Mad Scientist 270 General

[Norton_C]

But is there a faulty design? Like I replied in the 1st part there are many benefits of him to certain players. Also if you look at the other threads there are number of people happy with him. To me Dracula for example was when originally introduced and still is more useless as he has a poor accuracy with no splash and has zero traits. We complained back then too as he seemed very expensive for the features he has. I found a far more cases for Mad Scientist than Dracula by simulating adventures.

You sort of sound as if you are afraid you would regret you didn't buy him and then we could go back and forth forever about Status Quo reasoning. Rather then that, if you believe he is actually a good design and useful general, why don't you start feeding us with specific examples of his usefulness which you found, similar like we have thread about reasonable use of Mary. To me that would have a whole lot more weight, provided that he really is useful, then your elaborate, but kind of meaningless imo, response to each paragraph of my simple post.

[Kelza]

Using status quo as an argument against improvement is a very lame approach imo. From what I understand BB failed to do a good job when designing this general and our top gun testers failed to comment on his uselessness enough to enact a change before he went live. Both probably happened due to too many changees, too much rush and not enough time to properly think through and balance everything that comes in the game. Since I'm not hardcore I don't have time for test server and so rely on the game provider and immensely more active players to "negotiate" what the improvement should be exactly. But if there is a universal agreement that the gen is more or less useless for both low and high level players then what's the point of keeping something useless in the game for status quo argument?

Improvements like that happened before, like most recent probably Scouting post buffs going from 20 % boost to 50 % boost and others (surely active players could point out many more).

So I'd expect BB guys and experienced very active players to get together and redesign the gen features so that he fit's the game. It should have been done on test before going live, but better late then never imo. Status Quo is simply not an excuse for preserving faulty design, otherwise we could even stop the game development completely. That same Status Quo argument could be used to stop introducing better improved buildings, as some guys invested a lot of high end material to upgrade less powerful older buildings which now become useless, or stop adding tasks and buffs demanding rebalancing of economy for the same reason, etc. I think everybody can see that it would not be very smart approach. To rectify the "harm" some may feel would happen to them there's always option to make him available for gems or stalks or next event with absolute amount limited to one to equalize the field.

Thank you for writing with far more details and elaboration what I would have liked to say. The main point of rebuttal I see from the few players not wanting (-denying, in fact) a change on this general is because they think he's mainly useless, and thus they didnt take him, and so they would feel frustrated in their decision-making if it were to change somehow. That is an incredibly selfish argument IMO to say the least. Nobody argued that this specific general should (then) never be available again for others who either didnt take him in event (because they didnt feel he was a good choice in the rewards) or simply were unable to play in this particular event.

The very fact that older players were able to get something as powerful as COAs in at least one event in the past, which will NEVER be a possibility to any other player in the future, according to what a mod said in chat the other day ("BB wont give away COAs in the future", quite litteraly), should make those older players invoking status quo a little more weighted in their denying of better generals for others, IMHO.

[Mannerheim]

You sort of sound as if you are afraid you would regret you didn't buy him and then we could go back and forth forever about Status Quo reasoning. Rather then that, if you believe he is actually a good design and useful general, why don't you start feeding us with specific examples of his usefulness which you found, similar like we have thread about reasonable use of Mary. To me that would have a whole lot more weight, provided that he really is useful, then your elaborate, but kind of meaningless imo, response to each paragraph of my simple post.

Nope, I could have easily bought him but I saw the advertised stats of him and tested how well he works with them and decided that I would not use him that much next to my other generals. However I saw at the same time that he wouldn't be completely useless to everyone. If they would for any reason happen to improve him it would happen for the next Halloween event anyways so I could buy him then and not lose anything. Below are few random snapshots on how he is in the top attacks but I'm not going to make huge effort to provide a detailed guide and chart to defend the general as everyone who purchased him can already do it themselves

http://prntscr.com/ljsphu
http://prntscr.com/ljspns
http://prntscr.com/ljsw12

If you can google translate you can see that at the German forum people are fine with the general and listing uses and skills.

https://forum.diesiedleronline.de/th...issenschaftler
https://forum.diesiedleronline.de/th...r-ihn-geeignet

Or just our forum with few happy people

https://forum.thesettlersonline.com/...-Mad-Scientist

[Budgy]

** they think he's mainly useless, and thus they didnt take him, and so they would feel frustrated in their decision-making if it were to change somehow. That is an incredibly selfish argument IMO to say the least.

Please stop calling people selfish, it's not a good argument, it can be applied on your argument just as easily (why do you want mad to have more capacity?) and it doesn't help with keeping things friendly here.

It's not about the being cheated part, its about this game being completely based on informed decisions.

http://prntscr.com/ljsphu
http://prntscr.com/ljspns
http://prntscr.com/ljsw12

LOL, 2 camps that most guides skip completely and a camp that is very easy to block. I am very pleased with giving those pumps to others.

[Norton_C]

Or just our forum with few happy people

https://forum.thesettlersonline.com/...-Mad-Scientist

I'm a bit confused about the logic or rather lack of it of your arguments. Budgy's response to your examples clarifies how useless they are. I skipped the German forum course the other two parts show you don't have a point anyway.

Examining again the thread which you refer to largely support my understanding. To summarize, most people view this gen as useless, you yourself give 3 posts in that thread confirming how useless he is (I would have linked them or quoted them here but not sure if somebody would take it as an offence), those who "like" him do not give any solid comparison and evidence at all or give examples at which others laugh. So that's where general consensus seems to be.

All in all we are back to the square one. Gen mostly useless suggests faulty design which begs for reconsideration of his traits, gen being so bad that nobody (including you) even bothers to start supplying consistent evidence for his usefulness although several less engaged players including me asked for it several times. Can't see any reason why his traits shouldn't be adjusted. And in the absence of any solid consistent evidence speaking for this general I have no other option then keep my stance until that evidence is provided.

Maybe BB could step in and enlighten us what they had in mind with this gen or if Sparkz is correct in his suggestion that this design is the result of designer's ignorance.

Anyway, feels like we've said it all already and we are starting to repeat ourselves.

[Madorosu]

The main point of rebuttal I see from the few players not wanting (-denying, in fact) a change on this general is because they think he's mainly useless, and thus they didnt take him, and so they would feel frustrated in their decision-making if it were to change somehow.

Actually, I did buy him, even though I was well aware of his limited use. Despite that, I can fully understand those that would feel somewhat 'hard done by', if he were to be radically altered after the opportunity to purchase him had passed, which is why I suggested only a minor change earlier in the thread, one which would make him no more powerful/useful in regular adventures (when compare to a major) than he already is in adventures where elite troops are permitted.

[lordloocan]

Thread has degenerated into I/you/they did, I/you/they didn't. Question has been asked re making it a 270 general; some in favour, some against, Bb to decide.

[Mannerheim]

LOL, 2 camps that most guides skip completely and a camp that is very easy to block. I am very pleased with giving those pumps to others.

I defeated both of the wisdom camps every time I did the adventure during event because of the xp which I why also remembered the camps easily for the mad scientist examples. Arrow start + skipping meant 200-400k xp lost when using scout + prem

https://prnt.sc/lapege

[Kelza]

Please stop calling people selfish, it's not a good argument, it can be applied on your argument just as easily (why do you want mad to have more capacity?) and it doesn't help with keeping things friendly here.

(...) I'm just giving my opinion, (...) so why the remarks about me not being constructive. (...)

So it kind of seem like you dont like your own medecine, uh? ;-)
Like I was told in the thread about item deletion, if you are unhappy about what I say and think it breaks Rules of Conduct, feel free to file a complain report, otherwise, I kindly suggest you to learn and deal with it.
I stand by my points, which are very nicely expanded and far better written and way more diplomaticly in Norton_C posts, so I will direct you to them. You invoke status quo because it would otherwise "mess with your decision making", and I think you are using completely flawed logic, and that you are in fact purely selfish. If the Mad Sci would ever get a buff, you could probably still get him later somehow without gems, another event, etc. And I also think that you were absolutely not "friendly" at all from your very first post in this thread (like you arent, in other threads, from all evidence), so making me such remark is quite absurd. I dont think I have anything else to say to you in this discussion...

[Budgy]

My apologies for having a bit of a harsh tone in my comments, i'm Dutch, so no beating around the bush.
I don't like most suggestions on this whole forum, not because they are change but because people complain about things they don't understand (well). This game is completely based on logic. BB sets the parameters and we get to play the game. We can predict everything. This allows us to plan a good economy and makes guides a possibility. I believe pvp has random camps but it is not a great success.

Therefor decision making in general is key in the game.

I had the pumps, I have the gems so no problem if he gets an upgrade, but in my opinion this would set an unfavorable example.

And what Lordloocan said.

PS
As long as your opinion is on topic I have no problem with it. But you have an opinion about me.