I'm usually all for ambitions, but please, with regards to tactics, lower them a notch or two. Don't present your tactic as "It always works" or "You can't lose with this one", or even the dreaded "This is the best strategy". It makes for a very unintelligent discussion since you are wrong right off the bat. The discussion will just be about proving that you are wrong, and the point of the thread will mainly be lost.
A topic like "this is a good strategy" or "this usually works on ns_bast" however is a lot easier to support.
The only way a strategy can be universally "the best" is if the game is broken and that strategy manages to take a 100% advantage of that, in which case it is uninteresting. You can argue that for example a JP/HMG rush would be that but it's not true, they have and will be countered hundreds of times already and will be again in the future. As far as we can tell, the game is not 'broken'. It may have imbalances, actually it has to, nothing more complex then a molecule could be perfectly balanced, and not even they can I think.
All strategies are relative to at least these fundamental factors:
- How good your team is (or what they are good at)
- How good your enemies are (or what they are good at)
- What your enemy strategy is
Using 'good' in a very abstract way here...
Please take this into consideration next time you post a strategy, that is all I ask. You can consider this thread a "good tactic for posting strategies".