. It also makes it much easier for one to get frustrated that they aren't winning. The point of an argument should be to reach the truth and, in the event that the truth is a problem, find a reasonable solution or solutions to fix it. Whether or not screenshots of an unsatisfactory point (as already established) are able to prove something or not has no effect on reality or the merits of discussing it.

[TerrorBite]

It's irrelevant whether it actually occurred (assuming it was on hard or rag)

It actually is. To come to an agreement we need to take both stances in consideration. From cases like the top scoring legionnaire with melee only, we could learn what is needed to achieve such accomplishment. Even if external factors played a role it is still relevant as these factors will help in balancing the final outcome.

Yes but we also know that NI kill count tends to be highly variable and dependent on many factors. The rest of the team could easily have been highly afk, or at least the normal heavy shooters could have been afk for some time. The leg could have also prioritised slashing spot or shooting spot or w/e, and could have been really active. The map could have also been a slow paced one etc. 

The point is it's not unlikely for it to occur, and changing the meta based on ^ assuming it doesn't take away from the rest of the team is unlikely (given this playstyle would have been picked up by others by now automatically from seeing it, or would in the future if it is worthwhile).

---

Regading inf being underpowered if you go to page 1 i think we said it isn't underpowered, but just too specialied in its roles to the extent it's not as fun or versatile. So without making it OP we were looking for ways to improve other aspects of it like more hp.

[Sir Baron]

I have been trying to get reasons why Infantry is under powered
But I have heard that it's do to
Lack of shielding
which is do to cades
The lack of taking several hits from high tier two-handed
And...
I can't think of anything else please post if you can

[Winter]

And I have yet to hear why Infantry is under powered besides being able to be 2-3 hit by bots that 1 hit most else

What specific evidence would you accept to prove that infantry is under powered? To others on the thread, what specific evidence would prove to you that infantry is not under powered?

It is hard to prove feelings. Neither group will prove that their feelings are "correct." You have only said you play infantry a lot, get a lot of kills, and don't feel like it is under powered. This is also insufficient in convincing others. I think that, as Kaasovic said, the best way to establish if the community believes infantry is underpowered (less worth playing) than the other classes is to make a poll.

I think the idea that infantry is under powered is less based on specific traits and more on a general feeling that other classes are valued more and are more necessary for successful runs, or are at least more fun to play. The fact that infantry is killed in 2-3 hits rather than 1 is not a good enough reason to pick it over other classes, hence why it is being brought up. It is an example of infantry failing to make itself competitive in value (***in their opinion***) to the other classes.