[QUOTE=tinker;490373]spam , read on at “important” or the whole post
READ BEFORE READING ON : this is not to offend beebi_gun or anyone else, just to point out what my intention is. read the full post before trying to get what I am trying to say.
I automatically analyse the behaviour of people. well there is no such thing as mimic, body-language or your voice on written words
but there is so much more
all you did in this long post was:
- trying to make my arguments bad (and convince others) by making my “person” and aproach bad.
- trying to hide your anger, that came up because you PERSONALLY felt offended by one(or more) of my words and try to convince others that I AM A BAD PERSON because you somehow felt offended
and as you might know, people won’t listen to the words of a “bad person”
- you are redundand and repeat over and over, that I am repeating my words (yeah, epic loop)
- actually negate everything you said about the damage of the weapon, fully concentrating on its range (and in fact the dmg there) since you gave no other (new) argument here (only trying to negate mine)[/QUOTE]
Let’s try approaching the first part of your post, shall we ??
“1. trying to make my arguments bad (and convince others) by making my “person” and aproach bad.”
Very well, if you’re going to start to throw out accusations, you need first to make sure you back up what you’re saying. How did I try to make your arguments bad ?? Ohh just because I countered with something else that didn’t go on accord with what you were saying ?? Again I ask you, do you know what a debate is ??
Other thing is, I’m talking to you, I’m not talking nor trying to show anyone else anything, I’m here to come to a consensus, with YOU, not whoever is watching in the sidelines. So please, specify how did I try to make you look bad ?
“2. trying to hide your anger, that came up because you PERSONALLY felt offended by one(or more) of my words and try to convince others that I AM A BAD PERSON because you somehow felt offended”
I’m not angry. You can only take my word for it, or insisting on the matter, it is, after all, up to you. As you said previously, you cannot tell from where you are so I’m very interested in seeing how can you be so certain that I’m angry, and if so, please do show. The only thing I’m seeing here is you desperately trying to make believe that I’m totally angry/raging; and that that is funny to you - your words, paraphrased; so that you can somehow make you look more credible. Once again I ask you, do you know what a debate is ?? Because I can tell you, you’re doing it wrong:
You are attacking a poster rather than the content or argument of their posts .
It should not matter how I’m feeling, anyway, you need only to address the content of my argument, and you’ve been avoiding it this whole time. After that, you keep hitting the key that I’m here to convince anyone of something, especially that you are a bad person. Please, stop doing it the wrong way:
You’re not backing up what you say with evidence of that, you’re only trying to make believe I’m attacking you, so you can feel a victim.
“3. you are redundand and repeat over and over, that I am repeating my words (yeah, epic loop)”
No, I’m not redundant.You are. Let’s see: I therefore offered a counter to what you were saying and instead of countering my counter, you proceed to repeat the same claim you offered in the beginning of the argument, which I countered, only that you refuse to give it attention because it does not suit you. That is redundancy.
“4. actually negate everything you said about the damage of the weapon, fully concentrating on its range (and in fact the dmg there) since you gave no other (new) argument here (only trying to negate mine)”
One thing is: You can say whatever you want about me negating anything. Truth is: I never really claimed anything on its damage, it is there, you need only to read. If you can prove it I said the dmg of the Fryer is too strong and therefore the Fryer is OP, then please do so.I’ve told you are doing it wrong.
You are attempting to alter my argument in order to suit yours. Disregarding what I have to say in the process; as being redundant; just because you cannot offer anything to tell it otherwise.
[QUOTE=tinker;490373]what I wanna tell you with THIS is: you don’t need to write a whole post on a personal offensive basis when it actually does not work. you say, you did NOT at least try to offend me or make me look bad? “tinker is just making it seem that way to look like I’m whining on it”
“It looks like he’s afraid I’m trying to get away “his” weapon.”
“This but a civil argument for me; I’m not sure if you are used to ones of that kind”
" Once more, you seem to think you know everything and are again jumping to conclusions about my person. I have not made this personal yet."[/QUOTE]
What you are doing here is quoting chunks of my post that best suit what you’re trying to say without considering the context of it and what it follows next. In any case, tell me of it what you think it is offensive ??
> Because I think you’re making it look like I’m whining offends you ??
> Because it appears you are so defensive on a weapon that you do certainly use and don’t want it nerfed ??
> Because I implied that you are not used to have debates over this ??
> Or because I think you are jumping to conclusions about how I am, behave and think ??
Which is it, please ?
Oh but I can also do something similar, you know ? And show it to you how you did exactly:
[QUOTE=tinker;490158]tell me, how to convince someone like you, only trying to win the argue with being sarcastic and one-sided
how to convince someone to play a “new” setup more than once in a MINDGAME if he fails the first time and blames the setup.[/QUOTE]
I have not heard, at all, that being sarcastic is now considered an offensive form. Again you need not to attack how I do reply to your posts, I have not attacked you personally in any of them. If being sarcastic is the way I chose to express what I wanted to say, what does it make offensive on it ??
I am not being one-sided, only you see it that way. Because you told and presented the chart about the dmg/energy and I have no quarrels with that, no problems in agreeing with that, which is why I find weird that you keep up illuding yourself that I’m somehow saying the contrary. I have no quarrels with the dmg of the Fryer; I never said it was too strong. I said: its lowest dmg is +/- the standard of some weapons (e.g. Lowest Fryer = 24 / Highest Pistol = 24) - you throw the energy factor, I agree. I then throw the range factor (seeing this is what defines the weapon), you disregard it.
Are you sure you are the one who should feel offended ? I do not feel you offended me, I was only having a normal discussion with you until you started doing this whole drama.
[QUOTE=tinker;490373]“I cannot, yet, simply close my eyes and say that a certain setup is not favorable to the other. I feel like saying it; I am backing it up; it is my experience. I’d understand your stance if I was whining; matter of fact, I’m not, because I’m not even pissed of by it. I’m merely poking on the fact of an imbalanced mechanic of the game. If it is there, it is there.”
ever had a talk with an angry friend, girlfriend or parent, that often point out that they are NOT angry? and what was the fact ?
try to be convincing with your facts and ONLY your facts. everything else is just spam for me.[/QUOTE]
By your use of the word “spam”, either in the beginning, as of now, I will have to assume that you do not know what it means. You can try making this look offensive if you will, either. But I’m simply analyzing it and being incapable of fitting that in context.
As I said before, me being angry does change anything, as long as my posts are not in any way trying to be offensive; it is not distorting my view on my points, neither on yours. I continue to fail to connect what you are trying to prove with my supposed anger.
My fact is there, I’ve posted it, and I’ve not seen it countered. I’ve seen it contoured; that and disregarded because it went not on agreement with what you said. But that may be of the similarity of the words.
[QUOTE=tinker;490373]and tbh I am pissed
because writing such a post is anything but pleasurable to me
but it happened before that people did not believe what I posted and not believe that I wrote FACTS (instead of “personal opinions”) before I actually showed them that THEY are personal and offensive (and this wayyyy more than me)[/QUOTE]
To be honest, I don’t see what your problem is. I can only assume, and mark this well: assume, that you are not accustomed to debates; now either because you are not used to have your “facts” being questioned or you happen to think everything you say is true and/or always more important than what others do.
Why on earth would you pissed over something like this ?? Seriously, tinker, do you have any knowledge on debates ?? You would not be pissed if you did, honestly. It is obvious that in a debate you will offer a claim and defend your position and someone will come and tell you something different; then both will defend themselves until proven otherwise; or come to a consensus of some kind that neither are entirely wrong or right. Now, why did you post anything, to try to debate, if you were only going to get pissed by it ?? That’s not how debating works, unless you were not trying to debate, but simply showing that when you come in, what you say has to be accepted with no margin to be objected.
In your case, really, what you did was completely disregard my position, saying: “you only talk about that, you only talk about that… - (paraphrased)” therefore it is not valid. Not really, that’s not how it works either. I only use that because until now that position still remains unrefuted. I don’t understand, what you want me to do ?? To simply ignore my own position and embrace only what you have to say so that your point becomes easier to defend ?? Again, what kind of solution is this ?
Listen, I know these are your forums, barely anyone else comments on them. You are pro in this, you are the Master of this game; whenever someone posts a suggestion or something of the like, you are used to come and say what you will, then no one argues back against you. But then it comes me. And when I do not cede, you get pissed off, because, apparently, that is what you do when someone questions your “facts”; because your opinions/evidences should obviously be seen as absolute truths. Then you try to appeal to the crowd to make believe that you are full of pure intentions and that Beebi_Gun is the evil one trying to make yourself look bad. In fact, I repeat, I am here talking to you, not anyone else. Whoever is making off this a big dramatic show is you. Putting on big bold letters as sign to try to tell everyone what your intentions are. This is between you and me, other people are not called to it; and even if they are, I’d assume anyone accompanying this would know how to read, so you let them take their own conclusions upon what they read, and not try to mold their minds with a disclaimer in the beginning.
First, I don’t want to be offensive, but anyone is in their own right to assume what they want: To me, it’s been as if I’m “arguing with a kid over the internet”. You need not do this whole drama about: " this person is being mean/sarcastic" or " this person is trying to make me look bad/she’s a troll" - for that in itself makes you already look bad. I’m used to debating; I will [always] back off and admit when I’m clearly defeated, I will not argue for the sake of arguing with no reason behind it. I can also acknowledge someone else’s points and agree that they, in part, affect on the ones I’m presenting. It’s called consensus. I will not, and should never, nor anyone for that matter, disregard what the other is saying because otherwise I can’t prove/show my absolute victory, because I know the other point sort of conflicts with mine. We get to an interlock. You, on the other hand, are doing exactly that.
Secondly, we need to separate what we are trying to discuss here. We shall not start throwing everything to the soup. They are different matters, correlated yes, but different. You once again start throwing matters I did not argue over with you. You are good, you are a master in this; so you throw everything you know (as shown below in the second part of your post), in scenarios you imagine and picture, and swoop the tide to your own side through that. Notice that you only consider positions where it goes to your favor. If you want to discuss on a topic of why sniper-builds are not OP, then you should see to it that you create a new thread and I’ll be very glad to see what you have to offer. Which in any case, I agree that it can be countered, I just don’t agree it is easy as you make it seem. It is not a question of not wanting to think, because even with sniper, you have to think, I never claimed otherwise. But it is the effort you have to put in one, and the effort you have to put in all the rest. There is a very huge gap, mind you.
The discussion here is that most people think the Fryer should go 6 SP, because it is a very easy to use weapon, very easy to take advantage of, and has become very common because of it. You want a good 5 SP sniper ? Buff Otto. That’d make it more viable; but the Fryer does not compete with the 5 SP sniper-- it competes with the 6 SP sniper (Botherer); in the end, it even replaces it because how easy it is to use without costing too much. This said, making it 6 SP would still be the same weapon, only less common and still comparable to the Botherer.
I didn’t come here to argument against you-- I didn’t come here to end up in bad terms with you either-- even because that would be bad as I came here for suggestions and to gain more understanding, not to get involved in this drama you created. I just didn’t know you were like this; that you think the forums are yours and everyone that contradicts what you say is either noob, angry, inexperienced, etc and/or is trying to make you look bad (not sure if you have a reputation to maintain or something), for some very odd reason, is worthy of your attitude of being “pissed off”.
If you did not want to get involved in a debate, if you did not want to pass through the trouble of showing your own positions on the matter, if you did not want to carry the burden of proving it to the others; then once more I ask you, why did you bother yourself to answer !?
Seriously, stop making a tempest in a glass of water.
About the second part of the post:
I don’t want to disregard what you are saying. You, after all, worked on it to show it to me.
However, you keep putting on scenarios where no sane player would let their sniper go toe to toe with a toon with a shotgun; especially not one with 300 HP. If you’re going to do that, consider the energy wasted by the toon to get remotely close too, thus firing less and much weaker.
Also does not refute anywhere what we were initially arguing, at any event. The sniper-setup keeps still being more comfortable and steadfast. It is just this easy. I fail understanding this too: why do you keep telling me I don’t want to think, and should not be playing mindgames ?? < (See, this is where you make it look like I’m whining). I am not complaining about it, if anything, I could simply just roll one all the time either. But I’m pointing that there is an imbalance in that regard. It does not automatically mean I don’t want to think.
Always looking up to solutions anyway, so it is good to have a good look on the hypothesis.
Absoluted long range should be lower for it is harder to aim and punch power of bullet not as effective (though botherer and avenger seem able to be stronger than any other weap in this).
(except FPS because I’m a terrible shot)