That's the thing, I am debating you. I'm proving that your methodology is wrong based on examples of you misunderstanding simple concepts in english. By undermining the foundation of your argument by attacking and disproving your understanding of whatever your point is, I can invalidate your points. Basically, by destroying your foundation I can topple your argument. That's a debate tactic. Because you can't recognize that fact just proves that you are ignorant as to what a debate actually is. You keep telling people to debate you as a tactic to force people who may or may not be knowledgeable as to how debates work into thinking that no one has been able to prove you wrong, therefore you must be right. You are preying upon the ignorance of the masses to force them to support your position, one that they may not recognize as opinion derived from your meager experience regarding snipers.
English
-
That's no how debates work. Debates are about looking at someone's logic, someone's ideals or reasoning. And disproving their thoughts. Not finding ways to demean someone based of a misunderstanding. It's one thing to say I'm a idiot, liar etc. but the fact that you have to reduce yourself to trying to say I don't understand basic reading skills in order to defend snipers? Are you really that misinformed or obsessed with protecting snipers? How about you address one of the points I've made. Till then I think I'm done with this conversation.
-
Edited by Strayed543211: 7/9/2016 7:37:13 AM[quote]That's no how debates work. Debates are about looking at someone's logic, someone's ideals or reasoning. And disproving their thoughts.[/quote] That's what I did. I looked at your reasoning and basis of understanding, founded that it was scewed, provided evidence to prove my assertion, then concluded that all of your points are opinionated and based on a misunderstanding. Your first point is that snipers are so easy to handle, anyone can use them. If that were true, then why is it that not everyone is using a sniper? If it's as easy as you claim, then everyone would be sniping all the time. The majority of people I run into either use shotguns, sidearms, fusions, or their primaries. I do run into snipers but not everyone does it. Yeah sure that's also due to player preference, but also due to player skill. People naturally don't like things they aren't good at. There are tons a psychological surveys and studies that prove that. Your second point is opinion because you state that they should not be able to two shot, yet yo fail to provide a valid reason. A reason like "snipers shouldn't two shot body shot because they can already one shot headshot. Make them a 3 shot body shot to punish a poor hand". If you had said that instead of whining about how people body shot then switch to primaries, I would've left well enough alone. Your 3rd point about aim assist, is flat out wrong. You say that "aim assist practically aims the weapon for you"(that's a slight paraphrase but the meaning is the same). In another comment you say that aim assist causes the "reticle to stick on the person head". That means that you quickly researched what aim assist in destiny was to save face, or miss spoke when you wrote your third point. I -blam!-ing dare you to prove me wrong on any of that. You might try to say that by me paraphrasing what you said is misleading, and that it doesn't reflect your true meaning. Anyone with a brain can read and realize that that isn't true. You might try to say that I am biased, and I am, because I enjoy sniping and that I think that snipers need to be left alone (besides, you can't change snipers just in pvp and not pve. You can either do both, or none. It's physically impossible with the current coding of the game to have two different variants of play, handling, feel, recoil, etc for one weapon). You might say that my points are invalid because I'm name calling, which I am. But just because someone name calls, doesn't mean their points are invalid. As you've requested, I've debated your points with facts and logic. I've disproven your assertions by proving that your points are opinion, not fact. I provided aduaquate defence toward my argument, while simultaneously removing yours. I pointed out the arguments you would most likely try to use based on your other conversations in this thread, and proved them wrong. The proverbial ball is in your court, friend. *mic drop*