The fight of the century: hypocrites VS hypocrites

So I made myself some popcorn to enjoy the fight of the century: hypocrites VS hypocrites, brought to you by our good friends at the Advance Wars subreddshit, who banned me under the claim of wanting to stop the infighting. I'm going to eat through the popcorn as I read through this interesting little comment thread where clearly infighting is happening there anyway.

The thread starts off with our favorite commenter, GoldenJerk24--er, sorry, "GoldenJOE24":
"As nice as it is to have the numbers, all of these posts boil down to: “while not cost effective as tanks or copters, tech becomes good late game and can OHKO some extra stuff with boosts”. It’s not just not a very deep or interesting meta, which is why even most of the remaining diehard fans don’t want to play 1v1."
That first part is actually a sound point. I first got interested in Advance Wars seeing the tech units have relative weaknesses to their lower cost counterparts that don't rely on costs, something to showcase that no, it would not be some arms race. There's incentive to care about learning the gameplay itself.

That second part, I agree there too. What I blame is the lack of incentive for considering things like flanking. As I have pointed out in the past, brute forcing should be more of a Mighty Glacier's privilege. Of course, who really brings up the concept of flanking is Checkmark Games, the makers of Shattered Throne. I need only point to how Ghouls in Shattered Throne reward flanking because Vicious adds up fast if given the chance, and there's also Fae Courts in general, designed in general to be flankers, which ironically made it hard to make sure they were well balanced. How does it take everybody else, myself included sadly, so long to consider these concepts more actively?

Of course, GipFarce has a response to GoldenJoe's comment:
"But that's exactly why it's deep. AW doesn't have units with a bunch of different abilities. Positioning plays a large role."
Yeah, I'll believe it when I see it. By the way, where's the mentions of flanking? All I'm seeing from you is active hate of sea units as a concept rather than their clear execution problems in the Advance Wars games. It doesn't even make sense that the Cruiser, or any decent size boat really, literally can't use its weapons against land units when realistically there would be so many options. And this is off the top of my head. How often does the word "flanking" spring to mind in the Advance Wars series. Play through it again and let me know. I can't imagine it will be a lot.

But problems with flanking or no, GoldenJoe has this to say to GipFarce's comment:
"You just gave a very good argument for it not being deep. You can still like it if it’s not."
To be fair--and I haven't forgotten that GoldenJoe is the same person who claimed that literally anything I say is more obnoxious than anything in a community that includes GipFarce's general material--Advance Wars is supposed to involve enough simplicity. Of course, that just makes it clear that GipFarce has an ego to brag about being a superfan of Advance Wars since 9/11.

Unfortunately, GipFarce being an arrogant racial stereotype doesn't change that he has his sycophantic supporters, like rwbonesy, who has this to say:
"goldenjoe24 is just salty"
Love how you use the term "salty" there, buddy. Almost like you're proving my point that the Advance War subreddshit is full of darwinistic garbage, that is determined to turn a strategy game into thoughtless garbage no less. Oh wait, you are.

Now here's GoldenJoe's response, and one that is ultimately hypocritical:
"Yeah...you’re not a true fan if you criticize the work."
Yeah, uh, how long have I been calling out the Advance Wars series' problems? I forget. But I do know it's why I was banned from the Advance Wars subreddshit, not to mention why GoldenJoe would claim that literally anything coming out of my mouth is worse than the sort of material you come to expect from a guy who mocks lust-induced murder victims. The worst part about it is how if GoldenJoe weren't the pot calling the kettle black, he would actually have a good point. Unfortunately, his actions from before, and arguably his actions now proving that there is in-fighting, with or without me, just undermine it.

Oh and speaking of comments that are rich, rwbonesy's response:
"all you ever do here is shit on people"
That's funny. By the way, rwbonesy, I notice you do that, oh, only 5 times a post. Maybe I should have had an extra bag of popcorn ready just for this.

GoldenJoe's response works just as well, by the way:
"I’m actually not sure who you even are. Please, share some of your quality commentary with us. This should be good."
Yeah, it is good, watching you and rwbonesy fight to determine which one of you is the bigger hypocrite. Shame the opposite sex could stand to treat me with more respect and dignity, because I'd gladly pass the popcorn to my wife if I had one, and no, I haven't forgotten what that implies given my type.

rwbonesy doesn't know when to quit:
"i could say the same thing about you, kiddo"
I love how you call ANYBODY kiddo, troll. And I also love how you ban people for calling you out for your garbage.

And back to GoldenJoe re-...wait a minute:
"No, you couldn't, because you purport to be familiar with my posting habits, 'kiddo'. Try to keep up for at least one post before resorting to a third grade "no, u!"."
AHAHAHAHAHAHA! Ya know, that's actually pretty funny. I'm not being sarcastic there, it actually is funny, and not because of GoldenJoe being a hypocrite. No, he actually turned rwbonesy's trolling against itself. I actually would be supporting GoldenJoe if he weren't so abrasive to begin with like I wasn't providing a disclaimer that I was playing devil's advocate about Cloud in Smash 4.

Surprisingly, rwbonesy has a point about GoldenJoe's behavior:
"Every damn time I read this reddit and see a post from you it's usually you bitching about something or someone. That isn't to say it happens all the time but god damn you're a weenie."
Now that complaint about GoldenJoe's behavior actually works, if only because it shows how GoldenJoe is on the opposite extreme of rwbonesy. I'll say I'm surprised again. Nevertheless, however, BOTH of them are still at unwelcome extremes, no matter how opposite. And rwbonesy is STILL fond of anger-shaming, especially since he's still using name-calling such as calling GoldenJoe a weenie.

It's not like GoldenJoe is much better:
"Aw, do my bi-monthy critiques trigger you, little snowflake? Well then, let's go back to the start. Share some of your wonderful posts so we can all laud your positivity. Or just bitch at people for having a different opinion. Whatever works for you, snowflake."
First off, love how you call people snowflake, GoldenJerk. Like it's so good to be manly, even when it ultimately invites strength without compassion. Second, you did toward me that very second thing you offer as a clearly worse option, which was just bitch at me for having a different opinion. But hey, whatever works for you, 'snowflake.' I'm just enjoying this show.

Oh wait, no more responses. Darn. It's over. At least rwbonesy got pwned. Oh, and a bonus line that doesn't show up on the topic, by AeroAria:
"Is (GoldenJoe) one of those people  who think the only game that can have depth are those boring ass grand strategy 4x for hardcore mature gamers suck"
I did not know Battalion Wars, Game Boy Wars 3, and Shattered Throne were grand strategy 4x games! .....wait a minute.

So what's the moral of the story? Simple: if you ban somebody thinking what they do causes increasingly more infighting simply by being a scapegoat, the infighting happens anyway and you will consequently make your community worse with arbitrary reasons. Congratulations, lazerjerk. You proved you're a historic failure.

In other news, next week, when TinyMetal gets released, I will be streaming it. And also, January 21 will be Game Boy Wars 3 Day. Look forward to both.