|
|
|
 |

November 6th, 2007, 11:57 PM
|
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 674
Thanks: 7
Thanked 15 Times in 10 Posts
|
|
Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
Death bless will molest ulmish troops and pretender, end of story. Afflictions up the wazzoo, with mr based an attack.
|

November 7th, 2007, 05:46 AM
|
Captain
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sweden, Ume�
Posts: 991
Thanks: 5
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
Whatever pretender you build there is a counter (not to mention your pretender cannot be everywhere). Also the bandar log player is allowed a pretender of his own you know.
Edit: I feel we have argued this as far as it will go, if you want to test the ulm v bandar log deal feel free to send me a pm.
|

November 7th, 2007, 07:14 AM
|
BANNED USER
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,463
Thanks: 165
Thanked 324 Times in 190 Posts
|
|
Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
Want to play Top Trumps? Before we start, I should point out I've memorised the deck, so you lose. See you around.
|

November 7th, 2007, 07:49 AM
|
Second Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 465
Thanks: 10
Thanked 16 Times in 14 Posts
|
|
Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
Again.
All the arguing is beside the point. Bob has absolutely no basis for his argument. Let me explain.
1) His premise is flawed. He states that 'Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN' (thread subject line). This is logically equivalent to stating that these nations CANNOT win. He cites the MP win thread as his proof. Statistically, that thread does not prove his point. Therefore, his statement has no support.
2) He then explains why he believes that his unsupported premise is correct. Their PD is bad. Every single response to this point accepts, implicitly, statement 1), above. In other words, you are arguing implicitly accepting that they cannot win. This is a classic (if ridiculous) rhetorical technique. Don't follow it. Someone must prove premises before they are allowed to use them as the basis for other arguments.
3) He does not offer a solution! He is simply describing a rather ridiculous reason for a nonexistant problem. He is complaining, purely and simply. At least NTJedi suggests a solution to this (though again, he is implicitly accepting 1) and most likely 2) above, which is incorrect). Offer some sort of solution if you are going to complain.
Bob, answer these points, or shut. the. hell. up. Even IW people have pointed out to you this very issue, which means the designers of the game _are not going to listen to you until you respond to this_. To the point, you are trolling. This is against forum policy, and you should expect a warning and/or banning for it.
|

November 7th, 2007, 07:56 AM
|
 |
Second Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: country of stinky fromages
Posts: 564
Thanks: 29
Thanked 15 Times in 13 Posts
|
|
Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
I find them an under average nation, but they are not the only ones which could use a power up, and I can't see the point of such an argument.
Are they the ONLY nation that haven't won in MP ?
__________________
10 times more numerous, by nigth and backstabbing.
Senior member of the GLIN !
|

November 7th, 2007, 08:13 AM
|
BANNED USER
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,463
Thanks: 165
Thanked 324 Times in 190 Posts
|
|
Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
Quote:
Humakty said:
Are they the ONLY nation that haven't won in MP ?
|
Not even close.
|

November 7th, 2007, 09:02 AM
|
 |
Second Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: country of stinky fromages
Posts: 564
Thanks: 29
Thanked 15 Times in 13 Posts
|
|
Re: Why Kailasa, Bandar Log, and Patala NEVER WIN
So here we have our Don Quichotte, hopelessly charging windmills...
__________________
10 times more numerous, by nigth and backstabbing.
Senior member of the GLIN !
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|