I moved this since my argument has nothing to do with that threads topic
=£= Ziza wrote:
[DD]Whiplash wrote:
=£= Ziza wrote: PD oh, by the way, it is curious that whip him like your comment, because when that happened that I bombardié hangars using the tactic of sneaking, he chased me almost reached my base for shooting me, allowing the rest of the pilots penetrated their territory, only to try to break me, even taking into account that I was going from his territory
Wow...almost back to your base...you never made it past midfield...but it's about as accurate as the rest of what you say. I'm done with this...we know your position and ours lets just leave it at that.
good whip, as I mentioned, this is not a matter of point of view, is that you have a concept of cowardice far from its true meaning and especially its practical application. Apparently you confuse cowardice with intelligent acts and courage acts which have advantage over your enemies.
I repeat again, I have an argument, I quoted logical facts and history, but your argument only refers to a game "fair"
I'll help a little with your argument,bcs it's a little hard to decipher, but what I say has a very strong argumentative fracture: I'm trying to expand the expectations of the application of a game that has been played for a long time in the same way, and that, under any circumstances, is going against the methodology used by many, and the same methodology is what keeps them effective statistics of many pilots, pretty much what I am proposing, though I say historical and logical arguments, is a restructuring of one of the most played games, and that will certainly have many problems with pilots who only know how to do what is already being done.
therefore, as I said, the only thing I'm asking is that if someone else does something different, understand that is achieved should not be demonized, much less socially isolated. the game can not be always played in the same way, and if you can not adapt to change, or even I can not, should not be cause for tantrums.
That's the fracture that I see in my argument, ask maturity
Yes I often confuse intelligence and cowardice how silly of me. The argumentative nature of my comments come from the fact that you continue this stupid argument that is beneath me and I only continue in the hopes of making others who are, like you, feeling that to win at all costs benefits the game.
Why is it that you ALWAYS OMIT THE POINT, ONLY IN MISMATCHED TEAMS? You tack it on somewhere in the middle of the argument that it covers this too. Of course it's a better way to win, of course you think it's right, what do you care about any of us here? You really think we never thought of going around the planes shooting at us? Maybe you will understand this, say you have 2 groups of friends, they from different schools or towns or whatever but you are all friends. You decide to play soccer (Football) and for some reason one side has 4 players only and the other comes with 16. Would you play the other 4 dancing around them using your large advantage of numbers to hammer in goal after goal. Well if you did I bet the 4 wouldn't be your friends any more. That's the point I am making. In that situation do you not loan some players to the other side so you can have a decent game or do you care about the win more?
So back to cowardice, you can't do what you are doing if the numbers are reversed. If you are in a 5 vs 2 and you are the 2 and you go way outside you leave 1 vs 5 down the middle and that would be the end. Maybe you would get 1 hangar but that would be nothing compared to the assault on yours. I call it cowardly since you are all the same you don't sneak at the start it's after being mowed down over and over that you decide to go way around because you can't win the fight even against an outnumbered enemy.
Someone who runs from a fight to take more advantage of an already disadvantaged enemy is a coward!
Or is that your superior intelligence? You'd think all this intelligence of which you speak could be used to remember the actual facts of the game or to consider all points of my counter arguments instead of picking and choosing what you care to address.
So you feel that we go down the middle because we are brainwashed or conditioned to do so...I go down the middle to keep my team alive. If I am in a team that does not have a strong head to head player and I go chasing a tank or sneaker or whatever quickly my team starts to get over run and we have a huge disadvantage and often lose. The game is played like this by so many because this is what we have learned. I love people who come into a situation with much less experience who believe they know much more than those with the experience. Wow the audacity! It's a simple matter of time and the way the game works. The fastest route is a straight line, if I can hit and take down in head to head I can make it all the way there before anyone could go around or high, hit the hangar respawn and defend. So you must defend the center, if you have less skill and less pilots you will be pushed back further and further until you are no longer even able to sneak because you spawn from a base that is surrounded by the enemy. When you have played more you will understand or probably not given the amount of time it's taken me to get the simplest of points even understood by you let alone accepted.
I await your next blind rambling of how dumb we all are for playing like we do and how taking advantage of a smaller team is in fact brave and good for everyone.