|
Post by BulgarianMenace on Nov 13, 2009 22:07:28 GMT -5
even with 3 mages, according to hanz 8 mages should be better, no?
--
|
|
|
Post by hanzrimer on Nov 13, 2009 22:07:51 GMT -5
Lol, you're retarded. Archers are better 1v1, and in a real game scenario, e.g mixed classes. According to your logic, 8 mages should be able to beat anything. Let's put that to the test. And I'll play warrior or scout if you don't want me to play mage. See the difference between me and you is when I "ad hominem" it's related to the topic and basically related to the topic or guessing a motive, you just flat out insult me, that's fine though, your jabs are petty and so far off it's kind of funny. Any way, YOU said that archers are the best so by YOUR logic, a team of archers could beat anyone. You're trying to turn it around on me after I made the challenge because you know your team of archers would get crushed and you don't want to prove me wrong. This is MY challenge, and I stated the rules. Having even one mage on the opposite team would just prove further that every team needs a mage but a team could do just fine and win without a single archer. If you grow a pair and do this challenge and we win I'd be more and happy then your challenge, but in the mean time we have this one at hand. So either admit i'm right, or join the archer team or stfu, you're choice but I'm sure you'll have some awesome reply calling me stupid or something.
|
|
|
Post by BulgarianMenace on Nov 13, 2009 22:12:45 GMT -5
When you're discussing which class is better you're not discussing whether 8 of one will beat 8 of the other. You're discussing which has better matchups 1v1, and which has better success in an 8v8 situation.
8 mages might beat 8 archers but it doesn't prove anything.
What you're doing is creating a false dichotomy: either 8 archers can beat 8 mages or archers are worse than mages. We call that a logical fallacy. Look it up, I'm sure you need to.
|
|
|
Post by hanzrimer on Nov 13, 2009 22:19:25 GMT -5
When you're discussing which class is better you're not discussing whether 8 of one will beat 8 of the other. You're discussing which has better matchups 1v1, and which has better success in an 8v8 situation. 8 mages might beat 8 archers doesn't prove anything. What you're doing is creating a false dichotomy: either 8 archers can beat 8 mages or archers are worse than mages. We call that a logical fallacy. Look it up, I'm sure you need to.[/quote Another insult, big surprise. The funny thing I actually get criticized by people who actually know me for being a know it all, just ask my girlfriend, so I find the intelligence knocking you seem obsessed with rather funny. I'm not sure why it would make a difference really. So you're saying 1vs1 an archer would win, but 8 vs 8 mages would win. would does the number matter so much? I'd gladly do 1vs1 but I think 8 vs 8 would prove more as the 1vs1 would basically prove who was better at the game between the two people involved. like I'm sure joppi could beat a noob mage as an archer, but that wouldn't prove shit. But a game with 16 players would be more definitive. Now if you'd actually like to continue this debate without your childish insults that's fine, other wise get out and let the people with a pair take place in this challenge. Like that guy straightcash or whatever his name, he seems like a dickhead, but hey at least his willing to play and prove me wrong.
|
|
|
Post by BulgarianMenace on Nov 13, 2009 22:21:24 GMT -5
Way to not address my points.
|
|
|
Post by wottesworthsgurl on Nov 13, 2009 22:53:49 GMT -5
We're all friends here..so lets just stop with the arguing
|
|
|
Post by straightcash5 on Nov 13, 2009 23:31:22 GMT -5
When you're discussing which class is better you're not discussing whether 8 of one will beat 8 of the other. You're discussing which has better matchups 1v1, and which has better success in an 8v8 situation. for example a really good warrior is goin to beat a really good mage in a 1v1, but in an 8v8 the mages are goin to destroy the warriors, but this proves nothing, because in an actual game it's not goin to be 8 mages vs 8 warriors or archers
|
|
|
Post by TheLegendaryBroly on Nov 13, 2009 23:46:38 GMT -5
........we're not all friends here....we are all ENEMIES!!!
|
|
|
Post by hanzrimer on Nov 14, 2009 6:58:34 GMT -5
When you're discussing which class is better you're not discussing whether 8 of one will beat 8 of the other. You're discussing which has better matchups 1v1, and which has better success in an 8v8 situation. for example a really good warrior is goin to beat a really good mage in a 1v1, but in an 8v8 the mages are goin to destroy the warriors, but this proves nothing, because in an actual game it's not goin to be 8 mages vs 8 warriors or archers[/quote So mages apparently suck balls 1 vs 1, yet are awesome in 8's. hmm good logic. End of the day, I'm right. mages are the best class.
|
|
|
Post by bierslyr1969 on Nov 14, 2009 9:14:56 GMT -5
I agree with BM, n i'll warrior or scout for that fight.
|
|
|
Post by hanzrimer on Nov 14, 2009 14:27:29 GMT -5
I agree with BM, n i'll warrior or scout for that fight. that's cool that you agree with him, but this is my challenge, if you guys want to make separate thread with your own rules then go for it. This challenge is mages vs archers. If everyone here thinks mages would win that's fine, my point is proven. for some reason some people here think archers are godly 1vs1 and are donkey poop in 8's (Spock would think this is quite illogical) then i'd gladly accept an average archer in a 1vs1 deathmatch.
|
|
|
Post by hanzrimer on Nov 14, 2009 18:34:55 GMT -5
Seems like everyone likes to talk about how much better archers are, actually proving seems to be a tad more difficult.
|
|
|
Post by BulgarianMenace on Nov 14, 2009 19:47:58 GMT -5
Your point is proven? And what point is that? That 8 mages would beat 8 archers? Ok, but it doesn't prove that mages as a class are better than archers. You're ignoring everything else in the game. Like I said, when you're discussing which class is better you're not discussing whether 8 of one will beat 8 of the other. You're discussing which has better matchups 1v1, and which has better success in an 8v8 situation.
No one is saying archers are "donkey poop" in 8v8s. They actually dominate in real game 8v8s. A mixed team would own a team of mages, and on that mixed team the archers would have the highest kills and lowest deaths.
|
|
|
Post by hanzrimer on Nov 15, 2009 12:59:39 GMT -5
Your point is proven? And what point is that? That 8 mages would beat 8 archers? Ok, but it doesn't prove that mages as a class are better than archers. You're ignoring everything else in the game. Like I said, when you're discussing which class is better you're not discussing whether 8 of one will beat 8 of the other. You're discussing which has better matchups 1v1, and which has better success in an 8v8 situation. No one is saying archers are "donkey poop" in 8v8s. They actually dominate in real game 8v8s. A mixed team would own a team of mages, and on that mixed team the archers would have the highest kills and lowest deaths. Well if you actually read what I wrote I also said they'd win 1vs1, as well as 8vs8. Also I think a teams needs a mage or two to win, but a team really doesn't need an archer. In fact in CTR the team which consist of the most archers will always lose. So if we were to do a mixed team vs a mage team the mixed team should not include mages at all.
|
|
|
Post by straightcash5 on Nov 15, 2009 18:42:51 GMT -5
Not on Pellinor, Shire, or even Mount Doom ctr, the archers on those maps keep the other team from getting captures and keep the other team away from their ring bearer, having 3 to 4 archers there is always more effective then 3 to 4 mages.
|
|