Butthurt? Nope. Correcting and teaching? Yes. This is a new KaW but not everything has changed.I dont agree with wgat you say and never will.
But according to your logic, every combination of buildings should have it's own title. Correct? Well I for sure am nominating 2 attack buildings and rest spy, the hashashi (sorry if misspelled)
He's not educating anyone on anything. He's like the guy sitting in the back of the class saying "No, clearly the earth is flat. It's what the first person who made a map said it was! I must educate my entire class on their wrongness and try to get them to overcome the proof and logic!"
Evrry combonation¿ No. Titles have been dictated andl personally these builds outdating you should stay. Ive actually been there since before they had a title. Butthurt, sorry the typically forum retard spams that. just assumed. Close enough since you were claiming I was hurt over this. Build named after me? Sweet, all good. I wont argue that. Let me drop a guild to make it true. But lets call it the scar buiod. Or bestalltime build, your archonic overlord build¿
@oli just kind of seems like he continues to reiterate the same thing and think we're going to respond differently. I've already responded, he's said nothing new. Nothing he's said has had any clear logic behind it so clearly it's not even worth discussing with him anymore. The earth is definitely flat though, right hash?
Yep and on the back of a turtle. Since you compare the build to earth ill compare this analogy to the beginning of time. You werent there to see the creation of the build. Hypothetically I was, your basis is of a corrupted misinformed version of the build. It doesnt make it right because players who have assumed and been told wrong say its so.
Lets all call the variation of the hansel build the Cynder build then! You're raging over a bloody NAME!
If you'd like to make that analogy people have no where near the understanding, and education in "the beginning of time" as they do now. There is more research done and actual understanding. By using that analogy, you're just further proving our point. You're stuck in a close minded box who refused to accept change. That's your issue, not ours. We know what a hansel is, clearly you do not. Also I find it comical that you assume you know how long anyone has been playing, it proves your ignorance even further.
Hansel's build had 1 attack building, yes. But the discovery of the build, and the mechanics behind it still apply when having more than 1 attack building. He didn't create the build purely because he liked the idea of having 1 attack building. He liked the build because of how it worked and what he was able to do with it. If you are still able to do exactly that with more than 1 attack building, it is still a hansel build, because it does exactly the same thing.
How does the viewing of the beginning of something and the ending of something make your point? Wheresbyour argument for that other than "i said so". Thats right there is none. Your entire argument thus far has been because you are "right" and me "wrong" with no evidende as to why. My entire argument as been as to why i am right on the instance. Words adapt, titles dont. A commander is still a commander. A general is still a general. A sous chef is still the same meaning as to when Escoffier designed the modern kitchen. Hansel as a title, still the same. The belief of what a hansel is has changed, thus making the title and belief at conflict with eachother. As such, youre wrong. Done here.
Why not ask Hansel why he chose that build. He won't answer with "because having 1 attack building is the way to go". He will answer with stuff to do with allies bonus.
Im well aware why. Melon. Read my posts, seriously. Was going to post some long, complicated post hut nonpoijt you wont read it.
I haven't posted the same arguments as the others. Mine are basic. While I understand Hansel's build was 1 attack, and so the "Hansel Build" should only be 1 attack since it was HIS, the name has taken on new meaning where Hansel no longer refers to the player, but how the build works. And the build mechanics still holds true to the reason why he used that build, so it makes perfect sense to still be a hansel and NOT a hybrid build. If it makes you feel better, perhaps we will refer to it as a VARIATION of the hansel build? That's how I would speak of it in my "hansel" threads, since I had more than 1 attack building and encourage others to do so until they are prepared to invest in allies for BFA, or acquire equipment.
Except the purpose of the hansel was for a high plubder while retaining a heavy spy stat. Hansel stopped beinf rhe player a long LONG time ago. IE why i said its a title, not a name. Giving up spy stats for troops drasticallt reduces the meaning of the build. Its more of a spy heavy hyrid, a "hansel breaker" or as you said a hansel hybdrid. However having the 2 attack buildings means that no it is not a hansel. For example a hansel with added spy def towers would be a war hansel, war hybrid, ETC: but its not a hansel.