legozer

I was completely honest and upfront with every aspect of the scenarios I presented. There is no effort to sugar coat the truth. I admit, wholeheartedly that the fact the Amagi was a really bad player played a part in my decision (a fact that I could have easily omitted had I been dishonest about this). I am willing to accept fault if an argument is presented that shows my fault. Calling me a liar is nonsense. Saying that my stats make me a "poor thinker" is likewise absurd, and is in fact, the height of arrogance. It suggests that you "think better" than I do because you have had greater overall success at an arcade style computer game than I have. Not only is that arrogant, it's really, really stupid.

That is not at all what has been put forward. You are being extreme to the point of complete absurdity.

You couldn't find a way to highjack this into becoming a boring (and really dumb) argument about freedom of speech? C'mon, you can do it!

Ok. So, this is really dumb. I've given two examples of times where I've decided to take a team damage risk and invited some discussion about when/if it's acceptable. You decided that, since I have a 49.7x% WR, that I can't possibly be correct. That's a logical fallacy, and it will never hold water. If you have an actual argument with what I've posted, spit it out. Until then, your attempt to stat shame is, like I said, really dumb. I never, at any point argued that "I torp teammates to win games". I did say that I took the risk of hitting teammates on two occasions because I felt it was an acceptable risk given the circumstances. As has been discussed ad nauseum, stats don't always tell a complete story about the player. Mine certainly don't, and I could go into detail what I mean by that, but I don't care to at the moment; it's a different conversation to be had at another time. So, if you have a legitimate viewpoint to add, please, now is the time. If not, then piss up a rope.

Ah, an awkward attempt to stat shame with no real argument. It was only a matter of time, I suppose.

There is a big difference between " just to sink an enemy ship" and "to win".

Wrong again. Keep trying though, you're almost there.

To be clear, he wasn't going to factor into the game again, having somehow gotten stuck at J10 when the battle was many, many miles away. Utter, and complete isolation.

I have no idea what any of this is, but I'm replying anyway.

Man! I would have torped him, and then flamed him in the forums for being so gullible! Afterwards, I'd laugh, and laugh, and laugh, and drink, and laugh, and drink, and cry (for no good reason), and laugh, and drink, and pass out, naked, on the living room floor.

Get it, and finally feel what it means to love.

Yes. That's why I shoot at all those red ships.

The answer is 'never'. I've literally never done it outside of those two examples, which is what got me thinking about the idea of acceptable risk.

The post isn't about how well you do in your Shimakaze, or how awesome you are at nobly avoiding team damage. Thanks for letting us know both, though. I did apologize, but that is immaterial to the discussion.

Incorrect.